Politics As Usual

[Say_hello_for_me]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
A wholly different perspective on the Najaf situation from my friends at the WSJ editorial page:

"...As Mr. Bush noted, the U.S. military has been making progress against our enemies in Iraq. Fallujah is calm, at least for the moment. And yesterday U.S. forces agreed to stop offensive operations against Muqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi militia after having shredded the radical cleric's rebellion. In recent days the Army's 1st Armored Division has arrested his chief lieutenant and killed hundreds of his fighters with just one casualty of its own -- to the point that Mahdi militia had little safe refuge other than mosques.

More important for future stability, Mr. al-Sadr was defeated with the help of other Iraqi Shiites. Respected Shiite clerics, led by Grand Ayatollah Sistani, issued a remarkable statement blaming the violence squarely on the shoulders of the young renegade.

Three Shiite members of the Iraqi Governing Council negotiated the cease-fire, which will prevent further damage to holy sites in Najaf and elsewhere by requiring the Mahdi militia to disarm and depart. The U.S. will withdraw most of its troops as well, but it will still protect returning Iraqi police and government buildings and have free movement through the city. The U.S. was also careful not to disavow the outstanding warrant against Mr. al-Sadr, who needs to be arrested sooner or later. All in all, a big coalition victory...."

I have to agree with the WSJ sentiment while endorsing (to some degree, but not entirely) Ty's thoughts. As you all know, I am a very reasonable Attila-the-Hun type Republican.

If they want Sadr, they can have Sadr. My main concern for the long run in Iraq is a.) Democracy of some sorts (its good for everybody, really); b.) don't make us come back; and 3.) let us know if y'all need a hand with anything within reason.

Democracy: The rest of the nation politilely asked us not to break stuff. No problem here with the cease fire.

I guess another way of saying that is, there is no point in fighting just for the sake of fighting. If the rest of the country just wants everybody to have a say, then let em.

Tell ya one thing though. When we leave, 7 million AKs in that country are gonna do a whole lot of retaliating. If I were middle class there, I'd leave now.

e b/c my reviewing attorney just came by and pointed out that I had used the word "their" instead of "there". Twice!!!!

[Replaced_Texan]

Apparently the Justice Department forgot that there is a Department of Homeland Security.

In other Department of Homeland Security news, the website from which I stole my avatar has recently put up billboards in my neighborhood, reminding us to put our kits together and have plans in place. For some reason, I thought that after all of the initial laughter died down, the Department of Homeland Security was backing off on the duct tape and plastic wrap solution to the pesky terrorism problem. Yet the duct tape/plastic sheeting tent is still the dominant subject on the FAQ. The Department of Homeland Security was unhelpful in recommending a particular brand of duct tape.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I plan on heading to Home Depot this weekend. I have to work on my back yard and I need some bedding plants.

[Say_hello_for_me]

disregard

[Secret_Agent_Man]

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/...ain/index.html

They announced the new interim Prime Minister today (one of their own), apparently without telling the UN or the US.

S_A_M

[SlaveNoMore]

Tyrone Slothrop

Do you read the WSJ, and the excerpts of Bush's comments of April 13 that I posted, and not see any tension between the two? Like, these concessions:

• Allowing the Mahdi Army to continue intact, as long as it remains off the streets, is a major concession to Mr. Sadr. In another, Iraqi officials agreed to "suspend" the arrest warrant for him that cites his suspected involvement in the murder of a rival cleric in April 2003. That represents, at least for now, a reversal for the Americans, who have said repeatedly that they intend to "kill or capture" Mr. Sadr and "destroy" the Mahdi Army.

Of course, you have to go to the NYT to find this out.

But this isn't all that clear. Note the following from your own link:

• There seems to be a contradiction in the press reporting, with some saying that the US accepted a provision that the arrest warrant against Muqtada be suspended for the time being, while this Reuters report seems to suggest that the U.S. would still very much like to apprehend him. If the latter is true, it would help explain his reluctance to come out in public at a time when he has agreed to dissolve his militia in the holy cities, and when his fighters in Kufa, in any case, have taken heavy casualties.

And here's the rub. Too many competing reporters with too many competing agendas are all too quick to report a story.

Without being there, neither of us have a clue.

PS - The appointment of the exile Allawi over the not-so-silent relcutance of [UN puppet] Brahimi has to be seen as a victory for the US, no?

[Atticus Grinch]

The Best of Richard Nixon. {MSNBC; for-profit media site.}

His obvious fascination with homosexuality is, um, interesting.

[The Larry Davis Experience]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
But this isn't all that clear. Note the following from your own link:

• There seems to be a contradiction in the press reporting, with some saying that the US accepted a provision that the arrest warrant against Muqtada be suspended for the time being, while this Reuters report seems to suggest that the U.S. would still very much like to apprehend him. If the latter is true, it would help explain his reluctance to come out in public at a time when he has agreed to dissolve his militia in the holy cities, and when his fighters in Kufa, in any case, have taken heavy casualties.

I sincerely hope our intention is still to apprehend him at some point. It is going to be pretty awkward if after the handover of sovereignty we have some difference of opinion with the Iraqi leadership as to whether Sadr should be detained. Obviously we'll arrest him if we want to, because we are still the big dog over there, but it certainly won't be a PR victory. And of course if he never comes to justice it will be one more firebrand who can claim to have beaten the occupiers, just like those thugs in the fallujah story I posted earlier this week.

Like everyone else I'm glad we didn't have to reduce any mosques to rubble to end this standoff. There are a lot of questions to be answered before we know if this was a win or a loss.

And here's the rub. Too many competing reporters with too many competing agendas are all too quick to report a story.

Excellent point. I'd throw in incomplete information as well, but that may be subsumed in the "too quick to report" part. Then again, complete info may never be forthcoming, at least not until Ken Burns makes the ten-part documentary on the Iraq invasion. I can't wait to hear Shelby Foote try to pronounce "Abu Ghraib" or "Umm Qasr."

PS - The appointment of the exile Allawi over the not-so-silent relcutance of [UN puppet] Brahimi has to be seen as a victory for the US, no?

Beyond the immediate sensation of sticking a thumb in the UN's eye, do you really think so? If we're throwing our picking-the-govt chips in with Brahimi it would seem to me that anything that complicates his task is bad news for us. I should remember the rub you cite above, but I'm not sure I can say confidently that the governing council are really "our guys" any more. Esp after Chalabi's break with us (and not the recent stuff, but back when he and some of the other higher profile Shi'ites on the IGC decided to voice Sistani's objections to the transitional law).

btw, no need to bracket the UN puppet before Brahimi's name. I believe that's his actual title.

edited for grammar. Hello, to save me the trouble of editing this stuff can you send your reviewing attorney down here before the next time I post?

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
The Best of Richard Nixon. {MSNBC; for-profit media site.}

His obvious fascination with homosexuality is, um, interesting.

Or at least the editors' fascination with Nixon's uncensored thoughts about various groupe leads one to this conclusion.

He recognizes the superior survival strategy of the Catholic church at least.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by The Larry Davis Experience
I sincerely hope our intention is still to apprehend him at some point. It is going to be pretty awkward if after the handover of sovereignty we have some difference of opinion with the Iraqi leadership as to whether Sadr should be detained. Obviously we'll arrest him if we want to, because we are still the big dog over there, but it certainly won't be a PR victory. And of course if he never comes to justice it will be one more firebrand who can claim to have beaten the occupiers, just like those thugs in the fallujah story I posted earlier this week.

You do realize that we aren't the party interested in arresting him. The arrest warrant was issued by an Iraqi judge. It's other shiites who want him for killing another cleric.

Originally posted by The Larry Davis Experience
Like everyone else I'm glad we didn't have to reduce any mosques to rubble to end this standoff.

Speak for yourself.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
But this isn't all that clear. Note the following from your own link:

• There seems to be a contradiction in the press reporting, with some saying that the US accepted a provision that the arrest warrant against Muqtada be suspended for the time being, while this Reuters report seems to suggest that the U.S. would still very much like to apprehend him. If the latter is true, it would help explain his reluctance to come out in public at a time when he has agreed to dissolve his militia in the holy cities, and when his fighters in Kufa, in any case, have taken heavy casualties.

And here's the rub. Too many competing reporters with too many competing agendas are all too quick to report a story.

Without being there, neither of us have a clue.

I guess the bottom line is that we didn't apprehend him and we seem to have cut a deal where we're going to stop trying.

PS - The appointment of the exile Allawi over the not-so-silent relcutance of [UN puppet] Brahimi has to be seen as a victory for the US, no?

I haven't the foggiest idea. But since it was Bush's call to bring Brahimi back in, I wouldn't be too quick to assume that what's bad for him is good for us. As S_A_M suggests above, it's at least possible that the IGC just gamed us by announcing its own candidate before we or Brahimi had reached a verdict.

eta: Take a look at Josh Marshall's site, where he has collected various press accounts about the naming of Allawi. The story has changed a lot during the day, but at least some people now are reporting this as Brahimi's choice. I have no idea what is going on here.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I have no idea what is going on here.

Hey, we finally agree on something!

[The Larry Davis Experience]

Originally posted by Not Me
You do realize that we aren't the party interested in arresting him. The arrest warrant was issued by an Iraqi judge. It's other shiites who want him for killing another cleric.

Despite the differences pointed out by Ty and Slave the Reuters article does appear to agree with the NYT's description:

"That represents, at least for now, a reversal for the Americans, who have said repeatedly that they intend to "kill or capture" Mr. Sadr and "destroy" the Mahdi Army.

In a news conference on Thursday, American officials insisted they had not altered that policy, but they said the timing of any action against Mr. Sadr was open to negotiation."

Sure looks like we are interested to me. However, I will commend the exactness of your citation to the warrant's issuing authority. I assume this policy will be extended throughout your posts and you will be amending all past references to "Gorelick's wall" over the holiday weekend.

Speak for yourself.

I had already assumed that.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Fafblog interviews Donald Rumsfeld:

• FAFBLOG: Great to have you here Donald Rumsfeld! Lets get right to it an start by askin: what is with this torture thing, and how long have you known about it?
  DONALD RUMSFELD: Good gosh, that’s a tricky one there. Was it torture? Were detainees indefinitely held for days with bags over their heads? Yes. Were testicles electrocuted? You bet. Were orifices molested, flesh ripped by dogs, and nostrils raped? Almost certainly. But torture? Hard to say.
  FB: Wow - that IS hard to say.
  DR: It sure is.
  FB: A recent article in the New Yorker says you approved extending a secret interrogation program that allowed torture tactics to spread to Iraq. Is that true?
  DR: My goodness me! Did the Pentagon implement a black ops interrogation program that greatly expanded what guards could do to prisoners? Maybe. Did I personally expand that program to low-level prisoners captured in Iraq? Possibly. Did this lead to the abuses at Abu Ghraib? Who can say?
  FB: It's almost like the more questions we ask the fewer answers we know!
  DR: The truth is a swirling miasma of shadow and fog, Fafnir.
  FB: Now Secretary Rumsfeld, there are a lot of people criticizing your handling of the war over things like the undermanning of the military, the not preparing for reconstruction, the letting crazy militias run whole cities. What is your response to those critics?
  DR: Well, jeepers, it's hard to say. It's easy for those people, in their press boxes and their ivory towers, to sit back and criticize without having to do the actual work of running the military. Now would another secretary of defense have done a better job, or do a better job? That question comes with a lot of unknowns. Some of those unknowns we know, and some of them we don't know. Do we have a metric for these known unknowns? Are there more unknown unknowns than known unknowns? Is that another unknown? We just don't know.
  FB: It's all so crazy we might as well just leave things as they are with you in charge!
  DR: If you say so.

more

[SlaveNoMore]

Tyrone Slothrop
Fafblog interviews Donald Rumsfeld:

[Tyrone Slothrop]