When Moqtada al-Sadr extended his cease-fire in Iraq last month, many wondered what he had in mind. Did he intend to bide his time, purge his movement of dissenters, or simply withdraw from public life to study Islam in Iran? Almost two weeks ago, Sadr himself provided an answer. He failed:

“I have failed to liberate Iraq, and transform its society into an Islamic society.”
– Moqtada al-Sadr, Asharq Al Awsat newspaper, March 8, 2008

Moqtada al-Sadr — the radical cleric dubbed “The Most Dangerous Man in Iraq” by a Newsweek cover story in December 2006 — has just unilaterally extended the ceasefire he imposed on his Mahdi Army militia last summer. And on the eve of the Iraq War’s fifth anniversary, Sadr also issued a somber but dramatic statement. He not only declared that he had failed to transform Iraq, but also lamented the new debates and divisions within his own movement. Explaining his marginalization, Sadr all but confessed his growing isolation: “One hand cannot clap alone.”

What happened? Over the past five years, Sadr has been one of the most persistent and insurmountable challenges for the U.S. Leveraging his family’s prestige among the disaffected Shiite underclass, he asserted his power by violently intimidating rival clerics, agitating against the U.S. occupation, and using force to establish de facto control over Baghdad’s Sadr City (named after his father, and home to two million Shiites on the east bank of the Tigris) and large swaths of southern Iraq.

Sadr failed for a number of reasons, but chief among them was the change in American strategy in early 2007. Until the US began to fight with a counterinsurgency strategy, basic security needs had gone unmet, especially in Baghdad. Sadr filled the vacuum with his Mahdi Army, providing protection for the Shi’ite residents, especially in Sadr City. The US and the fledgling Iraqi security services were either unable or unwilling to protect Shi’ites against Sunni terrorists, but Sadr’s forces shielded them and allowed them to fight back against their tormentors.


Unfortunately for Sadr, two things occurred. His Mahdi militiamen applied their radical Islamist impulses to their own communities. While the Shi’a bitterly resented the Sunnis, they did not want to trade their relatively secular governance for a strict imposition of shari’a — coincidentally, the same problem al-Qaeda in Iraq had in the Sunni areas they controlled. Shi’ites under the protection of the Mahdis came to resent their brutality almost as much as the Sunnis who attacked them.

When the US finally changed strategies and put boots on the street in Baghdad and elsewhere, the Shi’ites no longer needed the Mahdis for protection. They didn’t have to choose between two different sets of oppressors, and responded to the professionalism of the US military and the growing Iraqi security forces we trained. The entire raison d’etre of the Mahdis and of Sadr dissipated in 2007, leaving Sadr with a damaged political base and no particular way to muscle his way back into power. Nouri al-Maliki realized this and dumped Sadr for the slightly more moderate Supreme Islamic Iraq Council, which has been Sadr’s political and militia opponent in the south since the invasion.

By the time 2008 arrived, Sadr had failed, and he knew it. Ending the cease-fire would only have left his organization vulnerable to coordinated attack from the central government and the more robust American forces. Worse, it would have forced new leadership to the fore in the Mahdi Army, leadership that Sadr would not be able to control. The surge has completely wrong-footed Sadr and left him with few options except in the religious sphere, where he will not cause much trouble.

This could still change, as Dan Senor and Roman Martinez warn. An eruption of sectarian violence could rebirth the conditions which gave Sadr power for a period of time. With more Iraqi troops coming on line and the Americans shifting to logistics and support, as well as rebuilding, that seems less and less likely.

Via Michael Goldfarb at the essential Weekly Standard blog, who notes: “[i]f Sadr required chaos in order to leverage support for his Islamist agenda, as Senor and Martinez suggest, then the surge has clearly chopped off that other hand.”


Hot Air » Blog Archive » Sadr admits failure in Iraq

__________________
"The most important and most connected man on this forum."
"As per the Forums leftist who insist I am associated with the upper echelons of our government, corporate America and the world’s power class.
Every moon bat conspiracy leads to me. "

Gix, I was relieved in February when Sadr agreed to continue the ceasefire. The US military is working with him and has made concessions with him.
So you see, whether or not gains attributed to the surge can be maintained depends on how smart our forces play it with Sadr and his decisions. It is good he want to quell the violence...I am not so sure what we have won in the process.

This is not a simple solution such as the number of troops, but rather a complex interaction of local politics, religious and sectarian divides, and tenuous cooperation based on many concessions on our part. In the end Sadr remains one of the most influential leaders in Iraq. His alliance is with Iran and so ceasefire or not..I am not so sure the three trillion was worth getting to this point.

We are arming many of his militias now and have quelled some violence. Now what?

BBC NEWS | Middle East | Sadr declares new Iraq ceasefire

In the statement read out from the pulpits Mr Sadr ordered the Mehdi Army to continue suspending all military activities for a further six months until August.

The aim, it said, was to give the movement an opportunity to retrieve what it called its ideological position.

so you are saying sadr declaring a cease fire has helped to keep the peace (which i agree) So now there is peace in the country less violence etc.... but sadr just stated he has failed.. (which i agree aswell)

lets just call a spade a spade and say that iran and sadr have been out manouvered By W........

__________________
"The most important and most connected man on this forum."
"As per the Forums leftist who insist I am associated with the upper echelons of our government, corporate America and the world’s power class.
Every moon bat conspiracy leads to me. "

Gix, he extended the ceasefire it until August. I could not be more happy that some of the violence has stopped however you are not seeing the entire picture. First, show me the entirety of where he uses the word failed. he does not mean against us-we are now negotiating wit him and his sect we have put in power.

Could you explain to me the value of putting a religious Shiite theocracy in power, in place of a secular Sunni theocracy? Was it worth 3 trillion and all those dead Iraqi civilians and American troops?

this is the problem for sadr.... he has failed to create a religiouse shiite theocracy.....


This is one of the main reasons why we are fightinh in iraq. To create a secular country in the heart of the middle east that can defends itself and is an aactive participant against radical islam

so like i said in my above post.... It seem W has outflanked iran, sadr and AQ

__________________
"The most important and most connected man on this forum."
"As per the Forums leftist who insist I am associated with the upper echelons of our government, corporate America and the world’s power class.
Every moon bat conspiracy leads to me. "

Good God Gix! We had a secular country in the mideast that outflanked Iran and Sadr. You do not get this ,do you? We spent 3 trillion, killed thousands of innocent civilians, took our eye off Afghanistan, sacrificed our military and weakened them to create a shitte theocracy who is sympathetic to sadr and is allies with Iran. We radicalized thousands, opened borders for Al quaeda and put a situation in place that could elevate Ahmanjinedad.

Iran to provide power to Iraq - CNN.com

We gained nothing ..we lost it all and now we are entrneched so deep.

Yes we Iraq was a secular country before 2oo3 but in now way was it a partner in taking on islamic extreamist...

yes wars are expensive... 3 trillion is allitle inflated.... as far as body counts and civilians

(letter recently sent to Iraq Body Count)
The reason I have doubts about such a fantastic number is because all of our military actions in Iraq have been in a tactical capacity, consisting of isolated raids, battles and what not. Can you name one major battle where more than 1000 'civilians' died at the hands of the troops. Or would you rather have us believe that we are just carpet bombing Iraqi neighborhoods on an everyday basis? With this perspective in mind it is next to impossible to believe that some 82,000+ deaths have resulted from our 'tactical' operations in Iraq. And how do you distinguish a dead terrorist or insurgent from a 'civilian'? And how do you distinguish the 'civilians' who have provided aid, supplies, intelligence and safe houses to terrorists and insurgents from those who haven't? Are they wearing terrorist dog tags?

As for your sources, you claim:

"Data is drawn from cross-checked media reports, hospital, morgue, NGO and official figures to" produce a credible record of known deaths and incidents."

Media reports? Of course you must know that most of the journalists over there are only reporting the car bombings, deaths and what have you. Rarely, if ever, do we hear about the dozens of hospitals and schools that have been built and/or repaired, new infrastructures, and things of this nature, so it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that their accounts have been skewed and are rife with oversights, omissions and outright distortions. Virtually none of the troops are ever interviewed because most 'journalists' only want to portray the war (and it is a 'War', not a picnic) in the worst possible terms.

NGO's? Which NGO's? 'Official reports'? What official reports? The military's? For 'some reason' you failed to say. Do they include the 1000's of accounts taken from the troops over the past few years? (No, they do not.)

Morgues? When visiting such places how does one determine which 'civilians' were killed by our troops and which ones were killed by terrorists and insurgents? For 'some reason' you failed to say.

I noticed that your website doesn't include a chart * NAMING * your sources and the numbers they provide and their methods of counting casualties. All you have given us are generic claims on their behalf. Can you name one NGO that has eyes and ears all over Iraq and who are always in a position to go into battle zones and monitor ALL the activity? For 'some reason' you failed to say.

As for 'civilian' deaths...are you bearing in mind that terrorists and insurgents are 'civilians', and that they (very) often operate by setting up their operations surrounded with women and children, and that many of the terrorists and insurgents have the phone numbers of their favorite journalist(s) so that in the event that the women and children they hide behind happen to get killed, the first thing they do is call these 'journalists, knowing full well many of them operate with an agenda?

It would also be interesting to know who your largest supporters are. For 'some reason' you failed to say. Are they United States citizens... or are they people like George Soros? And of course to keep your supporters happy, and the funds coming in, you are no doubt compelled to report what they want to hear. Aren't you? From a mile away, guys



NATO Progress in Afghanistan Significant, General Says http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=49316

No please read the first post... Sadr feals he has failed becuase a theocracy has failed to materialise.

American Thinker Blog: Young Iraqis turn against religious extremism

BBC NEWS | Middle East | Saudis to retrain 40,000 clerics


We have gained more than anyone can comprehend right now.... who would of thought that saudi arabia would be retraining all it's imams to counter islamic jihad.......

Yes we entreched deep..... but this is only becuase the results of not being involved would have destroyed the western world.

__________________
"The most important and most connected man on this forum."
"As per the Forums leftist who insist I am associated with the upper echelons of our government, corporate America and the world’s power class.
Every moon bat conspiracy leads to me. "

If you believe replacing one sects theocracy with another while weakening our military was worthwhile you truly are the last of the Mohigans, Gix.

"Yes we entreched deep..... but this is only becuase the results of not being involved would have destroyed the western world."
__________________

How?