PDA

View Full Version : Al Sadr gets it.



Scanker19
09-11-2011, 20:39
BAGHDAD (AP) — An anti-American cleric is urging his followers to stop attacking U.S. troops in Iraq so that their withdrawal from the country isn't slowed down, a call meant to ramp up pressure on Baghdad's political leaders who are considering asking some American forces to stay.
In a statement posted on his website, Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr told his militias to halt attacks against U.S. forces till the withdrawal is finished at the end of the year as required under a security agreement between Washington and Baghdad.
"Out of my desire to complete Iraq's independence and to finish the withdrawal of the occupation forces from our holy lands, I am obliged to halt military operations of the honest Iraqi resistance until the withdrawal of the occupation forces is complete," al-Sadr said in the statement, posted late Saturday. Sadrist lawmaker Mushraq Naji confirmed the statement on Sunday.
However, al-Sadr warned that "if the withdrawal doesn't happen ... the military operations will be resumed in a new and tougher way."
The statement followed last week's notice by U.S. officials in Baghdad, announcing the start of the withdrawal.
There are currently about 45,000 U.S. forces in Iraq.
However, U.S. and Iraqi leaders are currently weighing whether some American troops should remain past the Dec. 31 deadline as Baghdad continues to struggle with instability and burgeoning influence from neighboring Iran. Last month, Iraqi leaders began negotiating with U.S. officials in Baghdad to keep at least several thousand troops in Iraq to continue training the nation's shaky security forces.
Officials in Washington say President Barack Obama is willing to keep between 3,000 and 10,000 U.S. troops in Iraq. But with fewer than four months before the final deadline, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and parliament still have not indicated how many U.S. troops Iraq might need, how long they would stay, or exactly what they would be doing.
After more than eight years of war, many weary Iraqis are ready to see U.S. troops go, and staunchly defend their national sovereignty against an American force they see as occupiers. Al-Sadr's followers vehemently oppose a continued U.S. military presence in Iraq, and walked out of last month's meeting where political leaders decided to open the talks on having American troops stay.
"Our goal has been always to fight the occupiers because they are still in our country," Naji said Sunday.
Still, other Iraqi officials privately say they want American troops to continue training the nation's security forces for months, if not years, to come. The president of Iraq's northern Kurdish region this week pleaded for U.S. forces to stay to ward off threats of renewed sectarian violence.
Many Iraqis — both Sunnis and Shiites — share that fear.
"As for me, and the sheiks of Nasiriyah, we want the U.S. Army to stay," Sheik Manshad al-Ghezi of the southern Shiite city of Nasiriyah said in a recent interview. "We are afraid of civil war. All the parties and groups in Iraq are armed and the Iraqi Army cannot manage to bring security to Iraq and stop the fighting among these parties."
In another statement posted Sunday, a Shiite militia controlled by Iran jeered calls for U.S. troops to stay. The group ridiculed a warning last week by Kurdish regional President Massoud Barzani that raised the specter of civil war if American forces leave Iraq. Kurds have long depended on U.S. troops to protect them, going back to Saddam Hussein's rule.
"When the (U.S.) occupation gets out of the country with his agents, the Iraqi nation will be unified," an unidentified leader for Kataib Hezbollah, which operates in Iraq, wrote on the militia's website. "Whoever calls for keeping the occupation is linking his destiny with the occupation and has sold himself as cheap, and he should leave the country with his masters."
Violence has dropped dramatically across Iraq from just a few years ago, but deadly bombings and shootings still happen every day.
Late Sunday, police said a roadside bomb targeting a security patrol killed a passer-by and two police in Baghdad's eastern Shiite Shamaayah area. Three more police were among eight others who were wounded, officials said.
The casualties were confirmed by a medic at Imam Ali hospital. Both spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to release the information.

Bailey Guns
09-11-2011, 20:47
Just read that story. Interesting.

It's time we left. If the Iraqi's can't handle their problems by now, we probably can't help them anyway.

El Caballo Loco
09-11-2011, 20:53
This has been the name of the game since that mother fucker popped back up into the picture.

"However, al-Sadr warned that "if the withdrawal doesn't happen ... the military operations will be resumed in a new and tougher way."

Really? No shit. They know certain elements aren't leaving anytime soon and they are just dying for the opportunity to hit us with force. Since Sadr came back, nothing slowed down either. If anything, the boogers started ramping back up their attacks seeing a strong militia leader openly announce his presence and looking for a spot in office to boot.

Nothings changed but damn, even the majority of the Americans over there and the majority here still haven't realized this.

These statements by Sadr are from January by the way.

BPTactical
09-11-2011, 21:25
OK- Taliban lays on the DL until we are pulled out. We leave and the defecation hits the rotary oscillator.









Then what?

Bailey Guns
09-11-2011, 21:36
OK- Taliban lays on the DL until we are pulled out. We leave and the defecation hits the rotary oscillator.









Then what?

Our warrior men and women stopped getting killed and maimed.

SA Friday
09-11-2011, 21:55
Fuck that fat MFer. He's personally responsible for the death of hundreds of my fellow military members. I wanted to JDAM his ass to nothingness back in 04, but some unnamed agency had there heads up their asses as usual and didn't see just how influential he would become. Now we have to deal with him and his Fn Irianian handlers.

Personally, I would wet work his cranium the first chance we got after the withdraw and make it look like a Quds Force hit. Then I'd send a nice letter to Iran letting them know if they sed another puppet over the river, we'll evaporate them too.

This is completely a move to benefit his run at power and his Iranian handlers are banking on it to influence the post American withdraw Iraq.

Elhuero
09-11-2011, 22:02
one of the jihad's primary demand is the exit of the U.S. from the middle east.


therefore, I say we dig in and never leave.

Never.

KevDen2005
09-12-2011, 01:18
one of the jihad's primary demand is the exit of the U.S. from the middle east.


therefore, I say we dig in and never leave.

Never.


I kind of like this....I don't like the idea of giving into demands of terrorists...

brokenscout
09-12-2011, 08:15
You need a guy like that to run a Country like that. His sons needed to be killed,but Saddam should have stayed. Need to pull out and leave a Nuke on a timer.

mopar
09-12-2011, 09:19
This is probably over simplifing but, haven't these middle eastern countries been fighting each other for centuries ? What is the U.S. going do to stop this ? Aren't we basically protecting big oil interests? I don't have any answers but, I don't think fighting wars with them is going to help the situation. Maybe use covert operations to take out some of the leaders.

Opinons ?

brokenscout
09-12-2011, 09:24
This is probably over simplifing but, haven't these middle eastern countries been fighting each other for centuries ? What is the U.S. going do to stop this ? Aren't we basically protecting big oil interests? I don't have any answers but, I don't think fighting wars with them is going to help the situation. Maybe use covert operations to take out some of the leaders.

Opinons ?
It seems like every time we get rid of one guy, another guy twice as bad pops up. Let Israel deal with them

sniper7
09-12-2011, 10:21
a few planes dropping presents on the entire country could solve ALL their problems as well as ours.

Byte Stryke
09-12-2011, 11:05
Until this country re-adopts the previous policies of waging war in which the entire country was an enemy, we will continue to struggle with our fights.

I am all for diplomacy and negotiation.

Diplomacy and negotiation are a limp cock if the enemy knows you have no fight.



Carpet Bomb the enemy without apology, make the cost of transgression against this country so high that the enemy will not even consider it.



Stanley: War? Who are we at war with?
Gabriel: Anyone who impinges on America's freedom. Terrorist states, Stanley. Someone must bring their war to them. They bomb a church, we bomb ten. They hijack a plane, we take out an airport. They execute American tourists, we tactically nuke an entire city. Our job is to make terrorism so horrific that it becomes unthinkable to attack Americans.
This.

Ronin13
09-12-2011, 13:05
Originally Posted by Movie "Swordfish"
Stanley: War? Who are we at war with?
Gabriel: Anyone who impinges on America's freedom. Terrorist states, Stanley. Someone must bring their war to them. They bomb a church, we bomb ten. They hijack a plane, we take out an airport. They execute American tourists, we tactically nuke an entire city. Our job is to make terrorism so horrific that it becomes unthinkable to attack Americans.

Carpet Bomb the enemy without apology, make the cost of transgression against this country so high that the enemy will not even consider it.


This.

Touche Byte! I would love to have a president in charge that would adopt that policy. The only thing these bastards recognize is force. You don't fight an enemy that wants you dead with the Geneva conventions. The only way to fight them is by shooting them in the head. No talks, no hearts and minds, and no backing down. They say we bomb their cities and kill innocents, well what happens when we really start doing that and saying "if you support terrorism you will die. We will not differentiate between men, women, and children, we only see supporters." Perhaps fighting fire with fire is the only solution.

BlasterBob
09-12-2011, 14:44
We will not differentiate between men, women, and children, we only see supporters." Perhaps fighting fire with fire is the only solution.
+1,000 [Beer]

We should drop a few of our really "big ones" and convert those Countries into molten glass parking lots.
I'd gladly like to see my tax dollars spent that way..
They are either our enemies or at least POTENTIAL enemies. We now need a hawk rather than a damn dove driving our Country.....[Rant1]

Ronin13
09-12-2011, 14:56
We now need a hawk rather than a damn dove driving our Country.....[Rant1]

I thought we had the eagle as our national bird... have you ever encountered a bald eagle? They can be really pissed off! I haven't but I have seen those "When animals attack" stuff from the good people at the Fox Network- ya know, wholesome and wonderful programming.

mcantar18c
09-12-2011, 17:56
This is probably over simplifing but, haven't these middle eastern countries been fighting each other for centuries ? What is the U.S. going do to stop this ? Aren't we basically protecting big oil interests? I don't have any answers but, I don't think fighting wars with them is going to help the situation. Maybe use covert operations to take out some of the leaders.

Opinons ?

People never seem to understand the ultimate reason for "nation building" (what we're trying to do in Iraq) and the importance of sticking around and building a democracy instead of leaving a power vacuum.
As a general rule, democracies do not go to war with each other.
This means regional stability and easier trading of resources (yes, oil is probably a part of things, but really... if we aren't willing to go to war over oil, what are we willing to fight for?), etc.

Now, whether or not we will succeed in creating a stable democracy that will hold when we eventually leave is a whole different story. Most of the shitbags over there have no interest in having their country become a democracy. And whether we could succeed or not over there, we won't be sticking around long enough to get the job done anyway... the sheep no longer understand why it is we go to war, why we're in the wars were in, and that we need to support the war effort... though I'm not sure they ever did to begin with.