Al-Sadr Calls for Attacks on U.S. Soldiers

[orangikan]

It looks like the gloves are coming off...for both sides! It's good news for the Sunnis he's been killing, and many GI's would love to go at the Mahdi army. Clearly Al Sadr is trying to position himself as the top Shia, and is also taking a different tack to SCIRI, the dominant Shia group, who have tolerated the American presence while they build their power in the govt. It also means that Iran, which backs both sides, may be in an internal power struggle over who to back. Or they may simply giving Sadr the OK to ratchet up the pressure on America, hoping that an increase in fighting will not play well at home, and tie up resources even more so as to give Iran hope that the US will not bomb their nuclear facilities.

By SAAD ABDUL KADIR
AP
BAGHDAD (April 8) - The renegade cleric Muqtada al-Sadr urged Iraqi forces to stop cooperating with the United States and told his guerrilla fighters to concentrate their attacks on American troops rather than Iraqis, according to a statement issued Sunday.

The statement, stamped with al-Sadr's official seal, was distributed in the Shiite holy city of Najaf on Sunday -- a day before a large demonstration there, called for by al-Sadr, to mark the fourth anniversary of the fall of Baghdad .

"You, the Iraqi army and police forces, don't walk alongside the occupiers, because they are your archenemy," the statement said. Its authenticity could not be verified.

In the statement, al-Sadr -- who commands an enormous following among Iraq 's majority Shiites and has close allies in the Shiite-dominated government -- also encouraged his followers to attack only American forces, not fellow Iraqis.

"God has ordered you to be patient in front of your enemy, and unify your efforts against them -- not against the sons of Iraq," the statement said, in an apparent reference to clashes between al-Sadr's Mahdi Army fighters and Iraqi troops in Diwaniyah, south of Baghdad. "You have to protect and build Iraq."
http://news.aol.com/topnews/articles...90001?cid=2194

[Snouter]

I wonder what those savages did in a previously life to be born a Shiite or Sunni in a filthy desert. They must have done something very, very evil to be punished like that.

[Malcolm Wright]

Originally Posted by Snouter

I wonder what those savages did in a previously life to be born a Shiite or Sunni in a filthy desert. They must have done something very, very evil to be punished like that.

When you leave DA for such long stretches of time, could you try to evolve before coming back?

M.

[Snouter]

Malcolm, PLEES TRIE TO ADRESS THE ISHUES RELEVANT TO THE THRED.

[soylentgreen]

So much for the "peace loving" and "beautiful" religion of Islam.

[orangikan]

Originally Posted by soylentgreen

So much for the "peace loving" and "beautiful" religion of Islam.

Hey they're saying: "Don't kill each other: kill infidels instead." That's a start!!

[SwiftSloth]

Originally Posted by soylentgreen

So much for the "peace loving" and "beautiful" religion of Islam.

I'd love to see how the US reacted if any given state was occupied by a country and govt. that was alien to ours. I'm sure we wouldn't care, and would welcome our communist/islamic friends with open arms, to stay as long as they please.

[Snouter]

SwiftSloth, the USA is currently being invaded by illegal aliens. Nobody really cares because the Western World is a stupidly open Christian-based society with roots from the Ancient Greek civilization. If we were a savage, cowardly Islamic society, the illegal invaders would have problems. Let's be thankful that we do not live in a total insane asylum like the Muslim world.

[SwiftSloth]

Snout,

What did that have to do with my post? I was commenting that any people who are constantly being occupied and pushed around by another country, even if that country has good intentions, are going to be pissed off and likely fight back out of human nature. It had nothing to do with the fact that the US has better Human rights then many ME countrys.

[Snouter]

The thing is that the underlying insanity driving their actions revolves around their approach to life which unfortunately is based on the death cult known as Islam.

[86Dude]

I think it's time we reduced Sadr city to rubble.

[Snouter]

86Dude, I agree. Either destroy the evil or attempt to convert them to rational way of approaching life as humans. They need to stop worshipping that focking black meteorite at the kabba in mecca. Islam is permanently keeping them in the stone focking age.

[86Dude]

No disagreement there. But you can't turn a pagan satan worshipping cult around 360 if it doesn't want to change.

Sadr and his fools need to be given an ultimatum: Get involved in the Iraqi political process, or we're going to level your sanctuaries, your homes, etc., and pay little regard to collaterol damage.

[cirque]

Originally Posted by orangikan

It also means that Iran, which backs both sides, may be in an internal power struggle over who to back. Or they may simply giving Sadr the OK to ratchet up the pressure on America, hoping that an increase in fighting will not play well at home, and tie up resources even more so as to give Iran hope that the US will not bomb their nuclear facilities.

It means Iran IS fighting a war against the US just like they fought a proxy war against the Israelis in Lebanon.

Al Sadr and any muslim cleric should be target for assassination for calling followers to open conflict against US forces. We should target the leadership of these groups.

[Feenix566]

"God has ordered you to be patient in front of your enemy, and unify your efforts against them -- not against the sons of Iraq," the statement said, in an apparent reference to clashes between al-Sadr's Mahdi Army fighters and Iraqi troops in Diwaniyah, south of Baghdad. "You have to protect and build Iraq."

At least he's talking about unifying Iraq...

Originally Posted by Malcolm Wright

When you leave DA for such long stretches of time, could you try to evolve before coming back?

M.

Oh come on now, Malcolm. We'd miss the old Snouter if he ever changed.

Originally Posted by cirque

Al Sadr and any muslim cleric should be target for assassination for calling followers to open conflict against US forces. We should target the leadership of these groups.

Targeting the leadership has a perfect record. It never works. You can assassinate a thousand top clerics, and your situation will not change. These leaders wouldn't have power if their followers didn't also believe in the ideas they're promoting.

[cirque]

Originally Posted by Feenix566

Targeting the leadership has a perfect record. It never works.

You can cite proof of this?

Originally Posted by Feenix566

You can assassinate a thousand top clerics, and your situation will not change. These leaders wouldn't have power if their followers didn't also believe in the ideas they're promoting.

Assassinating leaders that incite violence has a perfect record; It punishes those leaders that deserve punishment. It will also make the remaining leaders think twice before they do the same.

[soylentgreen]

Originally Posted by SwiftSloth

I'd love to see how the US reacted if any given state was occupied by a country and govt. that was alien to ours. I'm sure we wouldn't care, and would welcome our communist/islamic friends with open arms, to stay as long as they please.

Al Sadr is nothing but a shit stirrer. If this country was occupied, I doubt there would be many holy men, priests or ministers advocating wholesale murder. Al Sadr is a "cleric" who advocates violence. That's the simple difference. It is too bad people can't see that.

[cirque]

Originally Posted by soylentgreen

Al Sadr is a "cleric" who advocates violence.

This simple fact is ignored. Is this because people expect violence from the "religion of peace?"

[Feenix566]

Originally Posted by cirque

You can cite proof of this?

Assassinating leaders that incite violence has a perfect record; It punishes those leaders that deserve punishment. It will also make the remaining leaders think twice before they do the same.

Can you name one time that a leader has been assassinated and all his followers just went home?

It doesn't make the followers "think twice" about following in the leaders' footsteps. If anything, it makes then even more eager to do so.

[grimrebuke]

Originally Posted by 86Dude

No disagreement there. But you can't turn a pagan satan worshipping cult around 360 if it doesn't want to change.

You can't be pagan and satan worshiping at the same time. Satan is a Christian character, and Christianity is monotheistic.

This is an ugly development. I've wondered for a long time why both the US and Muqtada were partially-friendly. Although, I'm equally puzzled as to what al-Sadr thinks he will gain by attacking US troops. Unless the thinking is that the US is going to pull out no matter what, and making an aggressive move now might make it look like we were driven out instead of having left of our own accord. But I can't see what he or Iran gain from that. Iran doesn't want us out of Iraq, and ratcheting the violence up isn't likely to convince us to hang around longer. I'm wondering what else might be influencing this particular play.