Comments on: Sistani Turns On Sadr, Joins Maliki!

By: 75

75 — Thu, 10 Apr 2008 21:43:20 +0000

“the holy hand grenade of Antioch”… if memory serves.

By: crosspatch

crosspatch — Thu, 10 Apr 2008 05:23:00 +0000

I love this article:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article3671530.ece#cid=OTC-RSS&attr=797084

Apparently the British are deploying a tactic they perfected in medieval days during their crusades and searches for Holy relics and have begun to taunt the Sadrists by running away.

I hear that we have given then provisions of wood from which to build a great wooden badger. About that hand grenade …

By: 75

75 — Thu, 10 Apr 2008 00:47:23 +0000

Truthy sure cites Petraeus frequently for someone who considers him treasonous. Just one more flaw we can add to his growing list of shortcomings.

By: truthhard2take

truthhard2take — Thu, 10 Apr 2008 00:17:17 +0000

WWS

Besides being wrong on all specifics he is wrong to assume that Maliki can decide whether al Sadr is banned from running or not.

Of course, banning him in any event will only cause worse civil war, because increasing numbers of Iraqis consider Maliki an ineffectual collaborator and little more. By the way WWS Petraeus admitted the
Maliki thrust was “disappointing.” The least this sycophant could have done.

By: 75

75 — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 18:41:49 +0000

Truthy, you and Norm share the same brain. It’s only natural that you would agree with him.

By: truthhard2take

truthhard2take — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 18:32:26 +0000

I only found Norm wrong once. He implied briefly days ago that he
bought into Strata’s foolishness about al Sadr’s influence being
insignificant in the new Iraq. In ensuing posts, he didn’t seem to continue this line of error.

By: truthhard2take

truthhard2take — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 18:28:39 +0000

Let me guess which views of the article Strata doesn’t “support.”
The truthful characterization of the next Iraqi government as
loyal to Iran,naturally.

By: 75

75 — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 17:40:36 +0000

Norm, you’ve been wrong with every posting. Please don’t force me to go over each one. Let’s just suffice to say you are a nut and nuts are wrong.

By: norm

norm — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 17:14:33 +0000

75…what exactly was i wrong about? please tell me.

By: kathie

kathie — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 16:12:15 +0000

al Sistani has always supported the division of church and state matters. Sadr would give his right hand for his support but through the barrel of a gun will never work for al Sistani.

By: 75

75 — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 15:14:10 +0000

Damn…that would mean that Truthhard and Norm were wrong again? I’m…shocked…hard to believe, given all the excellent assessments we get from them every 5 minutes.

By: WWS

WWS — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 13:34:37 +0000

This dissonance leads me to think that these various spokesmen aren’t able to keep in contact with Sadr and aren’t getting any clear directions – not surprising since he’s tucked away safely inside Iran, hundreds of miles away from all the acti0n. Without direction, everyone in his “army” is simply doing and saying whatever feels right to them. That’s how an organization dies.

And the news reports miss the fact that Maliki has Sadr boxed in no matter which way he goes. If he doesn’t disband the Mahdi Army, he and his supporters will be banned from the elections in October and will lose any political power they have. (they currently have 5 seats in the Iraqi parliament, I believe) And the inability to pull off the “million man march” indicates that even if he does manage to stay in the political game, his support is gone.

The leftoids who decry any “violence” don’t understand that organizations like this always die in a spasm of violence – it’s their nature. Going through a period like this is the only way to be rid of them.