The powerful Muslim cleric Muqtada al-Sadr says he wants to oust American forces from Iraq. According to a statement issued today, he's prepared to unleash his "guerrilla fighters to concentrate on pushing American forces out of the country."
He also called on the Iraqi army and police to end their working relationship with the U.S. For the past few months, Al-Sadr has been telling his troops to lie low, especially while the U.S. forces were operating in his region. Muqtada al-Sadr now wants Iraqi forces to join the insurgents in the battle against "the occupiers."
The statement, reportedly 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. In it, he said that “God has ordered you to be patient in front of your enemy, and unify your efforts against them – not against the sons of Iraq.”
Reuters reported Sunday afternoon that thousands of Iraqis were streaming to the holy southern city of Najaf on Sunday "in response to a call by... Al-Sadr for a big anti-American protest on Monday."
Al-Sadr's militant group has been likened to the Lebanese terrorist organization Hezbollah, in that they're taking a guns and butter approach in the neighborhoods they control. Besides his military activities, his people are providing basic social services the central government has been unable to accomplish, winning adherents throughout the region.
The situation in Iraq can seemingly change overnight. CBS news reported that the U.S. and Al-Sadr had held talks to reduce violence in the slums of Sadr City. An agreement was not achieved, partly because Al-Sadr's representatives demanded that the U.S. pull out of the neighborhood - a condition which was rejected.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - jaz
good eye, Mark..i had flagged this a few hours ago for reference
truly bad craziness indeed
2 - Mark Schannon
Thanks "Jaz"...actually, I had the article a lot earlier, but Roger C. found that AP, who first ran with it, wasn't sure...so I waited to get some more detail...frankly, it's a little over-edited...but the important point -- that the looney little lunatic is on the march again.
I think what's going on is that he was losing control of some of his forces with his "lay low" strategy, so he's letting them go kill so they can drink their fill of blood.
But not...
In Jameson Veritas
3 - Dave Nalle
This would perhaps be more meaningful if Sadr were actually in Iraq and had an actual 'army' to command, which according to the last reports he did not.
Dave
4 - Dave Nalle
It just occured to me that when he refers to 'his' army, he probably means the Iranian Revolutionary Guard.
Dave
5 - Mark Schannon
Dave, you're making a lot of assumptions. First, the Americans there aren't sure where he is--they think Lithuania, but they don't rule out that he is still in Iraq. Second, his people, surprise, insist he is still in Iraq. Third, I'm not sure where you get the notion that he doesn't have an army. He's lost some control of it by calling on them to not fight...letting some of the more radical elements break away...but I think that's why he issued the statement.
I haven't heard of anyone say he doesn't have an army.
In Jameson Veritas
6 - Dave Nalle
Lithuania? I hadn't heard that one. Last I'd heard he'd fled to Iran and most of his followers had gone to neighboring countries particularly Iran and Syria. As for not having an army, it's more a case of them being scattered to the four winds. I'm sure he could get them back together with some work - but not if he's in Lithuania.
Dave
7 - STM
al Sadr is a self-styled religious leader and runs a very distant second in terms of influence to the other Shi'ite mullahs in Iraq, who have called on Iraqis not to fight the coalition. Time will tell I guess, but I'd suspect not much is going to change. He's done it all before.
8 - moonraven
Was there a point somewhere in this article?
I sure as hell didn't see any.
As Che said, Let there be two, three, four, one hundred al Sadrs.
9 - Christopher Rose
I'm fairly confident Che was never aware of al Sadr, not unless he had a time travel machine. Not that time travel is possible of course.
10 - Lee Richards
The fact that violent fanatics can so easily gain control over masses of followers by using the ignorance, superstitions and fears of people would be laughable if it weren't so tragic.
The 21st century is no different from the 20th in that regard, so far. Can anyone name one so-called leader in the entire world who is rational, competent, and truthful?
11 - moonraven
The most dangerous violent fanatic is called Geroge Bush.
Chris, You're too young to understand the quote--whch originally referred to Vietnams.
12 - Clavos
Chris, You're too young to understand the quote--whch originally referred to Vietnams.
You're underestimating Christopher, mr. He knows what you meant, and what you actually said...
13 - moonraven
You are now his vocero, buttfuzz?
14 - Clavos
¿Y qué?
15 - moonraven
I would like to see where he has authorized you to interpret his thoughts, nailhead.
That would be like authorizing George Bush to be his vocero. All double digit IQ of him.
16 - Dave Nalle
I'm 100% positive that if Che was alive he'd see Sadr as an enemy rather than an ally. The type of society which Sadr advocates is inherently incompatible with the type of society which Che promoted. True, in the end both lead to oppression and dictatorship, but the ideologies are totally contradictory.
Dave
17 - moonraven
Put a sock in it, Nalle.
You have never read one word of Che's writings or you would not even consider such a foolish, pompous comment.
18 - Dave Nalle
I wasn't aware you were looking over my shoulder and monitoring what I read. In fact, I've read his book on Guerilla warfare and Socialism and Man in Cuba which was in a larger collection on socialism.
Do you really want to argue with me that the totalitarian theocratic state advocated by people like Moqtada al-Sadr is in any way compatible with the kind of government Che promoted?
Dave
19 - MBD
$18... It's all spelled N-A-T-I-O-N-A-L-=I-S-M.
20 - Les Slater
moonraven #8,
"As Che said, Let there be two, three, four, one hundred al Sadrs."
Che would never had said such a thing. Iraq and Viet Nam are not the same thing. The national liberation struggle in Viet Nam had a progressive program for workers and peasants.
All of the condenders in Iraq are just petty capitalists fighting for turf. They have no program.
Please do not insult Che to try to make your case.
Les
21 - Dave Nalle
Exactly, Les. And it's even worse than their being capitalists, which they really aren't except by convenience. They're also theocrats and Che wouldn't have liked that at all either.
Dave
22 - Les Slater
Dave,
I think they are fundamentally capitalists and only accidentally theocrats.
Les
23 - moonraven
You wet-behind the ears right-wing jokers think you know more about Che than I do?
24 - moonraven
How many of you have even read La guerra de guerrillas? Or even his speeches and his diaries written in Cuba, the Congo and Bolivia?
25 - Les Slater
"...think you know more about Che than I do?"
You seem to know little so it would not seem too dificult to know more.
"How many of you have read...."
I have and more.
Your #8 "As Che said, Let ther be two, ..." shows you have less understanding of politics than just a simple misunderstanding of Che.
Any advocacy of guerilla warfare in La guerra de guerrillas was preconditioned on that war being progressive.
The U.S. should get the fuck out of Iraq, Afghanistan, Philippines, Somalia and Cuba. But what does praising Muqtada al-Sadr have to do with that? Al-Sadr leads a Shiite militia that operates in and outside the Iraqi government and has a record of murdering opponents and Sunni civilians, much like Sunni-led death squads are doing. Al-Sadr's forces are one of the bases of support of Iraqi prime minister Nouri Kamal al-Maliki.
Let there be two, three, four, one hundred al Sadrs! My ass!