Sadr considers US embassy staff in Baghdad as "occupiers"

'In response to a question from one of his followers, Sadr now says that after the expiration of the SOFA, the staff of the embassy should be considered “occupiers” and must be “resisted”. '

On one hand I see Muqtada al Sadr as an ungrateful fundamentalist majnoon. His opposition to the US does not make sense, given that the US overthrew the dictator who murdered his father and his two oldest brothers in 1999.

On the other hand I can understand why Muqtada al Sadr and his followers would distrust the US, given that the US could have overthrown the dictator in 1991 after bombing Iraq for 40 consecutive days and marching to the outskirts of Baghdad. By the 29th day of the 1991 bombing, the "Allied air campaign passes 40,000-sortie mark - 10,000 more missions than were flown against Japan in final 14 months of World War II."

Based on comments by Americans for posts about 1991, some Americans seem to think the Iraqis should not be angry or bitter about what the US should have done differently in 1991. Some think Iraqis should blame the Saudis, who were afraid of Iran taking over. So did the US allow Saddam to fly his helicopters because the Saudis did not want to see the Shia take over Iraq? Did KSA & USA have common interests? Or was KSA in charge? Is America KSA's bitch? It seems that way, especially when you consider that KSA was not punished for 9/11. The friendship seemed to flourish, actually.

For Americans and Saudis, 1991 turned out to be a good year. They got it all: a short war with relatively little casualties, KSA paid for the war and Sunni Arab domination of Iraq continued. Few Americans and Arabs were interested in helping Iraqis overthrow the Saddam.

Despite the bad things that happened and the mistakes, I would say the average Iraqi does not agree with Muqtada al Sadr and would like to see normal relations with the US. Iraq needs international assistance to develop into a prosperous nation.

Muqtada al Sadr is cuckoo for cocoa puffs

Muhanad Mohammed, Reuters: 'Anti-U.S. Shi'ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr urged Iraqis on Thursday to protest against any possible U.S. military intervention in Libya, saying the United States installed Gaddafi and now wants to remove him.

Sadr accused Washington and western nations of planting agents in Arab states and supporting dictatorships, then intervening in the name of democracy and claiming to liberate Arabs, citing the overthrow of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein.

"U.S. tricks do not deceive us any more. We were and still are standing against any intervention from the state of evil, America, in countries' affairs," Sadr said in a statement.

"I hope the Arab people, and especially those in Iraq, will show their rejection (for U.S. intervention in Libya) through peaceful protests this coming Friday." '

Extremists on "both sides"

This is a clip of US Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords talking to MSNBC last March about the heated rhetoric after the healthcare bill was passed and about Sarah Palin's crosshairs map. She also noted that there are extremists on both sides. I didn't read about any Democrats encouraging people to "reload" and I don't think any Democrats displayed on their websites a map of the US with gun scope crosshairs over the Congressional districts of Republicans. Sarah Mullen pointed out that in 2004 the Democrats displayed a US map with targets over states in which GW Bush led by a small margin. But the Democrats' map in 2004 "seems more tame because it doesn't list specific names. The markings seem more like a dart boards than gunsights."

The resultant debate reminds me of the debates that took place online after terrorists killed innocents in Iraq. Many people noted that there are extremists on both sides (Sunni and Shiite) and it's true - there are extremists on both sides. But in general they don't act the same; there are differences between Sunni extremists and Shiite extremists. Likewise, there are differences between leftist extremists and rightist extremists in America. Maybe the analogy is far reaching and maybe even false. But one has to wonder at a time when leaders of the Republican party have called on their supporters to "reload" while Muqtada al Sadr says "Only those qualified will carry weapons." Things can change quickly in Iraq, and it might be easier to convince Iraqis to drop their weapons than to convince Americans to drop theirs. For politicians in the US, "Endorsement of even modest gun-control measures can spell political defeat."

Eugene Robinson said on Countdown that in general, in the 60s and 70s, political violence came mostly from the left. But today, he said that incontrovertibly political violence comes mostly from the right:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

It cannot be said that Jared Lee Loughner came from the right or the left. It's clear he was deranged. But some of his views bear similarity to the views of Tea Party patriots.

Also see this clip. Also read my post "Guns in America".

No chance of peace between Iraq & Israel?

Fat chance, says the Angry Arab, who seems to be impressed with the "new and improved" Muqtada al Sadr:

I could not believe the sight of Muqtada As-Sadr today. The rally was massive: hundreds of thousands of people attended in a scene reminiscent of rallies of Party of God in Lebanon. But what was most astonishing was the performance of As-Sadr himself. Here was this petulant and ill-tempered man of 5 years ago who used to speak in short and hesitant sentences now appearing as a forceful and capable public speaker who knew who to handle a crowd. It was quite remarkable how much he has grown as a public speaker. This formerly consistently bad-tempered man now was able to sprinkle humor into the speech and to lead the crowd in a chant against the US and Israel. When I watched the hundreds of thousands chanting in unison against US and Israel, I remembered the promises made by the London-based Iraqi puppet opposition that the "new" US-occupied Iraq would lead the country toward peace with Israel. Fat chance.

Hundreds of thousands? Really? On CNN I heard "tens of thousands" attended. This article says Sadr gave his speech in front of "thousands" and so does this one. The Angry Arab (Lebanese American professor in California) loves any talk about "resistance" to the US & Israel, and apparently so do the Sadrists.

Some Iraqis worried about Sadr's return

"Beyond the mosque, in neighboring Najaf, Mr. Sadr is often reviled. His militia’s battles with the American military in 2004 wrecked the sacred city, and his prominence during the occupation threatened to upset Najaf’s established order, whose clerics revere the antithesis of Mr. Sadr, namely age and scholarship. Its merchants, for whom piety means profit, still deem him little more than a dim rabble-rouser with ill-mannered followers. Some worry he augurs a return to strife that could interrupt the city’s feverish building — from overpasses to sewage systems — with vast complexes rising along boulevards."

Muqtada al Sadr back in Iraq

"Muqtada's return does not bode well for the war-weary nation. His support of Maliki in securing the premiership came at a price - the Sadrists control the Education and Justice ministries, among six others, and will continue to implant theological paradigms in the curricula while maintaining Sharia Law to override every other legal consideration. Women's rights are likely to be left in the Middle Ages."

In December the Education Ministry banned theater and music classes in Baghdad's Fine Arts Institute.

Criminals in Maliki's new government

From a very good article by Hayder al-Khoei:

'Maliki’s new government is being supported by the Sadrist “outlaws” he fought in 2008, and yet Moqtada al-Sadr, still wanted by the Iraqi judiciary for murder, is going to play a key political role in Iraq for the next 4 years. Another senior Sadrist, Hakim al-Zamili, is implicated in the kidnapping, and likely death, of a former Da’wa colleague of Maliki but is now rubbing shoulders with the new Baghdad elite. Hadi al-Ameri, the commander of a militia whose members formed death squads out of Ministry of Interior police commandos, is now the new Transport Minister.

So why do Iraq’s new elite object to the inclusion of ex-Ba’athists in the political process when they themselves have criminals in their ranks who have Iraqi blood on their hands?

The de-Ba’athification commission was set up to bar candidates implicated in crimes committed pre-2003 but there has been no commission set up to deal with the post-2003 criminals, especially the militias and death squad members who have maintained a legacy of kidnapping, extrajudicial executions and armed insurgency. '

Sadrists gain influence in Iraqi politics

'In Iraq’s last government, Mr. Sadr’s followers were accused of using their offices to spread corruption and sectarian enmity, with officials lining their pockets and death squads roaming public hospitals.

There are also remaining fears, among Americans and Iraqis, that the militia that helped bring Mr. Sadr to power initially — and was responsible for much of the sectarian violence that threatened to tear the country apart — could again be mobilized against his enemies, particularly after the American military finishes its withdrawal.

The growing strength of the movement could significantly complicate the United States’ relationship with Iraq. Mr. Sadr, who waged bloody street battles against American forces and Sunni Muslims, and his rank-and-file members insist that no American troops should remain on Iraqi soil, and they do not speak with American officials.

“We know there are going to be Sadrist ministries,” said an American diplomat, who spoke on the condition of anonymity under normal diplomatic ground rules. “We want to make it work. But we will also be true to our own principles, and they may not want to work with us.”

In addition to the governor’s seat in Maysan, they are seeking control of service ministries and a slot as one of Mr. Maliki’s deputies.

“We’re going to get everything,” said Nasser al-Rubaie, a leading Sadrist politician, as he emerged from Parliament one afternoon.

The posture and power of the Sadrists have forced a shift in tone from American officials and erstwhile Iraqi rivals, who now find themselves thrown together an awkward partnership government.

After fully embracing the political process, Mr. Sadr’s candidates pulled off surprising victories to win 40 seats in last March’s elections. Female members of the Sadrist slate, who campaigned in black, head-to-toe abayas, fared particularly well compared with their secular counterparts.'