Blacks continually claim racism is still alive and undaunted in America.

They should know....

From LGF via the Jawa Report

Barrack Obama's friend and minister Reverend Wright appears not to be the only one claiming oppre...

My husband is a Survivorman fan so that means I’ve watched Les Stroud mark his territory more than once myself. You know how it is, we women watch what our men watch. Its just a fact of life, men control the remote.

Interestingly, there is a story....

Just when I’ve been hearing how the United States feeds people what they are supposed to think from people who say they haven’t got the freedom to speak openly even while they are openly speaking …. I see a press release from China’s official Olymp...

Reposting this from 2006.

The world of politics is never pretty and often very ugly.

One of the most ugly features is how the politicians switch facts around to protect their argument. They determine a conclusion that fits their needs, ...

Obama and his campaign (along with Hillary!) have been making much of John McCain using the term 100 years in regard to Iraq. The claim being that McCain is ok with war lasting 100 years. But in a case of perhaps hell is seeing ......

Not Iran, just Shiite clerics in Iran. After all, his delegation was sent to Qom, not Tehran

True, but then again, there's the issue of how much influence Qom has on Tehran....

I'm not convinced. He basically laid the question at the feet of Iran, and told us he'd act at their directive. Still, he may ahve his own motivations....

Not Iran, just Shiite clerics in Iran. After all, his delegation was sent to Qom, not Tehran. I imagine that they will do much the same as the Najaf clerics did, and refuse to be drawn into Sadr's politic fight, despite how much Tehran would like to see Maliki and the Badr corps solidify their authority in Iraq.

Sadr has thus far not seemed inclined to be subservient to Iran, and as I noted above it doesn't seem they've told him much of anything, let alone telling him no.

I'm not convinced. He basically laid the question at the feet of Iran, and told us he'd act at their directive. Still, he may ahve his own motivations....

LOTR references don't exactly help make your case Bit

Perhaps, but the similarity is striking, none the less...a nd I for one can't think of a real life stirep that is similar enough to remark on. He strikes me as doing Iran's bidding, with the idea of being a high up part of that food chain when all is said and done. As I say, he's acting like he's got his own motivations. And I suppose given the numbers that LOTR turned in, the reference is a little better understood than are most Trek memes. Indeed; is there anyone here who does NOT understand it?

Indeed. And if Iraqis are as poor at following politics as US citizens are, this will work exactly as if Sistani had said it himself.

What we see here, is Sadr, not Maleki trying to capitulate,and his Iranian masters telling him no.

Sadr has thus far not seemed inclined to be subservient to Iran, and as I noted above it doesn't seem they've told him much of anything, let alone telling him no.

It strikes me his position is not unlike Saruman in LOTR.

LOTR references don't exactly help make your case Bit. Nor do star trek or star wars references, in case you were thinking of using one of those next time. In fact, it's probably best to stick with history and facts, rather than pop culture.

And as many people, including James have pointed out, security progress was not the goal of the surge, it was the means. The goal was political progress.

No, it was and remains the prerequisite.

It appears that Sadr is off the hook: “Iraq’s top Shiite religious leaders have told anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr not to disband his Mehdi Army, an al-Sadr spokesman said Monday amid fresh fighting in the militia’s Baghdad strongholds.”

And so now, Sadr finds himself bewteen Iraq and a hard place. What we see here, is Sadr, not Maleki trying to capitulate,and his Iranian masters telling him no. But why would he try to capitulate, if he had the uper hand? Clearly, he doesn't think he does.

It strikes me his position is not unlike Saruman in LOTR.

In addition, Cole's take of the headline seems more skeptical than yours

My point is simply that the people pushing the line that we've finally seen light and political progress is now here, replete with a full formal pony guard is lunacy to declare. Sadr is involved in a rather interesting and subtle political game which he seems to be winning quite handily. To quote axt113's comment in this thread

For Sadr its a win-win, if Sistani tells him to disband he looks like the peacemaker and true follower and rides the road to becoming the next Ayatollah and winning the elections in the fall.

If he tells him not to disband, then Sadr can say that the religion wants him to continue the fight against the evil occupiers and he'll have the support of the shia people, because sistanti is their religious leader.

those who think that he's backing down under pressure don't understand how politics works. Maliki tried to outmanuevar him but ended up playing right into Sadr's hands

Which pretty much sums up my position on the subject.

But al-Sadr spokesman Salah al-Obeidi said al-Sadr has consulted with Iraq's Shiite clerical leadership "and they refused that." He did not provide details of the talks.

To which Cole's analysis is:

They are not so foolish as to take responsibility for dissolving a militia that they had nothing to do with creating. And that is probably the real meaning of this CNN report that they 'refused' when asked. I doubt the grand ayatollahs in Najaf actively commanded Muqtada to keep his militia. They just declined to get drawn in.

So they're not telling him to keep his army, they're saying they won't get involved in this political infighting, that they are not responsible for Sadr or his Mahdi army.

Now it will be interesting to see what the decision is in Qom.