Comments on: Maliki Cracks Down on the Sons of Iraq

By: DC Loser

DC Loser — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 01:59:03 +0000

Well of course, Maliki, being from the Dawa Party, is taking his orders from Tehran. The Ayatollahs are laughing themselves silly to see us doing their minion's bidding in ridding themselves of the Sunni opposition.

By: steve

steve — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 20:19:15 +0000

John Nagl, one of the co-authors of the new Army field manual reported much the same thing. Maliki's government is not employing the SOI's. They are arresting some of them now. Maliki has learned to use our forces very well now. He can pretty effectively shut out the Sunni's with our support. He now seems convinced he can maintain this when we are gone also.

This should not be surprising to anyone who follows Mid East politics. It's just how its done there.

Steve

By: Hal

Hal — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 20:10:09 +0000

I love this "opinion" obsession. First, let's be clear that there is plenty of actual reporting - which Boyd is so keen on - and eye witness reports that backs up this "opinion". If you guys got your information from more than Fox, Drudge and Insty, you might have already understood that this is real and not just "opinion". What you're dismissing as merely unsubstantiated opinion is actually analysis which is actually quite different than reporting and isn't something to be discounted merely because it isn't reporting. It's a weird tick y'all have on the right.

By: Houston

Houston — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 18:38:05 +0000

they (Maliki's government) remain convinced that the movement is simply a way for Sunni insurgents to buy time to restart a campaign of violence or to infiltrate the state’s security apparatus

...and what do they base this on? Oh, that's right, it's an opinion.

he'd be force to actually negotiate a solution rather than - as he is apparently doing - "dealing" with them by eliminating them.

But Hal believes it, so it must be true.

By: Alex Knapp

Alex Knapp — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 17:42:07 +0000

Um, isn't that what we want him to do: work with the Sunnis? So what logically flows from your statement there, Alex? Isn't it just another argument to get out, now?

Um, yes. Yes it is.

By: Hal

Hal — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 17:36:54 +0000

Um, isn't that what we want him to do: work with the Sunnis? Sure, but without us there to back him up and take sides in the whole affair, he'd be force to actually negotiate a solution rather than - as he is apparently doing - "dealing" with them by eliminating them.

By: Venomous Kate

Venomous Kate — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 17:32:24 +0000

Without our presence, I have a feeling he'd be much more inclined to work with the Sunnis... Um, isn't that what we want him to do: work with the Sunnis? So what logically flows from your statement there, Alex? Isn't it just another argument to get out, now?

By: Hal

Hal — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 13:44:20 +0000

so it's not reporting, it's opining. So I guess if another civil war breaks out you'll be down with that.

By: Boyd

Boyd — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 11:52:28 +0000

Sorry, Alex and Hal, but this just reads like someone grasping at straws to justify their "get out now" position on Iraq. Even the LA Times identifies their piece as "Opinion," so it's not reporting, it's opining.

By: Hal

Hal — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 05:30:58 +0000

But the Surge WORKED. Didn't Malaki get the message? My lord. You'd think he was a democrat or something.