It would be very unwise to kill Al Sadr or fight with his militia. Al Sadr is allied with the dawa party,killing him would make Iraq more politically unstable. He has a strong following because of his father,who was killed by Saddam. At one time we had the Badr Brigade as an ally,research them. We have had some strange alliances in Iraq and still do.
2007-08-29 11:03:28
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Maybe these fools will have a big rally & we can get them all at once! That's happened before. We gotta find 'em before we can take 'em out. That's the problem. It's a bit like dealing with the Vietnamese because they all have such similar facial features, clothing, & languages!
Yes, it's a game to see how the US acts & reacts to everything that is said & done. They are attempting to figure out their next move against the US. It's war & that's the way the game is played.
2007-08-29 10:59:58
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Mookie does not have the control over Jaysh Al-mahdi that he claims. Militiamen and sub-groups regularly attack US Forces and Sunnis. But some of them claim to be helping provide security, and actually that is true.
So its complicated, while all Al-Qaeda in Iraq members are bad, only some Jaysh members are. You can't go after all of them, it would be chaotic.
2007-08-29 11:19:59
·
answer #3
·
answered by inTHEgaddadavida 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
No. he's able to skill. Maliki is attempting to appease him by way of fact he has exchange into very effectual. with the aid of the way, acceptable now he's in Iran, the real participant controlling what happens in Iraq at this factor.
2016-10-17 06:18:02
·
answer #4
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's a militia -- one of several dozen in the region.
And yes, the US knows about them -- in fact, Patraeus has been arming and training some of them in outlying regions -- that's how the US has been able to achieve relative stability in those provinces.
Just like al-Sadr's militia has been able to achieve relative stability in certain areas under its control -- and relative stability is the best anyone is going to get for decades.
If we keep attacking every militia, just because we arbitrarily decide we don't like them, we're going to be there for decades.
2007-08-29 10:57:31
·
answer #5
·
answered by coragryph 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
Brute force causes resentment that will hinder reconciliation down the road. We have to attempt diplomatic alternatives whenever we can. This is a very good development. The sooner there is peace and stability, the sooner our troops come home.
2007-08-29 10:54:54
·
answer #6
·
answered by Marco R 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
We should have done that along time ago when his power was weak, but now we have to deal with his increased power and position. I do not trust truces.
2007-08-29 10:53:21
·
answer #7
·
answered by SgtMoto 6
·
1⤊
0⤋