I'm sure Dan Rather will lead with this story tonight: Army unit claims victory over sheik. The Washington Times reports an American military victory ov Al-Sadr:
The Army's powerful 1st Armored Division is proclaiming victory over Sheik Muqtada al-Sadr's marauding militia that just a month ago seemed on the verge of conquering southern Iraq.The Germany-based division defeated the militia with a mix of American firepower and money paid to informants. Officers today say "Operation Iron Saber" will go down in military history books as one of the most important battles in post-Saddam Hussein Iraq.
"I've got to think this was a watershed operation in terms of how to do things as part of a counterinsurgency," said Brig. Gen. Mark Hertling, a West Point graduate and one of two 1st Armored assistant division commanders, in an interview last week as he moved around southern Iraq. "We happened to design a campaign that did very well against this militia."
Is anyone disturbed that the Army let Sadr get away?
We had the perfect opportunity to kill him and his insurgents,(and a warrant to capture him). Now he's going to run for office?
AlexC is absolutely right!
Posted by: sugarchuck at June 23, 2004 03:49 PMPerhaps he'll be Kerry's running mate!
Seriously, I hear you but his father was very highly thought of, and he is a cleric. I think he was discredited and that may be enough.
Not enough. He is responsible for the death of American soldiers. Either directly, or ordering his minions to do so.
That and he's responsible for the renewed quagmire talk.
Isn't he guilty of sedition? Maybe not. The "official" government is still a week out. He led a rebellion. That should count against him someway.
Alex, On first blush I'm inclined to agree with you. Particularly since at one point we vowed to capture or kill al Sadr. But as I learned from this article: [http://www.pinr.com/report.php?ac=view_report&report_id=182&language_id=1] al Sadr is not cut from the same cloth as, say, al Zarqawi. Sadr is an Iraqi and his actions have been viewed by other Iraqis as patriotic. (Zarqawi is a foreign terrorist with little sympathy from the citizenry.) Sadr enjoys large popular support and now that he's abandoned violent resistance to law and order it is appropriate that coalition forces leave it to the new Iraqi government to deal with him. It is their arrest warrant we sought to enforce, after all.
It is true that coalition forces "won" the military battle with Sadr's militia, killing nearly half of it and forcing the disbanding of the rest. Now it's up to Iraq's government to determine how to proceed. And how they deal with Sadr should weigh heavily on our decision when and how to turn Saddam over to them.
Posted by: johngalt at June 24, 2004 09:42 AMWell... there was a warrant for his arrest. He should be arrested without delay.
And, can you trust him?