Civil War Officially Starts: Basra Splits Off From Iraq Rule--Unity Ends

Al-Sadr: Do You Think Letting This Chap Keep His Own Enormous Militia and Allowing Him To Steal Tens of Million Of Oil Dollars Was Really Such A Good Bush Strategery?

You think Bush fucked up so far--JUST WAIT. Note this is a DU Exclusive as the press or even the Internet has not picked this up yet!

The article below means the war in Iraq is about to start. Yes, that's right. Soon US troops will be fighting millions of enraged Shia, with enormous militias, now armed to the teeth thanks to stolen oil.

The local government of Basra has refused to dissolve--meaning Iraq is officially in a state of CIVIL WAR. I guess we can call it "Iraqnam" now...



If the news that the Civil War has officially and legally started in Iraq gets out to the public somehow (please remember to recommend), the Democratic plan to withdraw will become even more of a club to bang the Rubber Stampers with--SO PASS THE WORD.

THE CIVIL WAR HAS STARTED AND THE MEDIA WON'T REPORT IT.

Here's more on what al-Sadr himself has been up to besides Humongous protests in Baghdad for Hizbollah (to which he is sending armed fighters):

:nuke: :nuke: :nuke:

What a differnce an invasion makes.

reasons now.

Umm Qasr is the port city, but it's only a few miles south of Basrah. You must go through Basrah to get to Umm Qasr. He who controls Basrah controls Iraq's access to the Persian Gulf.

That's a good quote. I've never heard it before. Sadly, it is all too true. Every President since FDR (inclusive) has been a criminal. *sigh*

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

in Iraq.

Check this out:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basra,_Iraq

Who's sorry now, to coin a phrase.

But, the best dates (fruit) in the world? :-( What else can/will be ruined?

One of Iraq's major cities and a large port---kind of like New Orleans.

I thought we gave Basra to the Brits because we knew it was going to be a bloodbath- lots of door to door fighting as opposed to dropping bombs from miles away. And they have all that experience from Northern Ireland.

Lou Dobbs seems to be the only one keeping Iraq war in the news...

This may be a good development in the long run. The US has to get out of Iraq and the Iraqis have got to take over their own lives. If that means they have to fight a civil war, that is regrettable, but sometimes civil wars bring about a good in the end - the US Civil War was good in the long run and brought about needed change in the country. Let's keep close track of these developments...

As civil war rages in Iraq, it would be a good idea to run pictures of the rethugs holding their blue fingers up.

It is unduly incendiary...

I knew that Sadr, as a Muslim cleric, would not be giving anyone the "finger". He is not the "evil enemy", as I am sure you know. He is anti-US right now, and rightfully so. Our government has screwed up so badly in Iraq that political and religious figures who were stoutly anti-Saddam, and would have been at least somewhat kindly disposed toward us, have instead become our steadfast enemies. They cannot be blamed for holding the US responsible for so many of their on-going miseries. This situation in Iraq is going to go even more to hell than it already is and with the Dictator Bush at the helm the trip to hell will simply increase in speed...

Oh, but we're making progress over there! The insurgency is in its last throes!

damn it all anyway

the spring of '03 there were loud, intelligent voices screaming that this is exactly what would happen if we invaded and occupied Iraq. But no one would listen - even the record-shattering 15 million people in the streets of the world had no affect. Dictator Bush dismissively call them a "focus group". Well, at least SOMEONE was "focused"...

Who is Azzaman?

It has a very broad distribution and appears to be a reputable paper/news service.

www.azzaman.com

There has been a low-level kind of civil war going on in Iraq for awhile. I see no evidence that over the last three days this has escalated to an all-out civil war or "officially started."

Sadr's Mahdi army is based in the Baghdad area. I'm not sure why he is the initial focus of a post addressing the secessionist threat in the Basra area. Of course that whole country is confusing, so I don't chastise the poster for getting signals crossed.

There has been a low-level kind of "civil war" going on in Iraq for awhile.

war WAS official, if one of the major city governments has refused an order from the PM. This brings the situation to a head and there can be little talk of "approaching" civil war, when such a showdown is in process - just MO...

why has there been almost no Western coverage of this conflict between Maliki and the Basra government? This at least seems like an important story, but no MSM coverage, at all. This lack of coverage, at the very least, is interesting...

It's sometimes a game of semantics in politics and on this board. Technically if the state of, let's say, New Hampshire decided to try and secede from the Union and armed the residents and said that the President and Congress' laws were no longer valid in their territory... wouldn't that be Civil War? Isn't that similar to what's going on here? Granted, this 'civil war' has been going on awhile... but doesn't this make it "official"? That's where the OP is headed in MO... it's a talking point... (forget Sadr and the inconsistencies... they're not needed) if this Basra thing is true, nothing else matters... any Rethug who says it's not a civil war!, you can say, well what about Basra?

whatever...
if people don't realise already that it's mayhem, a clusterfuck, a death zone in Iraq...
that 'civil war' is just a catch phrase, a wording obligation, then...

well, what can you say?

:shrug:

Bush would pull the troops out. That has now occured with the statement of the Basra City Council on August 9. We are officially in a civil war from this date.

What part of "No, we are not going to give up power and we have the army and police on our side, so bring it on!" don't you understand?

This changes everything. The fact that the media is IGNORING this development totally means not that it is phony, but that it is unfortunately all too real.

Btw, sorry I forgot to include that al-Sadr has a Headquarters in Basra. He has offices in major Shia areas. Figured nobody would forget that, as we fought him there and lost many good lives and dollars in failing to take him out in 2004 -- in Basra.

He's just trying to take over Baghdad and other towns now, so it is a little confusing I know.

Please post any other Iraq 101 questions and I'll be glad to answer them for you.

Here's one for everyone to discuss: "How much of Iraq's oil is stolen by the Shia for weapons every year?" (Answer: 20% to 30%)

after 911.

Please list the official rules for a civil war. I must have been sleeping when that lecture was given.

Your second source is suggesting that Al Sadr is attacking US military targets, not the Iraqi government.

Which brings me to my second point: Are you on the ground in Iraq? Are you talking to the military leaders on all sides? I'm going to guess not. While it's certainly possible to piece information together from different articles and see what's going on, I don't think you've done that. I hate to say it, but I think there's a reason this is a "DU Exclusive".

Are you talking to the military leaders on all sides?

I'm guessing not.

But most importantly I'm not declaring it's civil war either.

Is it too much to suggest that since all the poster has is a three day old source of somewhat questionable merit and an article that makes it seem like both sides are saying that Sadr is attacking American targets not Iraqi government ones, Iraq isn't in Civil War?! Now if the poster was on the ground in Iraq and talking to military leaders on all sides, than I might give the poster some credit. But for now, that's the only thing that's going to boost this posters' case. That are a lot of more articles that are recent.

Are you trying to suggest I'm wrong for doubting the poster's conclusion? Do you want the Iraqis to go into civil war or something? I personally think they have already suffered enough. I guess DU can tolerate all kinds of "humanitarians" though.

Finally: "Note this is a DU Exclusive as the press or even the Internet has not picked this up yet!" Do you understand this claim? If neither the press or "the Internet" has picked this up (despite the link provided), I'm not sure what else could be the source for this poster's info unless again, they were on the ground in Iraq or calling sources who were there.

Many of our military and analyst have been saying for a while that it is indeed a civil war. I just have to wonder if you are watching the military channel or faux news to be so damned ready to beat down a story that seems 100x's more accurate than all of the creepy spin that the American public is being weened onto.

Here's where you lost it:

Do you want the Iraqis to go into civil war or something?

You can take your rovian talking point and insert it--what a nasty ass thing to even imply. My dil will be in the ME in 2 weeks, in Iraq in 6. STFU when you feel like spouting that dumb ass shit around me.

However, I will say that it's not "Official civil war" like the poster is claiming. The two articles (who's lack of merit I've already discussed) cited by the poster don't go with the headline of "Official civil war". It's been low level civil war for quite some time, and it could escalate, but all I'm saying is that we should doubt this poster's claim because their sources don't back them up.

I apologize for the question that offended you, but your eagerness to accept such a huge claim based on shallow sources could only make me guess that you had some kind predetermined idea or agenda.

Let's put everything aside and answer me this. Do you believe that based on what you read in the poster's post that Iraq is now in official civil war?

If yes, I respect your opinion, but don't expect to become a journalist anytime soon.

Peace out DUer
I wish your dil the best and safest travel in the Middle East.

She'll be driving a fuel truck for the army.

It really wasn't much of an option. And obviously this question has to take as a given that it was functional to invade Iraq in the first place. Sadr's militia was a fact of life in Iraq, and as long as they were there and armed, we could either fight them or cut a deal with them. We tried the first option and it only made matters worse in the country. So then, coaxed by al-Sistani, who may be the smartest man in the world right now, we went ahead and cut a deal with Sadr, just to keep him from openly fighting our troops and their green recruits in the Iraqi army.

We have tough enough time fighting the Ba'athists, who are really out to fuck up the country. Badr, for all his radicalism, mostly just wants a piece of the pie. Trying to disarm his militia would be counter productive. Sure it's a crappy choice, but it's the best crappy choice we've got.

invaded Iraq. This would be the opportune time for the Busholini Regime to draw down massively and announce that indeed Civil War is a fact in Iraq.

Will that happen?

He'd have to add another 150,000 troops. Of course he would have to start a draft to do that.

I don't recommend it...

It means they're not recognising the Baghdad government. By that reckoning most of Iraq outside the Green Zone has seceded from Iraq; the northern areas have been quietly self-governing for a while. Basra is - and has been for a while - something of a fiefdom run by powerful local interests, which is why it was more peaceful than the centre in the first place.

Basra and Kirkuk and Mosul are the mostly likely to secede first. In Basra, the Shia warlords have been ethnically cleansing the remaining Sunnis and al-Maliki wants to take the council's governing power away to stop the incipient civil war.

So he appointed an emergency committee to replace the Basra Council, who are powerful warlords.

They just Cheneyed him with a GFY, so now al-Maliki has little choice but to take it or attack with one part of the army, which would be fighting the huge Shia militias, the corrupted Basra police force and apparently parts of the Iraqi army as well.

No good. No way out for the US and UK. In fact, the Brits just moved their guys out of Basra to a nearby camp in the desert.

Iraq has thus just moved from FUBAR to FUBUSH (Fucked-Up Beyond Unbelievable: Situation Hellzone).

This is an official civil war, as there are now TWO councils running Basra, and they are squared off against each other.

The equivalent of a Ft. Sumter-type event is all that remains to happen. The Basra warlords, including al-Sadr will NEVER give in to al-Maliki so this is seemingly inevitable.

He's kitten-weak down there; he must know that a confrontation would firstly result in failure, and secondly would trip off an unstoppable chain reaction. Well, we will see, I suppose. But Basra's governor has a long history of cutting off relations with Baghdad and/or the coalition and generally speaking throwing his toys out of the pram.

I suppose a confrontation is inevitable, eventually. Ditto in the north. I didn't mean to imply that I don't think there'll be a civil war, there alread is one really, just that I read your OP title as saying that Basra is leaving Iraq, which isn't going to happen any time soon.

P.S, FUBUSH = :rofl:

by Basra. Just tossing that in.

their hands...?

This is the most fucked up news I have seen on the Internets, an Iranian/Iraqi Shia/stronger Lebanese Hizbollah alliance is forming before your own screens...Please be sure to thank *!!!

Until I hear Abraham Lincoln issue the Emancipation Proclamation, I refuse believe that Iraq is anything but a hap-hap-happy land where simple indigenous brown peoples sing praises of joy to their white superiors who came to give them the gift of Bush (read: gift of God), freedom.

- My name is Ken Mehlman, and I approve this message.

God does that guy have bad teeth. His breath must be terrible....


(yes, yes, I know it's a shallow remark - just trying to inject a wry aside into some terrible news)

Lots of stuff for our project goes through Basra and Uum Qasr/Khor Al Zubayr. Everyone that is saying "shut down the port, shut down Iraq" is absolutely right. Large cargo goes through either Basra, the road ex Kuwait, or, the road ex Jordan through Anbar Province (practically useless and dangerous)

our illegal occupation. He's not "letting" us invade his country, ferchrissakes!

it's about the Republican word games that Bush Co plays. I agree with Clark 1 on the point that this is nothing new to us. But this story is a smack in the face to Bush's recent "civil war this, civil war that" remark. I think the General might find this story interesting as it paints Bush into a corner of his own construction, The definition of Civil War and the White House's, civil war contingency plans laid out in Newsweek. This may help bring our troops home faster.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14206642/

I also found this piece on Al-Rafidayn, an Iraq Wire service. It's a Google translation, so bare with it.

http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.alrafidayn.com%2FStory%2FNews%2FN07_08_28.html&langpair=ar%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF8

Recomended and linked to http://pleonexiabeyondhubris.blogspot.com/

Strip local government of its powers in Basra security

Basra - 7-8 : A source in the governorate of Basra today, Monday, was stripped local government of its powers in Basra security and the formation of the emergency security assume and exercise all such powers. The source explained, , who requested anonymity, said that "the Minister of State for Parliamentary Affairs Mr. net net envoy of the Prime Minister, Mr. Nuri Maliki to Basra visited the city yesterday, carrying with him is the formation of the emergency security consists of three persons shall exercise all the functions and powers of security in Basra."

The source said that the committee is composed of the "Brigade for Hammadi President (commander of the border guards earlier), Major General Abdul Khader Mahdi members (the Deputy Minister of the Interior now), and Brigadier Ali Ibrahim members (from the Ministry of Defence)."

It is likely to have been the selection of these names module of the independence of the Islamic parties in Basra.

The source added that "it was decided to concentrate all the tasks and powers to deal with the security situation in Basra in the hands of this committee without interference by the local government."

He pointed out that "this committee will lead all sectors and departments and the various security organs of the army and police, including the protection of plant and the protection of oil installations and customs and border police, intelligence and national security, all under the control of this Committee and the administration."

He said : "This Committee will impose punishment in accordance with the legal controls on any of the employees under the leadership and management Yishan irregularities and non-compliance with the orders or complacency in the implementation or lawlessness."

He added : "The process of transfer and replacement units outside the province will be under the responsibility after consultation with the Ministerial Follow-up Committee and presented for approval to the General Commander of the Armed Forces."

The "to assess the performance and efficiency of all the leaders of the security services and management in the Governorate of Basra and the nomination of directors and associate different equipment will be their responsibility."

The source said that "the Commission will coordinate and cooperate and consult with the multinational forces in order to enhance security and increase the efficiency of the security organs in accordance with the mechanisms provided for by Security Council resolution No. 1546."

He added that "the Committee is working in accordance with the law governing the state of emergency and directed the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces and will be enforced from the date of issuance," pointing out that "the duration of the Committee's work was the month extendable decision of the Prime Minister

as the day the holy shrine in Samarra was blown up. I don't give a damn when Rumsfeld or al Sadr or Maliki or Blair or Bush or whomever else decides they're going to finally call it a "civil war" -- the Iraqi people know they're in a civil war, and have known for a long time. Only the pundits have been so stupid as to continue this pointless game for so long.

Like Kerry has said "Tell the Truth", something our government is COMPLETELY incapable of doing.

8/9/06, the defiance of the Basra Council to Maliki made it official...

By Nidhal Al-Laithi



Azzaman, August 10, 2006

:kick: