Everybody seems pretty quiet on the Sistani development.

[DrWeird]

It was breaking news on CNN when I left this morning. Apparently the Ayatollah Sistani has called for shiites to march on Najaf and drive away the American invaders. Seems like this is the most substantial development to come out of Iraq in quite awhile.

[ewagner]

1. I've been away from the pc for a while

didn't hear Sistani's call.........

If true or confirmed, this could be the beginning of the civil war in Iraq.

[Journeyman]

2. I do not think that word means what you think it means. . .

Civil War is conflict between the factions of a country. If Sistani is calling on the Shi'ites to rally together to drive an invading army from their midst, it would not be a Civil War but just a plain old war, and as incivil as most of those are.

[ewagner]

5. Agree

I stand corrected.

[hang a left]

3. I saw that in LBN.

There is a major distraction going on in Crawford. I am sure you have heard.

[BrotherBuzz]

7. Seems that Bush* has a lot on his plate today

[hang a left]

10. That is very nice.

Love to see it on the nightly news. Wouldn't you? :evilgrin:

[madrchsod]

4. listened to BBC overnight

they had a report from a reporter from inside the mosque..pretty grim situation for all involved.he reported that there were many injured there and the neighborhoods around the area has many wounded and dead but cannot get medical help. the us army has a ring of tanks around the mosque and is slowly inching their way to the gates..the soldiers who are left to defend the mosque are losing the will to fight on since they realize it is hopeless.
pretty riveting report..i was struck by the fact that the us forces haven`t done shit for the wounded in the neighborhood clearly in control by them...
for an over all picture of the area <http://www.globalsecurity.org> has sat photos of the entire area of combat.

[paulk]

6. The news reports I have seen

are that Sistani has called for Shi'ites to march on Najaf and "join him in the holy city". I haven't seen anything that refers to driving away the American invaders. Perhaps you have a link?

[leftchick]

11. I believe al-Sistani is trying to save the Shrine.....

Now who do you think has been bombing Najaf daily now for 3 weeks?
Clue for you... it ain't al-Sadr's militia... :eyes:

[paulk]

12. from the BBC -

"He issued a statement urging "all believers" to follow him to Najaf.

"I have come for the sake of Najaf and I will stay in Najaf until the crisis ends," the statement said."

------

Sistani has yet to make a statement directly supporting al-Sadr's insurrection. If you have been following this at all you would know that al-Sistani and al-Sadr are not exactly allies. Perhaps Sistani is just as interested in getting the Mehdi Army out of Najaf as he is the Americans?

BTW - the Mehdi ain't just armed with popguns - they've been firing 120mm mortars at the Americans. They've knocked a few buildings down themselves.

[leftchick]

13. lol....

"if you have been following this at all"... :eyes:

[paulk]

14. do you have a reponse?

a little deeper than that of a five year olds?

[leftchick]

15. Nah...

If you paid a visit to LBN on a daily basis you would know what I post and be very well aware that this situation is more about anti-US sentiment (Think of millions of Shiia supporting al-Sistani vs the US Puppet Allawi)than any old al-Sadr factor. But then, I think I will put you on ignore... bu-bye...

[paulk]

16. you started this conversation

:nopity:

[Sugarbleus]

17. That's kind of what I understand the situation to be too..

TV bobbleheads were talking about this guy being really sick.
I'll be interested to see how this plays out....

No doubt he doesn't much care about the Americans either, in any case.

[Aidoneus]

19. Well, if you had been paying attention,

a few days ago you'd have noticed his statement that the occupyers must leave Iraq.. combine these statements and 2+2=? :shrug: I suppose it is reading into implications, at any rate events themselves will unfold more clearly than anything from this esteemed marja`iya's pen.

On the contrary to another post of yours, the two appear to have cautiously come to a sort of understanding. True, the movements had clashed previously, in a period where everybody was aggressively staking out their territory before any sort of new order solidified. Now, their personalities compliment one another. The one can habitually act as the other cannot and put pressure on the enemy in their own way. The barbaric US atrocities have roused even a dying man who has lived long enough to have heart trouble exactly because he doesn't dive in like this.

A joint Sadr-Sistani demonstration has already been fired on as it headed from Kufah to Najaf responding to the calls for this by both. I have been told there are at a least a dozen martyrs, dozens more injured. It was not clear to me whether it was a US unit or collaborating agents that fired on the unarmed joint-demo, but that wouldn't really matter much.

[paulk]

23. I think

the rapprochement between Sistani and Sadr is wishful thinking on your part. However, like you way, "events themselves" will no doubt unfold more clearly.

Sistani has actually said the occupiers must leave several times, he just doesn't say when. Sistani doesn't want a civil war, although Sadr's militia do provide a useful distraction. A cynic might even think that Sistani was playing Sadr.

[Aidoneus]

24. of course they're playing each other

that doesn't mean what I said isn't true as well.

For one thing, Sistani has shielded him from SCIRI gunmen, who are jealous and disappointed in their increasing weakness by comparison. His intentions here may just be public safety, discouraging fitna, but the result is the same either way. Accordingly, Sadr more or less switched his tone from his martyred father's editorial line against the "silent ones" (the Persians, the Afghan, and the Pakistani) to a more conciliatory or neutral tendency--for example, the last truce suggestion spit back by the occupyers and collaborating agents including turning administration of Najaf over to the marjaiyas (bypassing deliberately, of course, the puppet Baathist dicatorship operating under the occupyers).

It is probably safe to say that the heart matter has given him much to think about and plenty of quiet time to do so, particularly relating to how he would like his last scene to be remembered by history. It can go either way. With a large enough crowd he can be "peacemaker" and take some of the heat off the city for a while, allowing the middleclass shopkeepers to grow their bank accounts off the Iranian pilgrims for another few weeks again. Or if enough of those crowds are fired on, those he called can join them, perhaps obtaining weaponry from the martyrs that decorate the pavement all over Najaf. :shrug:

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

8. I saw something about a large explosion in Najaf

I don't remember which news service mentioned it, but I remember them saying that the US had launched a new attack in Najaf and the videotape showed a skyline in flames.

[KamaAina]

9. But, but, but, but isn't Sistani the *moderate* Shi'ite cleric?

as compared to al-Sadr, anyway?

Ruh-roh, Rorge...

[TomNickell]

18. Mahatma Al Sistani??

I doubt the culture will sustain it, but the moment one of these religious leaders urges his followers to march on the American position -unarmed- it will all be over.

What do US troops do with 20,000 unarmed civilians walking toward them?

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

20. Open fire? Or toss roses?

What do US troops do with 20,000 unarmed civilians walking toward them?
:shrug:

[Aidoneus]

21. open fire, of course

that's the act that provoked the main armed resistance in Fallujah, Madinat as-Sadr, and Najaf in the first place on a lesser scale.

An early Sadr-Sistani demo responding to the calls has already been shot at. Considering the scorched earth devastation and killings already carried out, it is not a difficult assumption to assume that the trend of shooting people who disagree will continue, all in the name of "freedom" of course.

Provided this gets off the ground, it is a loss for the occupyers and collaborating agents either way.

[bvar22]

22. That would justify...

...a press blackout.

Dark evil, spawned in the whitehouse, is descending on Iraq.

[Nordic]

25. Yeah I'd say that's a big deal. And just like back when

they shut down Sadr's paper and all those people started marching, any fool can plainly see what's coming.

Any fool, that is, except for those fools who run our country.

Does anyone remember the photos of the marches in Iraq when they shut down Sadr's paper? It was THOUSANDS upon thousands of people filling the streets. It was an ominous sight, and I remember looking at those and thinking "whoa, here comes some serious trouble"!

The mess in Fallujah soon followed.

It reminded me of when I watched the end of the Rodney King trial in LA, and the verdict came in, and Stacy Koon got into his lawyer's big black mercedes, and people, many of them well-dressed black folks who were at the trial, professional looking people, just started spontaneously chasing the mercedes as it drove away.

And I knew then "uh-oh".

Perhaps there should be a basic intelligence test for those who run our government and our military.

Giving a bunch of gung-ho suicidal muslims their own Alamo is NOT gonna help US in any way shape or form.