# Sadr Militia Takes Over Amarah



## tomahawk6 (20 Oct 2006)

Big trouble for the Iraqi government. These militias need to be disarmed and if they resist killed. A strong central government cannot exist where there are competing armies.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061020/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_061020115129



> The Mahdi Army fighters stormed three main police stations Friday morning, planting explosives that flattened the buildings, residents said.
> 
> About 800 black-clad militiamen with Kalashnikov rifles and rocket-propelled grenade launchers were patrolling city streets in commandeered police vehicles, eyewitnesses said. Other fighters had set up roadblocks on routes into the city and sound trucks circulated telling residents to stay indoors.
> 
> Fighting broke out in Amara on Thursday after the head of police intelligence in the surrounding province, a member of the rival Shiite Badr Brigade militia, was killed by a roadside bomb, prompting his family to kidnap the teenage brother of the local head of the a-Madhi Army.


----------



## Kirkhill (20 Oct 2006)

Agreed tomahawk6, but the issue is not the willingness of individual Iraqi's to take up arms in support of a cause.  The issue is the loyalty of the leadership.  Sadr needs to be arrested - political faction or not.  Just as Gerry Adams and Martin McGuiness should have been arrested years ago.


----------



## youravatar (20 Oct 2006)

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> Agreed tomahawk6, but the issue is not the willingness of individual Iraqi's to take up arms in support of a cause.  The issue is the loyalty of the leadership.  Sadr needs to be arrested - political faction or not.  Just as Gerry Adams and Martin McGuiness should have been arrested years ago.



Then what of the kurdish peshmerga. They aren't fighting against the US, but still stand in the way of a unified Iraq.


----------



## boondocksaint (21 Oct 2006)

Insurgents seem to fight very hard _after_ they've lost the formal war.

If only they'd fought like soldiers, during the war, there be less of these cowards to deal with after a war.

+ 1 tomahawk


----------



## KevinB (21 Oct 2006)

paging BigRed...

IIRC he stated (dont quote me) they (the Mahdi militia's) have been active in a lot of town elsewhere as well...

Same issue in Afghan in the North as the Kurds in Iraq -- they are not causing problems since they are getting there way -- but they are a visible and potential threat to the central governments.

edit -- I fully agree with T6, they need to be stopped right now.
  the Iraqi Security Forces need to act -- if nec supported by the coalition (read US .mil)


----------



## tomahawk6 (21 Oct 2006)

The Iraqi Army is in control of Amarah now.The immediate crisis is over but the problem remains.


----------



## youravatar (21 Oct 2006)

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> The Iraqi Army is in control of Amarah now.The immediate crisis is over but the problem remains.



The Iraqi Army? Wow. Haven't heard much about them doing anything in a while. Were they supported by US troops or not.


----------



## 1feral1 (21 Oct 2006)

As I sit here in my office, disillusioned with the welfare INet shyting itself yet again, I'll briefly comment on this topic...

Ya, the IP skipped town under a bit of pressure. I have a zero condfidence vote for the New Iraqi Army, and the IP. Primitive is to good of a word, although some try, and pay with their lives.

This incident has had not had much press here in country (it did make todays Stars and Stripes though), but CNN has been playing it up, maybe to take the heat off them airing the US soldiers being sniped by Juba and Co. That was in the S&S too.

Meanwhle AIF snipers are playing havoc here, but some relief, one was caught setting up a hide red handed today, so one less arsehole has been permamantly retired.

Not only has it been a bad week here in Baghdad, but a bad month overall for allied forces in Iraq.


Regards,

Wes


----------



## Infanteer (21 Oct 2006)

Is Juba still around?


----------



## Kirkhill (21 Oct 2006)

I was just reading an article in this mornings Globe and Mail about the militias.  Frankly I would say it was all ultimately good news.

Vis.  The article started off to say the Americans and Brits had lost control of the situation because the Iraqi Shiites had turned to Sadr's Mahdi army to supply the security that the government and the occupiers had failed to provide.  Standard stuff.

But then the article went on to state that the Amarah situation was actually caused by about 300 or so of Sadr's militia, apparently beyond his control, who attacked the police stations and were opposed not only by the federal police but also by Al Sistani's Badr Brigade.  In the end the locals got to see the edifying sight of two Shiite militias, one supporting and one opposing the government, battling it out in the streets and causing more damage than the Brits and the Yanks created in the 3 years of "occupation".  The final result was that while the Government may not be in control.  Sadr's militia - whom he can't control and may actively have to disown - definitely wasn't in control.

The article then goes on to say that the Sunni's have their own militia now, the Omar brigade (that is apparently GW's fault as well) but also states that in Baghdad 23 separate "militias" have been identified, many of them claiming affiliation with one or other of the high profile "Militias" but more generally involved in criminal activities and protection rackets.  

In the midst of all of this you have the local citizenry buying their own weapons for the same reasons that most of us would or have.

So what's the good news?  The good news is that the more this carries on the more Sadr and Sistani (and for that matter the current Governors) are discredited and the greater the demand from the citizenry for the Government to get a grip on the situation.  Also the greater the willingness of the citizenry to accept compromise in the name of security.

The "Yanks" have already seen this in the Sunni areas where the locals that were supporting the bombers when the target was the "Yanks" all of a sudden are finding that they have become bosom buddies when the Shiite "militias" show up.  Likewise in Basra:  the biggest complaint that the locals have with the Brits, as tomahawk6 has rightly pointed out, is that they have allowed the "government" institutions to be taken over by the militias.  

Is it any wonder that the locals are taking to arming themselves and setting up neighbourhood watches?  But, I would argue, there are the seeds of the solution.  There and in the success in Oman and in the Second Amendment to the US Constitution.  There is no problem in finding people willing to take up arms in defence of their community.  The issue is creating "Well Regulated" Militias, as called for under the Second Amendment.  It is a matter of finding the local leaders that are willing to support the Government and also of the Government willing to trust local leaders.  That is a matter of trial and error and experimentation.

Somebody asked about how you deal with the Peshmerga militias.  My answer is you don't.  They and the Government are currently marching in the same general direction.  The art of governance is to be able to punish your friends and reward your enemies and that requires trust which is a limited resource.  You can only lead as far as your followers are willing to go - the old maxim of "Don't give an order you don't expect to be obeyed."  Currently the Peshmerga are supporting the government because the government is getting them what they want without them having to give up more than they are willing to give.  Some Sunnis are coming or have come to the same understanding.  It is possible that some, if not most Shiites are moving down the same road.  The secularists have been on track for a while.

The issue becomes a matter of time, patience and willingness to use a firm hand.  Maliki may not be the man for the job.  Perhaps his predecessor (who seems to have been a better balance of autocrat, democrat and pragmatist) would have been a better solution.  

The advantage that the Iraqi's currently enjoy with the guarantee of elections is if they don't like the job one guy is doing they get to try somebody else.  

My sense is that the longer the mess continues the more likely they are to try somebody else.  I am willing to bet that  a compromiser is going to look better and better to a country of survivors that want security when compared to a bunch of pedagogues that apparently can't control their own "supporters".

But maybe that is just my medication kicking in. ;D

Edited for spelling.


----------



## Big Red (21 Oct 2006)

The Ammarah takeover is not alone, they also took a few other places like Hamzah-20 km SE of Al Hillah and Sawelah(?) (have no idea how that one is spelled or wtf it is exactly).

A few weeks ago I got a local newspaper article translated and it was an announcement by Sadr that the openly armed roving Madhi militia were NOT under his control and were no longer to be associated with him.  The locals were pleased at this as this allowed the MNFI to go after these groups in several cities in the south.

Educated Iraqis HATE the religious militias.  These militias kill people for selling/using alcohol, frequenting hookers, talking to women, being seen with women...generally all the fun parts of life they used to enjoy.  Groups like the Mahdi are made up of LOSERS.  They are the deadbeats without jobs who use the militia membership to act as criminals and feel a sense of belonging. Unfortunately you have the various Sheiks promoting the Mahdi/Badr/whatever several times a day during prayers.  They make the militas seem like some sort of heroes.  

Eg. one of the dumber ones here at an illegal VCP drew down on a SF soldier, recieved a 3rd eye for his efforts and his mosque got remodelled by some .50s...They named a street after him and he was declared a martyr.

The ONE positive thing I have to say about the miltias.....they keep the Sunni insurgents from living in their towns.  Almost all insurgent activity in Shiia towns in the south is from outsiders.  Their illegal VCPs are pretty good at ferreting out whether a person has a legitimate reason to be in that area. If their story seems suspicious they have been known to escort the person to their destination to verify it.  So at least in some areas you have another 'force' looking for things that don't belong...

That's not to say that they still don't set IEDs/EFPs on the Coalition themselves...


----------



## Infanteer (21 Oct 2006)

Big Red said:
			
		

> Groups like the Mahdi are made up of LOSERS.  They are the deadbeats without jobs who use the militia membership to act as criminals and feel a sense of belonging. Unfortunately you have the various Sheiks promoting the Mahdi/Badr/whatever several times a day during prayers.  They make the militas seem like some sort of heroes.



Seems to be a general trend with alot of the guys who go hardcore religious.  With no real opportunities, most of these deadbeats find a sense of direction in organized groups with a very aggressive stance towards society and outsiders.  Dead-enders find new meanings for life; this is what Zarqawi did - he was a two-bit petty criminal in jail in Jordan when he found religion.  Of course, ambitious mullahs find such impressionable and willing adherents as perfect enablers for their goals.

http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/PUB597.pdf


----------



## boondocksaint (21 Oct 2006)

And these were typically the first guys to toss their weapons away (IMO) when they heard the M-1's rolling in the desert, during the formal war. Now they have weapons again, with their own agenda.


----------



## 1feral1 (22 Oct 2006)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> Is Juba still around?



I don't know, but I think he is the phantom sniper.

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## Infanteer (22 Oct 2006)

Wesley 'Over There' (formerly Down Under) said:
			
		

> I don't know, but I think he is the phantom sniper.



Yeah, I remember hearing about him last year - I would have thought they would have bagged him by now.  Maybe it's a "Robin Hood" monkier given to a rash of snipings?


----------



## 1feral1 (23 Oct 2006)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> Is Juba still around?



Hi Infanteer, I think Juba has become a generic term for such. I hope he has been long since retired via JDAM assistance, but some say he is out there, getting at least one kill per day. I don't know if there is any truth to it, although snipers are active against allies all the time, especially around chk pts.

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## FastEddy (23 Oct 2006)

Wesley 'Over There' (formerly Down Under) said:
			
		

> Meanwhle AIF snipers are playing havoc here, but some relief, one was caught setting up a hide red handed today, so one less arsehole has been permamantly retired.




Well "Wes" that's a bit of good news.

You wouldn't know the disposition of that incident. Who caught him, how are Charmers like that handled.

Cheers.


----------



## KevinB (23 Oct 2006)

I have an idea...


----------



## 1feral1 (23 Oct 2006)

Hey F.E. you got a PM.  :soldier:

Good one I6!  ;D

Regards from Madmaxton,


Wes


----------



## FastEddy (24 Oct 2006)

Wesley 'Over There' (formerly Down Under) said:
			
		

> Hey F.E. you got a PM.  :soldier:
> 
> Good one I6!  ;D
> 
> ...




10-4, The best I've heard.

Cheers. ED


----------

