Cease-fire holds in Sadr City after deadly clashes

BAGHDAD — A shaky cease-fire appeared to take hold Tuesday in Baghdad's Sadr City, after a cleric who brokered the deal for Shiite fighters said they would honor it even after clashes left at least 11 dead and 19 wounded.

The pact was intended to stop seven weeks of fighting between U.S.-supported Iraqi troops and Shiite extremists who have fired more than 1,000 mortars and rockets into the Green Zone, home to the government and Western embassies. But the cease-fire did not start well, with clashes late Monday and early Tuesday.

Iraqi medics reported 11 killed and 19 wounded. There were women and children among the wounded, said hospital officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to talk to the media. The U.S. military said Tuesday it could confirm the deaths of six militants.

In unrelated violence in northern Iraq, a roadside bombing killed five Iraqi soldiers Tuesday in Mosul, police said, also speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to talk to the media. Iraqi troops and U.S. soldiers have launched an operation against Sunni extremists there.

A U.S. soldier was killed just before dark Tuesday when a roadside bomb exploded next to his vehicle in northwest Baghdad, the military said. At least 4,077 U.S. military personnel have died in the Iraq war since it began in March 2003, according to an Associated Press count.

The Sadr City fighting and cease-fire have brought into question the authority of anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, who currently lives in Iran. Al-Sadr signed a cease-fire agreement in August, but Shiite militiamen have recently ignored those orders.

Lt. Col. Steve Stover, a military spokesman for American troops in Baghdad, said Tuesday that the fighting was caused by "special groups," Shiite factions that have broken with al-Sadr. Many are thought to be trained and armed by Iranian forces. Iran denies the allegations.

Nevertheless, pro-Sadr clerics negotiated the new cease-fire and one said Tuesday it was taking hold and would be enforced.

"We signed an agreement and we are loyal to the agreement we reached," said Sheik Salah al-Obeidi, an aide to al-Sadr. "There might be some violations from both sides and we have to try to prevent them."

The deal allows Iraqi forces to take over security on Wednesday in sprawling Sadr City, the stronghold of al-Sadr's Mahdi Army militia.

Under the compromise, Iraqi forces will try to refrain from seeking American help to restore order. U.S. military officials on Sunday said they would follow the Iraqis' lead. The Sadrists rejected calls by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki to surrender weapons, saying Mahdi fighters have no "medium or heavy weapons."

But Stover blamed the so-called "special groups" for a failed surface-to-air missile attack on a helicopter gunship over Sadr City on Saturday. The missile was fired from an unknown location in eastern Baghdad but missed the target, he said.

The missile harmlessly exploded, and the rocket body landed in the Azamiyah neighborhood, where it was recovered by allied Sunni fighters and handed over to the U.S. military. Stover refused to release any details on the missile type.

The missile attack came a day before the four-day cease-fire went into effect.

___

Associated Press writer Hamid Ahmed in Baghdad contributed to this report.

Comments

[cj ett]

I really enjoy watching HeatherJones' head explode. More irrational every time. Great fun

[Nyland8]

GhostintheMachine
"Its good to see you terrorists supporters call suicide bombers successful, I call them insane."

If a suicide bomber's intention is to bomb while committing suicide, and they do that, they've succeeded. If you achieve your goal, you are "successful".

Is English not your first language?

If you support the administration that has FAILED to capture Osama bin Laden - AFTER 6-1/2 YEARS - then you support terrorism. If you support the man whose early business FAILURES were funded by the bin Laden family, then you support terrorism. If you support the man who holds hands with the Saudis, the country that spawned and funded 15 of the 9/11 hijackers, then you support terrorism.

Who do YOU support?

8

[timothe]

Yeah...we're the terrorists. OK. I get it. All Bush's fault. Sure. Whatever.

And you guys wonder why liberal talk radio has never succeeded.

[Nyland8]

timothe
"Yeah...we're the terrorists. OK. I get it. All Bush's fault. Sure"

That's quite a cogent defense of Bush and his administration. Don't tell me. Captain of the debating club ??

LOL

8

[GhostintheMachine]

When you call a suicide bomber successful and you say that the American military has failed then you support the terrorists not your own Country we see where your alliance is.

[Nyland8]

TgoodAngel writes:

"This cannot forebode well for Iraq and the U.S.! Al-Sadr is emasculating the U.S. efforts to effect a positive change!"

??
Huh?

We have no business being in Iraq and haven't for years. Our own presence "emasculates" us, because in 5+ years, we haven't even been able to quell the violence in Baghdad, let alone Iraq. From what imaginary plateau do your comments proceed? Iraq cannot be "un-failed". The past will not be forgotten, the dead will not come back to life, the displaced will never return home, the blind will not see, the lame will not walk and our tax coffers will never miraculously be refilled.

It's a FAILURE.

Get it?

Bush's Iraq policy has already failed. Nothing we do can force it to succeed.

The only "success" that can be had is that of the Iraqis themselves - and al Sadr's minions are Iraqi.

8

[cdnnewsjunky]

"You must be right there is no possible way that there could be militants or insurgents occupying those houses and shooting innocent civilians. " - GhostintheMachine

For some odd reason, there was no Reply button on that post, so I had to start a new thread.

So your rationale, is that if the militants or insurgents violated the articles of the Geneva Convention, then it's legal for the American forces to ignore those same articles. Sorry it doesn't work that way, them committing war crimes is no defense against American forces committing war crimes.

[GhostintheMachine]

It was sarcasm, militants and insurgents and terrorists obviously don't follow the Geneva conventions otherwise Daniel pearl would still have his head.

[cdnnewsjunky]

"It was sarcasm, militants and insurgents and terrorists obviously don't follow the Geneva conventions " - GhostintheMachine

I'll agree that terrorists don't follow the Geneva Convention but insurgents do, that's why they're given the same protections under the GC as regular armies are. Once the insurgents quit following the articles laid out in the GS then they become terrorists.

The Irish Republican Army at one time, were insurgents, until they quit targeting the British Military and started targeting civilians with their bombing campaing, at that point they became a terrorist organization.

[GhostintheMachine]

Also, I don't think strapping a bomb onto your body and setting it offin a busy market falls under the Geneva conventions.

[cdnnewsjunky]

" Also, I don't think strapping a bomb onto your body and setting it offin a busy market falls under the Geneva conventions." - GhostintheMachine

It doesn't, and those that commits acts of violence against non-military targets are terrorists.

[Nyland8]

That's because successful suicide bombers can never be prosecuted under the rules of the Geneva conventions.

Suicide is the ultimate loophole.

8

[andyboy]

"It was not immediately clear if the those killed in the clashes, which escalated early Tuesday, were militants or civilians. There were women and children among the wounded, said"

You do see what's happening here. It's called indiscriminate murder. Children as young as 2 yrs old are being blown to bits. This is the Israeli school of warfare. "Accidently" slaughter the kids. It doesn't accomplish anything. But it feels so righteously good to know your blowing infants to hell and no one is going to arrest you or call you out on it.

Is it worse what Hitler did? Ask yourself a question. Is the life of an Iraqi child worth less than a german Jew's? In what military code of conduct is it deemed acceptable to target and kill children and other civilians? How can you sleep at night knowing you pay the taxes that support this genocide?

Who will come to the rescue of the innocent Iraqi's being slaughtered by the occupying Americans? Who speaks for them? Who will stand up and protest this abomination?

[GhostintheMachine]

Show me where it says Americans killed innocent children, I believe that hte militants would do that and blame it on the Americans. If you really believe that American soldiers would purposely kill children just for kicks you do not belong in America.

[bigkay]

If you are U.S, military in a plane or helicopter shooting missles at houses in urban areas your killing innocent civilians! Very few Americans will protest this genocide until they re-institute the draft. Remember VIETNAM!
The Department of Defense is recruiting criminals and mercenaries to fight their dirty war. in Iraq and Afghanistan.

[connman]

Take your head out of the sand and see what's really going on.

[cdnnewsjunky]

" If you really believe that American soldiers would purposely kill children"
- GhostintheMachine

If you took the time to read the articles of the Geneva Convention, you would understand that the deaths of non-combatants does not have to be purposeful, to be a war crime.

[Nyland8]

5+ years and we're still waiting to secure Baghdad. Not some outlying province. Not some cave in Kurdistan. The commander in chief has yet to secure the capitol city.

Is there anther word for failure that his supporters might comprehend? They still don't seem to get it.

More than 5 years of abject, irredeemable, unimaginable FAILURE.

Stop the funding of any military appropriations - for any reason. Stop the contracts for "rebuilding" Iraq. Stop the security contracts with CACI, AEGIS, Blackwater and all the other mercenaries in Iraq. Start withdrawals tomorrow. Stop making excuses. Stop listening to lies. Submit to the overwhelming will of the American people.

Get out of Iraq ... now. ASAP

8

[GhostintheMachine]

Over 230 years and we are still waiting to secure Washington DC there were 181 murders in 2007, New York had 497.

[Durango]

Good comparison.

But tell me? How would you feel if those 181 murders in Wasington or 497 in New York came from Iraqi soldiers occupying those cities?

You probably wouldn't mind. You would probably be a collaborator.

[Troubledgoodangel]

Al Sadr should have been arrested five years ago. Thosands have die because of his doublespeak! Iraq cannot rebuilt as long as al-Sadr has 60,000 militias in the capital! This is insane! One wonders what Gen. Petraeus have been doing all this time!

[Durango]

I thought it was Saddam who was the boogie man? Or wasn't it Osama Bin Ladin? Who never came close to Iraq.

Now its some Shia.

Don't you know that al Sadr is the leader of a MOVEMENT. If he is killed he will be replaced.

But why we are in Iraq killing Shia in Iraq remains the biggest mystery.

[Nyland8]

"Petraeus have been doing all this time!"

Hmm. Following the orders of the commander in chief ? That would be my guess.

8

[cdnnewsjunky]

More work for the ICC.

[Paul]

Ammobob call your office!

[abouttime]

RE: "... a general cease-fire ordered last August by al-Sadr, which has been one of the key factors causing a steep drop in violence in the country."

Isn't that about the time the "surge" was announced? The "surge" was merely propaganda to molify concerns in the US that things were getting better in Iraq. It's about the control of oil, plain and simple.
The joint military offensive launched in March into Basra by US trained Iraqi forces under command of Prime minister Nouri al-Maliki and the U.S. ended in complete failure and mutiny of Iraqi forces. It was Maliki's attempt to rout Sadre's forces in Basra. Basra controls Iraq's South Oil Company, which pumps and exports the vast amjority of Iraq's oil. Basra has been under the control of militias loyal to Sadre and a Sadrist splinter party, Fadhila.
The situation in Iraq is dire. No end in site. Only when the US occupation ends can Iraq rebuild itself.
US out of Iraq NOW!

[lastams]

Were it not for the fact that American lives are being lost in horrendous door to door combat, there would be some humor in watching the Iraqis broker a cease fire through Iran.
There's been this big build up the past few weeks about how the Iraqi "government" was going over to confront Iran about supporting the militias and at the same time, we, the US Army, were going to put on this big show of captured weapons as "evidence" of Iranian involvement.
Well the Iraqi government goes over to Iran all right, and instead of a confrontation, gets Iran to broker a cease fire between the Sadarists and the Militia of the Supreme Council (who basically have been using US troops to fight their battles for them). Well low and behold Iran sides with the Maliki/Al Hakim government which speaks volumes about Iranian "interference" in Iraq, most especially amongst our "friends" in Baghdad.
Then the much promoted dog and pony show with all the captured weapons goes bust when an independent assessor determines that NONE of the weapons came from Iran.
Here the Bush administration's got two carrier groups in the Gulf just chomping at the bit to bomb Tehran, they've removed Fallon, their biggest obstacle, and all they need is a good excuse ... well an excuse they can spin anyway. And look what happens ... they keep stepping on their own dicks. Sometimes it's almost a good thing that these people are idiots.

[thegreatgiginthesky]

Well in Bush's mind only 11 dying is like a cease fire.

[jesuswazasocialist]

Why is Bush now talking about arming the Lebanese Army?
Why get involved in another Lebanese Civil War.
Do we really want another Marines barracks massacre?

[ftprairiedog]

He wants to arm the Lebanese Army so that Lebanese kill Lebanese, Divide and conquer just like in Iraq and Palestine. And it will be easy for the Zionists to attack Lebanon with out the party of God to stop them.

[demigod]

The Marines Barracks bombing had nothing to do with Lebanon's civil war. Our good friends, the Israelis, whom Bush is going to visit and party with, invaded Lebanon with American supplied tanks and jets, and bombed Beirut, the Lebanese capital by air, land and sea for many months, killing thousands and destroying a major world city. Ronald Reagan, the Republican Saint, could do nothing to stop them, and succeeded in getting Israeli troops out of Lebanon ONLY when he put American troops IN. Stupidly, Reagan allowed the American marines to bivouac all in a single building, allowing the Islamic resistance to collapse it with a single truck bomb, killing some 243 Marines. Terrible American policy, coupled with a terrible alliance, and a complete lack of foresight, resulted in the Marine Barracks bombing. Reagan should have been impeached for this dereliction of duty, instead the Republicans deify him.

[madmaggie57]

I would just like to add to your comment by stating that our Marines were not allowed to use real ammunition. They were supplied with rubber bullets that bounced off the windshield of the truck bringing doom. Sad, but true. Yeah, Rules of Engagement like "don't fire until being fired upon" always seem to work...Right?