By Andrew L. Jaffee

Officials in Iraq say at least 200 militants were killed on Sunday during clashes with US-backed Iraqi troops ahead of a major Shia Muslim festival.

- BBC, 1/29/07

Add to this news: these terrorists’ leader was nixed — a guy who claimed to be the Madhi, an Islamic messiah. Two or three years ago, I was celebrating such Coalition/Iraqi triumphs. First Najaf was cleaned up, then Sadr City, then Fallujah, then Mosul… U.S. and Iraqi forces killed at least 1,200 insurgents and captured an estimated 1,025 in Fallujah back in ‘04. But we seem to keep having this fight; this conversation. Today, “a series of mortar, bomb and gun attacks across Iraq left at least 36 people dead and scores injured, security officials said?” Sunni/Wahabi terrorists; al-Qaeda in Iraq; Shiite revenge via death squads; now Shiite messianic cults trying to kill other Shiites — is there still hope for bringing democracy to the country?

Have we been “moving closer to defeat” since 2004? It seems so. I have tried to remain optimistic, but have become pessimistic. I will not put all the blame on the Bush administration, because Iraqis certainly could’ve cleaned up their country if they wanted to. If there is a “silent majority” of Iraqis whom favor democracy, what are they doing? Losing more American kids while Iraqis make up their minds is not worth the effort.

Where are these terrorists coming from? Are Iraq’s borders so porous that foreign Arab/Muslim fighters keep pouring in? Or is this endless supply of jihadis mainly made up of indigenous Iraqis? Or is it both? Patrolling the Syrian/Iranian/Iraqi borders with Predator Drones and dropping a few smart-bombs on terrorists crossing the borders would send a clearer message — certainly more so than talking tough. Or do we need to bomb Syrian and Iranian targets? I doubt the will to do this exists in Washington. Does anyone know who makes up the majority of these terrorists? Do the Iraqis themselves even know?

Iraqi government spokesman Ali Dabbagh said the Soldiers of Heaven was a Shia fringe group and identified its slain leader as an Iraqi called Ali bin Ali bin Abi Taleb.

Earlier, security sources said the insurgents involved in the fighting had included both Shia and Sunni Muslims, as well Afghans, Saudis and Sudanese fighters.

It is gratifying to know that Iraqi troops performed the terrorist cleanup yesterday — though backed by U.S. soldiers. But perhaps the terrorist leader and his cohorts’ beliefs are a measure of how bad things are in Iraq and the Arab/Muslim world. This loony Shiite cult was planning on attacking… other Shiites. They were well-armed and mostly in uniform, and they followed a guy who was “wearing jeans, a coat and a hat and carrying two pistols.” First, endless Sunni on Shiite atrocities; then Shiite reprisals; and now Shiite on Shiite death squads? Talk about needing innovative ideas to solve this mess.

A fresh idea on curbing Iranian involvement in Iraq came from the Democratic side of the aisle today:

A Democratic senator wants to cut off all Pentagon sales of surplus F-14 parts, saying the military’s marketing of the spares “defies common sense” in light of their importance to Iran.

Sen. Ron Wyden’s bill came in response to an investigation by The Associated Press that found weaknesses in surplus-sale security that allowed buyers for countries including Iran and China to surreptitiously obtain sensitive U.S. military equipment including Tomcat parts.

Here’s another idea which, since I’ve heard it so many times since the beginning of the Iraq war, cannot consider fresh:

President Bush said Monday the United States “will respond firmly” if Iran escalates military action in Iraq and endangers American forces. But Bush emphasized he has no intention of invading Iran.

What besides a military strike on Iran would stop its meddling in Iraq? Blah, blah, blah.

How do we quantify Iraqi willingness to embrace stability? That one I can answer: They inform on terrorists to U.S. troops, or kill the terrorists themselves. Iraqis keep talking about wanting weapons to protect themselves. Why not use them? Stability can be measured by the diminishment of daily atrocities. How do we help them bring harmony? We have gone from many to few options.

Upping U.S. troop strength in Iraq, especially around Baghdad makes sense, partially as it seems to be our last option. Allowing those troops to engage the enemy this time around makes even more sense. Why else have troops in Baghdad?

Putting “Army Lt. Gen. David H. Petraeus, who gained fame for his early success in training Iraqi troops and securing a volatile city in northern Iraq,” in charge of coalition troops also makes a lot of sense. Who can argue with a track-record of success?

I pose many questions for which I do not have answers. Dear President Bush: This is your last chance in Iraq. Better make it a good one.

---

---

Related: United States, Iraq, Terrorist Groups

---