The political movement of Iraqi cleric and militia leader Moqtada al-Sadr said it would end a two-month boycott of parliament on Sunday, smoothing over a rift with its Shi’ite allies in the U.S.-backed government.
The US death toll of 25 on Saturday was one of the highest since US-led forces invaded Iraq in March 2003 and underscored the scale of the task faced by new troops sent to Baghdad in a make-or-break bid to quell sectarian bloodshed.
Kurdish lawmaker Mahmud Othman said-
‘It is also an indication by the Sadr group that they want to be part of the political process and not resort to violent methods at a time when Iraqi and US forces are targeting militias.’
At this point, I remember the old saying: “How do you know when politicians are lying? When their lips are moving.”
Parliament speaker Mahmoud al-Mashhadani said an all-party committee would discuss calls for a timetable for a U.S. troop withdrawal and the renewal of the U.N. mandate for the U.S. presence in Iraq.
Is this a new beginning or a last chance?
Mahmoud al-Mashhadani told in the news conference-
“This is a new beginning, we want to say to the world that an Iraqi solution for Iraqi problems is the key, and others must support these solutions.”
This is the first time I am hearing the word ‘new beginning,’ however the most commonly used word in Iraq’s milieu is ‘the last chance.’ Last chance for Maliki, last chance for Bush, last chance for Iraq... but why is it said all the time, particularly after the ‘New way forward’ is introduced?
This is only because plans after plans are formulated in Washington but without any success. ‘The new way forward’ is the coin flipped in the air for ‘the last time’ that on one face carry victory while doom on the other.
However, after a long time it appears, it is Iraq, not the US, which is being tested here. Surely, Iraq doesn’t contain a quick fix and there’s no military solution to the current problem. As most of the politicians and most importantly military analysts and experts have stated that, an increase in the number of troops, without a parallel change in tactics, would be a waste. The US-centric attitudes of the antiwar, quit-now elements in US (a Newsweek poll found more than two-thirds of Americans opposed sending 21,500 more troops to Iraq), and elsewhere seems right at the face of it.
Via: Reuters
