Failed plot to kill al-Sadr

[Odin]

It's worth blowing away any remaining trust people will have in your word to end a siege, especially when you're doing the attacking?

Considering that this issue has not been at the fore for the eroding trust in american occupying forces and america as a while I would say yes it was. Of course I could be wrong, maybe this one incident has been the catalyst for the upswell in not liking america.


Since no one on this thread has chosen to provide evidence that in fact thats the case (this event did happen after all) it would seem that answers your question in itself.

Cost-benefit. The benefit would have been getting rid of the local warlord.

the local warlord who is generally considered to be the king maker in getting malaki in to the PM spot? Perhaps you and I have a different valuation of Al sadr's influence in Iraq.

The cost would be no-one ever again trusting a word you say, with the resulting impracticality of a political end to the war.

See my first repsonse.

Is he even the most militant in his group?

I dont know is he?

There was a chap who seized on Protestant unease in Northern Ireland in the 1960s, and advocated the deepening of sectarian tensions, sectarian violence even. Then there was another chap who was present at the Bloody Sunday shootings in 1972, being the head of the local IRA. They're now First Minister and Deputy First Minister of the Northern Ireland Assembly.

I think I get your point, but not really sure. Sadr's group has been linked to sectarian violence. Would someone have come in in his sted should he have been removed? Probably, but 2.5 years ago we would have been ahead of the issue, not in refelction.

[Watchman]

Shouldacouldawoulda - hindsight is such a wonderful thing isn't it ?