Bush on Basra: ‘A Very Positive Moment’

Think Progress wrote about Bush calling Iraq’s Resurging Violence ‘A Very Positive Moment’. CIA chief General Hayden was on Meet The Press this morning and described the violence in Basra, the confrontation between the al-Maliki Iraqi forces and the al-Sadr's militia, as inevitable and something we've been waiting for.

As Think Progess says: "In reality, the violence is undoing the very goals of Bush’s surge. Iraqi forces aren’t trying to restore “the law,” as Bush thinks, but are trying to do the opposite — suppress its political enemies before the October elections, historian Reidar Vissar noted. Most ironically, if U.S.-backed efforts “succeed,” Iran’s hand in Iraq will be strengthened. IPS’ Gareth Porter explains: The Badr Organisation and the ISCI had always been and remained the most pro-Iranian political-military forces in Iraq, having been established, trained and funded by the [Iranian Revolutionary Guard] from Shiite exiles in Iran during the Iran-Iraq war."

I just want to know, if this fighting is good, and we've been waiting for it, wouldn't it have come a year sooner if not for the surge? I suppose it could have given the government forces time to train. On Thu The New York TImes reported, "American officials have presented the Iraqi Army’s attempts to secure the port city as an example of its ability to carry out a major operation against the insurgency on its own." But by Friday "Washington Post correspondent Sudarsan Raghavan saw U.S. Stryker armored vehicles, backed by U.S. helicopters and drones, engaging militiamen armed with AK-47 assault rifles and rocket-propelled grenades, as Iraqi army and police units stayed on the outskirts of the sprawling Shiite stronghold." And how did this happen? "Col. Abbas al-Tamimi, media officer for the 14th Iraqi Army Division operating in the city, said he expected the fighting to escalate. 'The gunmen have heavier and more sophisticated weapons than we have,' he said."