| Submit your comments on this article |
| Iraq-Jordan |
| US, Fallujah rebels agree 12-hour ceasefire |
| 2004-04-10 |
| The US-led coalition and insurgents in the Sunni bastion of Fallujah agreed to a 12-hour ceasefire beginning today at 0600 GMT (1600 AEST) after six days of fierce clashes which claimed the lives of hundreds of people, an Iraqi mediator said. However, the insurgents threatened to kill a presumed American citizen unless the siege of the Sunni Muslim town was lifted in the latest example of their new tactic of kidnapping foreigners to win concessions on the ground and put pressure on US allies in Iraq. "The two sides have agreed to observe a 12-hour ceasefire tomorrow, Sunday, at 10am," or 0600 GMT (1600 AEST), a senior member of the Iraqi Islamic Party, Hatem al-Husseini, said. "This will pave the way for the gradual pullout of US Marine troops from Fallujah," Husseini said after a meeting with coalition officials in Baghdad on his return from the mediation talks in the town west of the capital. I doubt it. My assessment is complete disarmanent of the entire city is the objective. A senior coalition spokesman had no comment on the negotiations but said a statement would be issued later today. The apparent breakthrough came after the coalition suspended offensive operations in Fallujah and offered the talks. A 35-member Iraqi delegation, led by members of the US-installed interim Governing Council, entered Fallujah and held meetings to mediate an end to the bloodshed. However, a group calling itself "the mujaheieen of Iraq to US forces" still threatened to kill a presumed US national identified as Thomas Hamill if the siege was not lifted. "If this is not heeded within 12 hours starting at 6pm on Saturday, April 10, 2004, (0100 Sunday AEST), he will be treated worse than those who were killed and burned in Fallujah," the group said in an audiotaped message read on Al-Jazeera satellite TV. I very much doubt it will hold for 12 hours, but we shall see. |
| Posted by:Phil B |
| #5 "If things get worse and worse, and GWB loses in November, then it's game over." It's game over if Iraq gets divided up in three, with Baathists controlling one part, Islamofascists the other, and a tiny Kurdish nation, that'll be too weak to do anything at all to benefit you in a "War on Terror" and would possibly get into conflicts with Turkey. If Bush loses in November, it's nothing but a governmental change in a democratic country. The sky won't fall. |
| Posted by: Aris Katsaris 2004-04-10 11:51:23 PM |
| #4 Man, this is deja vu all over again! Where have we seen this movie before? We have now been in Iraq long enough to know what the situation is, namely this: The Kurds are very pro American and appreciative of what we have done for them. The Shiite south also is generally supportive, Badr's goons not whithstanding. The problem is the Sunni middle. They seem to be heavily supportive of the insurgency. Why should we stay in an area where the people are hostile just to say we control it? We shouldn't be in the business of forcing people to accept an ideology (liberal democracy) if the population is not interested, or are more interested in driving you out. Iraq needs to be split in three. What is Iraq anyway? It is just an arbitrary line in the sand drawn up by the colonial British administration. We should make it plain that the ICDC must do the fighting in the Sunni triangle and drive the militants out. We would tell them that it is their country and they must be the ones who control it. We would of course help them, but without supplying significant combat troops. The ICDC is more numerous than the insurgents and better armed, and should be able to rout them. If they can't then they are just not committed to their country Iraq. Why should we be more committed than they are? They will fail miserably, of course, but that should be our game plan. Then when we evacuate out of the Sunni areas, the splitting of Iraq will follow naturally. The Shiite and Kurds won't allow the Sunnis to dominate then again like they used to, and the Sunnis won't allow themselves to be a minor player in a democratic Iraq (which invariably they would be). I don't agree with those who say we should wipe out the insurgents period, because after we do that, whithin a few months they will reconstitute themselves with foreign help, and we're back to where we started. The Sunni triangle is becoming Lebanized. We had better start coming up with a winning game plan pretty quick before this war turns out to be an unmitigated disaster like Vietnam was. If things get worse and worse, and GWB loses in November, then it's game over. Not only will all those Amrican lives and treasure have been for nought, but Iraq could turn out to be worse than it was under Saddam as far as the WoT goes. |
| Posted by: Puck 2004-04-10 11:33:46 PM |
| #3 check out Den Beste on whether we're "pleading" for a cease-fire...BS spin |
| Posted by: Frank G 2004-04-10 11:07:33 PM |
| #2 AFP, Fisk, Pilger, and the other usual suspects will hail a US pullout as a great victory for the heroic freedom-fighters of Fallujah and their tactics of butchery and terrorism. They will gloat about it for years, as they gloat about the Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon. Those who worry about how "the world" (actually meaning the murder-apologist authoritarians who presume to speak for the world) will respond to our actions seem oddly unconcerned with this. |
| Posted by: Atomic Conspiracy 2004-04-10 10:23:04 PM |
| #1 Pullout? Bullshit! "We" finally got a clue about winning the same territory twice in Vietnam! "Take the hill!" Lose 25 people. Leave. 2 months later: "Take the hill!" Whoa there, Birdy Actual-6, if you wanted the fuckin' hill why the hell did you order us to leave last time?" Fuck that noise - you keep territory taken by force. Corollary issue: Anyone else here surprised that there are any civs running around solo anywhere near Fallujah? Unarmed - or just unable / unwilling to fight? I know one thing - there's no way I'd let myself be taken alive if I was conscious - cuz I wouldn't do whatever it was without being well armed. Something's not right about this. |
| Posted by: .com 2004-04-10 9:50:13 PM |