This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2008 Iraq spring fighting article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies |
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This page is not a forum for general discussion about views on politics or personal points of view. Any such comments may be removedorrefactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about views on politics or personal points of view at the Reference desk. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Material from Battle of Basra (2008) was split to Iraq spring fighting of 2008on20:39, 4 May 2008. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted so long as the latter page exists. Please leave this template in place to link the article histories and preserve this attribution. The former page's talk page can be accessed at Talk:Battle of Basra (2008). |
All sources from antiwar.com should be removed as this is source that with self-admitted bias.
Also citations for some of the details are needed, civilian casualties seem to be exaggerated... I can't connect the figures in the article with the citations given.
Mentions of Stryker vehicles inside Sadr City are largely false. 4th ID dictated no wheeled vehicles except Route Clearance vehicles inside Sadr City beginning in early April.
Many sections and paragraphs in this article are unsourced. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.189.190.8 (talk) 14:31, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm concerned about the title "Mahdi Army revolt". Is this NPOV? Everyking (talk) 06:54, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, how is this a revolt? I figured all that happened was that the agreement was broken and resulted in fighting. Hoboron (talk) 20:17, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Reports indicate this series of events was initiated by the Iraqi PM. Better title might be "Responses to Spring 2008 Basra offensive". YippeeYoTayYoe (talk) 04:17, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
for the Terrorist killed dos that include from Basra or not? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.229.16.129 (talk) 13:26, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think so, for one it doesn't include the equipment losses of the Iraqis in Basra or the Mahdi wounded in Basra. Also the Iraqi captured/deserted/defected aren't listed in Basra, so are we to assume the only time Iraqi troops did this was in engagements outside Basra? Someone should seriously clarify the casualties for this article and the new battle of Basra one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.223.170.177 (talk) 08:28, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Mahdi Army ordered to end fighting by Al-Sadr, it on wikinews and other source to lazy to post it sorry —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.229.16.129 (talk) 16:10, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Who says March 23 was the beginning? Serious clashes broke only after the beginning of the Basra op.--TheFEARgod (Ч) 19:48, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It seems this article overlaps with Battle of Basra (2008). Should they be merged? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.189.190.8 (talk) 11:10, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It may very well be a "propaganda victory" for the Mahdi Army, but this would belong in the article, not the infobox. There is no documentation at all about listing propaganda successes in {{Infobox Military Conflict}}. The infobox is for military victories and defeats.--Pharos (talk) 19:30, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"Propaganda victory" is biased, why not just use psychologicall victory, politicall victory or say: Isurgents claim victory. The Honorable Kermanshahi (talk) 14:44, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Pro-American anyalists you meen... Anyway the Mahdi Army revolt was because Iraq refused to let loose their prisoners and because of the revolt Iraq let go the prisoners, this makes the Mahdi Army the victor, it's not just propaganda, no, they actually gained their objectives. The Honorable Kermanshahi (talk) 19:44, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It is more neutrall and while politicall victory indicates they didn't win the fighting but got what they wanted or it was to their advantage, propaganda victory indicates they actually didn't win but are using it for propaganda. Ayway, let's just keep politicall victory. The Honorable Kermanshahi (talk) 13:36, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"Following the fighting the Maliki government agreed to political concessions for a cease-fire, including legal and military immunity for the Mahdi Army and a release of its captured members. This scored a major political victory for the Mahdi Army and also presented the fighting capabilities of the militia that were, despite a lack of heavier weapons, far greater than those of the Iraqi security forces."
These are two very debatable statements, considering that Maliki never ordered a halt of the offensive operations, he simply backed down from his initial approach -he is now only pursuing the "criminal" members within the militias-. He didn't even agree to the 9-point agreement sent by al Sadr [2]. Claiming that Maliki gave the militias "military and legal inmunity" is just absurd as hundreds of militants are still in prison, and the crackdown is still under way. On the other hand, the Mahdi Army suffered considerable casualties during the battle. To put things in perspective, by the third day of fighting, the Mahdi Army was suffering casualties at a higher rate that Al Qaeda and the ISI were at any point of 2007(the year of both the Awakening and the Surge).
We should clearly make the distinction that the Mahdi Army managed to defend itself well in their main strongholds (Basra and Sadr City) but they performed poorly in other regions of southern Iraq [3]. In return, The Iraqi Army was forced into a stalemate in Basra, failing to take control of any important district in the city. Both sides were suffering logistical strains. Most of the desertions ocurred in Basra (the local IP, very unreliable to begin with, and the poorly trained 52nd IA brigade, rushed into action with no combat experience at all)
The battle was unsustainable for both sides. They decided to back down. Al Sadr claims that he was able to stop the government's offensive, but he knows he just doesn't have the capability he had on 2004 to launch large scale operations. Al Malaki wasn't making much progress at all, and in fear of losing political support, decided to back down. But he never ended the crackdown completely -he is now pursuing only the most belligerant members of the militias, instead of the entire group.
This wasn't a victory for the Mahdi Army or the Iraqi government.
As for any "political capital" gained by Al Sadr, we should remember that "When the Iraqi opposition held an emergency session of parliament to oppose the Basra operations, only 54 of the 275 lawmakers attended".[4] —Preceding unsigned comment added by XMaster4000 (talk • contribs) 05:57, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
12 May, there where new clashes between the al-Mahdi Amry and Iraqi security forces 2 killed, 25 wounded in clashes in Sadr city . The Honorable Kermanshahi (talk) 12:00, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Here, more clashes: U.S. troops repel attacks in Baghdad slum, kill 3. The Honorable Kermanshahi (talk) 12:52, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Inthe last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :)
DumZiBoT (talk) 17:13, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
We do not have a clear beginning and ending of this. Some could argue that the fighting began on March 23, with the Green Zone attack, others with the March 25 Basra operation. The end: May 11 was the cease fire date but sporadic fighting continued until May 15. Putting just one date would be WP:OR, which is against Wikipedia rules. So we can:
An image used in this article, File:Sciri logo.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Deletion requests June 2011
| |
A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 16:13, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply] |
I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 03:56, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 65 external links on Iraq spring fighting of 2008. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to trueorfailed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:57, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Iraq spring fighting of 2008. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{dead link}}
tag to http://news.monstersandcritics.com/middleeast/news/article_1399504.php/Al-Sadrs_brother-in-law_killed_in_Iraqs_Najaf__RoundupWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:06, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]