Radical Militia and Iraqi Army in Fierce Battle
that's the headline on the NY Times home page
can we say CIVIL WAR yet ???
you know the drill
here's the link
At least 20 gunmen and 8 civilians were killed Monday when the Iraqi Army battled fiercely for hours with members of a militia loyal to Moktada al-Sadr, the radical Shiite cleric, in Diwaniya, Iraqi officials said.
but it's not a CIVIL WAR
With sectarian violence soaring, American generals and the American ambassador, Zalmay Khalilzad, say that militias are now the single greatest threat to the stability of Iraq and that the Iraqi government must disband them.
But Mr. Maliki has yet to introduce any new policy, and has refrained from strong condemnations of Mr. Sadr's militia, the Mahdi Army. Mr. Maliki relies on Mr. Sadr, who is enormously popular among poor Shiites, for political support against rival Shiite politicians. Mr. Sadr controls several ministries and at least 30 seats in Parliament, and he maintains close ties to Mr. Maliki's political group, the Islamic Dawa Party.
but it's not a CIVIL WAR
The fighting ended only after Shiite politicians visited Mr. Sadr's office in Najaf to negotiate a cease-fire.
but it's not a CIVIL WAR
General Ghanimi and other Iraqi Army and police officials said several militias were involved, not just the Mahdi Army. But they said the seed of the violence on Monday was planted a week ago when a roadside bomb they believe was planted by the Mahdi Army killed at least two Iraqi soldiers. Two days later, the Iraqi Army arrested a member of the Mahdi Army.
Nasir al-Saadi, a spokesman for the Sadr bloc in Parliament, said the unidentified Sadr militant arrested by the army was tortured and may have been killed. According to Mr. Saadi's account, the army started attacking a Mahdi-dominated neighborhood late Sunday night. He said the soldiers killed civilians and damaged houses while Sadr militants "did not participate" at first, refusing to return fire.
but it's not a CIVIL WAR
can anybody tell me why it's not a CIVIL WAR