[Mavdog]

Originally posted by: Evilmav2

Sure, Mr. al-Sadr's devoted followers and rabble of a militia represent a few thousand Iraqi's, but they almost certainly do not represent the wishes of the majority of Iraqi Shiites, or indeed the wishes of the 25 million liberated residents of greater Iraq.

I don't know how many they number, but it certainly seems like a lot more than a "few thousand". I don't know what "the wishes of the 25 million liberated residents of greater Iraq" are, how do you?

Muqtada rolled the dice in starting this small uprising, in a panicky move predicated by one of his closest advisors being arrested and in the closing of his newspaper propoganda organ. Allied occupation forces started to turn their attentions to the 30 year old's paramilitary forces, just as his rival Ayatotollah Sistani had clearly gained the loyalties and respect of most Shiites, and as al-Sadr saw the door closing on his megalomaniacal ambitions, he had to act against the Americans and the provisional Iraqi authority, or risk inevitable political impotence in this new Iraq.

plausible. OTOH, he could sense that the general public was frustrated by the progress of providing security to them and he moved thinking that he could ride that emotion to become their leader.

Essentially, he wins if other Iraqi groups rally to his call for Islamic revolution, and he loses if he and his rabble of armed children and old men end up being surrounded and innoculated by American and National Iraqi forces. As of this moment, it looks like he is a loser...[

Those were definitely NOT "armed children and old men" marching down the street in black outfits shown on my TV.

The most disturbing result of the uprising was the lack of performance by that National Iraqi forces you mention. They ran away.

Now, are Kerry's comments about the "legitimacy" of al-Sadr's as a "voice" of Iraqi's cogent?

Technically yes, but only in the sense he represents a fractional and tiny segment of the population of that recovering land.

Again, we don't understand how much support this man has.

We'd see just how "legitimate" Saddam would have found al-Sadr's voice if he tried to mount this kind of revolutionary escapade back in the good old days. My guess is that the Mukhrabat would have been busy for weeks with Shiite genital electrocutions, finger-bone breaking, wife-raping, and bulldozing corpses into mass graves in the desert, if any ragtag al-Sadr Shiite militia's attempted to seize control of the recently renamed "Sadr" city...

He has lost many family members to Hussein, let's not lose sight of that, yet it is clear that he is not going to be a man who will co-exist with others in a democratic Iraq.

Yes, he couldn't have this type of opportunity under Saddam or he'd be erased.

Nevertheless, there is nothing irrational about Kerry's comments.