Source: Reuters via theaustralian:
Asked if it was the biggest battle since the clashes first began in March, a US military spokesman, Mark Cheadle, said: "Certainly."
Dust storms have grounded US Apache attack helicopters, the main weapon used by US forces to hunt militants firing rockets.
"We are aware of the rise in attacks and how they correspond to bad weather," said Mr Cheadle.
"The end is inevitable. They are going to lose. We don't understand why they keep fighting, why they keep putting the people they are supposed to be protecting in danger."
Lets re-read the last one.
Cheadle, a propaganda and public relations guy for the US Army, is saying that:
1) He doesn't understand why the Sadrists keep fighting the Americans and the pro Iranian Maliki regime.
2) He states that the Sadrists are putting other Iraqis in danger by resisting the American military.
Lets flip the script here.
For 1), let us ask Cheadle and all the American soldiers in Iraq, why are WE fighting there...
when on the one hand we were pushed into this war by the pro Israel lobby (see here, here, here and here, but if you can stomach it, also here)...
and on the other hand, right now we are propping up a pro Iran regime fighting Sadr, a more of an Iraqi nationalist type (see here).
Cheadle, I can tell you what the Sadrists are fighting for - but better yet, can you please tell me what we, the Americans, are fighting for in Iraq?
For 2), lets flip the script also.
Cheadle states that by fighting and resisting, the Sadrists are putting other Iraqis in danger. From whom are those Iraqis that Cheadle cares so much about in danger from? Since by implication the Sadrists are the ones putting other iraqis in danger, perhaps the iraqis are in danger from...