U.S. Forces need to withdraw from Najaf ...

[annxburns]

I am really worried that Al-Sadr supporters will try any hurt Al-Sistani and blame the American forces.

If anything happens to Al-Sistani then the backlash toward our forces will be extreme.

I hope like hell Sistani has good protection.

[goodhue]

1. Yes, that would be a good start . . .

[annxburns]

2. What are we accomplishing by being there?

If we withdraw then it will be up to Al-Sadr to protect Sistani. And he would never take him on directly.

We are adding to the problem and getting caught in the cross-fire..

[goodhue]

6. "We are adding to the problem and getting caught in the cross-fire."

This statement is completely correct! And it applies not just to Najaf but to the whole country.

Bush says "Bring 'em on." We say "BRING THEM HOME NOW!"
Not one more troop killed in action.
Not one more troop wounded in action.
Not one more troop psychologically damaged by the act of terrifying, humiliating, injuring or killing innocent people.
Not one more troop spending one more day inhaling depleted uranium.
Not one more troop separated from spouse and children.

[babylon_system]

3. al-Sadr's Shi'a Mahdi militia wouldn't harm Grand Ayatollah al-Sistani

Iraqi puppet soldiers under US command have already slaughtered dozens of unarmed al-Sistani supporters. That's where you can look for trouble.

[4morewars]

4. US forces need to withdraw from IRAQ !!!

Bring them home, NOW !!!!!!!!!!

Read Smedley Butler's book, "War is a Racket" Here is chapter 1 :

http://www.scuttlebuttsmallchow.com/racket1.html

There will be a quiz !

[G_j]

5. if your only tool is a hammer

every problem looks like a nail.

[coalition_unwilling]

7. Apparently, U.S. forces suspended "offensive" operations in Najaf

Altho, if that were true, they would have withdrawn from Iraq, since their very presence is "offensive" to the vast majority of Iraqis.

But MSNBC reported they suspended operations for 24 hours to give Sistani a chance to broker a deal.