It's not that he wouldn't. When a group of the "anti-Crest"'s followers offered to attack U.S. forces in June, he thanked them and asked for Allah to watch over them. On the other hand, al-Sadr does not have to take any present action on a threat for the future, so the sabre-rattling is likely to cost him nothing. For that matter, the chances are good that he may benefit on some level as his sympathizers within Iraqi ranks receive that same training.
"U.S. military trainers could be targets: Iraq's Sadr," by Aseel Kami for Reuters, August 7:
BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Iraq's fiercely anti-U.S. cleric Moqtada al-Sadr has warned that U.S. military trainers will be targets if they stay in the country beyond a year-end deadline for American troops to leave.
The statement from Sadr, whose Mehdi Army militia fought U.S. troops until 2008, follows a deal by Iraqi leaders to allow Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki to negotiate with the United States on whether to keep trainers in Iraq after the deadline.
Sadr followers have sent mixed messages on that, but any deal to keep U.S. troops in Iraq, even as trainers, remains a sensitive issue in Baghdad and Washington eight years after the U.S. invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein.
"Whoever stays in Iraq will be treated as an unjust invader and should be opposed with military resistance," Sadr said in a statement published on a pro-Sadr website on Saturday.
"A government which agrees for them to stay, even for training, is a weak government."
Sadr's Mehdi Army militia has for the most part demobilized, but U.S. officials say Sadrist splinter groups have continued to attack U.S. troops still stationed in Iraq.
Violence in Iraq has eased sharply since sectarian bloodshed peaked four years ago, but bombings and assassinations are still carried out almost daily by Sunni Islamists, some tied to al Qaeda, and by Shi'ite militas the U.S. government says are backed by Iran.
Sadr himself is now part of mainstream politics and a key ally to Maliki in his fragile power-sharing coalition among Shi'ite, Sunni and Kurdish blocs.
Sadr's representatives walked out of last week's discussions on U.S. troops, signaling possible dissension within the coalition.
U.S. and Iraqi officials agree that Iraq's security forces are capable of taking on internal threats, but say they need training in heavy conventional weaponry like tanks, and in air and naval defenses.
Details of any deal are far from clear, and an agreement would need to pass through parliament, say U.S. officials, who want legal immunity for any residual U.S. military presence.
Sadr has in the past threatened to revive his Shi'ite Mehdi Army if U.S. troops stay, but Sadrist sources have said the militia is riven with splinter groups and internal divisions.
It was a big mistake not to have taken out this wonder of dental excellence long ago.
Iraq will no doubt be among "the many nations" who attack Israel with Turkey (Gog), and Iran (Persia), etc. in the final war (Ezekiel 38). There have been no fundamental changes in spite of our costly nation building efforts.
Too much blood and treasure had already been wasted on this questionable Iraq enterprise, and expect no gratitude from that world, any of it, whether warring Afghanistan, starving Somalia, imploding Libya, burning Syria, teeter tottering Lebanon, 'sectarian' violence Yemen, Pakistan, south Sudan, Chad, northern Nigeria, Algeria, UAE, Egypt, Indonesia, not even 'secular' Turkey. They deserve none of it, and will never be gracious to thank us. It's against their jihad Book. Let them fight it out amongst themselves, Iran takes the winnings, and Saudis come crying to America. Tough love in Islamic world. We should cut all AID to them. Wasted enough, too much.
"Anti-Crest!" ROTFLMAO!
One answer to Sadr (and Maliki): bye!
Unjust invaders! LOLAROTF!
We should really use Iraq as a staging ground to invade Iran while we still have the infrastructure there.
NOT 'invade'.
NO boots on the ground.
Just enormous bombs hitting every one of their nuke installations, over and over, until there are just smoking holes in the ground all over Iran.
I repeat.
NO invasion. No 'regime change' or 'nation building'.
Just the pinpoint, targeted obliteration of identified nuke sites and sites that support them.
Here is an intelligent exposition of what could be done.
http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_direct_link.cfm/blog_id/36657
"Save Iran - Bomb Iran".