From Austin Bay: Battle of Najaf, 2007

This is interesting:

"I'll get to the Battle of Najaf 2007 in a moment, but first consider who benefits from the mass murder of Shia pilgrims and senior Shia clerisy who support reconciliation and national unity. Here's the answer: the Islamo-fascist killers who fear the emergence of a democratic alternative to tyranny and terror in the Middle East. " (snip)

"Saddamist and Sunni rejectionists also benefit from murder and chaos. We know from documents captured in February 2004 that al-Qaida saw a Sunni-Shia war as its only path to victory in Iraq. Saddam's supporters gambled that they could murder their way back into power by killing Iraqis and inciting ethnic as well as religious conflict. Saddam's holdouts have been trying to stage an "Iraqi Tet" since 2004, achieving a media-driven psychological victory that will force the United States to abandon Iraqi democrats."

Iraq is a civil war and we should leave- so say too many Dhims and dim newspapers and talking TV marionettes. What a swell idea! Then succeeding turmoil and murder cannot be blamed on anybody that's not Bush!! Oh, Paths of Glory, victory in sight, Wings ahoy, the Donkey takes flight!!

Of the fight Austin Bay writes:

"So last weekend the Soldiers of Heaven -- allegedly a Shia faction, but certainly a rejectionist organization -- gathered at least 600 fighters (and possibly more) outside of Najaf on a farm owned by a supporter of Saddam's regime.

But the Iraqi government struck first.

Press reports have emphasized the Iraqi government's and Iraqi Army's inadequacies. (Smoothing Plane: what a surprise!) An Iraqi Army battalion dispatched to the Soldiers of Heaven camp encountered fierce resistance. It pulled back and requested air strikes and U.S. military support. (Smoothing Plane: The pullback, very sensible to all not journalists, was, in my local paper's NY Times graft described as "Unprepared Iraqis saved by Airstrikes". Had they stood their ground and been overwhelmed? "US faulted in slaughter of poorly trained Iraqis." There is an aphorism which aptly describes this 'thinking': A saint looks at a thief and sees only pockets. Translated into journalism-ese, "A journalist looks at victory and sees only US failures.) The firefight raged for 24 hours. The Iraqi Ministry of Defense reported 263 militants killed and over 300 captured.

Striking first indicates improved intelligence. Iraqi forces striking first demonstrates improved Iraqi military capabilities. U.S. and coalition air and ground "back up" is an operational version of "strategic overwatch," which was the goal coalition forces set for themselves in 2004.
Mass murder in Najaf was thwarted. The rejectionist forces were destroyed. American defeatists and Middle Eastern fascists should take note. "

"Striking first indicates improved intelligence." The leftist, progressive journalists' out of hand, reflexive, automatic, default dismissal of any points of view, (by which read 'experience'), even 1% military flavored runs them aground to flailing, fish out of water, gasping for air conclusions. A common man would be red-faced in shame. At the least they ought to be intelligent's failure, blue-faced from lack of air. Of course the sensible thing to do, having encountered superior forces, is withdraw, i.e., back-up and escalate...and call for a surge of reinforcements! Capturing 300 means 300 surrendered, which means they realized their position was untenable and undefendable. Translated from reality so the journalistas can make sense of it, their boat was capsized, sinking, and/or blown to pieces. Eschewing complexity-surrender or die. I suppose the virgins are disallowed when someone else blows you up. It's so unfair... curse those infidel, unclean J-dams!