zenpundit.com » Blog Archive » Reuters + Daily Beast + Nasrallah = now I got it

Reuters + Daily Beast + Nasrallah = now I got it

[ by Charles Cameron — piecing together an understanding – Shi’ite militia, Iraq ]
.

Reuters reported today:

Pentagon slams “unhelpful” Iraqi code name for Ramadi offensive
WASHINGTON

May 26 The Pentagon on Tuesday said it was “unhelpful” for Iraq’s Shi’ite militia to have chosen an openly sectarian code name for the operation to retake the city Ramadi and added that, in the U.S. view, the full-on offensive had yet to begin.

Pentagon spokesman Colonel Steve Warren also emphasized that problems leading to last week’s Iraqi military withdrawal from the city of Ramadi included “both low morale amongst the troops” as well as problems within the Iraqi military command structure.

“There are many factors that caused Iraqi security forces to withdraw from Ramadi,” Warren said, noting that Iraqi forces “vastly outnumbered their enemy yet they chose to withdraw.” (Reporting by Phillip Stewart; Editing by Doina Chiacu)

That doesn’t tell us what the “unhelpful name” in question is.

**

According to The Daily Beast, the “code name” is “Labaik Ya Hussein”:

The Iraqi government said it launched a campaign Tuesday to take back Anbar province from ISIS, two weeks after it captured the provincial capital of Ramadi. The campaign features a leading role for Iran-backed Shiite militias, raising fears that such an openly Shiite-led push threatens to exacerbate sectarian tensions in majority-Sunni Anbar. A spokesman for the Iran-backed militias even said the operation’s codename will be Labaik Ya Hussein —- a nod to the Shiite saint. “The Labaik Ya Hussein operation is led by the Hashid Shaabi in cooperation and coordination with the armed forces there,” he said. “We believe that liberating Ramadi will not take long.”

So that’s “a nod to the Shiite saint” eh?

**

Nasrallah expands on the meaning of that “nod” in a fiery clip from 2009.

Ooh. Oh. Ah.

One Response to “Reuters + Daily Beast + Nasrallah = now I got it”

  1. larrydunbar Says:

    “The campaign features a leading role for Iran-backed Shiite militias,”
    A name defines a position.
    So I don’t understand what the problem with this name, as it pretty much defines the Iraqi militias.
    Likewise, it doesn’t seem like the fact that the Iraqi army turned-over a bunch of, most likely, much needed equipment to ISIS should come as a shock. Isn’t this exactly what happened the first time the Iraqi Army came under stress from ISIS historically?
    Perhaps if the Iran-backed Shiite militias start acting as an Iraqi force and the Iraqi Army starts acting as an Iran-backed militia that something surprising will come out of that part of the Middle East.


Switch to our mobile site