EVEN MORE ON BASRA

I've written before that despite conflicting reports in the news media, all is not peachy-keen in Basra. TIME Magazine weighs in ("What the British Left Behind in Basra")and offers a little more confirming evidence:

...the British were bystanders to a turf war that involved militias loyal to the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council (SIIC), followers of the cleric Moqtada al Sadr, and the smaller Fadhila party.

...Basra will continue to be a high-stakes front in the intra-Shi'a fight for control of southern Iraq. That fight has largely escaped the notice of Americans — both because U.S. troops are not on the front lines and because the violence has not reached the appalling levels seen in other

...the violence in southern Iraq gives the lie to the idea that simply relinquishing control of a province constitutes progress. The local governments and security forces in these provinces do not represent some ideal of unified Iraqi control so much as they represent control by one faction or another.