This was all predicted by many on these boards for the past year, and now the nightmare on two fronts has become a reality for the occupiers.
http://www.iht.com/articles/514069.html
Rebellion by Shiites reflects growth of hostility to U.S. in Iraq
U.S. forces are confronting a broad-based Shiite uprising that goes well beyond supporters of one militant Islamic cleric who has been the focus of U.S. counterinsurgency efforts, according to U.S. intelligence officials. That assertion contradicts repeated statements by the Bush administration and U.S. officials in Iraq. On Wednesday, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and General Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said that they did not believe the United States is facing a broad-based Shiite insurgency. Administration officials have portrayed Moktada al-Sadr, a rebel Shiite cleric who is wanted by U.S. forces, as the catalyst of the rising tide of violence within the Shiite community of Iraq. But intelligence officials now say that there is evidence that the insurgency goes beyond Sadr and his militia, and that many more Shiites have turned against the U.S.-led occupation of Iraq, even if they are not actively aiding the uprising. A year ago, many Shiites rejoiced at the U.S. invasion and the toppling of Saddam Hussein, a Sunni who had brutally repressed the Shiites for decades. **But U.S. intelligence officials now believe that hatred of the U.S. occupation has spread rapidly among Shiites, and is now so large that Sadr and his forces represent just one element of it. **
Meanwhile, U.S. intelligence has not yet detected signs of coordination between the Sunni rebellion in Iraq’s heartland and the Shiite insurgency. But intelligence officials say that the Sunni rebellion also goes far beyond former Baathist regime members. Sunni tribal leaders, particularly in the Anbar Province, home to Ramadi, the provincial capital, and Falluja, have turned against the United States and are helping to lead the Sunni rebellion, intelligence officials say. The result is that the United States is facing two broad-based insurgencies that are now on parallel tracks, both of which are increasingly difficult to contain. The Bush administration has sought to portray the opposition much more narrowly. In the Sunni insurgency, the White House and Pentagon have focused on the role of former leaders of the Baath Party and Saddam’s government, while in the Shiite rebellion they have focused almost exclusively on the role of Sadr. Rumsfeld told reporters at the Pentagon that the fighting in Iraq was just the work of “thugs, gangs and terrorists” and was not a popular uprising. Myers added, “It’s not a Shiite uprising. Sadr has a very small following.” According to some experts on Iraq’s Shiite Muslims, the uprising has spread to many Shiites who are not followers of the cleric Sadr. “There is a general mood of anti-Americanism among the people in the streets,” said Ghassan al-Attiyah, executive director of the Iraq Foundation for Development and Democracy in Baghdad. “They identify with Sadr not because they believe in him but because they have their own grievances.”
While they share the broader anger in Iraq over the lack of jobs and security, many Shiites suspect that the handover of sovereignty from the occupying powers to Iraqi politicians on June 30 would bypass their interests, Attiyah said. With his offensive, Sadr has “hijacked the political process,” he said. As a result, more moderate Shiite clerics and politicians risk going against public opinion if they come out too strongly against the rebellious young cleric. Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani is an aging cleric venerated for his teachings, while Sadr is a youthful rabble-rouser, with little clerical standing. This week, Sistani issued a statement supporting Sadr’s decision to act against the Americans, but emphasizing the need for a peaceful solution. In this, the older man seemed to be marking out a position that allowed him to associate with the tide of Shiite popular feelings, while allowing Sadr, for whom he is said to harbor a personal contempt, to risk his militia - and his life - in a showdown with the Americans. While Sadr’s militiamen prepared for battle, all was quiet at the Kufa headquarters of a rival militia that has helped sustain Sadr’s political influence - the Badr Brigade. Nominally controlled by another Shiite political organization, the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, the Badr Brigade has generally been seen as underpinning Sistani’s authority.
Although anti-Americanism is hardly universal among Shiites, an anti-American mood has been building for months. At the Grand Mosque in Kufa, where Sadr took refuge as his militiamen were seizing control of the city on Sunday, a deep vein of it feeds off every rumor. At night, as they torch gasoline-soaked tires to light checkpoints guarding the approaches to the mosque, the militiamen speak of America planning to uproot Islam in Iraq, to steal its oil, to deny Shiites a voice in the country’s future governance, even to bring back Saddam. In the Shiite-dominated areas of Iraq, some Pentagon officials and other government officials believe that Hezbollah, an Iran-backed Shiite extremist group, is now playing a key role in the Shiite insurgency. Some officials said that the Islamic Jihad Organization, a terrorist group closely affiliated with Hezbollah, has established offices in Iraq, and that Iran is behind much of the violence. CIA officials disagree, however, and say they have not yet seen evidence that Hezbollah has joined forces with Iraqi Shiites.
How many more days before some sunnis bomb a shia mosque?