Brain Fertilizer

Four Reasons:

First, Sadr's uprising occurred nearly simultaneously with the Marines engaging insurgents/terrorist in Fallujah. And yet, most of the country remains fairly stable. Then the bombs went off in Basrah, killing somewhere up to 68 (recent estimates have revised the figure downward...don't remember how far). But the country remains fairly stable... If they can take this level of shake-up without collapse, it's a good thing for the future of the country.

Second, Sadr doesn't seem to be whipping up the support he needs to sustain this. From what I've seen, Sistani is still calling the shots. The Arab world loves a winner, and neither the insurgents in Fallujah nor Sadr in Najaf are looking all that victorious at the moment. I expect the tide to turn and remaining support to erode away rapidly.

Third, Saddam's trial is set to happen. Actually convicting this guy and carrying out the sentence will be very cathartic to the people, and will bring a whole bunch of people off of the fence on to our side.

Fourth, once the sovereignty handover happens on 30 June, it removes any remaining claims to legitimacy any of these troublesome groups might claim. Instead of sticking it to the US, thugs like Sadr will be making things messy for their fellow Shias. Instead of Iraqi cops quitting on the Americans so we can risk our Western butts for them, they'll be defending their own country and their own leadership's safety...someone will be holding some feet to the fire on that aspect, I'm sure. And at that point, it officially becomes impossible to get the US out by causing trouble, because the quicker stability can be ensured, the quicker the US is gone. I don't think President Bush is holding to the 30 June timetable for political reasons in the US, i.e., the election (although it doesn't hurt that); no, I think he is sticking to it for political reasons in Iraq: See? We are keeping our promise and handing your country back over to you!.

We'll see if I'm right, won't we?