AL-SADR TELLS MALIKI: "DON'T MEET BUSH" - MEETING IS CANCELLED

And, I think the White House is spinning it now. You be the judge.

This morning the report came out that al-Sadr had threatened to pull his members out of Maliki's Parliamentary coalition (via Washington Post):

AMMAN (Reuters) - Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki flew to Jordan for crisis talks with President Bush on Wednesday, prompting a radical Shi'ite faction to suspend participation in his government in anger. Iranian-backed cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, who leads the Mehdi Army militia, was making good on a threat to boycott parliament and Maliki's coalition if the premier met the U.S. president.

And this afternoon, the story is being told this way (via AP):

AMMAN, Jordan - President Bush's high-profile meeting with Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki on Wednesday was canceled in a stunning turn of events after disclosure of U.S. doubts about the Iraqi leader's capabilities and a political boycott in Baghdad protesting his attendance. Instead of two days of talks, Bush and al-Maliki will have breakfast and a single meeting followed by a news conference on Thursday morning, the White House said.

The abrupt cancellation was an almost unheard-of development in the high-level diplomatic circles of a U.S. president, a king and a prime minister. White House counselor Dan Bartlett denied that the delay was a snub by al-Maliki directed at Bush or was related to the leak of a memo written by White House National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley questioning the prime minister's capacity for controlling violence in Iraq.

No, I don't think Bush did snub Maliki. I think Maliki snubbed Bush. What do you think?

Reliapundit adds: If these reports are true - and that's a big if - then it means that Iran effectively controls the Iraqi federal government. If this is not reversible, then it means we should support the Kurds seceding - and declaring an independent republic, and then we should reposition our troops there - at their invitation. We can use these troops and bases - along with our bases in Afghanistan, and our fleet in the Gulf nearby - to attack and demolish the military, industrial, and nuclear assets of Iran. And we must do this no later than December 2008.

Why the rush? Well, LGF's interpretation of Ahmadinejad's letter to American citizens is correct: this is clearly a jihadist threat and indicates that they intend to destroy the USA - the Great Satan - and Israel AS SOON AS THEY CAN. If we do not preempt, then we will be attacked. I believe we should therefore preempt. This will demolish Iran's ability to project power, and thereby neutralize Syria, and Hizballah, and thus save the entire Middle East. YES: ENTIRE MIDDLE EAST. The entire Middle East has long been targeted by the jihadists: Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and even Turkey have long been targeted. A failure in Iraq will aid the enemy everywhere else.

What will Bush do? I DON'T KNOW. Bush's words have been fine:

In Riga, Bush said he'd be flexible with his strategy in Iraq, changing it as conditions there change, but that U.S. troops would stay as long as needed.

"There's one thing I'm not going to do: I'm not going to pull our troops off the battlefield before the mission is complete," he said during a speech at Latvia University's Grand Hall. "We can accept nothing less than victory for our children and our grandchildren."

But now it's time Bush backed these words up with actions. If he doesn't, then I must conclude that "Dubya" stands for wobbly and wimp and waste; (MORE ON THIS LATER - AFTER THE POTUS RETURNS TO THE STATES).

Or - as RICK BALLARD asks: "I wonder when Grant and Sherman will be brought in to replace Casey and Abizaid? Soon, I hope."