Iraq War, v5

[SageThyme]

Originally Posted by purplehawk

I think the coffins are hidden here because the Bush administration doesn't wish voters to see the human cost of this godforsaken war. Bush himself has not attended a single funeral of a soldier lost in Iraq. He has met with the families who lost loved ones over there - but he has done so well after the fact.

Just to set the record straight, should anything happen to my husband (heaven forbid), he ceases to be under any direction of the US Navy - including the Commander-in-Chief. I have final say-so on how I wish his remains to be returned to me and whether or not they are photographed. Bush has no authority over my decision as the spouse of the deceased.

[lindaluna]

The White House is now trying to say that Osama Bin Laden is NOT responsible for attacks of 9/11, therefore it's OK that he isn't caught. I kid you not.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/0..._n_125751.html

[ComicBookWorm]

And war is peace, freedom is slavery, and ignorance is strength.

[Hes]

Please take everything related to the White House, 9/11 and Al Qaeda to The Bush Administration thread. Thank you!

[lindaluna]

The "surge" did not work.

1. It was a troop increase to prevent total defeat. We are back to stalemate with the same number of troops on the ground as pre-surge. So it solved nothing.
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/255/story/52170.html

2. The amount of Iraqi casualties has stayed at 50% plus what it was pre surge. The chart shows only to end of 2007, not 2008 figures. http://www.iraqbodycount.org/analysis/numbers/2007/

Year / Civilians Killed

2003 - 10,077 – 12,010
2004 - 9,741 – 10,573
2005 - 13,071 – 14,324
2006 - 25,699 – 27,519
2007 - 22,586 – 24,159

[Alastor]

Originally Posted by lindaluna

The chart shows only to end of 2007, not 2008 figures.

Which means we are missing eight whole months there.

And regardless of what are the reasons for it, the chart shows a clear downward trend through 2007. So I'm very much afraid that this chart can't be used as evidence for the "surge" not working.

[OldLupin]

Originally Posted by lindaluna

The "surge" did not work.

1. It was a troop increase to prevent total defeat. We are back to stalemate with the same number of troops on the ground as pre-surge. So it solved nothing.
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/255/story/52170.html

2. The amount of Iraqi casualties has stayed at 50% plus what it was pre surge. The chart shows only to end of 2007, not 2008 figures. http://www.iraqbodycount.org/analysis/numbers/2007/

Year / Civilians Killed

2003 - 10,077 – 12,010
2004 - 9,741 – 10,573
2005 - 13,071 – 14,324
2006 - 25,699 – 27,519
2007 - 22,586 – 24,159

We are turning over large portions of the security responsibility to the Iraqi forces, have secured areas that pre-surge were out of control and have enabled troops withdraw from formerly hostile areas to secure areas and reduction is being scheduled. If it didn't work, it is doing a pretty fair impersonation of it.

[purplehawk]

Didn't Iraq stop reporting civilian casualties around the same time as the surge became operational?

[pensieve_master]

Originally Posted by lindaluna

The "surge" did not work.

Senator Obama doesn't agree with you, though I'm sure he wishes he could.

Obama: Surge Succeeded Beyond ‘Wildest Dreams’

[monster_mom]

Wow - the Iraqi parliament met another milestone!

Iraqi parliament approves provincial elections law

AP Iraq's parliament overwhelmingly approved a provincial elections law Wednesday, overcoming months of deadlock and giving a boost to U.S.-backed national reconciliation efforts. U.S. officials have complained privately that Iraqi politicians have failed to take advantage of the sharp drop in violence — down 80 percent since last year, according to the U.S. military — to forge lasting power-sharing agreements.

[Lash Dresden]

From a blog written by an Iraqi citizen, dated today: "But now, since the U.S. military surge has increased security in Baghdad . . . "
Simply being able to go to a movie indicates a move in the right direction.

[monster_mom]

Not that we'll hear about it in the major media, but Camp Fallujah, the last remaining US military base in Anbar province, is in the process of being dismantled. Many of us recall that just a couple of years ago Anbar, with Fallujah leading the way, was considered a lost cause. It is now so stable the the Marines are heading out of town.

http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?s...7&archive=true

[Wab]

The "success" of the surge was helped in no small part on the ethnic cleansing of Sunni areas of Baghdad by Shi'ite terrorists armed by the US.

"Night light in neighborhoods populated primarily by embattled Sunni residents declined dramatically just before the February 2007 surge and never returned, suggesting that ethnic cleansing by rival Shiites may have been largely responsible for the decrease in violence for which the U.S. military has claimed credit."

Science Daily

[monster_mom]

Originally Posted by Wab

The "success" of the surge was helped in no small part on the ethnic cleansing of Sunni areas of Baghdad by Shi'ite terrorists armed by the US.

"Night light in neighborhoods populated primarily by embattled Sunni residents declined dramatically just before the February 2007 surge and never returned, suggesting that ethnic cleansing by rival Shiites may have been largely responsible for the decrease in violence for which the U.S. military has claimed credit."

Science Daily

And what of the success in other parts of Iraq?

Oh - and I'd like a few links from reliable sources that support your assertion that the US armed the shi'ite terrorists who participated in ethnic cleansing in Iraq.

[Wab]

Originally Posted by monster_mom

And what of the success in other parts of Iraq?

Hate to break this to you, but the surge was only in Baghdad.

Oh - and I'd like a few links from reliable sources that support your assertion that the US armed the shi'ite terrorists who participated in ethnic cleansing in Iraq.

How about Gen Petreaus's admission in a speech to the Heritage Foundation that an essential part of the success of the surge and Anbar Awakening was "we sat down with some of those who were shooting at us" ie designated Shi'ite terrorists who accepted US support and arms to sort out their Sunni enemies.

[monster_mom]

Originally Posted by Wab

Hate to break this to you, but the surge was only in Baghdad.

And Al Anbar, which was and is largely Sunni and includes the cities of Fallujah, Ramadi, and Haditha and is considered one of the greatest successes to result from the surge and change in strategy is what?

How about Gen Petreaus's admission in a speech to the Heritage Foundation that an essential part of the success of the surge and Anbar Awakening was "we sat down with some of those who were shooting at us" ie designated Shi'ite terrorists who accepted US support and arms to sort out their Sunni enemies.

Here's a rather less biased opinion of the "meetings" coalition forces had with the Jazeera Council.

Long War Journal The formation of the Sahawah Al Anbar, or Anbar Awakening, the grouping of Anbari tribes and former insurgents opposed to al Qaeda's Taliban like rule, traces back to last year, when al Qaeda in Iraq conducted its campaign of murder and intimidation throughout Anbar province. Sheik Abdul Sattar Al-Rishawi and his allies among the tribes and anti al Qaeda insurgent groups began forming alliances in the spring and summer of 2006. In September, the groups established the Jazeera Council in Ramadi, and began working more closely with Coalition forces to begin securing neighborhoods in Ramadi. The Sahawah Al Anbar, which followed the success of the Jazeera Council, was formed in October. The Awakening provided the disparate groups with a political platform, and began to work closely with the Coalition and establishing ties with the Iraqi government.

Slightly different take than sitting down with the terrorists and arming them to commit genocide against their Sunni neighbors. Oh - and the Anbar Awakening was origianlly called the Sunni Awakening because it started with the Sunni getting fed up with and standing against Al Qaeda.

[purplehawk]

Originally Posted by monster_mom

Slightly different take than sitting down with the terrorists and arming them to commit genocide against their Sunni neighbors. Oh - and the Anbar Awakening was origianlly called the Sunni Awakening because it started with the Sunni getting fed up with and standing against Al Qaeda.

Yeah, right. Shortly after the U.S. began paying them to lay down their arms and stop fighting. I honestly don't know which happened first, but the cash payments gave them a means to live without fighting alongside al Quaeda.

[Wab]

Originally Posted by monster_mom

And Al Anbar, which was and is largely Sunni and includes the cities of Fallujah, Ramadi, and Haditha and is considered one of the greatest successes to result from the surge and change in strategy is what?

The Anbar Awakening started in 2006 long before the surge which was focussed on Baghdad.

"The Anbar Awakening is genuinely good news, but (a) it had nothing to do with the surge, (b) it's happening only in homogeneous Sunni areas, and (c) it involves arming and training Sunni forces who are almost certain to turn against both us and the Shiite central government as soon as they've finished off AQI."

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/arc..._08/011937.php

"The turnabout began last September [2006], when a federation of tribes in the Ramadi area came together as the Anbar Salvation Council to oppose the fundamentalist militants of Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia."

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/29/wo...pagewanted=all

Even Defense says that the Anbar Awakening and Sadr Ceasefire were separate (but around the same time) to the surge: “There's no question that the awakening in Anbar, the cease-fire by Sadr, simultaneous to the surge, has helped the overall security situation in Iraq.”

[monster_mom]

Originally Posted by Wab

The Anbar Awakening started in 2006 long before the surge which was focussed on Baghdad.

"The Anbar Awakening is genuinely good news, but (a) it had nothing to do with the surge, (b) it's happening only in homogeneous Sunni areas, and (c) it involves arming and training Sunni forces who are almost certain to turn against both us and the Shiite central government as soon as they've finished off AQI."

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/arc..._08/011937.php

Washington Monthly's view of Anbar Awakening is a bit skewed as it completely ignores the relevant facts. The US Marines were in Anbar before the surge when Ramidi was a frightening place. The Marines changed the way they operated and were able to hold some ground and meet with local tribal leaders. Those meetings and the commitment from the Marines that they would not abandon the people of ramadi helped kick off the Anbar Awakening. The surge and change is strategy that came later was based on the success those Marines had in convincing local Sunni tribes to stand up against al Qaeda.

The surge allowed more troops to come into Anbar and other areas of Iraq and spread the Awakening's movement throughout Iraq.

You don't have to take my word for it, or the word of some pundit writing an article about the situation from their Washington DC or New York City office, nope, you can take the word of Staff Sgt. John Costa who served three tours in Anbar and wrote this about Ramidi.

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/news....aspx?id=48166

or you can take the word of Major Neil Smith, who served in Ramidi in the summer and fall of 2006 when Anbar was awakening and has written several articles about his experience.

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/8/b53/910

Even Defense says that the Anbar Awakening and Sadr Ceasefire were separate (but around the same time) to the surge: “There's no question that the awakening in Anbar, the cease-fire by Sadr, simultaneous to the surge, has helped the overall security situation in Iraq.”

Defense Link also talks about how the actions of the Marines in Anbar, and Ramidi in particular, provided the security needed to facilitate the Anbar Awakening.

[Wab]

I'm not denying that. The point I'm making is a historical one. The Anbar Awakening was not a result of the surge. That, and the fact that the surge was not the sole reason for the reduction of violence.