on the other, it states that the political structure of iraq has not improved and the prospect of iraq governing itself is bleak. maliki has made the govt completely shiite run, despite the fact that shiites are a minority, not only in iraq, but in the arab world.
the "pluses" for the bush supporters, however, aren't really that positive. assuming that iraq becomes less stable after we leave....okay, well an immediate withdraw of troops is still gonna save US lives. nothing in the report alludes to the war being winnable...and if thats the case, aren't we just buying time? if the report had said that the US can end the violence between shiites, sunnis and kurds, that would be a different story. if the civil war that exists in iraq can be stopped, i don't see how the US is gonna play any role in mediating things. .
Shiites are 60% of Iraq's population and the government right now is run by Shiites from the Dawa and SIIC plus the two Kurdish parties. There's still one Sunni as well from an unaffiliated party. Sadr and the two main Sunni parties, plus a secular one have pulled out.
If the surge were simply a military campaign than it would be a success. The problem is it's not. None of the political goals have been met, and won't be, and that was the ultimate goal of the plan. The U.S. presence simply puts a cap on the violence and forestalls the battle for power between the different factions until the U.S. leaves.
You have Sunni vs. Sunni vs. Shiites in the West, Kurds vs. Arabs and Turkomen in Kirkuk, Shiites vs. Sunni in central Iraq, and Shiite vs. Shiite in the south. None of these groups share the same vision of Iraq, which is why they're fighting and not making any compromises. No military strategy by the U.S. is going to solve this, and neither will any of the laws the U.S. has made as benchmarks.
Shiites are 60% of Iraq's population and the government right now is run by Shiites from the Dawa and SIIC plus the two Kurdish parties.
It is very clear from the official numbers taken from the results of the elections of January 31, 2005, and December 15, 2005, that: the Sunnis are 60???62% of the population of Iraq (42???44% Arab, and 16???18% Kurd and Turk Iraqis), and only 38???40% are Shi'ites.
Shiites are 60% of Iraq's population and the government right now is run by Shiites from the Dawa and SIIC plus the two Kurdish parties.
It is very clear from the official numbers taken from the results of the elections of January 31, 2005, and December 15, 2005, that: the Sunnis are 60???62% of the population of Iraq (42???44% Arab, and 16???18% Kurd and Turk Iraqis), and only 38???40% are Shi'ites.
You're tripping. First of all the Sunni Arabs boycotted the first election.
Here's the numbers from the CIA factbook that are from 2007:
75-80% Arab, 15-20% Kurd, 5% Assyrian, Turkoman, other
97% Muslim - 60-65% Shiite, 32-37% Sunni, 3% Christian, other
Who Is Fueling The Iraqi Violence? Could it be the U.S. and Maliki Governments?[/b]
At the beginning of August, 2007, the U.S. military made another accusation against Iran for providing special road side bombs to Shiite militias that are taking a heavy toll on U.S. troops. In the last year or two, the U.S. has increasingly blamed Iran for stoking violence in Iraq. What is being overlooked is the role of the U.S. and the Maliki government in supplying weapons to the Iraqi conflict.
After the March 2003 invasion, Iraq was awash in weapons. Like many Middle Eastern countries, it was common for families to have at least one gun in the home. Add to this the fact that the U.S. military did not secure any of the major weapons stockpiles after the war, and you had a situation where Sunni insurgents and Shiite militias had the pick of the litter in small arms.
The U.S. has also continuously blamed Syria and Iran for stoking violence in Iraq, but recent reports show that the U.S. and Iraqi government are also contributing. A July 2007 report by the Government Accountability Office found that the U.S. could not account for 190,000 weapons it gave to Iraqi security forces from 2004 to 2005. It blames the Defense Department for not following accounting rules. More importantly, it notes that there are still no rules to keep track of the weapons being given to the Iraqi government. Many of these weapons probably ended up on the black market and in the hands of insurgents and militias.
In February 2007, the Italian government also busted an illegal deal between Italian arms suppliers and the Iraqi Ministry of Interior. The Ministry contacted the arms merchants and cut a deal for 115, 000 rifles and machine guns for $39.7 million saying they were for security forces and that the U.S. had been informed. The U.S. actually knew nothing about it, and the Italian businessmen were arrested. The weapons were suspected to be heading to Shiite militias, which control the Interior Ministry.
To add to the problem, the U.S. is planning on switching the Iraqi security forces from older AK-47s to U.S. made M-16s. The surplus guns will most likely end up on the black market and into forces fighting the U.S. and perpetrating sectarian violence.
It???s ironic that the current surge policy is aimed at securing the Iraqi population, and the U.S. and Maliki governments are directly adding to the violence.
National Public Radio reported yesterday that Turkey has complained that U.S. provided weapons meant for Iraq are ending up in their country and undermining the government. Turkish police held a press conference where they showed U.S. supplied Glock pistols that were given to Iraqi police that ended up on the black market in Turkey. In July the Turkish government reported that they were finding U.S. supplied AK-47s and M-16s meant for the Iraqi security forces in the hands of the Kurdish insurgent group the Kurdish Workers Party (PKK), which is based in Iraqi Kurdistan and southern Turkey. A high level official in the Iraqi Interior Ministry admitted that Iraqi police were selling the weapons the U.S. gave them to make money, and the Defense Department is investigating whether this is related to the 190,000 weapons gone missing reported by the Government Accountability Office in July 2007.
Source[/b]
Watson, Ivan, ???U.S. Weapons from Iraq Making Their Way To Turkey,??? National Public Radio, 8/24/07
America???s top brass never supported the surge. The previous American commander in Iraq, Gen. Casey, wanted to hand over security to Iraqis and gradually draw down U.S. forces. This was a view shared by Central Command head Gen. Abizaid, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. Gen. Casey and Gen. Abizaid believed that U.S. troops only fueled the fighting, so Americans had to pull back, let the Iraqis deal with their own problems, and break from dependency on the U.S. The explosion of sectarian violence in 2006 meant Casey had to shelve his plan, and it eventually cost him his job as he got pushed up the chain of command to Army Chief of Staff and Gen. Petraeus and the surge took over. Now that debate has started on what to do after the surge effectively ends in the spring of 2008 when troop rotations are up, Gen. Casey???s ideas have returned.
Outgoing head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Pace has said that he is for drawing down the number of U.S. troops in Iraq to 100,000 in 2008 if possible. He???s supported by Secretary of Defense Gates and incoming Joint Chiefs head Adm. Mullen. Their main concern is that continued deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan where tours usually have to be extended from 12 to 15 months is breaking the Army, Reserves, National Guard, and to a lesser extent the Marine Corps. They warn that if a new emergency were to arise the U.S. wouldn???t have the troops to respond. Gen. Petraeus and more importantly Pres. Bush disagree. Come September they???ll ask for more time with the surge and want to keep as many troops in Iraq as possible until the end of Bush???s presidency. Gen. Pace on the other hand, is expected to recommend Casey???s strategy next month as well.
Drawing down U.S. forces would not provide a light at the end of the tunnel for Iraq. It would probably increase the violence because the Iraqi security forces are not ready, overwhelmingly Shiite, and heavily infiltrated by militias. Fewer troops would mean a reduction in U.S. casualties, and Gen. Casey and Sec. Gates argue that it could increase American public support for the war, appease the increasing number of dissenting Republican members of Congress, and lead to a long term presence and bases in Iraq to project American power in the region. As long as U.S. forces remain however, they will put a cap on the chaos and forestall the time when Iraqis fight it out to ultimately decide who will run the country and how, ultimately dragging out the civil conflict for years to come.
Sources:[/b]
Baker, Peter and Weisman, Jonathan, ???Warner Calls for Pullouts By Winter,??? Washington Post, 8/24/07
Baldor, Lolita, ???Army too stretched if Iraq buildup lasts,??? Associated Press, 8/19/07
Barnes, Julian, and Spiegel, Peter, ???Top general to urge Iraq troop cut,??? Los Angeles Times, 8/24/07
Dobbins, James, ???Who Lost Iraq???? Foreign Policy, September/October 2007
Dreazen, Yochi, ???Discarded Troop Plan,??? Wall Street Journal, 8/23/07
Mathews, Jessica, ???The Situation in Iraq,??? House Armed Services Committee, 7/18/07
PBS Frontline, ???Gen. George Casey,??? End Game, 6/19/07 - ???Interview Col. Kalev Sepp (Ret.),??? End Game, 6/19/07 - ???Interview Col. William Hix,??? End Game, 6/19/07 - ???Interview Frederick Kagan,??? End Game, 6/19/07 - ???Interview Gen. Jack Keane (Ret.),??? End Game, 6/19/07 - ???Interview Lt. Col. Andrew Krepinevich (Ret.),??? End Game, 6/19/07 - ???Interview Michael Gordon,??? End Game, 6/19/07 - ???Interview Philip Zelikow,??? End Game, 6/19/07 - ???Interview Thomas Ricks,??? End Game, 6/19/07 - ???Timeline Struggling to Find a Strategy for Success,??? End Game, 6/19/07
Spiegel, Peter, ???White House splinters over ???surge??? length,??? San Jose Mercury News, 7/21/07
Youssef, Nancy, ???U.S. general: Iraq ???surge??? likely to end in spring,??? McClatchy Newspapers, 8/17/07
Hints At September Report and Post-Surge Strategy By The Bush Administration[/b]
If President Bush???s weekly radio address is any hint, the White House will claim tactical gains against Al Qaeda in Anbar province and some local political movement, say the surge is a success, and then come March, begin withdrawing U.S. troops when their rotations are up, all packaged as a new strategy for Iraq.
From 8/25/07
The Dissenting Generals[/b] Come September they???ll ask for more time with the surge and want to keep as many troops in Iraq as possible until the end of Bush???s presidency. ...
and lead to a long term presence and bases in Iraq to project American power in the region
No Big Shifts Planned After Report on Iraq White House Senses Recent Political Gains
By Michael Abramowitz Washington Post Staff Writer Saturday, August 25, 2007; Page A01
CRAWFORD, Tex., Aug. 24 -- Despite political pressure for a change of course in Iraq, the White House hopes to keep in place its existing military strategy and troop levels there after the mid-September report from Army Gen. David H. Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker, administration officials said.
Even as the administration faced a new call this week from Sen. John W. Warner (R-Va.), a leading ally, to begin at least a symbolic withdrawal of troops by Christmas, White House officials said privately that they are not contemplating making major shifts before early next year. They said that next month's report is likely to highlight what they see as significant improvements in security over the past year and that they expect the president to assert that now is not the time to dramatically change approaches.
...
Another senior official, who also spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss White House thinking more freely, said he expects the U.S. presence to return to pre-buildup levels of 15 combat brigades and about 130,000 troops a year from now, down from about 160,000. "We all know where we want to get to," this official said. "We all know that there will be a long-term robust troop presence that will outlast this president."
Outgoing head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Pace has said that he is for drawing down the number of U.S. troops in Iraq to 100,000 in 2008 if possible. He???s supported by Secretary of Defense Gates and incoming Joint Chiefs head Adm. Mullen. Their main concern is that continued deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan where tours usually have to be extended from 12 to 15 months is breaking the Army, Reserves, National Guard, and to a lesser extent the Marine Corps. They warn that if a new emergency were to arise the U.S. wouldn???t have the troops to respond. Gen. Petraeus and more importantly Pres. Bush disagree. Come September they???ll ask for more time with the surge and want to keep as many troops in Iraq as possible until the end of Bush???s presidency. Gen. Pace on the other hand, is expected to recommend Casey???s strategy next month as well.
August 25, 2007 Generals Differ on the Timing of Troop Cuts By DAVID S. CLOUD and STEVEN LEE MYERS New York Times
WASHINGTON, Aug. 24 ??? As the Bush administration mulls options for withdrawing forces in Iraq, fault lines are beginning to emerge in a debate between commanders in the field who favor slow reductions and senior generals at the Pentagon who favor cutting the number of combat troops more deeply.
Among others, Gen. Peter Pace, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Gen. George W. Casey Jr., the Army chief of staff, are said to be leaning toward a recommendation that steep reductions by the end of 2008, perhaps to half of the 20 combat brigades now in Iraq, should be the administration???s goal.
Such a drawdown would be deeper and faster than Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top commander in Iraq, is expected to recommend next month, administration officials said.
Their main concern is that continued deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan where tours usually have to be extended from 12 to 15 months is breaking the Army, Reserves, National Guard, and to a lesser extent the Marine Corps.
GIs' morale dips as Iraq war drags on With tours extended, multiple deployments and new tactics that put them in bare posts in greater danger, they feel leaders are out of touch with reality. By Tina Susman Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
August 25, 2007
YOUSIFIYA, IRAQ ??? In the dining hall of a U.S. Army post south of Baghdad, President Bush was on the wide-screen TV, giving a speech about the war in Iraq. The soldiers didn't look up from their chicken and mashed potatoes.
As military and political leaders prepare to deliver a progress report on the conflict to Congress next month, many soldiers are increasingly disdainful of the happy talk that they say commanders on the ground and White House officials are using in their discussions about the war.
And they're becoming vocal about their frustration over longer deployments and a taxing mission that keeps many living in dangerous and uncomfortably austere conditions. Some say two wars are being fought here: the one the enlisted men see, and the one that senior officers and politicians want the world to see.
"I don't see any progress. Just us getting killed," said Spc. Yvenson Tertulien, one of those in the dining hall in Yousifiya, 10 miles south of Baghdad, as Bush's speech aired last month. "I don't want to be here anymore."
...
The signs of frustration and of flagging morale are unmistakable, including blunt comments, online rants and the findings of surveys on military morale and suicides.
Sometimes the signs are to be found even in latrines. In the stalls at Baghdad's Camp Liberty, someone had posted Army help cards listing "nine signs of suicide." On one card, seven of the boxes had been checked.
"This occupation, this money pit, this smorgasbord of superfluous aggression is getting more hopeless and dismal by the second," a soldier in Diyala province, north of Baghdad, wrote in an Aug. 7 post on his blog, www.armyofdude.blogspot.com.
"The only person I know who believed Iraq was improving was killed by a sniper in May," the blogger, identified only as Alex from Frisco, Texas, said in a separate e-mail.
The Army's suicide rate is at its highest in 23 years: 17.3 per 100,000 troops, compared with 12.4 per 100,000 in 2003, the first year of the war. Of the 99 suicides last year, 27 occurred in Iraq.
The latest in a series of mental health surveys of troops in Iraq, released in May, says 45% of the 1,320 soldiers interviewed ranked morale in their unit as low or very low. Seven percent ranked it high or very high.
Mental health trends have worsened in the last two years, said Cindy Williams, an expert in military personnel at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. "These long and repeated deployments are causing acute mental stress," she said.
Most troops in Iraq expected 12-month deployments. Those were extended in May by three months for the troop buildup. Thousands already were on their second or third deployments.
The result is a fighting force that includes many soldiers who are worn down, just as Petraeus, who took command of the war six months ago, is asking them to adopt intense counterinsurgency tactics.
Iraq's leaders agree on key benchmarks By Waleed Ibrahim and Wisam Mohammed Sun Aug 26, 6:27 PM ET
BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Iraq's top Shi'ite, Sunni Arab and Kurdish political leaders announced on Sunday they had reached consensus on some key measures seen as vital to fostering national reconciliation.[/b]
i know this must be a big bummer for you motown, especially since this was all going on at the very same time that you were drafting up you 10,000 word essay on how it wasn't. Don't let these things you get you down, and keep the dream (of failure) a live. I'm sure there will be a big suicide bomb to buck up your spirits in a day or two.
P.S. I bet you can find something from Glen Greenwald or one of your "think tank" reports that spins this an acceptable light.
Iraq's leaders agree on key benchmarks By Waleed Ibrahim and Wisam Mohammed Sun Aug 26, 6:27 PM ET
BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Iraq's top Shi'ite, Sunni Arab and Kurdish political leaders announced on Sunday they had reached consensus on some key measures seen as vital to fostering national reconciliation.[/b]
i know this must be a big bummer for you motown, especially since this was all going on at the very same time that you were drafting up you 10,000 word essay on how it wasn't. Don't let these things you get you down, and keep the dream (of failure) a live. I'm sure there will be a big suicide bomb to buck up your spirits in a day or two.
P.S. I bet you can find something from Glen Greenwald or one of your "think tank" reports that spins this an acceptable light.
yeah lets see how long that lasts...like you said until the next truck bomb
you add a lot of relavent data to the discourse what is your solution to the fact that the sunni's and the shiittes have been at war for centuries? what is your solution to the fact that the middle east has never had a true working "democracy" in the western model? these are obvious facts that the bush administration ignored in their rush for an oil grab
since you are a republican genius..shed some light on the big picture and how your people/views are working for a better Iraq/American foreign policy..its been 4 years and billlions of OUR tax dollars wasted with 0 to show for it
Iraq's leaders agree on key benchmarks By Waleed Ibrahim and Wisam Mohammed Sun Aug 26, 6:27 PM ET
BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Iraq's top Shi'ite, Sunni Arab and Kurdish political leaders announced on Sunday they had reached consensus on some key measures seen as vital to fostering national reconciliation.[/b]
i know this must be a big bummer for you motown, especially since this was all going on at the very same time that you were drafting up you 10,000 word essay on how it wasn't. Don't let these things you get you down, and keep the dream (of failure) a live. I'm sure there will be a big suicide bomb to buck up your spirits in a day or two.
P.S. I bet you can find something from Glen Greenwald or one of your "think tank" reports that spins this an acceptable light.
The important question is whether this will actually happen. This is a pledge and not actual legislation and in case you didn't notice, but the Maliki government is on life support right now. Here's some things to consider.
1) The pledge was for a new de-Baathification law, local elections and sharing of government jobs amongst the three main sects.
2) Half of Maliki's cabinet is missing and the only Sunni politican that was in on this pledge was the Vice President. His own party denounced him for taking part and the main Sunni party is still boycotting and said the pledge was window dressing.
3) As of now, the Maliki coalition of Dawa, SIIC and the 2 Kurdish parties do not have a majority in parliament to pass any laws so they need to reach out to others to make this pledge into reality. They especially need to get the Sunni parties on board so that they can show the country they really believe in power sharing.
4) In 2006 the Maliki government pledged to pass these same laws by December 2006. The Iraqi government also promised to pass an oil law Sept. 2006, Dec. 2006, Feb. 2007, and June 2007. It's August 2007 and nothing has happened. Actions speak louder than words.
Agence France Presse, "Iraq leaders pledge to bridge sectarian divide," 8/27/07 - "Iraq leaders vow to boost national reconciliation," 8/27/07 - "Sunnis cool on Iraq political deal," 8/27/07
Gearan, Anne, "Rice: Iraq Missed Political Deadlines," Washington Post, 1/30/07
Katzman, Kenneth, ???Iraq: Government Formation and Benchmarks,??? Congressional Research Service, 8/10/07
Reuters, "Iraq Sunnis say deal won't end boycott," 8/27/07
San Francisco Chronicle, ???U.S. military divided on troop withdrawal,??? 8/25/07
Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, ???Quarterly Report and Semiannual Report to the United States Government,??? 7/30/07
Stockman, Farah, ???US struggles to keep leader at helm Defections strike Maliki???s coalition,??? Boston Globe, 8/21/07
Zaman, Az, ???Iraqi Papers Sat: Front of the ???Moderates,?????? IraqSlogger.com, 8/17/07
you dont pay taxes cause you're poor. you take the credit.
once again instead of taking the opening I offered you for a constructive discourse you revert to calling me "POOR" and a "Bitch" truly pathetic and your going to be a lawyer? you can't even argue your own position because you know the war initiative has failed As you go down in flames you revert to child-like name calling in an atempt to cover your stupidity.
Iraq's leaders agree on key benchmarks By Waleed Ibrahim and Wisam Mohammed Sun Aug 26, 6:27 PM ET
BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Iraq's top Shi'ite, Sunni Arab and Kurdish political leaders announced on Sunday they had reached consensus on some key measures seen as vital to fostering national reconciliation.[/b]
i know this must be a big bummer for you motown, especially since this was all going on at the very same time that you were drafting up you 10,000 word essay on how it wasn't. Don't let these things you get you down, and keep the dream (of failure) a live. I'm sure there will be a big suicide bomb to buck up your spirits in a day or two.
P.S. I bet you can find something from Glen Greenwald or one of your "think tank" reports that spins this an acceptable light.
2003 20 March - American missiles hit targets in Baghdad, marking the start of a US-led campaign to topple Saddam Hussein. In the following days US and British ground troops enter Iraq from the south.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
Baghdad, 9 April 2003: A symbol of Saddam's power tumbles Timeline: Iraq after Saddam In Depth: The struggle for Iraq
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
BBC's Rageh Omaar on the day's drama 2003 9 April - US forces advance into central Baghdad. Saddam Hussein's grip on the city is broken. In the following days Kurdish fighters and US forces take control of the northern cities of Kirkuk and Mosul. There is looting in Baghdad and elsewhere.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2003 April - US lists 55 most-wanted members of former regime in the form of a deck of cards. Former deputy prime minister Tariq Aziz is taken into custody.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2003 May - UN Security Council backs US-led administration in Iraq and lifts economic sanctions. US administrator abolishes Baath Party and institutions of former regime.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2003 July - US-appointed Governing Council meets for first time. Commander of US forces says his troops face low-intensity guerrilla-style war. Saddam's sons Uday and Qusay killed in gun battle in Mosul.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
Insurgency intensifies
2003 August - Deadly bomb attacks on Jordanian embassy and UN HQ in Baghdad. Saddam's cousin Ali Hassan al-Majid, or Chemical Ali, captured. Car bomb in Najaf kills 125 including Shia leader Ayatollah Mohammed Baqr al-Hakim.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
Soldiers and civilians are targets in ongoing violence
Iraq Body Count: War dead figures Who are the insurgents?
2003 14 December - Saddam Hussein captured in Tikrit.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2004 February - More than 100 killed in Irbil in suicide attacks on offices of main Kurdish factions.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2004 March - Suicide bombers attack Shia festival-goers in Karbala and Baghdad, killing 140 people.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2004 April-May - Shia militias loyal to radical cleric Moqtada Sadr take on coalition forces.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
Hundreds are reported killed in fighting during the month-long US military siege of the Sunni Muslim city of Falluja.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
Photographic evidence emerges of abuse of Iraqi prisoners by US troops.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
Sovereignty and elections
2004 June - US hands sovereignty to interim government headed by Prime Minister Iyad Allawi.
Saddam Hussein transferred to Iraqi legal custody.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2004 August - Fighting in Najaf between US forces and Shia militia of radical cleric Moqtada Sadr.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2004 November - Major US-led offensive against insurgents in Falluja.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
Religious, ethnic fault lines run through Iraqi politics
Guide to Iraqi political parties 2006: Iraq election results confirmed 2005 30 January - An estimated eight million people vote in elections for a Transitional National Assembly. The Shia United Iraqi Alliance wins a majority of assembly seats. Kurdish parties come second.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2005 28 February - At least 114 people are killed by a massive car bomb in Hilla, south of Baghdad. It is the worst single such incident since the US-led invasion.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2005 April - Amid escalating violence, parliament selects Kurdish leader Jalal Talabani as president. Ibrahim Jaafari, a Shia, is named as prime minister.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2005 May onwards - Surge in car bombings, bomb explosions and shootings: Iraqi ministries put the civilian death toll for May at 672, up from 364 in April.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2005 June - Massoud Barzani is sworn in as regional president of Iraqi Kurdistan.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2005 July - Study compiled by the non-governmental Iraq Body Count organisation estimates that nearly 25,000 Iraqi civilians have been killed since the 2003 US-led invasion.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
Saddam was executed for crimes against humanity
Q&A: Saddam on trial Timeline of Saddam's trial 2005 August - Draft constitution is endorsed by Shia and Kurdish negotiators, but not by Sunni representatives.
More than 1,000 people are killed during a stampede at a Shia ceremony in Baghdad.
2005 September - 182 people are killed in attacks in Baghdad, including a car bomb attack on a group of workers in a mainly-Shia district.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
Saddam on trial
2005 October - Saddam Hussein goes on trial on charges of crimes against humanity.
Voters approve a new constitution, which aims to create an Islamic federal democracy.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2005 15 December - Iraqis vote for the first, full-term government and parliament since the US-led invasion.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2006 20 January - Shia-led United Iraqi Alliance emerges as the winner of December's par
liamentary elections, but fails to gain an absolute majority.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
Sectarian violence
2006 February onwards - A bomb attack on an important Shia shrine in Samarra unleashes a wave of sectarian violence in which hundreds of people are killed.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2006 22 April - Newly re-elected President Talabani asks Shia compromise candidate Jawad al-Maliki to form a new government. The move ends four months of political deadlock.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
Radical Shia cleric Moqtada Sadr - a key power broker
Who's who in Iraq: Moqtada Sadr 2006 May and June - An average of more than 100 civilians per day are killed in violence in Iraq, the UN says.
2006 7 June - Al-Qaeda leader in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, is killed in an air strike.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2006 September - A much-anticipated ceremony to transfer operational command from US-led forces to Iraq's new army is postponed.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2006 November - Saddam Hussein is found guilty of crimes against humanity and sentenced to death.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
Iraq and Syria restore diplomatic relations after nearly a quarter century.
More than 200 die in car bombings in the mostly Shia area of Sadr City in Baghdad. An indefinite curfew is imposed after what is considered the worst attack on the capital since the US-led invasion of 2003.
2006 December - Iraq Study Group report making recommendations to President Bush on future policy in Iraq describes the situation as grave and deteriorating. It warns of the prospect of a slide towards chaos, triggering the collapse of the government and a humanitarian catastrophe.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
Saddam executed
2006 30 December - Saddam Hussein is executed by hanging.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
Bombers have repeatedly targeted markets
2007: Baghdad diary - First, worst, biggest
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2007 January - US President Bush announces a new Iraq strategy; thousands more US troops will be dispatched to shore up security in Baghdad.
Barzan Ibrahim - Saddam Hussein's half-brother - and Awad Hamed al-Bandar, former head of the Revolutionary Court, are executed by hanging.
UN says more than 34,000 civilians were killed in violence during 2006; the figure surpasses official Iraqi estimates threefold.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2007 February - A bomb in Baghdad's Sadriya market kills more than 130 people. It is the worst single bombing since 2003.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2007 March - Insurgents detonate three trucks with toxic chlorine gas in Falluja and Ramadi, injuring hundreds.
Former Vice-President Taha Yassin Ramadan is executed on the fourth anniversary of the US-led invasion.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2007 12 April - A bomb blast rocks parliament, killing an MP.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
18 April - Bombings in Baghdad kill nearly 200 people in the worst day of violence since a US-led security drive began in the capital in February.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2007 May - The leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq, Abu Ayyub al-Masri, is reported killed.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2007 July - President Bush says there's been only limited military and political progress in Iraq following his decision to reinforce US troops levels there.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2007 August - The main Sunni Arab political bloc in Iraq, the Iraqi Accordance Front, withdraws from the cabinet, plunging the government into crisis.
Truck and car bombs hit two villages of Yezidi Kurds, killing at least 250 people - the deadliest attack since 2003.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
Sun Aug 26, 6:27 PM ET
BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Iraq's top Shi'ite, Sunni Arab and Kurdish political leaders announced on Sunday they had reached consensus on some key measures seen as vital to fostering national reconciliation.[/b]
Please, try and accept a little good news once in a while. All the recent developments show that everything is fine and not only that, but the war is almost over.
All the recent developments show that everything is fine and not only that, but the war is almost over.
The war on TERRORISM is almost over????!? Long live George W. He will surely be known as the guy who brought peace to the middle east...nah, the world. With jesus on your side...anything is possible....I mean profitable.
All the recent developments show that everything is fine and not only that, but the war is almost over.
In the Summery of 2006 the Maliki government pledged to pass these laws. In January 2007 when the surge began the Maliki government pledged to pass these laws. In August 2007 the remains of the Maliki government pledge to pass the same laws they pleded to pass in the Summer of 2006 and beginning 2007. Progress!
All the recent developments show that everything is fine and not only that, but the war is almost over.
In the Summery of 2006 the Maliki government pledged to pass these laws. In January 2007 when the surge began the Maliki government pledged to pass these laws. In August 2007 the remains of the Maliki government pledge to pass the same laws they pleded to pass in the Summer of 2006 and beginning 2007. Progress!
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment. Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment. Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment. ... keep saying this and you might (blindly) believe it too.
Big September Report For The Surge? Don???t Believe The Hype[/b]
September is suppose to be a big month with Gen. Petraeus and U.S. Ambassador Crocker traveling to Washington to deliver their report to Congress on Iraq. In fact, the report has been made moot already. It doesn???t matter that the surge hasn???t accomplished any of its strategic political goals, because the White House is going to spin it as a military success, and ask for $50 billion more for the war. After a rancorous debate on Capitol Hill, Bush will largely get his way to ???stay the course??? until the end of his presidency.
Cherry Picking The Good and Ignoring The Bad[/b]
The White House will present as positive a view of the surge as possible in September. As part of this process it has asked for several different reports to be delivered. The first was a National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq. Gen. Petraeus actually got this released earlier than planned at the end of August 2007. The pessimistic report said that violence was still high, security could only be improved moderately, the Maliki government wasn???t functioning, and there were no moves towards peace. By pushing up the release date, Petraeus hoped that people would forget about it by the time he testified to Congress.
The much ballyhooed September Petraeus report will actually be written by the White House, and there will also be reports by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Army Chief of Staff Gen. Casey, Central Command commander Adm. Fallon, and Secretary of Defense Gates. Congress has also requested two reports of its own. The surge of reports on the surge will allow the administration to cherry pick the best news and ignore the rest, while hoping that the differing views will drown each other out.
No Political Success? Fix The Numbers And Emphasize The Military Side[/b]
The main argument the White House and Gen. Petraeus will present is that the surge has been a military success. This will ignore the fact that the surge is simply a military tactic to achieve a political goal, reconciliation between the warring factions in Iraq. While violence has seen a dramatic decrease in Anbar province, the focus of the surge has always been on Baghdad. When the surge first began in February the military claimed that Iraqis were returning to homes that they had been forced out of in Baghdad. By May the military said that the surge had halted the displacement. At the end of August, Gen. Petraeus made the audacious statement to The Australian newspaper that violence was down 75% in the capitol. Somehow all of this had been accomplished with only half of the city secured by U.S. forces by August. In fact, deaths have been up and down during the surge in Baghdad, and other forms of sectarian violence have continued, if not increased. In order to argue these points, the U.S. has been fixing numbers.
The National Security Network did a study of four reports by the Pentagon to Congress from August 2006 to June 2007. It found that in three out of the four reports the military changed how it counted deaths. During some periods this caused a dramatic drop, and in others a just as sharp increase during the same time period. For example, in an August 2006 report the Pentagon said that there were approximately 1,750 ???casualties??? in Iraq in one month. In the following three reports, the Pentagon only counted ???deaths by execution??? during that same month and the number miraculously dropped by 1,000 to around 750. Likewise, the same change in counting produced an increase from 5,500 sectarian deaths over a series of months right before the surge started to 7,400, and then amazingly enough, a dramatic drop after the military plan was implemented.
As the Iraq Study Group found, the U.S. has been playing with the numbers since the beginning to give the war a positive spin. It found that on one day in July 2006 the U.S. officially claimed 93 attacks, when there had actually been 1,100. The study group found that murders of Iraqis, attacks that did not harm Americans, or ones that the U.S. could not officially blame on someone were simply left off the books. By ignoring dozens of acts of violence, the U.S. claimed that violence was down 52% in Baghdad during the summer of 2006 while conducting a campaign to pacify the city. In fact, deaths were dramatically up at the time and the operation was later dubbed a failure. The U.S. still does not count these acts, nor does it include Sunni on Sunni and Shiite on Shiite violence in its numbers. It???s by these manipulations that the military an administration has been able to claim much of its military success with the surge.
The claims of success with displaced Iraqis are also widely off. Humanitarian groups such as Oxfam and the U.N. have found that few Iraqis returned to their homes during the surge, and many actually left afterwards. More importantly the dispossessed actually increased during the military operation. When the surge began in February 2007 there were 499,000 displaced Iraqis, by August that number had more than doubled to 1.1 million with 40,000-50,000 leaving their homes each month. The majority of those forced out from Baghdad have been Sunnis as Shiite militias and their allies in the security forces have continued ethnic cleansing throughout the surge. The capitol use to be approximately 65% Sunni, now that maybe down to as low as 15%.
The surge has also pushed violence outside of the capitol to other regions where there are fewer U.S. troops. As a sign of this shift, the Associated Press found that Baghdad accounted for 76% of the deaths in the entire country in 2006. In comparison, by August 2007 it was responsible for only 52%. Not only that, but the AP reported that deaths throughout the country have gone up during the surge as well. In 2006 there were 13,811. In comparison, during the first eight months of 2007 there were already approximately 14,800. There???s also been an increase in deaths at the end of the summer. In June there were 1,227 casualties, July had 1,753, and August saw 1,773.
Divided Congress[/b]
The mix of reports and the claims of military success will continue the divisions within Congress. Even though several leading Republicans such as Senator Warner and Senator Lugar have spoken against the surge, they have found few supporters within their own party, and they cannot agree with the Democratic leadership who pushed a hard-line, withdraw or nothing approach which garnered few results. The Democrats are also becoming divided themselves with some wanting to give the surge more time. With a divided legislature there are sure to be some heated hearings on Iraq, but in the end, they will not be able to forge a consensus and provide a real opposition to the President, allowing him to continue his policies. This would???ve happened whether Gen. Petraeus made his report or not, again making it moot before it???s even given.
Conclusion[/b]
September is suppose to be a big month, but the proceedings will mostly be a show. Thanks to numbers fixing and a divided Congress, a surge policy that has failed to reach any of its strategic goals will be called a success. Congress will argue with him, but in the end, the President will be able to carry the day until he steps down from office when it comes to Iraq.
SOURCES[/b]
Government Reports[/b]
National Intelligence Council, ???Prospects for Iraq???s Stability: Some Security Progress but Political Reconciliation Elusive,??? National Intelligence Estimate, August 2007
Think Tank Reports[/b]
Cordesman, Anthony, ???Iraq???s Insurgency and Civil Violence,??? Center for Strategic and International Studies, 8/22/07
Goldenberg Ilan, ???More Fuzziness,??? National Security Network, DemocracyArsenal.org, 8/30/07
National Security Network, ???Drop in Violence???? 8/30/07
Articles[/b]
Abramowitz, Michael, ??
?No Big Shifts Planned After Report on Iraq,??? Washington Post, 8/25/07
Baker, Peter and Weisman, Jonathan, ???Warner Calls for Pullouts By Winter,??? Washington Post, 8/24/07
Barnes, Julian, and Spiegel, Peter, ???Top general may propose pullbacks,??? Los Angeles Times, 8/15/07 - ???Top general to urge Iraq troop cut,??? Los Angeles Times, 8/24/07
Burns, Robert, ???Panel: U.S. Underreported Iraq Violence,??? Associated Press, 12/6/06
Dreazen, Yochi, ???Discarded Troop Plan,??? Wall Street Journal, 8/23/07
Economist, ???Is the surge going to fizzle???? 6/21/07
Fadel, Leila, ???Despite violence drop, officers see bleak future for Iraq,??? McClatchy Newspapers, 8/15/07
Glanz, James, and Farrell, Stephen, ???More Iraqis Said to Flee Since Troop Increase,??? New York Times, 8/24/07
Hurst, Steven, ???Violence lessens in Baghdad as it grows elsewhere,??? San Francisco Chronicle, 8/26/07
Sanger, David and Shanker, Thom, ???Alternative reports may dilute general???s appraisal of war,??? San Francisco Chronicle, 6/24/07
Shanahan, Dennis, ???Surge working: top US general,??? Australian, 8/31/07
Stolberg, Sheryl Gay, ???White House Is Gaining Confidence It Can Win Fight in Congress Over Iraq Policy,??? New York Times, 8/30/07
Weisman, Jonathan and DeYoung, Karen, ???An Early Clash Over Iraq Report,??? Washington Post, 8/16/07
While the U.S. was pumping in new troops into Iraq at the beginning of 2007 with the surge, the British, our staunchest allies in the Coalition of the Willing were withdrawing theirs. At the beginning of September they officially turned over control of Basra, the second largest city in Iraq, to Iraqi security forces. At the same time, two of the leading British generals during the invasion and immediate post-war period blasted the lack of U.S. planning and conduct after the war. While criticizing the U.S., the British have a mixed record in Iraq themselves, and their experience could also foreshadow the future of the country.
British Criticisms[/b]
Two leading British generals, Gen. Sir Mike Jackson, who was in charge of the British forces during the 2003 invasion, and Major General Tim Cross, who was commander of post-war planning and worked with the Coalition Provisional Authority after the war, came out at the beginning of September 2007 and blamed Rumsfeld, Cheney and the neoconservatives in the Bush administration for the post-war mess. Sir Jackson, in his memoir that is soon to be published, said that he met with Rumsfeld and warned him of the dangers that could happen after the invasion, specifically the need to embrace nation building and send more troops. He said that Rumsfeld blew him off because the Pentagon had an ideological vision of a welcoming Iraqi public and the blossoming of democracy after the fall of Saddam. Jackson said anyone who challenged this vision was dismissed. Likewise, Gen. Cross said he also met with Rumsfeld and said that more troops were needed, the post-war process needed to be internationalized, and the U.N. needed to get involved. He too said Rumsfeld dismissed his suggestions. Since the Pentagon was put in charge of Iraq, they both blame Rumsfeld and his neoconservative deputies as those most responsible for the current chaos in the country because they did not adequately plan for the post-war situation, and ignored advice.
Britain???s Failure In Southern Iraq[/b]
The British have legitimate reasons to complain about Rumsfeld and the Pentagon???s handling of post-war Iraq, but their own record is not that good either. The British were given control of the Shiite majority South. This was suppose to be an easier job since the Shiites were assumed to be grateful for Saddam???s removal and the English had experience in civil-military affairs with Northern Ireland. The center of southern Iraq and the base of British operations was the city of Basra the second largest city in the country, and also the main port for Iraq???s oil industry. As the occupation continued, the South became a battleground between rival Shiite factions who seized the government, security forces, oil and power industry, and eventually turned on each other.
At the beginning of the occupation, things seemed to be fine, but as the Shiites began organizing, they formed rival political parties each backed by its own militia. The main forces were the Fadhila Party, the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council (SIIC), Moqtada Sadr and his Mahdi Army, Iraqi Hezbollah, and the Tharullah Party. The main jewel of contention was the city of Basra. Each party took over a part of the city. Fadhila came to control the city and provincial governments, the oil industry, and the oil protection security force. Sadr had the local police, facilities protection services, electrical department, and port authority. The SIIC took over the intelligence service and commandos, while Iraqi Hizbollah had the customs police. Jobs were dolled out as patronage to their followers, each took a cut of the huge oil smuggling business that was based in the city, and citizens began turning to the parties, rather than the government for services and protection. The Shiites also imposed their will on the region by driving out Christians, Sunnis and other minorities, imposed Islamic law, cut a deal with Iran to provide electricity to the region, and in turn, began cutting off power to the capitol. Ultimately, the rivalries led to gun battles in the streets of Basra and other southern cities. The British didn???t escape the violence either as they came under constant mortar and small arms fire.
British claim that they were not defeated in the South and that they are not retreating as they pull out of Basra. In fact, that???s exactly what happened. The South is devolving into a series of competing and independent fiefdoms and there is always violence just below the surface. In August 2007 for example, two provincial governors were executed that belonged to the SIIC. Sadr???s Mahdi Army is suspected of the killings. That was followed by a clash between SIIC controlled police and Mahdi Army fighters in Karbala during a Shiite religious festival. 50 were killed there as fighting spread throughout the South and Baghdad between the two factions. As a sign of who really controlled the South, when the British withdrew from their base in Basra in September 2007 they had to cut a deal with Sadr for safe passage.
Conclusion[/b]
The British experience is a microcosm of Iraq. They foresaw the flaws in U.S. planning that led to the current crisis gripping Iraq. They also couldn???t stop Iraqis from organizing and establishing their own power bases. The violent rivalries between Shiites also shows how complex the situation is within the country. Rather than the U.S. just facing a Sunni insurgency, it is facing Shiite on Shiite violence in the South, Sunnis vs Sunnis in the West, Shiites vs Sunnis in the center, and Arabs/Turkoman/Assyrians vs Kurds in the north. Each party has its own vision of Iraq, which keeps the parties apart and fuels the fighting. Rather than try to impose itself between these factions, the British chose to withdraw instead and leave the Iraqis to sort out their differences between themselves. A lesson that the U.S. could learn.
Sources[/b]
Think Tank Reports[/b]
Borden, Anthony, ???Iraqi Governance Report,??? Institute For War And Peace Reporting, August 2007
Cordesman, Anthony, ???British Defeat in the South and the Uncertain Bush "Strategy" in Iraq: ???Oil Spots,??? ???Ink Blots,??? ???White Space,??? or Pointlessness???? Center for Strategic and International Studies, 2/21/07 - ???Iraq???s Insurgency and Civil Violence,??? Center for Strategic and International Studies, 8/22/07
Institute For War And Peace Reporting, ???Battling for Power in Basra,??? 8/7/07
International Crisis Group, ???Where Is Iraq Heading? Lessons From Basra,??? 6/25/07
Knights, Michael and Williams, Ed, ???The Calm before the Storm; The British Experience in Southern Iraq,??? Washington Institute for Near East Policy, February, 2007
Articles[/b]
Dagher, Sam, ???As British leave Basra, militias dig in,??? Christian Science Monitor 8/28/07 - ???Trouble grows in Iraq???s Shiite south,??? Christian Science Monitor, 8/13/07
DeYoung, Karen and Ricks, Thomas, ???As British Leave, Basra Deteriorates,??? Washington Post, 8/7/07
al-Fadhily, Ali, ???Basra Splits Between Warring Shias,??? Inter Press Service, 4/20/07
Farrell, Stephen, ???50 Die in Fight Between Shiite Groups in Karbala,??? New York Times, 8/29/07 - ???British Pullback in Iraq Presages Hurdles for U.S.,??? New York Times, 7/29/07 - ???Governor of Iraqi Province Assassinated,??? New York Times, 8/21/07
Glanz, James and Farrell, Stephen, ???Militias Seizing Control of Iraqi Electricity Grid,??? New York Times, 8/23/07
IraqSlogger.com, ???BasraWatch: After the Drawdown, New Questions,??? 2/26/07 - ???Transcript Blair: British Troops to Begin Exiting Iraq,??? 2/21/07
Jervis, Rick, ???Iran, militias could gain from British pullout,??? USA Today, 2/22/07
Kasim, Zeyad, ???Tensions Between Shia In South On The Rise,??? IraqSlogger.com, 3/23/07
Why is everybody holding their breathe waiting for Petraeus' report. Does anyone believe that he is going to say anything other than the surge is working and that we need to give him more time?
Why is everybody holding their breathe waiting for Petraeus' report. Does anyone believe that he is going to say anything other than the surge is working and that we need to give him more time?
and does anyone believe that he isnt going to get it?
the fun will be when the nutroots crowd goes ballistic after the democratic leadership throws the surrender movement under the bus.
Comments
Yeah, me too, every morning when i wake up before i shower.
God help us all.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=757_1187963465&p=1
Shiites are 60% of Iraq's population and the government right now is run by Shiites from the Dawa and SIIC plus the two Kurdish parties. There's still one Sunni as well from an unaffiliated party. Sadr and the two main Sunni parties, plus a secular one have pulled out.
If the surge were simply a military campaign than it would be a success. The problem is it's not. None of the political goals have been met, and won't be, and that was the ultimate goal of the plan. The U.S. presence simply puts a cap on the violence and forestalls the battle for power between the different factions until the U.S. leaves.
You have Sunni vs. Sunni vs. Shiites in the West, Kurds vs. Arabs and Turkomen in Kirkuk, Shiites vs. Sunni in central Iraq, and Shiite vs. Shiite in the south. None of these groups share the same vision of Iraq, which is why they're fighting and not making any compromises. No military strategy by the U.S. is going to solve this, and neither will any of the laws the U.S. has made as benchmarks.
It is very clear from the official numbers taken from the results of the elections of January 31, 2005, and December 15, 2005, that: the Sunnis are 60???62% of the population of Iraq (42???44% Arab, and 16???18% Kurd and Turk Iraqis), and only 38???40% are Shi'ites.
It doesn't seem like I'm alone:
Foreign Policy and Center for American Progress, ???Terrorism Index,??? 8/20/07
- Polled 100 American foreign policy experts
- 80% served in government, more than half in Executive, 32% in military and 21% in
intelligence
- More than 60% say invasion was a mistake
- 92% say war bad for U.S., up 5% from last year
- 84% of conservatives say war bad for U.S.[/b]
- 53% say surge is having no to a negative impact, up 22% from 6 months ago when started
- 64% of conservatives say surge having no or negative impact[/b]
- Gave Bush administration 2.9 out of 10 for handling war, second lowest score
You're tripping. First of all the Sunni Arabs boycotted the first election.
Here's the numbers from the CIA factbook that are from 2007:
75-80% Arab, 15-20% Kurd, 5% Assyrian, Turkoman, other
97% Muslim - 60-65% Shiite, 32-37% Sunni, 3% Christian, other
National Public Radio reported yesterday that Turkey has complained that U.S. provided weapons meant for Iraq are ending up in their country and undermining the government. Turkish police held a press conference where they showed U.S. supplied Glock pistols that were given to Iraqi police that ended up on the black market in Turkey. In July the Turkish government reported that they were finding U.S. supplied AK-47s and M-16s meant for the Iraqi security forces in the hands of the Kurdish insurgent group the Kurdish Workers Party (PKK), which is based in Iraqi Kurdistan and southern Turkey. A high level official in the Iraqi Interior Ministry admitted that Iraqi police were selling the weapons the U.S. gave them to make money, and the Defense Department is investigating whether this is related to the 190,000 weapons gone missing reported by the Government Accountability Office in July 2007.
Source[/b]
Watson, Ivan, ???U.S. Weapons from Iraq Making Their Way To Turkey,??? National Public Radio, 8/24/07
America???s top brass never supported the surge. The previous American commander in Iraq, Gen. Casey, wanted to hand over security to Iraqis and gradually draw down U.S. forces. This was a view shared by Central Command head Gen. Abizaid, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. Gen. Casey and Gen. Abizaid believed that U.S. troops only fueled the fighting, so Americans had to pull back, let the Iraqis deal with their own problems, and break from dependency on the U.S. The explosion of sectarian violence in 2006 meant Casey had to shelve his plan, and it eventually cost him his job as he got pushed up the chain of command to Army Chief of Staff and Gen. Petraeus and the surge took over. Now that debate has started on what to do after the surge effectively ends in the spring of 2008 when troop rotations are up, Gen. Casey???s ideas have returned.
Outgoing head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Pace has said that he is for drawing down the number of U.S. troops in Iraq to 100,000 in 2008 if possible. He???s supported by Secretary of Defense Gates and incoming Joint Chiefs head Adm. Mullen. Their main concern is that continued deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan where tours usually have to be extended from 12 to 15 months is breaking the Army, Reserves, National Guard, and to a lesser extent the Marine Corps. They warn that if a new emergency were to arise the U.S. wouldn???t have the troops to respond. Gen. Petraeus and more importantly Pres. Bush disagree. Come September they???ll ask for more time with the surge and want to keep as many troops in Iraq as possible until the end of Bush???s presidency. Gen. Pace on the other hand, is expected to recommend Casey???s strategy next month as well.
Drawing down U.S. forces would not provide a light at the end of the tunnel for Iraq. It would probably increase the violence because the Iraqi security forces are not ready, overwhelmingly Shiite, and heavily infiltrated by militias. Fewer troops would mean a reduction in U.S. casualties, and Gen. Casey and Sec. Gates argue that it could increase American public support for the war, appease the increasing number of dissenting Republican members of Congress, and lead to a long term presence and bases in Iraq to project American power in the region. As long as U.S. forces remain however, they will put a cap on the chaos and forestall the time when Iraqis fight it out to ultimately decide who will run the country and how, ultimately dragging out the civil conflict for years to come.
Sources:[/b]
Baker, Peter and Weisman, Jonathan, ???Warner Calls for Pullouts By Winter,??? Washington Post, 8/24/07
Baldor, Lolita, ???Army too stretched if Iraq buildup lasts,??? Associated Press, 8/19/07
Barnes, Julian, and Spiegel, Peter, ???Top general to urge Iraq troop cut,??? Los Angeles Times, 8/24/07
Dobbins, James, ???Who Lost Iraq???? Foreign Policy, September/October 2007
Dreazen, Yochi, ???Discarded Troop Plan,??? Wall Street Journal, 8/23/07
Mathews, Jessica, ???The Situation in Iraq,??? House Armed Services Committee, 7/18/07
PBS Frontline, ???Gen. George Casey,??? End Game, 6/19/07
- ???Interview Col. Kalev Sepp (Ret.),??? End Game, 6/19/07
- ???Interview Col. William Hix,??? End Game, 6/19/07
- ???Interview Frederick Kagan,??? End Game, 6/19/07
- ???Interview Gen. Jack Keane (Ret.),??? End Game, 6/19/07
- ???Interview Lt. Col. Andrew Krepinevich (Ret.),??? End Game, 6/19/07
- ???Interview Michael Gordon,??? End Game, 6/19/07
- ???Interview Philip Zelikow,??? End Game, 6/19/07
- ???Interview Thomas Ricks,??? End Game, 6/19/07
- ???Timeline Struggling to Find a Strategy for Success,??? End Game, 6/19/07
Spiegel, Peter, ???White House splinters over ???surge??? length,??? San Jose Mercury News, 7/21/07
Youssef, Nancy, ???U.S. general: Iraq ???surge??? likely to end in spring,??? McClatchy Newspapers, 8/17/07
#938944 - 08/25/07 03:57 AM[/b] (71.141.236.219)
loseer, and pacific time is no excsue because its Friday night.
From 8/25/07
No Big Shifts Planned After Report on Iraq
White House Senses Recent Political Gains
By Michael Abramowitz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, August 25, 2007; Page A01
CRAWFORD, Tex., Aug. 24 -- Despite political pressure for a change of course in Iraq, the White House hopes to keep in place its existing military strategy and troop levels there after the mid-September report from Army Gen. David H. Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker, administration officials said.
Even as the administration faced a new call this week from Sen. John W. Warner (R-Va.), a leading ally, to begin at least a symbolic withdrawal of troops by Christmas, White House officials said privately that they are not contemplating making major shifts before early next year. They said that next month's report is likely to highlight what they see as significant improvements in security over the past year and that they expect the president to assert that now is not the time to dramatically change approaches.
...
Another senior official, who also spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss White House thinking more freely, said he expects the U.S. presence to return to pre-buildup levels of 15 combat brigades and about 130,000 troops a year from now, down from about 160,000. "We all know where we want to get to," this official said. "We all know that there will be a long-term robust troop presence that will outlast this president."
August 25, 2007
Generals Differ on the Timing of Troop Cuts
By DAVID S. CLOUD and STEVEN LEE MYERS
New York Times
WASHINGTON, Aug. 24 ??? As the Bush administration mulls options for withdrawing forces in Iraq, fault lines are beginning to emerge in a debate between commanders in the field who favor slow reductions and senior generals at the Pentagon who favor cutting the number of combat troops more deeply.
Among others, Gen. Peter Pace, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Gen. George W. Casey Jr., the Army chief of staff, are said to be leaning toward a recommendation that steep reductions by the end of 2008, perhaps to half of the 20 combat brigades now in Iraq, should be the administration???s goal.
Such a drawdown would be deeper and faster than Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top commander in Iraq, is expected to recommend next month, administration officials said.
GIs' morale dips as Iraq war drags on
With tours extended, multiple deployments and new tactics that put them in bare posts in greater danger, they feel leaders are out of touch with reality.
By Tina Susman
Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
August 25, 2007
YOUSIFIYA, IRAQ ??? In the dining hall of a U.S. Army post south of Baghdad, President Bush was on the wide-screen TV, giving a speech about the war in Iraq. The soldiers didn't look up from their chicken and mashed potatoes.
As military and political leaders prepare to deliver a progress report on the conflict to Congress next month, many soldiers are increasingly disdainful of the happy talk that they say commanders on the ground and White House officials are using in their discussions about the war.
And they're becoming vocal about their frustration over longer deployments and a taxing mission that keeps many living in dangerous and uncomfortably austere conditions. Some say two wars are being fought here: the one the enlisted men see, and the one that senior officers and politicians want the world to see.
"I don't see any progress. Just us getting killed," said Spc. Yvenson Tertulien, one of those in the dining hall in Yousifiya, 10 miles south of Baghdad, as Bush's speech aired last month. "I don't want to be here anymore."
...
The signs of frustration and of flagging morale are unmistakable, including blunt comments, online rants and the findings of surveys on military morale and suicides.
Sometimes the signs are to be found even in latrines. In the stalls at Baghdad's Camp Liberty, someone had posted Army help cards listing "nine signs of suicide." On one card, seven of the boxes had been checked.
"This occupation, this money pit, this smorgasbord of superfluous aggression is getting more hopeless and dismal by the second," a soldier in Diyala province, north of Baghdad, wrote in an Aug. 7 post on his blog, www.armyofdude.blogspot.com.
"The only person I know who believed Iraq was improving was killed by a sniper in May," the blogger, identified only as Alex from Frisco, Texas, said in a separate e-mail.
The Army's suicide rate is at its highest in 23 years: 17.3 per 100,000 troops, compared with 12.4 per 100,000 in 2003, the first year of the war. Of the 99 suicides last year, 27 occurred in Iraq.
The latest in a series of mental health surveys of troops in Iraq, released in May, says 45% of the 1,320 soldiers interviewed ranked morale in their unit as low or very low. Seven percent ranked it high or very high.
Mental health trends have worsened in the last two years, said Cindy Williams, an expert in military personnel at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. "These long and repeated deployments are causing acute mental stress," she said.
Most troops in Iraq expected 12-month deployments. Those were extended in May by three months for the troop buildup. Thousands already were on their second or third deployments.
The result is a fighting force that includes many soldiers who are worn down, just as Petraeus, who took command of the war six months ago, is asking them to adopt intense counterinsurgency tactics.
By Waleed Ibrahim and Wisam Mohammed
Sun Aug 26, 6:27 PM ET
BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Iraq's top Shi'ite, Sunni Arab and Kurdish political leaders announced on Sunday they had reached consensus on some key measures seen as vital to fostering national reconciliation.[/b]
i know this must be a big bummer for you motown, especially since this was all going on at the very same time that you were drafting up you 10,000 word essay on how it wasn't. Don't let these things you get you down, and keep the dream (of failure) a live. I'm sure there will be a big suicide bomb to buck up your spirits in a day or two.
P.S. I bet you can find something from Glen Greenwald or one of your "think tank" reports that spins this an acceptable light.
yeah lets see how long that lasts...like you said
until the next truck bomb
you add a lot of relavent data to the discourse
what is your solution to the fact that the sunni's and the shiittes have been at war for centuries?
what is your solution to the fact that the middle east has never had a true working "democracy" in the western model?
these are obvious facts that the bush administration ignored in their rush for an oil grab
since you are a republican genius..shed some light on the big picture and how your people/views are working for a better Iraq/American foreign policy..its been 4 years and billlions of OUR tax dollars wasted with 0 to show for it
.
you dont pay taxes cause you're poor. you take the credit.
The important question is whether this will actually happen. This is a pledge and not actual legislation and in case you didn't notice, but the Maliki government is on life support right now. Here's some things to consider.
1) The pledge was for a new de-Baathification law, local elections and sharing of government jobs amongst the three main sects.
2) Half of Maliki's cabinet is missing and the only Sunni politican that was in on this pledge was the Vice President. His own party denounced him for taking part and the main Sunni party is still boycotting and said the pledge was window dressing.
3) As of now, the Maliki coalition of Dawa, SIIC and the 2 Kurdish parties do not have a majority in parliament to pass any laws so they need to reach out to others to make this pledge into reality. They especially need to get the Sunni parties on board so that they can show the country they really believe in power sharing.
4) In 2006 the Maliki government pledged to pass these same laws by December 2006. The Iraqi government also promised to pass an oil law Sept. 2006, Dec. 2006, Feb. 2007, and June 2007. It's August 2007 and nothing has happened. Actions speak louder than words.
Agence France Presse, "Iraq leaders pledge to bridge sectarian divide," 8/27/07
- "Iraq leaders vow to boost national reconciliation," 8/27/07
- "Sunnis cool on Iraq political deal," 8/27/07
Gearan, Anne, "Rice: Iraq Missed Political Deadlines," Washington Post, 1/30/07
Katzman, Kenneth, ???Iraq: Government Formation and Benchmarks,??? Congressional Research Service, 8/10/07
Reuters, "Iraq Sunnis say deal won't end boycott," 8/27/07
San Francisco Chronicle, ???U.S. military divided on troop withdrawal,??? 8/25/07
Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, ???Quarterly Report and Semiannual Report to the United States Government,??? 7/30/07
Stockman, Farah, ???US struggles to keep leader at helm Defections strike Maliki???s coalition,??? Boston Globe, 8/21/07
Zaman, Az, ???Iraqi Papers Sat: Front of the ???Moderates,?????? IraqSlogger.com, 8/17/07
once again instead of taking the opening I offered you for a constructive discourse you revert to calling me "POOR" and a "Bitch"
truly pathetic
and your going to be a lawyer?
you can't even argue your own position because you know the war initiative has failed
As you go down in flames you revert to child-like name calling in an atempt to cover your stupidity.
truth hurts
2003 20 March - American missiles hit targets in Baghdad, marking the start of a US-led campaign to topple Saddam Hussein. In the following days US and British ground troops enter Iraq from the south.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
Baghdad, 9 April 2003: A symbol of Saddam's power tumbles
Timeline: Iraq after Saddam
In Depth: The struggle for Iraq
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
BBC's Rageh Omaar on the day's drama
2003 9 April - US forces advance into central Baghdad. Saddam Hussein's grip on the city is broken. In the following days Kurdish fighters and US forces take control of the northern cities of Kirkuk and Mosul. There is looting in Baghdad and elsewhere.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2003 April - US lists 55 most-wanted members of former regime in the form of a deck of cards. Former deputy prime minister Tariq Aziz is taken into custody.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2003 May - UN Security Council backs US-led administration in Iraq and lifts economic sanctions. US administrator abolishes Baath Party and institutions of former regime.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2003 July - US-appointed Governing Council meets for first time. Commander of US forces says his troops face low-intensity guerrilla-style war. Saddam's sons Uday and Qusay killed in gun battle in Mosul.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
Insurgency intensifies
2003 August - Deadly bomb attacks on Jordanian embassy and UN HQ in Baghdad. Saddam's cousin Ali Hassan al-Majid, or Chemical Ali, captured. Car bomb in Najaf kills 125 including Shia leader Ayatollah Mohammed Baqr al-Hakim.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
Soldiers and civilians are targets in ongoing violence
Iraq Body Count: War dead figures
Who are the insurgents?
2003 14 December - Saddam Hussein captured in Tikrit.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2004 February - More than 100 killed in Irbil in suicide attacks on offices of main Kurdish factions.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2004 March - Suicide bombers attack Shia festival-goers in Karbala and Baghdad, killing 140 people.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2004 April-May - Shia militias loyal to radical cleric Moqtada Sadr take on coalition forces.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
Hundreds are reported killed in fighting during the month-long US military siege of the Sunni Muslim city of Falluja.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
Photographic evidence emerges of abuse of Iraqi prisoners by US troops.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
Sovereignty and elections
2004 June - US hands sovereignty to interim government headed by Prime Minister Iyad Allawi.
Saddam Hussein transferred to Iraqi legal custody.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2004 August - Fighting in Najaf between US forces and Shia militia of radical cleric Moqtada Sadr.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2004 November - Major US-led offensive against insurgents in Falluja.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
Religious, ethnic fault lines run through Iraqi politics
Guide to Iraqi political parties
2006: Iraq election results confirmed
2005 30 January - An estimated eight million people vote in elections for a Transitional National Assembly. The Shia United Iraqi Alliance wins a majority of assembly seats. Kurdish parties come second.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2005 28 February - At least 114 people are killed by a massive car bomb in Hilla, south of Baghdad. It is the worst single such incident since the US-led invasion.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2005 April - Amid escalating violence, parliament selects Kurdish leader Jalal Talabani as president. Ibrahim Jaafari, a Shia, is named as prime minister.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2005 May onwards - Surge in car bombings, bomb explosions and shootings: Iraqi ministries put the civilian death toll for May at 672, up from 364 in April.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2005 June - Massoud Barzani is sworn in as regional president of Iraqi Kurdistan.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2005 July - Study compiled by the non-governmental Iraq Body Count organisation estimates that nearly 25,000 Iraqi civilians have been killed since the 2003 US-led invasion.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
Saddam was executed for crimes against humanity
Q&A: Saddam on trial
Timeline of Saddam's trial
2005 August - Draft constitution is endorsed by Shia and Kurdish negotiators, but not by Sunni representatives.
More than 1,000 people are killed during a stampede at a Shia ceremony in Baghdad.
2005 September - 182 people are killed in attacks in Baghdad, including a car bomb attack on a group of workers in a mainly-Shia district.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
Saddam on trial
2005 October - Saddam Hussein goes on trial on charges of crimes against humanity.
Voters approve a new constitution, which aims to create an Islamic federal democracy.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2005 15 December - Iraqis vote for the first, full-term government and parliament since the US-led invasion.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2006 20 January - Shia-led United Iraqi Alliance emerges as the winner of December's par liamentary elections, but fails to gain an absolute majority.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
Sectarian violence
2006 February onwards - A bomb attack on an important Shia shrine in Samarra unleashes a wave of sectarian violence in which hundreds of people are killed.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2006 22 April - Newly re-elected President Talabani asks Shia compromise candidate Jawad al-Maliki to form a new government. The move ends four months of political deadlock.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
Radical Shia cleric Moqtada Sadr - a key power broker
Who's who in Iraq: Moqtada Sadr
2006 May and June - An average of more than 100 civilians per day are killed in violence in Iraq, the UN says.
2006 7 June - Al-Qaeda leader in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, is killed in an air strike.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2006 September - A much-anticipated ceremony to transfer operational command from US-led forces to Iraq's new army is postponed.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2006 November - Saddam Hussein is found guilty of crimes against humanity and sentenced to death.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
Iraq and Syria restore diplomatic relations after nearly a quarter century.
More than 200 die in car bombings in the mostly Shia area of Sadr City in Baghdad. An indefinite curfew is imposed after what is considered the worst attack on the capital since the US-led invasion of 2003.
2006 December - Iraq Study Group report making recommendations to President Bush on future policy in Iraq describes the situation as grave and deteriorating. It warns of the prospect of a slide towards chaos, triggering the collapse of the government and a humanitarian catastrophe.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
Saddam executed
2006 30 December - Saddam Hussein is executed by hanging.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
Bombers have repeatedly targeted markets
2007: Baghdad diary - First, worst, biggest
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2007 January - US President Bush announces a new Iraq strategy; thousands more US troops will be dispatched to shore up security in Baghdad.
Barzan Ibrahim - Saddam Hussein's half-brother - and Awad Hamed al-Bandar, former head of the Revolutionary Court, are executed by hanging.
UN says more than 34,000 civilians were killed in violence during 2006; the figure surpasses official Iraqi estimates threefold.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2007 February - A bomb in Baghdad's Sadriya market kills more than 130 people. It is the worst single bombing since 2003.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2007 March - Insurgents detonate three trucks with toxic chlorine gas in Falluja and Ramadi, injuring hundreds.
Former Vice-President Taha Yassin Ramadan is executed on the fourth anniversary of the US-led invasion.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2007 12 April - A bomb blast rocks parliament, killing an MP.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
18 April - Bombings in Baghdad kill nearly 200 people in the worst day of violence since a US-led security drive began in the capital in February.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2007 May - The leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq, Abu Ayyub al-Masri, is reported killed.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2007 July - President Bush says there's been only limited military and political progress in Iraq following his decision to reinforce US troops levels there.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
2007 August - The main Sunni Arab political bloc in Iraq, the Iraqi Accordance Front, withdraws from the cabinet, plunging the government into crisis.
Truck and car bombs hit two villages of Yezidi Kurds, killing at least 250 people - the deadliest attack since 2003.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
Sun Aug 26, 6:27 PM ET
BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Iraq's top Shi'ite, Sunni Arab and Kurdish political leaders announced on Sunday they had reached consensus on some key measures seen as vital to fostering national reconciliation.[/b]
Saba says...
The war on TERRORISM is almost over????!? Long live George W. He will surely be known as the guy who brought peace to the middle east...nah, the world. With jesus on your side...anything is possible....I mean profitable.
In the Summery of 2006 the Maliki government pledged to pass these laws. In January 2007 when the surge began the Maliki government pledged to pass these laws. In August 2007 the remains of the Maliki government pledge to pass the same laws they pleded to pass in the Summer of 2006 and beginning 2007. Progress!
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
Saba says everything is fine and the war is almost over much to liberals dissapointment.
...
keep saying this and you might (blindly) believe it too.
September is suppose to be a big month with Gen. Petraeus and U.S. Ambassador Crocker traveling to Washington to deliver their report to Congress on Iraq. In fact, the report has been made moot already. It doesn???t matter that the surge hasn???t accomplished any of its strategic political goals, because the White House is going to spin it as a military success, and ask for $50 billion more for the war. After a rancorous debate on Capitol Hill, Bush will largely get his way to ???stay the course??? until the end of his presidency.
Cherry Picking The Good and Ignoring The Bad[/b]
The White House will present as positive a view of the surge as possible in September. As part of this process it has asked for several different reports to be delivered. The first was a National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq. Gen. Petraeus actually got this released earlier than planned at the end of August 2007. The pessimistic report said that violence was still high, security could only be improved moderately, the Maliki government wasn???t functioning, and there were no moves towards peace. By pushing up the release date, Petraeus hoped that people would forget about it by the time he testified to Congress.
The much ballyhooed September Petraeus report will actually be written by the White House, and there will also be reports by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Army Chief of Staff Gen. Casey, Central Command commander Adm. Fallon, and Secretary of Defense Gates. Congress has also requested two reports of its own. The surge of reports on the surge will allow the administration to cherry pick the best news and ignore the rest, while hoping that the differing views will drown each other out.
No Political Success? Fix The Numbers And Emphasize The Military Side[/b]
The main argument the White House and Gen. Petraeus will present is that the surge has been a military success. This will ignore the fact that the surge is simply a military tactic to achieve a political goal, reconciliation between the warring factions in Iraq. While violence has seen a dramatic decrease in Anbar province, the focus of the surge has always been on Baghdad. When the surge first began in February the military claimed that Iraqis were returning to homes that they had been forced out of in Baghdad. By May the military said that the surge had halted the displacement. At the end of August, Gen. Petraeus made the audacious statement to The Australian newspaper that violence was down 75% in the capitol. Somehow all of this had been accomplished with only half of the city secured by U.S. forces by August. In fact, deaths have been up and down during the surge in Baghdad, and other forms of sectarian violence have continued, if not increased. In order to argue these points, the U.S. has been fixing numbers.
The National Security Network did a study of four reports by the Pentagon to Congress from August 2006 to June 2007. It found that in three out of the four reports the military changed how it counted deaths. During some periods this caused a dramatic drop, and in others a just as sharp increase during the same time period. For example, in an August 2006 report the Pentagon said that there were approximately 1,750 ???casualties??? in Iraq in one month. In the following three reports, the Pentagon only counted ???deaths by execution??? during that same month and the number miraculously dropped by 1,000 to around 750. Likewise, the same change in counting produced an increase from 5,500 sectarian deaths over a series of months right before the surge started to 7,400, and then amazingly enough, a dramatic drop after the military plan was implemented.
As the Iraq Study Group found, the U.S. has been playing with the numbers since the beginning to give the war a positive spin. It found that on one day in July 2006 the U.S. officially claimed 93 attacks, when there had actually been 1,100. The study group found that murders of Iraqis, attacks that did not harm Americans, or ones that the U.S. could not officially blame on someone were simply left off the books. By ignoring dozens of acts of violence, the U.S. claimed that violence was down 52% in Baghdad during the summer of 2006 while conducting a campaign to pacify the city. In fact, deaths were dramatically up at the time and the operation was later dubbed a failure. The U.S. still does not count these acts, nor does it include Sunni on Sunni and Shiite on Shiite violence in its numbers. It???s by these manipulations that the military an administration has been able to claim much of its military success with the surge.
The claims of success with displaced Iraqis are also widely off. Humanitarian groups such as Oxfam and the U.N. have found that few Iraqis returned to their homes during the surge, and many actually left afterwards. More importantly the dispossessed actually increased during the military operation. When the surge began in February 2007 there were 499,000 displaced Iraqis, by August that number had more than doubled to 1.1 million with 40,000-50,000 leaving their homes each month. The majority of those forced out from Baghdad have been Sunnis as Shiite militias and their allies in the security forces have continued ethnic cleansing throughout the surge. The capitol use to be approximately 65% Sunni, now that maybe down to as low as 15%.
The surge has also pushed violence outside of the capitol to other regions where there are fewer U.S. troops. As a sign of this shift, the Associated Press found that Baghdad accounted for 76% of the deaths in the entire country in 2006. In comparison, by August 2007 it was responsible for only 52%. Not only that, but the AP reported that deaths throughout the country have gone up during the surge as well. In 2006 there were 13,811. In comparison, during the first eight months of 2007 there were already approximately 14,800. There???s also been an increase in deaths at the end of the summer. In June there were 1,227 casualties, July had 1,753, and August saw 1,773.
Divided Congress[/b]
The mix of reports and the claims of military success will continue the divisions within Congress. Even though several leading Republicans such as Senator Warner and Senator Lugar have spoken against the surge, they have found few supporters within their own party, and they cannot agree with the Democratic leadership who pushed a hard-line, withdraw or nothing approach which garnered few results. The Democrats are also becoming divided themselves with some wanting to give the surge more time. With a divided legislature there are sure to be some heated hearings on Iraq, but in the end, they will not be able to forge a consensus and provide a real opposition to the President, allowing him to continue his policies. This would???ve happened whether Gen. Petraeus made his report or not, again making it moot before it???s even given.
Conclusion[/b]
September is suppose to be a big month, but the proceedings will mostly be a show. Thanks to numbers fixing and a divided Congress, a surge policy that has failed to reach any of its strategic goals will be called a success. Congress will argue with him, but in the end, the President will be able to carry the day until he steps down from office when it comes to Iraq.
SOURCES[/b]
Government Reports[/b]
National Intelligence Council, ???Prospects for Iraq???s Stability: Some Security Progress but Political Reconciliation Elusive,??? National Intelligence Estimate, August 2007
Think Tank Reports[/b]
Cordesman, Anthony, ???Iraq???s Insurgency and Civil Violence,??? Center for Strategic and International Studies, 8/22/07
Goldenberg Ilan, ???More Fuzziness,??? National Security Network, DemocracyArsenal.org, 8/30/07
National Security Network, ???Drop in Violence???? 8/30/07
Articles[/b]
Abramowitz, Michael, ?? ?No Big Shifts Planned After Report on Iraq,??? Washington Post, 8/25/07
Baker, Peter and Weisman, Jonathan, ???Warner Calls for Pullouts By Winter,??? Washington Post, 8/24/07
Barnes, Julian, and Spiegel, Peter, ???Top general may propose pullbacks,??? Los Angeles Times, 8/15/07
- ???Top general to urge Iraq troop cut,??? Los Angeles Times, 8/24/07
Burns, Robert, ???Panel: U.S. Underreported Iraq Violence,??? Associated Press, 12/6/06
Dreazen, Yochi, ???Discarded Troop Plan,??? Wall Street Journal, 8/23/07
Economist, ???Is the surge going to fizzle???? 6/21/07
Fadel, Leila, ???Despite violence drop, officers see bleak future for Iraq,??? McClatchy Newspapers, 8/15/07
Glanz, James, and Farrell, Stephen, ???More Iraqis Said to Flee Since Troop Increase,??? New York Times, 8/24/07
Hurst, Steven, ???Violence lessens in Baghdad as it grows elsewhere,??? San Francisco Chronicle, 8/26/07
Sanger, David and Shanker, Thom, ???Alternative reports may dilute general???s appraisal of war,??? San Francisco Chronicle, 6/24/07
Shanahan, Dennis, ???Surge working: top US general,??? Australian, 8/31/07
Stolberg, Sheryl Gay, ???White House Is Gaining Confidence It Can Win Fight in Congress Over Iraq Policy,??? New York Times, 8/30/07
Weisman, Jonathan and DeYoung, Karen, ???An Early Clash Over Iraq Report,??? Washington Post, 8/16/07
Yates, Dean, ???Iraqi civilian deaths rise,??? Reuters, 9/1/07
Youssef, Nancy, ???Pentagon won???t make surge recommendation to Bush,??? McClatchy Newspapers, 8/30/07
While the U.S. was pumping in new troops into Iraq at the beginning of 2007 with the surge, the British, our staunchest allies in the Coalition of the Willing were withdrawing theirs. At the beginning of September they officially turned over control of Basra, the second largest city in Iraq, to Iraqi security forces. At the same time, two of the leading British generals during the invasion and immediate post-war period blasted the lack of U.S. planning and conduct after the war. While criticizing the U.S., the British have a mixed record in Iraq themselves, and their experience could also foreshadow the future of the country.
British Criticisms[/b]
Two leading British generals, Gen. Sir Mike Jackson, who was in charge of the British forces during the 2003 invasion, and Major General Tim Cross, who was commander of post-war planning and worked with the Coalition Provisional Authority after the war, came out at the beginning of September 2007 and blamed Rumsfeld, Cheney and the neoconservatives in the Bush administration for the post-war mess. Sir Jackson, in his memoir that is soon to be published, said that he met with Rumsfeld and warned him of the dangers that could happen after the invasion, specifically the need to embrace nation building and send more troops. He said that Rumsfeld blew him off because the Pentagon had an ideological vision of a welcoming Iraqi public and the blossoming of democracy after the fall of Saddam. Jackson said anyone who challenged this vision was dismissed. Likewise, Gen. Cross said he also met with Rumsfeld and said that more troops were needed, the post-war process needed to be internationalized, and the U.N. needed to get involved. He too said Rumsfeld dismissed his suggestions. Since the Pentagon was put in charge of Iraq, they both blame Rumsfeld and his neoconservative deputies as those most responsible for the current chaos in the country because they did not adequately plan for the post-war situation, and ignored advice.
Britain???s Failure In Southern Iraq[/b]
The British have legitimate reasons to complain about Rumsfeld and the Pentagon???s handling of post-war Iraq, but their own record is not that good either. The British were given control of the Shiite majority South. This was suppose to be an easier job since the Shiites were assumed to be grateful for Saddam???s removal and the English had experience in civil-military affairs with Northern Ireland. The center of southern Iraq and the base of British operations was the city of Basra the second largest city in the country, and also the main port for Iraq???s oil industry. As the occupation continued, the South became a battleground between rival Shiite factions who seized the government, security forces, oil and power industry, and eventually turned on each other.
At the beginning of the occupation, things seemed to be fine, but as the Shiites began organizing, they formed rival political parties each backed by its own militia. The main forces were the Fadhila Party, the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council (SIIC), Moqtada Sadr and his Mahdi Army, Iraqi Hezbollah, and the Tharullah Party. The main jewel of contention was the city of Basra. Each party took over a part of the city. Fadhila came to control the city and provincial governments, the oil industry, and the oil protection security force. Sadr had the local police, facilities protection services, electrical department, and port authority. The SIIC took over the intelligence service and commandos, while Iraqi Hizbollah had the customs police. Jobs were dolled out as patronage to their followers, each took a cut of the huge oil smuggling business that was based in the city, and citizens began turning to the parties, rather than the government for services and protection. The Shiites also imposed their will on the region by driving out Christians, Sunnis and other minorities, imposed Islamic law, cut a deal with Iran to provide electricity to the region, and in turn, began cutting off power to the capitol. Ultimately, the rivalries led to gun battles in the streets of Basra and other southern cities. The British didn???t escape the violence either as they came under constant mortar and small arms fire.
British claim that they were not defeated in the South and that they are not retreating as they pull out of Basra. In fact, that???s exactly what happened. The South is devolving into a series of competing and independent fiefdoms and there is always violence just below the surface. In August 2007 for example, two provincial governors were executed that belonged to the SIIC. Sadr???s Mahdi Army is suspected of the killings. That was followed by a clash between SIIC controlled police and Mahdi Army fighters in Karbala during a Shiite religious festival. 50 were killed there as fighting spread throughout the South and Baghdad between the two factions. As a sign of who really controlled the South, when the British withdrew from their base in Basra in September 2007 they had to cut a deal with Sadr for safe passage.
Conclusion[/b]
The British experience is a microcosm of Iraq. They foresaw the flaws in U.S. planning that led to the current crisis gripping Iraq. They also couldn???t stop Iraqis from organizing and establishing their own power bases. The violent rivalries between Shiites also shows how complex the situation is within the country. Rather than the U.S. just facing a Sunni insurgency, it is facing Shiite on Shiite violence in the South, Sunnis vs Sunnis in the West, Shiites vs Sunnis in the center, and Arabs/Turkoman/Assyrians vs Kurds in the north. Each party has its own vision of Iraq, which keeps the parties apart and fuels the fighting. Rather than try to impose itself between these factions, the British chose to withdraw instead and leave the Iraqis to sort out their differences between themselves. A lesson that the U.S. could learn.
Sources[/b]
Think Tank Reports[/b]
Borden, Anthony, ???Iraqi Governance Report,??? Institute For War And Peace Reporting, August 2007
Cordesman, Anthony, ???British Defeat in the South and the Uncertain Bush "Strategy" in Iraq: ???Oil Spots,??? ???Ink Blots,??? ???White Space,??? or Pointlessness???? Center for Strategic and International Studies, 2/21/07
- ???Iraq???s Insurgency and Civil Violence,??? Center for Strategic and International Studies, 8/22/07
Institute For War And Peace Reporting, ???Battling for Power in Basra,??? 8/7/07
International Crisis Group, ???Where Is Iraq Heading? Lessons From Basra,??? 6/25/07
Knights, Michael and Williams, Ed, ???The Calm before the Storm; The British Experience in Southern Iraq,??? Washington Institute for Near East Policy, February, 2007
Articles[/b]
Dagher, Sam, ???As British leave Basra, militias dig in,??? Christian Science Monitor 8/28/07
- ???Trouble grows in Iraq???s Shiite south,??? Christian Science Monitor, 8/13/07
DeYoung, Karen and Ricks, Thomas, ???As British Leave, Basra Deteriorates,??? Washington Post, 8/7/07
al-Fadhily, Ali, ???Basra Splits Between Warring Shias,??? Inter Press Service, 4/20/07
Farrell, Stephen, ???50 Die in Fight Between Shiite Groups in Karbala,??? New York Times, 8/29/07
- ???British Pullback in Iraq Presages Hurdles for U.S.,??? New York Times, 7/29/07
- ???Governor of Iraqi Province Assassinated,??? New York Times, 8/21/07
Glanz, James and Farrell, Stephen, ???Militias Seizing Control of Iraqi Electricity Grid,??? New York Times, 8/23/07
IraqSlogger.com, ???BasraWatch: After the Drawdown, New Questions,??? 2/26/07
- ???Transcript Blair: British Troops to Begin Exiting Iraq,??? 2/21/07
Jervis, Rick, ???Iran, militias could gain from British pullout,??? USA Today, 2/22/07
Kasim, Zeyad, ???Tensions Between Shia In South On The Rise,??? IraqSlogger.com, 3/23/07
Lando, Ben, ???Analysis : Iraq's oil smuggling - Part 2,??? UPI, 12/15/06
- ???Violence Threatens Oil, Iraq,??? UPI, 4/12/07
Rice-Oxley, Mark and Murphy, Dan, ???As US surges, British start exiting Iraq,??? Christian Science Monitor, 2/22/07
Rubin, Alissa, ???Demonstration in Basra Signals Growing Tensions Between Iraqi Shiites,??? New York Times, 4/18/07
Zand, Bernhard, ???British Leaving Basra to the Mahdi Militia,??? Der Spiegel, 2/23/07
and does anyone believe that he isnt going to get it?
the fun will be when the nutroots crowd goes ballistic after the democratic leadership throws the surrender movement under the bus.