Is Iraq's Progress Under Gen Petraeus a Turning Point in History?

[drankin]

I heard an interesting interview with Gen Petraeus on Hannity the other day. That and a few news articles I've read suggest things are turning around over there. Most of the Iraqi people are rejecting Al Queada now as opposed to being indifferent or supporting them. Their new government is gaining a foothold. The media in general has been pretty quiet about it all anymore. Will history show this to be a turning point for civilization in Iraq? Will Bush actually have some positive notes in the books 50 yrs down the road? Or is at all right-wing propaganda and Iraq will crumble to being what it used to be?

 

[seycyrus]

I think we need to avoid making any quick decisions that will hurt us either way. That's why I think a quick pullout needs to be avoided, unless the place is really stable. I don't want to see footage of mass carnage as we pull out as we had in Vietnam.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

As much as I enjoy watching FoxNews for it's entertainment value, they definitely have an agenda no matter how many sprinkles of balance they throw into seem credible. When was the last time FoxNews talked about how Afghanistan is back to being a disaster.

 

[mheslep]

... When was the last time FoxNews talked about how Afghanistan is back to being a disaster.

Its not a disaster in any meaningful comparison to the Taliban or Soviet days.

 

[lisab]

Its not a disaster in any meaningful comparison to the Taliban or Soviet days.

It is if you're the Pakistani ambassador...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23111407/

 

[turbo]

The relative lull in violence in Iraq is due in large part because formerly integrated neighborhoods and towns have been purged of many of their minority inhabitants either by militia killings or evacuations. (There are millions of Iraqis displaced in Iraq, and millions more displaced to neighboring countries.) Fewer enemies to kill = fewer killings. Add to that the fact that Muqtada al-Sadr ordered the Mahdi army to stand down for 6 months starting last August, taking another group of militants out of the conflict, at least in part. Still, suicide bombings and car bombings seem to be a daily occurrence and Gates and Petreaus are both talking about interrupting a planned draw-down despite objections from Army and Marine brass who are concerned about the degradation of their fighting forces.

 

[mgb_phys]

hat's why I think a quick pullout needs to be avoided, unless the place is really stable..

We won a decisive military victory in 1690 over a place with a population with the same religion divided into two rival sects - we still have troops there now.

When you a reporting a slow down in the increasing rate of bombings as a sucess - it's time to think of a way out.

 

[mheslep]

The relative lull in violence in Iraq is due in large part because formerly integrated neighborhoods and towns have been purged of many of their minority inhabitants either by militia killings or evacuations.

Source?

(There are millions of Iraqis displaced in Iraq, and millions more displaced to neighboring countries.) Fewer enemies to kill = fewer killings. Add to that the fact that Muqtada al-Sadr ordered the Mahdi army to stand down for 6 months starting last August, taking another group of militants out of the conflict, at least in part.

Why do you believe al-Sadr did so after all this time?

Still, suicide bombings and car bombings seem to be a daily occurrence

Compared to when and what previous levels of occurence?

and Gates and Petreaus are both talking about interrupting a planned draw-down despite objections from Army and Marine brass who are concerned about the degradation of their fighting forces.

Source?

 

[CaptainQuasar]

I think that the only two honorable courses of action in Iraq are to either escalate U.S. troop levels until they can really stabilize the country like McCain proposes, or if we pull out we need to explicitly hand the country over to Iran or Syria so that they can put it in shape. Yeah, that would be a political loss for us but that's the ride we bought a ticket for. Other options would completely screw over the Iraqi people and we've screwed them over enough.

Unfortunately the guy who got us into this mess, who is the one who should be taking responsibility for going down one of those two roads and should be spending his own political capital and risking his own political legacy to do it, is languishing in the White House waiting for a limo to come and take him home.

⚛​

 

[mgb_phys]

There are the two standard British techniques (we have a lot more experience with getting into little native wars than you chaps)
1, Rename the place and hope everyone forgets about it.
2, Split it into two states along religous/trible grounds and let them fight it out among themselves for the next couple of centuries.

 

[turbo]

How much reduction in violence is due to the success of ethnic cleansing? There have been MANY articles written about this, but they don't often hit the mainstream press or the right-leaning outlets that want to treat any reduction in ethnic killings as a direct result of the troop surge. Remember these are the same people that accept with a straight face that if the victim was shot in the heart, it's just murder, but if he or she was shot in the back of the head, the killing was then considered a killing due to sectarian violence. Dead is dead, and the perpetrators rarely hang around to explain their motives. How to show that sectarian violence is slowing? Apart from the perfectly understandable reduction in ethnic violence as regions are purged of minority groups, the military has chosen to "reduce" incidents of sectarian violence further by only counting people shot execution-style.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-ed-iraq12nov12,0,5276194.story?coll=la-opinion-leftrail

Analysts will continue to debate how much of the progress is because of the "surge" of 30,000 U.S. troops last spring, how much is the result of Iraqi Sunnis in Anbar province and elsewhere making common cause with the United States against Al Qaeda terrorists, and how much is because ethnic cleansing of some neighborhoods is complete and the "enemies" within have fled or been killed. All of these factors undoubtedly played a role. And the daily carnage, though lessened, remains horrific. The high casualty rate earlier this year made 2007 the deadliest for U.S. troops in this tragic misadventure.

Return of internally-displaced Iraqis could result in an upsurge in ethnic violence.
http://www.globaldashboard.org/conflict-and-security/iraqi-refugee-return-return-to-violence/

Displaced Iraqis
http://www.refugeesinternational.org/content/article/detail/9679

If you want to know if car bombings and suicide bombings are still a daily occurrence, just pop up Yahoo! News on any given day. If you want a very incomplete but still chilling summary, look here.
http://www.icasualties.org/oif/IraqiDeaths.aspx

On suspension of draw-down - it's all over the news outlets today.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080211/ts_nm/iraq_dc;_ylt=AlaFufl6Ua28WzJ1MkCm6ZCs0NUE
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/11/gates-pause-in-troop-cut_n_85970.html

 

[mheslep]

How much reduction in violence is due to the success of ethnic cleansing? There have been MANY articles written about this, but they don't often hit the mainstream press or the right-leaning outlets

Of course not.

If you want to know if car bombings and suicide bombings are still a daily occurrence, just pop up Yahoo! News on any given day. If you want a very incomplete but still chilling summary, look here.

Yes this is terrible but it's not what I asked. I asked about what's changing, as that's how I care to judge a plan for going forward. I note from that http://www.icasualties.org/oif/IraqiDeathsByYear.aspx" that January Iraqi deaths are less than 1/3 from Jan '07, and have declined every month except one since Petraeus and Crocker took the wheel. They are going in the right direction.

On suspension of draw-down - it's all over the news outlets today.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080211/ts_nm/iraq_dc;_ylt=AlaFufl6Ua28WzJ1MkCm6ZCs0NUE
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/11/gates-pause-in-troop-cut_n_85970.html

suspend in July? Thats always been the plan.

interrupting a planned draw-down

This is simply incorrect, there was no plan to draw-down past pre-surge levels, and though the surge levels certainly strained the US military, there's no objection extant to this summer's coming pause from the 'brass'. This has been the plan since last September when Petraeus was before Congress: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3580220&page=1".
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iraq/2007/09/iraq-070910-afps03.htm"

I do not believe it is reasonable to have an adequate appreciation for the pace of further reductions and mission adjustments beyond the summer of 2008 ...

or see http://www.sofmag.com/news/permalink/2008/1/28/101941.html"

No response on al-Sadr? I have one. He greatly overstepped when his army violently intervened http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Karbala_%282007%29" (holy city) and it was broadcast on national TV. Now, the posture of the coalition forces during the Najaf attack is critical. A couple years ago under guys like Gen Sanchez when commanders were running around like cowboys, shooting up the place, mass interning people and then leaving the area, al-Sadr would have gotten a pass by the population as a guy necessary to thwart the coalition. Today Petraeus has these same commanders delivering air conditioners instead, and they stay and hold in the neighborhoods they once abandoned - providing security under which people can live. Under these conditions al-Sadr shooting up Najaf becomes unforgivable to the population. This is textbook counter insurgency (Petraeus wrote the book). Al-Sadr had to 'cease-fire.'

Gen. Mccafrey was a harsh critic of the early war; his report delivered in December:
http://www.smallwarsjournal.com/documents/iraqaardec2007.pdf"

The struggle for stability in the Iraqi Civil War has entered a new phase with dramatically reduced levels of civilian sectarian violence, political assassinations, abductions, and small arms/ indirect fire and IED attacks on US and Iraqi Police and Army Forces.

 

[edward]

or see Petraeus: Upcoming Troop Reduction Plans ‘On Track’

This link leads to Soldier of Fortune Magazine?? And it looks to be a bit overly optomistic.

Nothing is on track in Iraq. The latest news is that the late summer troop draw down may not be a sure thing.

FORWARD OPERATING BASE FALCON, Iraq - In a clear sign the draw down of U.S. forces from Iraq will be suspended, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Monday he favors taking time this summer to assess security gains before more troops leave the country, an idea President Bush is expected to support.

It was Gates' first public endorsement of a possible suspension, and it would seem to mark an end to the Pentagon chief's previously stated hope that conditions in Iraq would permit American troops to withdraw in the second half of this year as rapidly as they are leaving now.

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/sns-ap-gates,0,4124324.story

We are not yet in absolute control of anything in Iraq.
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/02/11/africa/ME-GEN-Iraq-Pipeline-Explosion.php

The only realistic plan is that we will have to keep changing plans.

 

[Astronuc]

It's not working for the women in Iraq - or perhaps some of them.

Violations of 'Islamic teachings' take deadly toll on Iraqi women

• Crimes against women in Iraq's south have included killings and amputations
• Police chief: "Two women were killed in front of their kids"
• Not wearing headscarves, other violations of "Islamic teachings" bring crimes
• Woman tells CNN "fear is always there," but "we don't know who to be afraid of"

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/02/08/iraq.women/

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- The images in the Basra police file are nauseating: Page after page of women killed in brutal fashion -- some strangled to death, their faces disfigured; others beheaded. All bear signs of torture.

The women are killed, police say, because they failed to wear a headscarf or because they ignored other "rules" that secretive fundamentalist groups want to enforce.

"Fear, fear is always there," says 30-year-old Safana, an artist and university professor. "We don't know who to be afraid of. Maybe it's a friend or a student you teach. There is no break, no security. I don't know who to be afraid of."

Her fear is justified. Iraq's second-largest city, Basra, is a stronghold of conservative Shia groups. As many as 133 women were killed in Basra last year -- 79 for violation of "Islamic teachings" and 47 for so-called honor killings, according to IRIN, the news branch of the U.N.'s Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs.

. . . .

Gates is rethinking the drawdown.

 

[DrClapeyron]

There is nothing unusual resulting from this war. It's not as if millions of civilians have been bombed or half the country set on fire.

 

[Supercritical]

Regarding pipelines:

http://img177.imageshack.us/img177/575/infrastructurelx4.png .

 

[mheslep]

Nothing is on track in Iraq. The latest news is that the late summer troop draw down may not be a sure thing.

Implying anything after this summer was ever promised as a 'sure thing' is at the least, uninformed.

This draw down plan as announced by Patraeus to Congress on Sept 10th is very much on track.
Petraeus http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3580220&page=1":

"I believe that we will be able to reduce our forces to the pre-surge level ... by next summer without jeopardizing the security gains we have fought so hard to achieve," Petraeus said.

Petraeus also in the same testimony:

I do not believe it is reasonable to have an adequate appreciation for the pace of further reductions and mission adjustments beyond the summer of 2008 until after mid-March of next year

Then four months later on http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0801/27/le.01.html" Gen. P confirmed his plan from September:

BLITZER: Let's talk about troop levels, in Iraq, right now. I know you're getting ready, later, in March or April, to come back to Washington to testify with Ambassador Ryan Crocker on what's going on, an update on that.

But there were, at one point -- correct me if I'm wrong -- about 170,000 U.S. troops in Iraq. Right now, I think it's down to closer to 160,000. It's supposed to go down to about 130,000 by July.

Is all of that on schedule? Are things working out the way you want?

PETRAEUS: They are, Wolf. We have, as you noted, already withdrawn, without replacement, a brigade combat team and the Marine expeditionary unit that was in here last year. And we are on track to withdraw four more brigade combat teams and two Marine battalions by the end of July.

And as to what Gates http://voanews.com/english/2008-01-17-voa71.cfm" in January:

"That remains my hope, that the pace of the drawdowns in the second half of the year can be what it was in the first half of the year," he said. "But as I have told General Petraeus directly, he is to make his evaluation of that possibility based solely on the conditions on the ground."

 

[mheslep]

Regarding pipelines:

http://img177.imageshack.us/img177/575/infrastructurelx4.png .

That shows pipeline attacks went to nil in September and have stayed there. Thats amazing.

 

[mheslep]

It's not working for the women in Iraq - or perhaps some of them.

Violations of 'Islamic teachings' take deadly toll on Iraqi women

• Crimes against women in Iraq's south have included killings and amputations
• Police chief: "Two women were killed in front of their kids"
• Not wearing headscarves, other violations of "Islamic teachings" bring crimes
• Woman tells CNN "fear is always there," but "we don't know who to be afraid of"

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/02/08/iraq.women/

CNN also said:

The attacks on the women of Basra have intensified since British forces withdrew to their base at the airport back in September, police say.

Given that fact, I'd like to hear Sen. Obama explain how he thinks his two brigades/mo plan is the best thing for the Iraq and the US.

 

[turbo]

Instead of drawing new material into this discussion, you have repeatedly engaged in unsubstantiated nay-saying and misdirection. Would you like to discuss the facts (as we can know them) or would your your prefer to continue to flog right-wing talking-points with little or no factual back-up?

 

[mheslep]

Instead of drawing new material into this discussion, you have repeatedly engaged in unsubstantiated nay-saying and misdirection. Would you like to discuss the facts (as we can know them) or would your your prefer to continue to flog right-wing talking-points with little or no factual back-up?

I've provided numerous direct quotes of the testimony to Congress and interviews of the US Commanding Gen. in Iraq, a link to the graphical data over time from the same site you provided, and McCafrey's December report to support everything I've said here. Make of them what you will.

 

[phoenixy]

I still believe Iraq has WMD.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

This just out
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/US/02/11/rand.insurgencies/index.html

 

[turbo]

Yep, and that is from the watered-down unclassified version of the Rand report. We can only hope that somebody sick of this senseless war will release the classified version to the press, and that the press has the guts to print it. According to a report I read yesterday, nobody in the WH, DOD, intelligence agencies, or State would appreciate letting the public get a look at that. Lack of planning, communication, coordination, etc are apparently only the tip of the iceberg.

 

[edward]

The Army totally buried the Rand study done in 05 because it was critical of the Administration. I wonder how they will bury this one.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/11/washington/11army.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

 

[chemisttree]

As much as I enjoy watching FoxNews for it's entertainment value, they definitely have an agenda no matter how many sprinkles of balance they throw into seem credible. When was the last time FoxNews talked about how Afghanistan is back to being a disaster.

Here's some sprinkles for you. They only go back to the 6th of Feb.

http://youdecide08.foxnews.com/2008/02/12/raw-data-text-of-obamas-potomac-primaries-remarks/
http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008Feb11/0,4670,Afghanistan,00.html
http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008Feb11/0,4670,PakistanMissingDiplomat,00.html
http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008Feb13/0,4670,Afghanistan,00.html
http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008Feb12/0,4670,Afghanistan,00.html
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,330219,00.html
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,330233,00.html
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,330221,00.html
http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008Feb09/0,4670,MilitaryRiskAssessment,00.html
http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008Feb09/0,4670,PakistanUS,00.html
http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008Feb08/0,4670,AfghanUSDeaths,00.html
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,330148,00.html
http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008Feb07/0,4670,NaggingNATO,00.html
http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008Feb08/0,4670,NATOAfghanistan,00.html
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,328825,00.html
http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008Feb06/0,4670,Rice,00.html
http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008Feb06/0,4670,AfghanUSDeaths,00.html

 

[Astronuc]

Perhaps some progress afterall - even if it is a small step.

Ending Impasse, Iraq Parliament Backs Measures
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/14/world/middleeast/14iraq.html

By ALISSA J. RUBIN
BAGHDAD — Iraq’s parliamentary leaders on Wednesday pushed through three far-reaching measures that had been delayed for weeks by bitter political maneuvering that became so acrimonious that some lawmakers threatened to try to dissolve the legislative body.

More than any previous legislation, the new initiatives have the potential to spur reconciliation between Sunnis and Shiites and set the country on the road to a more representative government, starting with new provincial elections.

The voting itself was a significant step forward for the Parliament, where even basic quorums have been rare. In a classic legislative compromise, the three measures, each of which was a burning issue for at least one faction, were packaged together for a single vote to encourage agreement across sectarian lines.

“Today we have a wedding party for the Iraqi Parliament,” said Mahmoud al-Mashhadani, the speaker, who is a Sunni. “We have proved that Iraqis are one bloc and Parliament is able to find solutions that represent all Iraqis.”

 

[mheslep]

Astronuc: thanks for the link.

I agree this federal parliamentary action is to the good, though what the highly ineffective Malaki government does or doesn't do at this point pails in comparison as a metric to the country wide reduction in violence from last year and the destruction AQI. Yes Malaki was duly elected but a boat load of Malakis is not worth improved security (far from good, yet) to the society.

 

[BobG]

Astronuc: thanks for the link.

I agree this federal parliamentary action is to the good, though what the highly ineffective Malaki government does or doesn't do at this point pails in comparison as a metric to the country wide reduction in violence from last year and the destruction AQI. Yes Malaki was duly elected but a boat load of Malakis is not worth improved security (far from good, yet) to the society.

The whole intent of the surge was to create an environment where the Iraq government could begin functioning. Reducing violence might be good, but we don't want US forces reducing the violence for 100 years.

Having the government at least begin to show signs functioning is the first sign that the surge might actually have had a positive effect.

 

[Astronuc]

I think a functioning government, assuming it really does work for the people and actually accomplishes the provision of services to society, goes hand-in-hand with the reduction in violence. If the people see the government working as they want, then they are less inclinced to support insurgents, and more likely to support government forces and US troops.

The various awakening movements seem to be working. I hope that continues.

There is still the matter of resolving the ethno-religious conflict between Sunni and Shii, if that is possible.

 

[mheslep]

The whole intent of the surge was to create an environment where the Iraq government could begin functioning.

Not quite. The surge was to be measured by some dozen metrics defining a functioning Iraqi government. Turns out almost none of the were met until this recent announcement. Turns out that a lot of local initiatives were none the less accomplishing what the federal metrics set out to measure, e.g. oil money being widely distributed even in the absence of federal laws.

Reducing violence might be good,

joke? It might be good if the Malaki government completes all the metrics, but there's nothing written in stone yet that says Iraq has to be governed by on all power Bagdad honcho with borders set up in 191x. If the people there find a peaceful way to do it differently let us not decry them. Might be a much faster way for the US to get out.

 

[TVP45]

We won a decisive military victory in 1690 over a place with a population with the same religion divided into two rival sects - we still have troops there now.

When you a reporting a slow down in the increasing rate of bombings as a sucess - it's time to think of a way out.

And if tis thinking you are that the Boyne was decisive, Johnny, tis a poor thing indeed.

 

[BobG]

Reducing violence might be good,

joke? It might be good if the Malaki government completes all the metrics, but there's nothing written in stone yet that says Iraq has to be governed by on all power Bagdad honcho with borders set up in 191x. If the people there find a peaceful way to do it differently let us not decry them. Might be a much faster way for the US to get out.

No, it's not a joke. You took the first half of my sentence out of context. The statement was made in the same vein as "feeding a stray dog might be good" - unless the dog decides my house is his source of food and starts raiding my garbage can when I'm not home to feed him.

The only good development is one that leads to us leaving. Iraq handling their own problems is good because it contributes to the more important goal - us leaving.

Whether Iraq handles their own problems as a single country or as three separate countries is unimportant. Whichever one leads to us leaving the soonest is best.

Iraq not handling their problems isn't necessarily a reason for us not to achieve what should be our primary goal - leaving.

Us reducing violence in Iraq might be a good thing, but it might not be a good thing. If us reducing violence results in depending on us to reduce violence for decades, then it's not a good thing. It delays what should be our primary goal - leaving.

Reducing violence is only a good thing if contributes to us leaving sooner.

 

[Astronuc]

No, it's not a joke. You took the first half of my sentence out of context. The statement was made in the same vein as "feeding a stray dog might be good" - unless the dog decides my house is his source of food and starts raiding my garbage can when I'm not home to feed him.

The only good development is one that leads to us leaving. Iraq handling their own problems is good because it contributes to the more important goal - us leaving.

Whether Iraq handles their own problems as a single country or as three separate countries is unimportant. Whichever one leads to us leaving the soonest is best.

Iraq not handling their problems isn't necessarily a reason for us not to achieve what should be our primary goal - leaving.

Us reducing violence in Iraq might be a good thing, but it might not be a good thing. If us reducing violence results in depending on us to reduce violence for decades, then it's not a good thing. It delays what should be our primary goal - leaving.

Reducing violence is only a good thing if contributes to us leaving sooner.

Right on, Bob! The US cannot afford to stay in (occupy) Iraq.

 

[mheslep]

No, it's not a joke. You took the first half of my sentence out of context. The statement was made in the same vein as "feeding a stray dog might be good" - unless the dog decides my house is his source of food and starts raiding my garbage can when I'm not home to feed him.

The only good development is one that leads to us leaving. Iraq handling their own problems is good because it contributes to the more important goal - us leaving.

Whether Iraq handles their own problems as a single country or as three separate countries is unimportant. Whichever one leads to us leaving the soonest is best.

Iraq not handling their problems isn't necessarily a reason for us not to achieve what should be our primary goal - leaving.

Us reducing violence in Iraq might be a good thing, but it might not be a good thing. If us reducing violence results in depending on us to reduce violence for decades, then it's not a good thing. It delays what should be our primary goal - leaving.

Reducing violence is only a good thing if contributes to us leaving sooner.

Sounds like an isolationism argument, if so I disagree.