2007 is deadliest year for US in Iraq

[JohnnyMarzetti]

2007 is deadliest year in Iraq. (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071106/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq)

BAGHDAD - The U.S. military on Tuesday announced the deaths of five more soldiers, making 2007 the deadliest year for U.S. troops despite a recent downturn, according to an Associated Press count.

At least 852 American military personnel have died in Iraq so far this year — the highest annual toll since the war began in March 2003, according to AP figures.

The grim milestone passed despite a sharp drop in U.S. and Iraqi deaths here in recent months, after a 30,000-strong U.S. force buildup. There were 39 deaths in October, compared to 65 in September and 84 in August.

Five U.S. soldiers were killed Monday in two separate roadside bomb attacks, said Rear Adm. Gregory Smith, director of the Multi-National Force-Iraq's communications division.

"We lost five soldiers yesterday in two unfortunate incidents, both involving IEDs," Smith told reporters in Baghdad's heavily-guarded Green Zone.


I'm sure Yonivore will respond with "Bring 'em on!"

[Hillary]

This is a fact that not even Yonivore can argue against.

[Yonivore]

This is a fact that not even Yonivore can argue against.
Sure I can, I have Marzetti on ignore.

But, I'll predict this. Because of the sacrifices made during the surge, 2008 will be the year with the fewest U. S. deaths in Iraq.

[Oh, Gee!!]

Sure I can, I have Marzetti on ignore.

but you still post in the threads he creates. Way to ignore him.

[Yonivore]

but you still post in the threads he creates. Way to ignore him.
I was responding to you...you have some weird fascination with me, it appears.

[clambake]

i predict your prediction will end up like all your other predictions. you should go look at some of your history before making any new ones. then again, you've never been one for accuracy.

[Yonivore]

Well, Democratic Congressman David Obey of Wisconsin has discovered why U.S. Deaths in Iraq are trending down...way, way down. "We're running out of people to kill."

I am not saying he is senile — clearly he is not — but man is he out of touch. Everything is focused 24/7 on Washington politics.

Consider this question and the answer he gave, as reported by Amanda Carpenter at Townhall.com (http://www.townhall.com/columnists/AmandaCarpenter/2007/11/05/obey_on_iraq_‘we’ve_run_out_of_people_to_kill’).

Video at Michelle Malkin's place (http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/05/video-david-obey-said-what/).


Carpenter: “Some Republicans say the casualties are going down in Iraq, there seems to be signs the surge is working. Do you think that is true?”

Obey: “One of the reason we’ve had incidents of violence, sectarian violence go down is because they are running out of people to kill. They’ve killed so many in so many areas, that there are fewer opportunity targets, if you want to put it that way, for each side. I welcome any reduction in the level in violence for whatever reasons it occurs, but I don’t think that tells us much for what the future is going to be.”
“Running out of people to kill” is a bad thing?

That is the whole point of a war: To kill the enemy. “Running out of people to kill” is also called victory.

V-I-C-T-O-R-Y.

Obey has been in Congress so long that he is like a mole squinting at the Sun when confronted with something outside the realm of Gotcha Politics.

As the Stars and Stripes (http://stripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=50019) reported, the Air Force dramatically reduced air strikes in Afghanistan and Iraq in September and October.

What were once target-rich environments have dried up.

I blame George Bush and Global Warring.

I suspect many combatants have decided it no longer is worth fighting. Muqtada al-Sadr decided to retreat until the Surge is over. I doubt he will be able to rally his troops again.

You know there was a time when a Democratic Party leader would have cheered “running out of people to kill.” Heck, there was a time when all the Democratic Party leaders would have cheered “running out of people to kill.”

But their No. 1 appropriator belittles the success of our troops because — in the words of House Democratic Whip James Clyburn in July — victory in Iraq “a real big problem for us.”

Party first, country last.

Obey is an embarrassment who should be ashamed of being so ignorant.

On the number of troop deaths in 2007; As Tony Snow (http://minx.cc/?post=245652) pointed out, the media seemed to have lost interest in Iraq once the US started suffering fewer casualties in Iraq. Unfortunately, yesterday was a bad day in Iraq with 5 Soldiers killed in IED attacks. Despite the fact that one day does not constitute a trend, the media is now able to take yesterday’s attacks and hook it to a story they must have been salivating to report: 2007 now the deadliest year for U.S. troops in Iraq.

CDR Salamander (http://cdrsalamander.blogspot.com/2007/11/800-iraqi-gorilla.html) takes a look at the trends in Iraq and finds some graphics you are not likely to see in the MSM today or ever, including this one:

http://www.defenselink.mil/dodcmsshare/briefingslide/317/071101-D-6570C-007.jpg

My guess is once this story fades, The Deciders will go back to talking about their new favorite storyline…“mercenaries” that aren't mercenaries or "torture" that isn't torture.

[clambake]

terrorist get vacation, too. this is the deadliest year, period.

[spurster]

So can we leave now?

[Yonivore]

So can we leave now?
I'd say pretty quick, yeah.

Seems there are few trouble spots left but, they are falling fast.

The last complete year of WWII, 1944, was the deadliest.

[Yonivore]

http://www.defenselink.mil/dodcmsshare/briefingslide/317/071101-D-6570C-005.jpg

[Yonivore]

http://www.defenselink.mil/dodcmsshare/briefingslide/317/071101-D-6570C-006.jpg

[clambake]

does that mean the millions that have fled can now return? what will happen when they come back? anyone care to guess? this thing is nowhere near over. chaos will rule this country when people start to carve out their piece.

[ChumpDumper]

Sure I can, I have Marzetti on ignore.Coward.


But, I'll predict this. Because of the sacrifices made during the surge, 2008 will be the year with the fewest U. S. deaths in Iraq.
Of course it will be lower since we'll be beginning the big pull out.

[boutons_]

The civilian deaths decline is due to the Iraqis themselves partitioning into Sunni and Shiite regions, esp the Shiites ethnically cleansing Baghdad of Sunnis under US noses, NOT due to the surge.

There are 5M internal refugees in Iraq. Their life is much improved vs under Saddam.

The unemployment rate?

Poverty rate feeding the crime rate, unabated due to ineffective policing?

Iraq is fucked, all the US reconstruction projects are fucked and corrupt, and it's ALL dubya's Exec's fault. Impeach dubya, he's worse than useless.

[Yonivore]

Thousands Return to Safer Iraqi Capital (http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gkx-3oYeFwuWKCusr2jrojs98w8wD8SMC1HG0)

Sue me, I peaked at Clammy's post.

[ChumpDumper]

So 3,000 families out of about 2,000,000 total refugees.

Mission Accomplished.

[Yonivore]

An Iraqi Parade Against al-Qaeda (http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1674888,00.html)

Face it, conditions in Iraq are improving dramatically. The Democrats dream of a defeat in Iraq are over.

Oh, and I'm not peeking at yours SpunkMeister, you haven't said anything intelligent in, well, forever.

[clambake]

Thousands Return to Safer Iraqi Capital (http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gkx-3oYeFwuWKCusr2jrojs98w8wD8SMC1HG0)

Sue me, I peaked at Clammy's post.
:lol 3k? you wait and see.

[Yonivore]

:lol 3k? you wait and see.
Okay. I will.

[boutons_]

1000s? How about 5M?



Millions Trapped in Their Own Country
By Ahmed Ali
Inter Press Service

Monday 05 November 2007

Baquba, Iraq - At least five million Iraqis have fled their homes due to the violence under the U.S.-led occupation, but half of them are unable to leave the country, according to well-informed estimates.

According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), there are more than 4.4 million displaced Iraqis, an estimate that many workers among refugees find conservative.

The UNHCR announced last week that at present 2,000 Iraqis are fleeing their homes every day. Most of them have received direct threats from death squads or militias.

The provinces that have suffered the greatest displacement are the largely Sunni Baghdad, Diyala, al-Anbar and Salahadeen in central Iraq.

Members of many families who have not fled told IPS they have stayed on because they had no choice.

"We could not leave our city despite the security situation because we don't have the money to travel and live outside Iraq," Ali Muhsin, an official with the directorate general of education and a father of five told IPS in Baquba, 40 km northeast of Baghdad.

"For more than a year, we used to receive the salary only every 50 or 60 days because the militants had taken over the entire city. They even controlled the banks, which prevented our offices from receiving the money."

Muhsin said most workers in the education system in Diyala province (north of Baghdad where Baquba is located) are not fully employed, and are therefore not paid salaries. And the rampant violence has prevented people going to work.

"People can hardly afford to live in Iraq, so how could they afford the expense of travelling and living abroad," Najmeldeen Alwan, a local grocer near Baquba told IPS. His wife Suhir, standing by his side, said, "We just wait for our destiny."

Local Iraqis say most people who fled had the means, or the ability to acquire the means.

"Seventy percent of those who fled are rich, and the rest had various resources," Abaid Nasir, an unemployed trader in Baquba told IPS. "Some sold their properties, others used up their savings to save the lives of their family."

But it is not money alone that decides whether a family stays or goes.

"My family live in a small village which has managed to defend itself from criminals and gangs," Ta'ama Aed told IPS. "Our people protect it against the militants. The only thing the militants can do is bomb it with mortars."

Aed lives in a small village on the outskirts of Baquba. But the need for safety meant that "inhabitants do not leave the village," he said.

Other families have made deals with militias and resistance groups for their protection.

"A large number of people have sided with the militants for their safety," local resident Mohammed Jabur told IPS. "In such cases, one of the militants guarantees the family that nobody will hurt them, and they usually keep their word."

There are no formal, government sponsored refugee camps in Iraq. Makeshift camps are common throughout the country, but they are fluid, and security in them is poor.

One reason keeping many Iraqis back now is the lack of security on highways. Most people IPS interviewed said they avoided travelling more than two or three kilometres from their villages, towns, or cities.

"I wanted to leave Iraq, but I could not because the militants control the highways and all the roads from the city," Ahmed Salih from Baquba city told IPS. "All the way to the borders, militias and fighters control the roads."

On Oct. 1 Syria decided to close its borders to Iraqis, except for traders and academics. The move has left thousands of family members separated from one another.

Roughly 10 percent of Syria's population is now Iraqis, and the government has said it cannot absorb more refugees.

The U.S. itself is least affected by the refugee crisis. Since the invasion of Iraq in March 2003, the U.S. administration has issued less than 2,000 visas to Iraqis.

"Since October 2006 the U.S. government has gone from denying that large numbers of vulnerable Iraqi refugees even existed, to speaking openly of an Iraqi refugee crisis," the group Refugees International said in a statement. "But its actual financial commitments are commensurate neither with the need nor with the U.S. role in creating the displacement crisis in the first place. The President and his war cabinet have yet to recognise the human toll the violence has been taking on Iraqi civilians and neighbouring countries."

Ahmed, our correspondent in Iraq's Diyala province, works in close collaboration with Dahr Jamail, our US-based specialist writer on Iraq who travels extensively in the region.

http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=39921

==============

Shed a tear for Yoni, bitched-slapped and balls-kicked yet again, like shooting yoni-fish in a barrel.

[2centsworth]

the trend has been lower since the surge. I believe the surge has worked in the short-term.

[clambake]

yep, when this thing takes off they'll be hacking up each other like beef.

[Yonivore]

:lol 3k? you wait and see.
In an October 20 story on MSNBC (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21387023/), slanted to make it look like refugees were being forced to return to Iraq against their will, the "news" site allowed this:


Around 1,500 returning each day

No figures are available on how many Iraqis are leaving safe havens in Syria, Jordan and other Arab countries to return to an uncertain future in Iraq.

At the border station at Tanaf, a Syrian immigration official estimated late last month that up to 1,500 Iraqis were returning to Iraq each day.
Well, even if it was "against their will," it appears that returning to Iraq was a safe gamble because of the drastically improving security situation -- courtesy of the United States Military.

The same story says there were an estimated 1.5 million Iraqi refugees in Syria and I suspect the flow will increase as violence decreases.

[Yonivore]

yep, when this thing takes off they'll be hacking up each other like beef.
Civilian deaths continue to drop even as the refugees return grows. If you'll read that story, it refers to the 1,500 per day trend starting back in September. That's 45,000 a month.

Combine that with Shia and Sunni tribes pledging cooperation with the new government of Iraq and I'm afraid you're going to be mistaken if you're hoping for renewed sectarian strife.

[Yonivore]

'Historic' meeting stresses reconciliation between Sunni and Shia in Rashidiyah (http://newsblaze.com/story/20071103071150tsop.nb/newsblaze/TOPSTORY/Top-Stories.html)

[clambake]

iraqi govt? they'll be nothing but spectators, unless they try to get in the game. power will be the goal. you wait and see. nobody's hoping for sectarian strife. it just hasn't started yet. you're dreaming if you think they're a democracy.

[clambake]

'Historic' meeting stresses reconciliation between Sunni and Shia in Rashidiyah (http://newsblaze.com/story/20071103071150tsop.nb/newsblaze/TOPSTORY/Top-Stories.html)
historic pony show meetings. you wait.

[boutons_]

So, Yoni, assuming your peaceful, normal Iraq fantasy pans out before dubya leaves office, will dubya start a signinficant withdrawal, Mission Accomplished? or will dubya leave office with 170K troops in Iraq, following his original, pre-war intention to occupy, Korea-like, for decades to grab that oil.

[Yonivore]

iraqi govt? they'll be nothing but spectators, unless they try to get in the game. power will be the goal. you wait and see. nobody's hoping for sectarian strife. it just hasn't started yet. you're dreaming if you think they're a democracy.
Japan will never believe the Emporer isn't a diety.

The German Nazi's will die to the last man before giving up der Fuhrer.

Sunni and Shia will never get along.

All three statements are full of crap.

The vast majority of people -- Sunni and Shia, as well -- just want to live and raise families in peace.

[boutons_]

'live and raise families in peace"

yawn. Same is true in Iran, North Korea, Zimbabwe, the Horn of Africa, or anywhere.

There are 100s of $Bs of oil at stake in Iraq that will fuel the Sunnis trying to get their share or more, and fuel the Shiites wanting to get more than their share, while punishing the Sunnis/Baathists for their oppression under Saddam.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

why wasn't this spread all over the internets?!

----------------------------------------------------

Violence in Iraq drops sharply: Ministry
Mon Oct 22, 2007 1:01pm EDT

By Aseel Kami

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Violence in Iraq has dropped by 70 percent since the end of June, when U.S. forces completed their build-up of 30,000 extra troops to stabilize the war-torn country, the Interior Ministry said on Monday.

The ministry released the new figures as bomb blasts in Baghdad and the northern city of Mosul killed five people and six gunmen died in clashes with police in the holy Shi'ite city of Kerbala south of the Iraqi capital.

Washington began dispatching reinforcements to Iraq in February to try to buy Iraq's feuding political leaders time to reach a political accommodation to end violence between majority Shi'ites and minority Sunni Arabs that has killed tens of thousands and forced millions from their homes.

While the leaders have failed to agree on key laws aimed at reconciling the country's warring sects, the troop buildup has succeeded in quelling violence.

Under the plan, U.S. troops left their large bases and set up combat outposts in neighborhoods while launching a series of summer offensives against Sunni Islamist al Qaeda, other Sunni Arab militants and Shi'ite militias in the Baghdad beltway.

Interior Ministry spokesman Major-General Abdul-Karim Khalaf told reporters that there had been a 70 percent decrease in violence countrywide in the three months from July to September over the previous quarter.

GRADUAL IMPROVEMENT

In Baghdad, considered the epicenter of the violence because of its mix of Shi'ites and Sunni Arabs, car bombs had decreased by 67 percent and roadside bombs by 40 percent, he said. There had also been a 28 percent decline in the number of bodies found dumped in the capital's streets.

In Anbar, a former insurgent hotbed where Sunni Arab tribes have joined U.S. forces against al Qaeda, there has been an 82 percent drop in violent deaths.

"These figures show a gradual improvement in controlling the security situation," Khalaf said.

However, in the northern province of Nineveh, where many al Qaeda and other Sunni Arab militants fled to escape the crackdown in Baghdad and surrounding region, there had been a 129 percent rise in car bombings and a corresponding 114 percent increase in the number of people killed in violence.

While the figures confirm U.S. data showing a positive trend in combating al Qaeda bombers, there is growing instability in southern Iraq, where rival Shi'ite factions are fighting for political dominance.

Police said six gunmen were killed in police raids in Kerbala, 110 km (70 miles) southwest of Baghdad.

Some 50 people were killed in Kerbala in August in fierce clashes between fighters loyal to Shi'ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr and local police, who are seen as aligned to the rival Supreme Iraqi Islamic Council's armed wing, the Badr Organization.

After the clashes, Sadr said he was imposing a six-month freeze on the activities of the Mehdi Army, increasingly seen as beyond his control, so that he could reorganize it.

In Baghdad, three roadside bombs killed four people, including three policemen, while in Mosul one policeman was killed when a blast hit a police patrol.

© Reuters2007All rights reserved

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSCOL24813120071022?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&rpc=22&sp=true

[101A]

There will be good news from Iraq ONLY after a Democrat is elected president.

In fact, a few minutes after swearing in we will be deluged with 18 months of pent up good news.

[ChumpDumper]

Hey, I hope Yoni is right -- it will be a first for this war.

I suspect, however, that the main players are simply waiting out the American occupation since our hand has already been shown. Once we start leaving, it will be on.

[ChumpDumper]

why wasn't this spread all over the internets?!It was. I'm pleased the US finally got around to using actual counterinsurgency tactics. It was about time. Kudos to Petraeus.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

It was.not as much as the "violent 2007" news was.

[ChumpDumper]

not as much as the "violent 2007" news was.It was a violent year. That was by design. Deal with it.

[101A]

It was. I'm pleased the US finally got around to using actual counterinsurgency tactics. It was about time. Kudos to Petraeus.Gates, too.

[101A]

Hey, I hope Yoni is right -- it will be a first for this war.

I suspect, however, that the main players are simply waiting out the American occupation since our hand has already been shown. Once we start leaving, it will be on.This is why so many have been against timetables, including Hillary (which is why, if we have to have a Dem in the WH, she would be my choice)

[ChumpDumper]

Gates, too.Yes, it's amazing what can happen when competent people are in charge.

[101A]

Yes, it's amazing what can happen when competent people are in charge.Rumsfeld, from what I've read, was anything but incompetent.

I think he wanted it going the direction it was going; non-stabilizing. Oil prices? Loki?

Or I could, like you, give him the benefit of the doubt and just call him an idiot.

[ChumpDumper]

This is why so many have been against timetables, including Hillary (which is why, if we have to have a Dem in the WH, she would be my choice)Shit, the original plan was to draw down to 40,000 troops six months after the invasion was complete. We were always planning on bugging out, the big players just realize that they are wasting time killing us now when they could just kill their domestic enemies later when we are gone.

[ChumpDumper]

Rumsfeld, from what I've read, was anything but incompetent.

I think he wanted it going the direction it was going; non-stabilizing. Oil prices? Loki?

Or I could, like you, give him the benefit of the doubt and just call him an idiot.No, he fought for control of the occupation then did nothing about it. There was no appreciable planning, and whatever planning was done he undid by installing Viceroy Bremer. He was incompetent. If you want to say he was incompetent like a fox, it doesn't change anything.

[clambake]

Hey, I hope Yoni is right -- it will be a first for this war.

I suspect, however, that the main players are simply waiting out the American occupation since our hand has already been shown. Once we start leaving, it will be on.
it'll be on, alright. the first thing to disappear will be coverage of the events as they unfold. it's gonna be bugout time for anyone dumb enough to report what they see. the players are coming home.

[Yonivore]

Rumsfeld, from what I've read, was anything but incompetent.

I think he wanted it going the direction it was going; non-stabilizing. Oil prices? Loki?

Or I could, like you, give him the benefit of the doubt and just call him an idiot.
Or, it could be the current strategy would not have worked in an immediate post-invasion Iraq without many more casualties than we've already experienced.

[ChumpDumper]

Or, it could be the current strategy would not have worked in an immediate post-invasion Iraq without many more casualties than we've already experienced.Or it could be the current strategy wouldn't even be necessary because the whole insurgency could have been avoided by following the original invasion plan before Rummy fucked it up and discarding the disastrous policies of disbanding the army and total de-Baathification ordered by Rummy's Viceroy Bremer.

[Wild Cobra]

Notice how many glass half empty people seem to dominate this board in quantity, but not quality...

Things are better. Isn't that enough?

[101A]

Notice how many glass half empty people seem to dominate this board in quantity, but not quality...

Things are better. Isn't that enough?They DO NOT want things to be better in Iraq, and will never admit they are. Reid, Pelosi, and the whole Democratic field are terrified things could look significantly rosie by this time next year.

[Wild Cobra]

They DO NOT want things to be better in Iraq, and will never admit they are. Reid, Pelosi, and the whole Democratic field are terrified things could look significantly rosie by this time next year.
It could even sway the elections back to republican control because of those maintaining the course, and not being quitters, like the demoncraps prove to be.

[ChumpDumper]

Things are better in Iraq.

Too bad they could have been better four years ago.

I will never forgive Bush for fucking this war up -- nor will I let you idiots try to give him a pass on it.

[clambake]

you guys are nuts. keep rubbing your genie lamps. the deciders will huff and puff and blow down this straw iraqi govt. you think the real players are going to take orders from them? dreamers.

[Yonivore]

It appears the Defeaters on the left are beginning to settle on a strategy that will allow them to deny a victory is occurring in Iraq -- just a little longer. If they can just stretch it through next November, they've got it made.

Here's a blog post from a soldier "stuck" in Iraq.

Counter-InSURGEncy, a primer on our impending victory (http://www.blackfive.net/main/2007/11/counter-insurge.html)



Brandon Friedman has a post up at Kos (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/11/5/22022/5007) purporting to debunk the "myth" that the Surge is working in response to Grim's (http://www.blackfive.net/main/2007/11/sharp-drop-in-a.html) post. He is a VoteVets vet for reference.


As U.S. casualties have continued to drop, many people on the anti-Bush side of the aisle have begun to quietly panic in recent days over this question: "Could George W. Bush and Frederick Kagan have possibly been right about the surge?"

Simply put, the answer is no. The surge is not working and George W. Bush and Frederick Kagan were not right. Despite what right-wing blogs (http://www.blackfive.net/main/2007/11/sharp-drop-in-a.html) are saying, and despite what conservative observers are noting, the plunge in violence is actually the result of an Iraqi political decision made by and implemented by Iraqis—and the drop has little to do with the "surge"—an infusion of 30,000 troops (which wouldn’t fill a Major League stadium) into Baghdad, a city of six million people........

The "Shiite militants" described by the New York Times were, in fact, members of Muqtada al-Sadr’s Mahdi Army. And, as we all saw this past summer, Muqtada’s fighters were really doing a job on American forces—despite the troop increase which began earlier in the year.

That was on August 7th. And remember, this was during a summer throughout which we were bombarded with news of Iranian/Shia efforts to kill Americans and destabilize the Iraqi government.

Then, barely three weeks after the New York Times article ran, 50 Muslim pilgrims were slaughtered in sectarian fighting in Karbala. In response, Muqtada al-Sadr announced (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/08/30/wiraq130.xml) that he had ordered his militia to suspend offensive operations for six months.

No one saw this coming.
That would surprise the many of us who watched the kinetic battle from Spring through Summer and me who was wearing himself out doing the dead tango dance as we racked up huge numbers of enemy KIA and the groups of thugs that remained began splintering in smaller bunches or giving up the game. Plus the Surge is a misnomer.

The Surge is not our strategy and he is correct that it is not responsible for the tremendous success in Baghdad, the surrounding belts, Al Anbar, Diyala and now even in some of the Shia tribal areas as well. Our strategy is Counter-Insurgency (COIN) and the additional troops, known as the Surge, are simply part of that effort along with every other military member and civilian over there. Read LTC Kilcullen for an elegant primer on COIN (http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/2007/06/understanding-current-operatio/) in the Small Wars Journal.

COIN is completely different than the nation-building and national institution-building that we had been doing since toppling Saddam and up until the beginning of this year. We had hunkered down on the FOBs heading out on patrols and then back inside the wire. Now we cleared areas and then stayed and lived side by side with the Iraqis, and once they saw that we were staying they "awakened" and determined that al Qaeda brought death and destruction and the Americans brought electricity and water, not to mention security.

Friedman's main point is that it was Sadr's announcement of a 6 month cease fire that is responsible for all this peace breaking out, not the Surge. Well I explained that the Surge is a straw target, and while Mookie's announcement was a net positive, let's look at why he did it. Once we began shining a bright light on the fact that Iran was responsible for a good bit of the slaughter in Iraq, they had to start being a little cautious. They talk a big game, but they don't want to be caught in any particularly heinous casus belli, since they know W has an itchy trigger finger.

Sadr's and the other Shia militia served a purpose when Iran was working hard to cause an outright civil war that would eject us from the country. Unfortunately for them we managed to shift fire and engage in COIN before they managed to get a hot war going. Sadr announced his cease fire in August after thousands of his thugs and every other flavor of scumbag in Iraq began dying in bunches. We began offensive operations in many places we had simply left to fester before and many brave and foolish gunmen became dead tangos. Hurrah!

Sadr's coalition of thugs was unraveling as we scarfed up bad guys and they ratted out their buddies. He had no effective control left of the organization and his handlers in Teheran were not about to prop up a deranged, discredited, increasingly irrelevant, serial loser. His message was more of an attempt to retain some semblance of power in a situation where he no longer actually had much.

We killed thousands of Shia militia, Sunni insurgents and al Qaeda terrorists over the six months leading up to Mookie's capitulation and the cascade of intelligence gathered and areas cleared led to more tips about bad guys and fewer rat holes. It has gotten pretty tough for a terrorist to find a good place to hang out. Every police precinct staffed by Concerned Citizens (http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2007/09/standing_up_the_conc.php) we stand up is one more place the bad guys can't go. Plus the Iraqis are increasingly doing the standing up themselves.

No one wants an iron boot or sandal on their neck and as we stood with the Iraqis they have thrown off the attempted imposition of an Islamist paradise and new capital of the Caliphate. We and they have dealt a crushing defeat to al Qaeda in Iraq and everywhere else. They sent their best to the big battle with the Great Satan and all they have to show for it is a horrendous toll of Muslims they slaughtered and a long list of dead tangos for me to rejoice about.

We and the Iraqis have also effectively derailed Iran's cunning plan to dominate Iraq via Shia political parties & militias. There are plenty of Shia who want absolutely no part of being an Iranian puppet and they are experiencing their own awakening. That doesn't mean that Iran is neutralized, but it does mean they didn't get the civil war they were working for. Sadr's cease fire was a direct result of the success of our COIN operations and his ability to cause major disruptions is mostly eliminated.

Mr. Friedman served in both Afghanistan and Iraq, although apparently not since 2003, I commend his service. But his analysis of this situation is fundamentally flawed and almost requires that he has willfully suspended rational observation. It is fine to argue that Sadr's action played a role in our current success, it did. But it is folly to say that it was a major or in this case, the major cause of it. It is very enjoyable to watch the squirming and backsliding the left is already having to do when faced with the reality that we are winning.

What is the pro-defeat position in victory anyhow?
Uncle Jimbo at Blackfive is beginning to sense panic on Iraq, citing a long authoritative post at Daily Kos explaining that recent security improvements in Iraq, presumably including events in Anbar, stem from the circumstance that Moqtada al-Sadr ordered his milita to cease offensive operations for six months.

Doctrines in distress must be progressively modified to maintain their credibility. The classic example was the Ptolemaic theory that sun revolved around the earth. After the evidence began to go against it, the theory was modified by the addition of epicycles, a type of complex celestial movement, to make observations fit the theory. The complex ballet included deferents, equants, prograde and retrograde motions, an entire scaffolding of evolutions to prop up a theory in trouble. Some cling to geocentric idea to this day.

Historical debates go on for a long time. Anyone who remembers the ups and downs of its history should realize that the campaign in Iraq isn't over 'til it's over. The near hysteria Blackfive detects in reaction to the possibility of an American victory in Iraq reflects both the torment of suspense and a loss in confidence. Still, nobody psychologically invested in the orthodoxy of defeat should jump in despondency off a bridge -- yet. And even if such a victory should be forthcoming the narrative of defeat can always be salvaged from it through the modern day equivalent of epicycles; some alternative explanation giving credit to the enemy, be he ever so wretched as Moqtada al-Sadr.

But disappointment should never go so far as to obscure what it was all about. The War in Iraq was in part about domestic political upmanship, it's true. But except to the meanest and most partisan of minds it must ultimately have been about the future of Iraq, the security of America and the soul of Islam. And however we arrived at this point that future, that security and the prospects for that soul seem better off today than had al-Qaeda or Sadr won, though I know some will debate the point. But the broad minded man of the Left shouldn't care who "won" for so long as it works out well, as it is looking to do. It is sometimes good to be wrong about your worst fears coming true; to be luckier than you thought.

One of the most comical true stories I ever heard was about a man who spent a lot of money getting a thorough medical checkup only to be disappointed the doctor found nothing wrong with him. He felt cheated somehow, that he hadn't received value for money. Had he stopped to consider he might have realized how lucky he was to be disappointed. If Iraq turns out well so be it. That would be justification in itself to anyone of good will.

Yes, that's stolen...but oh so appropriate.

[Winehole23]

It appears the Defeaters on the left are beginning to settle on a strategy that will allow them to deny a victory is occurring in Iraq -- just a little longer. If they can just stretch it through next November, they've got it made.

Here's a blog post from a soldier "stuck" in Iraq.

Counter-InSURGEncy, a primer on our impending victory (http://www.blackfive.net/main/2007/11/counter-insurge.html)


Uncle Jimbo at Blackfive is beginning to sense panic on Iraq, citing a long authoritative post at Daily Kos explaining that recent security improvements in Iraq, presumably including events in Anbar, stem from the circumstance that Moqtada al-Sadr ordered his milita to cease offensive operations for six months.

Doctrines in distress must be progressively modified to maintain their credibility. The classic example was the Ptolemaic theory that sun revolved around the earth. After the evidence began to go against it, the theory was modified by the addition of epicycles, a type of complex celestial movement, to make observations fit the theory. The complex ballet included deferents, equants, prograde and retrograde motions, an entire scaffolding of evolutions to prop up a theory in trouble. Some cling to geocentric idea to this day.

Historical debates go on for a long time. Anyone who remembers the ups and downs of its history should realize that the campaign in Iraq isn't over 'til it's over. The near hysteria Blackfive detects in reaction to the possibility of an American victory in Iraq reflects both the torment of suspense and a loss in confidence. Still, nobody psychologically invested in the orthodoxy of defeat should jump in despondency off a bridge -- yet. And even if such a victory should be forthcoming the narrative of defeat can always be salvaged from it through the modern day equivalent of epicycles; some alternative explanation giving credit to the enemy, be he ever so wretched as Moqtada al-Sadr.

But disappointment should never go so far as to obscure what it was all about. The War in Iraq was in part about domestic political upmanship, it's true. But except to the meanest and most partisan of minds it must ultimately have been about the future of Iraq, the security of America and the soul of Islam. And however we arrived at this point that future, that security and the prospects for that soul seem better off today than had al-Qaeda or Sadr won, though I know some will debate the point. But the broad minded man of the Left shouldn't care who "won" for so long as it works out well, as it is looking to do. It is sometimes good to be wrong about your worst fears coming true; to be luckier than you thought.

One of the most comical true stories I ever heard was about a man who spent a lot of money getting a thorough medical checkup only to be disappointed the doctor found nothing wrong with him. He felt cheated somehow, that he hadn't received value for money. Had he stopped to consider he might have realized how lucky he was to be disappointed. If Iraq turns out well so be it. That would be justification in itself to anyone of good will.

Yes, that's stolen...but oh so appropriate.Damn, we were so close to winning

1447604247948840970