Dec 19 2006
Knocking Down Tall Poles In Iraq
Those who do not have to deal with complex and difficult problems never seem to understand that one must deal with a line up of challenges, knocking them down one-by-one on the path to success. This has been the untold story in Iraq because the media don’t have a long view on anything. Their attention span and business cycle is less than a day, usualy on the order of hours. So when a new tall pole pops up in Iraq to take its place at the head of the list, they cannot grasp what is going on:
Armed militiamen affiliated with radical Shiite Muslim cleric Muqtada Sadr pose the gravest danger to the security and stability of Iraq, surpassing Sunni Arab insurgents and Al Qaeda terrorists, a new Defense Department report to Congress says.
The finding represents the military’s strongest characterization of the danger posed by Sadr and is among the conclusions of a quarterly report to Congress that chronicles the instability in Iraq and record level of sectarian violence.
In the last three months, the number of attacks on U.S. and Iraqi troops and Iraqi civilians rose 22%, and the number of U.S. casualties grew 32%, the Pentagon assessment says.
Classic tall pole whacking. We took out Saddam and then the Sunni’s stepped in to take their turn at control. We deal with the Sunni’s, making them allies and Al Qaeda takes their turn. With both those groups being dealt with reasonably well the Shiites try their hand. The interesting thing is the solutions become clearly and more achievable. The Shiites are in no position to risk their new found freedom and Shia leader Sistani has been a force for good in Iraq. So yes, the next tall pole has shown up. But that is the nature of tough problems and why it takes stamina and will to break through all the challenges to get to the needed objective.
The handwringers will be out in force again, demonstrating for the umpteenth time why they cannot be called upon to do anything of import. They see these situations and do their Chicken Little dance. Those familiar with tacking tough problems see the long view and the fact that it was not so much the Shia have become stronger, it is simply they look stronger with the two other more dangerous groups now on the wane.
AJ,
It’s funny how the media is only “looking forward” on Iraq when they are seeking out the next disaster that they think awaits of. It’s funny how the “news cycle” and lack of desire to report progress leads them to somehow get to the point of saying Shi’ite extremists are the problem without ever reporting the progress made against the Sunni insurgency. The collective willfull ignorance and absolute agenda driven journalism continues to sicken me.
Just think when you read nearly every story from these people that they view Iraq through this lens “We shouldn’t have went, we went for no reason” and any loss of life is viewed through that prism of utter ignorance. They really aren’t even aware of it and just ignore anything that doesn’t come down that windpipe of information and the reader is continually left without context and left wondering “Woah…how did we get to this point from the last story?” and so on. There is no historical perspective and little military understanding by these people. It’s ok when those of us who know better read it and ask “what else is happening and what ARENT they telling us?”…
but when these people are driving public opinion through stories that don’t reflect ENTIRE realities and then public opinion, misinformed, pushes weak politicians to surrender instead of stand up and explain. It’s really a shame. We can’t win wars like this.
The media seem upset about the dead U.S. soldiers, dead Iraqis, and the 20,000 more U.S. soldiers we are sending to die in Iraq.
Silly media. They don’t sem to understand that the dead U.S. soldiers and Iraqis aren’t me.
Roberto,
The truth is we are sending people to Iraq and their deaths and injouries must be for something and not thrown away for partisan advantage. That is why the left never understands. Police get hurt protecting us, so do firefighters. So do those in our military. It is not that life is without risk and we can just la, la, la without a care in the world (the liberal media’s impression). It is we put our people in harms way for good reasons and we make sure their sacrifices are not in vain.
If this is too hard to grasp for a liberal, it is because that is the definition of a liberal.
Except that the Sunni insurgency has not been “dealt with”, is not “on the wane”, has not been dealt with “reasonably.” There is no “knocking down one-by-one”-there is total impasse at best.
If Strata’s essential misreading of Iraq is due to having a better attention span than the media, perhaps his rose colored glasses are the problem.
Mark78
The Sunni insurgency controls Anbar Province. Its numbers are
as strong as ever and recent reports show it can perpetuate itself
off skimmed oil proceeds, not to mention sundry other sources.
To ALL–Strata says
“It is we put our people in harms way for good reasons and we make sure their sacrifices are not in vain.”
Hasn’t learned a thing from Vietnam…..
White House and Joint Chiefs on Iraq…
The pentagon and the joint chiefs asks legitimate questions, ones they are being paid to ask during these meetings. They bring up points about logistics, they mention potential flaws in certain plans…. they are doing their job….
Ken, you didn’t learn the lesson of surrender from VietNam. Millions got killed. Something like what would happen if we surrender in Iraq.
I know you don’t understand that for 2 reasons. 1. you don’t want to and 2. You’e a liberal French guy.
Ken is doing is Chicken Little dance – as expected.
Cluck, cluck Ken! Go to it man!
Answer to Enforcement.
The lesson in Viet nam is that when some one tells you that we are fighting to prevent a “Domino” effect from happening (Viet Nam beeing the so called Domino), and then we live Viet Nam, and the so called “Domino” effect never happens…… Then you have been taken for a fool… And lead by an Idiot(s) having hallucinations about “Dominos”.
Apparently you took the wrong class on Viet Nam. … And are extrapolating that sorry event in our history into another sorry event in our history…. Iraq.
By the way, millions did die in Viet Nam and will probably will die in Iraq BECAUSE WE HAD NO BUSINESS THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE. Our presence and invasions, started events that indeed cost the lives of millions.
We should have learned from that!!
Class on Iraq 101 starts next semester. Be sure to take it.
Gil is ON THE MARK. Which means to an idiot like For Enforcement, (who of course risks nothing in Iraq) he’s French.
Neither does Strata, who if he had had to publicly reveal his identity as his three years worth of starry-eyed optimism about Iraq unfolded,
wouldn’t dare show up at work, such a laughing-stock he would be.
Trolls everywhere.
The thing that amazes me is that Saddam wiped out entire villages and yet it seems that was just normal. No biggee.
Roberto:
Too bad the press was not more interested a decade or so ago. We might have been able to deal with Iraq before things got to this place.
Gil:
Saddam tried to kill a president. No one made him do that. Now if he had succeeded just what do you think would have happened to him and his regime?
But that is right, killing presidents is ok. We should build a wall around America and let Saddam take over the ME and maybe if he is lucky he can control the world’s economy through the oil. And if we don’t like it? Will he will have his terrorist friends and his weapons and no one will do anything about any of it.
Surrender now Gil says.
Bush Senior tried to kill Saddam and killed 400 innocent Iraqis in a
fallout shelter where typical US mis-“intelligence” had placed him in the Persian Gulf war.
I assume Terrye , you have called on the US government to force Israel to give back the West Bank and Samaria, as every Arab leader
has told us and the Baker Report confirms, would reduce Arab/Moslem anger at America significantly?
http://editorandpublisher.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=CNN+Poll%3A++Only+11%25+Back+Call+to+Send+More+Troops+to+Iraq&expire=&urlID=20559334&fb=Y&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.editorandpublisher.com%2Feandp%2Fnews%2Farticle_display.jsp%3Fvnu_content_id%3D1003523154&partnerID=60
I see 11 percent of Americans support the increased troop
“surge” policy….but Bush is the undemocratic “Decider”….
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/11/15/MNGE7MD5ER1.DTL
40 percent of Iraq’s professional class have left the country and
For Enforcement claims Iraq is “free” with a great economy.
Ken:
You do not know what you are talking about. You are an anti semite. Plain and simple, when it comes to Israel you are not even coeherent. The Palestinians have ample oppurtunity to have a state along side Israel and instead they prefer killing Jews and each other. It is sad for the children of the territories that they have been deprived of a future not only by the thieves and murderers that run the territories, but by bigots like you who would rather see them live and die in poverty than see them at peace with Israel.
As for Iraq, whatever else is true we have been dealing with that country one way or another for many years. Whether Bush came along or not we would have still had to deal with them.
I know you think the Arabs are mindless drones incapable of thought or actions of their own and whatever they do is only in reaction the superior white race, but Saddam could have kept this war from happening, he had ample oppurtunity to do that long before Bush left Texas. He did not.
Cheer up, the Democrats won. Maybe we will surrender, the terrorists will win and there will be that blood bath you keep yearning for. But why am I talking to you? If you actually believe the stuff you say you are beyond hope anyway.
Saddam killed or exiled 10% of the population and Ken did not care. Saddam killed more Muslims than the Crusaders and Ken did not care. Saddam destroyed the ecosystem of Iraq and Ken did not care. Saddam was pursuing ethnic cleansing of the Kurds and Marsh Arabs and Ken did not care. Saddam was in violation of more than a dozen force resolutions of the UN and Ken did not care. Saddam ran torture chambers and rape rooms and children prisons and Ken did not care. Saddam deliberately turned off the power to major Shia cities to make them suffer and Ken did not care. Saddam was known far and wide as the Butcher of Baghdad for a reason and Ken did not care. Saddam tried to kill a president of the United States and Ken did not care. Saddam fired on our planes in violation of a cease fire and Ken did not care. Saddam made Iraq a haven a for terrorists like Yasin fugitive from the first attack on the World Trade Center and Ken did not care. Saddam allowed Zarqawi, Abu Nidal and the Carlos the Jackal to come to Iraq and Ken certainly did not care. Saddam paid suicide bombers for killing Israeli civilians and Ken thought that was cool.
Saddam Hussein could have done the same thing in 1998 that Kaddafi did in 2003 and he would probably still be poking out the eyeballs of small children and terrorizing his people and using oil as a weapon. But he did not comply and so there was an invasion.
Now we have all the lefties who could have cared less if Saddam wiped out half his population making up insane crap about 600,000 dead in Iraq, even though common sense says it is absurd. They believe anything and everything negative as Ken’s endless lame silly links prove. But the truth is the only reason they care about the Iraqis now is that they hate Bush and truth be told they hate America. I am just glad they were not around 60 years ago or we might be speaking German.
And by the way Ken the Iraqi economy is booming and unemployment is less than it was when Saddam was in power. That is just a fact.
Iraq economy booming