May 23 2007
A Broader New Iraq Plan Emerges
The “Surge” is just one aspect of the new Iraq plan emerging as a result in the change in military leadership. The plan has a lot of new elements and has a lot longer timeframe than many on the left will have the patience to support (nothing new there):
The plan has three pillars to be carried out simultaneously — in contrast to the prior sequential strategy of “clear, hold and build.” One shifts the immediate emphasis of military operations away from transitioning to Iraqi security forces — the primary focus under the former top U.S. commander, Gen. George W. Casey Jr. — toward protecting Iraq’s population in trouble areas, a central objective of the troop increase that President Bush announced in January.
“The revised counterinsurgency approach we’re taking now really focuses on protecting those people 24/7 . . . and that competent non-sectarian institutions take the baton from us,” said Kilcullen, offering an overview of the campaign plan.
…
Next, the plan emphasizes building the government’s capacity to function, admitting severe weaknesses in government ministries and often nonexistent institutional links between the central government and provincial and local governments. This, too, is in contrast with Casey’s strategy, which focused on rapidly handing over responsibility to Iraq’s government.
…
Finally, the campaign plan aims to purge Iraq’s leadership of a small but influential number of officials and commanders whose sectarian and criminal agendas are thwarting U.S. efforts. It recognizes that the Iraqi government is deeply infiltrated by militia and corrupt officials who are “part of the problem” and are maneuvering to kill off opponents, install sectarian allies and otherwise solidify their power for when U.S. troops withdraw, said one person familiar with the plan.
This stage of adjustment to conditions is being toted as a ‘new plan’ when it is actually the ebb and flow of warfare. Al Qaeda was stronger and more determined to use massacres of Muslims to flame violence than we thought. We seem to underestimate their brutality – which is normal. We have a rough time envisioning such bloodlust since it is foreign to our nature. But what is important is we are adjusting to win. Not voting to surrender. But these things take time, and the plan includes some time frames that will test our patience in the modern ‘instant-gratification’ world we exist in here in the US:
The overarching aim of the plan, which sets goals for the end of this year and the end of 2008, is more political than military: to negotiate settlements between warring factions in Iraq from the national level down to the local level.
I am sure troop strengths are being increased as well as al Qaeda lashes out in desparation, killing anyone in sight in order to try and create the civil war they need to exploit and to take control. We cannot afford to lose, so we must go all out to win. Or else every death would be a wasted death. Our people died to win – not to give up because for partisan opportunism.
Wow, Al Qaeda in Iraq, has finally succeeded in driving Sunnis and Shia’s into each other’s arms Sunnis make-up with Shia’s in Iraq
Stunning; wonder what the Leftists in Congress will say about the “civil war” in Iraq now?
And the Taliban are in trouble in Afghanistan, though you’d never know it from the MSM: Taliban in trouble
Wow, Al Qaeda in Iraq, has finally succeeded in driving Sunnis and Shia’s into each other’s arms Sunnis make-up with Shia’s in Iraq
Great, Sunni insurgents and Sadrist united in their hatred for Al-Qaeda and US. What to say of this, except “Democrats told you so all the way”?
Nikolay: another Anti-American/Pro-Jihadi Bozo stops by, to expose his ass to the world, and plead “take me, I’m yours”, in typical Leftist Dhimmi reflexive surrender mode!
Congrats!
Nikolay: another Anti-American/Pro-Jihadi Bozo stops by, to expose his ass to the world, and plead “take me, I’m yoursâ€, in typical Leftist Dhimmi reflexive surrender mode!
Well, can you just skip name-calling and say clearly, what possible good angle can you find in Sunnies from Anbar (most of them former insurgents) that get support from US allying themselves with blatantly anti-American Al-Sadr? Besides the fact that this probably means that 1) the bloodbath after US leaves is not that inevitable, 2) Al-Qaeda is not likely to survive in Iraq in the long run? Both of them being things that Republicans refuse to admit.
Nik- who says we have to leave? In how many countries are we presently around the world? Yes, there. I said it. Just what your ilk have been trying to get the President to say but you know he can’t.
“Sometimes it seems [the news media] are less interested in legitimate news than they are in proving their knowledge and wisdom is superior to ours. The most frustrating thing is when I have the facts to prove them wrong but cannot reveal those facts without endangering security or wrecking some plan we’re engaged in.â€
~~ Ronald Reagan
Nikolay: are you Russian, based upon your name?
IF so, YOU of all people should know the generalizations you make, are ludicrous!
FACT: during the Soviet era in Russia, no more that 2% of the entire population, belonged to the Communist Party, yet for over 70 years, they cowed, intimdated, massacred, brutalized, murdered and otherwise kept 98% of the non-Communist population in Thrall!
How’s that?
My point: “in Sunnies from Anbar (most of them former insurgents)”
You have NO data, or evidence, to support your personal BIASED opinion, that most Sunni’s in Anbar were former insurgents, nor do you know IF the Sunnis who have joined with the Shi’ites are the SAME Sunnis that were insurgents!
NONE, NADA, ZILCH, ZIPPO: it’s a Supposition you make, without proof or evidence, to back up a conclusion you reached before you even know the FACTS!
Typical Anti-American Leftist!
Truth hurts by the way!
“blatantly anti-American Al-Sadr?
We know As -Sadr (it IS “As-Sadr” by the way; NOT “Al-Sadr”; it Arabic, the indefinite article “Al”, has it’s second letter, the “l”, changed and doubled to an “s”, when it precedes one of six letters in Arabic called the Sun & Moon Letters, because in Arabic, it makes it easier to Pronounce that contraction “As-Sadr” than “Al-Sadr”; hence “Al-Shadr” becomes “Ash Shadr”, “Al-Sadr” becomes “As-Sadr”; “Al-Tadr”, etc….see, I DO know a little about the subject matters on which I post, which is WAAAY more than Leftists like yourself can say!; even the Leftist MSM makes that same basic mistake, which makes them a laughingstock in the Arab world…)
anyway….We know As-Sadr is Anti-American, that’s obvious…
But the allies that the Sunnis were seeking, do NOT necessarily have to Sadr adherents, and certainly not ALL Shia’s, living in “Sadr City” are Sadrists; besides, he abandoned them, and fled to Iran, and his hold over them is tenuous at best, and slipping every day.
So AGAIN, you make an assumption, based upon no FACT, and of which you have NO expertise, nor knowledge, to judge!
Again, TYPICAL Leftist!
1) the bloodbath after US leaves is not that inevitable,
2) Al-Qaeda is not likely to survive in Iraq in the long run?
Both of them being things that Republicans refuse to admit.
WHAT?
WHAT DID YOU SAY?
ARE YOU SERIOUS?
That “Republicans” refuse to admit?
The ONLY reason they are NOT “likely”, is because of REPUBLICAN”S, and President Bush, STAYING the COURSE, refusing to curl up into the fetal position like you Pro-Jihadi/Anti-American Leftists, and SURRENDERING as soon as possible!
THAT’S the ONLY reason those things MAY NOT HAPPEN; and now you try and turn it around, and make it seem like it would be all fine and dandy, IF we SURRENDER, and “strategically redeploy” to Okinawa!
Are you KIDDING ME?
Nik- who says we have to leave?
Well, 90% of Iraqi politicians say so. Some say that you have to leave now, some eventually, but none of them want the Germany scenario. As far as I remember, there was a lot of talk about bringing democracy to Iraq.
You have NO data, or evidence, to support your personal BIASED opinion, that most Sunni’s in Anbar were former insurgents, nor do you know IF the Sunnis who have joined with the Shi’ites are the SAME Sunnis that were insurgents
That’s not opinion at all. If you just bothered to check background of the Anbar Awakening group mentioned there, it consists mostly of former insurgents. Anbar Awakening, the grouping of Anbari tribes and former insurgents. Do you think that Bill Roggio is leftist propagandist?
But the allies that the Sunnis were seeking, do NOT necessarily have to Sadr adherents, and certainly not ALL Shia’s, living in “Sadr City†are Sadrists
Here’s another story about the same meeting that makes it pretty clear that all the Shia’s in question are Sadrists, meaning followers of Al-Sadr. In case you didn’t notice, the other major Shia’s, SCIRI, are much worse than Sadrists — they want to divide the country and they are only loyal to Iran.
besides, he abandoned them, and fled to Iran, and his hold over them is tenuous at best, and slipping every day.
Wishful thinking is a great thing.
That “Republicans†refuse to admit?
The ONLY reason they are NOT “likelyâ€, is because of REPUBLICANâ€S, and President Bush, STAYING the COURSE, refusing to curl up into the fetal position like you Pro-Jihadi/Anti-American Leftists, and SURRENDERING as soon as possible!
All the Republicans say that getting out means that there will be a total genocide and that it will be a victory for Al-Qaeda. Both of those things seem to be untrue.
The ONLY reason they are NOT “likelyâ€, is because of REPUBLICANâ€S, and President Bush, STAYING the COURSE, refusing to curl up into the fetal position like you Pro-Jihadi/Anti-American Leftists, and SURRENDERING as soon as possible!
OK, there you are. Surrendering to whom? To Al-Qaeda? It’s not going to win anyway. To Iran? How does “staying the course”, i.e. supporting Al-Hakim SCIRI’s 100% pro-Iranian thugs help against Iran?
First you incorporate this, into a post that’s 99% of a reply to me, when I never said it, another poster did, giving the false impression that it’s my quote:
“who says we have to leave?”
“Well, 90% of Iraqi politicians say so. Some say that you have to leave now, some eventually, but none of them want the Germany scenario. As far as I remember, there was a lot of talk about bringing democracy to Iraq.”
Ah, so what, a bogus poll done, some time ago, says that 90% of Iraqi politicians, want us to leave …..EVENTUALLY!
So what?
How long is “eventually”? What’s your point? Is that one day, one year, one decade, or is open ended, when the “troubles” are over?
So what?
Besides, if you knew ANYTHING about Muslims and Islam, you’d know that just about 100% of them practice “Taqiyah” (I’ll let you do your own research, Iwon’t do if for you, I’ve studied Taqiyah for 17 years now, one of the first Islamists to know about it, study, it, and remark on it; so don’t try to debate me on this, you’ll LOSE!)
and they say mainly whatever they think it is you want them to hear, or they direct their comments towards some notional “Muslim” audience, even when they don’t believe what they are saying!
Being the rank amateur that you are, you’ll Google it, and come back with some “Wiki” article trying to tell me it’s a “Shia practice”, not Sunni, which will immedidately expose you for the less-than-novice you are.
Regardless, any idiot that actually believes a “Poll” of Muslims, anywhere in the world, is just plain delusional!
Secondly, I know who Bill Roggio is, and never said he was a Leftist; in fact, I know only know who he is, and have read his Blog for years, but I actully DO know, some of the people that he works with, and you complete misrepresent the article you link to!
You have said, and try to imply with Bill’s article, that ALL Sunnis or the majority of Sunnis from Anbar, joining the “awaking”, are former insurgents.
If you actually READ the article you link, it says nothing of the sort, it just says that “some” insurgents have joined the Al Anbar Awakening coaltion, and in fact, it also says this, about the leader of the “Awakening”:
“Sheikh Sattar is also described as both a nationalist and a friend of America. “In Sattar’s office, there are two flags – one is Iraqi, the other American.” Sattar, according to Col Koenig and other sources in the military and intelligence establishment, wants to build a nationalist, non secular party. ”
Wow, Nikolay, sounds like a REAL Anti-American Sunni Insurgent there, when that IS THE LEADER of the movement!
So, note, as I SAID, some of the Awakening may be, or are in fact, “former insurgents”; but that is NOT what you said/implied, in generalizeing and claiming that ALL Sunnis in Anbar, and the Sunni Awakeing movement, are “former Insurgents”!
Sorry, you lose again, but then FACTS are not a Leftist strongpoint!
Yes, the second article you link to, vis a vis the Sadrist, makes it More clear that the Shia attendees, were supposed to be All Sadrists, but I stand by my original contention, and statments, vis a vis your implications: i.e. all Shias/Sadrists are bad somehow, so this is no big deal!
First, You cannot prove, in anyway, as I said, that ALL Shias in Sadr City, ARE “Sadrists”, by the way.
The article that you link to, also says this:
“..while the Sadrists are hoping to shed the baggage of having ushered the Maliki government into power, as well as the sectarian reputation of the Mahdi Army. ”
Wow; please actually READ, and UNDERSTAND, the information that you link to, that is supposed to rebutt me, but actually supports my contentions, against yours!
You claim that all Sunnis in Anbar are “former Insurgents”; we now PROVE that it bogus; you claim that all Shias in Sadr City are “Sadrists”, and that is definitely bogus (I won’t even bring up the Al Akhbaris, who also live in Sadr City, and the “quietist” Usulis as well; both of whom you know nothing about, and which you will immediately Google, to try and pretend that you do…); but in addition, you post a link to a story that shows that the actual “Sadrists” who DID attend the meeting, are interested in shedding the “Sadrist” baggage/image!
Wow Nikolay; really sounds like a bunch of bad guys there, trying to make peace with their fellow Iraqis, and repudiate their former boss!
Yep, it’s gotta be bad, and they’re all bad, because they’re trying to make peace and as a result will make Bush look “good”; can’t have that, can we?
How typically juvenile BDS-afflicted Leftist of you!
Pathetic!!
“In case you didn’t notice, the other major Shia’s, SCIRI,….”
Again, you betray your ignorance, lack of knowledge of Islam, Shias and Iraq in general, without even mentioning the Usuli “quietists led by Ayatollah Sistani, the fact that you ignore him completely, shows you’re Googling your ass off, and don’t even comphrehend what you write; as well as the Akhbaris. Again, I have over 30 years in this arena, you are a Google’ert, at the maximum; but keep trying, it is amusing to watch you make an ass of yourself!
“Wishful thinking is a great thing.”
Ahhhh…..sigh…..again, with the typical Leftist bullshit…..SIGH….
Well, lets look at some FACTS:
a) Sadr fled to Iran, MONTHS AGO! If YOU have evidence to the contrary, please post it here, so I can notify the CENTCOM!
b) YOU just posted a LINK, for me, to read all about “SADRISTS”, meeting with “Sunnis”, to repudiate “Sadrist” baggage/image; and now, you’re acting like it’s NOT TRUE??
I get it, Leftist forked-tongue syndrome, or is that talking out of both your mouth and ass at the same time?
Something like that?
“All the Republicans say that getting out means that there will be a total genocide and that it will be a victory for Al-Qaeda. Both of those things seem to be untrue. ”
Ah…..SIGH……
Once again….S….L….O……W……..L……….YEEEEEEE
……just ……….for…….yooooooouuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu!
Yes, Republians did and do say such things, and it was, and IS true, and the Meeting, which you seem to discount and attempt to dismiss and mock, MAY be THE reason why it Doesn’t happen, and then you turn around, and try to use the very outcome of that exact same meeting, to repudiate an outcome that probably would’ve happened, WITHOUT the meeting…!
Are you KIDDING ME?
What type of twisted, Leftist, head-in-the-sand, hypocritcal, Taqiyah-influenced “logic” is that?
I’d love to see an X-ran of your brain; it would make Al Gore’s look like a straight and narrow line!
Nikolay; seriously now, do you ACTUALLY BELIEVE the Bullshit that you right?
How do you keep track of all the crap that comes out of your brain?
I’m serious, please tell me??
“OK, there you are. Surrendering to whom? To Al-Qaeda? It’s not going to win anyway….”
Nikolay; that’s the beauty of being an Anti-American/Pro-Jihadi Leftist like yourself….you don’t care WHO you surrender too; you just HAVE to surrender to someone; as long as it makes America look bad, and it goes against Bush!
That’s all that matters to you Lunar Chiroptera….
Nikolay: I’m giving you homework; read ALL of these, then go look in the mirror, contemplate for 5 seconds, realize that that IS YOU, then you can come back and post again!
Stockholm Syndrome
Taqiyah
Psychosis
Cognitive Dissonance
Displacement
Category Error
Jacobin
Reflexive Surrender Syndrome (that’s mine, not in the “Wiki”; but you can figure it out if you try…!) It’s doesn’t matter who you surrender to, you just HAVE to surrender to someone, anyone, hurry…..
Dale, as you know, the biggest people with the biggest ideas(George W. Bush) will be shot at by the smallest people with the smallest minds (you know who).
Ivehadit: I preformed a vivisection on Nikolay, after the above post, but AJ has it stuck in his queue because I think I used a “bad” word; I’m not rewriting it, so I’ll have to see if AJ let’s it post later!
I see Ken has a new name again. Nothing else new though.