Jul 14 2007
As al-Qaeda Loses Iraq, Congress Tries To Take Credit
What is all the noise about Congress calling for withdrawl from Iraq? With the surge doing quite well, it seems to be an attempt for the Surrendercrats and Naysayers to take credit for a possible success:
The US surge strategy is making ‘definitive progress’ in one of Iraq’s most fiercely contested provinces, and US troops there could be reduced as early as January, a US commander said today.
Major General Benjamin Mixon said the US forces in Diyala province — about six combat brigades — could be cut in half over a 12- to 18-month period beginning in January.
‘I think that over time in a very methodical and well thought out way — and I’m only speaking for MultiNational Division North — we could have a reduction of force that could begin in January 2008,’ Mixon said via videolink from Iraq.
The Congress gets reports on progress all the time, not just those big PR stunt ones where they put on a show for the press. So they know things are going pretty well. They also know they are looking really, really bad in the eyes of the American people:
Public satisfaction with the job lawmakers are doing has fallen 11 points since May, to 24 percent, according to an Associated Press-Ipsos poll. That’s lower than for President Bush, who hasn’t fared well lately, either.
I doubt running to the cameras to demand we declare failure in Iraq is going to help their image – but they believe it will. They believe they will get rewarded if they can make Iraq go away. So they put on the charade they are doing something (besides giving hope to our enemies and concern to our allies). Congress isn’t doing a damn thing, despite the media’s fiction they call ‘news’.
Just note how the stories all say the same thing that has been said for years – withdrawl depends on the conditions on the streets in Iraq. And the quick-fix crowd ain’t going to like the fact it takes a long time to withdrawl:
Pulling the U.S. military out of Iraq would be a massive undertaking and would have to be done slowly and deliberately, defense officials said Friday. One general said it would take up to 18 months to cut his troop levels in northern Iraq in half.
The length of the withdrawal would depend largely on the level of violence. It would be more difficult and take far longer if forces had to get out while intense fighting was going on.
Noting that it took a year to bring U.S. troops out of Kuwait in the early 1990s, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said that was under good conditions where there was a “permissive environment” and easy access to ports and airports to move troops and equipment.
“You’re talking about not just U.S. soldiers, but millions of tons of contractor equipment that belongs to the United States government, and a variety of other things,” Gates said. “This is a massive logistical undertaking whenever it takes place.”
There is no way Iraq will ‘be over’ before the Presidential elections. It may not be over by the time the next President gets sworn in. That is the reality despite what the SurrenderMedia implies or says.
To put this in civilian terms that most people can understand …
Imagine creating a city that includes all the kinds of things needed to make a city run including repair shops, food service, stores, construction companies, communications including radio and TV … then set up dozens of these cities. Now, move them all halfway around the world (without losing anything) while someone is shooting at you.
By clearing and holding the belt areas around Baghdad and doing the same for Baghdad itself you remove a lot of the car bomb source for 80% of the population.
Once you get the bad guys out, people are more likely to report new bad guys coming back in to mess up the neighborhood.
You can hold the area mostly with local army and police after the clearing is done.
Also you are still training new army and police as this goes along, so even if the surge passes and you start reducing our troops they are replaced on a 3 to 1 basis by locals you have trained during the surge.
Every place you hold takes less people to maintain than to clear freeing up local troops to then do other areas , rinse wash repeat.
When you get all of the country cleared or even before, commit troops when you can to doing border patrol duties to check the inflow of terrorists and weapons from the outside.
I contacted Lugar’s office and told him that I was disappointed in him. He and Warner have a bill up that would supposedly force the president to “recalibrate” the mission in Iraq. Most of his problems are with the Iraqi government and its slow political progress, but it is the president who will have to respond by October 16 with a new plan. Another new plan, one that is designed to leave the troops fighting while the Iraqi government swings in the wind.
How are the troops supposed to know the difference between AlQaida, who they can fight, and the militias who they are supposed to ignore?
The Senators say they are trying to avoid a call for an all out pull out, but it all reminds me of politicians trying to run the war in Vietnam. And we know how that turned out. Politicians+Media=we lose.
I also told him that the politicians over there have a good excuse for not getting anything done. So what is his excuse? These guys can not even come up with immigration reform. Entitlement reform. Drilling in ANWR. New refineries. And in spite of their low numbers no one is lobbing shells at them.
How long have we been in Bosnia tring to get their Govt. in place, AJ you do a wonderful job for us layman explaing the real facts that is occurring in Iraq and as one of those layman it is refreshing to see a movement in the right direction. I do enjoy history and know that nothing happens overnite keep the great work going for us readers.