Iraq's Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki meets with an Iraqi army officer in Baqouba, 60 kilometers (35 miles) northeast of Baghdad, Iraq, Thursday, July 26, 2007. Prime Minister al-Maliki was in Baqouba to meet with local leaders about improving the quality of life for local residents following military operations to drive out Sunni extremists. (AP Photo/Talal Mohammed)
Heat rises between Iraq PM and Petraeus (click here for Boston Globe article)
The title of this editorial is "A War We Just Might Win" (click link at title) when it should state "A War We Have Already Lost." The editorial is rhetorical. It is to 'save face' for the military. I wish the propaganda that affects the lives of Iraqis would just stop. This editorial claims no real progress EXCEPT the organized surrender by Petraeus. It is covert in it's reailty.
After a lengthy touting of accomplishmenst the editorial FINALLY states this:
...In the end, the situation in Iraq remains grave. In particular, we still face huge hurdles on the political front. Iraqi politicians of all stripes continue to dawdle and maneuver for position against one another when major steps towards reconciliation — or at least accommodation — are needed. This cannot continue indefinitely....
Every expert on Earth states the answer to the violence in Iraq is what? What does everyone state is the answer to end the violence in Iraq? A POLITICAL SOLUTION !! In the same paragraph the authors, whom claim to be experts states this:
...Otherwise, once we begin to downsize, important communities may not feel committed to the status quo, and Iraqi security forces may splinter along ethnic and religious lines....
The division of Iraq into sectarian (ethnic and religious) lines has already been establish. What this statement tells me is that there is a 'waiting game' going on with Iraqis. Although they don't want the violence, they also don't want the 'status quo.' At first light, these folks will divide into enclaves of sectarian interests and remain there, while defending their homes. The ONLY reason that is not happening now is because of the precense of USA military. The tensions that exist in areas such as this results in attacks on USA troops and the recruitment of 'strong men' such as al Qaeda. Literally, what has happened is that the occupation forces of the USA are just occupying one sector of Iraq now. The longevity of such 'successes' is dependant on whether or not the USA occupies that sector forever.
I want to point to something else as well. There is 'attrition' of the population that exists in Iraq today. At the onset of the invasion Iraq was a country of 25 million people. That is down by at least 3 million due to the absence of refugees and the dead from the violence and war in Iraq. When statements such as this below are made it is with complete abandon in realizing 'statistically' the violence has decreased in the face of a changing demographic that is adverse to the best outcome for Iraqis. A country diminished in it's populous by 3 million people is a form of genocide.
...As a result, civilian fatality rates are down roughly a third since the surge began — though they remain very high, underscoring how much more still needs to be done....
What is even more troubling is the fact these authors see 'more that needs to be done' without realizing what that 'more' actually entails. Reducing the number of fighters in any war is definately a way to victory. A decrease of over 10 percent of the Iraqi population since the beginnings of the war is what is realized here, NOT the success of Bush's Surge. More of the same is simply murder and alienation of the citizens of Iraq. The USA is a blight to that country and why a political resolve is impossible with the presence of the USA. The people of Iraq simply want to be left alone and are in a waiting game for the exit of these troops.
This is what the authors and the USA military is touting as 'success.'
...In Baghdad’s Ghazaliya neighborhood, which has seen some of the worst sectarian combat, we walked a street slowly coming back to life with stores and shoppers. The Sunni residents were unhappy with the nearby police checkpoint, where Shiite officers reportedly abused them, but they seemed genuinely happy with the American soldiers and a mostly Kurdish Iraqi Army company patrolling the street. The local Sunni militia even had agreed to confine itself to its compound once the Americans and Iraqi units arrived....
The USA military is a 'coersion force' to the demands of returning a sovereign state called Iraq to the political leaders 'hold up' in The Green Zone. "The local Sunni militia." "The local Sunni militia." Ah, ha. In other words, the people of the Ghazaliya neighborhood will 'stand down' when the USA arrives because there local militia which normally protects them can't defeat an armed American unit. But, will the people of Ghazaliya neighborhood FOREVER relinquish their 'own' Sunni militia? Heck, no. They are involved in a civil war of control. In this case the author states the people of Ghazaliya neighborhood are afraid of the IRAQI POLICE. Hello? These folks don't trust the USA military either. They reserve the right to house their own militia until the point where something goes "W"rong again and the militia needs to 'take up the fight again.'
What will go "W"rong? Let's see.
Literally, in this video, the USA military create their own war. There was absolutely no threat to the men of this unit, however, in their 'urban surge strategy' the unit goes into full aggression 'at the thought' of dying. They create their own emergency when they assassinate a taxi driver because he didn't understand he had to stop for inspection by the troops. Living on 'the street' in Iraq doesn't come with instructions although 'the police tactics' of this unit believes it does.
Video: Inside the surge, part one (click here)
The Guardian's award-winning photographer and filmmaker Sean Smith spent two months embedded with US troops in Baghdad and Anbar province. His harrowing documentary exposes the exhaustion and disillusionment of the soldiers.
These soldiers not only 'take control' of their immediate area to prevent any of their deaths, they bring about a scenario which was never a threat in the first place. They traumatize an old woman not just once but many times 'in the face' of a reality that they haven't been assaulted by anyone. All that happened in the scenario with the taxi cab driver was that he didn't stop. He was circling the neighborhood looking for business.
The USA military is simply seeking the people whom are long gone after planting a road side bomb like 'chickens with their heads cut off.' Sorry for the graphic example. But they have no 'intelligence' of the area. It is completely obvious, their boss isn't in charge of any strategy, the leaders of the USA units simply 'react' to the conditions before them without direction, 'rest' or a sincere strategy. They see themselves dead day in and day out and they react to any 'preceived' threat 'real' or 'unreal.' And people don't want to hear this but this is simply the 'fly by the seat of your pants' strategy that existed in Vietnam when the USA occupied that country with the help of Bell Helicopter.
What will bring about the deaths of any American entrenched and trapped in the Iraq Civil War is when a local resident takes food to the local militia and reports 'the goings on' of the death of the local taxi driver and the traumaticed old woman. The local militia will then seek to 'move' the American troops from the area, and rightfully so, they are out of control and in an aggressive stance because someone and more than likely from the local militia planted a successful road side bomb. The local militia will continue to have the loyalty of the locals and will continue to be that neighborhoods protectors. The USA cannot offer these Iraqi neighborhoods any option other than occupation and that occupation comes with adverse outcomes to the people on a daily basis.
This is hideous. It's genocidal and it has successfully killed 3648 American troops to date and over 15 thousand maimed and permanently disabled.
The Surge is an abject failure. It has no strategy except to send out on patrol in Sunni areas units that have orders to 'survive the day' in whatever that means.
Additionally, Patraeus sees fit to arm the local militias in order to carry out attacks against al Qaeda in Iraq. Al Qaeda in Iraq is the 'reinforcements' to the militias when they don't have enough fire power to defeat the occupying Americans or opposing ethnicities. When these militias are armed to turn against a force they invited into their own territory it isn't with loyalty to anyone except their own empowerment leading to 'warlord' status based in religious preference to their neighborhood. This is a civil war and Patraeus is fueling it. There will be no end in sight for the Iraqis so long as 'this gaming' of an accepted insurgency continues.
One question. When the USA military arms militias to DEFEAT al Qaeda do they accept the weapons back after the defeat of al Qaeda because if they don't then I guess al Qaeda isn't defeated and will be returning. So, therefore, in 'the light' of having overwhelming numbers of USA ground troops, the local militias will do just fine.
The USA military needs to come home. There is no support for their mission in the populous of the USA and these 'type' of editorials amount to nothing but Bush propaganda 'designed' to lend support to the elections of 2008.
