‘Serious Success in Iraq Is Not Being Recognised’

Discussion in 'Middle East - General' started by red states rule, Nov 3, 2007.

  1. red states rule
    Offline

    red states rule Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    16,011
    Thanks Received:
    571
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +572
    The good news from Iraq is finally being published in a MSM newspaper - in London

    How long before the NY Times, Washington Post, and LA Times does the same?



    From The Times

    November 3, 2007

    The Petraeus Curve
    Serious success in Iraq is not being recognised as it should be

    Is no news good news or bad news? In Iraq, it seems good news is deemed no news. There has been striking success in the past few months in the attempt to improve security, defeat al-Qaeda sympathisers and create the political conditions in which a settlement between the Shia and the Sunni communities can be reached. This has not been an accident but the consequence of a strategy overseen by General David Petraeus in the past several months. While summarised by the single word “surge” his efforts have not just been about putting more troops on the ground but also employing them in a more sophisticated manner. This drive has effectively broken whatever alliances might have been struck in the past by terrorist factions and aggrieved Sunnis. Cities such as Fallujah, once notorious centres of slaughter, have been transformed in a remarkable time.

    Indeed, on every relevant measure, the shape of the Petraeus curve is profoundly encouraging. It is not only the number of coalition deaths and injuries that has fallen sharply (October was the best month for 18 months and the second-best in almost four years), but the number of fatalities among Iraqi civilians has also tumbled similarly. This process started outside Baghdad but now even the capital itself has a sense of being much less violent and more viable. As we report today, something akin to a normal nightlife is beginning to re-emerge in the city. As the pace of reconstruction quickens, the prospects for economic recovery will be enhanced yet further. With oil at record high prices, Iraq should be an extremely prosperous nation and in a position to start planning for its future with confidence.

    None of this means that all the past difficulties have become history. A weakened al-Qaeda will be tempted to attempt more spectacular attacks to inflict substantial loss of life in an effort to prove that it remains in business. Although the tally of car bombings and improvised explosive devices has fallen back sharply, it would only take one blast directed at an especially large crowd or a holy site of unusual reverence for the headlines about impending civil war to be allowed another outing. The Government headed by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has become more proactive since the summer, but must immediately take advantage of these favourable conditions. The supposed representatives of the Iraqi people in Baghdad need to show both responsibility and creativity if the country's potential is to be realised.

    The current achievements, and they are achievements, are being treated as almost an embarrassment in certain quarters. The entire context of the contest for the Democratic nomination for president has been based on the conclusion that Iraq is an absolute disaster and the first task of the next president is to extricate the United States at maximum speed. Democrats who voted for the war have either repudiated their past support completely (John Edwards) or engaged in a convoluted partial retraction (Hillary Clinton). Congressional Democrats have spent most of this year trying (and failing) to impose a timetable for an outright exit. In Britain, in a somewhat more subtle fashion admittedly, Gordon Brown assumed on becoming the Prime Minister that he should send signals to the voters that Iraq had been “Blair's War”, not one to which he or Britain were totally committed.

    All of these attitudes have become outdated. There are many valid complaints about the manner in which the Bush Administration and Donald Rumsfeld, in particular, managed Iraq after the 2003 military victory. But not to recognise that matters have improved vastly in the year since Mr Rumsfeld's resignation from the Pentagon was announced and General Petraeus was liberated would be ridiculous. Politicians on both sides of the Atlantic have to appreciate that Iraq is no longer, as they thought, an exercise in damage limitation but one of making the most of an opportunity. The instinct of too many people is that if Iraq is going badly we should get out because it is going badly and if it is getting better we should get out because it is getting better. This is a catastrophic miscalculation. Iraq is getting better. That is good, not bad, news.

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/leading_article/article2796318.ece
     
  2. doniston
    Offline

    doniston Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2007
    Messages:
    874
    Thanks Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +28
    first I have to see it, to recognize it. Thus far I haven't
     
  3. eots
    Offline

    eots no fly list

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2007
    Messages:
    28,995
    Thanks Received:
    2,034
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Location:
    IN TH HEARTS AND MINDS OF FREE MEN
    Ratings:
    +2,606
    uhhh ya.... I don't think so
     
  4. red states rule
    Offline

    red states rule Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    16,011
    Thanks Received:
    571
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +572
    Open your eyes

    The liberal media is reporting nothing from Iraq and even the Dems have fell silent on how the war is "lost"

    Of course, every so often a Dem opens his blowhole and tries to offer a lame excuse


    Terrorists are ‘running out of people to kill,’ says (Rep. David) Obey (DUhhhhh-WI Alert!)

    If violence is decreasing in Iraq, it may be because insurgents “are running out of people to kill,” House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey (D-Wis.) said Monday.

    “There are fewer targets of opportunity,” Obey said in a speech to the National Press Club.

    Obey was responding to a question about reports touted by Republicans that security is improving in Iraq and that President Bush’s “surge” strategy is working. He stressed that military success has not led to political reconciliation.

    “The issue has never been military,” Obey said. “The issue has always been political improvement.”

    As the House’s top appropriator, Obey has his hands on the nation’s purse strings, giving him a significant say on the war in Iraq.

    In his speech Monday, he stuck by his pledge not to approve any more money for the war until President Bush changes course on Iraq. He also offered a spirited defense of a new surtax to pay for the Iraq war, admitting that he knew it wouldn’t pass when he offered his support for the plan. But he said it highlighted the fact that Bush has loaded the cost of the war onto the national debt while pushing tax cuts tilted to the wealthy.

    The surtax plan, which is backed by Reps. John Murtha (D-Pa.) and James McGovern (D-Mass.), would raise $150 billion a year for the war.

    “That may not be a popular thing to do, but it’s a hell of a lot more responsible than sending the bill to your kids,” Obey said.

    Obey is the point man among House Democrats on the looming spending battle with Bush, which Obey called a “manufactured controversy” and an “unnecessary diversion.” President Bush has threatened to veto any bills that exceed his requested spending levels, which together are $22 billion less than what Democrats have proposed.

    He also accused President Bush, his allies and his aides of hypocrisy and an unwillingness to negotiate that is immature.

    He said that when Democrats were in the majority, they worked with Republicans “like adults” to get spending bills passed.

    “I believed that the way politics is supposed to work is that we are supposed to first define our differences and then work like adults to find ways to resolve them,” Obey said.

    But this year, he said, Republicans have engaged in “filibuster by amendment,” trying to delay the process and then complaining when Democrats maneuvered to get bills passed by combining them.

    “I find it interesting that [Bush] now raises objections, because we are doing what his party did for so long,” Obey said.

    Obey and his fellow Democrats combined the bill for labor, education and social spending — which is disliked by Bush — with the military construction spending bill, which includes the budget for veterans’ affairs and is popular with Bush. But Republicans have said the maneuver could stall veterans’ funding.

    “That claim is enough to give hypocrisy a bad name,” Obey said, noting that last year, Republicans failed to pass any stand-alone domestic spending bills, including for military construction.

    White House budget office spokesman Sean Kevelighan said the difference is that previous GOP Congresses abided by President Bush’s “top-line” overall spending cap.

    “We’re in a different environment in this Congress,” Kevelighan said. “Unfortunately, what we’re finding with this Congress is that the reaction to everything is to raise taxes or spending more taxpayer dollars.”

    “With time running out this year and not a single bill complete, Democratic leaders may want to start focusing on the work that must be done now instead of blaming everyone but themselves for their pork-filled, shoddy work,” said Brian Kennedy, spokesman for House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio).


    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1921448/posts
     
  5. eots
    Offline

    eots no fly list

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2007
    Messages:
    28,995
    Thanks Received:
    2,034
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Location:
    IN TH HEARTS AND MINDS OF FREE MEN
    Ratings:
    +2,606
    its a dead horse give it up !...we are there based on lies . foreign invaders for corporate interest and everyone knows it and is sick of it
     
  6. red states rule
    Offline

    red states rule Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    16,011
    Thanks Received:
    571
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +572
    Here is a top Dem in the House - will the knives come out against him?

    I understand how you fell. With the US military winning - it makes the Dems attempt to surrender much harder to pass


    Hoyer Credits Surge for 'Decrease in Violence' in Iraq
    By Fred Lucas and Kevin Mooney
    CNSNews.com Staff Writers
    November 07, 2007

    On the Spot (CNSNews.com) - House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) said on Tuesday that the troop surge, which began in June, has had a significant impact on the situation in Iraq and noted that he had always been critical of the Bush administration for deploying an insufficient number of troops in previous years.

    "Stability and a decrease in violence, they've done that - God bless them. I'm not surprised that they did," Hoyer told Cybercast News Service in response to a question about steadily declining U.S. casualty rates in Iraq. (Hear Audio)

    Though the decline in causalities is "a very positive sign" - U.S. casualties have been declining every month since June - Hoyer said political reconciliation remains an elusive goal. Hoyer added that the Bush administration should have given more consideration to the Baker-Hamilton report released last year.

    "I am not surprised, therefore, that when we send 20,000 additional troops and put them in an area of consequence that those 20,000 troops from the best army in the world, the best trained, best equipped army in the world brings a very heightened security," he said.

    Despite the steady decline of combat deaths over the last five months in Iraq, only one number mattered to Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.).

    "I heard that we had the highest number of casualties this year of any year," Leahy told Cybercast News Service. "Make sure you get your numbers right, and I'll be happy to answer your questions." (Hear Audio)

    On Tuesday, the Defense Department announced that five more U.S. troops were killed in Iraq, bringing the total to 853 troops this year, the most troops killed during any one year of the war so far.

    However, the spike in deaths that came at the start of the year mostly occurred before the surge of 30,000 troops. Other members of Congress from both parties recognized the declining rates of combat deaths, reaching the lowest figure since spring 2006.

    Cybercast News Service previously reported on both a drop in casualties and a decline in the number of improvised explosives device fatalities.

    Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) credited the new strategy by Gen. David Petraeus for the decline in combat deaths over recent months, adding that Petraeus wrote the manual for dealing with insurgencies. (Hear Audio)

    The strategy, Sessions said, "placed our military far more at the ground level and working far more with local Iraqi leaders, and as a result confidence and partnerships developed and they more readily saw Americans as allies in creating a good Iraq."

    Sessions believes the next step - the political solution - will likely have to come from the bottom up.

    "Things function much better at the city and local areas than they do from Baghdad," Sessions said. "It's too much to hope, really, that this new government from Baghdad will be able to conduct sophisticated operations from every province, town, and village in the country."

    Sen. Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii) said he plans to find out the cause of the decline in casualties when he goes to Iraq later this month. (Hear Audio)

    "I really don't know," Inouye said regarding why the decline in casualties has occurred. "Maybe it's good fortune. Maybe we're doing the right thing. I hope so. Whenever some life is saved, it's positive."

    Former Rep. J.C. Watts (R-Okla.) told Cybercast News Service that the war is sure to have a political impact in 2008. Although "a lot of work" remains to be done, he sees a "ray of hope" that was not apparent before that could begin to "seep into" the public consciousness. (Hear Audio)

    "The better the numbers get, it encourages people to focus on the objective: and that's to win and leave Iraq in the right way," Watts said. "The more stable the war is the more progress you can make on the political front."

    http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=/Politics/archive/200711/POL20071107a.html
     
  7. eots
    Offline

    eots no fly list

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2007
    Messages:
    28,995
    Thanks Received:
    2,034
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Location:
    IN TH HEARTS AND MINDS OF FREE MEN
    Ratings:
    +2,606
    wow ! a perceived ray of hope well that's enough to excuse the lies, the death ,the billions of dollars

    KUCINICH: Takes House Floor, Moves for Cheney Impeachment - the ...KUCINICH: Takes House Floor, Moves for Cheney Impeachment - the whole shebang! ... Posted on YouTube: November 06, 2007 By YouTube Member: CapNewsNet ...
    http://www.democraticunderground.com...ress=385x67682 - 18 hours ago
     
  8. red states rule
    Offline

    red states rule Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    16,011
    Thanks Received:
    571
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +572
    Yes, libs are pissed the US military is winning in Iraq. It must be depressing not reading about US troop deaths, car bombs, and civilians being slaughtered

    The left have invested their political future in the US losing in Iraq, and now the US military screws those plans up by WINNING the war
     
  9. eots
    Offline

    eots no fly list

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2007
    Messages:
    28,995
    Thanks Received:
    2,034
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Location:
    IN TH HEARTS AND MINDS OF FREE MEN
    Ratings:
    +2,606

    Published: November 7, 2007

    BAGHDAD, Nov. 6 — Six American soldiers were killed in three separate attacks in Iraq on Monday, the military said Tuesday, taking the number of deaths this year to 852. The toll makes 2007 the deadliest year of the war for United States troops.
     
  10. red states rule
    Offline

    red states rule Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    16,011
    Thanks Received:
    571
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +572
    You must have missed (or ignored this) from the article

    It is not only the number of coalition deaths and injuries that has fallen sharply (October was the best month for 18 months and the second-best in almost four years), but the number of fatalities among Iraqi civilians has also tumbled similarly. This process started outside Baghdad but now even the capital itself has a sense of being much less violent and more viable. As we report today, something akin to a normal nightlife is beginning to re-emerge in the city. As the pace of reconstruction quickens, the prospects for economic recovery will be enhanced yet further. With oil at record high prices, Iraq should be an extremely prosperous nation and in a position to start planning for its future with confidence.
     

Share This Page