troung

Reinforcement of Bagdad

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Three Iraqi army brigades from the Kurdish north and the Shi'ite south will be brought in for a security crackdown in Baghdad seen as central to hopes of averting civil war, a senior Iraqi official said on Sunday.
Sami al-Askari, an adviser to Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, said the extra troops were part of the plan which foresees Iraqi forces taking responsibility for inner Baghdad while U.S.-led multinational forces will be in charge of the surrounding areas. Maliki announced the plan on Saturday, vowing to crush illegal armed groups "regardless of sect or politics" -- suggesting he may be ready to tackle militias loyal to his fellow Shi'ites, a key demand of Washington and the once dominant Sunni Arab minority.
The announcement comes as President Bush conducts a reshuffle of commanders and diplomats in Iraq and prepares to unveil a new strategy next week that officials say may include a proposal to add 20,000 U.S. troops in Baghdad.


Iraqi brigades number around 1,200 soldiers.
Askari said two from the north, mainly Kurdish soldiers, and one from the Shi'ite south would come to Baghdad to take part in the operation which aims to clear areas that are "bases for terrorist groups" and to station troops there permanently to hold them in the long term. When U.S. forces launched a major operation in Baghdad in the summer, their efforts were hampered as they were not able to hold areas that had been cleared. Some Iraqi army units have refused in the past to be deployed to combat zones, and sectarian loyalties have proved hard to overcome.

Askari said he was confident the additional three brigades would be in place soon, and said the government was also determined to crack down on infiltration by militias in the armed forces.
"There's a plan alongside this security plan to try to clear the ministry of interior and defense ministry of these elements," he said. "It takes time because it's not an easy task.... (but) without it the people will not trust the security forces."
Home to more than one Iraqi in four and with a rich mix of communities, Baghdad has seen heavy bloodshed. CRACKDOWN ON MILITIAS
Senior Shi'ite politicians told Reuters last month that U.S. and Iraqi forces planned a limited offensive against the Mehdi Army militia of Shi'ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, blamed by U.S. commanders and many Sunnis for much of the violence.


Sadr, whose supporters played a key role in Maliki's appointment as a compromise prime minister in April, denies any such involvement. Maliki has repeatedly rejected criticism that he has not confronted the Mehdi Army before now, saying the Shi'ite armed groups can be tamed through political dialogue.
A U.S. television report said Defense Secretary Robert Gates had recommended a buildup of 10,000 U.S. troops in Iraq, with an option of doubling that to 20,000 by spring. The Pentagon and the White House declined to comment on the report. U.S. envoy Zalmay Khalilzad and General George Casey, both of whom are to be replaced, said in a joint statement that U.S. forces were ready to help implement the plan for Baghdad "as determined by Iraqi and coalition field commanders".

Bush's Democratic opponents, who took control of Congress last week, question the need to increase troop numbers. More than 3,000 Americans have died in Iraq since the 2003 invasion and many voters favor a rapid withdrawal as U.S. forces find themselves increasingly caught in the sectarian crossfire.
The U.S. military urged Maliki last week to reach out to the disaffected Sunni minority after the sectarian tension generated by his decision to rush through the execution of Saddam Hussein and by an Internet video showing pro-Sadr officials taunting Saddam on the gallows.
U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Saturday urged a stay of executions in Iraq. Ban's chief of staff, Vijay Nambiar, wrote to the Iraqi authorities urging "restraint by the government of Iraq in the execution of death sentences imposed by the Iraqi High Tribunal."
Askari and a senior source in the prosecution, which by law must have a representative at the hanging, said on Sunday no date had been set for the hanging of Saddam's half-brother Barzan al-Tikriti and a former judge.

__________________
To sit down with these men and deal with them as the representatives of an enlightened and civilized people is to deride ones own dignity and to invite the disaster of their treachery - General Matthew Ridgway

Ray

Unless the Iraqis learn to govern and stop sectarians killings, no amount of troops will help!

Barbarians or, more aptly, people with barbaric inclinations, cannot be civilised!

__________________


"Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.

HAKUNA MATATA

S-2

Guessing that the constitution of these brigades are nominally peshmerga and shia militias, or is that a reach?, it might seem that Talabani's visit to Iran confirms my thoughts that the Kurds have cut a deal of sorts with Teheran to endorse the Shia majority government, even if it leads to a pogrom of sunnis.

Heaven knows that both the Kurds and Shias can make a case, if not achieve universal endorsement, but it's just another example of the lines hardening into a sectarian war that's becoming increasingly overt.

"...part of the plan which foresees Iraqi forces taking responsibility for inner Baghdad while U.S.-led multinational forces will be in charge of the surrounding areas. Maliki announced the plan on Saturday, vowing to crush illegal armed groups "regardless of sect or politics" -- suggesting he may be ready to tackle militias loyal to his fellow Shi'ites, a key demand of Washington and the once dominant Sunni Arab minority."

If I read this correctly, the intention is to denude Baghdad of U.S. combat forces to the "surrounding areas". Meanwhile, Kurdish and Shia forces of the "Iraqi Army" will take control of metropolitan Baghdad and proceed to "crush armed groups 'regardless of sect or politics'".

What if they don't, and instead only target sunni communities? Wouldn't their presence lead to providing cover for the al-Mahdi army? Wouldn't we have to re-occupy Baghdad over the Iraqi Army to then get at Sadr? BTW, at that point, why bother?

smilingassassin

On this I can agree 100%, sectarian violence is the real killer in Iraq right now and the sectarian nature reared its ugly head in Saddams execution as well.

Bluesman

I want to win this dam' war. I believe Peters is correct: get behind the effort, and back it until we win, or until it's clear that Iraqis would rather kill each other than save their country.

This is IT. We'll know in another few months whether we won or lost.

__________________
"The quickest way of ending a war is to lose it, and if one finds the prospect of a long war intolerable, it is natural to disbelieve in the possibility of victory."
- George Orwell

S-2

Not for the first time. I mentioned earlier how confident I was that the Kurds had reached an accomodation with the Persians. Not according to this from the JPOST-

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satelli...cle%2FShowFull

"Iraqi officials said Thursday that multinational forces detained five Iranians in an overnight raid on Teheran's diplomatic mission in the northern city of Irbil."

Five detained. Hmmm...time to windex the crystal ball.

bittercreek

the president said everything he needed to last night to by some more time, but I don't think its gonna work. His plan is really more of the same, maybe said a little better. All were gonna have is more body bags coming home. Very sad.
The problem in Iraq is that if the people won't compromise and work out their own problems THERES NOTHING WE CAN DO. How can we expect that the Iraqis are gonna stand up for a vision that they don't share. In America you'd have people standing up and fighting for a democracy and free society, not radicalism and tribal loyalty. We'd fight we'd win, and so would many other peoples who love and cherish freedom, but not the Iraqis. They've demonstrated that they wont do it, they won't fight for our vision fo what we think they're country should look like. They're loyal to their own people, and thats about it. You also got some religious extremists in there.
Solution, is to create a military coup in which a Shia led government takes control of the country. We say "your welcome Iran" and leave. Maybe leave a base in the North to protect the Kurds, thats about it. We can't give the country back to the baathists and Al Quada is Sunni led. Up to know its been the Sunnis who have been doin most of the killing, including the miserable IED attacks. Someones feedin and housing these murderers. And then they scratch their heads as to why the Shiia are forming militias, duh. Its time to unleash the dogs, and use the Shiia death squads to break some heads and hunt down these murderers. Time for a military coup

Bluesman

The real problem is just this simple:

We need to win faster then we're doing right now.

We ARE winning, but we'll lose at this pace. The American people won't support the effort for as long as it takes. That's becoming clearer every passing day.

If we stayed the course, we'd win. But we won't. SO, as far as I'm concerned we could stay the course and have a perfectly satisfactory outcome. But the American people aren't willing to do that: they want a decision, NOW, and they'll take a loss if that's all that's possible NOW.

What a shame. Osama is right about us in a certain sense. We're simply not as determined nor as far-sighted as he is. We could end up beating ourselves, as we've done so tragically so many times before.

The difference is, victory was optional then, a 'nice-to-have-but-not-necessary'. Well, it's different now.

Is a handful of Iraqis with a bunch of asshat foreign fighters capable of driving the US Army out of Iraq? Not without LOTS of American help, they're not. Is a bunch of drug-addled thugs capable of frustrating American policy in Somalia? Not without a lot of sob-sister politicos in Washington backing them up, they're not. Is the total combined strength of all jihadis everywhere in the world equivalent to American throw-weight and firepower? Not even close, until you factor in the myriad restraints, pulled punches and sellf-emasculations we've managed to bind ourselves with.

We don't fight hard enough, smart enough nor ruthless enough to wrap this thang up in the time given to us by an immature and ignorant population, and it all comes down to willpower.

Get ready for a new Dark Age if we can't get it together. And as I've said all along: Iraq will be decisive. Our enemies know this, and that's why they're so determined. We can't afford to let this one slide, and hope for the best the next time we engage. We've got lots of chips on the table an a strong hand. But the heart that backs it up is where the decision rests, and I think we're getting the shakes.

Terminator

brother, i agree.
From the moves to deploy more troops, it shows that Bush is getting tired of the war too. Its the fact that lives were lost. Theorically speaking, the more eq & manpower You have, the more security post You are able to withold. Althrough tis is a move that might end the Bush's career, but definitely, if You gg to pull out more men, with decreasing amount patrolling the street, whose going to cover ya back? Altro I'm not an American & might invite flames for saying this, but i respect Mr Bush for going against the wave. He might lost his own personal battle, but he had won the heart of many American soldiers in Iraq.

Being a soldier, I vow before my National Flag to lay my live down for My Nation. To leave with disgrace or to die for your country in pride - You decide.

astralis

bluesman,

i question this. we- and of course the iraqis- have made enough political blunders as to ensure that the insurgency is sustainable over some period of time. and this is just the insurgency we're talking about- we're not even looking at the sectarian issues. a good portion of the iraqi government is NOT on our side, it is on a "shi'ite" side. until we solve this problem, in our steps to enable the government, we also enable those within the government whom have absolutely no love for america. we need new ideas, and we need to consider them, whether it is bush's surge or others.

osama bin ladin is hiding in a cave, either in pakistan or afghanistan. fat lot of good determination and being "far-sighted" did HIM, when his group has been decimated as an organization. he has not achieved a SINGLE ONE of his goals, and has gone considerably backwards since 9/11. far from uniting the dar-al-islam, he has gone considerable lengths in splitting it, what with his association with the likes of zarqawi, whom hated the shi'a more than he hated the americans.

the "immature and ignorant population" is not directly responsible for the actions of either the military or the political leaders. going in with too few troops wasn't the fault of the populace; the PR disaster of abu ghraib wasn't caused by the american people; the decision to disband the iraqi army wasn't done by vote; rushing elections wasn't demanded by the american populace; not finishing off muqtada al-sadr wasn't forced by polls of americans.

we have been in iraq about as long as we were in WWII; and factoring in afghanistan, a good deal longer. and this is supposed to be a sign of no willpower?

the american people can tolerate casualties and show patience when it is clear that the investment is going somewhere. when we are told that we cannot militarily defeat this insurgency, and must depend on political solutions - then we better damn well find a good political solution. because propping up a government that at best demonstrates little seriousness about fixing its own problems- and at worse willingly pushes it along- that's not it. we're not gonna win that way, and the american people sure as hell don't want to throw good after the bad. something's gotta change.

__________________
Never let the future disturb you. You will meet it, if you have to, with the same weapons of reason which today arm you against the present.

-Marcus Aurelius, Meditations

bittercreek

Theres a whole psychology involved in a democratic country fighting a war. If the enemy knows that the populace doesn't have the resolve to stick it out and take casualties, then they will be all the more determined. If they know were staying no matter what then they are discouraged. It would be better that the country would outwardly support the war and debate these things in secret, but thats not realistic. Theres been so many blunders in this war that its sickening, even the initial reason for going in was based on bad information. We need to make the best of it, and I just don't see that the Iraqi people on the whole are bound by the common vision and goals and sense of nationalism that its gonna take to forge this unity government. We need law and order imposed, and to make sure that Iraq will not become a terrorist state. Even another Iran is better than a sunni terrorist state. If Israel and Saudi's dont like it tough. How many troops have they committed, and how have they helped us. It seems to be the best choice at this point.

leib10

The American public and some members of Congress lack the resolve necessary to see this thing out til the end. Since we can't be truly beaten in the field, we will be defeated at home.

Whether the troop increase will make a substantial difference remains to be seen.

__________________
"The right man in the wrong place can make all the difference in the world. So wake up, Mr. Freeman. Wake up and smell the ashes." G-Man

Ray

One wonders how one can win faster than what is being done right now. 20,000 more troops are being inducted. But that would not mean things will get any faster. It might however make things a little more secure for theUS troops.

It is a fact that President Bush himself has indicated that the US is NOT winning! He had earlier psyched the nation to believe that the US was winning and many believed him so. However, neither he nor the majority of the US public hold that delusion. Notwithstanding, the war is not lost.


President Bush has mentioned repeatedly that one must stay the course. However, what constitutes 'staying the course'. Whatever that one sees of 'the course' is mere confusion and body bags with the Iraqi Shia Govt running a riot and totally shrouded with the mist of incompetence!

If indeed 'staying the course' could give results, then Saddam's Baathist soldiers would not be re-recruited in the Army, when they had been discredited and disbanded at the onset of the coming of the civil govt!

It is not that the US govt was not determined when invading Iraq. They were. But they were also short sighted and taken in by the false promises and views of the Iraqi exiles like Chalabis (if that is the right name)! The US govt failed to realise the psychology of the Arabs and more so the fanatical content of Islam! The result was this quagmire called Iraq! Military action can only set up an environment, but it cannot replace governance!

I am sure that those soldiers in Iraq are as determined as any soldier anywhere. But what can soldiers do if the govt appears hapless and confused and only concerned with the cosmetics of 'winning a war' and 'staying on course' like the recent order of adding 20,000 troops! As if a miracle shall take place!

It is the Iraqis who are not bothered about at end to this mess up. They want it go get worse. The Shias have, for the first time in history, got ascendancy and they are not ready for any compromise and damn all including Freedom and Democracy. I have always been sorry for the Shias since they are the underdogs of Islam, but what they are doing in Iraq and Iran does not warm the cockles of the heart!

I would be very surprised if any American would be supporting the terrorists in Iraq. Therefore, to shift the blame on those who want their troop levels drop is again a ploy to find excuse for the crass failure of the US administration in applying themselves when they sought to invade, total bereft of vision in disbanding a working govt and army and then meandering rudderless, hoping for the favourable wind to blow! Firepower and manpower is not everything. This mess in Iraq has proved so without any doubt!

And anyway, though the US brought the 'winning the hearts and mind' as a concept in war fighting, they seem to have forgotten the the mechanics how to achieve the same.

Iraq will be the keystone to US prestige and power. Of that, there is no doubt. It is time to set egos aside and instead apply the mind at all levels, right from the trooper to the President.

Ray

Comments of a retd Lt Gen US Army.

An interesting viewpoint.

A very challenging and calculated gamble!

Any takers?

Ray

Another interesting viewpoint.

Helpless impotence!