How's the troop surge going...

[John21]

On the off chance that some of you might actually want to know what's going on over there, here's the latest video briefing from Commanding General Multinational Division, Baghdad and 1st Cavalry Division Maj. Gen. Joseph Fil Jr. video transcript

You're really not going to have any idea what's really going on over there unless you go outside of CNN or Fox. There's been all this debate going on over whether the surge will work or not, and what happens when Operation Law and Order kicks off…I don't know, the major news agencies don't tell us. They'll give a brief description of the operation, and like CNN reported saying coalition forces had some success and then show the aftermath of a carbomb explosion, before moving on to the more pressing concerns over what's going to happen with Anna Nicole.

What they don't mention is that the insurgent's conducted 20 attacks, and they were all ineffective or defeated with no coalition causalities. Or that U.S. forces completed all 10 of their mission objectives for the day, and they're clearing areas so quickly that the bottleneck is in getting the support troops in for the control part of the plan. Or that of the four Iraqi battalions that are showing up, they're far better trained and led than was expected.

Yeah I know watching those half-hour briefings suck, but at least you end up being able to form your own opinions from a second-hand account rather than just swallowing a fifth-hand analysis. Who knows - this just might work. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[whiskeytown]

[ QUOTE ]
On the off chance that some of you might actually want to know what's going on over there, here's the latest video briefing from Commanding General Multinational Division, Baghdad and 1st Cavalry Division Maj. Gen. Joseph Fil Jr. video transcript

You're really not going to have any idea what's really going on over there unless you go outside of CNN or Fox. There's been all this debate going on over whether the surge will work or not, and what happens when Operation Law and Order kicks off…I don't know, the major news agencies don't tell us. They'll give a brief description of the operation, and like CNN reported saying coalition forces had some success and then show the aftermath of a carbomb explosion, before moving on to the more pressing concerns over what's going to happen with Anna Nicole.

What they don't mention is that the insurgent's conducted 20 attacks, and they were all ineffective or defeated with no coalition causalities. Or that U.S. forces completed all 10 of their mission objectives for the day, and they're clearing areas so quickly that the bottleneck is in getting the support troops in for the control part of the plan. Or that of the four Iraqi battalions that are showing up, they're far better trained and led than was expected.

Yeah I know watching those half-hour briefings suck, but at least you end up being able to form your own opinions from a second-hand account rather than just swallowing a fifth-hand analysis. Who knows - this just might work.

[/ QUOTE ]

www.iraqslogger.com is the BEST source I've found for outside news - gives you the daily headlines in both Iraq and the US - they've scooped most of the MSM outlets on a daily basis -

even the Iranian news website has some good info - I knew from them the border between Iran and Iraq was going to be closed 4 days before the Americans announced it - (Iranians were warning pilgrams about border issues coming up)

no doubt part of the reason for our success in recent days is the virtual evacuation of the Mahdi army, that seems to have just faded into thin air a couple weeks after the surge was announced. Most of the killings lately, esp. the helicopters shot down are believed to have been hit by Sunni militants - but the Shia seems to have successfully executed a tactical repositioning - because we're not getting them killed and we can't find them -

rb

[John21]

[ QUOTE ]
no doubt part of the reason for our success in recent days is the virtual evacuation of the Mahdi army, that seems to have just faded into thin air a couple weeks after the surge was announced.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's pretty obvious that the insurgents are backing off a little right now. We'll see how it will play out, but I think it is a huge tactical mistake on their part. It's a whole lot easier to hold a hill than to retake it.

[whiskeytown]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
no doubt part of the reason for our success in recent days is the virtual evacuation of the Mahdi army, that seems to have just faded into thin air a couple weeks after the surge was announced.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's pretty obvious that the insurgents are backing off a little right now. We'll see how it will play out, but I think it is a huge tactical mistake on their part. It's a whole lot easier to hold a hill than to retake it.

[/ QUOTE ]

This isn't the same tactical situation - the Insurgents aren't using conventional military tactics like taking a hill and holding it -

and reoccupying/hiding in a city with a military force that looks like the civilian population is a lot easier then retaking a hill - I think it'll be just like before - they'll just wait till the Americans are gone and resume as before once those forces have pulled out - unless we plan on occupying Iraq indefinately, which it seems this Administration's plan is until further notice, judging by the number of permanent military bases we have there.

then when it blows up again they'll blame Dem's for losing the war they started, ran, and ended under Republican control. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

[John21]

[ QUOTE ]
and reoccupying/hiding in a city with a military force that looks like the civilian population is a lot easier then retaking a hill - I think it'll be just like before - they'll just wait till the Americans are gone and resume as before once those forces have pulled out - unless we plan on occupying Iraq indefinately, which it seems this Administration's plan is until further notice, judging by the number of permanent military bases we have there.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's ultimately going to be a question of popular support for the new government, or lack thereof, in regards to maintaining peace and stability. However someone tries to twist the situation around, 90%+ of the population wants peace and if this latest attempt succeeds in stabilizing the situation, the government will gain the popular support needed to maintain it. That's a big "if" but we'll see.

[John Kilduff]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
and reoccupying/hiding in a city with a military force that looks like the civilian population is a lot easier then retaking a hill - I think it'll be just like before - they'll just wait till the Americans are gone and resume as before once those forces have pulled out - unless we plan on occupying Iraq indefinately, which it seems this Administration's plan is until further notice, judging by the number of permanent military bases we have there.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's ultimately going to be a question of popular support for the new government, or lack thereof, in regards to maintaining peace and stability. However someone tries to twist the situation around, 90%+ of the population wants peace and if this latest attempt succeeds in stabilizing the situation, the government will gain the popular support needed to maintain it. That's a big "if" but we'll see.

[/ QUOTE ]

What do you say 90% of the Iraqi population wants peace, and at what price? I think it more likely that at least 50% of the Iraqi population wants their own side (Sunni or Shi'ite as the case may be) to WIN, and if that means crushing the other side, then that's what they'd like to see done.

Also, even if the government succeeds in stabilizing the situation (temporarily) is it really likely that the Sunnis and Shi'ites will put aside their centuries' old hatreds and become peaceful towards each other? Not to mention the backlash the Shi'ites now want to take revenge on the Sunnis for what happened under Saddam. Not to mention the huge percentage of Iraqis who crave religious rule.

Sorry but I have to say it again: Neo-Con dreams are what the Iraq war was based on and these dreams took no account of the mindset or historical loyalties of the peoples in the region. Sure it sounded good: bring them democracy - but on what basis? Dreams and wishes of the Neo-Con and the West, not the dreams and wishes of the Iraqis. It's a very, very different world over there,and it just isn't going to change all that much in a few short years or a few decades. It's not like the average Iraqi has been secretly hankering for democracy for all these decades of Iraq's existence. Yes, many hated being oppressed, but that doesn't mean they thought democracy would be their guiding light and salvation.

[iron81]

I saw an interesting Chicago Tribune article written by a reported embedded with troops participating in the Surge in Baghdad. It looks like we're seeing some improvement in the security situation over there.

[John21]

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry but I have to say it again: Neo-Con dreams are what the Iraq war was based on and these dreams took no account of the mindset or historical loyalties of the peoples in the region. Sure it sounded good: bring them democracy - but on what basis? Dreams and wishes of the Neo-Con and the West, not the dreams and wishes of the Iraqis. It's a very, very different world over there,and it just isn't going to change all that much in a few short years or a few decades. It's not like the average Iraqi has been secretly hankering for democracy for all these decades of Iraq's existence. Yes, many hated being oppressed, but that doesn't mean they thought democracy would be their guiding light and salvation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please don't discount the possibility that I'm getting your point, because I truly am. I just don't quite understand the newly hatched catch phrase, "neo-con pipe dreams". I've served the country and consider myself to be somewhat of a patriot, but for arguments sake, I have no problem saying, "screw the United States". To me the corporate body means nothing aside from the principles it was founded on, chief among them liberty. I don't see this as a battle between the United States and militant Islam. I see this as a battle between liberty and tyranny.

I happen to believe that whenever, however, or wherever you confront tyranny you kill it. I believe the preservation or establishment of liberty necessities killing tyranny at every point of contact. Period.

Now you might not agree with my belief, or feel it doesn't apply to other people or other places, and that's your right. I just don't agree.

Is it a dream? Sure. But I feel I'm using what you refer to as the "neo-cons" to promote my ideals at least as much as they're using me. I can live with it. Bottom line - it's fifty-cents a gallon. Cheap price for a dream.

[MidGe]

[ QUOTE ]
I happen to believe that whenever, however, or wherever you confront tyranny you kill it. I believe the preservation or establishment of liberty necessities killing tyranny at every point of contact. Period.
...
Is it a dream? Sure.
...
Bottom line - it's fifty-cents a gallon. Cheap price for a dream.


[/ QUOTE ]

Do you include the current US administration in that. They sure are more and more obviously imperialists.

A dream... yes!

A very cheap dream for the US, expensive for the rest of the world.

My respect for your service, all disagreements aside. You happened to have been seriously misled.

[whiskeytown]

[ QUOTE ]
I saw an interesting Chicago Tribune article written by a reported embedded with troops participating in the Surge in Baghdad. It looks like we're seeing some improvement in the security situation over there.

[/ QUOTE ]

except I don't think it's cause we're KILLING people -

Iraqslogger talked about an arrest today - 131 pistols being hauled across the border - from IRAQ to IRAN -

reasons why are only speculation, but I'd harbor a guess they're temporarily relocating troops and weapons out of Baghdad and other areas where the Surge is going thru -

at least we put an end to people driving into our compounds, kidnapping our soldiers, and executing them mercenary style -

RB