Are things in Iraq Getting better?

[GHook93]

Are Americans accepting this?

America's New Shi'a Allies - TIME

America's New Shi'a Allies The vaunted U.S. strategy in Anbar province that has put a dent in Al Qaeda in Iraq involved establishing ties with Sunni tribes. But there has always been skepticism whether the same strategy would work in Shi'ite areas of the country. However, that may be changing. In Musayyib, 40 miles south of Baghdad and not far from the holy city of Karbala, American officers are taking advantage of a network of "concerned citizens" in this predominantly Shi'ite area to help quell violence stemming from both Sunni insurgents and erratic elements of powerful Shi'a militias. Just as in Anbar, it was the tribes that asked the Americans for help. Over the past two months these "concerned citizens" groups have manned checkpoints and established a network of informants that have helped keep out Sunni extremists and finger Shi'ite militants who assassinate rivals and set bombs on roadways to kill American soldiers. While leaders concede that operations in surrounding areas and a growing public antipathy toward the radicals have contributed to diminishing violence, they point to the numbers and say the civilian patrols are having an effect. Soldiers say 57 improvised explosive devises, or IEDs, exploded or were discovered in May. In August, however, only six went off or were found. "It's pretty much shut 'em down," says Maj. Craig Whiteside, the executive officer for the 1st Battalion, 501st Parachute Infantry Batallion. Seeing a window of opportunity in their own sector, officers quickly mobilized, taking cues from the Anbar program and redesigning it to fit local conditions, enlisting volunteers from the town of Musayyib and surrounding villages to be part of ad-hoc militias supported and paid by the U.S. military. It's still a work in progress and sometimes dangerously clumsy. Members of the American battalion here recently shot and killed three of the new local volunteers at a checkpoint just north of town, saying they mistook them for insurgents planting roadside bombs. The volunteer militias sprang up here in Babil province over the last two months under local leadership after the tribes saw successes scored by Sunni tribesmen in adjacent Anbar Province. Those homegrown groups in Anbar turned on al-Qaeda and teamed up with American forces to clear their regions of extremists, or at least put them on the run, reaping a windfall of American aid money in the process. What has surprised military officials about the groups around Musayyib, though, is that they are Shi'ite or of mixed sect, containing both Sunnis and Shiite residents who rejected the excesses of the Jaish al Mahdi, the Shi'ite militia nominally loyal to anti-American cleric Moqtada al Sadr. Almost 500 Shi'ites and at least as many Sunnis have already signed on. Shi'ite communities in the capital of Baghdad are also reportedly growing unhappy with al-Sadr's militia. The newly armed and deputized groups have contributed to the biggest dip in violence and the lowest casualty rates since the battalion arrived a year ago. "Fewer of my guys have been killed than at any time before," Lt. Col. Robert Balcavage told TIME. Balcavage, commander of the 1st Battalion, 501st Parachute Infantry Regiment of the 25th Division, said the locally organized Sunni groups have already driven al-Qaeda out of the urban areas and into a rough no-man's land to the north, sandwiching them precariously between his paratroopers and elements of the 10th Mountain Division. In and around Musayyib to the south, the Shi'ite groups have manned checkpoints along roadways that once hid bombs. Since late July, roughly about the time the militias started working, no one has attacked the paratroopers there. While the real key to stability in the region is training and fielding Iraqi police and army forces loyal to the central government instead of their particular tribe or sect, officers say the concerned citizen militias create a surge effect, picking up some of the slack and creating a pipeline for new and better qualified recruits. A measure of skepticism is built into the program. Sunni and Shi'ite insurgents who once fought or still fight the Americans are surely among the new militias — as they are in the police and army. But deputizing them allows the Americans to gather personal information, take fingerprints and track their whereabouts for a least part of the time. The volunteers sign three-month contracts, wear only special armbands instead of uniforms and use their own weapons, but they get paid three quarters of what Iraqi police recruits receive and are given preference for joining the police and army. "It gives them a stake in the system. It's really the first step to becoming IP [Iraqi Police] or IA [Iraqi Army]," Balcavage said. In the absence of good alternatives, he said he was willing to give it a chance. "I guess it's making the best of a bad situation," he

[rmnunez]

Things are definitely getting better. The surge has been a success, the casualty rates are down for both civilians and Coalitioneers, they've been dropping for months, all sorts of incursions have been made in Anbar and other provinces. This has been accomplished while it was documented the Iranians were stepping up their efforts to arm fundamentalist factions, more foreign terrorists were infiltrating into Iraq and fellow Coalitioneers withdrawing their forces.

Now we see Shia and Sunni tribal leaders coming together to repudiate Al Qaeda and contribute in efforts to rout them. It looks like the surge is creating breathing room for political reconciliation.

[jose]

A former US military chief in Iraq has condemned the current strategy in the conflict, which he warned was "a nightmare with no end in sight". Retired Lt Gen Ricardo Sanchez also labelled US political leaders as "incompetent" and "corrupted". He said they would have faced courts martial for dereliction of duty had they been in the military. The best the US could manage under the current approach in Iraq was to "stave off defeat", Gen Sanchez warned. "There is no question that America is living a nightmare with no end in sight,

BBC NEWS | Middle East | US general damns Iraq 'nightmare'
but i guess thats just his opinion:rolleyes:

[GHook93]

Quote by: rmnunez Things are definitely getting better. The surge has been a success, the casualty rates are down for both civilians and Coalitioneers, they've been dropping for months, all sorts of incursions have been made in Anbar and other provinces. This has been accomplished while it was documented the Iranians were stepping up their efforts to arm fundamentalist factions, more foreign terrorists were infiltrating into Iraq and fellow Coalitioneers withdrawing their forces. Now we see Shia and Sunni tribal leaders coming together to repudiate Al Qaeda and contribute in efforts to rout them. It looks like the surge is creating breathing room for political reconciliation.

I agree with the assessment. I do think that the invasion was still the biggest US military blunder in US military history; however, I hope before we leave we can establish a central pro-US Iraqi government. I am still very very skeptical that will ever happen, but I do enjoy the good new coming out of Iraq.

[The Decider]

Quote by: rmnunez Now we see Shia and Sunni tribal leaders coming together to repudiate Al Qaeda and contribute in efforts to rout them. It looks like the surge is creating breathing room for political reconciliation.

What "political reconciliation" are you talking about? The surge has accomplished NONE of the national political goals for which it was created. Zero. Nada. Tactical successes on the ground in some localities have not changed that reality.

And, as Jose said, General Richard Sanchez has a different view. Is he a "phoney soldier?"

[rmnunez]

That would be a "phony" soldier, but I've never refered to this General Sanchez that way.

The "political reconciliation" is something expected to result from creating that "breathing room", something itself resulting from pushing back insurgents or terrorists.

The breathing room needs to be held and maintained and that is supposed to be done by properly refurbished and reconstituted local police, but their availability depends on this political reconciliation.

I think political reconciliation will take a bit longer, shouldn't be expected to immediately follow this breathing room, might take longer depending on circumstances.

The objective indications of the surge's effects all show this was a very good idea, its effectively pushed back insurgency and terrorism, strangers are more likely to get fingered, fewer misfits connect, locals are being empowered and recognized, made stakeholders and helped.

General Sanchez complained of the DoS screwups, I don't take any account of their imput in any surge mission or its accomplishment. It would be nice to know what DoS failures he found most disturbing.

[The Decider]

I think political reconciliation will take a bit longer, shouldn't be expected to immediately follow this breathing room, might take longer depending on circumstances.

Well, top Iraqi leaders don't share your optimism about national political reconciliation. What evidence do you have that they don't?

Top Iraqis Pull Back From Key U.S. Goal
Reconciliation Seen Unattainable Amid Struggle for Power

By Joshua Partlow
Washington Post Foreign Service
Monday, October 8, 2007; Page A01

BAGHDAD -- For much of this year, the U.S. military strategy in Iraq has sought to reduce violence so that politicians could bring about national reconciliation, but several top Iraqi leaders say they have lost faith in that broad goal.

Iraqi leaders argue that sectarian animosity is entrenched in the structure of their government. Instead of reconciliation, they now stress alternative and perhaps more attainable goals: streamlining the government bureaucracy, placing experienced technocrats in positions of authority and improving the dismal record of providing basic services.

Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi, the most influential Sunni politician in the country, gives presents to children in Baghdad's Yarmouk neighborhood who lost their fathers to sectarian violence. "There is a shortage of goodwill from those parties who are now in the driver's seat of the country," he said. "I don't think there is something called reconciliation, and there will be no reconciliation as such," said Deputy Prime Minister Barham Salih, a Kurd. "To me, it is a very inaccurate term. This is a struggle about power."

Humam Hamoudi, a prominent Shiite cleric and parliament member, said any future reconciliation would emerge naturally from an efficient, fair government, not through short-term political engineering among Sunnis and Shiites.

"Reconciliation should be a result and not a goal by itself," he said. "You should create the atmosphere for correct relationships, and not wave slogans that 'I want to reconcile with you.' "

washingtonpost.com - nation, world, technology and Washington area news and headlines

Quote by: rmnunez That would be a "phony" soldier, but I've never refered to this General Sanchez that way.

Do you believe Gen. Sanchez is a phony soldier or not?

[notworthabean]

Quote by: The Decider Well, top Iraqi leaders don't share your optimism about national political reconciliation. What evidence do you have that they don't? Top Iraqis Pull Back From Key U.S. Goal Reconciliation Seen Unattainable Amid Struggle for Power By Joshua Partlow Washington Post Foreign Service Monday, October 8, 2007; Page A01 BAGHDAD -- For much of this year, the U.S. military strategy in Iraq has sought to reduce violence so that politicians could bring about national reconciliation, but several top Iraqi leaders say they have lost faith in that broad goal. Iraqi leaders argue that sectarian animosity is entrenched in the structure of their government. Instead of reconciliation, they now stress alternative and perhaps more attainable goals: streamlining the government bureaucracy, placing experienced technocrats in positions of authority and improving the dismal record of providing basic services. Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi, the most influential Sunni politician in the country, gives presents to children in Baghdad's Yarmouk neighborhood who lost their fathers to sectarian violence. "There is a shortage of goodwill from those parties who are now in the driver's seat of the country," he said. "I don't think there is something called reconciliation, and there will be no reconciliation as such," said Deputy Prime Minister Barham Salih, a Kurd. "To me, it is a very inaccurate term. This is a struggle about power." Humam Hamoudi, a prominent Shiite cleric and parliament member, said any future reconciliation would emerge naturally from an efficient, fair government, not through short-term political engineering among Sunnis and Shiites. "Reconciliation should be a result and not a goal by itself," he said. "You should create the atmosphere for correct relationships, and not wave slogans that 'I want to reconcile with you.' " washingtonpost.com - nation, world, technology and Washington area news and headlines Do you believe Gen. Sanchez is a phony soldier or not?

1) In the middle east politics are as fluid as water. Your mortal enemy yesterday is your best friend today. somehow I imagine Iraqi politics are a bit more complex then that article

2) no one said anything about a phony solider, so drop the the strawman.

[The Decider]

Quote by: notworthabean 1) In the middle east politics are as fluid as water. Your mortal enemy yesterday is your best friend today. somehow I imagine Iraqi politics are a bit more complex then that article

That's deep. Now please offer some evidence that contradicts the article I posted or admit that you can't.

Quote by: notworthabean 2) no one said anything about a phony solider, so drop the the strawman.

False. I mentioned the phony soldier. rmnunez seemed to agree when he replied "That would be a 'phony' soldier."

Your strawman comment is ad hom to the conversation, and out of line.

[notworthabean]

That's deep. Now please offer some evidence that contradicts the article I posted or admit that you can't.

Evidence like what? Its a known fact that middle eastern politics are very complex-just like politics everywhere. Public statements don't necessarily reflect private realities. I don't know enough about internal iraqi politics

False. I mentioned the phony soldier. rmnunez seemed to agree when he replied "That would be a 'phony' soldier." Your strawman comment is ad hom to the conversation, and out of line.

Don't be dense, you brought it up orginally, and my point was that none of the people arguing against you brought it up. Rmunez said

That would be a "phony" soldier, but I've never refered to this General Sanchez that way.

In the first part he is referring to the spelling (phony vs phonEy)in the second he dismisses (as I do) the idea of calling Sanchez a phony solider. hence your argument, basically saying your opposition believes something that you have no evidence of them believing-is a strawman. Hence pointing out that you are creating a logical fallacy is not an ad hominem, is merely true.

[rmnunez]

I think the top Iraqi figures refered to in the note from the Washington Post are likely the folks who have the greatest sectarian differences, the ones who've been more involved in struggles between such groups and are more likely to require the most time to reconcile. I'd expect people less committeed to any sectarian cause to more readily reconcile political differences.

I'd also point out the earlier story dealing with tribal lord integration in Al Qaeda erradication efforts. Working together ought to lead to reconciliation easier so I expect as success percolates and insurgent or terrorist attacks become rarer and more remote pressure will build for the top Iraqi political figures to reconcile too.

[The Decider]

Quote by: notworthabean Evidence like what? Its a known fact that middle eastern politics are very complex-just like politics everywhere. Public statements don't necessarily reflect private realities. I don't know enough about internal iraqi politics

In your own words, "don't be dense." Provide evidence that contradicts the article. Since you already conceded that "you don't know enough about internal iraqi politics" I'll take that as an admission that you can't. Move on.

Quote by: notworthabean Don't be dense, you brought it up orginally, and my point was that none of the people arguing against you brought it up. Rmunez said.

I never argued otherwise. To repeat my last post, "I mentioned the phony soldier." "I" as in me, myself, my words. The quotation marks were also mine, and referred to the words used by some neo-cons for soldiers that oppose the war (the Rush Limbaugh debate).

Quote by: notworthabean In the first part he is referring to the spelling (phony vs phonEy)

OK, I see that now, although getting spelling advice from nunez is funny. I don't correct his spelling, but I guess I'll start immediately. I hope he (and you) don't mind.

Quote by: rmnunez less committeed to any sectarian cause

Nunez, the word you are looking for is "committed."

Quote by: notworthabean in the second he dismisses (as I do) the idea of calling Sanchez a phony solider. hence your argument, basically saying your opposition believes something that you have no evidence of them believing-is a strawman. Hence pointing out that you are creating a logical fallacy is not an ad hominem, is merely true.

It wasn't an argument, it was a question:

And, as Jose said, General Richard Sanchez has a different view. Is he a "phoney soldier?"

Therefore, I built no strawmen and committed no fallacies. Nice try. Now, could you please address the OP, my link, or something relevant?

[notworthabean]

I never argued otherwise. To repeat my last post, "I mentioned the phony soldier." "I" as in me, myself, my words. The quotation marks were also mine, and referred to the words used by some neo-cons for soldiers that oppose the war (the Rush Limbaugh debate).

The refrences to "phony soliders" on the right is the subject for another thread. Suffice to say no one here is calling gen sanchez a phony anything.

It wasn't an argument, it was a question

It was an attempt to divert the thread actually.

now for the article:

Obviously the lowering of the mortatliy rate in Iraq is a good thing. Hopefully this, as well as the aligning of the tribal groups in Iraq, will help facilitate iraqs transition into a stable democratic state.

[The Decider]

Quote by: notworthabean The refrences to "phony soliders" on the right is the subject for another thread. Suffice to say no one here is calling gen sanchez a phony anything.

I never claimed otherwise--just asking a question. I'll get your permission next time.

Quote by: notworthabean It was an attempt to divert the thread actually.

The only diverting I've seen in the last few posts has come from you.

Quote by: notworthabean Obviously the lowering of the mortatliy rate in Iraq is a good thing. Hopefully this, as well as the aligning of the tribal groups in Iraq, will help facilitate iraqs transition into a stable democratic state.

Some Iraqi politicians have made it quite clear that "reconciliation" is a pipe dream (see the WaPo article for evidence).

[notworthabean]

Some Iraqi politicians have made it quite clear that "reconciliation" is a pipe dream (see the WaPo article for evidence).

So based on one WaPo article we should just assume it's all a lost cause?

[The Decider]

Quote by: notworthabean So based on one WaPo article we should just assume it's all a lost cause?

If "lost cause" means no political reconciliation, then I would say the WaPo article is not good news, wouldn't you? Then again, you are free to provide a counterargument, say, from Prime Minister Maliki. I'm sure he will paint a rosier picture about the prospects for reconciliation.

[notworthabean]

I never said it did, but my point is that article is not the end all be all pack it up and go home article you seemed to be arguing for it to be.

[The Decider]

Quote by: notworthabean I never said it did, but my point is that article is not the end all be all pack it up and go home article you seemed to be arguing for it to be.

And I never claimed the article, alone, was reason to end the war. I could make that argument without the citation, and have. But we're discussing the "success" of the surge and its relationship to Bush's own call for reconciliation. Within that context, the WaPo article is more than relevant--it's valuable evidence against the "things in Iraq getting better" argument.

[Chaossaber314]

Quote by: Decider I never claimed otherwise--just asking a question.

Ok, right, and when Fox News puts up "questions" like "Do the Democrats hate America?" They're not trying to not-so-subtly insult them by saying that the Democrats hate America.

[GHook93]

Quote by: The Decider What "political reconciliation" are you talking about? The surge has accomplished NONE of the national political goals for which it was created. Zero. Nada. Tactical successes on the ground in some localities have not changed that reality.

I heard on the tube last night that the largest Shia militia leaders were reaching out to the largest Sunni Militia leaders to form truces. I read somewhere that voluntary Shia and Sunni members around the country are picking up partrols instead of US troops!

And, as Jose said, General Richard Sanchez has a different view. Is he a "phoney soldier?"

For the record I hate Rush, but the phoney soldier comment was directed at a guy who falsified what he did in military and in fact saw NO action, when he claimed he did. The guy that Rush directed the comment to, completely hit the mark! Not that I want to derail the thread.