Shhhh... The Surge is Working

F

fewl

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2005
Messages
427
Reaction score
11
Location
Kenton-on-Sea
Shhhh... The Surge is Working

By Patrick Ruffini

Saturday, February 24, 2007


A gloomy haze has settled over the nation's prosecution of the War on Terror as of late. It seems like we can only watch helplessly as Nancy Pelosi and Jack Murtha size up new angles of attack for undermining the war effort. The media is chomping at the bit the tell the story of an America, bruised and humbled and exhausted, heading for the exits in Iraq.

But something interesting is happening on the way to the "new direction." Early indications are that the troop surge into Baghdad is working. It hasn't been reported on widely, but murders in Baghdad are down 70%, attacks are down 80%, Mahdi Army chief Moqtada al-Sadr has reportedly made off for Iran, and many Baghdadis who had fled the violence now feel it's safe enough to return. The strategy that Congress is busy denouncing is proving to be our best hope for victory.

In Iraq, there's a sense that change is in the air -- literally. Omar of Iraq the Model spots a B-1 Bomber in the skies of Baghdad for the first time since the end of the major combat. On the ground, Omar writes that the signs that Iraqis are getting serious about security are more palpable. With the help of Compstat-like technology, security forces are cracking down at checkpoints (even ambulances are getting stopped) and getting nimbler about locating them strategically so the terrorists don't know what to expect.

This turnaround in Baghdad is confirmed at home by the media's near-deafening silence. If it seems like you've heard less about how Iraq is spiraling into civil war in the weeks since the surge was announced, this is why. Even some discordant voices in the media are starting to wonder what's happening. Time magazine worries that it's "Quiet in Baghdad. Too quiet." That's right -- a dramatic reduction in violence is actually bad news.

It's too early to claim victory just yet; the operation is just two weeks old. But U.S. troops have been able to accomplish all of this with just one more brigade in-country, with four more on the way by May. These encouraging early returns show the potential for success when we apply concentrated military force to the security problem. When the Army and Marine Corps are on offense, carrying out combat operations and clearing out insurgent strongholds, we win. When we lay back, carrying out routine patrols and playing Baghdad beat cop, we lose.

The key to success is staying power. The always incisive Daffyd ab-Hugh has a good read on this dynamic. Counterinsurgency in Iraq has often been compared to a game of whack-a-mole -- secure an area, only to have the insurgents pop up somewhere else. But if we slammed a mallet into the hole, and kept it there, then picked up a new one... and did the same?
This is a new game called Seal-a-Hole , and it has a very different dynamic from Whack-a-Mole: the normal game is one of futility; the game continues until the player gets tired and quits or he runs out of money. But Seal-a-Hole actually has a victory point: when all the holes are sealed, the game is over -- and the player, America, has won.

Even though Seal-a-Hole is not futile, it nevertheless requires a great deal of patience; there are many, many holes, and each hole has a mole who must be whacked. Some of the holes, such as Sadr City, are very big and will require many mallets to properly seal. But if we have the courage and fortitude of our American forebears, we will seal those holes... and we will win.


On the political front, the White House also seems to have dislodged a major roadblock to victory: Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's reluctance to allow U.S. troops to take the fight to Sadr and his militias. Returning American troops have expressed their frustration at having to walk on eggshells when it came to came to entering Shi'ite areas, a backbone of support for the government. Thankfully, the rules of engagement are changing. American troops are now freer to take on all comers, and the results are clear in both Sunni and Shi'ite areas.

In the coming days and weeks, these rules of engagement will face their ultimate test with the decision to enter Sadr City, the Mahdi Army's key stronghold. And enter we must. Those intent on turning Iraq into a breeding ground for al-Qaeda won't be convinced of our seriousness until we confront the key sources of violence on both sides of the sectarian divide.

When things don't go well in Iraq, we see the endless B-roll of chaos and carnage. When things are on the upswing, we tend to hear more about Anna Nicole Smith. The media will never acknowledge victories in Iraq, so we'll have to settle for an absence of bad coverage. But even in this relative lull in Iraq, it's important to understand and appreciate the short-term victories so we can create more of them. And finish the job.
Click to expand...

SOURCE
 
And more positive news from Iraq... for a change :)

Fighting for a foothold

Combat outpost troops report steady progress in Ramadi

By Michelle Tan - Staff writer
Posted : February 26, 2007

COMBAT OUTPOST FALCON, Iraq — The shooting started before 5 a.m. The distinctive crack of the AK47 was silenced by the thunderous but almost rhythmic roar of the M2 .50-caliber machine guns that sit on the roof of this combat outpost in south central Ramadi.

Inside the tactical operations center, Capt. Mike Bajema, commander of Bravo Company, 1st Battalion, 37th Armor, simultaneously manned two radios.

His soldiers continued to return fire. Some 1,700 rounds of .50-caliber and 7.62mm ammo later, the enemy fire ceased.

Facing down enemy attacks on this combat outpost is not unusual for the estimated 140 soldiers who live here, but in the seven months since they pushed into Ramadi and established Combat Outpost Falcon, the soldiers report steady and encouraging progress in their section of this embattled city.

After spending the first months of their deployment in the relatively quiet Sinjar and Tal Afar in northern Iraq, Bajema and his soldiers were sent south and west to Ramadi, capital of the insurgent stronghold Anbar province.

“The pucker factor was definitely high,” Bajema said. “We hear the same stories everybody in the States does [about Ramadi]. I wouldn’t say we were scared, but I’d say we had that nervous anticipation about what Ramadi would be like.”

Bajema estimates his company, which calls itself the Bulldogs, experienced eight or nine mortar attacks in their six months up north. The first time they tried to push into Ramadi to check out their new area of operations, the soldiers’ convoy had traveled a mere 100 meters on Route Central, a key road, when it was hit by three improvised explosive devices.

The soldiers escaped unharmed, but three vehicles, including an M1A1 Abrams, were destroyed.

“It was like, ‘Where are we going? We can’t even go 100 meters without losing three huge vehicles,’” Bajema said.

On June 26, with soldiers from a sister company providing an outer ring of security, Bravo, 1-37, seized the houses that now make up COP Falcon.

The U.S. military has built 10 COPs in this city in an effort to seize and hold individual sectors and get out of huge forward operating bases to establish good relations with local communities.

The area of operations for the soldiers at COP Falcon includes some 6,000 residents and 1,458 homes.

In 72 hours, under fire, the soldiers built up this slice of military might and strategic initiative. One soldier was killed during that period, when a 120mm mortar round landed on the COP. The next day, American forces killed 24 enemy fighters from one sniper position.

Here at COP Falcon, American soldiers live side-by-side with Iraqi soldiers and police.

They always patrol together, and the Iraqi forces, especially the police, who are from the area, connect with the local populace much better than the Americans ever could.

“The Iraqi police by far are our intelligence gatherers,” Bajema said. “You’d be surprised what people will tell the IP. ... The people just open up to them.”

The early fighting sparked fears of a massive attack on the neighborhood and drove many who lived close to COP Falcon to move away, Bajema said.

As the months went on, however, the locals slowly moved back and COP Falcon troops, in an effort to get to know their neighbors, set about visiting every home in the area. They also conducted a census in the area of responsibility and now have the names and photographs of its residents and a list of their occupations.

In the time that the military has operated COP Falcon, Bajema said, conditions in the area have improved for those who live there.

Previously, he said, insurgents “could walk down the streets en masse and terrorize the people.” The presence of U.S. forces, though, has driven the insurgents to “go from very open operations to very clandestine, and the people are turning against them.”

The soldiers, meanwhile, have gone from daily gun battles to one or two a month, and daily patrols have kept the insurgents on the move, Bajema said. “We’ve denied them a safe haven,” he said.

Part of the reason local residents are opening up to the U.S. troops is that they have helped bring improvements in their living conditions, he said. Streets that were flooded with sewage in June today are clean and dry, thanks to a $400,000 project to fix the pump station.

“You want the city to continue to improve,” Bajema said. “You want people to be able to drive to the market, go to school. You want life to continue. You don’t want them to be locked in their homes like prisoners.”

However, he said, there remains concern that the insurgents “are able to mingle among the people who’re going to the market or going to school.”

‘A better place for the next unit’

Fighting the insurgency is probably the hardest mission anyone’s had, Bajema said.

“They don’t wear uniforms, they sleep in houses near the COP, their families are here. We want to protect the innocents of Ramadi but find the terrorists,” he said. “[But] we’re winning this battle. They’re losing fighters, they’re losing caches daily. This fight for them is a hundred times harder than it is for us.”

Sgt. Justin Fewtrell, of Bravo Company, 16th Engineer Battalion, was attached to the Bulldogs and he often manned one of the guard towers on the roofs of COP Falcon.

“The Iraqi police and Iraqi army are making steady progress in the city,” he said. “We’re leaving this place a better place for the next unit that’s coming in and for the IP and IA to stand up.”

As Bajema and his soldiers prepare to return to Germany after 14 months in Iraq, their replacements, Charlie Company, 2nd Battalion, 7th Infantry, from Fort Stewart, Ga., led by Capt. Diogo Tavares, are quickly learning their way around the area of responsibility.

“Our expectations, I think, are to take what the Bulldogs have done and take it to the next level,” Tavares said. “When you’re giving something up, you hope the unit after you carries it forward. They want it to be a success story. They were the first foothold in here. They don’t want us to fail. We have some big shoes to fill.”

The incoming soldiers will face big challenges, Bajema said.

“You can pass on the lessons learned but they really have to, unfortunately, live a lot of that,” he said. “Time makes the best warriors out here.”

The Americans are now slowly able to turn more responsibility to the Iraqi forces, Bajema said.

“We’re here in a big brother role now. ... We have set them up for success.”

Master Sgt. Jeffory Aldrich, of the Indiana National Guard’s 2nd Battalion, 152nd Infantry, runs the police transition team in charge of the police at COP Falcon.

The station, the Al Forsan Iraqi Police Station, opened Dec. 31, and most of the recruits are new.

In a little more than a month, the station has grown to about 200 policemen, but they have already been battle-tested in a number of firefights.

The enemy still finds a way to attack the American and Iraqi forces stationed here, Bajema said.

“We didn’t necessarily come here to destroy the terrorists,” he said. “That’ll be the mission of the Iraqi army and Iraqi police for years to come.”

As he prepares to go home, Bajema reflected on his time in Ramadi and the distinction of being the first Army company in that part of the city.

“We definitely feel a great deal of ownership of not only Falcon but also all the things we’ve done in this area,” he said. “It’s probably one of the most difficult things I’ve done in my life. We’ve paid dearly, not only in life and blood, but sweat, too.”

The Bulldogs filled and stacked by hand the 70,000 sandbags that fortify COP Falcon.

They fixed the showers, installed electricity and heat and worked to get at least one hot meal a day.

“They’ll never fully understand what it took to build this place,” Bajema said.
Click to expand...
 
(I try again) America has no real interest in a victory, or rather getting out the country. The more of a mess it is the better reason for them to be there. Pressure at home means it is time to show a little result. Nothing to do with a surge.

In the chaos of Iraq, one project is on target: a giant US embassy May 03, 06
THE question puzzles and enrages a city: how is it that the Americans cannot keep the electricity running in Baghdad for more than a couple of hours a day, yet still manage to build themselves the biggest embassy on Earth?
-
Iraqi politicians opposed to the US presence protest that the scale of the project suggests that America retains long-term ambitions here. The International Crisis Group, a think-tank, said the embassy’s size “is seen by Iraqis as an indication of who actually exercises power in their country”.

A State Department official said that the size reflected the “massive amount of work still facing the US and our commitment to see it through”.
 
Last edited:
And how come "all of a sudden" they're fixing pump systems. Please. Time to make progress, for the good folks back home. Time to show a little result. Nothing to do with a surge. Their extended stay has been long planned.
Click to expand...

All of a sudden? That's one guy talking about one project he happened to oversee during his tenure. There's nothing "all of a sudden" about it. Iraq is a big, big country. Billions are being invested in infrastructure projects. That there's not more progress is down to the insurgency targeting public works and making it difficult for civilian engineers to operate. The Army Corps of Engineers isn't big enough rebuild a neighborhood on their own, let alone the whole of Iraq. The insurgents are the impediment to progress, not the Yanks.

Look at how much trouble Eskom has delivering a decent standard of service in peacetime. How would you think they'd cope if their technicians were being kidnapped and beheaded while out on call? If they could only go out when an escort becomes available?

THE question puzzles and enrages a city: how is it that the Americans cannot keep the electricity running in Baghdad for more than a couple of hours a day, yet still manage to build themselves the biggest embassy on Earth?
Click to expand...

Um... is it because the embassy is in the green zone where it's easy to work, and power substations are in the red zone, where it isn't? :rolleyes:
 
fewl said:
That there's not more progress is down to the insurgency targeting public works and making it difficult for civilian engineers to operate. The Army Corps of Engineers isn't big enough rebuild a neighborhood on their own, let alone the whole of Iraq. The insurgents are the impediment to progress, not the Yanks.

Look at how much trouble Eskom has delivering a decent standard of service in peacetime. How would you think they'd cope if their technicians were being kidnapped and beheaded while out on call? If they could only go out when an escort becomes available?
-
Um... is it because the embassy is in the green zone where it's easy to work, and power substations are in the red zone, where it isn't? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Yes they've been fixing pump systems for years, and as you point out, not for very long. Now the situation seems to have changed. Please don't tell me this is because of a surge.

Did you miss the bit about "the biggest embassy on Earth?"
 
Yes they've been fixing pump systems for years, and as you point out, not for very long. Now the situation seems to have changed. Please don't tell me this is because of a surge.
Click to expand...

The troop surge is to address sectarian violence in Baghdad. Ramadi - where that random public works project you're choosing to focus on took place - is somewhere completely different.

Did you miss the bit about "the biggest embassy on Earth?"
Click to expand...

So what? It's in the green zone. Power substations are in the red zone. The Americans being able to build X in the green zone bears zero relation to the American ability to provide Y in the red zone. What's your point?
 
Is it really the 'biggest embassy on earth'? Surely they'd have a huge embassy in allied countries like those in the EU and Japan,
and also in places like Russia and China - where the real economic
struggles play themselves out. Iraq, oil and all is small fry
compared to those other places. Maybe it just happens
to be BIG. :)

Our own Pres is building a 90Mil wall. I wonder if its made from
the same stuff as this new embassy? :)
 
Back on topic : two weeks is hardly enough time to tell if it's going to work or not, as the article originally said.

Chances are mostly that the various forces have toned down their activities until such a time as they know exactly what the strategy and tactics the surge is using.

I'm personally betting that the violence quickly goes up to pre-sure levels within a month.
 
Is it really the 'biggest embassy on earth'?
Click to expand...

It's huge, but what other embassy in the world is responsible for both the security and reconstruction of the host nation? It's a unique embassy for a unique situation.
 
I'm personally betting that the violence quickly goes up to pre-sure levels within a month.
Click to expand...

Agreed, and it's only Baghdad anyway. The point is that the opening stages of the surge prove that if you can get enough boots on the ground you can drastically alter the security situation. If the US wants to withdraw they must hurry up and withdraw. If they want to stay, they need to commit the ground forces necessary to win.
 
fewl said:
Agreed, and it's only Baghdad anyway. The point is that the opening stages of the surge prove that if you can get enough boots on the ground you can drastically alter the security situation. If the US wants to withdraw they must hurry up and withdraw. If they want to stay, they need to commit the ground forces necessary to win.
Click to expand...
They can't occupy Bagdad over the long term. First off, the Shiites have largely ignored the US forces up until now - only 10% of US deaths are attributed to Shiite attacks.

If they go after Sadr then that ratio is going to shift dramatically because it will cause widespread Shiite rage against the occupation and they won't be satisfied to merely attack the Sunnis. Sunnis will probably only cause 40% of US deaths as opposed to 90% (to reflect the demographics of the nation, roughly). My maths might be off but I calculate that in meaning an overall increase to 225% of current US deaths (in any given period).

Then there's the fact that this is a war of attrition. Time and time again, it has been shown that an occupying army sucks at fighting wars of attrition, and what's more, the US has specifically built itself as a force which relies on small but highly equipped units to combat a more or less standard national army like you'd expect South Africa or Russia to have. Basically they're sitting ducks when it comes to fighting the so-called insurgents.
 
They can't occupy Bagdad over the long term.
Click to expand...

That's not the idea. Winning in Iraq means stabilizing the security situation long enough that they can hand over responsibility to the IA and IP, and leave. At pre-surge levels they were accomplishing absolutely nothing toward that end.

If they go after Sadr then that ratio is going to shift dramatically because it will cause widespread Shiite rage against the occupation and they...
Click to expand...

The Mahdi Army doesn't represent Shiite Iraq, and going after Sadr is nothing new. In April of 2004 they staged a full-scale uprising... alone. August 2004... alone. October 2006... alone. The country belongs to the Iraqi Shia now. They understand that the route to MNF withdrawal is calm, not chaos.

Then there's the fact that this is a war of attrition. Time and time again, it has been shown that an occupying army sucks at fighting wars of attrition, and what's more, the US has specifically built itself as a force which relies on small but highly equipped units to combat a more or less standard national army like you'd expect South Africa or Russia to have. Basically they're sitting ducks when it comes to fighting the so-called
insurgents.
Click to expand...

True. All of it. A long term occupation is not what anyone wants.
 
It's to early IMO to say whether it is working. But it's no surprise any positive news is being swept under the carpet by the "supposedly pro dubya:rolleyes:" MSM.

Even our local propaganda pamphlet here in PMB otherwise known as The Witness:sick: spews out every bit a negativity they can find about the U.S military all over the "international" pages. Any U.S soldier who steps out of line can be assured that even in a tiny place far away he will get sensationalist and biased mass coverage. Of course any positive or heroic deeds will be deliberately and intentionally withheld from publication.


Journalism my @SS
 
fewl said:
The troop surge is to address sectarian violence in Baghdad. Ramadi - where that random public works project you're choosing to focus on took place - is somewhere completely different.
-
So what? It's in the green zone. Power substations are in the red zone. The Americans being able to build X in the green zone bears zero relation to the American ability to provide Y in the red zone. What's your point?
Click to expand...
My point was/is there has been no will to go home (or even to win.) The 'largest embassy in the world' is testimony to this.

The american troops have been underequipped, and any Iraqi forces more so. The above story is also one of hearts and minds, something the americans seem to have been little interested in.

There has been a change of political will at home (GB and cronies now deciding he has to show something for their long years of occupation, a few victories help.)

The americans were never planning on going home, it is/was a war of occupation: nothing to do with WMD's, nothing to do with a dictator; everything to do with a long occupation and control of oil supply (and a likely launching point into other countries.)

Give us guns – and troops can go, says Iraqi leader
Prime Minister wants change of US policy Mistakes over Saddam hanging, Times told
America’s refusal to give Baghdad’s security forces sufficient guns and equipment has cost a great number of lives, the Iraqi Prime Minister said yesterday.

Nouri al-Maliki said the insurgency had been bloodier and prolonged because Washington had refused to part with equipment. If it released the necessary arms, US forces could “dramatically” cut their numbers in three to six months, he told The Times.


US marines to be proudly South African
February 20, 2007

Johannesburg - The US Marine Corps has placed a $55.4 million (R392.2 million) order for 90 South African-designed RG33 mine-resistant and ambush-proof vehicles.

BAE Systems' South African unit, Land Systems OMC, won the order after turning around a request for a proposal from a clean-sheet design to delivering a working, blast-tested prototype in under seven weeks.
 
dont forget the classic line about 'they'll greet us as liberators'..

"Winning in Iraq means stabilizing the security situation long enough that they can hand over responsibility to the IA and IP, and leave."

Unfortunately though, the US are an invading occupying power, who've put
their own puppets in charge of Iraq - and the instant they a) leave b) hold free and fair elections, those puppets are gone.

I recall a stat for January that there were around 180+ attacks PER DAY on US forces.
There used to be none. Now everyone in that country wants them to leave. (Except the puppets put in power by the US)
That's what the 'insurgents' are all about - its people wanting an occupation
force to piss off and leave. The longer they stay, the more attacks. The more
hostility.
Recent reports have shown that the US itself, is spawning a hatred that
wasn't there initially.

And it also suits the US down to the ground, to have chaos and civil war
unfolding - it means Iraq can't stabilize, unify, and begin to sell its oil in Euro's
to whoever IT wants to sell to.

So the surge is just a bogus PR idea.
read
Military Chiefs - US Faces Vietnam Collapse In Iraq Soon
Military chiefs give US six months to win Iraq war


· Violence expected to rise after UK withdrawal
· Troop numbers too low
· Coalition is 'disintegrating'
Simon Tisdall
Wednesday February 28, 2007
Guardian Unlimited
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2023542,00.html
An elite team of officers advising US commander General David Petraeus in Baghdad has concluded the US has six months to win the war in Iraq - or face a Vietnam-style collapse in political and public support that could force the military into a hasty retreat.

The officers - combat veterans who are leading experts in counter-insurgency - are charged with implementing the "new way forward" strategy announced by president George Bush on January 10. The plan includes a controversial "surge" of 21,500 additional American troops to establish security in the Iraqi capital and Anbar province.

Article continues
But the team, known as the "Baghdad brains trust" and ensconced in the heavily fortified Green Zone around the US embassy, is struggling to overcome a range of entrenched problems in what has become a race against time, said a former senior administration official familiar with their deliberations. "They know they are operating under a clock. They know they are going to hear a lot more talk in Washington about 'Plan B' by the autumn - meaning withdrawal. They know the next six-month period is their opportunity. And they say it's getting harder every day," the former official said.

By improving security, the plan's short-term aim is to create time and space for the Iraqi government to bring rival Shia, Sunni and Kurd factions together in a process of national reconciliation, us officials say. If that works within the stipulated timeframe, longer-term schemes for rebuilding Iraq under the so-called "go long" strategy will be set in motion. But the next six months are make-or-break for both the US military and the Iraqi government.
 
Army Retribution - Wounded At Walter Reed Told To Shut Up

Walter Reed patients told to keep quiet
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/02/TNSreedinspect070227/
By Kelly Kennedy - Staff writer
Posted : Wednesday Feb 28, 2007 20:26:13 EST

Soldiers at Walter Reed Army Medical Center’s Medical Hold Unit say they have been told they will wake up at 6 a.m. every morning and have their rooms ready for inspection at 7 a.m., and that they must not speak to the media.

“Some soldiers believe this is a form of punishment for the trouble soldiers caused by talking to the media,” one Medical Hold Unit soldier said, speaking on the condition of anonymity.

It is unusual for soldiers to have daily inspections after Basic Training.

Soldiers say their sergeant major gathered troops at 6 p.m. Monday to tell them they must follow their chain of command when asking for help with their medical evaluation paperwork, or when they spot mold, mice or other problems in their quarters.

They were also told they would be moving out of Building 18 to Building 14 within the next couple of weeks. Building 14 is a barracks that houses the administrative offices for the Medical Hold Unit and was renovated in 2006. It’s also located on the Walter Reed Campus, where reporters must be escorted by public affairs personnel. Building 18 is located just off campus and is easy to access.

The soldiers said they were also told their first sergeant has been relieved of duty, and that all of their platoon sergeants have been moved to other positions at Walter Reed. And 120 permanent-duty soldiers are expected to arrive by mid-March to take control of the Medical Hold Unit, the soldiers said.

As of Tuesday afternoon, Army public affairs did not respond to a request sent Sunday evening to verify the personnel changes.

The Pentagon also clamped down on media coverage of any and all Defense Department medical facilities, to include suspending planned projects by CNN and the Discovery Channel, saying in an e-mail to spokespeople: “It will be in most cases not appropriate to engage the media while this review takes place,” referring to an investigation of the problems at Walter Reed.
 
US Generals, Admirals Will Quit If Bush Hits Iran
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article1434540.ece
SOME of America’s most senior military commanders are prepared to resign if the White House orders a military strike against Iran, according to highly placed defence and intelligence sources.

Tension in the Gulf region has raised fears that an attack on Iran is becoming increasingly likely before President George Bush leaves office. The Sunday Times has learnt that up to five generals and admirals are willing to resign rather than approve what they consider would be a reckless attack.

“There are four or five generals and admirals we know of who would resign if Bush ordered an attack on Iran,” a source with close ties to British intelligence said. “There is simply no stomach for it in the Pentagon, and a lot of people question whether such an attack would be effective or even possible.”

A British defence source confirmed that there were deep misgivings inside the Pentagon about a military strike. “All the generals are perfectly clear that they don’t have the military capacity to take Iran on in any meaningful fashion. Nobody wants to do it and it would be a matter of conscience for them.
 
The americans were never planning on going home, it is/was a war of occupation: nothing to do with WMD's, nothing to do with a dictator; everything to do with a long occupation and control of oil supply (and a likely launching point into other countries.)
Click to expand...

America isn't a person. It's a diverse political entity, the landscape of which changes every four years. What could possibly be the point of an "occupy forever" strategy when they're never more than four years away from a "get the **** out" government? Don't be silly.

That the Americans armed forces weren't prepared for an occupation is obvious. They were fully anticipating being out by now.

Iraq invasion plan 'delusional'

The US is now sending some 20,000 extra troops to Iraq
The US invasion plan for Iraq envisaged that only 5,000 US troops would remain in Iraq by December 2006, declassified Central Command documents show.
The material also shows that the US military projected a stable, pro-US and democratic Iraq by that time.

The August 2002 material was obtained by the National Security Archive (NSA). Its officials said the plans were based on delusional assumptions.

The US currently has some 132,000 troops in the violence-torn state.

'Completely unrealistic'

The documents - in the former of PowerPoint slides - were prepared by the now-retired Gen Tommy Franks and other top commanders at the time.

All of these were delusions

Thomas Blanton, National Security Archive


Iran border sealed
Shia cleric 'in Iran'

The documents were presented at a briefing in August 2002 - less than a year before the US invasion of Iraq in April 2003.

The commanders predicted that after the fighting was over there would be a two- to three-month "stabilisation" phase, followed by an 18- to 24-month "recovery" stage.

They projected that the US forces would be almost completely "re-deployed" out of Iraq at the end of the "transition" phase - within 45 months of invasion.

"Completely unrealistic assumptions about a post-Saddam Iraq permeate these war plans," NSA executive director Thomas Blanton said in a statement posted on the organisation's website.

"First, they assumed that a provisional government would be in place by 'D-Day', then that the Iraqis would stay in their garrisons and be reliable partners, and finally that the post-hostilities phase would be a matter of mere months'," Mr Blanton said.

"All of these were delusions," he added.

The NSA said it received the documents last month, after making a request in 2004.

The NSA is an independent research institute at George Washington University.

It obtained the papers under the Freedom of Information Act.
Click to expand...
 
For general info, one might want to examine
The Israeli origins of Bush II's war
http://www.thornwalker.com/ditch/snieg_isrorgs.htm
While the neoconservatives were the driving force behind the American invasion of Iraq and the consequent efforts to bring about regime change throughout the Middle East, the idea for such a war did not originate with American neocon thinkers but rather in Israel. An obvious linkage exists between the war position of the neocons and what has long been a strategy of the Israeli Right and, to a lesser extent, of the Israeli mainstream.

The idea of a Middle East war had been bandied about in Israel for many years as a means of enhancing Israeli security. War would serve two purposes. It would enhance Israel's external security by weakening and splintering Israel's neighbors. Moreover, such a war and the consequent weakening of Israel's external enemies could help resolve the internal Palestinian demographic problem, since the Palestinian resistance has derived material and moral support from Israel's neighboring states..
(more)

AND

http://www.newyorker.com/printables/fact/070305fa_fact_hersh

A STRATEGIC SHIFT

In the past few months, as the situation in Iraq has deteriorated, the Bush Administration, in both its public diplomacy and its covert operations, has significantly shifted its Middle East strategy. The “redirection,” as some inside the White House have called the new strategy, has brought the United States closer to an open confrontation with Iran and, in parts of the region, propelled it into a widening sectarian conflict between Shiite and Sunni Muslims.

To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has coöperated with Saudi Arabia’s government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran. The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda..
(more)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X