Posted on 09/08/2007 9:18:37 PM PDT by smoothsailing
The Tide Is Turning in Iraq
The tribal movement against al Qaeda in Anbar province has spread to other parts of the country.
BY KIMBERLY KAGAN
Sunday, September 9, 2007 12:01 a.m.
The initial concept of the "surge" strategy in Iraq was to secure Baghdad and its immediate environs, which is why its proper name was the "Baghdad Security Plan." But as President Bush pointed out during his surprise trip to Iraq, operations and events on the ground are already showing successes well beyond Baghdad in Anbar, Diyala and Salahaddin provinces--formerly al Qaeda strongholds and hotbeds of the Sunni insurgency.
Considering the speed with which these successes have developed, and the rapidly growing grass-roots movement among Iraqis to support the effort, there is every reason to be optimistic about the prospects for establishing security in Iraq, and every reason to continue supporting the current strategy.
The first major combat operation of the surge, Operation Phantom Thunder, began on June 15 and accomplished its primary objectives. American troops and Iraqi Security Forces eliminated all of al Qaeda's sanctuaries in the Baghdad belts, including its urban stronghold in Baqubah. U.S. forces cleared Dora, al Qaeda's stronghold in western Baghdad. They established an extensive net of outposts in former enemy safe havens, degraded the capabilities of Shiite militias, and dramatically reduced sectarian violence and spectacular attacks in and around the capital.
Phantom Thunder was the first coherent campaign aimed at all of the major al Qaeda strongholds at once. As a result, terrorists could not move from one safe haven to another. Iraqi and coalition forces killed, wounded and captured thousands of them.
Six months ago, insurgents operated freely around Baghdad's belts. Now U.S. and Iraqi forces limit them to discrete areas, more distant from urban centers, where they cannot easily defend themselves.....
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
.
MEL’s -PASSION- sparked by -WE WERE SOLDIERS-
http://www.Freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1085111/posts
http://www.Freerepublic.com/~aloharonnie/
http://www.Freerepublic.com/~anita1/
.
Perhaps we will be able to bring the troops home sooner than we think.
As long as it’s under the terms of victory, not legislated defeat by the Democrats.
Of course we really need a permanent base in Iraq, like we have in Ramstein, Germany.
Our exit strategy should be rotating the battalions so they all get combat experience. THAT is how we leave Iraq as outlined by Duncan Hunter.
How would that be an improvement?
I’m pretty sure Al Asad airbase will be one of them. It has 2 of the longest runways in IQ (13,123’) I believe Balad also has 2 of the longest runways (11,300’ & 11,200’) and will be one of the permanent bases. Camp Ananconda might stay intact too. There might be 1 or 2 other large bases, to remain.
From what I understand, the Democrats have mandated that the bases be non-permanent structures, and the troops have to work out of trailers and such.
Yes- per the rats and with the help of some of their spineless counterparts, concrete structures are verboten. There are however, a great number of hard buildings on the base, with which to choose from for occupancy. There are tents & ‘cans’ used for housing primarily.
this war like every one before it and every one to come after it depends on having the right person at the right place and at the right time to win it.
On what basis do you make these claims? Just because they're Muslims? Are you suggesting we just abandon the entire Mideast and hope for the best? Respectfully, that's nuts.
I don’t know, but I feel a need of more troops in Baghdad. The casualties of US troops are now down to around 80 from above 100 months ago. Civilian casualties mark around 1500 stubbornly while Iraqi security force casualties recorded a new low below 100 last month on icasualties.org. It’s a difficult analysis with different trends of casualties between groups. In Baghdad, many are killed in the dark, rather than old fashioned suicide bombing, which the coalition force needs to adjust itself to hunt those engaging killing-in-the-dark tactictics. Approximately 15 people in Baghdad per day are found dead, likely a result of the in-the-dark murders. This adds up to at least 30% of the total deaths of iraqi civilians per months. One news source points to Shiite extremists and Iranian agents, which is very likely pointing to Mahdi Army. Sadr demanded to avoid clashes, but whatever their motivations, the coalition should begin to plan a total offensive against Mahdi Army and kill or capture Al Sadr. Baghdad needs more clean up.
I hear you.
And all I can say in reply is this....
As Americans, we are not conquerors, nor occupiers, it is just not our way...
That said, we have a noble history as a nation of promoting and expanding the human concept that we enjoy, individial freedom and liberty.
That's all I know, Carry, as long as we spread the hope of freedom, our own freedom remains safer.
Nor do I, Wiz. That's why we have the CIC, ground commanders, and the finest military the world has ever known.
I'm turning in.
Tomorrow there be more dragons! :-)
The Surge is Working and Victory is Near
Pray for W and Our Troops
I am cautiously optimistic.
But, it’s up to the Iraqis to support their own country and to dissavow extremists and violent tribal murder-groups.
Hopefully they have begun to see the darkness that Al-Qeada promises, and the hope that freedom and reconciliation holds for their future.
Let’s hope the dems don’t ruin the progress with their selfish political opportunism.
Um, in case you hadn't noticed, Muslims have a predominant antipathy for Israel and it's not going away.
Are you suggesting we just abandon the entire Mideast and hope for the best? Respectfully, that's nuts.
OK, we "secure" Iraq. How many troops will have to remain on a steady state basis for the foreseeable future? Then add the number it will take to quell Iran, Pakistan, possibly Indonesia, and still be able to deal with China?
I do think we've bit off more than we can reasonably chew when it comes to dealing with both Islam and communofascism simultaneously (as if we weren't infested with the latter), especially when we try to "make friends and influence people" at the rate of spending to which we've been teaching the world to become used. As is easily observable, things are getting out of hand in our own hemisphere, and fast while our infrastructural, educational, and demographic trends aren't exactly what I'd reasonably call hunky dory.
I'm not looking for an "exit strategy" as much as I'm looking to manage finite resources, especially debt and young male volunteers. We don't have the money or the people to police both a billion Islamists, more Chinese, and half a billion crazed hispanics, especially when half of our own country (or more) is being fed a steady diet of an equivalently destructive ideology. Isn't that evident?
Liberals are scared to death of Rupert Murdoch and the WSJ and they should be.
The WSJ does good old fashioned reporting - anathema to the J-school grads and their editors at the NY Slimes and others.
I have a dream. The WSJ puts out regional papers with two sections devoted strictly to national, finanacial and world news PLUS a regional section with region-specific, objective news reports.
Forget the crossword, forget the jumble, forget the comics and the horoscope, just good old reporting.
The mass has a thirst for a paper like that. It would sell hugh.
Democracies don't make war on each other, not since the days of Greece.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.