⁂Asterism - astral thinking...
other than building up an Iraqi army which will eventually control 70% of the country by May, yes, billions of dollars wasted right?
The fact that the Army did pretty much a better job than the Police in terms of law and order after the Shrine bombing, billions wasted right?
The fact that you can SAY you governments a failure, can BLAME the occupation, can DERIDE, anyone you want from Iraq, speaks volumes.
Well Ryan, you really are pulling at strings. Eventually? 70%? by May? Really? The only Iraq army unit that was classified by its US trainers as being able to operate independently was recently reclassified as incapable - hardly progress. And frankly 3 years and a few hundred billions should have produced something more credible than this.
How about Fallujah?
We surrounded the terrorists and Baathists and went block by block and killed hundreds of them and took control of the entire city. We uncovered torture chambers where wet blood and flesh were still hanging on the walls and IED factories that were intended to kill Iraqis and Americans alike.
Salam, the American military is the most lethal military in the world. We came from 7,000 miles away (that is force projection that NO other military in the world has) and removed a dictator in 21 days -- and without the 4th ID coming down through Turkey.
Military affairs are NOT your area of expertise. Even if we captured no insurgents, forcing them to relocate allows us to take ground and perhaps follow them and it slows down their car-bomb operations. Also, the Iraqi military, from what I've read, set up the operation from their intelligence and both Iraqi Army and Iraqi Commandos participated in the airborne maneuver. All of that is good because before too long all of Iraq will be the Iraqi military's responsibility.
I believe that Iraq will form a successful democracy. Iraq's democracy, however, will not look like most Western democracies, but it will, nonetheless, become a model for the Middle East.
I've noticed that your pedestrian anti-Americanism often distorts your views about Iraq and its future. If you want to become a respected blogger, I would examine your knee-jerk responses and allow more reasoned ones to surface.
*
Welcome to my humble little rant Jeffrey, and I will do my best not to sound like a pedestrian anti-American.
I am glad you brought up Falluja campaign and listed what you could count as its immediate successes. From any assessment of its legacy, I cannot see what actual positive effect it had on stopping the insurgency. Maybe your pedestrian pro-Americanism is blinding you to the obvious. By any objective measure, the insurgency got stronger after Falluja not weaker.
In fact it was a landmark of two defining factors that determine the mess in Iraq now. 1. The sectarian divisions became more entrenched sparking the civil war we have now. 2. The power of the American military on the politics of Iraq started its downward slide. Before Falluja, America had a real threat that it could frighten people with. Anyone who does not play ball would have their city destroyed. Now the US army did its worst and it did not make a difference. No one was or will ever be cowed into submission.
I for one would be pleased if the American military has the numbers and ability to put a lid on the civil war that is going on now; If it could sack all the militia men from the state army and police forces; If it has the power to keep the whole of Baghdad secure and the electricity on. But it can't without a force at least 3 times the numbers they have now. And as Free Iraqi said, either America puts in the commitment now or it gets out. As its stands now the American army is irrelevent to the political situation that is going on now. Damn it, the Iraqi army is irrelevent. An army needs a government to support and there is no government nor any idea what form that govenment will take thanks to the botched constitution.
America is stuck. It cannot afford to upset the Shia parties, because it is only their silence that is preventing the whole of Iraq from rising up against occupation and masses of Americans getting killed. But these parties are also driving a sectarian war and trying to create a state in the south that could spark a wider international war.
Salam,
If you can hold your knee-jerk anti-Americanism in check, I think we can have a good debate. I judge you to be an intelligent and reasonably well-informed commentator on the affairs in front of us.
I cannot see what actual positive effect it had on stopping the insurgency.
Killing somewhere around a thousand fanatical jihadists and Baathist thugs had, for both Multinational Forces and for Iraqi (non-Saddamite) citizens, a very positive result in that it meant those thousand head-slicers and carbombers were left moldering in a soccer field.
It also taught the insurgents that if you try to take on the American military force-on-force, you are going to die. Since then, the insurgents have stopped full-scale battles with our military and with the Iraqi Army.
More to come.
*
Salam,
I for one would be pleased if the American military has the numbers and ability to put a lid on the civil war that is going on now; If it could sack all the militia men from the state army and police forces.
I don't agree with those who think that a civil war is inevitable. I don't even think we are anywhere close to a civil war now. When entire divisions splinter off from the Iraqi Army and fight each other, then I would say a civil war is in progress. And I don't see that happening.
And as Free Iraqi said, either America puts in the commitment now or it gets out.
We will be getting out. We've walked the Iraqis through the process so far, just as we did with the Japanese and the Germans in the past, and it now time for Iraqis to pull together. It's up to your countrymen, Salam. Have a little more patience. We didn't leave Japan until 1952, seven years after we began our occupation. We turned a deeply authoritarian society into a prosperous democracy. The Japanese really worked hard and built a great country (and they don't have a drop of oil). Iraq can too. It's up to you.
As its stands now the American army is irrelevent to the political situation that is going on now.
I agree.
Damn it, the Iraqi army is irrelevent.
I do not agree. The Iraqi Army before the invasion did have some good commanders but all the moves were dictated by a paranoid dictator, Saddam Hussein. Trainor and Goodwin's "Cobra II" is just being published now that chronicles the military confusion from the Iraqi point of view. Over time, Iraq will field a good military, one we hope will stay under democratic, civilian control.
An army needs a government to support and there is no government nor any idea what form that govenment will take thanks to the botched constitution.
Salam, why the hysterics? A parliament with prime minister and president will be seated within a month or so and the constitution is fine; in fact the constitution is by far the best in the Middle East. Deal with the leaders you have now and just remember that in four years they'll be up for election again. If you don't like their performance, vote them out.
*
Salam,
BTW, I've enjoyed your Iraqi blog round-ups.
I've been commenting on the Iraqi blogs for almost two years now and I've learned a lot from all the Iraqi bloggers, both from the ones I agree with AND the ones I disagree with. As it should be, of course, for those who believe in intellectual honesty.
I've had your blog on the blogroll for a while now too. Check it out.
Iraqi Bloggers Central.
Make sure, however, that you read the subtitle to the blog. Also keep in mind that sometimes I mix a good deal of humor with my sober, not to mention sobering, analysis.
*
Salam,
I thought that perhaps you might have missed the nice job that Hassan has done with the history of the Iraqi blogosphere.
It's was proof-read by many of the originals.
*
Hi Jeffrey,
Your argument on Falluja sounds like you have made up your mind and are fitting the facts around your impression. There was no overall reduction in the number of insurgent operations against the Americans or their effectiveness. And among the thousand insurgents you claim were killed were also a thousand innocent bystanders which just fuels the anger that fuels the insurgency.
Perhaps you have not read my past posts on the constitution. What I mean by 'botched' is that it guarantees that a minority in the parilament can create (as is happeing now) a statemate that prevents the government operating. Which will drive groups in government to use increasingly violent means to break that deadlock. The constitution may have been well-intentioned but it is unworkable and is creating a crisis where an effective government is needed.
BTW - thanks for the link on Hassan's history of blogs and the link back to my blog 
Salam,
Your argument on Falluja sounds like you have made up your mind and are fitting the facts around your impression. There was no overall reduction in the number of insurgent operations against the Americans or their effectiveness.
There were no more force-on-force battles with the insurgents after Fallujah (at least not of that magnitude), and you could certainly argue that we could only hope that the insurgents would attempt many more because it's the easiest way for us to kill insurgents.
But our operation also shut down AN ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD in Fallujah that had been devoted to making carbombs and making videos of head-slicing. All that is good. Did the terrorists relocate and continue? Yes. But, believe me, they would have preferred to stay in Fallujah.
And among the thousand insurgents you claim were killed were also a thousand innocent bystanders which just fuels the anger that fuels the insurgency.
This is simply not true. I have read many sources -- both paper and electronic -- and relied on Bing West's "No True Glory: a Frontline Account of the Battle for Fallujah," which covers in detail Operation Phantom Fury (the November 2004 offensive). There were no "thousand innocent bystanders" IN Fallujah, much less caught in the crossfire and killed.
Hey, did you see that Zeyad had a very long article in the Washington Post today? That's great when an Iraqi blogger is given prime real estate in an American newspaper -- on Sunday too. Check the WaPo website -- you'll need to register, but it's worth it. If you can't, let me know and I'll clip a bit that you can include in your next round-up.
My job here is to persuade you to set aside that knee-jerk anti-Americanism that is the only thing stopping you from being a fine blogger. (Heh heh)
*
[Jeffrey] “Military affairs are NOT your area of expertise. ”
Ah, Jeffrey the famous military tactician, is it? Well, perhaps you could explain why Fallujah was such a success in terms of this factoid:
Insurgent attacks in Iraq jumped in 2005: US
Daily Times - Wednesday, January 25, 2006
“Insurgents in Iraq mounted more than 34,000 attacks last year on US and other foreign troops, Iraqi security forces and Iraqi civilians, a nearly 30 percent jump from 2004, the US military said on Monday.”
Wait, I know, spin me a tale of how “desperate” the Iraqi patriots are!
[Jeffrey] “Killing somewhere around a thousand fanatical jihadists and Baathist thugs had […] a very positive result …”
Of course, if to kill a thousand fanatics, you destroy a city and its occupants, that
’s positive, right? I would argue that instead it has turned a lot more Iraqis against the US instead, and yes, the statistics bear me out as usual.
And this statement of yours is WRONG: [Jeffrey ] “There were no "thousand innocent bystanders" IN Fallujah”
It is a fact, verified by on-the-ground observers that there were many civilians in Fallujah at the time of the assult, some of whom were undoubtedly killed by US forces. Additionally, it is furthermore true that males of 16-65 years of ages were forcibly turned back into the city by US soldiers when they tried to leave on the eve of the attack. These non-combatants were exposed to all the dangers of the battlefield, to the contrary of your disingenuous remarks.
[Jeffrey] “My job here is to persuade you to set aside that knee-jerk anti-Americanism that is the only thing stopping you from being a fine blogger.”
And my job here is to persuade you, Salam Adil, that Jeffrey is nothing more than a troll with too much time on his hands, whose sole purpose is to try to lure Iraqis to his lame excuse for a blog in order to increase exposure to his noxious propaganda.
The fact is, if Salam was a “knee jerk anti-American” he would not have argued so persuasively to try convince me that it was Iran and not the US which was behind the Askariya bombing. But I guess Jeffrey wasn’t here for that one.
Commenting by HaloScan
