Newshoggers Comments
According to ABC News (a favourite Pentagon tool),
Remote-controlled explosives strapped to two mentally retarded women detonated in a coordinated attack on Baghdad pet bazaars Friday, Iraqi officials said, killing at least 73 people in the deadliest day since the U.S. sent 30,000 extra troops to the capital last spring.Right-wingers are howling about the evil within, without any apparent wonder as to how on earth anyone would know that the bombers had "Down syndrome." I mean, how the hell does one make that observation of a suicide bomber after the fact?
The chief Iraqi military spokesman in Baghdad, Brig. Gen. Qassim al-Moussawi, claimed the female bombers had Down syndrome and that the explosives were detonated by remote control, indicating they may not having been willing attackers in what could be a new method by suspected Sunni insurgents to subvert stepped up security measures.
Good question and thanks for the link. I suppose they relied on eyewitness accounts, Down's sufferers do have a distinctive physical appearance, but of course eyewitness accounts are often unreliable and the Pentagon and its Iraqi lackeys are even more unreliable reporters.
I expect that years from now, if the truth comes out, the sheer weight of the lies will be crushing.
I think most are going with Owens:
http://confederateyankee.mu.nu/a...ives/
253726.php
The surge, you see (like spell-check) is a gimmick in Libby's eyes, and the very real drop in attacks and casualties around Iraq because of the application of COIN doctrine is just the result of artificial "manipulatons," whatever they may be.
Both, of course, miss the larger picture in their desire, their need to prove their worldview right. But she is right in one regard... she is "under-schooled" in how this war is being fought, and why it is being won.
These attacks today are not the first time al Qaeda in Iraq has stooped to using female suicide bombers. They have been used several times, including twice earlier this month in Diyala.
This tells us several things.
First, it tells us that al Qaeda in Iraq recognizes that attempts to use male suicide bombers and vehicle-borne improvised explosive devices (VBIEDs), their preferred method of suicide attacks for those seeking martyrdom, are no longer effective. These attacks fail because the combination of coalition military forces, Iraqi security forces, and neighborhood militias, known as "concerned local citizens" (CLCs) creating a security system that increasingly works, and makes it very unlikely that these preferred attacks will succeed. There is also some speculation that the influx of would-be foreign suicide bombers into Iraq is drying up.
Today's attacks also tell us that al Qaeda in Iraq is getting very desperate in seeking the high-casualty attacks that they so value. They were forced to scrape the bottom of the proverbial barrel, and use not only women (which they'd prefer to subjugate), but mentally disabled women at that, suggesting that finding willing volunteers is becoming ever more difficult.
These attacks today serve to show that al Qaeda in Iraq is not quite finished, but then, that is something we already knew. What is does show us is just how desperate they are to retain relevance in a war that is going very badly for them.
Far from today's attacks being a sign of the "surge" in Iraq failing, the extraordinary lengths al Qaeda was forced to take to carry out these attacks show that the "surge" and the COIN doctrine implemented by General Petraeus are working precisely as we'd hoped.
Impeachment?
Really thinking outside the box there.
GO,
very real drop in attacks and casualties around Iraq because of the application of COIN doctrine Don't forget Sadr's ceasefire and the Awakening crews - neither of which had anything to do with Petreaus' surge and both of which have warned they'll open fire again if they don't get what they want. The US military gives these equal credit with the surge - why don't you?
Don't forget either that we liberals were advocating Petreaus style COIN back in 2005 when it might have really made a difference. And we got called names by you wingnuts for it back then. You wasted two years and many lives because you wouldn't listen until your own plans were FUBAR even in your own eyes.
But go on - name an actual reconciliation effected by the surge. Bush himself said that creating space for reconciliation was its purpose. Tactical success thanks in great part to the troops on the ground, strategic failure thanks in great part to the administration you support.
Regards, C
LOL. You know you scored a hit when they target your typos...
Otherwise, I agree with what Cernig said. There was a time a COIN or surge strategy would have worked, but that window had long closed by the time Bush got around to using it. Like everything else about this occupation, all his decisions were made for his own political benefit, not for the success of the mission -- whatever the hell it's supposed to be this week.
TheBhc - One of the grisly artifacts of bombing vests is that very often the heads of the bombers are preserved intact by a quirk of physics. Downs Syndrome has physical signs which often manifest in facial structure. It is, therefore perfectly reasonable to figure out from post bombing evidence that the bombers did, indeed have Down's Syndrome. Another very common feature of the syndrome is low intelligence, an incredibly sunny disposition, excessive trust of others, and not being willing to hurt a fly.
The idea that two people with the condition were actual suicide bombers, understood what that meant, and blew themselves up at markets almost at the same time is ludicrous.
It would be useful if readers would actually follow the link. The reconciliation bill that the US hailed was vetoed and sent back to parliament for being insufficiently generous. At the same time, the Maliki government may get its Sunni partners back and the veto was part of the negotiations. That's par for the course in parliamentary democracies.
The violence stats were also interesting. The January violence was down, not up both compared to a year ago and a month ago. How this is a resurgence of violence escapes me.
TML - a year and a month ago was about when the bloody surge was ordered against all advice, including the much touted Baker Commission and at a time when everyone was saying that the level of violence was unacceptable. Raising violence levels above that and then going back to that level simply isn't progress.
I don't see why that's so difficult to grasp.
Typos corrected with thanks to my human spell checker.
One more, Libby: "adaption" in your last paragraph should be "adaptation."
Excellent post, btw.
I don't believe any "liberal" when they said they wanted anything but a withdrawal from Iraq. The evidence in the rhetoric has been apparent since before the boots got on the ground.
Thanks Kathy. I never use the spellcheck and clearly my eyesight is failing me. My proofing sucks today.
Steve, I never wanted to invade in the first place but once we got stuck there, it would have been nice to plan the strategy for military success instead of political gain. That didn't happen -- ever, as far as I can see.
Our troops didn't die for freedom, they died for the GOP and frankly that pisses me off. I honestly don't understand why you all aren't pissed about that too.
SteveIL
I don't believe any "liberal" when they said they wanted anything but a withdrawal from Iraq. The evidence in the rhetoric has been apparent since before the boots got on the ground.
Here, try this post of mine from April 2005. It pretty much anticipates Petraeus' COIN doctrine by two years - which isn't all that surprising since everybody except US Republicans saw the need for such a doctine even then. Back then, it might have worked but you 'wingers were too busy calling every insurgent a "terrorist cockroach" to pursue an Awakening, proper reconstruction and real reconcilliation.
Two years later, I maintain, the damage done by inactivity then is too deep to fix by only that COIN doctrine now. I blame you lot for not listening back then, not us liberals for being defeatists.
Regards, C
but I don't see it as a sign of desperation.
I suggest a closer reading of the Koran.
C,
Who do you like on Sunday?
Libby, spell check is highly overrated. It has no idea what a homophone is and can't tell you if you've incorrectly used one. As long as the word is spelled right, spell check doesn't mind if it's used incorrectly.
I miss typos in my own posts all the time. Sometimes I have to republish half a dozen times 'fore I'm through, lol.
LOL, American spell-checking programmes never agree with me anyway.
Who do I like on Sunday? Stirling County RFC 
Regards, C
So if al-Qaeda succeeds in donating a bomb anywhere in Iraq, we lost? Boy you're stupid.
A "brilliant sign of adaptation". You seem very eager to give cowardly fascist murderers who used helpless pawns praise. Why don't you just slap yourself in the head a few times for writing something that stupid.
Oh goodie, the Insta-mouthbreathers have arrived. Thanks, Bob, your check's in the post!
Ian, wouldn't it be even more stupid not to notice AQ adapting its tactics because you were too busy calling them names from a distance?
Regards, C
Ian take your meds. It IS a brilliant tactical move. Acknowledging that doesn't mean I approve of it.
Maybe you can tell me how our troops are supposed to counter the tactic because I don't see how they can. That's been the problem with this stupid occupation from the beginning of the insurgency. We've got a brass heavy, stationary military force fighting roving bands of nimble guerrillas. By the time we adapt to their tactics, they're already moving on to something new. Numerous instances of this have been well documented here.
I don't need meds. You on the other hand I'm not so sure about. The gushing admiration you have for people that violate every possible norm of warfare and human decency is touching. Murdering unarmed civilians? A "brilliant adaptation". Using mentally impaired individuals to unwittingly do their dirty work? A "brilliant adaptation" too. Setting off a bomb in Iraq? Proof that all is lost, that al-Qaeda, through its tactical "brilliance" has won. Can you possibly have set the bar lower? I doubt the terrorists themselves can express more satisfaction regarding their handiwork. Sorry, but when your first reaction to cowardly mass murder is to say "I told you so" without any sense of sincere indignation, you need more than medication. Try a lobotomy.
LOL, American spell-checking programmes never agree with me anyway.
Right you are, C. Another strike against them!
The Surge has failed?
You are maybe one of three people in the world who actually believe that.
Hell, you don't even believe that. No one is that stupid.
Your glee over a return to the halcyon days of daily bombings in Iraq as a way to say 'see I told you so' is a rank embarassment.
You should be ashamed of yourself.
3 people? You need to get out of the echo chamber more, Ken.
And BTW, no-one here has shown "glee". However, we don't have our heads in the sand by way of substituting calling the enemy names for keeping an eye on their shifting tactics.
I've had enough of this particular unwarranted insult, on this or any other thread. Future such comments will get their author banned.
Regards, C
I can't fail to notice that all those who are accusing me of 'cheering' on the insurgents, or whoever is doing this, aren't able to answer my question. I'll repeat it for the slow learners.
How are our troops supposed to counter this tactic?
By the way, calling me stupid for asking the question, is not an answer. And suggesting I'm happy about this development is beyond silly and merely underlines that you obviously don't have an answer.
Ken ---the Surge had tangible political outcomes it sought to achieve --- namely a reconciled, unitary national government that enjoyed both legitimacy from all relevant veto players in Iraq and a near monopoly on violence. That was the strategic objective as announced by President Bush in Jan. 2007.
Are we closer to that end-state or not?
No we are not --- the one tangible step along the way towards that goal, de-ba'athification laws is a farce and will soon be veto-ed by the Sunni Arab VP. Oil revenue sharing has not advanced, the Awakening Councils de-legitimatized the central government's claim to a monopoly on legitimate force and the Kurds are still running their own independent polity.
Yes, the drop in violence from the highs of the 1h07 to levels more comparable to 2004/2005 is a good thing. However it has not helped the US achieve any strategic objectives.
fester
Your response shows a real lack of understanding of how things work in the Islamic world. In the Islamic world all things start at the ground level and work their way up, not from the top down. In most Islamic countries there are dictators in charge so it appears that the power is with the central government but that is a facade. Look at the trouble Lebanon has with the Hezbollah in their midst. In Egypt it is the Muslim brotherhood. There is no Muslim country that has complete control of their country, but rather they cede certain areas to the control of these radicals. To expect Iraq to become a Jeffersonian democracy overnight is the most unrealistic of expectations ever put forth.
You are asking them to throw aside a couple thousands of years of their culture. Even Russia is sliding back now, but it is more, in the case of Russia, because the people there are used to a all powerful central government, whether it was Czars or Communists.
In the Muslim world everything is done down at the tribal, town, province level and then flows upward. Trying to put your western ideals that you grew up with on this culture is to show your ignorance of how things in other parts of the world work.
But of course you could have asked any 20 year old Army guy who has just come back from there and gotten the same answer instead of listening to 50 year old professors who expertise consists of reading the "Kite Runner".
Siteowners note - comments thread cleaned up to deal with those who cannot read the rest of the thread and follow simple precepts for polite discussion. I will continue to do so.
Please note this is more acknowledgement (i.e. any) than Pajama Wearing Fool gave of his deletion of my comment on his blog. Since most of the rightwing replies are now coming to this post via his link from Malkin's Hot Air blog, I suggest you take up any free speech objections with him.
Thank you.
Cernig
BTW i went to JWF's site and he didn't delete your remarks. They are on the thread where you put them. You were just looking in the wrong place.
Regards, C"
What are you talking about? Your comment is still where you left it last night. On another post.
JWF | Homepage | 02.02.08 - 1:08 pm | #
Your comments are on this thread. I know this whole blogosphere thing gets confusing sometimes.
http://jammiewearingfool.blogspo...e- depraved.html
To expect Iraq to become a Jeffersonian democracy overnight is the most unrealistic of expectations ever put forth
Very true, and something this site and several others have been saying for years now in respect to Bush's rhetoric from even before the invasion.
And that includes the stated goals of the surge, which was to provide the central government breathing space to enforce its authority on the regions. It was criticized as unworkable then, and it is clearly not what is happening now, where the "awakening" councils mean the central government has even less real authority than it used to.
And outside of partition, what's the path forward? Now that you've empowered the local councils, how do you disempower them in favour of the central government? Without them turning against you once again?
You're correct JAG. My mistake on that.
However, the notion that anyone here is "gleeful" about the use of disabled people as human bombs is ridiculous. I'll continue to delete such blatant Liberal Derangement Syndrome insults.
Given that someone with Down's is less likely to be suspiciously looked upon by security forces or locals and still less likely to object to their use in this way, it's a clever but repellent AQ tactic. It seems to us that worrying about how to counter the tactic will be more productive than calling the perpetrators names, however.
That's all, no glee.
Have a look upthread for the link to a post I wrote in 2005 which pressaged much of what Petraeus did in the Surge. Back then, we liberals were being told talk of changing the COIN paradigm was defeatist. Now we want to look beyond the Surge to larger dynamics we're defeatist again. Go figure.
Regards, C
BJ
That is the whole point. You don't disempower them. You fold them into the central government. Think of these local councils as our House of Representatives. They retain control of their tribes and clans are given seats in the federal government. It will take another couple of rounds of elections for this to materialize in a form that westerners will recognize.
And before you criticize their progress on oil revenuse how long have we been arguing and scaring people with the status of Social Security program with no progress or change. Bush proposed a change and we all saw what happened. I don't think we can cast any stones.
I'll answer your question on, "how U.S. Forces are supposed to *counter* AQI using mentally disabled women as human bombs".
Do you really think local Iraqi's are going to be weaned over to AQ's side with such tactics? Don't you think locals will be more inclined to turn on insurgents who use such tactics?
Your reasoning really isn't very deep I'm afraid.
James, none of us have said that so you're reasoning for us. We've said all AQI really needs to do from its point of view is help keep the Iraqi situation unstable by any means.
Regards, C
No, AQI resorting to these sort of tactics is what led to the Anbar Awakening. Without the local population on your side no insurgency can survive. The Iraqi's are tired of doing the dying and that crosses their religious differences. This is not a situation that can be solved in the time it takes you to watch a sitcom and the solution to all of life's problem do not fit neatly on a bumper sticker. These are the actions of a group in their final death throes, just like the actions of all oppressive regimes exhibit in the end. To borrow from the left, look at the closing days of WWII when the Germans were putting boys into the front line. In Africa they resort to children soldiers also. You are aware that the parties doing this are also Muslim aren't you. It is glossed over in the news reports but it is there. There has been mentally challenged people used by the Palestinians to carry out suicide attacks also. It is not a new tactic by any means. In Afghanistan they have used young kids to get close also.
Read some reports out of Thailand where they are doing the same thing in what the press calls the "restive south".
There is a continuous list of these types of attacks being carried out all around the globe not just Iraq.
check
How are our troops supposed to counter this tactic?
Swiftly and violently.
Make those that do this fear walking into the daylight and the darkness even more dangerous.
JAG
You can't just "fold in" locally autonomous organizations into a central government without them having to give up some of their autonomy.
If you want to use a US example, (after telling us that the Islamic world works differently), I would point you to that little tiff you had over "state's rights" about a 150 years ago.
Now, I'm not saying that the Iraqis won't come up with some kind of solution over the next century or so, but outside of John McCain, who wants to keep the US fighting the insurgency there that long?
I've turned on comment moderation for now. Can I strongly suggest that posters read the site comments policy before commenting? The link is at the bottom of the left sidebar. Thanks, C
Libby, you should read the Iraq Study Group and James Baker recommended the surge. It is on page 7.
The Iraqi government should accelerate assuming responsibility for Iraqi security by
increasing the number and quality of Iraqi Army brigades. While this process is under way, and
to facilitate it, the United States should significantly increase the number of U.S. military
personnel, including combat troops, imbedded in and supporting Iraqi Army units. As these
actions proceed, U.S. combat forces could begin to move out of Iraq.
You should also read more on the bombing in Iraq. The bombs were detonated by remote control.
How to counter these tactics? I think the premise of the question is wrong. Suppose some pro life terrorist blew up an abortion clinic using downs syndrome people. Would your response be that we will just have to permanently shut down all abortion clinics, or perhaps we will just have to let them keep bombing until they get tired? Policy should not be set by tactics.
Re Down Syndrome - as someone mentioned, people with the syndrome have a distinctive appearance, and the head is generally intact after a suicide device explodes the torso. Also, there most likely were survivors, some of whom may have seen the women.
Finally, the syndrome is genetic, so tests could ensure whether they had the syndrome.
The bottom line, however, is that these people are EVIL to prey on disabled, innocent women to kill their fellow countrymen. EVIL.
The proper tactic is for Arab women to reject the burkha. Perhaps a switch to the form fitting burkina is in the offing.
Iraqi society, in rejecting the terrorists, will also reject the conditions which makes the terrorist acts possible. Palestinian women bring extra burkhas to Palestinian terrorists, to help them escape. The Geneva convention states that the illegal combatants do not gain protection by taking advantage of protected structures, crowds, or women and children. Rather, by their acts the illegal combatants remove protection from buildings or people so used. The rules were written that way to give the illegal combatant no incentive to so violate protected structures.
Palestinian society by embracing terrorism, chooses to make all women targets. Iraqi society, by rejecting terrorism will protect women from coercion by the terrorists, and the burkha is likely to be the casualty.
They knew one of the women suffered from Down's Syndrome because she was a regular at the market, well known locally as "the crazy lady." Doubtless the other one was known the same way, too.
Using the mentally handicapped to fight only seems brilliant to the Left, who often let their loonies lead. To the sane, it's an obvious sign of desperation. Once upon a time, the insurgents could count upon a steady stream of volunteers to meet chicks in paradise by blowing themselves up. It appears those volunteers are running out.
It demonstrates the faltering morale of the insurgents, who no longer see their cause as one worth dying for. They're losing. We're winning.
Okay. I'm glad to see some responsive answers because I asked the question out of genuine concern for the troops and our children's future. JAG I don't think the perps, and let's just stipulate that they're AQI, care about winning over the people. I think their sole aim is to keep a low level conflict going forever so they can bleed us dry. They don't need to beat us, they can't. They just need to keep us there long enough to bankrupt us. Isn't that what happened to Russia in Afghanistan? And I don't think it can solved quickly. I don't think WE can solve it ever. I'm not the one who, a year ago, promised it would be solved in six months. That was Bush and Pet. And isn't the fact that this is a well used tactic worldwide an indication of its success?
Mark, one graf from the report doesn't make the case for me. I may be wrong, but I seem to recall the recommendation being for a withdrawal coming from many quarters. And I'm aware the bombs were detonated remotely, as are the IEDs. That's a perfect example of AQI adapatability. We spent a lot of time and money figuring out how to jam their high tech remote systems. By the time the process went through the cumbersome chain of command, and we succeeded at doing so, they had already switched back to low tech methods rendering our new stuff useless. I don't see how we can match their agility with our current military structure.
Thomas, that's not a valid analogy. We don't have roving bands of anti-choice terrorists routinely carrying out suicide missions. Tactics shouldn't dictate policy, but neither should politics, which which has been my main bitch right through this whole sorry debacle. IMO, Bush has made all his decisions based on domestic politics, rather than military strategy and I would think tactics certainly should dictate strategy on the ground.
Catttt, agreed these people are evil. They're slime. That doesn't change the fact that there's really nothing we can do to stop them entirely and everything that Bush has decided to do so far has only made it worse. Bush is right now dealing under the table to establish a permanent presence there. I don't think he wants to win, I think he wants to leave behind the biggest mess possible. Which is why I think we should impeach him -- before he succeeds.
Don, no offense but considering the composition of the government and the sway of the Sharia crowd there, I don't see them banning the burkha anytime soon. Women lost a lot of ground since the new Iraq govt came in and those who try to dress in western clothing are routinely victims of violence now.
Tantor, I wish I could believe in that last throes thing, but I've been hearing that since Fallujah One. Every change in tactics has been a sure sign of their desperation and ultimate demise. Yet they're still there and hundreds of people are dying every day. I'm sorry. I just don't see any meaningful progress here.
I'm not the one who, a year ago, promised it would be solved in six months.
Can you point me to a citation for this claim?
Purple Avenger --- President Bush's benchmarks included Iraqi control over the security in all 18 provinces by November, 2007, provincial elections to be held 'later this year [2007] and other benchmarks are grammatically framed to be within this one year time frame that was laid out in Jan. 2007. If these goals were accomplished, supposedly there would be political reconciliation.
The entire speech is here
I excerpted the relevant parts for a post here:
Now onto the 6 month evaluation criteria -- in Sept. 07 Petreaus asked for another six months before any critical evaluation be made of his campaign plan.
So I see my comment wasn't "approved" while ones with various ad hominems against people like me remain up.
What a bunch of hypocrites (as usual) on the Left.
Chaos, you're telling me no-one's ever been banned from LGF or Hot Air? I've had comments not be approved at the latter and other rightwing sites just for not following their approved line.
But there's more than one of us moderating comments. Fester lets stuff stand that I wouldn't, for instance. Hey, those are the breaks. This is our place here and we run it the way we want to. If that bothers you, tell me when I can come around and camp on your lawn with my hippie friends playing diggeridoos
Regards, C
Using the mentally impaired as human bombs to intentionally blow up innocent civilians by remote control is diabolical. To refer to this as a brilliant adaptation is insane when any young jihadist could have just as easily wandered up to the same place and self detonated but the people of Iraq hate al-Qaeda. The people of Iraq and the Americans will know be watching for the use of the impaired, the elderly and anyone else whom could be used as a human bomb against their will.
Ms. Spencer, we of course agree that the terrorists are scum. I think our central disagreement is one of desire to succeed and help others to join the 21st century versus hopelessness and desire to fold in one's wings and hide from the world. With all due respect, I think you decided in advance that the surge would not work because if it does, your original thesis would be wrong, and that you are using these bombings (obviously coordinated) to your own ends a little precipitously.
The general consensus now, whether you like it or not, is that it is working. The surge has been on target and in line with what Gen. Petraeus has stated.
As a general rule, nothing bad can be completely stopped, though there are notable exceptions (smallpox comes to mind). However, I think you are wrong about the surge failing. More than three times as many Americans now think things are better, versus worse, in Iraq due to the surge (though that and a buck will buy me a coffee).
In spite of this horrific crime, I think the main point is that the Iraqis are (imho) getting up to speed, taking part in deterroristing their environment and learning to cooperate from the tribal level up. This is something that has never, to my knowledge, occurred before in an Arab country, where the old rules, the old hatreds, and a caliph-like strong man keep everyone in lockstep. Sometimes, it's a nice strong man, but it's still a strong man.
It takes time to learn to step up, it takes courage to innovate, and Iraqis are going there. It is vitally important that we finally got on the same page in Iraq with tribal leaders, who are the backbone of government in any Arab country - Saddam failed in his efforts to wipe out the tribal system, and the leaders are working with us now (I just wish we'd done this in the first place). I predict that in ten years, Iraq will have the best military in the ME, the most stable economy, and the most innovative government (not counting Israel, of course, which out-innovates most of the world).
Just wanted to mention that I've made a couple of comments here today, and I obviously am arguing an opposing view from HaloScan's piece. My comments were both very quickly posted.
Catt -- you're keeping things civil and seeking an intelligent argument... although I am confused as to what you mean by " from Haloscan piece"
Back to your previous comment at the end, I don't think this will happen as the oil curse will dominate as there is nothing else in the Iraqi economy that promises returns anywhere near as good as what selling oil for hard currency. The few countries that have avoided the resource curse have had highly developed trust based political structures in place before they had a resource windfall. I think the structural issues for conflict are way too high for the outcomes that you project.
And with that, I am ending my lame-i-tude and will stop blogging for the rest of my Saturday night
Fester - ahem - Newshoggers piece. Sorry.
Re the oil thing - I think Iraq is way far away from worrying about huge oil cash surpluses entrenching corrupt establishments, which is what the "oil curse" purportedly is. The "oil curse" is something that happens long-term, and imho it is not a valid thesis - it's the initial makeup of the government - centralized, strong man-oriented - that discourages sound long-term economic planning and lack of development cash. While Iraq is brand new at this, development is on the table, and the government is a consolidation of many people, with an underpinning of tribal support.
For 2008-9, the economy is looking good to international planners, with growth predicted at over seven percent this year and hold between 7 and 8 pct in 2009.
Yes Libby, you are wrong. Yes you have heard the call for withdrawal coming from many quarters, but they usually all had to connections on the left. The much touted Iraq Study Group report which you apparently have not read clearly states the need for a surge. So before you go qouting it and Baker, I would suggest you actually read it.
Cattt that's a beautiful scenario and I truly wish I could believe in it but it's not true that there's a consensus on anything. This just in from the WaPo, the generals can't even agree among themselves. Read that link and consider what Fallon has to say. He wants a drawdown and redeployment.
Iraq doesn't exist in a vacuum and we don't have ten years to spend. We don't have the troops and we're going to run out of money. I remind you again about Afghanistan and Russia. Weren't they there for about ten years?
Wow. One of my posts was deleted, and it actually wasn't that bad. It was attempt to respond to a question posed by the author. Maybe I did it too effectively. I'm oppressed! Now we see the violence inherit in the system!
Libby, Maybe you should read more about the engagement between Afghanistan and USSR (not Russia)before you comment on it as well. It was a completely different scenario.
Of course you should also know that we have been in the Balkins for over 10 years now. So why don't you complain about that? We have also been in Germany and Japan for over 60 years now. No problems there for you?
How are our troops supposed to counter this tactic?
That's pretty simple, Libby. What would you do if you had a Downs kid and you had information that there were local gangs using such kids as drug mules or some such?
You'd educate the kid to the threat and you'd keep your eyes peeled for such exploitation.
There's nothing brilliant about this. It's not terribly clever. It's a desperate exploitation that isn't going to enjoy much repeat success. Like using airlines as flying bombs, once you're on to it, it's a pretty easy tactic to counter.
Catt --- here I think is an assumption of disagreement when you state "the government is a consolidation of many people, with an underpinning of tribal support."
The government in my view is a mere head count of the major veto groups in Iraq with minimal cross party, cross cutting allegiances and issues. There is minimal tribal support for example see how reluctant the Maliki government is in trying to incorporate the Awakening groups into uniformed security units (for understandable coup prevention reasons) and the repeated reporting of the Awakening groups saying "First AQI and next those damn Shi'ites in Baghdad." I then take a look at the constitutional referandum, where an overwhelming number of Sunni Arabs rejected the constitution and the reconciliation steps that have been proposed (a committee to consider a committee on hearing new amendments and de-Ba'athification) have either been a sad joke or even more anti-Sunni.
Iraq is a corrupt place. Transparency International ranks it as the third most corrupt country they measured in 2007. The oil curse will take effect there as that is the only thing worth producing for hard currency in Iraq, with the possible exception of opium
Who can reply to all this nonsense? but really, troops in Germany (we've removed most of them) and even UN troops in the Balkans are a pretty lousy comparison and makes for a tendentious analogy.
A US base in Kitzengen isn't there to occupy Germany but was put there to counter what was once a credible threat from the USSR to Europe. Troops in Iraq are engaged in an occupation and are the de facto governmental authority. They are in a shooting war and as long as they are there they will be engaged in a shooting war with the Islamic nations that have attacked us for having troops in Islamic countries.
We are not a provocation in Germany. We are a lethal provocation in Iraq. Get it? Of course you don't. You want to keep insisting that empires built on military occupation no matter how benign, aren't a ticket to collapse as it always has been with every historical example.
Mark, Iraq is not exactly the same situation but I see some parallels in the ultimate effects. Likewise, Bosnia, Japan, Germany, Korea, none of those are the same as Iraq either. Our troops aren't dying there, there's no insurgencies to fight and it isn't costing a fortune in blood and treasure. Not to mention we're there by agreement with the host countries. I assume these agreements were made through customary political channels here with Congressional support and not by some sneaky under the table deal as Bush is currently trying to slip through against the will of the people in the US and in Iraq.
Pablo, my understanding is that these were grown women, not kids. I have a friend my age who is Down's person. She's actually quite capable of living on her own and many of them are highly functional and independent. It's not likely their families keep them under watch 24 hours a day. They're gentle souls who are easily misled.
But even putting that aside, I'm seeing that they're using women more in general, not just Down's women. I still don't see that as being easy to counter. Somehow I don't think invasive body searching of Muslim women at checkpoints would go over well with the general population.
I don't think this means that they can't get men to volunteer for these suicide missions. I think that it's become more difficult to get men in undetected so they changed their tactics to use women and this is a sign that more women are becoming radicalized.
Contrary to the prevailing notion here that I'm saying all this to protect my preconceived notions, I hope and pray that I'm wrong. I would welcome the demise of AQI and would happy to eat all the crow my critics can dish out if I'm proven wrong. What troubles me is that everything I've predicted so far about this mess has come true.
Pablo, my understanding is that these were grown women, not kids. I have a friend my age who is Down's person. She's actually quite capable of living on her own and many of them are highly functional and independent. It's not likely their families keep them under watch 24 hours a day. They're gentle souls who are easily misled.
Right. But they're also not complete idiots. They can coprehend right vs. wrong, and they can comprehend the concept of danger. How many people with Downs relatives in Baghdad do you suppose have already had this conversation with them? If I were in that position, I'd have already done it. How about you?
This isn't rocket surgery.
Libby, I was not trying to draw an analogy, it was a supposition. I was dealing in the abstract, apparently something you are unwilling to do. Quick question, if politics does not determine policy, then what does? Can’t agree on your comment on Bush as he has stuck by the Iraq war and it has cost him both politically and in the popular opinion. I suppose we do agree on the fact that he has executed this war very poorly.
Libby Spencer: "Tantor, I wish I could believe in that last throes thing, but I've been hearing that since Fallujah One. Every change in tactics has been a sure sign of their desperation and ultimate demise. Yet they're still there and hundreds of people are dying every day. I'm sorry. I just don't see any meaningful progress here."
The levels of attacks have dropped to a fraction of their previous tempo. That is meaningful progress. In many cases, former insurgents have switched sides, sickened by Al Qaeda or realizing their cause was hopeless and wrongheaded. That's meaningful progress. In some cases, Iraqi insurgents are patrolling with US soldiers against Al Qaeda and criminals in general. It's hard to see that as anything but meaningful progress.
One of the reasons the tactics seem to change is that the incompetent insurgents have been killed off. The insurgents have not evolved in their tactics so much as that those practicing successful tactics survived.
Meanwhile, outside the attention of the press, our military has been grinding down the insurgents. When we catch an insurgent, he usually freely offers up his entire chain of command, setting off a cascade of raids and arrests. This has been going on for years, whittling down the insurgents, who replace their leaders with less and less competent substitutes, who make mistakes which leads to more cascades.
You hear nothing of what's going on in Iraq because the media want to report on Vietnam, editing the Iraqi news to fit the Vietnam template. If you end run the media and read the raw feed, a different picture emerges. The intercepted messages from Al Qaeda in Iraq back to Bin Laden are not proclamations of victory but rather paint a picture of desperation and dwindling opportunity for success.
When our enemies in Iraq say they're losing, maybe you should take it seriously. You might also consider that in most wars, the victor is not readily apparent until the last phase of the war. The Union did not seem to make meaningful progress in the Civil War until the last eighteen months. The USA seemed to be constantly retreating the first couple years of WWII. Yet, behind the scenes, the mechanisms that ultimately led to victory were at work.
I can only do so much to make up for the failing of the US education system. I don't suppose you have heard of the Red Army Faction or even the Nazi Guerrilla attacks that took place after WWII (called the werewolves). Japan did not really protest because they were to busy trying to find food, there is remarkable research about how children raised after the war were quite a bit shorter than children raised before the war because of the lack of nutrition, but I digress. I guess we could have put Iraq in a similar state, but for some reason I do not think you would like that. Remeber those lovely cities that were completely destroyed (in Germany and Japan)
And Libby, we were not there by agreement of the host countries. Germany and Japan did not have any choice but to accept us, if you say that later there was an agreement than you should be aware that we now have such an agreement with Iraq. You should also not draw any comparisons between how people with disabilities are treated between the US and the rest of the world. In many parts of the mid-east people like this are considered shameful to the family and will be put away in an institution or something. I would more likely believe that the family was tricked in someway, which now that the word is out families will not be so easily tricked.
If you wish to persist in your comparision of the US presence in Iraq to the USSR presence in Afghanistan shall I assume that you wish for US troops to pull out of Afghanistan then as well? Or do you consider that a different comparison?
"It IS a brilliant tactical move. Acknowledging that doesn't mean I approve of it."
Brilliant, say, like how SS guards herded Jews into showers and instead of water...Hah! Tricked You! Gas instead. Or brilliant, say, like taking a power drill to someone's knee so they'll confess to anything you want them to? Or perhaps, brilliant, like, hmmm, perhaps, hijacking airliners and using them as missles?
Although I doubt you truly derive glee from scores of dead Iraqis, you walk a very fine line between reasonable commentary and outright adulation for unconditional evil.
Commenting by HaloScan
