Turnabout in Iraq a ‘Miracle’
Sunday, June 22, 2008 at 01:28AM When the New York Times reports on measurable progress in Iraq, you know it’s going well.
Violence across Iraq is at an all time, post-invasion low, Nouri al-Maliki’s opponents now see him from a position of strength rather than weakness and the Iraqi government viewed as legitimate.
One Basra businessman calls the turnabout in Iraq a miracle and says the Iraqi government, army and police are doing very well.
There is still work to be done, but we don’t need to look past our own government and military to see that problems exist. Political stalemates, corruption, a Congress that has been virtually impotent to achieve anything significant and a presidential candidate from a church with deep sectarian (racial) divides should act as our own caution to throw stones at a glass house.
Trackback URL:
http://amyproctor.squarespace.com/blog/trackback/1937396
Iraq 
View Printer Friendly Version
Email Article to Friend
Reader Comments (26)
And the Democrat Congress has just agreed to stay the Course with President Busg bu funding the war.
Makes me wonder what the left will pick on next. They can't just let all this good news stand. Will they try to drum up some new scandal? I can't wait.
Great post!
Ve(R)di-Go: "... stay the Course with President Busg bu"
SG: What 'type' of president is that!?
Snerd
Fout: "... Makes me wonder what the left will pick on next."
SG: Yes with 80% of Americans opposed to the "W"a(R) and Obama with a double digit lead on McCain ... one only wonders what the (D)z will have to do next. Wait! Is that toilet paper stuck to your foot!?
Snerd
Snerd, have you ever heard the expression "If everyone else was jumping off a bridge, would you?"
First, 80% of Americans are not opposed to the war. Last figure I saw was around 55%. Secondly, just because the uninformed masses oppose soemthing the don't understand doesn't mean it's wrong.
This is what changing the world is all about. It's about going against the direction the stream is flowing. Operation Iraq Freedom has been a success and we have liberated an entire nation in the Middle East, strategically positioned against vital countries that have the potentional to make the world a better or worse place.
Bush was right. Get over it.
Amy: "... just because the uninformed masses oppose soemthing the don't understand doesn't mean it's wrong."
SG: Democratically speaking, it does ... if Democracy has any value for you that is.
Snerd
Amy: "... Operation Iraq Liberation (OIL) has been a success ... strategically positioned against vital countries that have the potentional to make the world a better or worse place.
SG: Iran's national prestige, its military power, its Shia's influence in the Middle East have all grown as a direct result of the "W"a(R). America's power, position, prestige, military readiness and treasury have decreased as a direct result of the "W"a(R).
Bush was, is and will be wrong. In fact the there is considerable intellectual assessment that the "W"a(R) is the single biggest blunder in the entire USA history.
Snerd
p.s. 20% of Americanz and be (R)ight without being right
Amy" "... Bush was right. Get over it."
SG: NOT according to Dick Cheney, 1994, who accurately predicted that taking out Saddam would mean US would be alone (with no Arab forces) and, 'It would result in an American OCCUPATION'.
'If you took Saddam down', Cheney said, 'What would you put in its place? It would be a quagmire with parts of Iraq flying off and Kurds causing trouble for Turkey.'
'The question you have to ask yourself is', Cheney continued, 'How many American lives is Saddam worth? NOT VERY MANY, And I think we got it right.
See for yourself Amy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BEsZMvrq-I
Snerd
SG: Oooops! An error on my part in quoting you. It should have read
Amy: "... Operation Iraq [Liberation (OIL)] has been a success ...
Snerd
AMY: "... First, 80% of Americans are not opposed to the war. Last figure I saw was around 55%."
SG:
NBC/WSJ 06/06 - 06/09
Wrong Direction 16
Right Direction 71
ABC News/Wash Post 06/12 - 06/15
Wrong Direction 14
Right Direction 84
Newsweek 06/18 - 06/19
Wrong Direction 14
Right Direction 80
Snerd
Why rehash old business? It is already completely established that all our allies and our own government believed the invasion of Iraq was necessary.
The democrats have been aiding and abetting the enemy the entire way. They have been crying "the war is lost!" ad infinitum. They have attempted to cut war funding, kill the Patriot Act, and give Constitutional protections to terrorists apprehended on the battlefield.
What is really sad is that now that Iraq is on the glidepath to success we still have an absent MSM, and a public that 'opposes' the war (whatever that means). Ask most Americans if they favor immediate withdrawal from Iraq without consulting the Generals. You won't get the kind of stats you are touting Mr. Gronk. And that is Obama's position.
Lastly, President Bush's approval ratings are much higher than the democratic led Congress'. Crude oil prices have doubled since Pelosi and Company assumed the majority in the House and now they are obfuscating drilling offshore when 76% of Americans are in favor of it.
Its deplorable that liberating 50 million people is a 'mistake' in the eyes of some Americans.
Lastly, please Mr. Gronk, tell us what you would have done with Saddam Hussein, his sons, his 500+ attacks of Coalition Forces in 2002 alone, the two UN mandated No-Fly Zones, the 90,000 troops containing Saddam in the region, the flagrant violations of 14 UN Resolutions, his expelling of the UN Weapons inspectors, and his assasination attempt on Pres. Bush (41)?
It's pretty easy to armchair QB after the fact and say "invading Iraq was a mistake", but what would you have done sir?
I'm sorry, Snerd, it appears your data says 71%, 84% and 80% of Americans think the war is going in the right direction?
I wrote an article with a video (which I'm sure you won't watch) of the Cheney comments from 1994. He was wrong, Bush Sr. was wrong to not take out Saddam, and it was the actions of Bush Sr., who let down Iraqis trying to overthrow Saddam, that has led to some of the problems we inherited in Iraq. Here's the post:
Cheney Wrong on Iraq in 1994
It's funny, though, how you finally find Cheney credible! Hypocrisy?
Regarding Cheney; I am simply making a 'scientific-like' point. Cheney's 1994 statement to date, the su(R)ge aside for the moment, have predicted the Meso-potamia more accurately than the Feith-based,'stovepiped anti-intel', greet-us-with-flowers, intel predictions. The prediction + results relationship is a key scientific concept. Minimally, before the su(R)ge, 1994 Cheney has been more accurate than 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006 Cheney
Regarding the su(R)ge, let me say that I hope I am wrong, and that you are right. I hope that some peace takes hold in Iraq. However, inspite of the good newz, I remain unconvinced. The Mission Accomplished banner is being hung out again a little too prematurely, I think.
The original intent of the surge was for a decrease in violence to be the "means" for the political "end" of reconcilliationm Now the "means" has become and "end" in and of itself, in large part.
Secondly, paying and arming the Sunnis seems to be a recipe for short term gain and long term pain. With US troops on the ground, there is no pressure to 'reconcile'. In that 'stalled state'. the Sunnis are just regrouping and rearming, I fear, for the battle to come. Turkey and the Kurds in northern Iraq though not in the newz much, remain unresolved.
Thirdly, in the ever shifting semantics and (R)hetoric 'explanations' of the "W"a(R) policy, the shifts from 'no insurgents', to 'a few dead-enders', to 'insurgents = terrorist', to 'insurgents vs terrorists' one question remains troubling for me. How many American and Iraqis died needlessly before the call for more troops (by generals fired for saying so), was heeded? How many years of needless suffering occurred before the obvious was accepted? And given that the 1994 Cheny knew factionalism would occurr, how criminally incompetent were the 2003+ Cheney's denials that prevented more troop deployment ....err ... I mean the su(R)ge, when an insurgency was exactly what was happening?
Finally, 'The Su(R)ge is Working', has to be put into context - and let me say , I am MOT arguing for Saddam, here. However to understand if, or how well, the su(R)ge is working, a pre-invasion Saddam-Iraq has to be compared to a post-Saddam US occupied Iraq.
'Liberation' for you might be different than 'Liberation' for Iraqis. For example, millions of Iraqis have been displaced and in the subsequent ethnic cleansing, have been 'liberated' of their homes - homes they had under a Saddan Iraq. More Iraqis have died under the time of the US 'presence' than under a similar time frame prior to invasion and occupation. The infrastructure has been bommbed into the stone age, decreasing the quality of lfe for Iraqis. Al Qaeda is in Iraq now and they weren't a factor under Saddam. Iraqis were (are?) still being round up and tortured under a US presence. Iraq has provided a recruitment and training ground for Al Qaeda in Iraq under US 'presence', a set of consequences that were falsely attributed to Saddam and used as a justification for invading ... Irony or what!?
One finally 'Liberating' thought on the su(R)ge working deserves a paragraph of its own. Iran has been 'Liberated' from the counter balance in the Middle East that Iraq represented, neccessitating Cheney to advocate expanding the "W"a(R) and bomb Iran, now too. That's not peace in my book ... It's more "W"a(R). It is more "W"a(R) based on the justification of the failures of the earlier "W"a(R). That's how the su(R)ge is 'working'...
"W"a(R) Inc has also resulted in the (R) co(R)po(R)ate base looting USA coffers. That's also how the su(R)ge is 'working'
In conclusion, even if the 'su(R)ge' is working as you claim Amy, it 'lives' in a larger context which acts upon it and affects it. These factors might be more influential in determining its outcome.
And I don't see "W" addressing this.
Like McClellan sayz, everything in the WH is a campaign issue first and a policy for America issue second. If so, "W" will attempt to maintain the 'stall' the su(R)ge has afforded him, declare victory and then punt, leaving the situation for an adult to straighten out. That's the best case senario. Worse case, Cheney may convince "W" to attack Iran, in the attempt to 'obliterate' evidence of their failed NeoCon-militarist adventure in the Middle East. In the interim in Meso-potamia, Sunnis are arming, Iraqi Shia officials and militants alike (i.e. al Sadr) look to Iran more and more AND there is NO viable reconsilliation, not even a politically fabricated one ...
This is how 'the su(R)ge is working', is working ...
Snerd
Arming and paying Sunnis? How dare we! You'd think the United States Army actually armed and paid soldiers! Oh, wait we do.
Do you think Iraqis should work for free and bring their own weapons?
Base looting? Prove it.
The irrifutable fact is that the surge has worked. There's no way to disprove them.
Snerd,
This is a Republic and you should get familiar with how it operates.
In Iraq's "Republic" under Saddam Hussein, he was the only candidate up for election.
The people who were exterminated by Saddam's regime would have opted for an earlier liberation date if they had the choice.
Amy: "... The irrifutable fact is that the surge has worked. There's no way to disprove them."
SG: The irrefutable fact is violence is down.
The other irrefutable fact is Violence and Democracy are not the same thing. A decrease in violence for example, is not semantically, logically or practically identical to an increase in democracy.
"W" realized this when he stated, the STRATEGY of 'Democratization' would be aided by the TACTIC of the 'Surge', that a decrease in violence would create the possibility for reconciliation. The Tactic has been successful in and of itself, but its goals (advances in political reconciliation) have not occurred. Therefore the Strategy has been unsuccessful, using "W'z" own words.
Furthermore, Petraeus agrees ....
Petraeus: Iraqi Leaders Not Making 'Sufficient Progress'
By Cameron W. Barr
Washington Post Foreign Service
Friday, March 14, 2008; Page A10
BAGHDAD, March 13 -- Iraqi leaders have failed to take advantage of a reduction in violence to make adequate progress toward resolving their political differences, Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, said Thursday.
Petraeus, who is preparing to testify to Congress next month on the Iraq war, said in an interview that "no one" in the U.S. and Iraqi governments "feels that there has been sufficient progress by any means in the area of national reconciliation," or in the provision of basic public services.
GAO Report Faults Post-'Surge' Planning
By Karen DeYoung
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, June 24, 2008; Page A14
Lack of Comprehensive Strategy Cited
"The administration lacks an updated and comprehensive Iraq strategy to move beyond the "surge" of combat troops President Bush launched in January 2007 as an 18-month effort to curtail violence and build Iraqi democracy, government investigators said yesterday.
[...]
"Bush's strategy of January 2007, the GAO said, "defined the original goals and objectives that the Administration believed were achievable by the end of this phase in July 2008." Not meeting many of them changed circumstances on the ground and the pending withdrawal of the last of the additional U.S. forces mean that strategy is now outdated, the report said. The GAO recommends that the State and Defense departments work together to fashion a new approach.
Elsewhere, Seth Colter Walls notes...
"... The shared assessment by the Government Accounting Office (GAO) and DoD that the already meager political progress may easily be rolled back could impact the way the issue of Iraq plays in the presidential campaign -- if only by pushing past the question of whether the "surge" was a smart military tactic and onto the more substantive policy ground of whether an improved security atmosphere is bringing about a stable, democratic society."
Snerd
Uh, snerd, if post-surge planning is so awful, why are civilian, military and violence levels at all time lows?
Care to link to your articles? Of course not, because the rest of what GEN Petraeus had to say wasn't damning enough for you.
Any: Uh, snerd, if post-surge planning is so aw
SG: Ok, answer this. Now that the violence is down, what's next? OCCUPATION ...? What's the strategic plan, now that the 'su(R)ge is working'?
Any: Care to link to your articles? Of course not, because the rest of what GEN Petraeus had to say wasn't damning enough for you.
ful, why are civilian, military and violence levels at all time lows?
SG: When I footnoted the articles with:
Petraeus: Iraqi Leaders Not Making 'Sufficient Progress'
By Cameron W. Barr
Washington Post Foreign Service
Friday, March 14, 2008; Page A10
AND
GAO Report Faults Post-'Surge' Planning
By Karen DeYoung
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, June 24, 2008; Page A14
What I should have said was ....
Petraeus: Iraqi Leaders Not Making 'Sufficient Progress'
By Cameron W. Barr
Washington Post Foreign Service
Friday, March 14, 2008; Page A10
AND
GAO Report Faults Post-'Surge' Planning
By Karen DeYoung
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, June 24, 2008; Page A14
Snerd
Snerd would say that the 50's was a depression. He is a propagandist.
Violence is way down and the Iraqi government is making loads of political progress.
I can find fault in the waging of WWII and the Spanish American war, but they were clear U.S. victories.
Putting things into context is the enemy of Snerdism.
It's loverly to see doofi like SG turning and twisting in the wind. As reality further crushes their hopes of humiliating the Bush who humiliated them, expect wilder and wilder revisionist histories and goofier and goofier misunderestimations of what the military and Iraqis are achieving.
BTW, Amy, it's throwing stones FROM glass houses that's the problem, not AT them. ;)
brian: "... As reality further crushes their hopes of humiliating the Bush who humiliated them, expect wilder and wilder revisionist histories and goofier and goofier misunderestimations of what the military and Iraqis are achieving."
SG: I have said before, and I'll say it again (for the (R)evisionists, here, there brian), I hope that freedom and democratization in Iraq work. I hope the current increase in troop levels which has brought about a decrease in violence (though unfortunately I heard it's an unsustainable level), is a trend that continues to flourish.
I have said before, and I'll say it again, I hope I am wrong! However, I have concerns, not the least of which is the assessment of many qualified thinkers in the field of foreign policy (most of whom read more than mewzpaperz), that the illegal invasion of Iraq is the single biggest blunder in USA foreign policy history.
In particular, I have concerns that current 'improvements' have occurred in largely ethnically cleansed or pure areas ,,, say like tribal areas ... and that the serious reconciliation issues have NOT been addressed. If so, we are witnessing the Balkanization of Iraq. I fear we are arming the camps in this 'stalled state', while calling it progress, for political purposes.
Small amongst my concerns is the 23-per-cent-(R)z who prefer to 'smea(R) the messenger to avoid the message content'. I think a 'Chee(R)' or 'Boo' 'politicized' level of c(R)itical thinkin' is .... well ... self evidently shallow and unable to come to terms with "What Happened"
As I have said ... I hope I am wrong. However, I have seen very little acknowledgment on the (R) side that 'real' Reconciliation, which was the STRATEGIC intent of the TACTICAL surge, is NOT really taking place ... General Petraeus being one of the few exceptions
Snerd
French-Now: "... Putting things into context is the enemy of Snerdism ... Snerd would say that the 50's was a depression."
SG: Well, NO, Snerd wouldn't and didn't say that ... The context of those 'claims' is that they're from outta your butt.
In fact, based on your recent performance, I think we need to address your failed 'awakening' with an improved and more prepresentative internet name ...
French-f(R)eedumb-Now, (Guilt by defamation)
Have at her ...
Snerd
What is with your hatred of the French? Dont you want to build allies?
Anyway, the decade+ sanctions of the Baathist regime was the biggest blunder of America's history.
"Failed Awakening"? Snerd, you're so wrong it isn't funny. You have an anti-Iraq war view and stick to it no matter what the facts say. The Awakening is what saved Iraq from complete disaster. The Anbar Awakening is the shining jewel of the movements within Iraq. What are you basing your statement on?
Snerd,
Yes a typo, by the way thank you and your fellow democrats for passing Fisa and the war bill, Bush couldn't do it without their help.