THE US, THE UN AND IRAQ, TENTH THREAD.

Cycloptichorn wrote:

...

Cycloptichorn wrote:

- Leave Iraq. Immediately. And without a residual force.
- Focus on rebuilding diplomatic ties with nations around the world.
- Lead the world in building an international team to track down actual members of Al Qaeda and stop them, without going to war with entire countries.
- Improve defenses here at home.
- Shore up our forces in Afghanistan. Use the troops redeployed from Iraq to put pressure on Pakistan to clean up Waziristan.

I think this will help begin to solve our Al Qaeda problem, because unlike you, I can differentiate between the group which we call Al Qaeda (who attacked us on 9/11) and the group who decided to call themselves 'Al-Qaeda in Iraq' (who has practically nothing to do with the other group). Spending time focusing on the second group, who exists primarily to fight the occupation of their homeland by foreigners, is a waste of time.
...
Cycloptichorn

Therein lies the primary substance of our disagreement. You think al-Qaeda in Iraq is not part of the worldwide al-Qaeda confederation.

For the reasons I've given in my earlier long post to revel, I think al-Qaeda in Iraq is part of the worldwide al-Qaeda confederation.

If you are right, then we have no security reasons for remaining in Iraq any longer than necessary to affect our rapid but ordely departure.

If I am right, then we have substantial security reasons for remaining in Iraq until, either we have exterminated al-Qaeda there, or the Iraq government decides it is capable of securing Iraq without our help.

You apparently do not comprehend why I think what I think. I do not comprehend why you think what you think.




By the way, I am not a Bush supporter, and have not been a Bush supporter since the early part of Bush's second term. I am just an United States of America supporter.

...
they have begun the practice of referring to their opponents as 'al-qaeda fighters.' All of them, all the time. This is a significant change from the earlier and more accurate use of the term 'insurgent.' The people we are fighting over there in Iraq aren't planning on coming to America or Europe to attack us, and never were; whereas the people who are planning such things? We do nothing about.

I grant that it is a significant change. I think that change is derived from the al-Qaeda January 2006 destruction of the "Golden Mosque." I too think al-Qaeda destroyed that mosque in a major effort to promote civil war in Iraq. I think much subsequent evidence continues to support the view that al-Qaeda continues to be the primary cause of the continuation of the war in Iraq.

By promoting civil war in Iraq, I think al-Qaeda anticipates that it will convince the USA to leave and allow al-Qaeda to take over the governance of Iraq, and/or provide them a valuable sanctuary for recruiting and traning large numbers of worldwide suicidal mass murderers of non-murderers.

The real danger of Iraq is that it has distracted us from the true enemy, who lies elsewhere. It's sad, in that it didn't have to happen.

As you already know, I think al-Qaeda in Iraq, al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, and al-Qaeda every where else, are all part of the real danger and are all part of the real enemy.

Cycloptichorn

Petraeus's No. 2, General Raymond Odierno, says, "The surge needs to go through the beginning of next year for sure. What I am trying to do is to get until April so we can decide whether to keep it going or not."

And they undoubtedly will get that long. To call it quits sooner would require 67 senators to overrule the generals. While sending more U.S. forces is equally a nonstarter, even Boehner, the House minority leader, has said that if there's no surge-driven progress by fall, it'll be time for Plan B. And for Republicans facing elections next year, any Plan B must entail a withdrawal from Iraq that starts well before November 2008.

Thus are the U.S. politics of the Iraq war a Kabuki performance, punctuated by occasional moments of Democratic jujitsu. Washington will continue to bicker about timetables and appropriations, but whatever happens in Iraq between now and the end of this year, American policy is largely preordained for the next year and a half.

But that doesn't mean our long national nightmare will end when a new president is sworn in. We're only approaching the end of the beginning of our Iraq misadventure, not the beginning of the end.

This AP story made me angry. I admire a straight shooter, so I am glad that Brig. Gen. Mick Bednarak admitted to AP that the Iraqi Army is not up to actually holding the neighborhoods in Baquba that US troops recently cleared, in hard fighting, of Salafi Jihadi guerrillas.

So Baquba is a city of like 300,000 northeast of Baghdad, in Diyala Province. Diyala has a 60% Sunni majority, and it had a lot of Baath military bases in the old days. It is now ruled by the (Shiite) Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council, which benefits from the province's proximity to Iran. The previous Iraqi military commander had to be fired because he was helping, behind the scenes, Shiite militias.

So the Sunni Arabs in Baquba are done out. They have a Shiite government in their province that they don't want, and they have a Shiite/Kurdish government in Baghdad that sends Shiite troops of the Iraqi Army against them. The Sunni Arab neighborhoods of Baquba have thrown up local militias, and they have made alliances with Baathi and Salafi Jihadi cells.

The US military spent last week trying to 'clear' these Sunni Arab neighborhoods of 'al-Qaeda.' But I doubt they have Bin Laden's telephone number. They are just local guys or foreign volunteers who don't like seeing Sunni Arabs subjected to Shiite ayatollahs and secessionist Kurds.

As US troops fought on Sunday, they discovered that the guerrilla leaders had set mines and then made themselves scarce.

So after 6 days of hard fighting, in which US troops were killed and wounded, what do we have?

A sullen, defiant Sunni Arab urban population.

A guerrilla leadership that slipped away.

An Iraqi army unable actually to hold the 'cleared' neighborhoods, which are likely to throw up more guerrilla leaders and campaigns.

A continued dominance of Sunni Arabs in Diyala by a Shiite government completely unacceptable to them.

A US commitment to upholding the Shiite ("Iraqi") government.

So I am angry because this looks to me like we sent our guys to fight and die for a piece of political quicksand in which the entire endeavor is likely to sink.

It is not right.

A new Newsweek poll out this weekend exposed "gaps" in America's knowledge of history and current events.

Perhaps most alarmingly, 41% of Americans answered 'Yes' to the question "Do you think Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq was directly involved in planning, financing, or carrying out the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001?"

That total is actually up 5 points since September 2004.

Further, a majority of people couldn't identify Saudia Arabia as the country of origin of most of the 9/11 hijackers, even given the question in multiple choice format. 20% answered Iraq, while 14% believed the hijackers came from Iran.

A majority (52%) believe the US is losing the war against al Qaeda, however Newsweek disagrees. In the magazine's reporting of the poll, they made judgment that the US is in fact not "losing the fight against al-Qaeda or radical Islamic terrorism."

Closer to home, 89% of Americans are unable to name the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court (John Roberts), though a majority of those polled were able to name Nancy Pelosi as the current Speaker of the House.

A large majority of people said they didn't know or didn't care who the winner of this year's American Idol competition was (or at least weren't willing to admit it).

The full results of the Newsweek poll are available here.

A U.S. ally in Iraq is murdered

By Mohammed al Dulaimy and Hannah Allam | McClatchy Newspapers

revel, I'm no military expert, but knew from the very beginning that 21,500 more troops could not control the violence. That those generals assigned to evaluate the military mission in Baghdad could be so blind and ignorant is appalling. They only expose more of our soldiers and the Iraqi civilians to violence in their quest to make a name for themselves during "war time." Shameful.