Acknowledging up front that I don't think the surge will work and that, even if it did, I don't think our troops ought to be dying in Iraq trying to keep the Iraqis from killing one another...

While any respite from the violence is welcome by those who live there and by our military, is there any evidence that the militants/insurgents/terrorists are not simply keeping their heads low, waiting for either Bush to declare victory or for Pelosi, etc. to force Bush to pull out before they re-emerge and pick up where they left off?

I once surmised that the surge in Iraq might be analogous to an American city facing gang violence, where the police show up in force, the gangs keep quiet, the mayor claims the drop in violence is evidence of 'victory, the strain on the city's budget forces a return to pre-surge manpower... at which time the gangs get right back to shooting one another.

The surge is more than just more resources, its a change of tactics as well.

The surge will also give the Iraqi government some stability and sense of accomplishment to help them step up further.

This is a war of morale and not body counts and we need the points in our column.

The surge sure is working. It's working to make sure people outside Baghdad are getting killed more.

The latest massacre of Iraqi children came as 21 Shia market workers were ambushed, bound and shot dead north of the capital. The victims came from the Baghdad market visited the previous day by John McCain, the US presidential candidate, who said that an American security plan in the capital was starting to show signs of progress.

***

More than 600 Iraqis have been killed in the past week despite a US-Iraqi security plan to quell violence in the capital. Most of the killings have been the result of truck bombs outside Baghdad.

Mr McCain said that the situation was showing signs of improvement and blamed waning support in the United States for the war on the media, which were portraying an overly negative image of the crisis.

timesonline.co.uk

Its nice for a change. Still 80 Americans a month are being killed in Iraq...Lets hope not in vain...What's the odds with the leaders we currently enjoy?

There will always be the doom sayers of the left who will not concede that there was ever a good reason to depose Saddam and assure the people of Iraq a stable situation before we began to dial back our presence there. Some eyes will never view the greater whole within which their tiny viewpoint lurks looking for doom and gloom to bolster their cowardly refusal to sacrifice for anyone but their own tiny political view.

It is good to set people free, bad to leave them to thugs who lurk in the background much like the kossites who lurk around Wizbang devising their verbal IEDs with which which they think to disrupt the flow of ideas and the expressions of hope that more positive minds would like to consider.

To the shame of our nation, the left in this country has given great hope to the enemies of the Iraqi people and their fledgling nation. Never are they able to bring themselves to simply admit that it would be a wonderful thing for the Iraqi people to be able to live free of the fear that Saddam's former henchmen spread, backed by whatever jihadist shows up to kill and slaughter and destroy.

Not for them the possibility that the murderous thugs brutalizing the people can be defeated, bringing the possibility of a lasting peace and normal life to the people. A person who never voices a vision for the victory of decency and the safety of the people is a hollow person indeed. What a dark reality to live in where no hope shines.

The left is made up self loathing degeatists. They wanted to lose going in. ww

The left's greatest victory was cutting our support for South Vietnam. They thrilled to see the tanks go into Saigon, killing anyone that disagreed with the new regime. They spit with pleasure on the graves of all the Vietnamese that died in "re-education camps" after the takeover.

So, you see, wishing for calamity for an American ally is par for the course.

WildWillie"

degeatists? Please enlighten me.

Oh, I get it. I think you meant "defeatists". Sorry.

No wonder the dems want to cut funding? afraid of success?

I think the Wild one meant "defeatists" if I may be so bold.

Public opinion of the war will change and the current will start flowing against Team Pelosi, Murtha, and Levin. How will the Dems take this? Their candidates for 2008 have moved too far left on this issue. Watch as the clever ones start to change their tunes.

Unfortunately the Bush Adminsitration started the surge too late. Bush stubbornly accepted Rumsfield's position of a smaller and quicker force when the insurgency may have been quelled in its infancy. Add to that the blunders of dissolving the Iraqi Army and removing rank-and-file Baathists from important civil servant positions, and you wind up with the situation we have today.

It may be too little, too late. I hope I'm wrong, though.

Don't let the facts get in your way people:

In March, a total of 2,762 Iraqi civilians and policemen were killed, down 4 percent from the previous month, when 2,864 were killed. The number of Iraqi policemen killed across Iraq nearly doubled from 171 in February to 331 in March, according to Interior Ministry statistics. Meanwhile, the numbers of unidentified bodies found across Baghdad are rising again, suggesting an increase in sectarian-motivated death squad killings. In the first three weeks of the security plan, from Feb. 14 to March 7, 125 unidentified bodies were reported. But in the next three weeks, ending March 31, they nearly doubled to 230, according to the morgue data.

I'm continually amazed at how war supporters will triumphantly declare "turning points" with every sort of minor event that occurs in Iraq (e.g., capture of Saddam, elections, killing of Zarqawi, etc.). And now, you're declaring a turning point without there being any evidence at all (other than a confused John McCain who recently accompanied a massive sweep of US forces into a Baghdad market).

Any reasonable observer will tell you that it will take at least a decade to restore stability to Iraq and defeat the insurgency. By constantly declaring turning points, and then witnessing them go up in smoke with the next bloody spasm of violence in Iraq, you are effectively sapping the will of the American people to continue the fight. Instead, you should be steeling the American people for the long haul and the still substantial sacrifices that will be required if our nationbuilding effort in Iraq is to succeed.

So, proud, if we have problems with Baathist insurgents infiltrating the army and police now, enlighten me as to how keeping Saddams Baathist army and military intact would have LESSENED that particular phenomenon.

If someone is worried that we won't maintain the surge then they ought to make sure their congresspersons know that they expect resolution and continued support. If Bush is a doofus, then make sure your congresspersons know that you expect *them* to keep us on the straight and narrow and that you won't tolerate an on again off again approach to security in Iraq.

Oh, and Omar from ITM suggests that the biggest reason for the curfew change is longer daylight hours. Not that this takes away from the good news. It's still better that people can stay out longer. And it matters that they can sell, and buy, more ice cream.

Seriously, supporting the surge is an opportunity for a significant political win for the Democrats. Enough people were saying for long enough that Bush didn't have enough troops over there so framing this as a "see we were right and he was wrong" works.

Unlike some who can't stand the thought of allowing Republicans to appear to get a "win", this is important enough that I'd be more than happy if the Democrats took all the credit for success. I don't care who takes credit. If spinning it that way actually means that the Democrats start working for our success rather than for our failure, I'm all for it.

As I said, watch the clever Dem candidates start to change their tune on Iraq. They will be forced to re-spin in 6 months. And I will start screaming from the roof as Obamary squirms and turns.

Larkin, once again a disingenuous post. When you retake basic stats, which actually gets covered in middle school nowadays, you will learn to distinguish between different data populations. Don't mix data from all of Iraq with the areas where the surge has been applied.

You need to apply your "rational" analysis to only the data within the population where the "experiment" is being applied.

Just FYI, the youtube video is breaking the page for Opera. There's a missing ">" on the closing anchor tag in the embed code.

Kim, I don't suppose you noticed that Sistani spoke out about reversing de-Baathification. meaning the Sunni's biggest complaint is being ignored by the Shia, which means they won't put down their arms, which means no national reconciliation, which most likely means that any shorterm success of the surge (if it is in fact working much data I have seen indicates otherwise) will fail in the long term. Shia religious clerics now control Iraq.

Posted by: crazylibs at April 4, 2007 08:26 PM

So CrazyL, where's this data you flung in here looking like some dead fish colored red.

Don't mix data from all of Iraq with the areas where the surge has been applied.

That's the point, horse; as the number of incidences decrease where there are more forces, they increase elsewhere. Whack-a-mole.

Though it does seem as though the surge is causing the Shiite militias to hold back in Baghdad. How long it will take for the Al Qaeda and others to goad them into the open remains to be seen.

For every smile and happy face on an Iraqi , there is an ugly bitter democrat kicking his nieghbors dog.

Larkin , let me speak truth to democrats fiending for power.

"witnessing them go up in smoke with the next bloody spasm of violence in Iraq"

We witness democrats true delight and their claim of supporting the troops go up in smoke when ever there is a blood and violence in Iraq.

Now that's more like it. This is good news and a victory for Iraqi's, True Americans , George Bush and his Administration. The only ones who are sad are the terrorists , Democrats and there Media. They are losing.

Oh by the way 755 people die every month at the hands of illegal aliens. When are you going to withdraw yourself to Canada?

mantis:

That's the point, horse; as the number of incidences decrease where there are more forces, they increase elsewhere. Whack-a-mole.

OK, lets play whack-a-mole by expanding the surge strategy:

Iraq says it is extending the current security drive beyond Baghdad to areas outside the capital.

Efforts to bring the security plan to the northern city of Mosul began on Tuesday, officials said, and Baghdad's outskirts would also be targeted

Officials have expressed optimism about reduced sectarian violence in Baghdad, and have decided to ease the curfew.

Those with the slightest memory of history will recall the current "surge strategy" was used by Petraeus in Mosul during the first months of the war.

You should also recall residents of Mosul protested when Petraeus was transfered to another assignment.

Since he left sectarian violence, while not at the level of other areas, increased in the city.

Whack-a-mole has been the approach in the past; it is not the approach now.

What is key to fighting the insurgency is to secure, and not then in turn lose, Baghdad. It's the whole make red areas pink, and then pink areas white approach to succeeding. If the color change goes in reverse than you are failing.

The issue is they have not really gone about permanently securing areas before and turning them white, and then turning them over to government forces to maintain in that secure state.

The approach now should have been the approach 3-4 years ago, but that was not possible due to missteps and a leadership that had other thoughts.

As the above posters have stated, the problem has been a 'whack-a-mole' type problem. The troops clear and secure an area only to leave and have the 'insurgents' move back in. The intent of the surge is to provide sufficient manpower to clear, secure, and hold.

Democrats have made every claim imaginable as insurance just so they can say they were right. It's BS. It's like them claiming there were the only ones who guesed correctly the numbers in the Superlotto having bought a ticket for every possible combonation of numbers.

Synova, the democrat belong right where they are. If they begin to pretend like they are for us winning that will infuriate their betrayed partners and that will wmbolden them more than when they where United for Americas defeat. Many of our Soldiers have died as a direct result of the Democrats selfish and disgusting crack addict behavior as fiend for that next election and the Power they swindle away from True Americans.

Democrats have gone far to long unpunished for their despicable behavior.

The surge is working.

The WOT has been working.

On Sept 11, 2001 over 3000 non-uniformed Americans were killed - over 50,000 were saved just because the buildings stood long enough for people to leave. There were over 50,000 attempted murders that day alone and most people and all liberals only talk of the 3000. We also likely have 10,000 or more that may suffer some illness from exposure to the asbestos, dust, chemicals etc over their lifetimes.

We have greatly affected the terrorist structures in the world, the leadership is in disarray and the number of trained terrorists is significantly reduced. They are fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq - Saudis, Palistinians, Jordanians, Syrians, Iranians, Somalis and others - does anyone think for a minute that if the lamp wasn't attracking the vermin to Iraq, that they would not be attacking our embassies, ships and homeland?

Does anyone think that if Iraq is not stabilized, regardless of the price, that Iran and Syria will even consider laying down arms and negotiating peace?

Has everyone forgotten Lybia - all Khadafy had to see was the US military trouncing Saddam's armies and pulling him out of a spider hole and he gave up his WMD's and nuclear ambitions and has chosen a much better course for his country.

Does everyone forget that Pakistan was not an ally during the Clinton years?

Likely over 100,000 terrorists have been eliminated at a cost of 3500 uniformed soldiers, how many innocent lives have been saved in past 5-6 years with no attacks on our soil, ships and embassies? 1000, 10000, 100000???

Yes the mission is being accomplished every day that we take the fight to them. They have one goal, take away our life, liberty, freedom and happiness - we have one goal - to protect the same!

Is it worth the fight my friends or shall we all convert or die - that is the word of the Koran the way it is imterpretted by those we fight. There is not a middle ground.

Robbie in La,
Yes, the democratic party is right where they are, such as giving/doing oversight, which is Congress's right, and that really bugs you puggies, because for 6 years the rubber stamp puggies would not do oversight on anything.

Over 60% of Americans want us out of Iraq, (which I think maybe wrong) and you still are inhaling all those exhaust fumes in LA. Quit your BS and start realizing that you are in a minority on Iraq. Until you can do that, your drivel doesn't mean anything. Ir just gives the majority a good laugh at your stupidity.

mike, typing silly names and stating incorrect information in your rant provides us insight into what drives your irrational behavior. It would appear you have a lot of anger about something in your life, and it must make you feel better to post a rant anonymously online, even though it is filled with sophomoric insults and falsehoods. At least this is cheaper than group therapy, so you got that going for yourself.

But really, if you want to make progress, you are going to have to be honest with yourself and look inward rather than lashing outward.

Mike:

Quit your BS and start realizing that you are in a minority on Iraq. Until you can do that, your drivel doesn't mean anything. Ir just gives the majority a good laugh at your stupidity.

The truth is out I suppose. At least Mike's truthiness, which seems to state the minority speaks only "drivel" and presumably are better not seen nor heard. (NOTE: dKos is the place for you if that's what you truly desire))

Correct me if I'm wrong Mike, but are you on the first step of a 12 step program to get yourself banned as some of your fellow travelers?

I find it amazing that we do not employ the Leftist anti-whack-a-mole cut-and-run strategy in many other areas.

Like, for instance:

Billions spent on cancer research with little or no results. It is an unwinnable war. We could spend that money feeding the poor. George Bush is an ingrate. Republicans are evil. Americans get more cancer because they deserve it.

No matter how many tickets are handed out, speeders seem to increase in number. For every speeder that gets a ticket, another pops up to take his place. When will the cops learn to stop playing whack-a-mole?

Same thing with murderers, bank robbers, sex offenders, and just about every other run of the mill, scum of the earth dirtbag.

All the wars are unwinnable. We should give up immediately. I don't even know why I get out of bed in the morning. For every bill I pay, another pops up to take its place. I am going to go kill myself now...

You forgot the drug war.

Yeah, and I forgot the so-called "war on poverty." How long has that been going on? Definitely a quagmire.

ABC's News has been consistently less pessimistic than some other news outlets about Iraq. I wanted the new security measures to work, but statistics and facts simply prove this is not the case.

The Iraqi government's own Interior Ministry recorded official civilian death figures at 1,861 persons in March, up by 229 peerson over February, and certainly higher than the average of 1,500 persons a month in previous months. If the surge was indeed working shouldn't these civilian death numbers be decreasing rather than increasing?

It is car bomb deaths that have increased so much that any slight decline in police death squad murders has been overshadowed. The Shiite police death squad murders of Sunni citizens have only decreased somewhat because many of this units are taking part with American units in the new security measures and cannot perform these sectarian murders in the presense of the U.S. forces.

Last month U.S. deaths and wounded exceeded those of the Iraqi forces. Despite over 315,000 total Iraqi security forces, Americans are having to take on more security duties than the Iraqis who still are not very reliable to secure their own country. Is this progress?

When John McCain made his political campaign phot-opt walk through a Baghdad market earlier this weekend, he had three Blackhawk and two Apache helicopters flying overhead for security, and a tight envelop of U.S. troops with HumVees, and was wearing body armor. This was only after a very dangerous U.S. security sweep of the area, and now the very few merchants still open in the market area could face retribution as "U.S. collaborators" by militants. The same market area was the scene of a car bombing in February that killed 60 persons, and a fatal sniper shooting only hours after the McCain photo-opt. Is this progress? Is this a sign that that the surge is really working? Not a single Iraqi soldier was involved in the McCain security detail because they were not trustworthy. The entire security operation was an American effort.

Certainly there are a few upperclass neighborhoods in Iraq with little violence where a person can buy ice cream, or children play on a playground. But many areas of Iraq are so violent that there are now 2 million refugees, many living in tent cities or in Syria, or even Sweden.

I've offered my support to the surge and to the new security measures because of the humanitarian need to stop the violence and stabilize the nation, but the numbers and reality on the ground prove that it is not working so far. Violence has just been moved around to other areas outside Baghdad, or Iraqi police have avoided murdering Sunni mem in the presense of U.S. forces. The Shiite majority government of Iraq has so far resisted a political peace with the Sunni minority to end the violence.

Maybe John McCain was once right about one thing; that the U.S. would really need twice the number of current forces to secure the country. But who would support this in this environment of rapidly sinking support for this major foreign policy mistake in Iraq.

"You forgot the drug war."

Yes, that too.

Rob in L.A., I don't care who takes credit because, unlike people like Mike, this isn't about *me*. This isn't about winning politically here in America, of getting on top in the polls or getting control of congress, it's about working to secure liberty in Iraq. It's about dealing with the root causes of Islamic radicalism and terrorism.

I don't have a lot of hope for it, but if the Democrats get behind the "more troops" effort by pointing out that they'd been saying Bush hasn't sent anywhere near enough troops or that they've been saying for so long that Bush won't change course, if they want to say, "look see! this is what should have been done sooner", I'm fine with that.

The enemy should be encouraged to change their mind (even the military is simply a tool to make the enemy change their minds), but a way needs to be kept open for that to happen. The opposition has to be allowed a way to save face.

Is it true that the Bush administration has been so successful in fighting the WOT that the American people have became comfortable (no attacks going on 6 years) that they have forgotten 9-11-01? It would seen to be true from the way the democrats are trying to commit suicide and take millions of us with them.

Mantis my boy, the war on drugs was named that long ago. It's just term, not really a war.

More rants:
Are we all ready for the largest (percentage and dollar wise) tax increase in the history of the United States? I guess we will now pay off all of the rich that have, and are contributing to the democrats. DiFi got her billions and the rest want their's.

Looks like I will get my wish for $5 a gallon gas. It's over $4 in some places already. Will the real dhimmi's allow drilling in the wasteland of Alaska and off the shores of Florida or will we stand by and watch China drill and suck the oil out? My guess is that as long as there's a liberal alive we'll let China have it. Maybe we can buy some back at $20 a gallon.

If you can handle the tax increase and the rise in gas prices, I can, and I will laugh as it happens. (I'll cut back by running a lot less volunteer emergency fire and EMS calls from home) Funny thing is I drive a Ford F-150 FX4 gas guzzler, and my bass boat soaks up gas, but I still think it's funny.

Mantis my boy, the war on drugs was named that long ago. It's just term, not really a war.

Sigh.

"The Shiite majority government of Iraq has so far resisted a political peace with the Sunni minority to end the violence."

On the face of it that is a ridiculous statement.

Are Sunni Iraqis violent? Can you make that generalization? Are there not Sunni groups (and I suppose we should say Arab Sunni, since the Kurds are Sunni) that participate in the government?

What "political peace" have the Shiites rejected? Can you be more specific? Did the government likewise reject a "political peace" with any violent Shiite groups?

If so, why?

Three thoughts here: Even Jesus said that the "poor" will "always" be with us. The War On Poverty has helped many poor familiies avoid starvation and homelessness, and many eventually made a move to a better lifestyle, especially the children. But totally defeating poverty will never happen despite the very best efforts.

The War On Drugs cannot really be won either. Legal drugs like tobacco which is responsible for 40% of all illnesses in American society, and alcohol which is responsible for as much as 50% of accidents filling emergency room beds, and prescription drug abuse all undermine any attempts to control illegal drug use. And new designer drugs, not always under federal control seem to always emerge.

The biggest unknown problem with any Alaskan oil is that it contains many times the toxic benzene levels of any oil found anywhere in the world. This highly dangerous and cancer causing toxic compound is not filtered out by conventional oil refining or by automobile pollution systems. Only one new BP refinery is able to cut toxic benzene levels somewhat. It will be at least 2014 before EPA mandates will cut down this toxic compound in Alaskan oil, but big oil is balking at the extreme cost that makes importing oil from other areas far more cost effective.

Synova, I'm not going tp spend the entire evening on a useless back and forth exchange. But many of the Sunni citizens did not participate in the political process in Iraq, especially the Baathist elements which are the heart of the insurgency. And wide majorities of Suuni citizens are in opposition to the current government, with only a minority of moderates in participation. The Shiite cleric Ali al-Sistani has actively advocated that the majority Shiite lawmakers not give the Sunni community a more balahnced role in Iraqi politics as well, slowing any reforms considerably.

Synova,

"The opposition has to be allowed a way to save face."

I can't believe what I am reading. Shaking my head. The opposition when it was in the Minority , only had to support the President and ack like true Americans and completely unite 100% against the enemy and we would have been out of there years ago.

However some people have more important things to do , selfish things , unpatriotic things like undermining a president in a time of war to further advance their personal political agenda. "Greed" , there is no telling how many of our greatest heroic Americans lives were given because of a handful of greedy arrogant and pompous basturds "WANTS". Democrats din't need to divide the Country , tell lie after lie to undermine President Bush , deceive the public through their Media resulting in their Majority status, THEY WANTED TOO.

It's simply unforgivable. They don't have to be allowed a way to save face. They just need to shut their traps up and behave like an American Citizen not a politician and do their job as intended by our Founding Fathers and written in the Constitution, which used to only take a few weeks out of the year.

Remember when kids were told to stand in the corner and be Quiet? There was a reason for that.

Hey Scrapy, I'll row your boat for ya , in a Lake of course.

My karate instructor always says that we should have compassion for other people's insecurities. By insecurities he means all the things that make a person a bully. When our pride gets involved we aren't showing compassion.

Does he suggest *not* beating the ever-living crap out of them if the situations warrants? Not at all. But that strike to the throat isn't to save your pride, it's to save your life.

Giving the other person an out doesn't excuse them, it is a way to achieve a goal. It's not about your feelings or the truth of what jack*sses they are. It has to do with priorities.

Shorter version... you don't create desperate ground for your enemies if you have other options.

Now I'm getting a little confused here , are we talking about the same ememy here?

"you don't create desperate ground for your enemies if you have other options."

If your refering to the corner the Democrats have backed themselves into then I understand what you are saying here:

"Giving the other person an out doesn't excuse them, it is a way to achieve a goal"

However there is a conflict with this:

"It has to do with priorities."

Given the fact that they will "say anything" and "do whatever it takes" to achieve their sick agenda , your senario, noble and wise as it may be I'm affraid this is the .01% of the times it would not work as intended. Until someone comes up with the process of turning a "PICKLE" back into a "CUCUMBER" some people will not change their stripes even if they just been spared a certain death.

I prefer them stay in that corner preferably silent like a trapped animal and if they so desparately want to continue on different line of attack , I say let them chew off their limb to regain their freedom. In doing so that act of desperation will be recognized thus rendering there further efforts impotent and unhindering as priority goals are accomplished.

That's my take on the matter for it has worked in real life situations.

cl, have you figured out that your post about Sistani is contradictory?

I've maintained for years that Sistani is the key in Iraq. He learned about democracy from Jefferson and de Tocqueville because it isn't mentioned in the Koran. Something similar is the Islamic concept of 'justice', however.

About 6 months ago, Sistani publicly threw in the towel, politicallly, to Sadr the Lesser, vowing to stick to spiritual matters. Nonetheless, he was displeased with Sadr, who is failing to fill his father's wise shoes, and I hope Sistani is still the strength over there. We, and the Sunni, and the Kurds, could do worse.

And never forget about Chalabi, the Master of the Bazaar. Guess who's oil revenue sharing plan that was?
=========================

Paul Hooson:

You miss the entire point. You concede that neither the "war on poverty" or the "war on drugs" can ever be won. Then you go on to point out the benefits of waging the war nonetheless.

Hello...McFly....is there anyone in there?

"So CrazyL, where's this data you flung in here looking like some dead fish colored red."

The New York Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/03/world/middleeast/03iraq.html?_r=2&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1175818861-2/oL+6O0lq2vTs+tlNGqtQ

Well, cl, it looks like the Iraqis are taking their own governance into their own hands instead of just taking it as written from the American ambassador. In Sistani We Trust. Did you notice that he communicated through Chalabi that there will be further drafts of this proposed revision? It sounds to me like the process is working.
==============================