« Two Masked Men Seen In Boulder School | Main | "In the halls of justice, the only justice is in the halls" »

Good News from Iraq -- Anbar and Diyala

A.J. Strata is writing about some signs of progress in Diyala.

The Democrat's and al Qaeda's worst nightmares apparently are taking shape in Iraq's Diyala's Province. The model of success seen in what was the insurgent/al Qaeda stronghold of Anbar Province is now taking shape in Diyala as the Arab/Muslim street is rising up - against al Qaeda!:
Arab tribesmen in Baquba have said they will form a tribal alliance to cleanse the Diyala province of foreign fighters and those of the al-Qaeda terrorist network in Iraq, pan- Arab al-Hayat newspaper reported Thursday.

Tribesman Sheikh Wameed al-Jabouri told al-Hayat that a number of tribes had signed a cooperation agreement to undertake this mission and to bring the city back to how 'it used to be.' The agreement could be considered 'a national charter' that proves their rejection of the actions of the terrorist groups, al-Jabouri said.



We have the "civil war" we wanted in Iraq. We have the moderates fighting the Islamo Fascists. We have been told to back off and let them take care of security. This is great news. It means the Surge could produce the stability needed because the Sunni's and others who have given al Qaeda and thei ilk sanctuary to kill and maim are now changing sides (to a degree). What this means is the picture presented of Anbar and Diyala in the coming months will be one of huge progress and success.
Bill Roggio talked about similar progress in the Anbar province at the milblog conference last weekend and discusses this development in Diyala at The Fourth Rail.
The U.S. and Iraqi security forces have preparing the battlefield in Diyala until the full compliment of U.S. forces are in theater and able to finish securing the Baghdad "belts" - the regions surrounding Baghdad. The Diyala Campaign is only is its opening phase, with U.S. and Iraqi forces conducting raids, search and destroy missions, establishing forward operating bases and logistic nodes in preparation for the full assault sometime early this summer. The establishment of the yet to be named Diyala Salvation Front is a crucial element to establishing local intelligence networks and an auxiliary force to hunt al Qaeda.


The influence of Sheikh Sattar al Rishawi and his Anbar Salvation Council cannot be underestimated in the formation of the anti al Qaeda tribal alliance in Diyala. The Anbar Salvation Council has been operating outside its provincial boundaries and has sent emissaries into Diyala, Salahadin, Niwena and other provinces in an effort to expand his anti al Qaeda Awakening movement nationwide.

Update: Mohammed Fadhil asks Americans to stay:

I wasn't surprised when I saw Al Qaeda's second-in-command, Ayman al-Zawahiri, appear on Al Jazeera to announce America's defeat last week, not long after U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid did. Zawahiri claims Al Qaeda has won, and Reid claims America has lost.

But from here in Baghdad, I see only a war that's still raging - with no victory in sight for Al Qaeda or any other entity. In fact, I see Al Qaeda on the ropes, losing support among my fellow Iraqis.
...
And so, as an Iraqi, I say without hesitation: the American forces should stay here, and further reinforcements should be sent if the situation requires them. Not only that, these forces should be prepared to expand their operations whenever and wherever necessary to strike hard at the nests of evil that not only threaten Iraq and the Middle East, but seek to blackmail the whole world in the ugliest way through pursuing nuclear weapons.

It is up to us to show tyrants and murderers like Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Hezbollah's Hassan Nasrallah, Syria's Bashar Assad, and their would-be imitators who seek to control Iraq's people and wealth that we, the people, are not their possessions. They can't take out our humanity and they can't force us to back down.

The world should ask them to leave our land before asking the soldiers of freedom to do so.

Read it all.


TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Good News from Iraq -- Anbar and Diyala:

» Wizbang Blue linked with Al Qaeda Hits Back in Anbar

Comments (35)

The other week I predicted ... (Below threshold)
BarneyG2000:

The other week I predicted the slaughter of al Qaeda in Iraq fighters by the Sunni and Shia if we pulled out. This story supports my argument by this statement:

"The Arab tribes in Baquba called on US forces in Iraq not to interfere with their plans. Deputy governor of Diyala province Sheikh Dari Fahd al-Assadi said 'the US forces committed fatal mistakes in handling the security situation in Baquba.'"

I doubt the US forces will turn a blind eye to the actions in Diyala. That is why we need to pull out before the fun will begin.

I guess you practice "withd... (Below threshold)
Richard Romano:

I guess you practice "withdrawal" during sex, eh BarneyG? So the justice that AQ deserves is something that should get us out of Iraq? You have much sympathy for murderers, but little for innocence.

You're a sad and pathetic human being Mr. BarneyG.

Barney doesn't stay with it... (Below threshold)
Nymo:

Barney doesn't stay with it long enough to withdraw...

My only hope is that Barney... (Below threshold)

My only hope is that Barney did not reproduce.

How does it feel to require... (Below threshold)
metprof:

How does it feel to require the US to surrender or be defeated in order for your goals to be reached?

Barney, the chief prognosticator. Any stock tips for us???

Will the Iraqi government e... (Below threshold)
Semanticleo:

Will the Iraqi government ever take responsibility for their country? Two month vacation for Parliament?

http://news.aol.com/topnews/articles/_a/iraq-lawmakers-vacation-plans-draw-fire/20070502145609990001

Let's see if we can double their stipend.

It's a crying shame that mo... (Below threshold)
P. Bunyan:

It's a crying shame that most of the media in this country have a vested interest in America being defeated in Iraq so they will only report and sensationalize the terrorist's successes. They completely ignore the Allies' succeses.

Yep, when have you ever hea... (Below threshold)
jpm100:

Yep, when have you ever heard a Terrorist body count?

If the tribal chieftans are... (Below threshold)
Justrand:

If the tribal chieftans are asking us to get out of the way for bit so they can clean house...let's get out of the way for a while.

We don't have to leave the country...just let 'em do their stuff!!

Justrand, Exactly m... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Justrand,
Exactly my point. Thanks. Moreover, I don't know how we can make sure that the liberals in the west won't interfere with the way the chieftans take care of the terrorists there (eg. crying atrocities and sueing in international courts etc...)

After all these years, peop... (Below threshold)
Publicus:

After all these years, people aren't buying that "signs of progress" argument anymore.

"Prosperity is around the corner."
"We will be greeted as liberators."
"A war to end all wars."

You know, after a while, reality does set in...But you 30 percenters can believe what you want.

Two seperate issues here. M... (Below threshold)

Two seperate issues here. Most Americans including Democrats, Independents and Republicans offered Mr. Bush support in his mission to get rid of Saddam Hussein and any claimed WMD threat to the U.S. and Israel. Few Americans expected the insurgency or sectarian conflict problems in Iraq, or that Mr. Bush would encourage the small worldwide Al Qaeda organization to make a stand against the U.S. in Iraq when he encouraged them to "Bring it On". Even Mr. bush has acknowledged that was a mistake. More and more Democrats, Independents and Republicans are falling out from support of the Iraq policy by the day due to frustration with this ongoing conflict and draining the public will.

The second point. Some Sunni tribal leaders fighting with the tiny 1,000 member Al Qaeda organiztion in this nation of 26.7 million is not that significant, but certainly a good thing. But that hardly means that these Sunni leaders will not still battle with the Shiite majority for control of the nation. This is far different than any path to peace.

pubic-hair--And after all y... (Below threshold)
jhow66:

pubic-hair--And after all your posts people ain't buying your BS anymore.

Paul Hooson may be a senior... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Paul Hooson may be a senior member of Brian 's club here. Paul seems to forget that we didn't have a situation where a major political party in the US that is actively working for American defeat.

Using Paul 's logic, cut-and-run in Somalia shouldn't have encouraged Bin Laden to attack us more. That 's why Paul conviniently ignore the terrorist-aiding rhetoric from Reid/Pelosi.

Now we know that Paul is a member of the Brian 's club.

Al Qaeda isn't now and neve... (Below threshold)

Al Qaeda isn't now and never has been the biggest problem we face in Iraq. This is pure fiction created by those who want to keep US troops in that country indefinitely. Al Qaeda's strength has been variously estimated at between 2,000 and 10,000. In a country of 26 million, there's no way in the world such a small group could ever seize power. That's just preposterous. The Kurdish peshmerga could defeat them all by themselves.

No, Al Qaeda doesn't even rank high on the list of problems with Iraq. Let me give you the list:

1) the Shiites
2) the Sunnis
3) the Kurds

Three groups of people who have no interest in living in the same country together. Trying to force them together is the same sort of idiocy that perpetuated the violence in Yugoslavia rather than facilitating the breakup that had to occur. Iraq's current borders, as drawn by the imperial British, make no sense whatsoever and for us to expend vast resources trying to maintain them is complete lunacy. We need to step back, let the country disintegrate, let them have their civil war, and then try and help them to rebuild the new states that will emerge. We're trying to stand against the tide of history in Iraq and the 1500 year old schism between the Shiites and Sunnis. It's not going to work.

Yeah Publicus! And take tho... (Below threshold)
MyPetGloat:

Yeah Publicus! And take those stupid facts with you!

Americans Favor Iraq Timetable, Don't Foresee Increased Terrorism

You know what, Publicus? I... (Below threshold)

You know what, Publicus? I'd rather be called a "30 percenter" by you or anyone else because of my principles than to blindly follow a majority because I don't really have any foundation to base principles on.

Every silver lining has a dark cloud for you though, eh?

We were greeted as liberators.

Prosperity is not only around the corner, it's actually attainable for millions for the first time ever.

And your half-century old "a war to end all wars" was from Woodrow Wilson, a democrat.

MyPetGloat,Only so... (Below threshold)
Heralder:

MyPetGloat,

Only someone of your exquisite ignorance would cite a poll as fact, and further their "lack of foresight" as the same.

Check out this poll:

Americans Favor Ending Terrorism Through Cruise Missles, Don't Foresee 9/11.

Now we know that Paul is... (Below threshold)
Brian:

Now we know that Paul is a member of the Brian 's club.

Him and 70% of the country. And we won't tell you the secret handshake.

70% Impressive...did it hur... (Below threshold)
Heralder:

70% Impressive...did it hurt to pull that large a number out of your ass?

(To save you the time, don't bother linking to polls.)

" I'd rather be called a... (Below threshold)
Wieder:

" I'd rather be called a "30 percenter" by you or anyone else because of my principles "

Open your Oyster shell, you fool; your're at 28% & dropping like a rock. As for principles, anyone following the Chimp-in-chief to hell has no principles at all. Your principle is having someone else do the dying for your discredited politics.

You know what, Publicus?... (Below threshold)
Brian:

You know what, Publicus? I'd rather be called a "30 percenter" by you or anyone else because of my principles than to blindly follow a majority because I don't really have any foundation to base principles on.

Sorry, but it is you who are "blindly following". You're still pursuing a goal that can never be attained. On the other hand, the rest of America is paying attention to what's going on and adjusting their attitudes accordingly. That's not "blind". That's "smart".

You accuse the left of "blindly following a majority". But don't you remember that it used to be Bush who had the majority of support? What happened to that, huh? The Dems are not following the majority... it's the majority that has now come to the Dems. When the Dems were in the minority, the were mocked for being out of touch. Now that the American people have sided with them, you mock them for being the majority. Is it possible that perhaps you are out of touch?

Read Larkin's 1:28 post. That is a "foundation" to base a goal on. It may be incomplete, and it may be wrong, but it's a specific reasoned target. All you have is "victory", without ever finding a need to define what that means. And then you blindly stick to a failed strategy, while accusing those around you of being blind.

70% Impressive...did it ... (Below threshold)
Brian:

70% Impressive...did it hurt to pull that large a number out of your ass?

Actually, it came from my brain. But I understand your mistake... Republicans often confuse the two.

Brian, I didn't "accuse the... (Below threshold)

Brian, I didn't "accuse the left of blindly following a majority". You imagine something I did not say and then use that basis to carry on for two more paragraphs. I really expected publicus to be the one to use that angle of attack; not you. Byt the way, that majority you speak of is not comprised solely of "the left".

I keep hearing the same thing from those who are anti-war, those who are against this particular war, or those who have changed their minds about this war: "a majority now opposes the war". If arguments don't convince a person of something, stating that the majority agrees is certainly not another argument with any wieght.

We make decisions in our lives based on the information we have. We give more or less weight to certain facts and information that forms those decisions or opinions. My opinion is different than yours. There is no malice or ignorance involved in the conclusions that I come to and I don't believe there is in yours either. Yet, your remark that I "blindly stick to a failed strategy" is based on what?

At this point I do not feel a dire need to explain myself, my principles or anything else to you or anyone who automatically assumes what I mean and then creates an argument around it. It's senseless to argue an incorrect assumption.
--------------
And Wieder, your ad hominem attacks are hardly worth addressing. So cram it.

Oyster:I'd rath... (Below threshold)
Brian:

Oyster:

I'd rather be called a "30 percenter" ... than to blindly follow a majority

Oyster:

Brian, I didn't "accuse the left of blindly following a majority". You imagine something I did not say

Ooooookay.

"a majority now opposes the war". If arguments don't convince a person of something, stating that the majority agrees is certainly not another argument with any wieght.

It's not meant to convince any one person to change their mind. But it does carry weight when we operate within a system "of the people, by the people, for the people". And please don't respond with any of the silly "why not have people vote on everything?" or "governing by polls" arguments. The fact is that elected representatives are to a large extent supposed to represent the will of the people who elected them. And when the goals diverge too much, it is the leaders who need to bend, not the people.

Yet, your remark that I "blindly stick to a failed strategy" is based on what?

Your implication that those who disagree with you are blindly following the majority, with no principles on which to base their opinions.

did it hurt to... (Below threshold)
_Mike_:
did it hurt to pull that large a number out of your ass?

Actually, it came from my brain. But I understand your mistake... Republicans often confuse the two.

Republicans often confuse your head for your ass ? Is there really that strong of resemblance between the the two ? Or is it a matter of proximity ? :)

Nope, just that as is typic... (Below threshold)
Brian:

Nope, just that as is typical, they tend to take their own deplorable qualities and incorrectly project them onto others.

Actually, the matter is qui... (Below threshold)
Zelsdorf Ragshaft III:

Actually, the matter is quite simple. You are either for America or against it. The lying liberal left has through their scumbag minions, the MSM, that this has been a losing propostion from the beginning. It worked in Viet Nam and it has been working here. What the Democrats forgot is that Americans like to feel good about what they do and to abandon the Iraqi people to what will happen to them when we leave and the effects of turning over 215 billion barrels of oil to our enemies will be devastating to the party of cowards and communist lovers. Idiots like Larkin, Brian, BryanD and Weider will always blame Bush, but that is because they are not capable of taking responsiblity for their own acts. Seems we may have, for PC reasons backed the wrong horse in Bosnia. Seems those lovable Moslems are not very grateful for what we did for them and now want to kill us here. Wish we could supply addresses to where Larkin, Brian, Hooten and BryanD live. I didn't leave Weider out, I just what him to worry a while before they come for him.

Idiots like Larkin, Bria... (Below threshold)
Brian:

Idiots like Larkin, Brian, BryanD and Weider will always blame Bush, but that is because they are not capable of taking responsiblity for their own acts.

Wow, the floor is positively slippery from all the irony dripping off that statement!

Brian, one more time:... (Below threshold)

Brian, one more time:

This is long and I don't expect you or anyone else to bother reading it, but it has to be said.

There are indeed people who follow majorities simply because they are easily led. They're called myrmidons. My statement was simply put forward to clarify that I am not one to follow blindly, yet, you continue to aver that I am a blind follower, even though I clearly explained how I come to my own conclusions.

Your snide, "Ooooookay," in resonse to my statement, "Brian, I didn't "accuse the left of blindly following a majority" sounds much like you're calling me a liar.

Why do you keep insisting that I said, or implied, something I did not say?

I asked, "Yet, your remark that I "blindly stick to a failed strategy" is based on what?" To which you replied:

"Your implication that those who disagree with you are blindly following the majority, with no principles on which to base their opinions."

So let me get this right. You cleary stated that I (me specifically) am blindly following and your proof of this is your inference that I claimed "those who disagree with me" are blindly following. First it was "the left", now it's "those who disagree with me". You're pretty much telling me that I (me specifically) am blindly following and your proof of that is because you think I said [name your group here] is blindly following? (Let's ignore the fact that it's logically impossible for everyone who "disagrees with me" to be blindly following. Who would they be following?)

My only "implication" was that some people are just followers. I was attempting to separate myself from that group. Not "the left". Not "those who disagree with me". Not even all those who agree with me. Most of us have varied reasons. What I said is what I said. I was careful not to name a specific group, yet, you infer all manner of things, I suspect, because you already have me pegged and that's what you expect me to mean. I was addressing publicus' 30 percenter remark. He was the one doing the mocking. You complain that the minority was mocked (although I never mocked anyone for just being in a minority) and now that someone else has openly mocked the minority view right here in the same thread, you've completely ignored it and instead, piled on.

I did not "mock the majority". I simply clarified later that I have my own individual principles and reasons and the simple virtue of a majority believing differently it is not a compelling enough reason for me to consider it a factor in my decision making. But there are undoubtedly those among those ranks that deserve mocking as well as some in the minority.

By the people, for the people, etc. I fully understand and respect the concept. Are you implying that I don't? I can respect that our reps should express what the majority of their constituents want and take the proper steps to see it done, but it has nothing to do with my opinion of whether or not that decision is the right one. Two different things.

Do I need to cite history here? The majority was opposed to the Revolutionary War and the Civil War. Did it make them right? Let's say the majority got their wish on the matter of the Revolutionary War. What would have happened? Would we still be an English colony? Or would we merely have postponed the inevitable? And if it was inevitable, how much worse would it have been later? What if they got their wish in the matter of the Civil War. What would America be like today? The majority wanted us out of Vietnam. I don't need to tell you what happened then. It was a disgrace.

You said: "It's not meant to convince any one person to change their mind." Perhaps not by you, but it IS used by some as a tool to intimidate and ridicule with. And that's what publicus did and that's what I addressed.

With this, I am done. If you still don't get it, then no manner of further explanation from me will make it any clearer.

Great job, Lorie. Always t... (Below threshold)
Wieder:

Great job, Lorie. Always there to shovel the BS propaganda swill as you've done here.

Don't you ever tire of being a Republican hacking the swill propaganda.

Did you see the report w/ Maj. Gen. Mixon and the state of affairs in Diyala province?

I didn't say everything was... (Below threshold)
Lorie Byrd:

I didn't say everything was hunky dory in Iraq. I said that this is good news. Anytime you have Iraqis pledging to go after al Qaeda (and following up on those pledges) that is good news. Why is it that anytime good news comes from Iraq those on the left feel the need to point out all the bad news coming from the region? They seem to actually relish it. It is disgusting. We hear a steady stream 24/7 of bad news from Iraq. I just say give us the whole story. If things are really as bad as we have been told, then why are those on the left so afraid (to the point of hysteria) of the little bits of good news being presented as well? It really makes me wonder.

After listening to the guys who have been in Iraq (at the milblog conference last weekend) I learned that things are not great there, but that there are lots of good news stories in Iraq that are not seeing the light of day here in the states. I also learned that there are plenty of people in our military who believe they can win if supported and given what they need.

Lorie, you would have learn... (Below threshold)
Wieder:

Lorie, you would have learned a great deal more about the real state of affairs in Diyala had you listened to Maj. Gen Mixom's teleconference on the state of affairs there, contrary to what you wrote or hyped yesterday.

What you quote in your overwilling attempt to bandy any BS you can find flies in the face of what Mixom had to say about Diyala.

You can call that Strata swill that you dutifully regurgitate "good news" but in reality it is fiction.

You might have a better grounding in reality if you didn't go looking for all your "news" on kook blogsites.

Actually Wieder, I was basi... (Below threshold)
Lorie Byrd:

Actually Wieder, I was basing my opinion more on what I read from Bill Roggio than anything else. I trust you read the Roggio piece I linked before commenting, but for those who did not, go and read it now. Roggio talks about how the situation in Diyala has worsened and how al Qaeda has strongly organized there. That is why this development is such good news. Here is one quote from the Roggio piece -- go read it all for the whole picture.

"The U.S. and Iraqi security forces have preparing the battlefield in Diyala until the full compliment of U.S. forces are in theater and able to finish securing the Baghdad "belts" - the regions surrounding Baghdad. The Diyala Campaign is only is its opening phase, with U.S. and Iraqi forces conducting raids, search and destroy missions, establishing forward operating bases and logistic nodes in preparation for the full assault sometime early this summer. The establishment of the yet to be named Diyala Salvation Front is a crucial element to establishing local intelligence networks and an auxiliary force to hunt al Qaeda."

As I have said before, over and over again, we get a daily, 24/7 barrage of bad news from Iraq. There is some good news from Iraq, too. I don't understand why so many of those commenting here go apeshit (technical term) when any of that information is provided. Saying there is good news is not saying there is not bad news too. It is just providing a complete picture. The defeatists and the MSM give us all the bad news -- that is why I don't often bother relating it here, since it is already getting plenty of coverage. I try to point readers to the news the MSM doesn't share with them.

Oh, geez. I had not read a... (Below threshold)
Lorie Byrd:

Oh, geez. I had not read all of the comments when I responded to Wieder. If I had, I would not have bothered. I just saw the Wieder comment talking about the "Chimp-in-chief". It is impossible to have a meaningful dialogue with anyone using that childish insult as part of their argument. And Wieder lectured me about kook blogsites?




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy