Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Iraq Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: The 'SURGE' Is working
BadNews    3/14/2007 9:33:17 AM
The 'Surge' Is Succeeding By Robert Kagan Sunday, March 11, 2007; B07 A front-page story in The Post last week suggested that the Bush administration has no backup plan in case the surge in Iraq doesn't work. I wonder if The Post and other newspapers have a backup plan in case it does. Leading journalists have been reporting for some time that the war was hopeless, a fiasco that could not be salvaged by more troops and a new counterinsurgency strategy. The conventional wisdom in December held that sending more troops was politically impossible after the antiwar tenor of the midterm elections. It was practically impossible because the extra troops didn't exist. Even if the troops did exist, they could not make a difference. Four months later, the once insurmountable political opposition has been surmounted. The nonexistent troops are flowing into Iraq. And though it is still early and horrible acts of violence continue, there is substantial evidence that the new counterinsurgency strategy, backed by the infusion of new forces, is having a significant effect. Some observers are reporting the shift. Iraqi bloggers Mohammed and Omar Fadhil, widely respected for their straight talk, say that "early signs are encouraging." The first impact of the "surge," they write, was psychological. Both friends and foes in Iraq had been convinced, in no small part by the American media, that the United States was preparing to pull out. When the opposite occurred, this alone shifted the dynamic. As the Fadhils report, "Commanders and lieutenants of various militant groups abandoned their positions in Baghdad and in some cases fled the country." The most prominent leader to go into hiding has been Moqtada al-Sadr. His Mahdi Army has been instructed to avoid clashes with American and Iraqi forces, even as coalition forces begin to establish themselves in the once off-limits Sadr City. Before the arrival of Gen. David Petraeus, the Army's leading counterinsurgency strategist, U.S. forces tended to raid insurgent and terrorist strongholds and then pull back and hand over the areas to Iraqi forces, who failed to hold them. The Fadhils report, "One difference between this and earlier -- failed -- attempts to secure Baghdad is the willingness of the Iraqi and U.S. governments to commit enough resources for enough time to make it work." In the past, bursts of American activity were followed by withdrawal and a return of the insurgents. Now, the plan to secure Baghdad "is becoming stricter and gaining momentum by the day as more troops pour into the city, allowing for a better implementation of the 'clear and hold' strategy." Baghdadis "always want the 'hold' part to materialize, and feel safe when they go out and find the Army and police maintaining their posts -- the bad guys can't intimidate as long as the troops are staying." A greater sense of confidence produces many benefits. The number of security tips about insurgents that Iraqi civilians provide has jumped sharply. Stores and marketplaces are reopening in Baghdad, increasing the sense of community. People dislocated by sectarian violence are returning to their homes. As a result, "many Baghdadis feel hopeful again about the future, and the fear of civil war is slowly being replaced by optimism that peace might one day return to this city," the Fadhils report. "This change in mood is something huge by itself." Apparently some American journalists see the difference. NBC's Brian Williams recently reported a dramatic change in Ramadi since his previous visit. The city was safer; the airport more secure. The new American strategy of "getting out, decentralizing, going into the neighborhoods, grabbing a toehold, telling the enemy we're here, start talking to the locals -- that is having an obvious and palpable effect." U.S. soldiers forged agreements with local religious leaders and pushed al-Qaeda back -- a trend other observers have noted in some Sunni-dominated areas. The result, Williams said, is that "the war has changed." It is no coincidence that as the mood and the reality have shifted, political currents have shifted as well. A national agreement on sharing oil revenue appears on its way to approval. The Interior Ministry has been purged of corrupt officials and of many suspected of torture and brutality. And cracks are appearing in the Shiite governing coalition -- a good sign, given that the rock-solid unity was both the product and cause of growing sectarian violence. There is still violence, as Sunni insurgents and al-Qaeda seek to prove that the surge is not working. However, they are striking at more vulnerable targets in the provinces. Violence is down in Baghdad. As for Sadr and the Mahdi Army, it is possible they may reemerge as a problem later. But trying to wait out the American and Iraqi effort may be hazardous if the public becomes less tolerant of their violence. It could not be comforting to Sadr or al-Qaeda to read in
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
sofa       3/14/2007 11:48:05 AM
"Sunni insurgents and al-Qaeda seek to prove that the surge is not working"
 
Terrorists and those who support them: MSM, Demorats, self loathing surrender poodles.
 
Quote    Reply

ProDemocracy    Excellent news   3/14/2007 11:57:30 AM
This is excellent news - I am glad that increasing troop levels are helping to quash the insurgency.  I hope that we can now work with the Iraquis at some long-term solution.  Many people have suggested increasing troop levels for months and months - against Rumsfeld's assertions that we did not need additional troops.  Thank God that Bush listened to the Iraq report and increased the troops.  Hopefully dems will not try to block this progress that we are finally making thanks to Bush being held accountable and actually having to admit a mistake and try a fresh approach.
 
Quote    Reply

swhitebull       3/14/2007 2:47:20 PM

This is excellent news - I am glad that increasing troop levels are helping to quash the insurgency.  I hope that we can now work with the Iraquis at some long-term solution.  Many people have suggested increasing troop levels for months and months - against Rumsfeld's assertions that we did not need additional troops.  Thank God that Bush listened to the Iraq report and increased the troops.  Hopefully dems will not try to block this progress that we are finally making thanks to Bush being held accountable and actually having to admit a mistake and try a fresh approach.


From Powerlineblog.com:
 
 
Quantifying Progress in Baghdad

Iraqi officials today released data on violence in Baghdad since the "surge" began a month ago:

In an upbeat assessment of the first 30 days of the security plan, Iraqi military spokesman Brigadier Qassim Moussawi said the number of Iraqis killed by violence in Baghdad since February 14 was 265, down from 1,440 killed in the previous month.

The number of car bombings, a favorite weapon used by suspected Sunni Arab militants fighting the Shi'ite-led government, was down to 36 from 56, Moussawi told reporters.

 

That's more than an 80% reduction in fatalities in Baghdad, obviously a good start for the new strategy. The Iraqi official said that violence had increased in areas outside of Baghdad, presumably because terrorists had left the city. No numbers were given for the increase in areas outside the capital.

It's obviously relevant to know the extent to which increased violence outside Baghdad has offset improvements within the city, but pacifying Baghdad, a task many considered close to impossible, is important in and of itself. Violence outside Baghdad over the last couple of years has actually been lower than most people realize; it was the violence in the capital that caused many to fear that the Iraqi government couldn't function. If Baghdad can be secured, the Iraqi government should have time to continue addressing the terrorist threat in other areas of the country.

 
swhitebull
 
Quote    Reply

BadNews       3/14/2007 3:47:17 PM

This is excellent news - I am glad that increasing troop levels are helping to quash the insurgency.  I hope that we can now work with the Iraquis at some long-term solution.  Many people have suggested increasing troop levels for months and months - against Rumsfeld's assertions that we did not need additional troops.  Thank God that Bush listened to the Iraq report and increased the troops.  Hopefully dems will not try to block this progress that we are finally making thanks to Bush being held accountable and actually having to admit a mistake and try a fresh approach.



I wouldn't go far as to say that. the fact is Gen Praetaus has changed tactics is what realy made the difference. This has nothing to do with President Bush being held accountable, it has to do with one of his commanders submitting a strategy that he bought into.
 
The Iraq report I doubt was the stimulus, the concepot developed from the nations leading COIN strategist more likely did.
 
Quote    Reply

BadNews       3/14/2007 3:49:35 PM

This is excellent news - I am glad that increasing troop levels are helping to quash the insurgency.  I hope that we can now work with the Iraquis at some long-term solution.  Many people have suggested increasing troop levels for months and months - against Rumsfeld's assertions that we did not need additional troops.  Thank God that Bush listened to the Iraq report and increased the troops.  Hopefully dems will not try to block this progress that we are finally making thanks to Bush being held accountable and actually having to admit a mistake and try a fresh approach.


And as we debate this here, I am listening to the Senate debate over a bill to demand a withdrawel by 2008, it is doubtful they will get the 60 votes necessary, but it is evident that the Dems are afraid of this strategy's success

 
Quote    Reply

ProDemocracy       3/14/2007 3:51:56 PM
Perhaps you are correct and it's just coincidental that the surge was announced after the Iraq group made their reccommendations and Bush's party lost control of congress.  In any case, I think this does prove to some extent that Rumsfeld was wrong not to send more troops sooner.  Now that we have more competent leadership, I suspect we will see even greater improvement in Iraq.  British troops leaving in the south can also be viewed as a victory given that part of Iraq appears to have calmed.



This is excellent news - I am glad that increasing troop levels are helping to quash the insurgency.  I hope that we can now work with the Iraquis at some long-term solution.  Many people have suggested increasing troop levels for months and months - against Rumsfeld's assertions that we did not need additional troops.  Thank God that Bush listened to the Iraq report and increased the troops.  Hopefully dems will not try to block this progress that we are finally making thanks to Bush being held accountable and actually having to admit a mistake and try a fresh approach.





I wouldn't go far as to say that. the fact is Gen Praetaus has changed tactics is what realy made the difference. This has nothing to do with President Bush being held accountable, it has to do with one of his commanders submitting a strategy that he bought into.

 

The Iraq report I doubt was the stimulus, the concepot developed from the nations leading COIN strategist more likely did.



 
Quote    Reply

BadNews    More on Senate Debat   3/14/2007 3:55:44 PM
3:52 PM EST  Sen. Orin Hatch " I do not want to offend anyone but, we should not be debating this resolution based on polls, but rather on what is the right thing to do."
 
Quote    Reply

swhitebull    Opportunity for Success - Petraeus-Style   3/15/2007 10:34:24 AM
from CaptainsQuartersblog.com:
 
 

The Opportunity In Sadr City

A report by The Scotsman on the shock experienced by American troops on their first forays into Sadr City reveal an opportunity that we can seize to push the militias aside. Basic services such as sewage and trash removal do not exist, and although the residents of the slums have so far given the American surge a chance, success will depend on replacing those services provided by the militias:

In a capital where public services barely function and five straight hours of electricity is a cause for celebration, Sadr City stands out. Some 2.5 million people, nearly all of them Shiites, live in the northeastern Baghdad community. Many of them lack running water and proper sewerage. Hundreds of thousands have no jobs and subsist on monthly food rations, a throwback to the international sanctions of the Saddam Hussein era.

Streets in some parts of Sadr City run black with sludge. Damaged power lines provide, at best, only four hours of electricity a day.

Many US soldiers were unprepared for what they found. During a patrol last week, troops brushed flies from their faces as they drove through rotting heaps of refuse and excrement that were piled outside houses. One soldier opened his Humvee's door and vomited.

Improving the quality of life for Iraqis - including those in Sadr City - is part of the American strategy, articulated by the new US commander, General David Petraeus. Once areas have been rid of insurgents, criminals and death squads, the US hopes to pump in cash to encourage small businesses and revive the local economy.

The plan is for the Americans and their Iraqi counterparts to stay in the neighbourhoods to keep the militants from returning. But first comes security: economic improvement will have to wait until the streets are safe.

 

The sorry state of Sadr City has increased the appreciation of the Mahdi Army's role in the slums for American troops. What few services the residents received came from the Shi'ite militias -- along with protection rackets, violence, and exploitation. These people want to see their situation change, and they will be willing to work with almost anyone who can improve their conditions and allow them to get off of the dole.

General David Petraeus understands this. His strategy of neighborhood-based security allows for close interaction with the residents. He has adjusted the tactics used in implementing security to allow for softer, more friendly approaches to Sadr City residents, who will appreciate the difference between professional American troops and the crime-lord approach of the Mahdis. At this level, it is a hearts-and-minds strategy that Petraeus hopes will pay short- and long-term dividends.

At the same time, the US needs to start getting trash, sewage, and electical services running. Instead of having the Army or American contractors do the work, though, the US should invest resources to help create Iraqi businesses for these tasks. It would help employ thousands who need jobs and jump-start the creation of a Sadr City middle class. Entrepeneurialism will accelerate the process of clearing the trash and cleaning the streets while the sewage and electrical systems get put back to working order.

Security comes first, but efforts such as these have to follow soon after, or security will soon disappear. The US has a chance to make an impact on sectarian animosity by allowing everyone the chance for some prosperity, and to give Iraqis ownership of their own progress. A kick start beats a kicked-in door in the long run, as Petraeus knows. Let's hope Congress can figure this out as well.
 
 
swhitebull - hell, if Hizbollah in Lebanon, and al-sadr  in Sadr City and hamas in Gaza can do it, why can't we?
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics