Look how stable Iraq has become after the surge!!

[e90im]

American aircraft launch strikes in Basra; troops battle militia in Baghdad

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23788065/

This is just left wing liberal propaganda. I believe president G. Dub!!!

"It's going to take awhile, but it's a necessary part of the development of a free society,"
Bush said at a White House news conference with Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd.
At the same time, the president said the situation in Iraq remains "dangerous and fragile."



Don't misunderestimate him. He is a dangerous, dedicated, stubborn fool.

[ganeil]

Report to Congress on the Situation in Iraq
General David H. Petraeus
Commander, Multi-National Force-Iraq
10-11 September 2007

Mr. Chairmen, Ranking Members, Members of the Committees, thank you for the opportunity to
provide my assessment of the security situation in Iraq and to discuss the recommendations I
recently provided to my chain of command for the way forward.

At the outset, I would like to note that this is my testimony. Although I have briefed my
assessment and recommendations to my chain of command, I wrote this testimony myself. It has
not been cleared by, nor shared with, anyone in the Pentagon, the White House, or Congress.

As a bottom line up front, the military objectives of the surge are, in large measure, being met.
In recent months, in the face of tough enemies and the brutal summer heat of Iraq, Coalition and
Iraqi Security Forces have achieved progress in the security arena. Though the improvements
have been uneven across Iraq, the overall number of security incidents in Iraq has declined in 8
of the past 12 weeks, with the numbers of incidents in the last two weeks at the lowest levels
seen since June 2006.

One reason for the decline in incidents is that Coalition and Iraqi forces have dealt significant
blows to Al Qaeda-Iraq. Though Al Qaeda and its affiliates in Iraq remain dangerous, we have
taken away a number of their sanctuaries and gained the initiative in many areas.

We have also disrupted Shia militia extremists, capturing the head and numerous other leaders of
the Iranian-supported Special Groups, along with a senior Lebanese Hezbollah operative
supporting Iran’s activities in Iraq.

Coalition and Iraqi operations have helped reduce ethno-sectarian violence, as well, bringing
down the number of ethno-sectarian deaths substantially in Baghdad and across Iraq since the
height of the sectarian violence last December. The number of overall civilian deaths has also
declined during this period, although the numbers in each area are still at troubling levels.

Iraqi Security Forces have also continued to grow and to shoulder more of the load, albeit slowly
and amid continuing concerns about the sectarian tendencies of some elements in their ranks. In
general, however, Iraqi elements have been standing and fighting and sustaining tough losses,
and they have taken the lead in operations in many areas.

Additionally, in what may be the most significant development of the past 8 months, the tribal
rejection of Al Qaeda that started in Anbar Province and helped produce such significant change
there has now spread to a number of other locations as well.

Based on all this and on the further progress we believe we can achieve over the next few
months, I believe that we will be able to reduce our forces to the pre-surge level of brigade
combat teams by next summer without jeopardizing the security gains that we have fought so
hard to achieve.

Beyond that, while noting that the situation in Iraq remains complex, difficult, and sometimes
downright frustrating, I also believe that it is possible to achieve our objectives in Iraq over time,
though doing so will be neither quick nor easy.

Having provided that summary, I would like to review the nature of the conflict in Iraq, recall the
situation before the surge, describe the current situation, and explain the recommendations I have
provided to my chain of command for the way ahead in Iraq.

. . . .

Current Situation and Trends

The progress our forces have achieved with our Iraqi counterparts has, as I noted at the outset,
been substantial. While there have been setbacks as well as successes and tough losses along the
way, overall, our tactical commanders and I see improvements in the security environment. We
do not, however, just rely on gut feel or personal observations; we also conduct considerable data
collection and analysis to gauge progress and determine trends. We do this by gathering and
refining data from coalition and Iraqi operations centers, using a methodology that has been in
place for well over a year and that has benefited over the past seven months from the increased
presence of our forces living among the Iraqi people. We endeavor to ensure our analysis of that
data is conducted with rigor and consistency, as our ability to achieve a nuanced understanding
of the security environment is dependent on collecting and analyzing data in a consistent way
over time. Two US intelligence agencies recently reviewed our methodology, and they
concluded that the data we produce is the most accurate and authoritative in Iraq.

As I mentioned up front, and as the chart before you reflects, the level of security incidents has
decreased significantly since the start of the surge of offensive operations in mid-June, declining
in 8 of the past 12 weeks, with the level of incidents in the past two weeks the lowest since June
2006 and with the number of attacks this past week the lowest since April 2006.

Civilian deaths of all categories, less natural causes, have also declined considerably, by over
45% Iraq-wide since the height of the sectarian violence in December. This is shown by the top
line on this chart, and the decline by some 70% in Baghdad is shown by the bottom line.
Periodic mass casualty attacks by Al Qaeda have tragically added to the numbers outside
Baghdad, in particular. Even without the sensational attacks, however, the level of civilian
deaths is clearly still too high and continues to be of serious concern.

As the next chart shows, the number of ethno-sectarian deaths, an important subset of the overall
civilian casualty figures, has also declined significantly since the height of the sectarian violence
in December. Iraq-wide, as shown by the top line on this chart, the number of ethno-sectarian
deaths has come down by over 55%, and it would have come down much further were it not for
the casualties inflicted by barbaric Al Qaeda bombings attempting to reignite sectarian violence.
In Baghdad, as the bottom line shows, the number of ethno-sectarian deaths has come down by
some 80% since December. This chart also displays the density of sectarian incidents in various
Baghdad neighborhoods and it both reflects the progress made in reducing ethno-sectarian
violence in the Iraqi capital and identifies the areas that remain the most challenging.

As we have gone on the offensive in former Al Qaeda and insurgent sanctuaries, and as locals
have increasingly supported our efforts, we have found a substantially increased number of arms,
ammunition, and explosives caches. As this chart shows, we have, so far this year, already found
and cleared over 4,400 caches, nearly 1,700 more than we discovered in all of last year. This
may be a factor in the reduction in the number of overall improvised explosive device attacks in
recent months, which as this chart shows, has declined sharply, by about one-third, since June.

The change in the security situation in Anbar Province has, of course, been particularly dramatic.
As this chart shows, monthly attack levels in Anbar have declined from some 1,350 in October
2006 to a bit over 200 in August of this year. This dramatic decrease reflects the significance of
the local rejection of Al Qaeda and the newfound willingness of local Anbaris to volunteer to
serve in the Iraqi Army and Iraqi Police Service. As I noted earlier, we are seeing similar actions
in other locations, as well.

To be sure, trends have not been uniformly positive across Iraq, as is shown by this chart
depicting violence levels in several key Iraqi provinces. The trend in Ninevah Province, for
example, has been much more up and down, until a recent decline, and the same is true in Sala
ad Din Province, though recent trends there and in Baghdad have been in the right direction. In
any event, the overall trajectory in Iraq – a steady decline of incidents in the past three months –
is still quite significant.

The number of car bombings and suicide attacks has also declined in each of the past 5 months,
from a high of some 175 in March, as this chart shows, to about 90 this past month. While this
trend in recent months has been heartening, the number of high profile attacks is still too high,
and we continue to work hard to destroy the networks that carry out these barbaric attacks.

Our operations have, in fact, produced substantial progress against Al Qaeda and its affiliates in
Iraq. As this chart shows, in the past 8 months, we have considerably reduced the areas in which
Al Qaeda enjoyed sanctuary. We have also neutralized 5 media cells, detained the senior Iraqi
leader of Al Qaeda-Iraq, and killed or captured nearly 100 other key leaders and some 2,500
rank-and-file fighters. Al Qaeda is certainly not defeated; however, it is off balance and we are
pursuing its leaders and operators aggressively. Of note, as the recent National Intelligence
Estimate on Iraq explained, these gains against Al Qaeda are a result of the synergy of actions
by: conventional forces to deny the terrorists sanctuary; intelligence, surveillance, and
reconnaissance assets to find the enemy; and special operations elements to conduct targeted
raids. A combination of these assets is necessary to prevent the creation of a terrorist safe haven
in Iraq.

In the past six months we have also targeted Shia militia extremists, capturing a number of senior
leaders and fighters, as well as the deputy commander of Lebanese Hezbollah Department 2800,
the organization created to support the training, arming, funding, and, in some cases, direction of
the militia extremists by the Iranian Republican Guard Corps’ Qods Force. These elements have
assassinated and kidnapped Iraqi governmental leaders, killed and wounded our soldiers with
advanced explosive devices provided by Iran, and indiscriminately rocketed civilians in the
International Zone and elsewhere. It is increasingly apparent to both Coalition and Iraqi leaders
that Iran, through the use of the Qods Force, seeks to turn the Iraqi Special Groups into a
Hezbollah-like force to serve its interests and fight a proxy war against the Iraqi state and
coalition forces in Iraq.

The most significant development in the past six months likely has been the increasing
emergence of tribes and local citizens rejecting Al Qaeda and other extremists. This has, of
course, been most visible in Anbar Province. A year ago the province was assessed as “lost”
politically. Today, it is a model of what happens when local leaders and citizens decide to
oppose Al Qaeda and reject its Taliban-like ideology. While Anbar is unique and the model it
provides cannot be replicated everywhere in Iraq, it does demonstrate the dramatic change in
security that is possible with the support and participation of local citizens. As this chart shows,
other tribes have been inspired by the actions of those in Anbar and have volunteered to fight
extremists as well. We have, in coordination with the Iraqi government’s National
Reconciliation Committee, been engaging these tribes and groups of local citizens who want to
oppose extremists and to contribute to local security. Some 20,000 such individuals are already
being hired for the Iraqi Police, thousands of others are being assimilated into the Iraqi Army,
and thousands more are vying for a spot in Iraq’s Security Forces.

. . . .

Read the rest here.

Emphasis mine.

[e90im]

"At the outset, I would like to note that this is my testimony. Although I have briefed my
assessment and recommendations to my chain of command, I wrote this testimony myself. It has
not been cleared by, nor shared with, anyone in the Pentagon, the White House, or Congress. "

It comes from a Bush appointed soldier, so it must be accurate.

[FirstClass]

Originally Posted by e90im

It comes from a Bush appointed soldier, so it must be accurate.

You don't trust the leader of forces in Iraq's word nor his extensive supporting facts? You can say it's not true all you want but it is.

[ganeil]

Originally Posted by FirstClass

You don't trust the leader of forces in Iraq's word nor his extensive supporting facts? You can say it's not true all you want but it is.

This is a great example of why I no longer read nor respond to posts by e90im or dr325i. They are unwilling (or more likely unable) to respond to the substance of a post but instead commit one of any number of logical fallacies in an attempt to justify their pre-conceived opinions. The ad hominem attack seems to be e90im's preferred fallacy while dr325i prefers the argumentum ad populum.

[e90im]

"At the outset, I would like to note that this is my testimony. Although I have briefed my
assessment and recommendations to my chain of command, I wrote this testimony myself. It has
not been cleared by, nor shared with, anyone in the Pentagon, the White House, or Congress. "

Why hasn't been cleared by anyone? Not worth the time to look at it?

What is commander in chief doing these days? Looking into Putin's eyes?

[e90im]

Originally Posted by FirstClass

You don't trust the leader of forces in Iraq's word nor his extensive supporting facts? You can say it's not true all you want but it is.

Facts? You mean like when Powell presented WMD "facts" to UN?

Those kinds of facts?

[hks786]

Originally Posted by e90im

Facts? You mean like when Powell presented WMD "facts" to UN?

Those kinds of facts?

+1

[dr335is]

Originally Posted by FirstClass

You don't trust the leader of forces in Iraq's word nor his extensive supporting facts? You can say it's not true all you want but it is.

Do you trust Bill Clinton/Hilary???
I don't and did not while he was in the office...
So, why double standards???

Relize your responses are childish...

Bush lied to us at least once and so far it cost $1T and 200k Innocent lives, and the lowest level respect toward the US in modern history...
Should I trust him again -- hell NO!

[ganeil]

Originally Posted by FirstClass

You don't trust the leader of forces in Iraq's word nor his extensive supporting facts? You can say it's not true all you want but it is.

What the other side fails to understand is that if they want to question GEN Petraeus' analysis or the underlying data, they should do so with either alternative data or an alternative assessment of the presented data.

Since they are unable to do either, they resort to childish name calling.

There used to be reasonable people on this board who I disagreed with politically but they were capable of reasoned debate. Alas, I left for a few months and they seem to have disappeared.

[ironjw]

fack bushy

[ganeil]

Originally Posted by ironjw

fack bushy

As I was saying.

[FirstClass]

Originally Posted by dr325i

Relize your responses are childish...

Argumentum ad hominem much? Refute points if you can (rarely happens) attack people when you can't? Is that your basic argument strategy?

[dr335is]

Originally Posted by FirstClass

Argumentum ad hominem much? Refute points if you can (rarely happens) attack people when you can't? Is that your basic argument strategy?

First, learn what the latin expression means before trying to look smart.

Second, try instead to answer to ONE of my comments/answers, or do not bother to type crap at all...

[e90im]

General Petraeus is a soldier and as such is obedient to commander in chief.

Petraeus is NOT the one that should've been questioned.

Commander in chief should’ve stood before congress and explained how does he plan to get us out of the mess he put us in.

But, one needs cohones to do such a thing. Someone with high moral values that takes responsibility for his actions.

Instead, he blamed CIA for bad WMD intel, now puts GEN Petraeus in the hot seat, while crying on TV like a pussy that he is.

[FirstClass]

Originally Posted by dr325i

First, learn what the latin expression means before trying to look smart.

I'm perfectly familiar with the translation. I wouldn't have used the term if I didn't know what it meant. If you'd like me to answer your comments you'd do well to answer some of mine. You never actually refute a point other than saying it's untrue or making some ridiculous unrelated point of your own.

Originally Posted by dr325i

Do you trust Bill Clinton/Hilary???
I don't and did not while he was in the office...
So, why double standards???

No double standard. Bill is a proven liar and Hillary is just as bad if not worse if campaign statements are anything to go by. I haven't seen any indication that Petraeus has ever been anything less than truthful.

Originally Posted by dr325i

Bush lied to us at least once and so far it cost $1T and 200k Innocent lives, and the lowest level respect toward the US in modern history...
Should I trust him again -- hell NO!

Have any proof of this alleged lying or is it just more of your baseless accusations as usual?

Originally Posted by e90im

Commander in chief should’ve stood before congress and explained how does he plan to get us out of the mess he put us in.

That he put us in? Did you miss the part where Congress voted overwhelmingly to use force in Iraq? Are they going to question themselves?

[e90im]

I am not defending congress. You are defending Bush. Why? He fucked up, now he needs to un-fuck it.

The buck stops with him in terms of authority, as it should in terms of responsibility.

[e90im]

Little humor never hurt anyone...

[e90im]

One more

[FirstClass]

Originally Posted by e90im

You are defending Bush. Why? He fucked up, now he needs to un-fuck it.

I'm not defending Bush, I'm saying that you can't blame him any more than Congress. I hate the people who voted for the war and are now trying to crucify Bush because of it. *cough* Hillary, Reid, et al *cough*

Originally Posted by FirstClass

Did we fuck up? Probably. Did we do follow what we thought was the best course of action at the time? Absolutely.

[dr335is]

Originally Posted by FirstClass

I'm not defending Bush, I'm saying that you can't blame him any more than Congress. I hate the people who voted for the war and are now trying to crucify Bush because of it. *cough* Hillary, Reid, et al *cough*

Again, and again -- you fail to analyze the circumstances under which they had to vote -- right after the 9/11, weeks of the WMD and "how bad SH was and ready to hurt us" brainwashing, Bush's "You're with me or the enemy" speech, and much more...

There is no better way to control the Masses (including COngress) than to inject the fear, confussion and threats -- Bush did that and clearly used the events of 9/11 to achieve his goal.

Some people have come to their senses late, some still do not have guts to admit, and barely any (Obama for example) had guts to think clearly when asked...

The bottom line is that Iraq was in better situation even during the Iraq-Iran war and a common person in Iraq was definitely safer and lived better under SH. The mess we created has to be fixed by us...

[RIP-A4]

here's your stability