"Al Qaeda in Iraq is Defeated"

  1. http://michaelyon-online.com/wp/iraq...s-defeated.htm

    "Al Qaeda in Iraq is defeated," according to Sheik Omar Jabouri, spokesman for the Iraqi Islamic Party and a member of the widespread and influential Jabouri Tribe. Speaking through an interpreter at a 31 October meeting at the Iraqi Islamic Party headquarters in downtown Baghdad, Sheik Omar said that al Qaeda had been "defeated mentally, and therefore is defeated physically," referring to how clear it has become that the terrorist group's tactics have backfired. Operatives who could once disappear back into the crowd after committing an increasingly atrocious attack no longer find safe haven among the Iraqis who live in the southern part of Baghdad. They are being hunted down and killed. Or, if they are lucky, captured by Americans."


    Harry Reid was right: the war is lost - for Al Qaeda. Thank God we have a strong President.

    ~faith,
    Timothy.
    •  
  2. 20 Comments

  3. by   ZASHAGALKA
    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/com...cle2796318.ece

    From The Times
    November 3, 2007
    The Petraeus Curve
    Serious success in Iraq is not being recognised as it should be


    "Indeed, on every relevant measure, the shape of the Petraeus curve is profoundly encouraging. It is not only the number of coalition deaths and injuries that has fallen sharply (October was the best month for 18 months and the second-best in almost four years), but the number of fatalities among Iraqi civilians has also tumbled similarly. This process started outside Baghdad but now even the capital itself has a sense of being much less violent and more viable. As we report today, something akin to a normal nightlife is beginning to re-emerge in the city. As the pace of reconstruction quickens, the prospects for economic recovery will be enhanced yet further. With oil at record high prices, Iraq should be an extremely prosperous nation and in a position to start planning for its future with confidence."

    . . .

    "The current achievements, and they are achievements, are being treated as almost an embarrassment in certain quarters. The entire context of the contest for the Democratic nomination for president has been based on the conclusion that Iraq is an absolute disaster and the first task of the next president is to extricate the United States at maximum speed."

    ~faith,
    Timothy.
    Last edit by ZASHAGALKA on Nov 3, '07
  4. by   ZASHAGALKA
    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/art...sh_resolu.html

    Special Report w/ Brit Hume 10/15/07:

    COL. RICHARD SIMCOCK, REGIMENTAL COMBAT TEAM AND COMMANDER: "There are still attacks in Fallujah and surrounding areas. We had not killed or captured every single Al Qaeda member that is here. But their capabilities are greatly diminished. I would characterize them as a defeated force from my perspective."

    ~faith,
    Timothy.
  5. by   ZASHAGALKA
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?hpid=topnews

    Washington Post 10/15/07
    Al-Qaeda In Iraq Reported Crippled

    "The U.S. military believes it has dealt devastating and perhaps irreversible blows to al-Qaeda in Iraq in recent months, leading some generals to advocate a declaration of victory over the group, which the Bush administration has long described as the most lethal U.S. adversary in Iraq.

    . . .

    Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, head of the Joint Special Operations Command's operations in Iraq, is the chief promoter of a victory declaration and believes that AQI has been all but eliminated, the military intelligence official said. But Adm. William J. Fallon, the chief of U.S. Central Command, which oversees Iraq and the rest of the Middle East, is urging restraint, the official said. The military intelligence official, like others interviewed for this report, spoke on the condition of anonymity about Iraq assessments and strategy.

    Senior U.S. commanders on the ground, including Gen. David H. Petraeus, the head of U.S. forces in Iraq, have long complained that Central Command, along with the CIA, is too negative in its analyses. On this issue, however, Petraeus agrees with Fallon, the military intelligence official said."


    Read this whole article; it's amazing. There are 2 reasons the Administration and the military commanders in Iraq don't want to declare victory: 1. They don't want to look premature, as has happened before, and 2. They don't want victory against Al Qaeda to be taken as a rationale to pull the troops out prematurely, before we can take that victory and achieve a broader peace in Iraq. The amazing thing is that both calculations are political calculations for back home, and have NOTHING to do with the politics or war effort in Iraq.

    WE ARE WINNING. PERIOD. This is good news, no matter WHERE your politics reside. The result is fewer casualties, for Americans AND Iraqis. THAT is good news, no matter WHERE your politics reside.

    ~faith,
    Timothy.
  6. by   prmenrs
    Great. When will our kids be home?
  7. by   ZASHAGALKA
    Quote from prmenrs
    Great. When will our kids be home?
    PM Nouri Al-Maliki, in Iraq, says he believes that we can withdraw 100,000 of our 169,000 troops by the end of 2008.

    He said it in early October, but I'd have to search for the link because I found it in another link that linked to a Yahoo News article on it and that article is no longer available on-line.

    Gen Petraeus has said that we will begin withdrawing troops in Dec and should be back down to 130,000 by May. He said that in his report to Congress, in Sept.

    The answer to your question: the numbers of our troop presence will be decreasing steadily, beginning next month. No matter WHAT your political beliefs, that is good news.

    In fact, there will be pressure to withdraw more troops as the 2008 election approaches. That isn't even bad or cynical news: politics is part of war. Much better to withdraw while turning over day to day control to a stabilized Iraqi authority in an environment of growing peace than it would have been to turn day to day operations in Iraq over to terrorists and warring ethnicities. It is the difference between failure and success.

    It is the difference between victory and a bloodbath as we depart. More to the point, the President deserves credit. Thank you President Bush.

    I'll go one step further, while I believe that Sen. Reid was out of line to try to snatch failure from the jaws of victory with his "war is lost" comment, the loyal opposition here to the war deserves credit for this new turn of events, as well. If there had not been serious pressure on the President to perform, Rumsfield might still be in charge of operations. Thank God for a free society that can bring all sides to the table. It was the pressure-cooker here over the war that energized the change in strategy that is now producing results. So, all of you that have been against this war for so long: you deserve credit, as well. Thank you.

    And, of course, Thank you, General Petraeus, our awesome troops, and the Iraqi people.

    We can all be proud of our military and deservedly so.

    ~faith,
    Timothy.
    Last edit by ZASHAGALKA on Nov 3, '07
  8. by   Multicollinearity
    This would be great. I'm skeptical that these reports are accurate, though. It sounds a bit like a certain premature "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED" banner I recall.

    I'd really like to believe this, but we've been lied to so much. I'll believe it when the troops (including two of my relatives) are home.
    Last edit by Multicollinearity on Nov 3, '07
  9. by   VivaLasViejas
    I AM proud of them all---especially my dd and SIL, who as we speak are over there in the thick of things, assisting in the effort to defeat al-Qaeda.

    I still say this entire war was never necessary, that we should have continued the pursuit of Osama bin Laden and his associates until we caught up with them and destroyed them. I wish my loved ones were home safe, instead of in that Godforsaken desert where *anything* could happen to them, and indeed has happened to almost 4,000 Americans and countless Iraqis. But I also fervently wish for victory in Iraq so that not only can my family come home, but have a reasonable hope that there will be no need to leave their child again to fight an enemy who doesn't care enough about its own children to stop the hatred and the killing............let alone theirs.

    JMHO.
  10. by   ZASHAGALKA
    Quote from multicollinearity
    This would be great. I'm skeptical that these reports are accurate, though. It sounds a bit like a certain premature "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED" banner I recall.

    I'd really like to believe this, though.
    That banner was the Navy's banner and THEY HAD accomplished THEIR mission. The ground situation that followed is not principally a Naval battle. THAT carrier group was coming home, victorious in their mission.

    It is simply propaganda to place those words in the Administration's mouth at that time. In fact, President Bush, AT THAT TIME, was warning that the easy part was over, but it was going to take considerable time and effort to calm that nation.

    However, your are correct, and I did mention that is one of 2 reasons why the Administration and military commanders are being guarded in their assessment. THAT however, is a stateside political perspective that has nothing to do with facts on the ground.

    The FACTS on the ground are that the situation has been improving, for six months. It has taken THIS long for positive coverage to reach a tipping point for just the reason you cite, "I'd like to believe it, but . . ."

    Believe it. This isn't a passing improvement. The principle change is that Iraqis are tired of being taken advantage of by Al Qaeda. They know that the surest path to controlling their own destiny is to stand up for Iraq. Most of the Sunnis and Shias, in multiple polls, have said they consider themselves Iraqis first. They just needed a pathway to stand up for their country. What they needed was the trust in a continuous presence for long enough to rout the terrorists that were terrorizing THEM. The surge has been a brilliant success. President Bush finally found his General Grant.

    The endgame is in sight. Finally. That means the scenarios are coming together that will lead to the majority of our troops coming home, VICTORIOUS in honor and battle.

    ~faith,
    Timothy.
    Last edit by ZASHAGALKA on Nov 3, '07
  11. by   SuesquatchRN
    Sure it is.

    I'll let my brother, who is in Baghdad, know that you think it's over. He'll be glad to hear it.
  12. by   ZASHAGALKA
    Quote from Suesquatch
    Sure it is.

    I'll let my brother, who is in Baghdad, know that you think it's over. He'll be glad to hear it.
    If you took away from anything I've said here that the war is over, then you weren't reading what I actually wrote.

    The tide has turned. The endgame is now envisionable. That isn't the same thing as saying the endgame has arrived. I never said any such thing.

    However, it is now undeniable that things have significantly improved. I'm sure your brother could tell you that. Ask him.

    Tell your brother that we at home are proud of his service to our nation. That is precisely what this is: service to our nation.

    ~faith,
    Timothy.
  13. by   ZASHAGALKA
    Let me point out that I didn't say that Al Qaeda in Iraq is defeated. I merely quoted a growing number of boots and civilians on the ground in Iraq that are coming to that conclusion. Even so, a total defeat of Al Qaeda is not victory in Iraq unless and until it translate into a stable gov't tolerant of all ethnic/religious factions.

    Creating the seeds for that tolerant government IS the endgame. We aren't there yet.

    There is no reason however, why an oil rich nation at $100/barrel oil can't become hugely prosperous. I think it is clear that Iraqis would rather embrace that future than continue in their recent past. And THAT is why an endgame is now envisionable, even if it hasn't arrived.

    Good news in Iraq is NOT bad news for America. For that matter, it is not bad news for Democrats. It was more prudent to suggest withdrawal 6 months or a year ago. Based on improvement, it is less prudent to advocate that today. THIS is principally why national Democrats have all but dropped the issue. However, taking into account real changes on the ground will not hurt the majority of Democrats that held positions based upon real conditions on the ground 6 months ago. Harry Reid, I think, is in trouble in '10. His opinion polls in Nevada are worse than President Bush's are nationally. For the rest of Democrats that were in favor of withdrawal, but weren't on camera saying that our troops were losers, the turn of events will have no permanent effect on their candidacies, providing, they take those turn of events into account.

    Now, it might mean that there is less to beat up on Republicans about. Sure. So, Democrats might actually have to take on a variety of issues to win election instead of merely having another referendum on Iraq. I won't cry over the fact that Democrats must actually compete for your vote if this issue is largely off the table next year. Neither, should you.

    ~faith,
    Timothy.
    Last edit by ZASHAGALKA on Nov 3, '07
  14. by   SuesquatchRN
    Well, it would be wonderful if you are correct, Timothy. I will hope that you are.

    And thanks for the thanks. I'm proud of Bob.

close