I think that this is really, really bad. I think that Petraus never believed the so-called "surge" would work unless he had at least 50 thousand (but I think even higher) troops. I think that they all know it won't work, and that they are going to throw life after life into early and eternal graves in an effort to stave off the inevitable. I don't know why. I believe bush would like to pass it on to the next President so that he can then let the millions he collects for his "library" pay for whortorians who will write papers and even books claiming that we would have won the war if only we had listened to bush. But I don't think they can hold this off for two more years. So I don't know what the end game is.
In the meantime, I have become sickened lately by listening to Democrats claim that if the Iraqis don't want to fix their own country, well, screw them. That it's "up to the Iraqis." This is really beautiful. This is like someone breaking into your home, cutting off your legs, in order to "help you" and then when you can't get a job because you have no legs, claim that if you can't fix your own life, it's not their problem.
I wish that one person would have the guts to come out and say, that we f'd the Iraqis, and that there is no way to unfuck them. So we are going to have to pull back and try and contain the civil war, that a lot of them are going to die in (have already died in), because the best we can hope for now is that this does not spread through the region and eventually destabilize the entire world. Truly, they all make me sick.
· Violence expected to rise after UK withdrawal
· Troop numbers too low
· Coalition is 'disintegrating'
An elite team of officers advising US commander General David Petraeus in Baghdad has concluded the US has six months to win the war in Iraq - or face a Vietnam-style collapse in political and public support that could force the military into a hasty retreat.
The officers - combat veterans who are leading experts in counter-insurgency - are charged with implementing the "new way forward" strategy announced by president George Bush on January 10. The plan includes a controversial "surge" of 21,500 additional American troops to establish security in the Iraqi capital and Anbar province.
But the team, known as the "Baghdad brains trust" and ensconced in the heavily fortified Green Zone around the US embassy, is struggling to overcome a range of entrenched problems in what has become a race against time, said a former senior administration official familiar with their deliberations. "They know they are operating under a clock. They know they are going to hear a lot more talk in Washington about 'Plan B' by the autumn - meaning withdrawal. They know the next six-month period is their opportunity. And they say it's getting harder every day," the former official said.
By improving security, the plan's short-term aim is to create time and space for the Iraqi government to bring rival Shia, Sunni and Kurd factions together in a process of national reconciliation, us officials say. If that works within the stipulated timeframe, longer-term schemes for rebuilding Iraq under the so-called "go long" strategy will be set in motion. But the next six months are make-or-break for both the US military and the Iraqi government.
The main obstacles confronting Gen Petraeus's team are:
· Insufficent numbers of troops on the ground
· A "disintegrating" international coalition
· An anticipated upsurge in violence in the south as the British leave
· Morale problems as casualties rise
· A failure of political will in Washington and/or Baghdad
"The scene is very tense. They are working round the clock. Endless cups of tea with the Iraqis," the former senior administration official said. "But they're still trying to figure out what's the plan. The president is expecting progress. But they're thinking, what does he mean? The plan is changing every minute, as all plans do."
The team comprises an unusual mix of combat experience and high academic achievement. It includes Colonel Peter Mansoor, Gen Petraeus's executive officer and a former armoured division commander who holds a PhD in the history of infantry; Col H R McMaster, author of a well-known critique of Vietnam and a seasoned counter-insurgency operations chief; Lt-Col David Kilcullen, a seconded Australian army officer and expert on Islamism; and Col Michael Meese, son of the former US attorney-general, Edwin Meese, who was a member of the ill-fated Iraq Study Group.
Their biggest headache was insufficient numbers of troops on the ground despite the increase ordered by Mr Bush, the former official said. "We don't have the numbers for the counter-insurgency job even with the surge. The word 'surge' is a misnomer. Strategically, tactically, it's not a surge," an American officer said.
According to the US military's revised counter-insurgency field manual, FM 3-24, authored by Gen Petraeus, the optimum "troop-to-task" ratio for Baghdad requires 120,000 US and allied troops in the city alone. Current totals, even including often unreliable Iraqi units, fall short of that number. The deficit is even greater in conflict areas outside Baghdad.
"Additional troops are essential if we are to win," said Lt-Col John Nagel, another Petraeus confidant and co-author of the manual, in an address at the US Naval Institute in San Diego last month. One soldier for every 50 civilians in the most intense conflict areas was key to successful counter-insurgency work. Compounding the manpower problems is an apparently insurmountable shortage of civilian volunteers from the Pentagon, state department and treasury. They are needed to staff the additional provincial reconstruction teams and other aid projects promised by Mr Bush.
The recent British decision to reduced troop levels in southern Iraq, coupled with the actual or anticipated departure of other allies, has heightened the Petraeus team's worries that the international coalition is "disintegrating" even as the US strives to regain the initiative in Iraq, the former official said. Increased violence in the south is now expected, caused in part by the "displacement" of Shia militias forced out of Baghdad by the US crackdown. American and Iraqi forces entered the militant Shia stronghold of Sadr City today for the first time since the surge began. No more major operation have yet been attempted there but "we or the Iraqis are going to have to fight them", one American officer said.
According to a British source, plans are in hand for the possible southwards deployment of 6,000 US troops to compensate for Britain's phased withdrawal and any concomitant upsurge in unrest.
Morale is another key concern in the Green Zone headquarters as US forces prepare for a rise in casualties as the security crackdown gathers pace. In a message to the troops after he assumed overall command last month, Gen Petraeus heaped praise on their sacrifices while warning of more "difficult times" in the months to come.
"We serve in Iraq at a critical time... A decisive moment approaches. Shoulder to shoulder with our Iraqi comrades we will conduct a pivotal campaign to improve security for the Iraqi people. The stakes could not be higher," Gen Petraeus said.
"It's amazing how well morale has held up so far," the former official said. "But the guys know what's being said back home. There is no question morale is gradually being sapped by political debates in Washington."
The advisers are also said to be struggling to prevent the "politicisation" of the surge by the Shia-dominiated government of Nuri al-Maliki. The fear is that any security advances may be exploited to further weaken the position of Baghdad's Sunni minority.
Despite progress this week on a new law sharing Iraq's oil wealth, continuing Shia and Kurdish opposition to measures to ease the post-invasion de-Ba'athification policy that excludes Sunnis from many senior posts is proving intractable. The Petraeus team believes the government is failing to work hard enough to meet other national reconciliation "benchmarks" set by Mr Bush.
Yet it is accepted that the US is asking the Iraqi prime minister to do what most politicians in normal circumstances would refuse to contemplate. "What we're doing is asking Maliki to confront his own powerbase," one officer said.
Full Story:http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,2023541,00.html
In the meantime, I have become sickened lately by listening to Democrats claim that if the Iraqis don't want to fix their own country, well, screw them. That it's "up to the Iraqis." This is really beautiful. This is like someone breaking into your home, cutting off your legs, in order to "help you" and then when you can't get a job because you have no legs, claim that if you can't fix your own life, it's not their problem.
I wish that one person would have the guts to come out and say, that we f'd the Iraqis, and that there is no way to unfuck them. So we are going to have to pull back and try and contain the civil war, that a lot of them are going to die in (have already died in), because the best we can hope for now is that this does not spread through the region and eventually destabilize the entire world. Truly, they all make me sick.
· Violence expected to rise after UK withdrawal
· Troop numbers too low
· Coalition is 'disintegrating'
An elite team of officers advising US commander General David Petraeus in Baghdad has concluded the US has six months to win the war in Iraq - or face a Vietnam-style collapse in political and public support that could force the military into a hasty retreat.
The officers - combat veterans who are leading experts in counter-insurgency - are charged with implementing the "new way forward" strategy announced by president George Bush on January 10. The plan includes a controversial "surge" of 21,500 additional American troops to establish security in the Iraqi capital and Anbar province.
But the team, known as the "Baghdad brains trust" and ensconced in the heavily fortified Green Zone around the US embassy, is struggling to overcome a range of entrenched problems in what has become a race against time, said a former senior administration official familiar with their deliberations. "They know they are operating under a clock. They know they are going to hear a lot more talk in Washington about 'Plan B' by the autumn - meaning withdrawal. They know the next six-month period is their opportunity. And they say it's getting harder every day," the former official said.
By improving security, the plan's short-term aim is to create time and space for the Iraqi government to bring rival Shia, Sunni and Kurd factions together in a process of national reconciliation, us officials say. If that works within the stipulated timeframe, longer-term schemes for rebuilding Iraq under the so-called "go long" strategy will be set in motion. But the next six months are make-or-break for both the US military and the Iraqi government.
The main obstacles confronting Gen Petraeus's team are:
· Insufficent numbers of troops on the ground
· A "disintegrating" international coalition
· An anticipated upsurge in violence in the south as the British leave
· Morale problems as casualties rise
· A failure of political will in Washington and/or Baghdad
"The scene is very tense. They are working round the clock. Endless cups of tea with the Iraqis," the former senior administration official said. "But they're still trying to figure out what's the plan. The president is expecting progress. But they're thinking, what does he mean? The plan is changing every minute, as all plans do."
The team comprises an unusual mix of combat experience and high academic achievement. It includes Colonel Peter Mansoor, Gen Petraeus's executive officer and a former armoured division commander who holds a PhD in the history of infantry; Col H R McMaster, author of a well-known critique of Vietnam and a seasoned counter-insurgency operations chief; Lt-Col David Kilcullen, a seconded Australian army officer and expert on Islamism; and Col Michael Meese, son of the former US attorney-general, Edwin Meese, who was a member of the ill-fated Iraq Study Group.
Their biggest headache was insufficient numbers of troops on the ground despite the increase ordered by Mr Bush, the former official said. "We don't have the numbers for the counter-insurgency job even with the surge. The word 'surge' is a misnomer. Strategically, tactically, it's not a surge," an American officer said.
According to the US military's revised counter-insurgency field manual, FM 3-24, authored by Gen Petraeus, the optimum "troop-to-task" ratio for Baghdad requires 120,000 US and allied troops in the city alone. Current totals, even including often unreliable Iraqi units, fall short of that number. The deficit is even greater in conflict areas outside Baghdad.
"Additional troops are essential if we are to win," said Lt-Col John Nagel, another Petraeus confidant and co-author of the manual, in an address at the US Naval Institute in San Diego last month. One soldier for every 50 civilians in the most intense conflict areas was key to successful counter-insurgency work. Compounding the manpower problems is an apparently insurmountable shortage of civilian volunteers from the Pentagon, state department and treasury. They are needed to staff the additional provincial reconstruction teams and other aid projects promised by Mr Bush.
The recent British decision to reduced troop levels in southern Iraq, coupled with the actual or anticipated departure of other allies, has heightened the Petraeus team's worries that the international coalition is "disintegrating" even as the US strives to regain the initiative in Iraq, the former official said. Increased violence in the south is now expected, caused in part by the "displacement" of Shia militias forced out of Baghdad by the US crackdown. American and Iraqi forces entered the militant Shia stronghold of Sadr City today for the first time since the surge began. No more major operation have yet been attempted there but "we or the Iraqis are going to have to fight them", one American officer said.
According to a British source, plans are in hand for the possible southwards deployment of 6,000 US troops to compensate for Britain's phased withdrawal and any concomitant upsurge in unrest.
Morale is another key concern in the Green Zone headquarters as US forces prepare for a rise in casualties as the security crackdown gathers pace. In a message to the troops after he assumed overall command last month, Gen Petraeus heaped praise on their sacrifices while warning of more "difficult times" in the months to come.
"We serve in Iraq at a critical time... A decisive moment approaches. Shoulder to shoulder with our Iraqi comrades we will conduct a pivotal campaign to improve security for the Iraqi people. The stakes could not be higher," Gen Petraeus said.
"It's amazing how well morale has held up so far," the former official said. "But the guys know what's being said back home. There is no question morale is gradually being sapped by political debates in Washington."
The advisers are also said to be struggling to prevent the "politicisation" of the surge by the Shia-dominiated government of Nuri al-Maliki. The fear is that any security advances may be exploited to further weaken the position of Baghdad's Sunni minority.
Despite progress this week on a new law sharing Iraq's oil wealth, continuing Shia and Kurdish opposition to measures to ease the post-invasion de-Ba'athification policy that excludes Sunnis from many senior posts is proving intractable. The Petraeus team believes the government is failing to work hard enough to meet other national reconciliation "benchmarks" set by Mr Bush.
Yet it is accepted that the US is asking the Iraqi prime minister to do what most politicians in normal circumstances would refuse to contemplate. "What we're doing is asking Maliki to confront his own powerbase," one officer said.
Full Story:http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,2023541,00.html
