We wish the Iraqi forces and American forces Godspeed in this endeavor: Iraqis lead final purge of Al-Qaeda - Times Online (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article4276486.ece)

Nice of Times on line to notice. Operaton Lion's Roar has been ongoing since May 10.
I can't really find much about it except that the operation is mostly a round up of AQ and weapons . The population appears more than willing to turn on them.
Here is a blog from US Army Reserve Craig Cox about the operation .
Up Country Iraq: The Sand Rules (http://upcountryiraq.blogspot.com/2008/06/sand-rules.html)
The biggest thing I get from it is that Iraqi forces are stepping up ;and that American forces are increasingly being seen as the good guys. Iraqis, not Americans, are now at the tip of the spear... evidence of a successful counterinsurgency. I wonder if Obama will notice.

Hello George:

I don't know... OUR GUYS are ready to "stand up" after 9 weeks of boot camp. It took the Iraqi's 5 years, and they ain't standing up yet. Wassamatter?

excon

That's exactly what I have been wondering for some time now excon.

Compared to our fighting forces I guess they have a ways to go . Compared to the Iraqi forces under Saddam that retreated enmass in 1990 and disintegrated in 2003 they have progressed well considering that as a unified force they are still in their infancy.

Let's see... in all of 1776 how many engagements did Washington win ?

Hello George:

I dunno... OUR GUYS are ready to "stand up" after 9 weeks of boot camp. It took the Iraqi's 5 years, and they ain't standing up yet. Wassamatter?

excon
Stand up and do what? Actually, none of our troops are in the field in 9 weeks.

Let's see ....in all of 1776 how many engagements did Washington win ?
Great point. How many did Washington win in the American Revolutionary War (1775–1783)? "Throughout the war, the British were able to use their naval superiority to capture and occupy coastal cities, but control of the countryside (where 90% of the population lived) largely eluded them due to their relatively small land army...French involvement proved decisive, with a French naval victory in the Chesapeake leading to the surrender of a second British army at Yorktown in 1781." American Revolutionary War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Revolutionary_War#American_armies_and__mi litias)

Unfortunately they'll just reload using another country's stockpile of idiots. It's like Obama said to McCain, thanks to Dubya they are in Iraq.

An update on Iraqis taking control: "Even as the two candidates argue over the wisdom of the war and keeping American troops there, security in Iraq has improved vastly, as has the confidence of Iraq's government and military and police, raising the prospect of additional reductions that were barely conceivable a year ago. While officials caution that the relative calm is fragile, violence and attacks on American-led forces have dropped to the lowest levels since early 2004." U.S. considers increasing pace of Iraq pullout - International Herald Tribune (http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/07/13/america/13military.php)

Hello again, George:

Yes, Bush is pulling out the troops - 5 years after he declared victory. However... the following is from that same article:

"One factor in the consideration is the pressing need for additional American troops in Afghanistan, where the Taliban and other fighters have intensified their insurgency and inflicted a growing number of casualties on Afghans and American-led forces there."

It IS a shame that Bush got us soooo bogged down in the WRONG war that we couldn't/wouldn't/didn't win the RIGHT war. Our real enemies, Iran, Al Quaida and the Taliban are still there and stronger than ever.

The dufus in chief destroyed a country that didn't attack us, let the guy's go who DID attack us, destroyed our Constitution, and made us LESS safe in the process... Talk about shooting yourself in the foot...

excon

Hello again, George:

Yes, Bush is pulling out the troops - 5 years after he declared victory. However...... the following is from that same article:

"One factor in the consideration is the pressing need for additional American troops in Afghanistan, where the Taliban and other fighters have intensified their insurgency and inflicted a growing number of casualties on Afghans and American-led forces there."
...

excon
One wouldn't expect an 'atta boy' for Bush from the press, would you?

The Iraq situation has been about two wars: the first, to eliminate the Saddam regime; the second, to defeat the insurgency as well as quelling fanatical factions. Did you know that Yankees are still occupying Atlanta, 143 years after the war? In two locations, with two armies, no less: Home Page (http://www.forscom.army.mil/) and First Army - Train Like You Fight (http://www.first.army.mil/) There ain't no oil in Georgia.

One wouldn't expect an 'atta boy' for Bush from the press, would you?Hello again, George:

I don't know. Given the right wing nature of "The Times Online" I think one could expect it. But even they have disowned him.

excon

"One factor in the consideration is the pressing need for additional American troops in Afghanistan, where the Taliban and other fighters have intensified their insurgency and inflicted a growing number of casualties on Afghans and American-led forces there."


Is this the TET Offensive or Dienbienphu ? The combined NATO contingent is around 50,000 with the US having the largest contingent.

How many more troops do you think it would take ? The Soviets had over 100,000 deployed there for a decade and left with their tails between their legs .The Soviets employed a heavy-firepower, “scorched earth” approach and in doing so, mobilized most of Afghan society against them. Today's Coalition is attempting to be more constructive, and polling indicates that the Afghan populace largely welcomes its presence and assistance.


July 13, 2008: A newly established American-Afghan base near the Pakistani border in northeastern Kunar province, was attacked by the Taliban, and the battle left over a hundred dead, and many more wounded, in several hours of fighting. About a third of the dead were U.S. and Afghan troops.(9 US soldiers killed ).
A large Taliban force attacked from nearby buildings, including a mosque. U.S. and NATO warplanes responded quickly with smart bombs and missiles. Spectacular, but futile, attacks like this are mainly playing to the Western media. On the ground, the Taliban have suffered another defeat and killed a lot of civilians and destroyed much property. The Taliban are doing much worse than last year, taking heavier casualties and controlling less territory. So attacks are made that can be pitched to the Western press as victories. After a few days the "victories" fade away, but there are no Western reporters around to record that. If the Taliban can create an illusion of victory, they believe they can create a sense of hopelessness in NATO countries, and increased calls for withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan. As plans go, it's a long shot.
http://www.strategypage.com/qnd/afghan/articles/20080714.aspx

The Taliban attacked this outpost precisely because we're now on the offensive and directly threatening an area in which the Taliban previously felt safe.Since AQ is being rolled up in Iraq, and since the news is based on the principle of... 'If it bleeds it leads' ,and 'what's good for the Democrats is good for the USA'... you can expect to see non-stop hand-wringing over Afghanistan, right up until President Bush leaves office.

Then suddenly the narrative will switch if BO wins .You will see all the stories about soldiers, under the enlightened guidance of BO building schools ,roads ,hospitals ,and running soccer camps.

The Taliban attacked this outpost precisely because we're now on the offensive and directly threatening an area in which the Taliban previously felt safe.Since AQ is being rolled up in Iraq, and since the news is based on the principle of ...'If it bleeds it leads' ,and 'what's good for the Democrats is good for the USA'.... you can expect to see non-stop hand-wringing over Afghanistan, right up until President Bush leaves office.

Then suddenly the narrative will switch if BO wins .You will see all the stories about soldiers, under the enlightened guidance of BO building schools ,roads ,hospitals ,and running soccer camps.
Exactly right on this issue, Mr. Tom, as there was virtually no MSM criticism of any Clinton incursions on behalf of Muslim atrocities in Eastern Europe. I suppose it is a little easier being 'the good guy' at 10,000 feet. But the libs have a huge PR problem: they have repeatedly held-up Afghanistan as the correct place to fight (because we weren't fighting, for the most part, just occupying), so they have painted themselves into a corner.

Hello guys:

I'm trying... I really am. But, I haven't got a clue what either of you are saying.

I'm assuming BO is us (I'm just getting used to PODUS & SCOTUS). What?? One shouldn't ring their hands when 9 of our boys get killed?? That's pretty cold. By the way, why AREN'T we winning?? It's been a few years, no?? What narrative?? If we win, that's a GOOD THING...

And, you George. I'm sorry. I don't know what you're saying. I'm sure it's important. And, if I could figure it out, I'm sure I'd disagree. But I'll just fly along here are 10,000 feet??

excon

BO is Barack Obama . Wring your hands all you want to .I regret the loss of any of our troops but that is no indication at all of success or failure... nor is the length of time it takes to succeed.

You want to talk about bogged down ? It is my belief that we could've from the beginning deployed all our ground and air assets there and ,short of going nuclear ,still not have stabilized the country..

Even the contention that OBL could've been captured or killed is speculative at best.

What narrative?? If we win, that's a GOOD THING...
Yes it is... why has the press switched narratives from Iraq to gloom and doom in Afghanistan ? Because it serves their broader agenda. The stuff I pointed out that are intended " to win hearts and minds"have been ongoing in both operations since the beginning . But the press will not widely report them until it serves their purpose.

BO is Barack Obama . Wring your hands all you want to .I regret the loss of any of our troops but that is no indication at all of success or failure...nor is the length of time it takes to succeed.

You want to talk about bogged down ? It is my belief that we could've from the beginning deployed all our ground and air assets there and ,short of going nuclear ,still not have stabilized the country..

Even the contention that OBL could've been captured or killed is speculative at best.

yes it is .....why has the press switched narratives from Iraq to gloom and doom in Afghanistan ? Because it serves their broader agenda. The stuff I pointed out that are intended " to win hearts and minds"have been ongoing in both operations since the beginning . But the press will not widely report them until it serves their purpose.

The reason the focus is now on Afghanistan is because for the Dems, things are headed in the WRONG direction in Iraq... we are actually making real progress... that does not fit into their strategy... that the Iraq war is lost... and we must retreat.

Since they can't continue to lie about the progress, they just move their cursor over to a different topic.

Typical liberal tactics.

Excon, in response to your question about "Wassamatter", let me tell you what my son told me, and it sounds a lot like the problem we faced in Vietnam. My son, a sergeant in the 82nd Airborne Division, got back from Iraq last November and told me that while he was stationed at An Numaniyah, 40 security posts around the base were supposed to be manned by Iraqis. A check conducted by Americans revealled that only 8 were manned-the Iraqis simply walked off their posts or never reported in the first place.

He also told me that in some operations where joint U.S.-Iraqi patrols came under fire, the Iraqis simply vanished and let the Americans fend for themselves.

An Numaniyah is a training base where Iraqis are trained in military and police functions. There have been some instances, apparently kept hush-hush, where Iraqis turned on their instructors with deadly consequences.

We had the same problem in Vietnam. In many cases, we are more concerned with saving the country from evil than the locals are.

We had the same problem in Vietnam. In many cases, we are more concerned with saving the country from evil than the locals are.
In which event, call Ike for advice.

Yeah, George_1950 I always liked Ike! What angers me so much about this whole Iraq thing as it exists today is that these terrorists want the U.S. out so they can take over.

But they don't seem to grasp the concept that, once the killing stops, the Americans will leave. So all they have to do is lay low for awhile until we leave, then jump up and do what they want-you know once we leave we won't be back. But they love killing so much their common sense is clouded and is defeating their goal of domination of the country. They keep killing, so we stay!

But they don't seem to grasp the concept that, once the killing stops, the Americans will leave. So all they have to do is lay low for awhile until we leave, then jump up and do what they want-you know once we leave we won't be back. But they love killing so much their common sense is clouded and is defeating their goal of domination of the country. They keep killing, so we stay!
Exactly! We would have been practically out of there by now by now if the insurgency hadn't begun.

Jim I honor your son's service.
What your son recounts was probably true last year . However the Iraqi forces have improved greatly since the time they were retreating in the face of the enemy. They were the point of the spear in Sadr City ;in Basara ,and now in Mosul. My cousin is a Lt. Col.at Camp Victory and we keep in touch . He has kept me informed throughout the conflict.

I certainly hope they have improved, they certainly need to move quickly in the direction of running their own country. They should have the fortitude to step up to the plate and deal with their own problems. Unlike Vietnam, they are not facing massive forces backed by the Communist world.

My son is currently in a school in Arizona where he is learning to operate the Shadow, an unmanned aerial vehicle. He will complete the school in September and expects to go back to Iraq if the situation has not changed by then.

Until the surge they did not know what horse to bet on ;so many of them were fence sitters. I hope your son does not need to go back. Certainly there are better places where his talents can be used. I'd like the Shadow patrolling the border myself.

For sure fence sitting is a problem in situations like that and as the winning side wins more and more, it is only logical that more people will hop of the fence and go with the side that has the most success.

However it is obvious to me that the people over there need to get their act together and unite behind their own country instead of letting the tribal rivalries destroy them, just as it did when the Crusaders first pushed into the Holy Land. Until a leader came along like Saladin, they couldn't unite and defeat the Crusaders. They need to remember this lesson and apply it to the current situation.

Unlike Vietnam, they are not facing massive forces backed by the Communist world.

True but the "insurgency" was assisted by the Iranian regional hegemony wannabees and sanctuaries and supply and infiltration routes from and through Syria's "ratline" had to be dealt with .


However it is obvious to me that the people over there need to get their act together and unite behind their own country instead of letting the tribal rivalries destroy them
I fully agree .
You may find this article in the WSJ by the Kagans and Jack Kean interesting :
The New Reality in Iraq - WSJ.com (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121617045543756423.html?mod=opinion_main_comment aries)

Fur Sure! There are other elements that complicate the situation but I don't feel that the threats that face the creation of a free united Iraq are nearly as great as they were in attempting to create a free South Vietnam.

Hello again:

I remember Vietnam. We went in because of the "domino effect". If we LOST, the entire region would fall to the commies...

Well, we left (you say LOST), and the domino effect didn't happen. Gosh, somebody was wrong, weren't they??

So, when we leave Iraq (you'll say LOSE), nothing is going to happen, is it? Could they be wrong again?? I think they could be.

excon

Losing Vietnam;Cambodia ;Laos with the subsequent losses of millions of civilians purged after the war was a good vindication of the domino theory to me. Thailand would have too,if not for the Sino-Soviet split and the Thai government striking a deal with China in the wake of Nixon's trip to Beijing.Malaysia, Singapore and Indonesia and the Philippines benefitted from the rear-guard action that our being there provided.

Edit forgot to add Burma (Myanmar) to the list of dominos that fell

Don't forget that we also went into Vietnam because we knew what happens to people who live under Communism and their policies such as "We will bury you." Its an old story and goes all the way back to the end of WWII when the Soviets started pulling stuff like the attempted starvation of Berliners and the captivity of those trapped behind the "Iron Curtain."

As with any great historical event, there is usually more than one reason for its occurrence and I don't think its fair to claim that the one you don't like is the only one that existed.

excon, I never said we lost in Vietnam unless I used that word in quotes. I never said "lose" when it comes to Iraq as we already have a signed surrender agreement in hand from the government who lost the war there.

Hello again:

I remember Vietnam. We went in because of the "domino effect". If we LOST, the entire region would fall to the commies....

Well, we left (you say LOST), and the domino effect didn't happen. Gosh, somebody was wrong, weren't they?????
...
excon
More cherry picking, I'm afraid. We had a megalomaniacal president who wanted to be emperor. The foreign policy of the U.S. (rightly, in my view) incorporated the domino theory, but was hijacked and used as cover for a disastrous war party.