We wish the Iraqi forces and American forces Godspeed in this endeavor: Iraqis lead final purge of Al-Qaeda - Times Online

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
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 ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

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

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

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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 and First Army - Train Like You Fight There ain't no oil in Georgia.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by George_1950

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

Quote:

---

"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.

Quote:

---

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/afgh.../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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

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.

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JimGunther

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.