RAMADI, Iraq, Jan. 12, 2007
Signs Of Hope In Iraq's Hottest Spot
U.S. Marines Report Progress In Battle To Control An Insurgent Stronghold: Anbar Province
-
SSG Damon Ward of SVC Battery, 2-3 FA, from Riverdale, Ga., gives the OK for Iraqi soldiers to approach the shooting range during a training exercise at the Ramadi Training Center. (CBS/Cami McCormick)
-
Interactive New Plan For Iraq Key elements of the plan, excerpts from the president's speech, reaction and more.
-
Who's Who Congress Reacts To Plan Reaction to President Bush's new Iraq stategy, which includes an increase in troops.
-
Interactive Iraq: A Turning Point? New Congress, change at the Pentagon, study group report; what does the future hold?
"A lot of it has to do with, they know they are going to protect their community," said Maj. Paul Weyrauch, of the Ramadi Training Center, which is located on a U.S. military base where nearly 60 Iraqi recruits currently reside.
This week the sheikhs held what was billed as a "reconstruction" conference, during which Sittar reminded other tribal leaders that once areas are free of violence, the Americans will leave.
But "the nature of this conflict is one that takes time," said Zilmer, of the continuing unrest.
Sittar himself is provided with security by American forces, and as he spoke to reporters a rocket slammed into the ground near the building where the conference was being held.
Three tribes remain un-cooperative with the U.S. military, and the enemy in Ramadi is still elusive, causing a steady stream of American casualties.
"Outside of Baghdad, this is the main fight here in Iraq," said Lechner. "When we got here (in June), we accounted for about 60 percent of the casualties on a daily basis. Ramadi has been a serious battlefield for about three years now, so we're fighting some pretty skilled enemies out there."
Most of the U.S. casualties are due to roadside bombs and snipers.
Without releasing the actual figures, the U.S. military says daily attacks have dropped off, and IEDs (improvised explosive devices) are becoming more rudimentary in design. Officials give much of the credit for the improved security situation to the local tribal leaders.
"There's a lot of fighting left to do here," Lechner said, "but if you compare this to what it was seven or eight months ago, there is not a place in this city that al Qaeda controls."
"There were parts of town that Coalition forces would not even maneuver through because it was just too dangerous," Shoffner said. "There were lots of mines and IEDs. Now it's small arms attacks primarily. It's the best way they can engage us."
U.S. military commanders say keeping Iraqi recruitment numbers up and growing is key to the steady improvement of security in Anbar.
"I'm not suggesting the place is not dangerous, but the Iraqi police and the army are improving," Zilmer said. "And all of those things are now squeezing out al Qaeda."
© MMVII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Best-selling author Mitch Albom on his first nonfiction work since "Tuesdays with Morrie."
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- next
See all 72 CommentsAppeasing the Suni resistance is an interesting tactic, but it will never work, just as every other idea they have had, to date, has failed.
The U.S. "trainers" will never be able to unite the people of Iraq against the ficticious "al-CIA'da in Iraq" hoax.
The Iraqi people know that it is the brutal and illegal invasion of their country that poses the greatest threat to them. They are effectively defending themselves against the invaders and their collaborators, and there is no reason to think that will change.
They have every right to defend themselves.
There are now 14 police stations in the city today, compared to three in July of last year, and eight additional stations are planned for construction. Police recruiting in the city has recently surged from only a few dozen as recently as September last year, to more
than one thousand applicants in the first two weeks of Jan.
Progress is moving ahead rapidly in Iraq while politicians in Washington blabber over old news and views.
Sure thing, "Cami McCormick, embedded with U.S. forces in Ramadi..."
There backs are almost broken...again!!!
If you are the journalist, then why are the "U.S. Marines" doing the reporting? And why would we possibly choose to believe them?
As far as "not beaing able to to stomach the tough questions" That seems to be a staple of you and your party. Is it a liberal birthrite to go back and forth on issues on a daily basis. Bush is in command and as such must make difficult decisions. Kerry would have come up with a new "winning strategy" on a weekly basis. How did he do in that election anyway? An interesting sidenote.....Most liberal women have more testosterone in their system than their men. I don't agree with everything Bush does, but when given command, he actually commands. Think about that when you crack open that imported beer.
You people are the ones not able to openly debate. We as a country at the time of the beginning of the war were united in the fact that we were correct in going to war. They DID have WMD in Iraq and they were moved to Syria and Iran. Do 5 minutes of research and you will find out about it. Now a couple years later, You left wingers who have no idea of how to keep a contry safe call BUSH a "liar". He acted in this countries best interest and removed an unstable murderer (Hussein) who killed thousands of his own people. There were problems with the intelligence that was obtained but given the climate at the time, we had to err on the side of caution. Iraq had WMD's and it has been openly acknowledged that Russian forces were involved in moving them out of Iraq while we were dicking around about invading. It is easier for you people to say he "lied" than to actually do any research or because it fits better into your "politics". I myself am an independant on most things save for National security. That is a pretty big topic in this day and age. It is also the reason your party has lost the last 2 elections and why (if you idiots actually choose Hillary in '08) will lose a third election. A couple things besides adding troops are going to make things better in Iraq in the near future. We are not going to make it harder on Iran and PAkistan to harbor these terrorists.
After WWII "ended" there was a long period of German and Nazi resistance, and terror groups, but with determination and force, and some of our own brutality...we eliminated them. So here too. So in Somalia. But we need more:
1. Energy independance from these Crazy Oil Countries. We need 21th Century Nuclear, Solar power, and hybrid cars and homes.
2. We need to call the enemy by name. Islamic Fascists, not a nebulous war on terror.
3. We need to build that *** fence along S border, and profile, profile, profile ( which I think we are actually doing.)
4. We need to stick it to Iran and Syria and tell them , just as Ronald R. would have, don;t mess with us.
5. Recognise the threat to Europe, and reclaim the supremacy of Western Civilization.
What makes you think this war cannot be won militarily? Name one war that was won through diplomacy.
Seriously, this story is merely a glimmer of the actual kick b___ progress going on in Anbar province right now. In the last few days, 700 police recruits from Fallujah, Habbaniyah, and Ramadi were beginning their 6 week training course. Last month, over 1000 enlisted in Ramadi. See this story: http://www.mnf-iraq.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=8976&Itemid=21
Also, over 1,900 already in training are expected to graduate and return to Iraq in January and February.
Posted by miltpan72 at 11:42 PM : Jan 12, 2007
Ahhh . . . a new right-winger has emerged to take up the cause of the last 3 that seem to have disappeared to have never returned after I pointed out that they seem incapable of posting comments that aren't based solely on personal attacks . . . if you're capable of sticking to the issue, then I'm always open to a good debate. If all you have are hollow judgments of me based on asking the tough questions that you don't seem to have the stomach to hear, then I guess that speaks louder than any retort I could possibly make . . .
WOW....Why so cynical? Is it not right to report on anything good or are you just looking for bad news to get reported for some political agenda you hold?
Iraqi police and soldiers understand the politics in Iraq more than the pols in Washington and they are not going to risk their lives to their Arab brothers.
Get real. Pullout all but the U.S. training forces and save some American lives from a war that will not be won militarily.
If the Iraqi's want to progress from a backward existence they must decide do it themselves.
Several influencial Sunni tribal leaders contacted the U.S. military in Anbar province last week saying they were tired of the insurgents and their Al Qaida allies because of an attack last month against a prominent Sunni Shiek. The people of Anbar and Ramadi have now turned against the insurgents... and they are joining the Iraqi police by the thousands.
BBC News has a great video clip called "The Turning Point."
On Wednesday (Jan. 10th), Sunni leaders met with U.S. Military officials for a "Recontruction Conference." They discussed a plan to run the last of Al Qaida out of Anbar province.
I like your use of sticky sweet and gooey marshmallow instead of 'hot air' or the 'boogeyman' . . . more 'fluff' and 'puff' to marshmallow . . .
There isn't any al Qaeda anymore. It's a nonsense term thrown out there to make ignorant military spokespeople look smart, and to bring some sense of connection between 9/11 and this ridiculous endless war.
They might as well say "Marshmellow", as in 75% of the resistance is Marshmellow, the same sinister Marshmellow that attacked America and God's son, George Bush.
We've defeated 123 Marshmellow in Somalia with our smart bombs, no our genius bombs, this new report brought to you by Lockheed Martin, the samrts behind the bombs.
We only eavesdrop on American citizens when we believe they are talking to Marshmellow.
Get the picture yet.
My larger larger point being that it's quite possible that Sunnis are NOT on board with the US agenda.
Just keeping real, but how do they know the insurgents are al quaida and not Shiites? Maybe Sunnis are suddenly signing up in droves because they want US guns and knowledge to help further their cause in the civil war. The reason this seems more plausible to me is because of this comment:
"When we got here (in June), we accounted for about 60 percent of the casualties on a daily basis. The U.S. military says daily attacks have dropped off. Officials give much of the credit for the improved security situation to the local tribal leaders."
Like isn't it possible the attacks have stopped because Sunnis have figured out they can use the US army to further their own agenda? Maybe the attacks have dropped because the attackers are now part of the army.
My larger point being that if the primary goal of both Sunnis and Shiites is to try and gain dominance over the other, temporarily joining up with the US would help further that goal better than continuing to attack the US military AND the Shiites (who are already receiving support from the US via Al Maliki). I think it's always VERY dangerous for people to see what they want to see without at least considering that the reality may in fact be something very different.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- next
See all 72 Comments