Oct. 1, 2007
Al Qaeda Crippled By U.S. Strategy
National Review Online: Security And Intelligence Progress Is Happening Silently In Iraq
-
Photo
(CBS/AP)
-
Play CBS Video Video Iraq Strategy Analyzed
Julie Chen speaks with Michael O'Hanlon from the Brookings Institution about President Bush's plan to withdraw 30,000 troops from Iraq and what this means for the overall security of the Middle East.
-
Video Dismal Report On Iraq
The White House has issued a report stating that progress in Iraq has been limited and Iraqi leaders have not met key military and security goals. Susan Roberts reports.
-
Special Report
The Road Ahead
Katie Couric reports from Iraq on the future of U.S. involvement there.
As the director of an Iraq and Afghanistan veteran’s organization, I follow the headlines from Iraq very closely. So, it’s always news to me when there is little news from Iraq…at least from the mainstream media.
Over the last few weeks, with the exception of the unfortunate Blackwater story, headlines from Iraq have been few and far between.
Why is this the case? There must be a reason. And I believe the reason is rooted both in what has happened and what has not.
Two weeks ago, at the start of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, al Qaeda declared that it would escalate attacks and specifically target leaders who were cooperating with Iraqi security forces. (This strategy, in and of itself, is a sign that al Qaeda fears the growing strength of Sunni tribal cooperation). But instead of escalating attacks, the U.S. military reports that violence across Iraq during Ramadan dropped by 40 percent compared to last year. In addition, mass-casualty producing, spectacular attacks -- long a hallmark of al Qaeda -- have occurred with far less frequency.
This is not to say they cannot still deliver such attacks, but the new U.S. strategy has crippled them. Don’t just take my word for it; listen to the latest al Qaeda “martyr,” Abu Osama al-Tunisi. In a handwritten note found at the site of his death, the al Qaeda in Iraq No. 2 wrote, “I have been surrounded…for two and a half months because the road has been closed by the Apostate, and there is no other way,” he added, “We are so desperate for your help.” The words of this high-ranking al Qaeda member speak volumes, and underscore the now undeniable counter-narrative happening in Iraq.
While the mainstream media reports on roadside bombs and missed benchmarks, American soldiers -- along with Iraqi security forces -- continue to make great security gains (which are the necessary pre-condition for real political progress).
As for what has not happened, there is a number that may or may not make headlines tomorrow: 62. This is the number of American combat deaths in September, and happens to be the lowest since August of last year. And while this number is still too high, it is nonetheless relevant. Despite a counter-insurgency strategy that makes U.S. troops more “vulnerable,” American deaths have dropped. American troops have moved off of large, secure bases and into small security stations throughout the country -- yet American deaths, after a spike from April to June, have begun to drop.
Why? Because when Americans protect the population from al Qaeda attacks and Iranian-baked militias -- and hunt down those responsible for sectarian violence -- they gain the trust of locals and thereby gain access to intelligence. And this intelligence -- as any soldier or Marine infantryman will tell you -- is the crown jewel of counter-insurgency. Intelligence, and the ability to decipher between civilians and combatants, allows Americans and Iraqi security forces to go on the offensive. So, while seemingly more exposed, they are actually empowered and protected.
This is good news -- and the kind of news that everyone following the Iraq war debate should know. But I’m satisfied with silence, because the sounds of silent progress in Iraq will eventually overcome the steady drumbeat of defeat here at home.
Unless Congress surrenders first…
By Pete Hegseth
Reprinted with permission from National Review Online.
| America's Premier Site for Conservative News, Analysis, and Opinion. |
Video and Galleries from Opinion
-
Video
Ginuwine On Jackson
-
Video
Andy Sheds Some Clothes
-
Video
Separating Icons From Heroes
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 57 CommentsSo, Bu$h and other Repugs should not have kept saying we are winning, last throes, etc. It''s just more lies and spin.
I don''t believe it.
Perhaps your hero Ahmenojalabadal-aqsa of Iran can clue you in.
I mean that from a non-GOP view. The Republicans want the death tolls to escalate so they can justify spending even more tax payer money on the Iraq disaster.
Posted by mbcsmith at 02:46 PM : Oct 01, 2007
If we want to surrender, why is Bush ending the "surge"? It seems to me that after 4-1/2 years of failure on top of failure, if you finally found something that is allegedly working, wouldn''t you keep it going and try to NOT stop it? Or is he "cutting and running" from the "surge" the same way he did from the REAL war on terror in Afghanistan?
Perhaps your hero Ahmenojalabadal-aqsa of Iran can clue you in.
Posted by mbcsmith at 03:05 PM : Oct 01, 2007
You don''t fuqing know me so keep your personal attacks to your fuqing self. For all I know YOU are a TERRORIST and shoule be extermionated!
We will stand down as the Iraqis stand up. Why not try showing some support for your country.. or is that Iran, haji.
Keep going fellas and let us all know when Newt decides to run for Prez. We''re on pins and needles.
So, after 4-1/2 yrs of one dismal evaluation after another, everyone else, except you jokers on LSD at NRO or Weekly Standard, can see that instead of progress, Iraq is actually going the whole other way!!
The violence is unremitting, the ISG are helpless, the parliment is STILL boycotted and al-quida controls much of Iraq that it never did before.
Since there is an absolute VOID of positive evidence, that positive evidence must be SILENT???
How can shooting guns and blowing up cars be SILENT???
AND, most important of all you idiots, the ONLY progress that counts is in PARLIMENT!!
Talk about grasping for straws of hope!!! Just stay on that LSD guys, come next Nov you all will wake up with a VERY BAD HANGOVER CALLED DEMOCRATIC CONTROL.
NRO, Hegseth, Fox, Murdoch, Cheney, Bush, these people will all sit together on the ash heap of history and absolutely nobody in 10 years will be looking back thinking we made a mistake to leave Iraq. The important question is how many more have to die before the neocons grudgingly give up sending others to the slaughterhouse to stave off the bruising their fragile egos suffer from being wrong...
Hey, clestes, tejasdemo and hungry1968. Maybe you prefer those wonderful pieces in The New Republic by Stephen Glass and Scott Thomas Beauchamp? Now THAT was fact-based reporting. LOL.
As far as the silence goes, try this on for size. Why haven''t the Democrats cut funding for the war already? It''s why they were elected, isn''t it? To get us out of Iraq. But they just can''t seem to bring themselves to do it. They know that once they do that they will officially be known as the surender party and even THEY can''t talk their way out of that.
There were numerous mistakes made during this war and the American press was more than eager to show us all the details. Even when they made them up. But now, it appears that the strategy implemented by Gen. Petraeus is actually working. Can''t you take that as positive for our soldiers and country? Somehow I think that you much more prefer to side with moveon.org is smearing his name, right? Along with the Democratic candidates for president I highly doubt that you spoke out against that ad.
But then again, that''s how the left supports the troops. They call their top commander a traitor.
But the real clue to the NRO"s twisted view is their breif "with the exception of the unfortunate Blackwater story". They don''t want to accept the fact that Blackwater is THE story!
Blackwater is what this war is all about! And Halliburton. And the thousands of other profiteers making their mega-billions in collusion with the neo-cons.
2006 showed that the American people are on to their game, and 2008 will do so even more.
Nothing I enjoy more than sniggering away in my cube, tears rolling down my face, over the comic book capers of "NRO and Outlook/Progress/Victory in Iraq".
Beats most science fiction around for fantasy that''s for sure.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by clestes at 05:47 PM : Oct 01, 2007
Why don''t you provide some facts to counter the argument instead of attacking the messenger
Posted by scottyusa at 05:52 PM : Oct 01, 2007
Yea, yea, yea. We all know how proud you are and how much you stand behind the troops. I''d like to see you blowhards stand in front of the troops for a change. The sad truth is you guys are allllll talk.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by tejasdemo at 06:22 PM : Oct 01, 2007
+ report abuse
I know a whole lot more soldiers than you ever met and I have yet to year complaints from them about their job in Iraq. My father was wounded in wwII My brother was in the reserves. I was 4f. Most soldiers support the war.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by ghosttownsky
I Lincoln had listened and followed the polls we would have now a split country. Many more died and there were frequent serious defeats of the Union by the confederates. The first two major battles were unmitigated defeats of the Union. We were outmaneuvered and out fought despite often superior numbers. It took 4 different generals for them to come up with Grant who did what others couldn''t fight and not quit despite huge numbers of casualties
Yeah, and we wouldn''t have Texass, and we wouldn''t have the Bushits, and we wouldn''t have had Bill Clinton, and we wouldn''t have a lot of other crapola. Oh no!
Thank God for our Military men and women who are committed to making Iraq a success, and for a President who knows how to lead America!
Yeah, and we wouldn''''t have Texass, and we wouldn''''t have the Bushits, and we wouldn''''t have had Bill Clinton, and we wouldn''''t have a lot of other crapola. Oh no!
Posted by gkc99 at 07:39 PM : Oct 01, 2007
You really impressed me. do you ask your boss for a raise with that logic. I was a boss. If you spoke that way I''d suspend you if not fire you. Please note if you think logically at all I was trying to point out that perseverance in the face of adversity can result in good things. I can see you didn''t notice.
I think that Bush wants to hand off the war to the next president and then argue that that person is at fault for losing the war.
Bush is out of touch and he is nearly out of time.
Posted by Quatrops at 08:35 PM : Oct 01, 2007
Your ignorance is proven by your comments. do you know what 4F stands for. It means for some reason you weren''t up to military service. I had high blood pressure. Still do. I was drafted and tried to enlist but due my health they didn''t want me. Didn''t break my heart. I was just married.
Posted by IMNHO at 09:50 PM : Oct 01, 2007
+ report abuse
Maybe you are out of touch. I am sure you have access to more information than he does about Iraq. I can see reason for reserve and not assuming that this means we''ve turned the corner, but it does give reason for hope that the soldiers actions will not be in vain.
We probably do have more knowledge about Iraq than Bush does since Bush isn''t a "details" guy. But turn the corner? The body bags coming from Iraq and continued sectarian violence say different. And let''s not forget the, shall we say "creative", methods the Defense Department uses to count casualties.
All insurgents are now called "Al Qaeda in Iraq". It''s the new Lie.
Fun Fact :
Only 5% if the people who are attacking us call themselves Al Qaeda. And they weren''t in Iraq before we invaded.
More accurately
Al Qaeda Is Part Of U.S. Strategy
To alanrobisch,
Any one with eyes, ears, and a modicum of sentience knows more about Iraq than Bush apparently does. He lied about everything Iraqi, and is still lying. The old saw about "the president knows more than you" is pure BS, and has been used for generations to avoid the obvious, that the president has done something clearly illegal, whether by accident or design, and is too much of a craven coward to admit it and accept the consequences...
Posted by alanrobisch2
The fact that all of the reasons given by Bush for them being there were all lies from the beginning, means that every death was and will be in vain, unless you count the profits of the war profiteers as justifiable.
"Your ignorance is proven by your comments. do you know what 4F stands for. It means for some reason you weren''''t up to military service. I had high blood pressure. Still do. I was drafted and tried to enlist but due my health they didn''''t want me. Didn''''t break my heart. I was just married."
I didn''t realize that Blackwater were part of the US Military.
Why is it that those in favor of the war are always the least likely to join up and fight?
I mean, if you truly believe the lies that the Republicanazis keep spewing out, then you should be over in Iraq.
Then again, you sure do use a lot of excuses not to go over there.
You''re 4F, you''re newly married - what next - was it a man you married?
Don''t worry - they won''t ask, so you don''t need to tell.
Hmmm, or is it that you''re just too scared to fight for the lies of GW Bush and his corrupt a$$holes?
Never mind - there''s always Blackwater.
They take any old scum, so you should be over in Iraq and shooting 3 year old kids faster then you can say "GW Bush is a murdering piece of cr@p".
Just remember - Blackwater hires scum - you''ll fit right in.
Thank God for our Military men and women who are committed to making Iraq a success, and for a President who knows how to lead America!
Posted by One_American at 07:56 PM : Oct 01, 2007
They are running out of POPULATION in Iraq.
What is the population of Iraq now compared to a year ago !
Come on One_UNAmerican, they need census takers in Iraq !!
What is the population of Iraq now compared to a year ago !
Come on One_UNAmerican, they need census takers in Iraq !!
Posted by IOWEIGN at 08:06 AM : Oct 02, 2007
Here, you''ll have to come up with something a little more believeable than "running out of population"...
Year Population
2007 27,499,638
2006 26,783,383
2005 26,074,906
2004 25,374,691
2003 24,683,313
2002 24,001,816
2001 23,331,985
2000 22,675,617
Year Population
2007 27,499,638
2006 26,783,383
2005 26,074,906
2004 25,374,691
2003 24,683,313
2002 24,001,816
2001 23,331,985
2000 22,675,617
Actually, do we actually calculate this in spent dollars or blood spilled?
America paid a high price for its oil, because, after all, despite the "victory" stench that the article above reeks of, what really did the US gain in Iraq?
Other than wearing down an "army" of wack-jobs armed with only AKs and RPGs?
The real enemy got away ...
Where did I attack anybody?? I said these dumbo reports of "progress" are better than science fiction for fantasy.
I guess you mean the NRO writers, but hey, they put themselves out there publishing this TRIPE!!
As I said before, the ONLY REAL PROGRESS that matters is political. Get that???? You understand????
Having "relative" peace in Anbar compared to the rest of Iraq, is TOTALLY MEANINGLESS!!!
In order for Iraq to have ANY CHANCE AT ALL OF PEACE, those warring factions MUST COME TO AGREEMENT.
Right now, the Sunnis are STILL BOYCOTTING the parliment. It cannot pass ONE SINGLE PIECE OF LEGISLATION.
What the fck difference does it make what is happening in Anbar??? If you think Anbar is going to be repeated somewhere else, you don''t know sh*t about the political/secular truth in Iraq. Anbar is 99.9% Sunni. ie, no civil war. In NO OTHER PLACE is this true, ie civil war. Of course it is much easier to get the Sunni''s to work with us when we offer them guns and training and they are not engaged in fighting Shiites.
When that is not true, there is ZERO HOPE of getting anyone to cooperate while they engage in a life and death battle with their secular enemy.
Oh, and by the way, as soon as the Sunni''s in Anbar get what they want from us, they will turn those guns WE GAVE THEM on us and on the Shiite govn in Baghdad.
So know the facts before debating with me!
What is the population of Iraq now compared to a year ago !
Come on One_UNAmerican, they need census takers in Iraq !!
Posted by IOWEIGN at 08:06 AM : Oct 02, 2007
Here, you''''ll have to come up with something a little more believeable than "running out of population"...
Year Population
20
07 27,499,638
2006 26,783,383
2005 26,
074,906
2004 25,374,691
2003 24,683,31
3
2002 24,001,816
2001 23,331,985
200
0 22,675,617
Posted by s1ckd09 at 08:27 AM : Oct 02, 2007
Show your source - Here is mine
From Refugee International
http://www.refintl.org
The displacement of Iraqis from Iraq is now the fastest-growing refugee crisis in the world.
The UN estimates that over 4 million Iraqis have been displaced by violence in their country, the vast majority of which have fled since 2003. Over 2.2 million have vacated their homes for safer areas within Iraq, 1.5 million are now living in Syria, and over 1 million refugees inhabit Jordan, Iran, Egypt, Lebanon, Yemen, and Turkey. Most Iraqis are determined to be resettled to Europe or North America, and few consider return to Iraq an option. With no legal work options in their current host countries, Iraqis are already exploring the use of false documents to migrate to Western nations.
"What is missing here?"
Someone in the White House with an ounce of integrity.
I think because you called the people who prepared the reports liars as well as the people who quoted them
Posted by klifton2 at 01:50 PM : Oct 02, 2007
+ report abuse
Your suggestions to reduce the killing by the Al quaeda in Iraq and Afghanistan. Should we leave them to control Iraq and leave them to act freely in afghanistan. How do you deter their bombings such as 9/11 or the bombings in spain and england.
Posted by knyghtwolf at 10:02 AM : Oct 02
I would remind you that the korean war was less popular and truman persisted. He was right.
Posted by WogerWabbit at 04:55 PM : Oct 02, 2007
besides the need to insult what are your credentials?
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 57 Comments