Thursday, August 17, 2006

We Know That The Iraqi Civil War

Is Growing Nicely. July's body count set a new record high, Kurdish targets have started to be attacked and in Basra we now have Shiite militias fighting each other.

I am not sure were could have done a better job of assuring a total civil war if we had been trying. While we have been watching the civil war grow, one aspect of the war in Iraq has fallen off our radar,the insurgency.

The first couple of years in Iraq the insurgents (dead-enders, terrorist, bathist etc) were the only game in town. The attacks by various factions upon US, Iraqi and other coalition forces were regular news items and an issue of grave concern to the US military. In the last few months these have all but disappeared from media coverage, only being mentioned in passing when announcing another US death. It was almost as if the insurgents had quit fighting us, to attack each other.

It appears that the reporters at the NY Times have themselves gotten curious about this and asked the military for an update. The answer was very depressing.

The number of roadside bombs planted in Iraq rose in July to the highest monthly total of the war, offering more evidence that the anti-American insurgency has continued to strengthen despite the killing of the terrorist leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.


In addition to record deaths in the civil war, the insurgency is also more active than ever before. While we have focused on the Iraqi vs Iraqi conflict, we in the US have forgotten about the Iraqi vs the US fight, but it is cleat that the Iraqi's have not.

"The insurgency has gotten worse by almost all measures, with insurgent attacks at historically high levels," said a senior Defense Department official who agreed to discuss the issue only on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak for attribution. "The insurgency has more public support and is demonstrably more capable in numbers of people active and in its ability to direct violence than at any point in time."


Where are we headed now?

Bush has rolled out lame excuse number 14 for why we are fighting in Iraq, now it is so they will not follow us home, indicating that stay the course (or what ever they are calling it this week) is the operational plan, at least the one for the public. Behind the scenes a new plan may be in the works.

"Senior administration officials have acknowledged to me that they are considering alternatives other than democracy," said one military affairs expert who received an Iraq briefing at the White House last month and agreed to speak only on condition of anonymity.

"Everybody in the administration is being quite circumspect," the expert said, "but you can sense their own concern that this is drifting away from democracy."


A true indication of the level of failure we are talking about here.

Establishing a despotic strong man to rule a nation that was led by a despotic strong man we removed is assured to future harden the anti-US view of the residents of the Middle East.

and it appears, this is where we are now headed.


Tags

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

Theories Theories Theories. We may never know the real reason we as a country are in Iraq.
Terrorism has raised its ugly head many more times since we set the course to "KILL terrorism and anybody who harbors them" Well the message must a been lost somewhere. The Terrorists have been as active as ever just recently in Lebanon. The true threat to Middle East peace is Iran. One theory we are in Iraq at all is because Iran was willing to take that country from Saddam itself. One step closer to Israel whom that Iran would love to remove from the map altogether. Also gaining another portion of the Oil production increasing their world power.
Whatever the reason we are over there, we are there now. I can also tell you, there is no appeasing a terrorist. That is what Radical Islamists are. They spread problems all over the world. We have fought them everywhere. Every country has a problem with them. Go ahead and say the standard liberal gibberish here about how its all our fault. We started it. We were the agressor. We flew the planes into the world trade center so we could fight a war. Until you start meeting people in the middle, quit pointing fingers, and accept the fact we really can have enemies, its just the way it is. You are part of the problem.

Lynne said...

Meanwhile Afghanistan is in turmoil too.
We haven't accomplished a f**king thing anywhere.

People like Anon apparently haven't stopped to ponder why it is that "terrorist" groups exist in the first place. "Terrorism" (and I am loathe to use that hackneyed word) doesn't crop up out of thin air. It is a response to an injustice of some sort. I am not siding with those who blow themselves and others up, merely pointing out that if the United States spent as much money and time and effort on helping people around the world we would not now find ourselves in the crosshairs. Our foreign aid is less than 1% of our GDP and almost half of that goes to Israel.
If I were a poor person in a war-torn country, my allegiance would go to whoever would do the most good for me. That is human nature. What we get when we instead spend our resources on subjugating people or propping up regimes that subjugate their people, is war—a situation where only the war profiteers win.
We could do so much better.

“No matter how big a nation is, it is no stronger that its weakest people, and as long as you keep a person down, some part of you has to be down there to hold him down, so it means you cannot soar as you might otherwise”—Marian Anderson

Jon said...

Anon: This has nothing to do with 'appeasing a terrorist', but not creating more. About all of our actions since 2002 ave made the STRONGER, not weaker. Our policies are foolish, and are hurting our nation.

Iran would have loved to have the southern half of Iraq, but could never have taken it. Saddam was weak, but other Sunni states would have assisted him if Iran had made a move (heck, the last time it happen {and Saddam was the agressor then}, we supplied Iraq with chemical weapons). This arguent, like all the others if flawed.

Where have I said we started it?

I have not, I have said we are vrey busy making it worse, and it is clear we are. The blind parroting of absurd Faux News talking points.

We have enemys, every nation always does. The trick is, do your actions weaken or streghten them. Our nations actions, and your support of these actions are making the terrorist stronger.

yet, you say the left is part of the problem, that is just funny

Anonymous said...

We are only as strong as our weakest link? So are you saying I should quit saving for my Kids College education because some No Pride welfare Hack needs some Beer and Cigarette Money? Hell No! And Terrorism will be around no matter what. If we bow down to those jackasses and give them EVERYTHING they want. They will want what is not theirs too. That also is human nature. Its always the haves and the have nots. Liberals want to give it all away. Everyone should feel good. Everyone should be given what they need. Who cares if we have to take it like a modern day Robinhood to give it to them. Then the overzealous conservatives sit and name call, and blame, and make fun of everyone who is not like them. They dont look much smarter in the end. Its a sad circle we are in and its almost at the end.

Jon said...

I am sorry Anon, but your arguments are not making much sense.

We are only as strong as our weakest link? So are you saying I should quit saving for my Kids College education because some No Pride welfare Hack needs some Beer and Cigarette Money?

I am not sure where you are seeing this position presented, of even how it applies.


If we bow down to those jackasses and give them EVERYTHING they want. They will want what is not theirs too. That also is human nature.

Again, who is saying anything about bowing down? If our actions are creating more terrorist (as they clearly are) we have to accept that reality and find a new path of engagement.

That is not 'bowing down'

Its always the haves and the have nots. Liberals want to give it all away.

another foolish Faux talking point that has no basis in realiy. I hold many liberal positions, and I am in no hurry to 'give it all away'. I like my comforts that I have earned, and will continue to use them without remorse.

Everyone should feel good. Everyone should be given what they need.

We can't do a whole lot about how peopel feel, that is a personal issue, but as to giving people what they need (food shelter etc), yes those who need it shoudl get it, that is the moral (christian) way to behave.

Now back to Iraq.

Our attack of Iraq, under false pretenses, in violation on international laws in both action and behavior, and our continued presence in Iraq have created tens if not hundreads of thousands of more terrorist.

and has created a failed state in the middle of the most volital part of the world,

and you appear to this this is grand.

Anonymous said...

Terrorists exist because Terrorists want to exist.
Why are we in Aphganastan? Does 9-11 ring any bells? I dont recall the U.S. putting ourselves upon Saudi Arabia.
How about the endless cycle of Suicide Bombers(terrorists) blowing themselves up in Israel? They just want the world rid of them.
Here they condemn their own terrorists for their stupidity
http://www.rawa.org/statues.htm

Terrorism is not only reactive. It also seems to me many Prominant Democrats voted for the War. Others voted for the funding, before not voting for the funding of the war. Seems he figured out he needed support to win an election and thats the way the wind was blowing that day.

Where is your parrot Lynne?

Jon said...

Terrorists exist because Terrorists want to exist.

Not quite factual. While there are a very few people who will be anti-society in almost all circumstances, these are very fw. For them to be a threat, circumstances mus exist where a body of support develops to both provide them with the ability to grow, and people to pick up the cause.

Without a cause, terrorism isn't a threat, you just have an anti-social wack off (a bin laden) by themself.

Why are we in Aphganastan? Does 9-11 ring any bells? I dont recall the U.S. putting ourselves upon Saudi Arabia.

no we went into Iraq next.

Afganistan was a proper and needed war, the only regret is that we neglected it once we made the choice to attack Iraq.

How about the endless cycle of Suicide Bombers(terrorists) blowing themselves up in Israel? They just want the world rid of them.

How about you do a little research on oyur own, and find out what motivates them. I will give you a hint, Israel reguarlly enters into areas under palistinian control and blows up stuff, shoots up stuff etc, and that kills a number of palistinians. Sometimes Israel gets bad guys, more often they get kids, moms, and dads. The others in the community tend to not like this.

It also seems to me many Prominant Democrats voted for the War. Others voted for the funding, before not voting for the funding of the war.

Either another Faux talking point or a case of being uneducated on this issue.

I will assume that education is the issue.

The billin question was rather complex. It funded the Army, but also included tens of billions of dollars for the rebuilding of Iraq.

The initial bill included a 20 billion dollar loan to the new Iraq government. Kerry supported that, since it would not add to the long term debt. Bush insisted that the bill be changed and that 20 billion was converted to a grant.

Since we had already given Billions to the new govenrment, many including Kerry, could not support giving away another 20 Billion in tax payer dollars.

so he voted against it.

and YOU who complained earlier about liberial give aways, appear to ridicule him for being fiscally prudent.

Doesnt' that make you look a little foolish?