Murtha: 'Surge Is Working'

[wingman]

The only obligation for us to be in Iraq at this point is to fix what we broke.

I'm not certain we even have the obligation to repair what we broke. We should only enter into battle with a country if we are attack, we cannot nor should be a police force for the world. America is on a bad path, growing population from the third world well over 300 million people total, greedy corporation outsourcing and moving manufacturing plants to various third world countries, in the end it cannot work. Secure our borders and ports, trade and talk with countries, have a strong military that will use extreme force if attack and mind our own business.
My family and ancestors have served in the military since the beginning of this country however my belief is unless we change our policies we will fail.

 

[Garand Illusion]

The “top down” political reconciliation agreement shouldn’t take any power from the people. It should be a framework for the sects that want to kill each other to instead co-exist peacefully.

My point is ... if the government came up with such a framework, but the millions of people were still intent on fighting and killing each other, it would be meaningless. and the politicians from various areas would have little reason to support or pursue such a thing, since their constituents aren't behind them.

On the other hand ... if the people decide that peace is in their best interests ... the killing will stop and the politicians will find themselves forced to come up with a solution.

That's the way things happen in our country. When the majority of the population demands something, it happens, right or wrong.

The only obligation for us to be in Iraq at this point is to fix what we broke. It is common knowledge now that starting the Iraq war was a mistake, and that the occupation was mishandled. But if the Iraqis don’t step up to the plate and take responsibility for their country, our obligation is over and we should leave.

I actually don't argue with that. I think it's just a matter of when we leave. If things do break down now that we've made some solid progress and go back to where they are ... at some point we do just have to walk away and deal with the consequences.

With what's at stake, though, and the progress being made, I don't think we're anywhere near that point.

 

[publius42]

AHHH yes the political reconciliation spin. Tired but still tossed out.

Ignoring the differences that exist between the tribes in "Iraq" won't make them go away, and will make it harder to build one nation out of three.

You've posted many times on this subject, but I haven't seen you mention the tribal differences, except in a dismissive way, as above. Local to central? What about when local people are Sunnis and the central govt is controlled by Shiites? The fact that neither wants a unified Iraq as much as they want advantage for their own tribe is likely to cause problems.

The post-military-victory nation building phase of this war has gone on longer than WWII. That alone should tell you that Iraq is inherently unstable. It shouldn't be this hard to establish a government that is stable and leave. Yet it is. Because of the lack of reconciliation among the tribes.

I think we should continue the occupation of Iraq for now because I think our withdrawal would cause a regional tribal war that would make things worse and suck us back in. I don't think pointing to the improved security we imposed makes the sectarian problems in Iraq tired or irrelevant. The fact that we had to do it, and Iraqis couldn't do it themselves, means those problems are still very relevant.

 

[Thunderhawk88]

Don't be surprised if your grandchildren are reading books talking about how the "prophetic" George Bush is widely viewed as the most intellectual and far sighed president in American history.

Those will have to be comic books.

The Government of Iraq is about as effective as the Government of the Republic of South Vietnam was, and the people are much the same also. It doesn't matter how well the surge worked when the people won't carry their own water.

 

[Garand Illusion]

Those will have to be comic books.

The Government of Iraq is about as effective as the Government of the Republic of South Vietnam was, and the people are much the same also. It doesn't matter how well the surge worked when the people won't carry their own water.

Possibly comic books ... like I said, it will be history that will judge, and not for decades. The 2007 opinion of Thunderhaw88, while possibly intelligent and well thought out, does not have the advantage of historical perspective.

It's yet to be seen whether the Iraqi's will carry their own water. They've at least started mopping up a little of the mess. I admit there's still an ocean to go ... but at least they're moving in the right direction.

 

[Bruxley]

Ignoring the differences that exist between the tribes in "Iraq" won't make them go away, and will make it harder to build one nation out of three.

You've posted many times on this subject, but I haven't seen you mention the tribal differences, except in a dismissive way, as above. Local to central? What about when local people are Sunnis and the central govt is controlled by Shiites? The fact that neither wants a unified Iraq as much as they want advantage for their own tribe is likely to cause problems.

The Government of Iraq is about as effective as the Government of the Republic of South Vietnam was, and the people are much the same also. It doesn't matter how well the surge worked when the people won't carry their own water.

Shiite AND Sunnis ARE 'carrying their own water folks.
Sects UNITE in Iraq.

The local to central strategy is the concept that is creating the success, not the next step. The Petraeus Plan is truly brilliant if you folk would just look into it. Think about the age old adage about the North Wind and Sun discussing who was more powerful. The wager was who could get a man's coat off of him and the harder the wind blew, the harder he clung to his coat. The Sun took his turn and became warm and the man desired to remove his coat. The principle of liberty on one's own terms makes it vastly more appealing to grant that same liberty to your neighbor that may not live the same way.

I'll go ahead and share my brief summary of the Petraeus plan again. And let's attempt to look at it impartially and then critique it if you like. But I think without the bias glasses on you can see why and how it is so effective. I'm going to just cut and paste it from the other thread.

Petraeus laid out a plan of local to central alliance building to turn Iraq around. Working first with local tribal leaders from the premise that we were not going to tell THAT tribe how to live. They can live be whatever traditions they like. The people were to select a leader and that selection would be respected as would HOW they wanted to live under 1 condition, no killing each other.

They go to the next tribal group and repeat until it was understood that the Americans weren't going to force them to live any other way then they themselves chose. The expectation of them was that they also allowed their neighbors to live how THEY chose. NO KILLING EACH OTHER being the only non-negotiable condition.

Add to that the promise that should anyone else try killing them that the US military would be on task in force to back up their right to self determine how they live. Liberty under their own terms by their own definition. Appealing prospect to a culture used to injustice.

Follow that with KEEPING THAT PROMISE and word quickly spreads that this new General has kept his word and let's them live in peace in the tradition and values THEY wish and you see why Al Q who has killed and threatened to kill more if their will isn't complied with starts looking less like an ally and more like the enemy.

The human desire for freedom to live as they wish is just that, a HUMAN desire. Give them the avenue to it and you have an ally. Just patrolling for insurgents wasn't getting it done and fed the fear that taking sides risked winding up on the wrong one in the end. And to a culture used to injustice, a risk like that wasn't even considered.

The more this goes on, and the more assured the promise will be kept, the more success this General's plan has and assurance that it will continue to succeed. When it reaches critical mass is when the Iraqi authorities are keeping the promise not Americans.

One more aspect that works is that it shows by action a lack of intent to permanently occupy. Iraqis are becoming more and more their OWN promise keepers. Many areas of Iraq are self policed and secured only by Iraqi forces.

Local to central. Liberty on their own terms. No more rule of the gun. Religious AND secular law agree at least on this if little else.

Some have said that Iraq is getting 'segregated' by this. Well it IS human nature for people that want to live a certain way to group together and there are areas that 'live and let live' can mix.

This summary lacks alot of the details General Petraeus gave but I hope that now that RESULTS are being realized that more people will be interested in what his actual approach is. Maybe be able to see the reasons it has been, and has the ability to continue to be a lasting, Military free, AlQ free, and civil war free solution.

I find it very impressive and as I said, I hope political partisanship doesn't keep people here from seeing why/how we actually ARE succeeding in Iraq.

 

[Unregistered]

I hope the plan works, but really don't care all that much if it doesn't. We have done what we need to do in Iraq, and its up to them to fend for themselves. I just wish we would quit wasting taxpayer money over there.

 

[Bruxley]

It IS working. That is the point.

I've become fully aware of the dedication to veer.

A separate thread for such things is more appropriate. May I suggest 'Why and is it worth it' as a topic should you not wish to read threads that already have broached the topics. In fact YOU have broached the topics and they have been addressed repeatedly.

Do you see now why the General's plan addresses the problem all the way through rather then the wack-a-mole Abizaid strategy. It has put into place the power of the tenets of freedom. It IS called 'Operation Iraqi Freedom' after all. And AlQ IS broken there. By the effects of the same plan. AND local to central political reconciliation IS taking place.

You have to admit. This General has come up with an ingenious plan. 6 mos into implementing it and look how far it's come. Imagine if he would have been able to implement it upon his confirmation how many lives and how much money could have been spared.

 

[Fremmer]

Many Iraqis are returning to Iraq. The General's plan is effective because it relies on local control and support.

Even Murtha knows that.

 

[publius42]

The expectation of them was that they also allowed their neighbors to live how THEY chose. NO KILLING EACH OTHER being the only non-negotiable condition.

But killing each other and seeking advantage for their own sects IS how they have chosen to live for generations. If they chose reconciliation freely, we wouldn't have to be there and impose that one condition.

Every few months since 2003, I've read another article about how Sunnis are coming around and accepting Shiite rule. Well, yeah, they'll say that to us as long as we are there denying them their preferred choice - reestablishment of Sunni rule. After we are there for a couple of generations, it may even start to be true, but memories and grudges can last a very long time.

 

[publius42]

Many Iraqis are returning to Iraq.

Many are returning because they have no choice. Their money and foreign visas have run out, so they have to go back.

 

[GoSlash27]

Bruxley,

But I think without the bias glasses on you can see why and how it is so effective.

With all due respect, I think you're missing the bigger picture. Discussing top-down reconciliation vs. bottom-up is like discussing which formation is more aesthetically pleasing for the deck chairs on the Titanic.
His plan may be brilliant. It may even be producing results. It doesn't really matter because any hope of "winning" this war is coming to an abrupt halt in January '09 when our new anti-war president is sworn in along with an anti-war congress and anti-war senate.
Also, the surge is not sustainable long-term and even if we were to succeed in creating a stable government there, it's going to be more allied with Iran than us.
Any which way you cut it, it's simply not worth the lives, money, and political capital we're investing.

 

[Unregistered]

I think what GoSlash said is mostly true. The Surge worked. Thats great. But unfortunately, we cannot continue the Surge forever.

I would say it is working on the short term, but whether or not that actually matters is another story entirely. Personally, I think we would have been better off just letting Sunnis and Shiites kill each other for a little while longer.

 

[dwc1973]

command and conquer is the only way to ensure victory. there is no other way. it sounds cold to even my ears but in my heart, i feel it to be the only true way.

 

[Bruxley]

His plan may be brilliant. It may even be producing results. It doesn't really matter because any hope of "winning" this war is coming to an abrupt halt in January '09 when our new anti-war president is sworn in along with an anti-war congress and anti-war senate.

Well the acknowledgment of brilliance of the plan that is bring success in Iraq shows some recognition of factual information your assertion about the Congress is still baseless but at least consistent.

Fact is right now Operation Iraqi Freedom is TWICE as popular then the Democrat led 110th Congress. The 110th Congress is the least popular Congress since pollsters began measuring this.

Let us review. In November, Gallup pegged the Congressional job approval at 20% with 69% disapproval.

In December, Gallup found that 40% of Americans think the Surge is working, 39% say not working.

And while 57% now say going into Iraq was a mistake, 41% say it was not a mistake.

69% say electing this Congress was a mistake. Only 20% believe this Congress was not a mistake.

MORE people feel that electing this Congress was a mistake then feel that going into Iraq was. Hardly facts that support an increase in the Democrat majority.

Still Reid pushes for undermining this admittedly brilliant plan that is succeeding.

As for the Presidency, hardly a lock given that all 4 of the leading Republicans are now polling better then the (now questionably) assumed Democrat nominee Hillary Clinton in head to head polling.

The Democrats made the fatal error in politics. They bet on the failure of others instead of the attributes of themselves. There are many many people out there that actually believe that it is a spin and smear game. They think that Americans are unintelligent and unaware. This tactic may work short term but politics really is a battle of ideas and if your only idea is new ways to attack an opponent, you'll soon find yourself at the fringe. And once you get there you can't even get a legitimately valuable idea taken seriously from you. There is a huge difference between pointing out flaws and sophistry. Let then run against Bush instead of on their own attributes again. See if Americans fall for it twice. Polling data suggests that they won't.

Gallup War Poll

RCP Job aproval Polling data Gallup's results are on the second line.

As a note of political progress.....the Kurdish and Sunnis have made an agreement of use of the northern Iraqi oil fields. AP report

 

[Gator Monroe]

History will show that after the 911 attacks our response and methods of Military action and Domestic Security have kept us Safe from Attack ! This is somthing the Troops and Civilian contractors can bre proud of !

 

[Spade Cooley]

When we talk about winning in Iraq, I ask, Win what? We are having our troops killed for the sake of a country that will not unite or protect themselves. I would not sacrifice my child for that bunch of rabble. They could care less about a democracy.

That war in Iraq has to be the biggest waste of American lives and money that has happened in my lifetime. The thousands of Americans killed there is the tip of the iceberg. What about all the Post traumatic stress and lost limbs. Many of our young will pay for it for a lifetime. We have also ruined our economy for the sake of Iraq.

They will be fighting each other in that area when we all are dead and gone. Surge, Ha!

 

[Gator Monroe]

lol the DOW jones headin back to 14.000 ( Ruined our Econemy) :barf:

 

[Rockrz]

I wonder how long the pro-war Republicans would suggest our military play policemen in Iraq, while the Iraqi government does nothing but sit back and let Americans die? $10 Billion a month gets dumped into the Iraq mess while the Iraqi government simply refuses to take responsibility for their country.

That's where Bush and them screwed up once we kick Saddam out...we should have built a big base out west of Bagdad and trained the Iraqi military to police their own country while we support them from our base only when absolutely necessary.

Throwing their military away like we did was a big mistake, as they should be keeping security while we train and given them tools to do so.

It would have cost us alot less American lives, less American money and generated alot less bad will towards the United States world wide.

They could care less about a democracy.

That's true. Democracy doesn't work among those people. All they understand is strong men, so we should be setting up guys like the one running Pakistan.

At least he's supporting the fight against muzlim extremists, so he's alot better than democracy.

If you let these folks vote, they're just going to vote in the extremists and create a terrorist state that we will have to take out in yet another war

 

[Gator Monroe]

Ditto ! (Even Israel votes in Suicidal Dove leftist socialst anarchist leaders) who are selling the Tiny Jewish state down the River in the name of a Peace that will never happen !:barf: