Rep. Jan Schakowsky spins Bill O'Reilly's head into the ground over "the surge"
By John Amato Tuesday Nov 27, 2007 4:01pm
Bill O'Reilly opened his show by telling his viewers that the "surge" has worked and now Iraq is probably a non issue for the Democratic candidates in the upcoming election. He was so jazzed about his "talking point memo" that he had on not one, but two Democrats to debate him on this.
Download | play 
Download | play
Unfortunately for Bill, Rep. Jan Schakowsky would have none of it and made Bill stop and then spin what she said. Any person that has followed the war knows that the surge was sold as hopefully bringing down the sectarian violence in Iraq long enough for the Iraqi government to pas meaningful legislation. Well, as we know the central government has done nothing at all and Schakowsky broke O'Reilly's claim instantly. Notice that in Bill's twisted logic, we have to be "loyal Americans." WTF does he mean? OK, OK, we know what he means. If you have a differing opinion about the war and take a strong position, you're a commie---hippie-freak who's disloyal to the flag so wake the f*&k up or you'll be tazed, bro! O'Reilly gets back on message and says he was right and she was wrong.
Schakowsky: Bill, Bill, you can say that over and over, no, Bill, you can say over and over again 'the surge" has worked,
O'Reilly: Yes
Schakowsky: ...but defined by Petraeus and Croker at the start of the surge which was to create political reconciliation---we are as far from that as we have ever been.
O'Reilly: You're spinning..
Schakowsky: So you can repeat it and repeat it as often as you want. It's not the case.
O'Reilly: I have to define something because the Congresswoman is spinning the issue.
Can someone please look up the Crocker and Petraeus testimony and post it in the comment section and I'll update the post. To O'Reilly, the Iraqi government are a bunch of clowns anyway. I mean it wasn't like we went over there and invaded Iraq or anything, right? Oh, wait.
Login or Register to post comments.
Ya had to put up O'Reilly again...you just hadda.
Geeez.
I don't have the Crocker/Petraeus stuff, but I do have this:
http://matthewyglesias.theatlantic.com/archives/2007/09/a_tale_of_two_ma...
Equally if not more responsible for the decline in violence in Baghdad is the fact that, in many neighborhoods, ethnic cleansing has been completed. The sectarian violence that has made up 80-90% of the incidents has dried up in these areas because there's almost nobody left to kill -- the Sunnis are gone. It's the silence of the graveyard.
does this help--
http://www.politico.com/pdf/PPM43_general_petraeus_testimony_10_septembe...
http://www.politico.com/pdf/PPM43_070910_crocker_testimony.pdf
Bill the bloviator, king of his own delusions.
Bill O’Reilly is all about censorship and lies and his Plunging Popularity tells the whole story:
We will see him continue his meltdown in the coming months until he the guys in white snatch hom with their nets.
You think thats bad, you should see what O'Reilly said on his show monday night.
O'Reilly "Iran is now arming the taliban!"
This video does a great job of debunking him though.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Q5KWu6UI__c
When you have a city with horrible crime rates, you can bring down those high crime rates simply by putting a cop on every street corner 24/7.
It's a no brainer. And this is exactly what's happened in Iraq. (or actually "might have happened" -- I think it's too soon even to conclude that.)
But you do zero about crime rates unless you deal with the fundamentals causing that crime rate. This too is a no brainer.
And where is the evidence that we have changed the fundamentals in Iraq?
_____________
The above paragraph (though heaven knows and can be put better than I put it) is fundamentally the argument over the surges effectiveness or not. Why aren't any Demos making this point?
What is with the fixation on this guy? Why is he being taken any more seriously than Wally George ever was? Serious government representatives shouldn't give him the time of day.
I think the only way to stop this abomination is to start a draft. A "no excuses" draft. Start pulling Ivy League kids out of college and putting boots on them and you'll have an end to this war in about 5 minutes... surge or no surge.
I hate to say this but...alot of times when you post stuff from Bill-o and claim that a Dem spun him into the ground or got the best of him it turns out that he did just fine. Just like with this one...he's full of horse manure but he spun his position and controlled the situation so well that the truth the Congresswoman spoke was lost...at least to me. This guy is insane, but he is very skillfull and the Congresswoman didnt come off to well.
billo's ass is so coated with gop butter, you have to be careful not to fall against him from behind. you might fall in and find his butt is like a waterpark tunnel without end.
Bill never allows those damned facts to get in his way. Who needs facts when you are armed with an endless amount of bull shit. In his world bull shit trumps facts every time.
Besides shouldn't he be out on the streets supporting the troops in the war on Christmas? How's the surge working in that war?
Here's the transcript.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0907/5735.html
the best operatives for the liars and crooks in our governement are the ones who are so comprimised that they are willing to lie thru their teeth...this guy billo with his sexual creepy shenanigans is so held up by blackmail that they can get him to say anything they want...
"hey bill say the surge is working or we release the tapes of you jerkin off into a falaffel ,you know the tape with you, a loofa and some cooking oil?...thats right keep saying the surge is working"....
billo: "yes sirs..."
"and now for the talking points memo,,,the surge is....working!"
sharkcellar @ 13:
Arrrggggh
environmentalist @ 10:
not only is he skilled at what he does but theyve got a great editing team over there and a weird delay on their mics that makes it so that who ever hes speaking to has a 1 second lag before they can say anything and he can just yell over them and if he feels hes losing he can simply edit them out or cut them off completely
The fact that dems go on O'Reilly plays to his hand. Any that do are part of the problem, not the solution. Talking to him lends him credibility. Dems that go on his program are just as fucking stupid as he is, maybe even dumber....
I'm always amazed when Bill says someone else is spinning, because that's all he ever does. I'm kind of surprised he's not out
picketing the movie Redacted like the good patriot he is.
monumental douche bag. the crappy thing is that there is so much stupidity on that channel i am totally anesthetized - i don't care anymore, that bothers me, they just spew untruths constantly that....oh f-it whatever they're bastards.
What do we "win" in Iraq anyway? I mean average people? I know what we are losing.
Life must be great on Planet Billo. Truth be damned.
"We can't control those people..."
That's what we on what the Culture Warrior from Levittown calls the "looney left" have been saying all along!
Robert Crush @ 9:
There will never be a 'no excuses' draft. Rich white kids ain't gonna go. Rich white kids ain't gonna go. Rich white kids ain't gonna go. Rich white kids ain't gonna go. So as far as the draft goes, fuck you. I have 2 boys draft age and I would not be happy if they got pulled over there. Let the volunteers take it up the ass untill there ain't anymore.... I don't care if they borrow all the money in China to pay mercinaries. I don't want my 2 boys goin over there. Why? So Pedro can stay here and steal their jobs?
I think C&L has quite a dossier on Betrayus:
90-seconds-of-fox-fair-and-balanced-coverage-of-petraeus-hearings
pat-buchanans-conservative-rag-to-moveon-eat-your-heart-out
c-span-jim-webb-counters-petraeuss-claim-of-surge-success-in-anbar
late-edition-wes-clark-talks-to-blitzer
sen-hagel-on-real-time-petraeus-dog-and-pony-show
leave-gen-petraeus-alone
SEXUAL PREDATOR!
He belongs back on 'A Current Affair' or whatever schlock show he hosted before FAUX.
I would like to think that no one actually believes this prick...but...
environmentalist @ 10:
I agree that he's very skillful, but I disagree that he controlled her...The host always has control, but she made him recalibrate....
King of Kings @ 20:
what do we win? what do we win???
we win our freedoms , we get to fight them there so we dont fight them...ah dang ...were fucked
So the surge worked. That means we can declare victory and bring the troops home NOW. How about it Bill-o?
If we've won, why don't they just say so and get our troops out. Then State Department employees can take over our role there.
It's hard to get excited about "winning" when we should never have been there in the first place. We lost thousands of young men and women, tens of thousands severely wounded, and spent billions of dollars that could have gone to provide health care, upgrade schools or take good care of the service (wo)men coming back from Afghanistan. Bush & Co. made the worst mistake in our history. "Winning" seems like a hollow victory.
Maybe "the surge is working" is what we are being told, but ...
"Two US soldiers died in Iraq on Tuesday. A series of bombings and attacks in the area north of Baghdad has killed some 35 persons in the past 24 hours."
It didn't work for those people or those two soldiers.
And then there is this...
"Journalists polled by Pew say that at least half of Baghdad, including the Shiite slum of Sadr City, is too dangerous to visit still. The journalists say that Iraq is much more violent now than when they first arrived. A lot of them also think that the US media coverage of Iraq is overly sunny."
The quotes are from Juan Cole's site today.
look bill o is a mormon, that will help the repugs win 2008 by spinning the election .....
Jan Schakowsky is the best member of Congress not named Kucinich. She's right (correct) on EVERY issue. And she's a pit bull. She's the only person in the state, seemingly, other than me, who is concerned that Blackwater has a "base" in downstate Illinois. I doubt even 1/2 of 1/2 of 1% of Chicagoans know Blackwater operates in the state.
You cannot win a debate with O'Reilly, he won't let you, .. it's always the Iraqis fault, they're the clowns, why doesn't someone call him on the truth, that beiong that there are less Americans dying because of the "re-direction" the new plan is to arm the different groups to go after al aeada, which has seen attacks on Americans less frequent, but what happens when the various groups are done with the Al Qaeda factions ? ....well they're going to take those weapons the presdient gave them and turn them back on the coalition troops causing an even bigger blood bath.
JT @ 18:
Better to let sleeping dogs lie.
Dennis @ 34:
A reich-winger linking to the Post. R O F L. Priceless.
It seems to me that nothing much has changed in Iraq at all as we see from this headline:
Tuesday: 2 US Soldiers, 46 Iraqis Killed; 35 Iraqis Wounded
http://www.antiwar.com/updates/?articleid=11963
You realize that that article is the NY Post,right? Rupert's own....
The usual intellectually changed/dimwitted reich-wing apologists always arrive whenever their favorite O'Reilly/Pedophile is the topic.
Where is mrogi i.e., princess' twin?
JT @ 37:
Reich-wingers are waaaaay too obtuse to understand the ramifications of linking to Rupert-owned propaganda.
The Who had a Bubba O'Reilly and we have Baa-Baa O'Reilly... what a frickin' idiot he is! I'm repulsed by his vile being. EEEEEEEWWWW!
When someone tells me I'm spinning I ask them how much they've had to drink.
Wait wait wait wait wait....the cutaway footage was of a bombed sidewalk business, an ambulance, a guy with a bandaged forehead, armed soldiers entering a building, a car burning, and troops launching a mortar. Interesting choice of background video for Fox to use behind O'Reilly's declaration that the surge is working!
Shakowsky reveals the inherent hypocrisy behind the escalation. She correctly restates the Bush Administration position that the escalation was necessary not simply to reduce the level of violence. If that were the case, Bush was dead wrong in ignoring the experts at the beginning and not sending more troops from the get-go. Rather, the stated purpose of the escalation was to have political reconciliation among the Iraqi factions. If, as O'Reilly says, the "surge" really has nothing to do with Iraqi reconciliation, then the Bush Administration's reasons given for the "surge" were lies.
It never fails to amaze that a certain percentage of the population will give credence to a former tabloid television reporter. The people who tune in to watch O'Reilly perhaps do so in order to substantiate their patriotic, emotional point of view, despite that the facts reveal that O'Reilly's act ends up being one giant con job, indicative more of entertainment than anything resembling substance and truth telling. To think that O'Reilly once had the gall to compare himself to Edward R. Murrow. The mind reels at such a comparison.
billo
such a fool!
I don't know. I've always found Bill O'Reilly pretty pathetic. He, and those like him are wimps and have been wimps their entire lives. They dodged every chance to experience what many of us military veterans have experienced first hand. People like Bill O'Reilly have been and always will be cowards and they know it. Deep down they know that all to well. So, they talk tough and try to live their wartime fantasies through us. If only O'Reilly knew how many veterans like myself really feel about him. To me, and to many of the other veterans that I know, we actually look down upon him because he did not and does not have the guts to do what we did even though he is all for it. In our case, we had no choice but it was our task to carry out those orders whether we agreed with them or not.
"We can't control those people...."
I thought one of the purposes of the invasion was to bring democracy to Iraq.
If 'we' can't control those peoples how did the Bushco's think they would introduce democracy?
In addition;
If ' we' can't control those people , how did the Bushco's think they were going to train Iraqi police ,etc. to handle their own security.
And furthermore
If ' we ' can't control those people what the hell was Bremmer's re-construction crew doing or trying to do?
And in conclusion
Why is America spending billions in a country where ' we can't control the people'?
WTF... Why are the American people including, Congresswoman Schakowsky, parroting/buying into/spreading Bush's talking point lie that the "Surge is working".
My fellow countrymen and posters abroad let me make this simple.
THE SURGE IS NOT WORKING. IT IS A BUSH MYTH.
If anyone cares to debate this I will be more than happy to accommodate.
BTW... Why does the DOD report US Troop deaths only if the soldier dies on the battlefield? Our kids passing away at first aid stations, in transit flight or at out of country medical care facilities are not reported as combat deaths.
If your surge is working then have the guts Mr. Bush to show us the Dover, DE daily transfer tube ceremonies! Only in this way can we decide if you're telling the truth or lying as I believe you to be.
These are the same "people" that have been claiming victory since day one of the war. Sorry reich-wingers, you have no credibility.
Who ARE all the morons that watch this crap?!?
Wait, no, don't answer that question.
If the surge has worked, our troops can come home.
If it hasn't, they should come home.
That's all the discussion I will tolerate about it.
Still NOT working!!!
http://www.lies.com/images/first_year.gif
http://www.lies.com/images/entire_war.gif
This guy is a COMPLETE NUT CASE
Bush has NOT SAVED IRAQ fact
but left a illegal war for the next president
Media Matters has a great article on the Nightline (MSNBC) and why there hasn't been any stories from Iraq since Koppel left.
Take alook at this and repeat the lie about the surge working:
http://www.militarycity.com/valor/honor_november_2007.html
Nov1
MSGT Crowell
SSGT Wieger
2Lt Alger
Nov2
Sgt Walls
Nov 3
Pfc Covert
Nov 4
Pfc Muller
Sgt Shaw
Sgt Davis
SSgt Linde
Sgt Stenroos
Tech Bewley
Nov 6
Spc Ndururi
Nov 7
Capt. Tiffner
Sgt Tumanuvao
Nov 9
Spc Franklin
1Lt Ferrara
Spc Lagevin
Sgt Bocks
Nov 10
Sgt Mersman
Pfc Lancour
Spc Roque
Sgt Kutschbach
Nov 12
Sgt Vanek
Capt. Boris
Spc Hike
Spc Sietsema
Cpl Schmidt
Pfc Mason
Sgt Kruse
2Lt Liles
Nov 14
Spc Banks
Sgt Booker
2Lt Burks
Nov 16
Sgt Lewis
Sgt Ganczewski
Cpl Nelson
Cpl Lee
Pfc Ferrero
SSGT Ayala
Nov 20
Sgt Paredez
Nov 21
Spc Henley (non-combat related incident = suicide gunshot to the head)
Nov 22
SSgt Martin.
If a tree falls in the forrest and nobody is there...does it make a sound?
I think McCain had it right when he said that we're playing whack-a-mole. We have more troops, so more moles are staying underground. In Anbar, arming the Sunnis has worked against Al-qaeda, but those arms could later be turned on the Shiites in civil war. As far as Iraqi on Iraqi violence is concerned, the surge proponents are trying to take 100% credit for what actually is ethnic cleansing progressing - the prospective murder targets, either Shiites in Sunni neighborhoods, or Sunnies in Shiite neighborhoods, have fled, leaving less murder targets remaining behind.
Dirty Hippie Blogger @ 48:
Agreed. The Pentagon only counts those deaths that occured in Iraq and as the result of combat for the most part. They do not count those that died in another country due to wounds received in Iraq for example. Obviously, they do this to keep the death counts low. The reasons for doing this are obvious. The actual death toll the military has to contend with in my opinion is much higher. Besides, there are many ways to die in a combat zone. There is disease, accidents, suicides, snake bites, you name it. All add to those combat loses and all are a direct result of George W. Bush's "surge" and war overall.
Any hope of a transcript of the video for those of us without access to audio?
@32 illinois4schakowsky
“Jan Schakowsky is the best member of Congress not named Kucinich. She’s right (correct) on EVERY issue.”
Is that right?
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2007-993
May I suggest you look into this bill, and its Senate version (S. 1959, now being debated), a little more closely?
http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_kathryn__071128_urgent_3a_help_t...
You HAVE to love O'Reilly Logic:
I'm going to blow up your house.
The idea is that after I do. someone will come along and clean it up and then someone else will eventually build you a new, better one.
9 months later... Well, no one else came along but that's their problem. Operation Blow Up Your House worked.
These O'Reilly "takedowns" are always so frustrating.
No matter how strong the opposing point is, or how contradicted O'Reilly plainly is he gets the last word.
Every time.
It is, after all, his show.
It would be a good idea if ALL Dems boycotted FOX.
Billo asserts that the purpose of the Surge was to provide enough security for both warring factions to meet and negotiate a political agreement. In that sense the Surge, as defined by Petraeus, has worked.
If the success of the Surge is determined strictly by the success of those negotiations; the Surge has failed.
I think Billo says the surge is worked just so he doesn't have ot do any more USO tours. . .
email to O'Reilly:
Hey Bozo:
I know you are not the brightest light on your Chanukah bush, but try to follow this
The Surge works, but the Surge is not working
A painter has a selection of tools, one of which is his brush. Now the brush works, but it is not working unless some artisan picks it up and creates a painting.
The surge is a tool to create a project which is a functioning Iraqi government. So far no one has picked up the tool to even start the project, therefore the surge is not working.
Violence will be down as long as we have wall-to-wall troops in Iraq, but for how long are we willing to lend the Iraqis the tool we are providing?
Until our nation follows the USSR into fiscal chaos?
Oh great, Billo. So the urge is a success because fewer people have been dying lately and............... what? You are dumber than a door knob.
The surge is working in the same manner that a broken clock "works" twice a day.
Everything about justifying Petraus' ESCALLATION was a lie. Now the bushies claim SUCCESS in every corner... and they are trying to make the present situation PERMANANT!
Bill-O is a complete NUT CASE. He pontificates on subjects of which he knows nothing... then bullies and cuts off anyone who contradicts him.
Too bad that Ms. Schakowsky could not have taken a swing at O'Wrinkly's and kicked his sorry ass.
Report to Congress on the Situation in Iraq
General David H. Petraeus
Commander, Multi-National Force-Iraq
10-11 September 2007
Mr. Chairmen, Ranking Members, Members of the Committees, thank you for the opportunity to provide my assessment of the security situation in Iraq and to discuss the recommendations I recently provided to my chain of command for the way forward.
At the outset, I would like to note that this is my testimony. Although I have briefed my assessment and recommendations to my chain of command, I wrote this testimony myself. It has not been cleared by, nor shared with, anyone in the Pentagon, the White House, or Congress.
As a bottom line up front, the military objectives of the surge are, in large measure, being met. In recent months, in the face of tough enemies and the brutal summer heat of Iraq, Coalition and Iraqi Security Forces have achieved progress in the security arena. Though the improvements have been uneven across Iraq, the overall number of security incidents in Iraq has declined in 8 of the past 12 weeks, with the numbers of incidents in the last two weeks at the lowest levels seen since June 2006.
One reason for the decline in incidents is that Coalition and Iraqi forces have dealt significant blows to Al Qaeda-Iraq. Though Al Qaeda and its affiliates in Iraq remain dangerous, we have taken away a number of their sanctuaries and gained the initiative in many areas.
We have also disrupted Shia militia extremists, capturing the head and numerous other leaders of the Iranian-supported Special Groups, along with a senior Lebanese Hezbollah operative supporting Iran’s activities in Iraq.
Coalition and Iraqi operations have helped reduce ethno-sectarian violence, as well, bringing down the number of ethno-sectarian deaths substantially in Baghdad and across Iraq since the height of the sectarian violence last December. The number of overall civilian deaths has also declined during this period, although the numbers in each area are still at troubling levels.
Iraqi Security Forces have also continued to grow and to shoulder more of the load, albeit slowly and amid continuing concerns about the sectarian tendencies of some elements in their ranks. In general, however, Iraqi elements have been standing and fighting and sustaining tough losses, and they have taken the lead in operations in many areas.
Additionally, in what may be the most significant development of the past 8 months, the tribal rejection of Al Qaeda that started in Anbar Province and helped produce such significant change there has now spread to a number of other locations as well.
Based on all this and on the further progress we believe we can achieve over the next few months, I believe that we will be able to reduce our forces to the pre-surge level of brigade
1
combat teams by next summer without jeopardizing the security gains that we have fought so hard to achieve.
Beyond that, while noting that the situation in Iraq remains complex, difficult, and sometimes downright frustrating, I also believe that it is possible to achieve our objectives in Iraq over time, though doing so will be neither quick nor easy.
Having provided that summary, I would like to review the nature of the conflict in Iraq, recall the situation before the surge, describe the current situation, and explain the recommendations I have provided to my chain of command for the way ahead in Iraq.
The Nature of the Conflict
The fundamental source of the conflict in Iraq is competition among ethnic and sectarian communities for power and resources. This competition will take place, and its resolution is key to producing long-term stability in the new Iraq. The question is whether the competition takes place more – or less – violently. This chart shows the security challenges in Iraq. Foreign and home-grown terrorists, insurgents, militia extremists, and criminals all push the ethno-sectarian competition toward violence. Malign actions by Syria and, especially, by Iran fuel that violence. Lack of adequate governmental capacity, lingering sectarian mistrust, and various forms of corruption add to Iraq’s challenges.
The Situation in December 2006 and the Surge
In our recent efforts to look to the future, we found it useful to revisit the past. In December 2006, during the height of the ethno-sectarian violence that escalated in the wake of the bombing of the Golden Dome Mosque in Samarra, the leaders in Iraq at that time – General George Casey and Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad – concluded that the coalition was failing to achieve its objectives. Their review underscored the need to protect the population and reduce sectarian violence, especially in Baghdad. As a result, General Casey requested additional forces to enable the Coalition to accomplish these tasks, and those forces began to flow in January.
In the ensuing months, our forces and our Iraqi counterparts have focused on improving security, especially in Baghdad and the areas around it, wresting sanctuaries from Al Qaeda control, and disrupting the efforts of the Iranian-supported militia extremists. We have employed counterinsurgency practices that underscore the importance of units living among the people they are securing, and accordingly, our forces have established dozens of joint security stations and patrol bases manned by Coalition and Iraqi forces in Baghdad and in other areas across Iraq.
In mid-June, with all the surge brigades in place, we launched a series of offensive operations focused on: expanding the gains achieved in the preceding months in Anbar Province; clearing Baqubah, several key Baghdad neighborhoods, the remaining sanctuaries in Anbar Province, and important areas in the so-called “belts” around Baghdad; and pursuing Al Qaeda in the Diyala River Valley and several other areas.
2
Throughout this period, as well, we engaged in dialogue with insurgent groups and tribes, and this led to additional elements standing up to oppose Al Qaeda and other extremists. We also continued to emphasize the development of the Iraqi Security Forces and we employed non-kinetic means to exploit the opportunities provided by the conduct of our kinetic operations – aided in this effort by the arrival of additional Provincial Reconstruction Teams.
Current Situation and Trends
The progress our forces have achieved with our Iraqi counterparts has, as I noted at the outset, been substantial. While there have been setbacks as well as successes and tough losses along the way, overall, our tactical commanders and I see improvements in the security environment. We do not, however, just rely on gut feel or personal observations; we also conduct considerable data collection and analysis to gauge progress and determine trends. We do this by gathering and refining data from coalition and Iraqi operations centers, using a methodology that has been in place for well over a year and that has benefited over the past seven months from the increased presence of our forces living among the Iraqi people. We endeavor to ensure our analysis of that data is conducted with rigor and consistency, as our ability to achieve a nuanced understanding of the security environment is dependent on collecting and analyzing data in a consistent way over time. Two US intelligence agencies recently reviewed our methodology, and they concluded that the data we produce is the most accurate and authoritative in Iraq.
As I mentioned up front, and as the chart before you reflects, the level of security incidents has decreased significantly since the start of the surge of offensive operations in mid-June, declining in 8 of the past 12 weeks, with the level of incidents in the past two weeks the lowest since June 2006 and with the number of attacks this past week the lowest since April 2006.
Civilian deaths of all categories, less natural causes, have also declined considerably, by over 45% Iraq-wide since the height of the sectarian violence in December. This is shown by the top line on this chart, and the decline by some 70% in Baghdad is shown by the bottom line. Periodic mass casualty attacks by Al Qaeda have tragically added to the numbers outside Baghdad, in particular. Even without the sensational attacks, however, the level of civilian deaths is clearly still too high and continues to be of serious concern.
As the next chart shows, the number of ethno-sectarian deaths, an important subset of the overall civilian casualty figures, has also declined significantly since the height of the sectarian violence in December. Iraq-wide, as shown by the top line on this chart, the number of ethno-sectarian deaths has come down by over 55%, and it would have come down much further were it not for the casualties inflicted by barbaric Al Qaeda bombings attempting to reignite sectarian violence. In Baghdad, as the bottom line shows, the number of ethno-sectarian deaths has come down by some 80% since December. This chart also displays the density of sectarian incidents in various Baghdad neighborhoods and it both reflects the progress made in reducing ethno-sectarian violence in the Iraqi capital and identifies the areas that remain the most challenging.
As we have gone on the offensive in former Al Qaeda and insurgent sanctuaries, and as locals have increasingly supported our efforts, we have found a substantially increased number of arms, ammunition, and explosives caches. As this chart shows, we have, so far this year, already found
3
and cleared over 4,400 caches, nearly 1,700 more than we discovered in all of last year. This may be a factor in the reduction in the number of overall improvised explosive device attacks in recent months, which as this chart shows, has declined sharply, by about one-third, since June.
The change in the security situation in Anbar Province has, of course, been particularly dramatic. As this chart shows, monthly attack levels in Anbar have declined from some 1,350 in October 2006 to a bit over 200 in August of this year. This dramatic decrease reflects the significance of the local rejection of Al Qaeda and the newfound willingness of local Anbaris to volunteer to serve in the Iraqi Army and Iraqi Police Service. As I noted earlier, we are seeing similar actions in other locations, as well.
To be sure, trends have not been uniformly positive across Iraq, as is shown by this chart depicting violence levels in several key Iraqi provinces. The trend in Ninevah Province, for example, has been much more up and down, until a recent decline, and the same is true in Sala ad Din Province, though recent trends there and in Baghdad have been in the right direction. In any event, the overall trajectory in Iraq – a steady decline of incidents in the past three months – is still quite significant.
The number of car bombings and suicide attacks has also declined in each of the past 5 months, from a high of some 175 in March, as this chart shows, to about 90 this past month. While this trend in recent months has been heartening, the number of high profile attacks is still too high, and we continue to work hard to destroy the networks that carry out these barbaric attacks.
Our operations have, in fact, produced substantial progress against Al Qaeda and its affiliates in Iraq. As this chart shows, in the past 8 months, we have considerably reduced the areas in which Al Qaeda enjoyed sanctuary. We have also neutralized 5 media cells, detained the senior Iraqi leader of Al Qaeda-Iraq, and killed or captured nearly 100 other key leaders and some 2,500 rank-and-file fighters. Al Qaeda is certainly not defeated; however, it is off balance and we are pursuing its leaders and operators aggressively. Of note, as the recent National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq explained, these gains against Al Qaeda are a result of the synergy of actions by: conventional forces to deny the terrorists sanctuary; intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance assets to find the enemy; and special operations elements to conduct targeted raids. A combination of these assets is necessary to prevent the creation of a terrorist safe haven in Iraq.
In the past six months we have also targeted Shia militia extremists, capturing a number of senior leaders and fighters, as well as the deputy commander of Lebanese Hezbollah Department 2800, the organization created to support the training, arming, funding, and, in some cases, direction of the militia extremists by the Iranian Republican Guard Corps’ Qods Force. These elements have assassinated and kidnapped Iraqi governmental leaders, killed and wounded our soldiers with advanced explosive devices provided by Iran, and indiscriminately rocketed civilians in the International Zone and elsewhere. It is increasingly apparent to both Coalition and Iraqi leaders that Iran, through the use of the Qods Force, seeks to turn the Iraqi Special Groups into a Hezbollah-like force to serve its interests and fight a proxy war against the Iraqi state and coalition forces in Iraq.
4
The most significant development in the past six months likely has been the increasing emergence of tribes and local citizens rejecting Al Qaeda and other extremists. This has, of course, been most visible in Anbar Province. A year ago the province was assessed as “lost” politically. Today, it is a model of what happens when local leaders and citizens decide to oppose Al Qaeda and reject its Taliban-like ideology. While Anbar is unique and the model it provides cannot be replicated everywhere in Iraq, it does demonstrate the dramatic change in security that is possible with the support and participation of local citizens. As this chart shows, other tribes have been inspired by the actions of those in Anbar and have volunteered to fight extremists as well. We have, in coordination with the Iraqi government’s National Reconciliation Committee, been engaging these tribes and groups of local citizens who want to oppose extremists and to contribute to local security. Some 20,000 such individuals are already being hired for the Iraqi Police, thousands of others are being assimilated into the Iraqi Army, and thousands more are vying for a spot in Iraq’s Security Forces.
Iraqi Security Forces
As I noted earlier, Iraqi Security Forces have continued to grow, to develop their capabilities, and to shoulder more of the burden of providing security for their country. Despite concerns about sectarian influence, inadequate logistics and supporting institutions, and an insufficient number of qualified commissioned and non-commissioned officers, Iraqi units are engaged around the country.
As this chart shows, there are now nearly 140 Iraqi Army, National Police, and Special Operations Forces Battalions in the fight, with about 95 of those capable of taking the lead in operations, albeit with some coalition support. Beyond that, all of Iraq’s battalions have been heavily involved in combat operations that often result in the loss of leaders, soldiers, and equipment. These losses are among the shortcomings identified by operational readiness assessments, but we should not take from these assessments the impression that Iraqi forces are not in the fight and contributing. Indeed, despite their shortages, many Iraqi units across Iraq now operate with minimal coalition assistance.
As counterinsurgency operations require substantial numbers of boots on the ground, we are helping the Iraqis expand the size of their security forces. Currently, there are some 445,000 individuals on the payrolls of Iraq’s Interior and Defense Ministries. Based on recent decisions by Prime Minister Maliki, the number of Iraq’s security forces will grow further by the end of this year, possibly by as much as 40,000. Given the security challenges Iraq faces, we support this decision, and we will work with the two security ministries as they continue their efforts to expand their basic training capacity, leader development programs, logistical structures and elements, and various other institutional capabilities to support the substantial growth in Iraqi forces.
Significantly, in 2007, Iraq will, as in 2006, spend more on its security forces than it will receive in security assistance from the United States. In fact, Iraq is becoming one of the United States’ larger foreign military sales customers, committing some $1.6 billion to FMS already, with the possibility of up to $1.8 billion more being committed before the end of this year. And I
5
appreciate the attention that some members of Congress have recently given to speeding up the FMS process for Iraq.
To summarize, the security situation in Iraq is improving, and Iraqis elements are slowly taking on more of the responsibility for protecting their citizens. Innumerable challenges lie ahead; however, Coalition and Iraqi Security Forces have made progress toward achieving sustainable security. As a result, the United States will be in a position to reduce its forces in Iraq in the months ahead.
Recommendations
Two weeks ago I provided recommendations for the way ahead in Iraq to the members of my chain of command and the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The essence of the approach I recommended is captured in its title: “Security While Transitioning: From Leading to Partnering to Overwatch.” This approach seeks to build on the security improvements our troopers and our Iraqi counterparts have fought so hard to achieve in recent months. It reflects recognition of the importance of securing the population and the imperative of transitioning responsibilities to Iraqi institutions and Iraqi forces as quickly as possible, but without rushing to failure. It includes substantial support for the continuing development of Iraqi Security Forces. It also stresses the need to continue the counterinsurgency strategy that we have been employing, but with Iraqis gradually shouldering more of the load. And it highlights the importance of regional and global diplomatic approaches. Finally, in recognition of the fact that this war is not only being fought on the ground in Iraq but also in cyberspace, it also notes the need to contest the enemy’s growing use of that important medium to spread extremism.
The recommendations I provided were informed by operational and strategic considerations. The operational considerations include recognition that:
• military aspects of the surge have achieved progress and generated momentum;
• Iraqi Security Forces have continued to grow and have slowly been shouldering more of the security burden in Iraq;
• a mission focus on either population security or transition alone will not be adequate to achieve our objectives;
• success against Al Qaeda-Iraq and Iranian-supported militia extremists requires conventional forces as well as special operations forces; and
• the security and local political situations will enable us to draw down the surge forces.
My recommendations also took into account a number of strategic considerations:
• political progress will take place only if sufficient security exists;
• long-term US ground force viability will benefit from force reductions as the surge runs its course;
• regional, global, and cyberspace initiatives are critical to success; and
• Iraqi leaders understandably want to assume greater sovereignty in their country, although, as they recently announced, they do desire continued presence of coalition forces in Iraq in 2008 under a new UN Security Council Resolution and, following
6
that, they want to negotiate a long term security agreement with the United States and other nations.
Based on these considerations, and having worked the battlefield geometry with Lieutenant General Ray Odierno to ensure that we retain and build on the gains for which our troopers have fought, I have recommended a drawdown of the surge forces from Iraq. In fact, later this month, the Marine Expeditionary Unit deployed as part of the surge will depart Iraq. Beyond that, if my recommendations are approved, that unit’s departure will be followed by the withdrawal of a brigade combat team without replacement in mid-December and the further redeployment without replacement of four other brigade combat teams and the two surge Marine battalions in the first 7 months of 2008, until we reach the pre-surge level of 15 brigade combat teams by mid-July 2008.
I would also like to discuss the period beyond next summer. Force reductions will continue beyond the pre-surge levels of brigade combat teams that we will reach by mid-July 2008; however, in my professional judgment, it would be premature to make recommendations on the pace of such reductions at this time. In fact, our experience in Iraq has repeatedly shown that projecting too far into the future is not just difficult, it can be misleading and even hazardous. The events of the past six months underscore that point. When I testified in January, for example, no one would have dared to forecast that Anbar Province would have been transformed the way it has in the past 6 months. Nor would anyone have predicted that volunteers in one-time Al Qaeda strongholds like Ghazaliyah in western Baghdad or in Adamiya in eastern Baghdad would seek to join the fight against Al Qaeda. Nor would we have anticipated that a Shia-led government would accept significant numbers of Sunni volunteers into the ranks of the local police force in Abu Ghraib. Beyond that, on a less encouraging note, none of us earlier this year appreciated the extent of Iranian involvement in Iraq, something about which we and Iraq’s leaders all now have greater concern.
In view of this, I do not believe it is reasonable to have an adequate appreciation for the pace of further reductions and mission adjustments beyond the summer of 2008 until about mid-March of next year. We will, no later than that time, consider factors similar to those on which I based the current recommendations, having by then, of course, a better feel for the security situation, the improvements in the capabilities of our Iraqi counterparts, and the enemy situation. I will then, as I did in developing the recommendations I have explained here today, also take into consideration the demands on our Nation’s ground forces, although I believe that that consideration should once again inform, not drive, the recommendations I make.
This chart captures the recommendations I have described, showing the recommended reduction of brigade combat teams as the surge runs its course and illustrating the concept of our units adjusting their missions and transitioning responsibilities to Iraqis, as the situation and Iraqi capabilities permit. It also reflects the no-later-than date for recommendations on force adjustments beyond next summer and provides a possible approach we have considered for the future force structure and mission set in Iraq.
One may argue that the best way to speed the process in Iraq is to change the MNF-I mission from one that emphasizes population security, counter-terrorism, and transition, to one that is
7
strictly focused on transition and counter-terrorism. Making that change now would, in our view, be premature. We have learned before that there is a real danger in handing over tasks to the Iraqi Security Forces before their capacity and local conditions warrant. In fact, the drafters of the recently released National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq recognized this danger when they wrote, and I quote, “We assess that changing the mission of Coalition forces from a primarily counterinsurgency and stabilization role to a primary combat support role for Iraqi forces and counterterrorist operations to prevent AQI from establishing a safe haven would erode security gains achieved thus far.”
In describing the recommendations I have made, I should note again that, like Ambassador Crocker, I believe Iraq’s problems will require a long-term effort. There are no easy answers or quick solutions. And though we both believe this effort can succeed, it will take time. Our assessments underscore, in fact, the importance of recognizing that a premature drawdown of our forces would likely have devastating consequences.
That assessment is supported by the findings of a 16 August Defense Intelligence Agency report on the implications of a rapid withdrawal of US forces from Iraq. Summarizing it in an unclassified fashion, it concludes that a rapid withdrawal would result in the further release of the strong centrifugal forces in Iraq and produce a number of dangerous results, including a high risk of disintegration of the Iraqi Security Forces; rapid deterioration of local security initiatives; Al Qaeda-Iraq regaining lost ground and freedom of maneuver; a marked increase in violence and further ethno-sectarian displacement and refugee flows; alliances of convenience by Iraqi groups with internal and external forces to gain advantages over their rivals; and exacerbation of already challenging regional dynamics, especially with respect to Iran.
Lieutenant General Odierno and I share this assessment and believe that the best way to secure our national interests and avoid an unfavorable outcome in Iraq is to continue to focus our operations on securing the Iraqi people while targeting terrorist groups and militia extremists and, as quickly as conditions are met, transitioning security tasks to Iraqi elements.
Closing Comments
Before closing, I want to thank you and your colleagues for your support of our men and women in uniform in Iraq. The Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines, and Coast Guardsmen with whom I’m honored to serve are the best equipped and, very likely, the most professional force in our nation’s history. Impressively, despite all that has been asked of them in recent years, they continue to raise their right hands and volunteer to stay in uniform. With three weeks to go in this fiscal year, in fact, the Army elements in Iraq, for example, have achieved well over 130% of the reenlistment goals in the initial term and careerist categories and nearly 115% in the mid-career category. All of us appreciate what you have done to ensure that these great troopers have had what they’ve needed to accomplish their mission, just as we appreciate what you have done to take care of their families, as they, too, have made significant sacrifices in recent years.
The advances you have underwritten in weapons systems and individual equipment; in munitions; in command, control, and communications systems; in intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities; in vehicles and counter-IED systems and programs; and in manned
8
and unmanned aircraft have proven invaluable in Iraq. The capabilities that you have funded most recently – especially the vehicles that will provide greater protection against improvised explosive devices – are also of enormous importance. Additionally, your funding of the Commander’s Emergency Response Program has given our leaders a critical tool with which to prosecute the counterinsurgency campaign. Finally, we appreciate as well your funding of our new detention programs and rule of law initiatives in Iraq.
In closing, it remains an enormous privilege to soldier again in Iraq with America’s new “Greatest Generation.” Our country’s men and women in uniform have done a magnificent job in the most complex and challenging environment imaginable. All Americans should be very proud of their sons and daughters serving in Iraq today.
Thank you very much.
Report to U.S. House of Representatives on the Situation in Iraq: Ambassador Crocker
Ryan C. Crocker, U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Iraq
Joint Hearing of the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Committee on Armed Services
Washington, DC
September 10, 2007
http://www.state.gov/p/nea/rls/rm/2007/91941.htm
Mr. Chairman,
Thank you for the opportunity to address Congress this week. I have considered it a privilege and an honor to serve in Iraq at a time when so much is at stake for our country and the people of the region - and when so many Americans of the highest caliber in our military and civilian services are doing the same. I know that a heavy responsibility weighs on my shoulders to provide the country with my best, most honest assessment of the situation in Iraq and the implications for the United States.
Americans, in this chamber and beyond, are looking for more than an update on the latest events. They want to know the answers to some key questions. Are our objectives realistic? Is it possible that Iraq will become a united, stable country with a democratic government operating under the rule of law? What is the trajectory – is Iraq, on the whole, moving in the right direction? Can we expect more and under what time frame? Are there alternative courses of action for our country which are superior?
These are sensible questions to be asked by a nation investing in and sacrificing for another country and people. In asking these questions, however, we must not lose sight of the vital interests the United States has in a successful outcome in Iraq.
My intention today is to give you an assessment of political, economic, and diplomatic developments in Iraq. In doing so, I will not minimize the enormity of the challenges faced by Iraqis, nor the complexity of the situation. Yet at the same time, I intend to demonstrate that it is possible for the United States to see its goals realized in Iraq and that Iraqis are capable of tackling and addressing the problems confronting them today. A secure, stable democratic Iraq at peace with its neighbors is attainable. In my judgment, the cumulative trajectory of political, economic, and diplomatic developments in Iraq is upwards, although the slope of that line is not steep. The process will not be quick, it will be uneven, punctuated by setbacks as well as achievements, and it will require substantial U.S. resolve and commitment. There will be no single moment at which we can claim victory; any turning point will likely only be recognized in retrospect.
This is a sober assessment, but it should not be a disheartening one. I have found it helpful, during my time in Iraq to reflect on our own history. At many points in the early years, our survival as a nation was questionable. Our efforts to build the institutions of government were not always successful in the first instance. And tough issues - such as slavery, universal suffrage, civil rights, and state rights - were resolved only after acrimonious debate and sometimes violence.
Iraq is experiencing a revolution - not just regime change. It is only by understanding this that we can appreciate what is happening in Iraq and what Iraqis have achieved, as well as maintain a sense of realism about the challenges that remain.
Context
Evaluating where Iraqis are today only makes sense in the context of where they have been. Any Iraqi under 40 years old - and that is the overwhelming majority of the population - would have known nothing but the rule of the Ba'ath party before liberation four and a half years ago. Those 35 years were filled with crimes against humanity on every scale. Saddam Hussein ruled without any mercy, not hesitating to use lethal force and torture against even those in his inner circle. His genocidal campaign against the Kurds and savagery toward southern Shi'a are well known. But he also used violence and intimidation as tools in the complete deconstruction of Iraqi society. No organization or institution survived that was not linked in some way to regime protection. He created a pervasive climate of fear in which even family members were afraid to talk to one another.
This is the legacy that Iraqis had as their history when Saddam's statue came down on April 9, 2003. No Nelson Mandela existed to emerge on the national political scene; anyone with his leadership talents would have not survived. A new Iraq had to be built almost literally from scratch, and the builders in most cases were themselves reduced to their most basic identity, ethnic or sectarian.
Much progress has been made, particularly in building an institutional framework where there was none before. But rather than being a period in which old animosities and suspicions were overcome, the past 18 months in particular have further strained Iraqi society. The sectarian violence of 2006 and early 2007 had its seeds in Saddam's social deconstruction and it had dire consequences for the people of Iraq as well as its politics. Extensive displacement and widespread sectarian killings by al-Qa'ida and other extremist groups have gnawed away at the already frayed fabric of Iraqi society and politics. It is no exaggeration to say that Iraq is - and will remain for some time - a traumatized society.
National Politics
It is against this backdrop that developments in Iraq must be seen. Iraqis are facing some of the most profound political, economic, and security challenges imaginable. They are not simply grappling with the issue of who rules Iraq – but they are asking what kind of country Iraq will be, how it will be governed, and how Iraqis will share power and resources among each other. The constitution approved in a referendum in 2005 answered some of these questions in theory, but much remains uncertain in both law and practice.
Some of the more promising political developments at the national level are neither measured in benchmarks nor visible to those far from Baghdad. For instance, there is a budding debate about federalism among Iraq's leaders and, importantly, within the Sunni community. Those living in place like al-Anbar and Salahaddin are beginning to realize how localities having more of a say in daily decision making will empower their communities. No longer is an all-powerful Baghdad seen as the panacea to Iraq's problems. This thinking is nascent, but it is ultimately critical to the evolution of a common vision among all Iraqi leaders.
Similarly, there is a palpable frustration in Baghdad over the sectarian system that was used to divide the spoils of the state in the last few years. Leaders from all communities openly acknowledge that a focus on sectarian gains has led to poor governance and served Iraqis badly. And many claim to be ready to make the sacrifices that will be needed to put government performance ahead of sectarian and ethnic concerns. Such ideas are no longer controversial, although their application will be.
Finally, we are seeing Iraqis come to terms with complex issues not by first providing a national framework, but instead by tackling immediate problems. One such example is how the central government has accepted over 1700 young men from the Abu Ghurayb area west of Baghdad, including former members of insurgent groups, to be part of the Iraqi security forces. Another is how the government, without much public fanfare, has contacted thousands of members of the former Iraqi army, offering them retirement, return to the military, or public sector employment. So without the proclamation of a general amnesty, we see amnesty being granted, and de-ba'athification reform in advance of national legislation. In both instances, the seeds of reconciliation are being planted.
Our country, however, has come to associate progress on national reconciliation as meaning the passage of key pieces of legislation. There is logic to this, as the legislation we are urging the Iraqis to produce does - in one way or another – have to do with the question of how to share power and resources among Iraq's many communities. This legislation also has to do with the vision of the future Iraqi state. The oil and revenues sharing laws, for instance, deal with deeper issues than simply whether Iraqis in oil producing areas are willing to share their wealth with other Iraqis. What is difficult about the oil laws is that they take Iraq another step down the road toward a federal system that all Iraqis have not yet embraced. But once again, we see that even in the absence of legislation there is practical action as the central government shares oil revenues through budget allocations on an equitable basis with Iraq's provinces.
In many respects, the debates currently occurring in Iraq are akin to those surrounding our civil rights movement or struggle over states rights. With de-ba'athification,
Iraqis are struggling to come to terms with a vicious past. They are trying to balance fear that the Ba'ath party would one day return to power with the recognition that many former members of the party are guilty of no crime and joined the organization not to repress others but for personal survival. With provincial powers, they are grappling with very serious questions about what the right balance between the center and the periphery is for Iraq. Some see the devolution of power to regions and provinces as being the best insurance against the rise of a future tyrannical figure in Baghdad. Others see Iraq, with its complex demographics, as in need of a strong central authority.
In short, we should not be surprised or dismayed that Iraqis have not fully resolved such issues. Rather, we should ask whether the way in which they are approaching such issues gives us a sense of their seriousness and ultimate capability to resolve Iraq's fundamental problems. Is the collective national leadership of Iraq ready to prioritize Iraq over sectarian and community interests? Can and will they come to agreement about what sort of Iraq they want?
I do believe that Iraq's leaders have the will to tackle the country's pressing problems, although it will take longer than we originally anticipated because of the environment and the gravity of the issues before them. Prime Minister al-Maliki and the other Iraqi leaders face enormous obstacles in their efforts to govern effectively. They approach the task with a deep sense of commitment and patriotism. An important part of this positive judgment was the effort made by the leaders this past summer. After weeks of preparatory work and many days of intensive meetings, Iraq's five most prominent national leaders from the three major communities issued a communiqué on August 26 that noted agreement on draft legislation dealing with de-ba'athification and provincial powers. This agreement by no means solves all of Iraq's problems. But the commitment of its leaders to work together on hard issues is encouraging.
Perhaps most significantly, these five Iraqi leaders together decided to publicly express their joint desire to develop a long term relationship with the United States. Despite their many differences in perspectives and experiences, they all agreed on language acknowledging the need for a continue presence by the multinational forces in Iraq and expressing gratitude for the sacrifices these forces have made for Iraqis.
Provincial and Local Politics
At the provincial level, political gains have been more pronounced, particularly in the north and west of Iraq where the security improvements have been in some places dramatic. In these areas, there is abundant evidence that the security gains have opened the door for meaningful politics.
In al-Anbar, the progress on the security side has been extraordinary. Six months ago, violence was rampant, our forces were under daily attack, and Iraqis were cowering from the intimidation of al-Qa'ida. But al-Qa'ida overplayed its hand in al-Anbar and Anbaris began to reject its excesses - be they beheading school children or cutting off peoples' fingers as punishment for smoking. Recognizing the Coalition could help eject al-Qa'ida, the tribes began to fight with us, not against us, and the landscape in al-Anbar is dramatically different as a result.
Tribal representatives are on the provincial council, which is now meeting regularly to find ways of restoring services, developing the economy, and executing a provincial budget. These leaders are looking for help to rebuild their cities and talking of attracting investment. Such scenes are also unfolding in parts of Diyala and Ninewa, where Iraqis have mobilized with the help of the Coalition and Iraqi security forces to evict al-Qa'ida from their communities. The world should note that when al-Qa'ida began implementing its twisted vision of the Caliphate in Iraq, Iraqis, from al-Anbar to Baghdad to Diyala', have ovemhelmingly rejected it.
Shi'a extremists are also facing rejection. Recent attacks by elements of the
Iranian backed Jaysh al-Mahdi on worshipers in the holy city of Karbala have provoked a backlash and triggered a call by Muqtada as-Sadr for Jaysh al-Mahdi to cease attacks against Iraqis and coalition forces.
A key challenge for Iraqis now is to link these positive developments in the provinces to the central government in Baghdad. Unlike our states, Iraqi provinces have little ability to generate funds through taxation, making them dependent on the central government for resources. The growing ability of the provinces to design and execute budgets and the readiness of the central government to resource them are success stories. On September 5, Iraq's senior federal leadership traveled to al-Anbar where they announced a 70% increase in the 2007 provincial capital budget as well as $50 million to compensate losses in the fight against al-Qa'ida. The support of the central government is also needed to maintain hard-won security in areas like al-Anbar through the rapid expansion of locally-generated police. The Government of Iraq has placed some 21,000 Anbaris on police roles.
Economics and Capacity Building
Iraq is starting to make some gains in the economy. Improving security is stimulating revival of markets, with the active participation of local communities. War damage is being cleared and buildings repaired, roads and sewers built and commerce energized.
The IMF estimates that economic growth will exceed six percent for 2007. Iraqi ministries and provincial councils have made substantial progress this year in utilizing Iraq's oil revenue for investment. The 2007 governmental budget allocated $10 billion (nearly one-third Iraq's expected oil export revenue) to capital investment. Over $3 billion was allocated to the provinces and the Kurdish Region for spending. The latest data show that spending units (national ministries and provincial councils) have proceeded to commit these funds at more than twice the rate of last year. Doing the best are the provincial authorities, in the process gaining experience with making plans and decisions, and running fair tenders. In so doing, they are stimulating local business development and providing employment. Over time we expect the experience with more responsive local authorities will change Iraqi attitudes towards their elected leaders, and of the provinces towards Baghdad.
At two conferences in Dubai in the last two weeks, hundreds of Iraqi businessmen met an equal number of foreign investors newly interested in acquiring shares of businesses in Iraq. An auction of cell phone spectrum conducted by Pricewaterhouse Coopers netted the Government a better-than-expected sum of $3.75 billion. The Minister of Finance plans to use the funds, along with all the country's oil revenue, to apply to its pressing investment and current expenditure needs.
Overall, however, the Iraqi economy is performing significantly under potential. Insecurity in the countryside raises transport costs and especially affects manufacturing and agriculture. Electricity supply has improved in many parts of the country, but is woefully inadequate in Baghdad. Many neighborhoods in the city receive two hours a day or less from the national grid, although power supplies for essential services such as water pumping stations or hospitals are much better. The Minister of Electricity said last week that it would take $25 billion through 2016 to meet demand requirements, but that by investing the $2 billion a year the Ministry is now receiving from the government's budget, as well as private investment in power generation, that goal could be met.
We are deploying our assistance funds to make a difference to ordinary Iraqis and to support our political objectives. Military units are using Commanders Emergency Response (CERP) funds to ensure that residents see a difference when neighborhood violence declines. USAID Community Stabilization Funds provide tens of thousands of jobs. With the recent apportionment of 2007 Supplemental funds, we are putting "Quick Response Funds" in the hands of our Provincial Reconstruction Team leaders to build communities and institutions in post-kinetic environments. Vocational training and microfinance programs are supporting nascent private businesses. And in Baghdad, we are increasing our engagement and capacity building efforts with ministries.
Regional and International Dynamics
There is expanding international and regional engagement with Iraq. In August, the UN Security Council, at Iraq's invitation, provided the United Nations Assistance Mission in Iraq (UNAMI) with an expanded mandate through UNSCR 1770. The work of the International Compact with Iraq moves forward, jointly chaired by Iraq and the UN. Seventy-four countries pledged support for Iraq's economic reform efforts at a Ministerial Conference in May. The UN has reported progress in 75% of the 400 areas Iraq has identified for action. Later this month, the Iraqi Prime Minister and the UN Secretary General will chair a ministerial level meeting in New York to discuss further progress under the Compact and how UNSCR 1770 can be most effectively implemented.
Many of Iraq's neighbors recognize that they have a stake in the outcome of the current conflict in Iraq, and are engaging with Iraq in a constructive way. A neighbors' ministerial in May, also attended by the P-5 and the G-8, has been followed by meetings of working groups on security, border issues, and energy. An ambassadorial level meeting just took place in Baghdad, and another neighbors' ministerial will be held in Istanbul in October.
Against the backdrop of these new mechanisms, the business of being neighbors is quietly unfolding. For the first time in years, lraq is exporting oil through its neighbor, Turkey, as well as through the Gulf. Iraq and Kuwait are nearing conclusion on a commercial deal for Kuwait to supply its northern neighbor with critically needed diesel. Jordan recently issued a statement welcoming the recent leaders' communiqué and supporting Iraqi efforts at reconciliation. And Saudi Arabia is planning on opening an Embassy in Baghdad - its first since the fall of Saddam.
Syria's role has been more problematic. On one hand, Syria has hosted a meeting of the border security working group and interdicted some foreign terrorists in transit to Iraq. On the other hand, suicide-bombers continue to cross the border from Syria to murder Iraqi civilians.
Iran plays a harmful role in Iraq. While claiming to support Iraq in its transition, Iran has actively undermined it by providing lethal capabilities to the enemies of the Iraqi state. In doing so, the Iranian government seems to ignore the risks that an unstable Iraq carries for its own interests.
Looking Ahead
2006 was a bad year in Iraq. The country came close to unraveling politically, economically, and in security terms. 2007 has brought improvement. Enormous challenges remain. Iraqis still struggle with fundamental questions about how to share power, accept their differences and overcome their past. The changes to our strategy last January -the surge - have helped change the dynamics in Iraq for the better. Our increased presence made besieged communities feel that they could defeat al-Qa'ida by working with us. Our population security measures have made it much harder for terrorists to conduct attacks. We have given Iraqis the time and space to reflect on what sort of country they want. Most Iraqis genuinely accept Iraq as a multi-ethnic, multi-sectarian society - it is the balance of power that has yet to be sorted out.
Whether Iraq reaches its potential is of course ultimately the product of Iraqi decisions. But the involvement and support of the United States will be hugely important in shaping a positive outcome. Our country has given a great deal in blood and treasure to stabilize the situation in Iraq and help Iraqis build institutions for a united, democratic country governed under the rule of law. Realizing this vision will take more time and patience on the part of the United States.
I cannot guarantee success in Iraq. I do believe, as I have described, that it is attainable. I am certain that abandoning or drastically curtailing our efforts will bring failure, and the consequences of such a failure must be clearly understood. An Iraq that falls into chaos or civil war will mean massive human suffering - well beyond what has already occurred within Iraq's borders. It could well invite the intervention of regional states, all of which see their future connected to Iraq's in some fundamental way. Undoubtedly, Iran would be a winner in this scenario, consolidating its influence over Iraqi resources and possibly territory. The Iranian President has already announced that Iran will fill any vacuum in Iraq. In such an environment, the gains made against al-Qa'ida and other extremists groups could easily evaporate and they could establish strongholds to be used as safe havens for regional and international operations. Our current course is hard. The alternatives are far worse.
Every strategy requires recalibration as time goes on. This is particularly true in an environment like Iraq where change is a daily or hourly occurrence. As chief of mission in Iraq, I am constantly assessing our efforts and seeking to ensure that they are coordinated with and complementary to the efforts of our military. I believe that, thanks to the support of Congress, we have an appropriate civilian posture in Iraq. Over the coming year, we will continue to increase our civilian efforts outside of Baghdad and the international zone. This presence has allowed us to focus on capacity building, especially in the provinces - units which are likely to grow in influence as more power devolves from Baghdad. The number of Provincial Reconstruction Teams has grown from ten to 25 this year. In support of these goals, we will be asking Congress for additional economic assistance including additional quick response funds for capacity building. We will also seek support for two significant proposals that hold the prospect of creating permanent jobs for thousands of Iraqis. One would be the establishment of an "Iraqi-American Enterprise Fund," modeled on our successful funds in Poland and elsewhere in Central Europe. Such a fund could make equity investments in new and revamped f m s based in Iraq. The second would be a large-scale operations and maintenance facility based on our Highway Trust Fund. On a cost-sharing basis, such a fund would train Iraqis to budget for and maintain important public sector infrastructure (power plants, dams, roads). Over time, the cost-sharing would phase down and out, leaving behind well-trained professionals and instilling the habits of preventative maintenance.
We will continue our efforts to assist Iraqis in the pursuit of national reconciliation, while recognizing that progress on this front may come in many forms and must ultimately be done by Iraqis themselves. We will seek additional ways to neutralize regional interference and enhance regional and international support. And we will help Iraqis consolidate the positive developments at local levels and connect them with the national government. Finally, I expect we will invest much effort in developing the strategic partnership between the United States and Iraq, which is an investment in the future of both countries.
Forgot to include the URL for the Petraeus report, here it is:
http://www.state.gov/p/nea/rls/rm/2007/91966.htm
So now if you state a fact that O'Reilly doesn't agree with he will say "you're spinning." You gotta admit the guy is good at what he does. He's just the most disgusting dispicable hateful hypocritical blowhard.
Thanks for posting the Petraeus report Stentor.
Bill O has the memory of a dog peter gnat.
"We can't control THOSE people..." Is that why we invaded them?
I agree with O'Reilly. Let's employ the same pragmatic solution Nixon used to get us out of Vietnam. Declare the Surge and the Iraq War a victory and bring our troops home immediately.
Bill's second chin was about to explode. Kudos to Jan for taking on the combovered koolaidian
"...don't say that the surge has not worked..." But bill, you simpleton dumb ass, it hasn't. Sure, the surge turned out the lights on the worst of suicide bombings and IED's, but why did we do the surge bill? Think about that before you bloviate. Why did we implement the surge?? Are you ready bill?....to allow the political party to get something done while we are pushing back the dike. He bill....NOTHING happened. Nada. Not a f*cking thing. We still lost another platoon of young Americans, another busload of Iraqis were blown to smithereens, and the political solution went on vacation.
What an idiot!
Jan Schakowsky was feisty and compelling in her heated exchange with Billo. Billo destroys Olbermann in the TV ratings precisely because of his willingness to confront guests who vehemently oppose his opinions; and he does it on a nightly basis. The next time Olbermann invites a guest who disagrees with him; it will be the first time.
Bill O. is a whore.
environmentalist @ 10:
Your assertion herein above suggests to me that your bullshit meter needs adjustment. Sadly, most of Billo's sycophants have adjusted their meters so that anything their vainglorious hero says pings right to the 'truth' zone..just the result they need to justify their hate and fear mongering.
Just because Billo looks calm and sounds superficially erudite does NOT mean that he controlled the situation. He was forced to refute the Congresswoman, and to do so with an untenable argument and sheer projection. For those among us who can discern his foul effluvia, he comes off sounding like the Bush propagandist we ALL know he is.
fwacbar @ 23 "Why? So Pedro can stay here and steal their jobs?"
Look out now, Pedro has gone up your ass with a leafblower.
If he's stealing your sons' job, maybe he has done them a favor.
mrogi @ 78 "Billo destroys Olbermann in the TV ratings"
This and other lies can be found on mrogi's new website: "Why I Lie for Murdoch."
mrogi @ 78:
Ah, mrogi finally showed up, Dr. Matt (@38)!
Well, mrogi, are you asserting that it's Billo's confrontational approach to interviewing his 'guests' that makes him 'more popular' than Keith Olbermann? So, you're admitting that Billo's sycophants get off on his blustery bloviating and his unpleasant bullying? Tell us something we didn't know!
You know, a majority of this nation is terribly overweight. Does that mean overeating is a good thing?
BTW, I can easily recognize that Olbermann's show has a different format than Billo's, just as does Jon Stewart's. However, Billo is uber defensive about Olbermann, and good ol' Olbermann continues to poke fun at Billo whenever possible. Poor wee mannie. Billo needs to grow a sense of humor (and, it wouldn't hurt if he revised his sexual proclivities, either).
"Mr. O’Reilly outdraws Mr. Olbermann by about 1.5 million viewers over all at the same hour, according to Nielsen Media Research." -- NYT
When you consider that those 1.5 million are INSANE PEOPLE ABOUT TO FALL OFF THE TURNIP TRUCK WHEN IT ROUNDS THE NEXT BEND, Keith looks to be the winner.
It's a lot of fun to have a maniac that people will watch. But the better money is on the actual serious newsman who tells the truth, instead of O'Reilly the circus monkey -- who puts bananas up his ass, and then eats them.
Billo should be more more careful about what truth he lets slip out from between his lips. "We can't control those people" just about sums up my rejection of the whole fucking thing. The reason why we can't control those people is because of MISMANAGEMENT.
Thanks for proving my point.
This is a great example of some of those on the right that have too loyal and extreme views that forces them to place party politics above America.
Bill, will not take responsibility for supporting and cheer leading a surge that was defined to create the peaceful state that the Iraqi Government could in fact form the cohesion that Republicans like Bill O Rielly professed as matter of fact that would take place. At the expense of U.S. military and their families and tax payers. Splurge is a better word for it. Republicans splurging America's treasure.
Bill also forgets that the Iraqi Government decided to go on vacation while our troops fought and were killed in their vacationing behalf. Vacationing, at a critical time in Iraqi's history. As the peace, at the barrel of an American's weapon was being forged in force and anger. The tranquil bliss was not seized upon and Bill could not force the Iraqi government. He could not be responsible for Iraqi's not reconciling. But O Rielly reassured the surge would work and therefore vouched for the Iraqi Government.
So Bill can the tax payers have their money back? What of those lives, can they be given back?.
The surge didn't work if the purpose of the surge was to result in Iraqi Government reconciliation.
Bill O should realize some day that like the surge, and the occupation. You don't cause democracy at the barrel of a gun.
Please, someone in the media needs to verbally reprimand Bill's repugnant excuse of his post surge analysis and concern of his own credibility. Bill, news flash, any credibility you might have is with yourself, those in your employ, the few loyalty blinded Bush addicts and some very uneducated individuals. Its who your personality appeals to.
I simply find it sad that someone as Bill O Rielly with all his media time does not put such air time to good use. If Bill is the believer he tries to project. He should be concerned with the narrow width of that, " eye of the needle ", for Bill is looking like a fully grown Camel.!
So we send troops in harms way so the Iraq gov. could get thier shit together and they didn't. So what exactly did our troops die for Bill? What a slap in the face to our troops.
or
Hey Bill can you make a trip down to the store and get some suger. Bill goes and the store is closed. He comes back. Hey Bill was your trip successfully? Ya! so can I have the sugar? Oh no the store was closed but the trip was a success. This guy is off his rocker.
Show me somebody who thinks you cant impose democracy at gunpoint; and I'll show you somebody who didn't study the post WWll Japs.
- All previous surges and troop increases resulted in increased violence and casualties.
- Gen. Petraeus was reluctant to even characterize this latest exercise as a "surge".
- Top Pentagon strategists for Iraq have dimissed this surge as the reason for reduced violence and instead credited "luck" as the primary reason.
- Several Iraqi provinces where troops LEFT instead of surging saw dramatic decreases in violence and casualties earliest of all.
- The only difference between this surge and the previous surges (all of which failed to result in decreased violence and casualties and instead resulted in the exact opposite) is that THIS surge was advertized, even by those who supported it like McCain, as the LAST one and, therefore, the last chance for Iraqis to show they can stop shooting and blowing up each other in the streets.
- This surge was advertized as the LAST one for one reason and one reason only; because the American people VOTED in a Democratic majority in Congress to begin pushing for a troop redeployment out of Iraq sooner rather than later, contrary to the rhetoric of all previous failed surges that were accompanied by the Bush/GOP rhetoric of "staying the course" until doomsday if the Iraqis so desired.
Aside from the obvious fact already mentioned about the ethnic cleansing already done in the neighborhoods, the fact is it has been the new, refreshing, "cut & run" rhetoric that has been sorely missing from the majority party in our government that is more responsible for a reduction in violence and casualities this time around and NOT the increase in troop levels.
The reduction of violence and casualties, however temporary it might be, would have happend WITHOUT the surge and with the new Democratic majority in Congress...but it would NOT have happened WITHOUT the new Democratic majority and only another troop increase.
mrogi @ 88:
That's a false comparison. But you know that.
Part of the problem with the surge, is besides the obvious suicide bomber, is sometimes we run across mass graves. Maybe there are recent graves we haven't found yet.
All it takes is one attack on a mosque to reopen a civil war.
The surge seems to have kicked out most of Al Qaeda from Baghdad, but Al Qaeda was only a small part of the problem. And what about the areas outside of Baghdad?
With so many Iraqi refugees the crunch will be resettling them peacefully back into Iraq, and that's only just started. Of course those not in Iraq, also reduce the number of casualties in Iraq.
We've turned so many corners in Iraq, I'm getting dizzy.
88 mrogi
I would say you either need to punctuate "can't" correctly , or be aware that a cant is defined as buzzwords: stock phrases that have become nonsense through endless repetition (as defined by wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn). This seems describe your argument to the last iota.
mrogi @ 78:
Mein Kampf was a best seller as well.
And every Soviet household had copies of Das Kapital.
The funny thing about the surge "success" is they're only measuring back to six months ago when the surge started, and understandably our casualties increased to make 2007 one of the deadliest. My question is what is the ratio between current casualties of the past YEAR to the current reduced population due to death and forced immigration?
ysbaddaden @ 93:
Sister Edna, my grade school English teacher, diligently tried to beat an understanding of English grammar and punctuation into me with the business end of a ruler. I never seemed to get it right. Thanks to ysbaddaden, the spirit of Sister Edna is still present in my life...I am grateful.
No wonder the surge is working,our troops are hiding in safe places. But our airforce and USA paid death killers are just doing great bang up job,
Pull neo nazi clown orielly
replace him with
IMUS
ha h ah ah ha hah ah
Login or Register to post comments.