Iraq: U.S. Analysts Say 'Surge' Progress Warrants Patience

[yesman065]

Iraq: U.S. Analysts Say 'Surge' Progress Warrants Patience

The analysts aren't painting a rosy picture of military and political progress. And all three say the Iraqi government is moving unacceptably slowly toward political reconciliation.

But Michael O'Hanlon and Kenneth Pollack of the Brookings Institution and Anthony Cordesman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies say that the U.S. military surge is so far working well enough that the government of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki deserves a little more time to make progress on the political front.

"Ken Pollack and I only argue that it's going well enough now that we should keep trying well into 2008 -- but that's not very far away -- and the Congress should not try to use this upcoming period of debate in the early fall to stop the war. Because there's enough going well that we should hope that we can see that momentum spread to other areas, such as Iraqi politics," O'Hanlon says. "And moreover, if we were to give up on the war now, it would lead to -- probably, in our view -- a worse outcome than most Americans are really braced for or ready for, or that the region could easily withstand."

As an example of progress, O'Hanlon and Pollack point to Sunni sheikhs in Anbar province west of Baghdad -- once the most hostile area for U.S. troops -- who now are helping U.S. commanders fight Al-Qaeda and other insurgent forces.

"Mr. Bush might have added, 'Coming out of a couple years of chaos, which was in part due to the fact that his administration did not properly prepare for the post-Saddam [Hussein] period, listened too much to the [former U.S. Defense Secretary Donald] Rumsfeld doctrine,'" O'Hanlon says. "That makes it even harder, because it's not just the decades of tyranny -- it's the last few years of civil conflict that have really laid emotions raw and may be the single greatest impediment to progress right now of all. So I would take Mr. Bush's interpretation and go one further and remind him of the degree to which his own administration has contributed to the problem."

Ultimately, O'Hanlon and Pollack conclude that those problems are in the past and urge just a few more months to await concrete progress from al-Maliki's government.

"It's working, it's working in a way it never has before," O'Hanlon says. "There's a lot of momentum. It's still a very dangerous country. We have a lot of work to do even on the military front. It's a very difficult situation, but we're making progress, and I think it'd be a shame to give up at just the moment we're finally establishing some momentum."

[piercehawkeye45]

I'm not trying to be extremely cynical but does this imply overall process over the entire country or just in a few specific areas where we have progressed and once again, what is the definition of progress?

Would it still be possible to say we have progress if some areas (both physical areas and aspects of the war) that were helped by the surge while others have been deteriorating?


From most sources it seems that we have been doing very well fighting Al Qaeda lately, which is extremely good, but I just can't believe that is the only problem with Iraq since this is the result of a cultural war and I haven't seen anything resolved in the culture area.

I seriously want things to go well in Iraq but just do not want to make any assumptions with this matter since Bush's biggest mistakes had to do with making assumptions that later turned out to be false. We have to learn from history.

[yesman065]

I agree with you, but I feel compelled to post some positive feedback since it seems all we are fed is the negative perspective.

[piercehawkeye45]

Thats good, I would much rather hear more than one side in a situation as complex as Iraq.

[yesman065]

Exactly, and I think we haven't really been getting that.

Gonna' take a while to get that oil.

[Griff]

Not a single one of the television interviews Pollack and O'Hanlon gave about their Op-Ed included any reference to the fact that they were both supporters of the war and of the Surge.

[Undertoad]

Because that's irrelevant.

[Griff]

We all seek to reinforce our own opinions. even me

[Undertoad]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/i...2-lede13_N.htm

The number of truck bombs and other large al-Qaeda-style attacks in Iraq have declined nearly 50% since the United States started increasing troop levels in Iraq about six months ago, according to the U.S. military command in Iraq.

The high-profile attacks — generally large bombs hitting markets, mosques or other "soft" targets that produce mass casualties — have dropped to about 70 in July from a high during the past year of about 130 in March, according to the Multi-National Force — Iraq.

Military officers say the decline reflects progress in damaging al-Qaeda's networks in Iraq. The military has launched offensives around Baghdad aimed at al-Qaeda sanctuaries and bases.

"The enemy had the initiative and the momentum in '06," said Jack Keane, a retired general who is a chief architect of the increase in troop levels and mentor to Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq. "We've got it now."

[Undertoad]

Greenwald is doing exactly that.

Greenwald's piece addresses who Pollack and O'Hanlon are. In tremendous detail. What they actually said in the op-ed is irrelevant. He doesn't address much of what they said.

This whole approach sets off alarm bells in my head. This guy interviewed O'Hanlon and found that the most important aspect was that he was supposed to be one of "us" but he's not. Intruder alert!

At that point all facts and information presented by O'Hanlon become invisible.

This is how we got here in the first place, isn't it? Neo-cons only listening to neo-cons' version of official reality, fell apart when actual reality set in.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

This whole approach sets off alarm bells in my head. This guy interviewed O'Hanlon and found that the most important aspect was that he was supposed to be one of "us" but he's not. Intruder alert!

The way O'Hanlon's article had been spun was "even serious Iraq war critics are now seeing progress!" How much of that spin was his fault is impossible to say, but it's obviously false, which was the subject of the article. In the article is a link to an earlier article which puts O'Hanlon into even more perspective. His rosy assessments of Iraq go back to at least 2003.

[TheMercenary]

http://michaelyon-online.com/wp/thre...he-horizon.htm

[yesman065]

I'm trying to take it for what it is - As a pessimistic optimist - Its just another piece of "good news" that the majority of the country seems not to want to hear. I don't mean that in a bad way - Its just that a lot of people seem to want this OVER - no matter what - and if it goes really bad really fast then we'll get out sooner. At least thats my completely uninformed impartial, overtly emotional take on it.

Michael Yons latest piece almost seems like a plea.

[TheMercenary]

Yon said it best:
False advertising is afoot. I write these words from Indonesia, soaking wet, having just returned from photographing rice paddies in a pouring rain, wearing a Florida Gators shirt. That means there is a green alligator on my chest. While supporting my team, my shirt perpetuates the myth that alligators are green, when in fact they are black when wet, gray when dry.The mantra that “there is no political progress in Iraq” is rapidly becoming the “surge” equivalent of a green alligator: when enough people repeat something that sounds plausible, but also happens to be false, it becomes accepted as fact. The more often it is repeated—and the larger the number of people repeating it—the harder it is to convince anyone of the truth: alligators are not green, and Iraqis are making plenty of political progress.

There may be little progress on political goals crafted in America, to meet American concerns, by politicians who have a cushion of 200 years of democracy. Washington might as well be on the moon. Iraqis don’t respond well to rules imposed from outside their acknowledged authorities, though I have many times seen Iraqi Police and Army of all ranks responding very well to American Marines and soldiers who they have come to respect, and in many cases actually admire and try to emulate. Our military has increasing moral authority in Iraq, but the same cannot be said for our government at home. In fact, it’s in moral deficit because many Iraqis are increasingly frightened we will abandon them to genocide. The Iraqis I speak with couldn’t care less what is said from Washington but large numbers of them pay close attention to what some Marine Gunny says, or what American battalion commanders all over Iraq say. Some of our commanders could probably run for local offices in Iraq, and win. To say there has been no political progress in Iraq in 2007 is patently absurd, completely wrong and dangerously dismissive of the significant changes and improvements happening all across Iraq. Whether or not Americans are seeing it on the nightly news or reading it in their local papers, Iraqis are actively writing their children’s history.