JohnnyD 0 #1 July 13, 2007 http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070713/ap_on_go_co/us_iraq At the Pentagon, meanwhile, Marine Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters that the number of battle-ready Iraqi battalions able to fight on their own has dropped to a half-dozen from 10 in recent months despite heightened American training efforts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zipp0 1 #2 July 13, 2007 Amazing. No wonder it was so easy to win that war. Evidently, a group of junior Boy Scouts with their sling shots could have dominated the battle space. -------------------------- Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #3 July 13, 2007 Forgot to mention THIS part, didn't you? Pace, however, also said the readiness of the Iraqi fighting units was not an issue to be "overly concerned" about because the problem is partly attributable to the fact that the Iraq units are out operating in the field. Appearing at a news conference with Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Pace said that "as units operate in the field, they have casualties, they consume vehicles and equipment." ETA: It appears from the narrative that the other battalions are in the field, but it doesn't say that conclusively. I'm looking on the MNF-Iraq site for confirming information one way or the other.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnnyD 0 #4 July 13, 2007 QuoteAmazing. No wonder it was so easy to win that war. Evidently, a group of junior Boy Scouts with their sling shots could have dominated the battle space. The military objective was accomplished long ago. Remove SH and find the WMD. SH was removed and there weren't WMD. Nation building is not a military function and as such the current failures in Iraq have nothing to do with the military, which has done its job. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnnyD 0 #5 July 13, 2007 QuoteForgot to mention THIS part, didn't you? Pace, however, also said the readiness of the Iraqi fighting units was not an issue to be "overly concerned" about because the problem is partly attributable to the fact that the Iraq units are out operating in the field. Appearing at a news conference with Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Pace said that "as units operate in the field, they have casualties, they consume vehicles and equipment." Thats why I linked the entire article. I knew someone would jump on that. Here's how I read it. "Iraqi military readiness is down 40%, but its only because they are getting their ass kicked". Embarrassing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #6 July 13, 2007 I edited to show my thoughts better - from what I've read from embeds (not the MSM folks in the GZ waiting on their 'stringers' to report), the Iraqi security forces seem to be pretty well regarded.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnnyD 0 #7 July 13, 2007 QuoteI edited to show my thoughts better - from what I've read from embeds (not the MSM folks in the GZ waiting on their 'stringers' to report), the Iraqi security forces seem to be pretty well regarded. That is truly fantastic news. I assume we will be leaving immediately then. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #8 July 13, 2007 Who will protect your oil then? (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnnyD 0 #9 July 13, 2007 QuoteWho will protect your oil then? Not our oil. Actually, its supposed to be a sort of national product shared in by all Iraqis. I won't hold my breath waiting for it to happen. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070713/ap_on_go_pr_wh/iraq_benchmarks;_ylt=ApsElteKhmaHmvdc1QAKo7yyFz4D Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #10 July 13, 2007 Correct answer.... (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #11 July 13, 2007 QuoteQuoteI edited to show my thoughts better - from what I've read from embeds (not the MSM folks in the GZ waiting on their 'stringers' to report), the Iraqi security forces seem to be pretty well regarded. That is truly fantastic news. I assume we will be leaving immediately then. I know there have been several provinces turned over to Iraqi control - what that means for any timelines I couldn't say. Other news reports state that the Iraqi government is dragging their feet on several issues, I'm sure that's having an effect as well.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnnyD 0 #12 July 13, 2007 QuoteCorrect answer.... And when we back out of there, all hell will break loose. Every shit bag terrorist west of the mississippi will be slinging bullets and blowing up cars to get control of it. Then, we'll just say he has WMDs and lynch his ass, unless we decide we like him. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #13 July 13, 2007 Interestingly, Iraq was more stable with a dictator in charge... but someone(s) decided that that was not a good idea..... But why? (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnnyD 0 #14 July 13, 2007 Quote I know there have been several provinces turned over to Iraqi control - what that means for any timelines I couldn't say. Other news reports state that the Iraqi government is dragging their feet on several issues, I'm sure that's having an effect as well. Timelines? Careful with that crazy talk. Your republican party membership is in jeopardy of being revoked. Seriously though, the Iraqi government will possibly never be able to come to an agreement on a lot of the objectives the US has set for them. I don't see them being a cohesive nation able to police and defend its borders, maintain an armed force suitable enough to reasonably protect itself, agree on proper ownership and distribution of its largest resource, and establish and maintain the environment necessary for the growth of nation both economically and socially. Not in my lifetime. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #15 July 13, 2007 QuoteQuote I know there have been several provinces turned over to Iraqi control - what that means for any timelines I couldn't say. Other news reports state that the Iraqi government is dragging their feet on several issues, I'm sure that's having an effect as well. Timelines? Careful with that crazy talk. Your republican party membership is in jeopardy of being revoked. I'd be worried about that, *if* I were a Republican - while I agree more with conservative views than liberal on most things, I'd consider myself more an indy or libertarian (small "L", tyvm). QuoteSeriously though, the Iraqi government will possibly never be able to come to an agreement on a lot of the objectives the US has set for them. I don't see them being a cohesive nation able to police and defend its borders, maintain an armed force suitable enough to reasonably protect itself, agree on proper ownership and distribution of its largest resource, and establish and maintain the necessary environment necessary for the growth of nation both economically and socially. Not in my lifetime. I think you may be right - it'd be interesting to be a fly on the wall in those talks, though.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Royd 0 #16 July 13, 2007 QuoteCorrect answer... So I guess that we can remove the lame,' It's about the oil.' argument from the table. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnnyD 0 #17 July 13, 2007 Quote I think you may be right - it'd be interesting to be a fly on the wall in those talks, though. And how many more of the finest Americans should be left in that shit hole to die before we admit what is inevitable? I vote for zero. We can't force Iraq to be democratic, modern, or western. We can prevent them from hurting us - and we have (or would have). That really is all we can do. Time to go. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #18 July 13, 2007 Not what I said... I suggest that the oil belongs to Iraq... that's not to say that it isn't being um...... borrowed. To repeat, I'm only confirming the true ownership. (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
434 2 #19 July 13, 2007 Powel tried to talk Bush out of war! ***“I tried to avoid this war,” Powell said at the Aspen Ideas Festival in Colorado. “I took him through the consequences of going into an Arab country and becoming the occupiers. He added: “It is not a civil war that can be put down or solved by the armed forces of the United States.” All the military could do, Powell suggested, was put “a heavier lid on this pot of boiling sectarian stew”.[/url] http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article2042072.ece Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
trigger 0 #20 July 13, 2007 So true .CHOP WOOD COLLECT WATER. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnnyD 0 #21 July 13, 2007 QuotePowel tried to talk Bush out of war! ***“I tried to avoid this war,” Powell said at the Aspen Ideas Festival in Colorado. “I took him through the consequences of going into an Arab country and becoming the occupiers. He added: “It is not a civil war that can be put down or solved by the armed forces of the United States.” All the military could do, Powell suggested, was put “a heavier lid on this pot of boiling sectarian stew”. In hindsight, we now know it was a mistake of epic proportions. We can't change that now. What we can do is stop perpetuating the mistake. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #22 July 17, 2007 Troops See Progress, Grow Weary of Negative Reports on War By Fred W. Baker III American Forces Press Service WASHINGTON, July 16, 2007 – Troops on the ground in Iraq are not as much tired of the war as they are of those who are not in the fight saying that no progress has been made, a top commander in the region said today. (Video) The troops there see progress every day, said British Army Lt. Gen. Graeme Lamb, deputy commander of Multinational Force Iraq and senior British representative in Iraq, speaking to Pentagon reporters via satellite. “They see the water going to people who didn't have it before. They see electricity coming on line. They see stability to the networks. They see all the stuff that no one really portrays,” Lamb said. “While it's so clear to them that we're making progress, it's not reflected by those who are not in the fight, but [who] are sitting back and making judgment.” Overall, Lamb called the day-to-day work there by coalition forces “hard pounding,” and said that extraordinary things are being accomplished by ordinary people. “You should be enormously proud of what I see your Marines, your Air Force, your Navy, your Army and the civilians who are in the fight out here, as to what they do, and gladly,” Lamb said. The British general has served in Iraq since August 2006. This is his second tour to the region. He said, that in the first month of the surge there has been “good progress, steady momentum, hard fighting, [and coalition forces] going places where they haven't been before. I see -- unequivocally -- that this surge is making a difference.” Lamb compared the complexities of the mission there to playing three-dimensional chess in a dark room – while being shot at. But, he said, Iraqi forces are making ground in their training and several units own their own battlespace. This is key as coalition forces begin clearing and holding new sections of the capital city. Only a few years ago, after coalition soldiers would leave cleared areas, insurgents would return and again take control. Under the new strategy, coalition forces now hold sections of the city allowing for local governments to be formed, construction of key infrastructure, training of security forces and the rebuilding of the economy and workforce. Now, when coalition forces leave, Lamb said, the “vacuum” is not filled with insurgents, but a trained security force and a growing economy. He said it is a concerted effort on the parts of coalition forces, the local community, Iraqi security forces and the Iraqi government. “The sum of the parts is so much greater than where we were before, and the difference should not be underestimated,” Lamb said. Already, several Iraqi units are holding their own north in Diyala and Salahuddin and south in Babil and Basra. Still, most units require U.S. help with logistics, command and control and intelligence, he said. Iraqi security forces and the Iraqi government are busy weeding out those who are aligned with the insurgency and sectarian violence, especially within the police force, he said. U.S. forces are arresting, and turning over to the Iraqis, any of their security force who are guilty of using their positions to promote sectarian violence, Lamb said. “We'll take the individuals, arrest them and put them through the Iraqi criminal justice system,” he said. Already, 11,000 members of the police force have been removed and 4,000 are in the criminal justice system under review. “I've seen over my time here people … looking to improve and deliver a force that is Iraqi rather than sectarian,” he said."America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #23 July 17, 2007 The Dems understand if we don't get out of there quick, the win over there will look back on themJust thought I should post to the tittle of this threadTuesday, July 17, 2007 8:42 a.m. EDT Gen. Peter Pace Sees Positive 'Sea Change' in Iraq Gen. Peter Pace Sees Positive 'Sea Change' in Iraq Gen. Pace Sees Positive 'Sea Change' in Iraq Rosie O'Donnell, Bill Maher Back Al Franken Haditha Marine: Force a Response to'Threat' In his most optimistic remarks since the U.S. troop buildup began, Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Tuesday that Iraq has undergone a "sea change" in security in recent months, and that this will influence his recommendation to President Bush on how long to continue the current strategy. After conferring with Maj. Gen. Walter Gaskin and other commanders in this provincial capital west of Baghdad, Pace told reporters he has gathered a positive picture of the security environment not only here but also in Baghdad, where he began his Iraq visit on Monday. He was asked whether this would inform his thinking about whether to continue the current strategy, with extra U.S. troops battling to security Baghdad and Anbar province. "It will because what I'm hearing now is a sea change that is taking place in many places here," he replied. "It's no longer a matter of pushing al-Qaida out of Ramadi, for example, but rather - now that they have been pushed out - helping the local police and the local army have a chance to get their feet on the ground and set up their systems." Pace said earlier in Baghdad that the U.S. military is continuing various options for Iraq, including an even bigger troop buildup if President Bush thinks his "surge" strategy needs a further boost. Pace said the chiefs of the Army, Marine Corps, Navy and Air Force are developing their own assessment of the situation in Iraq, to be presented to Bush in September, that will be separate from a report to Congress that month by Gen. David Petraeus, the top commander for Iraq. The military must "be prepared for whatever it's going to look like two months from now," Pace said Monday in an interview with two reporters traveling with him to Iraq from Washington. "That way, if we need to plus up or come down" in numbers of troops in Iraq, the details will have been studied, he said. Pace, on his first visit since U.S. commanders accelerated combat operations in mid-June, said another option under consideration is maintaining current troop levels beyond September. There are now about 158,000 U.S. troops in Iraq, reflecting a boost of about 30,000 to carry out the new strategy Bush announced in January. The plan is focused on providing better security for Iraqis in Baghdad, but the intended effect - political reconciliation between Sunnis and Shiites - has yet to be achieved, and many in Congress are clamoring to begin withdrawing troops soon. In Washington on Monday, Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid said he would force the chamber's first all-night debate on the Iraq war Tuesday night in advance of a vote Wednesday on whether to bring home all combat troops by next spring. Republicans are using Senate rules to insist that the measure have 60 votes to pass - a de facto filibuster since it takes that many votes to cut off debate. Are Pheromones a Secret Weapon for Dating? Urgent Trade Alert - Nanotechnology Breakthrough Learn how to get $1,000s in Daily Cash by Courier ! Stop Poisoning Yourself! This sweetener can kill . . . Boost Confidence Eliminate Shyness Rapid Results ! Your trading method stinks. FREE CD tells you why. Eat yourself Healthy with Haagen Dazs, Eggs, more Penny Stocks Beat the Street Almost Every Year Pace conferred Monday with Petraeus and Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno, the No. 2 commander in Iraq, who said he did not currently foresee requesting more troops. "Right now I can't find an assessment where I would say I need more troops," Odierno said, adding that he is confident that by September he will be able to give Petraeus his advice on how the troop buildup is working. "My assessment right now is, I need more time" to understand how the offensive targeting al-Qaida in Iraq is working and how it could lead to political progress, Odierno said. "I'm seeing some progress now here in Iraq. We have really just started what the Iraqis term 'liberating' them from al-Qaida. What I've got to determine is what do I need in order to continue that progress so that the political piece can then take hold and Iraqi security forces can hold this for the long term." © 2007 Associated Press. "America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnnyD 0 #24 July 17, 2007 QuoteTroops See Progress, Grow Weary of Negative Reports on War By Fred W. Baker III American Forces Press Service WASHINGTON, July 16, 2007 – Troops on the ground in Iraq are not as much tired of the war as they are of those who are not in the fight saying that no progress has been made, a top commander in the region said today. How about if we take the word of the people there, and not some general sitting in an airconditioned secure building at CENTCOM. >I'm halfway through my third trip over here and I have yet to run into a soldier this trip who still supports "the cause". My last two trips even when it was apparent that our reasons for being here were bullshit the majority of us here still believed that the soldiers on the ground were contributing to something good. The administration made a mess and we were here fighting to clean it up and help people. Now, not so much, when every IED you get hit by is within 500 meters of an Iraqi army checkpoint and almost all the people you kill are the ones that were working with you just a few hours before they went home and switched uniforms its time to leave.< How much longer do we keep believing the lines we're being fed? Things are not getting better, they're getting worse. Americans are dying over there and Americans are going to be saddled with the debt of this failure for generations over here. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnnyD 0 #25 July 17, 2007 Quote The Dems understand if we don't get out of there quick, the win over there will look back on them Do you honestly believe - even just a little - that over 50% of Congress actually wants the US to lose the war (however you define that)? You really think that the Democratic party wants American servicemen and women to die? If you are buying into the punchlines and rhetoric of right wing radio so much that you actually believe the Democratic party has a platform that amounts to treason, how is it even possible to have a remotely rational conversation with you? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites