« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Today's Must Read
General Petraeus will go before Congress this afternoon to argue that the surge is working -- that sectarian killings and attacks against Iraqi and U.S. forces are substantially down. The military's secret numbers will serve as support for those conclusions, even as numbers from within the government (e.g. those collected by the Defense Intelligence Agency) dispute them.
We'll have more on the numbers game a little later. But from Petraeus' perspective, the question appears closed. We're making progress -- just how much is a secondary question. As he wrote in a recent letter to U.S. forces, we're "a long way from the goal line, but we do have the ball and we are driving down the field." We have the ball!
Accordingly, Petraeus' counsel to the president, The New York Times reports this morning, is to make March the new September. As a concession to those who worry about military preparedness and are calling for a draw down, one Army brigade, a unit that was in place before the surge, would depart in December. The full force minus that reduction of 4,000 would stay in place through March of next year. Then, and only then, would Petraeus make a decision about bringing the number to pre-surge levels -- possibly by next summer. Anything sooner, a military official tells the Times, would be "premature."
But there are no guarantees:
Even as American commanders plan to reduce the overall force, they have stressed that the troop reductions could be adjusted or delayed if violence increases. Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, the second-ranking American commander in Iraq, has said one important factor being weighed is whether attacks increase during the approaching Muslim holy month of Ramadan, as has happened in the past.“Ramadan is big,” General Odierno said last week. “So far in the 30 days before Ramadan, violence has been going down.”
“If we can continue to do what we are doing, we’ll get to such a level where we think we can do it with less troops,” he added.
Presumably next Ramadan will be the true test of whether the strategy is working?
Comments (21)
kentuck wrote on September 10, 2007 10:23 AM:It might be beneficial to know the numbers of Sunni on Sunni killings, as well as Shia on Shia killings, because if those numbers are going up, we might want to ask "why"? Is it because some Sunni are allying themselves with the Americans? And they are being murdered because of that? Are more Shia being killed by other Shia because they are willing to work with the Sunni Sheiks? We don't know.
However, to leave those numbers out of any statistics seems to me to be an incomplete picture? We do know that some of the violence has moved out into other areas of the country. The worst bomb attack since the war began happened in the northern part of Iraq, just last month. More than 500 people were killed at one time. Are they not counting carbombs either?
We can only hope that when Petraeus and others appear before the Congress, they are asked very tough questions and they should not put a timeline on their time spent before the Congress.
If necessary, they should call them back for a second day of hearings and cover every detail that might be spun.
(code word is soap - As in we need to wash this dirty laundry)
Son of Defarge wrote on September 10, 2007 10:33 AM:Just once I'd like to see these jerks give it... "five more months".. or "seven more months".. anything but SIX! If this is the level of their imagination for merchandising the war, how pitiful is their implimentation of tactics?
Philip Wright wrote on September 10, 2007 10:40 AM:Where in the hell is our Secretary of Defense. Like the Time article years ago that asked where Colin Powell had gone, we now have a "disappeared" Secretary of Defense. I thought Gates might not be cowed by Cheney, but we have the military commanders fighting each other and apparently Gates is taped and bound and on his way to Guantanamo. You'd think they would all learn from Powell that this administration is the black hole for careers. Say something or resign Robert.mark
M M wrote on September 10, 2007 10:53 AM:Now is this Friedman #10, 11 or 12? I've lost track but I guess that is the point.
Someone might also ask Petreus if the "Anbar Awakening" is just as likely to prevent national reconciliation as it is to promote it given the raised Shiite suspicions from U.S. funding of their centuries old enemies the Sunnis.
By following the two inches in front of our nose to get even a small whiff of temporary gains in An-Bar (which can be reversed any moment the Sunni tribes wish), we have likely pushed out any chance of the national reconciliation most people think is necessary for us to get out of Iraq.
Rachel wrote on September 10, 2007 10:53 AM:Of course there's slight improvement with 30,000 more troops...but on a cost/benefit analysis, is it good enough to continue letting our own children be killed? Remember that it was estimated that 300,000 to 400,000 troops would be necessary in an Iraqi invasion/occupation...even with the "surge", there's only about half that amount of US troops in Iraq...
What is the death of one of our children worth??
Nell wrote on September 10, 2007 10:55 AM:And also, what about that war czar Lute. What happened to him?
Slideguy wrote on September 10, 2007 11:07 AM:Can we please just hammer on the meme, "Running out the clock"? It's the parsimonious explanation of what's going on here. Get it in the papers and the op/eds. They're obviously just buying time with the deaths of our kids in order to hand the problem off the the next president.
Mike Bakunin wrote on September 10, 2007 11:07 AM:"As (Petraeus) he wrote in a recent letter to U.S. forces, we're "a long way from the goal line, but we do have the ball and we are driving down the field." We have the ball!"
I think he meant, "We have the balls."
Philip Wright wrote on September 10, 2007 11:16 AM:My Georgia Bulldogs had the ball this past weekend. Unfortunately, it didn't do them much good. They are just talking to the believers now. Maybe they are just talking to the Republican members of Congress. In the above situations they have to keep it simple.
Code words: Stupid and Mendacious
theswan wrote on September 10, 2007 11:19 AM:It appears that the general is the untiary king of the united states. He now appears to have the power to tell congress what will be done. Congress is so disfunctional they will just lap along. And the united states will once again be bound to Osama's game plan, destroyed from within.
Jolly Ranchero wrote on September 10, 2007 11:43 AM:How is Patraeus able to do something that his superior doesn't want him to do? If Fallon is indeed his commander, why is the buck stopping at Patraeus?
How in the hell is the military command allowing a subordinate to "outrank" his superior on this issue?
Lyna wrote on September 10, 2007 11:44 AM:Osama bin Laden and George W. Bush are in cohoots to destroy the United States. One from outside its borders and one from within.
Who is worse?
Lyna wrote on September 10, 2007 11:53 AM:Osama bin Laden and George W. Bush are in cohoots to destroy the United States. One from outside its borders and one from within.
Who is worse?
Slideguy wrote on September 10, 2007 11:56 AM:At the risk of boring y'all by repeating myself, this is the time to take action. This is a pivot point. Take ten minutes away from this discussion and all the others in the blogosphere and email your local paper.
Use the frame, "Running out the clock".
Remind your papers' readers that the administration knows they've blown it and all they're doing is trying to stall until they can hand this mess off to the next president an let him, or her, bear political cost of cleaning up the mess that Dick Cheney and George Bush have made.
Keep it clean and simple and use the frame. They're just running out the clock.
Redshift wrote on September 10, 2007 1:16 PM:Jolly Ranchero - the chain of command is yet another thing Bush has destroyed, along with most of the military. See here:
http://justworldnews.org/archives/002624.html
Bush only talks to people who agree with him. If you agree with him and your superior doesn't, and you're political enough to ignore that fact, screw the chain of command, you're golden. Yet another reason not to believe the "honorable," "honest" and "independent" General Petraeus.
Anonymous wrote on September 10, 2007 1:51 PM:re Redshift,, good link, good story,,thanks.
Sounds like a less violent form of a military coup...
drv wrote on September 10, 2007 2:32 PM:So now Petraeus says "ask me again in March". Why doesn't someone ask him if he's holding to that date? If says "no" (and you know he would) then why should we believe he won't say "September" when March rolls around? In other words, why should we give any credence to his estimates?
d
dixiegrl wrote on September 10, 2007 3:26 PM:Jolly ranchero asks**************
How is Patraeus able to do something that his superior doesn't want him to do? If Fallon is indeed his commander, why is the buck stopping at Patraeus?******************
Same way that Undersecretary of State John Bolton, inserted by Cheney, blocked Sec. of State Colin Powell’s initiatives and spied on him and his team, reporting back to the Office of the Vice President..( so says Sidney Blumenthal )
Richard L. Adlof wrote on September 10, 2007 4:01 PM:Not even in East L.A. are car bombs auto accidents BUT in Iraq . . .
SeeDee wrote on September 10, 2007 4:15 PM:Petraeus is not just asking for 'Six (sicks) More Months"...He is asking for the blood and lives of another 1,200 to 1,500 American Servicemen/women; he is asking for permission to inflict grievous bodily injury to another 6 or 7-thousands of Americans; he is asking for the American Public to endure another half-year of criminal activity by America's military acting at the behest and command of a cabal of crooks whose main interest is in securing trillions of dollars of petro-profits for their friends; he is asking the American tax-payers to fork over another $100-BILLIONS to finance a system of fraudulent, non-accountable 'contracting' engaged in by a joke of a government that Bush claims is Iraq's 'democratic' government;
He is NOT just asking for 'six more months'...
OCPatriot wrote on September 11, 2007 10:56 AM:Bush has always let other people clean up for him. Why are we surprised? His daddy, people like Gonzales, even Powell, do his dirty work and then, often, are discarded. His whole style has been one of "no resolution" and being bailed out by others. Do you think he could have gotten into Yale on his own? Like Tom Buchanan in Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby, Bush is a rich person (oh, yes, he is rich, make no mistake about it) who retreats into his protected world and lets others do the dirty work after he has wrecked things and someone else gets to clean up.