Petraeus on the Success in Iraq

DuH2 · #1 (**permalink**) 02-15-2008, 04:03 PM

Quote:

If you're looking for one measure of the impact of last year's troop surge in Iraq, look at Gen. David Petraeus as he walks through a Baghdad neighborhood, with no body armor, and no helmet.

It's been one year since the beginning of what's known here as Operation Fardh Al Qadnoon. According to the U.S. military, violence is down 60 percent. One key to the success is reconciliation.

"A big part of the effort, over the last year, has been to determine who is reconcilable, who, literally, is willing to put down his rifle and talk, who is willing to shout, instead of shoot." Petraeus said.

I spent the day with Petraeus, touring Jihad, a predominantly Shiite area in western Baghdad. This place was formerly ravaged by sectarian violence, and militiamen wreaked havoc on the streets. In the last year, U.S. and Iraqi troops moved into the neighborhood, set up joint security stations, earned the trust of local people, and found those men willing to put down their guns and work with them.

The results of the last year can be seen on the streets. A soccer team practices on the local pitch. The stalls in the market buzz with customers. I stop to talk to local residents, and ask if they feel a difference. Overwhelmingly, the answer is a resounding yes.

"The situation in Jihad is certainly better than before," a mechanic named Ali said. "Work is constant, shops are reopening, and people are coming back to their homes."

http://abcnews.go.com/WN/story?id=4292435&page=1

"Stay the Course"

SenaxFlatulus · #2 (**permalink**) 02-16-2008, 11:55 PM

General Dave is a pretty smart guy.

With all the pressure on him and Democrats hoping for his failure, the guy pulls off a great strategy. He seems to have accomplished what no one could before him.

DuH2 · #3 (**permalink**) 02-17-2008, 12:20 AM

Well to be fair to those before him they had to deal with the intial expansion of al Qaeda etc attacks.

Fear-And-Loathing · #4 (**permalink**) 02-17-2008, 09:03 AM

He wrote the American military doctrine on Guerilla Warfare. It's good Bush & Co. realised that's what it has become and sent in our best man for the situation instead of Big Battle Generals.

ziggy · #5 (**permalink**) 02-17-2008, 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SenaxFlatulus

General Dave is a pretty smart guy.

With all the pressure on him and Democrats hoping for his failure, the guy pulls off a great strategy. He seems to have accomplished what no one could before him.

For whatever it's worth I don't want him to fail, my issue is that he (and the other 150,000 Americans) shouldn't be there at all.

I've said this many times before but I'll say it again, any current success in Iraq is overshadowed by the failure of the first 6 years. The reasons our country invaded Iraq were not good enough reasons (in my opinion) even if 50% of them were true.

We are not winning when it comes to the general "War on Terror", and the numbers, when it comes to terrorism on the international level, are higher than ever before even when you exclude the number of attacks in Iraq & Afghanistan. "Terror" is not a country, therefore the "War on Terror" shouldn't be limited to any countries national borders. It shouldn't involve the invasion of military troops into countries. It shouldn't invlove 6-7 years of occupation (oops... nation building).

You can both enjoy the current success in Iraq all you want, it doesn't change the fact that our government took the wrong apporach in regards to the plague of terrorism.

Peace.

NoSocialism.com · #6 (**permalink**) 06-16-2008, 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ziggy

For whatever it's worth I don't want him to fail, my issue is that he (and the other 150,000 Americans) shouldn't be there at all.

I've said this many times before but I'll say it again, any current success in Iraq is overshadowed by the failure of the first 6 years. The reasons our country invaded Iraq were not good enough reasons (in my opinion) even if 50% of them were true.

We are not winning when it comes to the general "War on Terror", and the numbers, when it comes to terrorism on the international level, are higher than ever before even when you exclude the number of attacks in Iraq & Afghanistan. "Terror" is not a country, therefore the "War on Terror" shouldn't be limited to any countries national borders. It shouldn't involve the invasion of military troops into countries. It shouldn't invlove 6-7 years of occupation (oops... nation building).

You can both enjoy the current success in Iraq all you want, it doesn't change the fact that our government took the wrong apporach in regards to the plague of terrorism.

Peace.

This is the reason we invaded Iraq, and it's good enough for me

WafflesFTW · #7 (**permalink**) 06-19-2008, 06:23 PM

"This is the reason we invaded Iraq, and it's good enough for me"

That's a (*)(*)(*)(*)ty reason. A better analogy would be that he is the little kid you pick on and when he doesn't give you his lunch money like all the other little kids, you beat him up. While you beat him up, the other little kids seize the opportunity, run away, and get stronger, bigger and badder, until you can't bully them anymore.

Why doesn't the analogy work? Well the little, so called thief you mentioned, well, he didn't rob anything................................... doh.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Iraqi Prime Minister wants General Petraeus out of Iraq.	Tedminator	Current Events	49	03-22-2008 06:51 AM
Enduring Troubles Predicted By Petraeus For Iraq	apotropoxy	Ethnic & Religious Conflicts	2	06-18-2007 08:03 PM
McCain Endangers General Petraeus	apotropoxy	Current Events	22	03-29-2007 08:43 AM