The Americans are making progress in Iraq. They keep saying it, so it must be true. But what does that "progress" look like? Via Kevin Drum, here's one example:
The number of Iraqi army battalions that can fight insurgents without U.S. and coalition help has dropped from three to one, top U.S. generals told Congress yesterday, adding that the security situation in Iraq is too uncertain to predict large-scale American troop withdrawals anytime soon.Gen. George W. Casey Jr., who oversees U.S. forces in Iraq, said there are fewer Iraqi battalions at "Level 1" readiness than there were a few months ago...
I think this speaks for itself about how much "progress" the Americans are making.
2 comments:
It's interesting how every dificulty in Iraq is interpreted by those who opposed getting rid of Saddam as a poke in the eye for Bush. That's the importantr feature for them, not the consequences for the people of Iraq.
Another indication of their priorities is how disinterested they are in actually building any form of soldarity with those in Iraq fighting (literally sad to say) for liberal values against the forces of religious and secular facism. Where are all the "human shields" when they are really needed? Where are the demonstrations against the extremists? Where are the protests against the very real threat of reilgious fanaticism from those who are so worried about the religious right in NZ?
But this makes sense of the objective is to oppose the US rather than see democracy flourish.
Posted by Anonymous : 10/01/2005 10:33:00 PM
I think in this case its terrible. The sooner those troops are trained, the sooner the US can get out. Their utter failure to do this is prolonging the suffering for everyone.
(Not that I think that things will be all sweetness and light when the US leaves - but I think that their presence there is encouraging rather than discouraging attacks)
Posted by Idiot/Savant : 10/02/2005 12:40:00 AM
Post a Comment
(Anonymous comments are enabled).