Tuesday, June 05, 2007



The surge has failed

In February, the US began an escalation of the occupation of Iraq, commonly known as "the surge". So how's it going? Badly:

Three months after the start of the Baghdad security plan that has added thousands of American and Iraqi troops to the capital, they control fewer than one-third of the city’s neighborhoods, far short of the initial goal for the operation, according to some commanders and an internal military assessment.

The American assessment, completed in late May, found that American and Iraqi forces were able to “protect the population” and “maintain physical influence over” only 146 of the 457 Baghdad neighborhoods.

In the remaining 311 neighborhoods, troops have either not begun operations aimed at rooting out insurgents or still face “resistance,” according to the one-page assessment, which was provided to The New York Times and summarized reports from brigade and battalion commanders in Baghdad.

As for why, it seems that the Iraqi forces have no real interest in collaborating in the occupation of their own country. Funny, that. Meanwhile, casualties have risen, and the whole thing has turned into another part of Bush's great Iraq clusterfuck.

5 comments:

The neocons in the US Administration have no way out of this mess that they created.

Posted by Anonymous : 6/05/2007 02:41:00 PM

Again I wish to dissociate myself with this 'ruth' who is causing me grief on several NZ blogs.

(That is not to say I disagree with his comment in this case.)

Posted by Anonymous : 6/05/2007 03:54:00 PM

Again I wish to dissociate myself with this 'ruth' who is causing me grief on several NZ blogs

Ruth, you're causing me grief and not the other way round. You seemed to think that you own the name Ruth. Do you know how many are out there? Millions. I am not gonna change my real name in order to satisfy someone who might share the same first name as me. I am not gonna waste my time in Googling to checkout if a name Ruth is already being used in the world of blogosphere. If I go to post in a blog, then I will use my first name regardless if someone had already used it.

If you're so passionate about anonymous Ruth, then why don't you use your last name as well. In that way , you can differentiate yourself from me. Besides, nobody knows who Ruth is and stop crybaby about that ruth is not me , since you don't have a last name to be identified with.

Please stop bitching about my name as that ruth is not me.

Posted by Anonymous : 6/05/2007 06:05:00 PM

Iraqi troops do not want to help the occupiers???

So that want the killing and mayhem to continue, do they.

They doesn't seem very logically to me - if the US pullout there will be a bloodbath.

I think the Iraqi administration overpromised in return for getting aid.

Posted by Anonymous : 6/05/2007 06:49:00 PM

I/S, maybe instead of constantly attacking the US over Iraq,outlining a alternative could be better, that involves working to make Iraq more stable, and doesn't just involve surrendering by pulling all troops out. Also if the US does pull all its troops out of Iraq, and Iraq explodes into a bloodbath of genocide, sectarian violence, civil war and ethnic cleansing, or even if Iraq does worse on the peace index than it currently is, will you blame the US for the voilence and deteriation, or will you admit that you were wrong in calling for a US withdrawl?
If America pulls all of its troops out of iraq, and Iraq is magically transformed into a peacefull liberal secular democracy, I will be happy to admit I was wrong.

Posted by Anonymous : 6/06/2007 12:45:00 PM