|
On the four year anniversary of President Bush's victory speech.......
|
View this Thread in Original format
| LazFX |
On the four year anniversary of President Bush's victory speech, Baghdad is in near anarchy and the surge is not changing anything //fark
SOURCE
| quote: |
BBC NEWS
Despair stalks Baghdad as plan falters
By Andrew North
BBC News, Baghdad
Trying to get into the centre of Baghdad earlier this week offered one view of how far away the Americans and Iraqi authorities are from gaining control here.
We were at the airport. Just before we were due to leave, the entrance car park was hit by a car bomb.
US troops and private security forces who guard the perimeter locked the whole area down for the next four hours. No traffic was allowed in or out.
While we waited with scores of other vehicles, mortars were fired at the airport. Fortunately for us they landed on the other side of the runway, plumes of smoke shooting into the air.
You won't have heard about any of this because at the same time a series of other far more serious attacks was taking place.
One was at the Sadriya market in the city centre, where a massive car bomb killed more than 140 people.
The Sunni extremist surge seems to be having more effect than the American one
It was placed at the entrance to a set of barriers put up around another part of the market where a previous single bomb, in February, claimed more than 130 lives.
The market blast "did not penetrate the emplaced barriers" a later US military press release helpfully pointed out, ignoring the fact that the bombers had yet again adapted their tactics with vicious perfection - setting off their device at the point where crowds congregated outside and at the very moment when they were busiest.
Bombers 'organised'
As we drove into the city, we counted six blast holes left by recent roadside bombs along just one 100-metre stretch of road.
A large patch of damaged, blackened Tarmac on a bridge spoke of another attempt to destroy a key crossing.
The Sunni extremists held to be responsible for these attacks seem to be making a mockery of the US and Iraqi security plan, which is now into its third month.
So far, their surge seems to be having more effect than the American one.
Last month alone there were more than 100 car bombings, and the number of attacks has continued at a similar rate so far this month. This indicates a high level of organisation.
This despite the fact that there are many extra US and Iraqi troops in the city now. There are more raids and patrols.
On our drive into the city, we encountered several Iraqi army checkpoints. But almost every vehicle - including ours - was being waved through.
Many new checkpoints have been set up across Baghdad.
But what is their purpose, many Iraqis ask, when they seem to stop so few people?
It is not always encouraging when they do - a couple of times we have been pulled over by Iraqi soldiers who ask us if we have any bullets to give them.
Optimism fading
Just a month ago there was a cautious - very cautious, but still real - sense of optimism among many Baghdadis that the plan was starting to work.
The daily count of bodies found around the city - mostly Sunni victims of targeted sectarian killings - had dropped off significantly.
The Shia militia of Moqtada Sadr, which was blamed for most of these murders, was largely obeying orders to put away its weapons and co-operate with the security plan.
But there is a deadly and familiar equation here.
With official security forces apparently unable to protect Shia communities, pressure is growing on the militias to do so again.
And there are signs their death squads have returned to work. The body count is creeping up again. Twenty were found yesterday.
Dealing with the car bomb is "our top priority", says US military spokesman Lt Col Chris Garver.
But as ever it is a game of cat and mouse, played with insurgents who are "very adaptive", and very well-funded.
A man arrested by US soldiers after placing a truck bomb which failed to go off told interrogators he had been paid $30,000 (£15,000) for the task.
Lt Col Garver says the US believes it is up against several "car bombing networks".
"If there was just one, we might be able to pull the string and unravel it," he says.
People still have to be patient, he warns, adding a note of optimism.
"We are still not fully staffed," he says - there are another two months to go until all the extra US troops are in Baghdad.
Exhaustion
But there is frustration too among the Americans at the Iraqi government's lack of progress on reconciliation - ultimately the only solution to the conflict, most believe.
Key issues include the need to implement a new law on sharing oil revenues, an amnesty programme and limiting the scope of the de-Baathification process. All of these are crucial to winning over Sunnis.
The idea was that the security drive in Baghdad would create "space" for such efforts to get going. But although new laws have been drafted they are a long way from being approved.
US Defence Secretary Robert Gates stepped up the pressure over these issues on his visit to Baghdad. In the meantime, the young men and women sent out here to implement President Bush's plan are paying a heavy price.
An average of 80-90 Americans die each month. And US personnel have just had their tours extended by another three months.
But, as it has always been since the 2003 invasion, it is the Iraqis who suffer most.
No-one knows the exact figures, but at the end of another week of unspeakable, random carnage, hundreds more Iraqi families are grieving.
Exhaustion and despair hang over the country.
And there are no signs of change.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/...ast/6575717.stm
Published: 2007/04/20 12:51:58 GMT
|
No matter what your stance is on Iraq......... this is pretty ed up. :( |
|
|
| Magnetonium |
Lets listen to the Republicans and continue the same path! I mean, its all democracy, peace and stability, right? Saddam's long gone and all. Long live Iraqi democracy! :D ;) Things are nice and peachy, a few hundred or even thousand Iraqi civilian deaths a month is a decent price for a democracy they suppose ... ;) |
|
|
| Q5echo |
| quote: | Editor's note: The president delivered this message on Tuesday night as he vetoed the Iraq-war supplemental funding bill.
Good evening. Twelve weeks ago, I asked the Congress to pass an emergency war spending bill that would provide our brave men and women in uniform with the funds and flexibility they need.
Instead, members of the House and the Senate passed a bill that substitutes the opinions of politicians for the judgment of our military commanders. So a few minutes ago, I vetoed this bill.
Tonight I will explain the reasons for this veto — and my desire to work with Congress to resolve this matter as quickly as possible. We can begin tomorrow with a bipartisan meeting with the congressional leaders here at the White House.
Here is why the bill Congress passed is unacceptable. First, the bill would mandate a rigid and artificial deadline for American troops to begin withdrawing from Iraq. That withdrawal could start as early as July 1st. And it would have to start no later than October 1st, regardless of the situation on the ground.
It makes no sense to tell the enemy when you plan to start withdrawing. All the terrorists would have to do is mark their calendars and gather their strength — and begin plotting how to overthrow the government and take control of the country of Iraq. I believe setting a deadline for withdrawal would demoralize the Iraqi people, would encourage killers across the broader Middle East, and send a signal that America will not keep its commitments. Setting a deadline for withdrawal is setting a date for failure — and that would be irresponsible.
Second, the bill would impose impossible conditions on our commanders in combat. After forcing most of our troops to withdraw, the bill would dictate the terms on which the remaining commanders and troops could engage the enemy. That means American commanders in the middle of a combat zone would have to take fighting directions from politicians 6,000 miles away in Washington, D.C. This is a prescription for chaos and confusion, and we must not impose it on our troops.
Third, the bill is loaded with billions of dollars in non-emergency spending that has nothing to do with fighting the war on terror. Congress should debate these spending measures on their own merits — and not as part of an emergency funding bill for our troops.
The Democratic leaders know that many in Congress disagree with their approach, and that there are not enough votes to override a veto. I recognize that many Democrats saw this bill as an opportunity to make a political statement about their opposition to the war. They've sent their message. And now it is time to put politics behind us and support our troops with the funds they need.
Our troops are carrying out a new strategy with a new commander — General David Petraeus. The goal of this new strategy is to help the Iraqis secure their capital, so they can make progress toward reconciliation, and build a free nation that respects the rights of its people, upholds the rule of law, and fights extremists and radicals and killers alongside the United States in this war on terror.
In January, General Petraeus was confirmed by a unanimous vote in the United States Senate. In February, we began sending the first of the reinforcements he requested. Not all of these reinforcements have arrived. And as General Petraeus has said, it will be at least the end of summer before we can assess the impact of this operation. Congress ought to give General Petraeus' plan a chance to work.
In the months since our military has been implementing this plan, we've begun to see some important results. For example, Iraqi and coalition forces have closed down an al Qaeda car bomb network, they've captured a Shia militia leader implicated in the kidnapping and killing of American soldiers, they've broken up a death squad that had terrorized hundreds of residents in a Baghdad neighborhood.
Last week, General Petraeus was in Washington to brief me, and he briefed members of Congress on how the operation is unfolding. He noted that one of the most important indicators of progress is the level of sectarian violence in Baghdad. And he reported that since January, the number of sectarian murders has dropped substantially.
Even as sectarian attacks have declined, we continue to see spectacular suicide attacks that have caused great suffering. These attacks are largely the work of al Qaeda — the enemy that everyone agrees we should be fighting. The objective of these al Qaeda attacks is to subvert our efforts by reigniting the sectarian violence in Baghdad — and breaking support for the war here at home. In Washington last week, General Petraeus explained it this way: "Iraq is, in fact, the central front of all al Qaeda's global campaign."
Al Qaeda — al Qaeda's role makes the conflict in Iraq far more complex than a simple fight between Iraqis. It's true that not everyone taking innocent life in Iraq wants to attack America here at home. But many do. Many also belong to the same terrorist network that attacked us on September 11th, 2001 — and wants to attack us here at home again. We saw the death and destruction al Qaeda inflicted on our people when they were permitted a safe haven in Afghanistan. For the security of the American people, we must not allow al Qaeda to establish a new safe haven in Iraq.
We need to give our troops all the equipment and the training and protection they need to prevail. That means that Congress needs to pass an emergency war spending bill quickly. I've invited leaders of both parties to come to the White House tomorrow — and to discuss how we can get these vital funds to our troops. I am confident that with goodwill on both sides, we can agree on a bill that gets our troops the money and flexibility they need as soon as possible.
The need to act is urgent. Without a war funding bill, the military has to take money from some other account or training program so the troops in combat have what they need. Without a war funding bill, the Armed Forces will have to consider cutting back on buying new equipment or repairing existing equipment. Without a war funding bill, we add to the uncertainty felt by our military families. Our troops and their families deserve better — and their elected leaders can do better.
Here in Washington, we have our differences on the way forward in Iraq, and we will debate them openly. Yet whatever our differences, surely we can agree that our troops are worthy of this funding — and that we have a responsibility to get it to them without further delay.
Thank you for listening. May God bless our troops.
|
|
|
|
|
|
