BAGHDAD - In a dramatic turnaround, more than 3,000 Iraqi families driven out of their Baghdad neighborhoods have returned to their homes in the past three months as sectarian violence has dropped, the government said Saturday.
Saad al-Azawi, his wife and four children are among them. They fled to Syria six months ago, leaving behind what had become one of the capital's more dangerous districts — west Baghdad's largely Sunni Khadra region.
The family had been living inside a vicious and bloody turf battle between al-Qaida in Iraq and Mahdi Army militiamen. But Azawi said things began changing, becoming more peaceful, in August when radical anti-American Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr ordered his Mahdi Army fighters to stand down nationwide.
About the same time, the Khadra neighborhood Awakening Council rose up against brutal al-Qaida control — the imposition of its austere interpretation of Islam, along with the murder and torture of those who would not comply.
The uprising originated in Iraq's west and flowed into the capital. Earlier this year, the Sunni tribes and clans in the vast Anbar province began their own revolt and have successfully rid the largely desert region of al-Qaida control.
At one point the terrorist group virtually controlled Anbar, often with the complicity of the vast Sunni majority who welcomed the outsiders in their fight against American forces.
But, U.S. officials say, al-Qaida overplayed its hand with Iraq's Sunnis, who practice a moderate version of Islam. American forces were quick to capitalize on the upheaval, welcoming former Sunni enemies as colleagues in securing what was once the most dangerous region of the country.
And as 30,000 additional U.S. forces arrived for the crackdown in Baghdad and central Iraq, the American commander, Gen. David Petraeus, began stationing many of them in neighborhood outposts. The mission was not only to take back control but to foster neighborhood groups like the one in Khadra to shake off al-Qaida's grip.
The 40-year-old al-Azawi, who has gone back to work managing a car service, said relatives and friends persuaded him to bring his family home.
"Six months ago, I wouldn't dare be outside, not even to stand near the garden gate by the street. Killings had become routine. I stopped going to work, I was so afraid," he said, chatting with friends on a street in the neighborhood.
When he and his family joined the flood of Iraqi refugees to Syria the streets were empty by early afternoon, when all shops were tightly shuttered. Now the stores stay open until 10 p.m. and the U.S. military working with the neighborhood council is handing out $2,000 grants to shop owners who had closed their business. The money goes to those who agree to reopen or first-time businessmen.
Al-Azawi said he's trying to get one of the grants to open a poultry and egg shop that his brother would run.
"In Khadra, about 15 families have returned from Syria. I've called friends and family still there and told them it's safe to come home," he said.
Sattar Nawrous, a spokesman for the Ministry of Displacement and Migration, said the al-Azawi family was among 3,100 that have returned to their homes in Baghdad in the past 90 days.
"In the past three months, the ministry did not register any forced displacement in the whole of Iraq," said Nawrous, who is a Kurd.
The claim could not be independently verified, but, if true, it would represent a dramatic end to the sectarian cleansing that has shredded the fabric of Baghdad's once mixed society.
The head of the ministry is Abdul-Samad Rahman, a Shiite appointed to his job by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who is accused of promoting the Shiite cause to the detriment of Sunnis. Under Saddam Hussein, the Sunni minority ruled and heavily oppressed many in the Shiite majority.
Part of the inflow can be attributed to stiffening of visa and residency procedures for Iraqis by the Syrian government.
Mahmoud al-Zubaidi, who runs the Iraqi Airways office in Damascus, the Syrian capital, the flow of Iraqis has almost reversed.
What were once full flights arriving from Baghdad now touch down virtually empty, he told Al-Sabah, the government funded Iraqi daily newspaper. Now the flights are leaving Damascus with more passengers but the volume of travel is off considerably.
On average, 56 Iraqis — civilians and security forces — have died each day so far in this very bloody year. Last month, however, the toll fell to just under 30 Iraqis killed daily in sectarian violence.
More than four months after U.S. forces completed a 30,000-strong force buildup, the death toll for both Iraqis and Americans has fallen dramatically for two months running.
Across Iraq Saturday, 18 people were killed or found dead in sectarian violence, well below the year's daily average.
Good to know our arm forces are making progress. I cant wait what excuse the far left is going to spur out to discredit the progress our brave men and women
Q5echo
quote:
November 3, 2007
The Petraeus Curve
Serious success in Iraq is not being recognised as it should be
Is no news good news or bad news? In Iraq, it seems good news is deemed no news. There has been striking success in the past few months in the attempt to improve security, defeat al-Qaeda sympathisers and create the political conditions in which a settlement between the Shia and the Sunni communities can be reached. This has not been an accident but the consequence of a strategy overseen by General David Petraeus in the past several months. While summarised by the single word “surge” his efforts have not just been about putting more troops on the ground but also employing them in a more sophisticated manner. This drive has effectively broken whatever alliances might have been struck in the past by terrorist factions and aggrieved Sunnis. Cities such as Fallujah, once notorious centres of slaughter, have been transformed in a remarkable time.
Indeed, on every relevant measure, the shape of the Petraeus curve is profoundly encouraging. It is not only the number of coalition deaths and injuries that has fallen sharply (October was the best month for 18 months and the second-best in almost four years), but the number of fatalities among Iraqi civilians has also tumbled similarly. This process started outside Baghdad but now even the capital itself has a sense of being much less violent and more viable. As we report today, something akin to a normal nightlife is beginning to re-emerge in the city. As the pace of reconstruction quickens, the prospects for economic recovery will be enhanced yet further. With oil at record high prices, Iraq should be an extremely prosperous nation and in a position to start planning for its future with confidence.
None of this means that all the past difficulties have become history. A weakened al-Qaeda will be tempted to attempt more spectacular attacks to inflict substantial loss of life in an effort to prove that it remains in business. Although the tally of car bombings and improvised explosive devices has fallen back sharply, it would only take one blast directed at an especially large crowd or a holy site of unusual reverence for the headlines about impending civil war to be allowed another outing. The Government headed by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has become more proactive since the summer, but must immediately take advantage of these favourable conditions. The supposed representatives of the Iraqi people in Baghdad need to show both responsibility and creativity if the country's potential is to be realised.
The current achievements, and they are achievements, are being treated as almost an embarrassment in certain quarters. The entire context of the contest for the Democratic nomination for president has been based on the conclusion that Iraq is an absolute disaster and the first task of the next president is to extricate the United States at maximum speed. Democrats who voted for the war have either repudiated their past support completely (John Edwards) or engaged in a convoluted partial retraction (Hillary Clinton). Congressional Democrats have spent most of this year trying (and failing) to impose a timetable for an outright exit. In Britain, in a somewhat more subtle fashion admittedly, Gordon Brown assumed on becoming the Prime Minister that he should send signals to the voters that Iraq had been “Blair's War”, not one to which he or Britain were totally committed.
All of these attitudes have become outdated. There are many valid complaints about the manner in which the Bush Administration and Donald Rumsfeld, in particular, managed Iraq after the 2003 military victory. But not to recognise that matters have improved vastly in the year since Mr Rumsfeld's resignation from the Pentagon was announced and General Petraeus was liberated would be ridiculous. Politicians on both sides of the Atlantic have to appreciate that Iraq is no longer, as they thought, an exercise in damage limitation but one of making the most of an opportunity. The instinct of too many people is that if Iraq is going badly we should get out because it is going badly and if it is getting better we should get out because it is getting better. This is a catastrophic miscalculation. Iraq is getting better. That is good, not bad, news.
Is that a response to Latin's question ? Or just a causal dems bashing post ? :rolleyes:
quote:
Added: April 20, 2007
eROs.au
Ah finally. I'm glad my money is being used wisely
MisterOpus1
Hi Arnoldj. I'd thought I'd give you another chance to help me out with the answer to this simple question I posted earlier. In case you forgot, here you go:
quote:
what is the best test to determine the differences between more than 1 independ. variable but with no repeated measures? IOW, to determine the impact of more than 1 independ. variable on a depend. variable?
Also, can you tell us where you teach again as well as any names on your faculty? Thanks.
Q5echo
quote:
Originally posted by Omega_M
Is that a response to Latin's question ? Or just a causal dems bashing post ? :rolleyes:
yeah, Latin never asked a question:rolleyes:
casual dem bashing post.
mind you, it's never without context.:rolleyes:
here's some more. were you ever part of the "Bush-lied-about-WMD's" meme?
Democraps...pssshhh:rolleyes:
MisterOpus1
quote:
Originally posted by LatinLover
Good to know our arm forces are making progress. I cant wait what excuse the far left is going to spur out to discredit the progress our brave men and women
What was the end goal and rationale for the surge, Arnold? Do you remember? Was the end goal to quell the violence, period? Or in your feeble mind do you possibly recall the primary reason Bush sent in more troops in the first place? Here, let me give you a little hint:
quote:
O’HANLON: … and it doesn’t answer the questions about political progress.
KARL: In fact, there’s been almost no political progress on the national level, and U.S. officials know military gains won’t mean much if the Iraqi government doesn’t get its act together, which is one reason the Pentagon doesn’t even want to use the word “winning.”
[To Defense Secretary] You’re not ready to say we’re winning, that the surge is working –
ROBERT GATES [Defense Secretary]: (From tape.) I think — I think that those end up being loaded words. I think we have been very successful. We need to continue being successful.
KARL: Today, Defense Secretary Gates said that the reduction in violence would not have been possible without the surge of 30,000 additional troops into Iraq, but, Charlie, those troops are going home in the coming months, raising the question of whether the violence will go up when they leave.
GIBSON: Jonathan Karl tonight reporting from the Pentagon, thanks.
But take a look at that link. Take a look at how YOUR ed up president has DELIBERATELY and willfully edited out that little bad news part:
quote:
News flash -- The White House has selectively edited a report on Iraq, taking out negative information and distorting the report's meaning.
This isn't about intelligence or weapons of mass destruction. It's my report on Thursday's evening on World News with Charles Gibson.
The report noted "violence in Iraq is down and down considerably" in virtually every category, but my report also noted that "there has been almost no political progress on the national level" and that "U.S. officials know military gains won't mean much if the Iraqi government doesn't get its act together."
The White House sent out an edited version of my report in an official White House publication called "White House Iraq Update."
That's called "propaganda," Latin, Q. That's what you get when you have this Administration play politics with our ing war. And now perhaps you might gain a little understanding as to why no one trusts this Administration anymore, let alone anything they purport out of Iraq. Hell, there might even be some truth mixed in with their bull, but until there's consistency in their stories you won't be seeing the "far left"(majority of Americans) believe anything you say. Sorry for your bad luck, but you have nothing but yourselves pumping up this bull all-out political Administration to blame.
And finally, since our Administration is so fond of moving the goalposts, and zombie minions like Arnold/Latin here do nothing but help those goalposts being moved, I was wondering if any of you Bush supporters approve of this sectarian cleansing? Because if the reduction in violence is predicated on this ethnic cleansing done prior to our SURGE!, does that really demonstrate our SURGE! doing anything worthwhile in the long run?
Or do you even care about the long run at all?
Q5echo
quote:
Originally posted by MisterOpus1
But take a look at that link. Take a look at how YOUR ed up president has DELIBERATELY and willfully edited out that little bad news part:
That's called "propaganda," Latin, Q. That's what you get when you have this Administration play politics with our ing war.
i think Thinkprogress.com got the better of you.
there was nothing in the omitted part that wasn't in the entire original ABC report.
it looks like the WH press secretary didn't like some of the wording in the very last portion of Karl's report. it happens. it's not nefarious in nature. the WH is not the sole arbiter of all news coming out of Iraq.:rolleyes:
it has since been returned inside 24hrs.
Lebezniatnikov
Meanwhile 650,000 refugees have returned home to Northern Uganda and the security situation there is worsening by the day as peace talks wither. The fact that 3000 Iraqis are returning to Baghdad isn't very compelling stuff, about the security situation or the hope on the ground.
MisterOpus1
quote:
Originally posted by Q5echo
i think Thinkprogress.com got the better of you.
there was nothing in the omitted part that wasn't in the entire original ABC report.
it looks like the WH press secretary didn't like some of the wording in the very last portion of Karl's report.
Gee, I can't imagine why. Considering the whole point of the SURGE! is to clear the way for the political process to go forward, which of course the political process hasn't done since, one really has to wonder. Strange how they "didn't like the working" in that last portion all right - that part that says the political process (i.e. the primary reason for the SURGE!) is going nowhere.....
quote:
it happens. it's not nefarious in nature. the WH is not the sole arbiter of all news coming out of Iraq.:rolleyes:
it has since been returned inside 24hrs.
It returned, Q, because ABC news called the WH on their bull and busted them for selectively editing their report. You really think the WH would have changed their edited report back to the full interview all on their own?
Q5echo
quote:
Originally posted by MisterOpus1
political process (i.e. the primary reason for the SURGE!) is going nowhere.....
okay so you are going on the record right now to say that the political process will not work?
