Will the troop surge work?

[Murffieus]

IMO, it has to work-----because the alternative is unthinkable.

If we pull out we leave a terrorist paradise in certain parts of Iraq (ala Afghanistan pre 9/11) from which to train terrorists and plan attacks on the USA  & Britain------we leave a strengthened Iran------ we demonstrate to the moderate Islamists of the region that the future is with the Islamic Extremists not with the forces of moderation supported by the USA, as we show we don't have the staying power------Iraqi Oil will support terrorism------the civil war will escalate with the crapes ethnically cleansing the Sunni's-----could embroil the whole region (sunni vs crape).

[mu_hilltopper]

Honestly, I believe the options presented are simply the difference between slow failure and quick failure.  The only honest debate is whether to withdraw immediately, or make plans to stay 5, maybe 10 or 15 more years.

The surge?  Like a 6-9-12 month surge?  Not a chance.

[augoman]

absolutely Murf, the alternative is unthinkable!  If we 'cut and run' (by any name you choose) we invite disaster. 

[tower912]

I have been a virulent opponent of this war for going on 5 years.  As soon as the trial balloon was floated, I spoke out against it and did all of the typical ineffective stuff to try to stop it.  It is still a bad idea.  Having said all of that.........I hope it works exactly like the president says.   Nothing would make me happier than this 7th surge in troops being the magical one that gives the Maliki government the necessary stability to start taking the steps to stabilize their country.   Yes, it would be a disaster if we rapidly withdrew from the mess we have created.   So, I have added prayers for the success of this surge to my daily prayers for the safety of our troops.

[Murffieus]

"7th surge"-----keep in mind that this surge is accompanied by different leadership and a different plan (clear out the bad guys and HOLD).

Listening to the former generals in charge of eliminating the resistance-----they sounded more like social workers to me than military generals!

[mviale]

How many more surges do we need Murf? You can have this one, but how many more?

[Wareagle]

This surgescalation doesn't raise the troop levels any higher than they were a year ago.  While I am happy the old faces in charge of previous failed policies are gone, I believe that the military has achieved all it can, which was winning the initial war against the Iraqi army.  These soldiers do not have the training to mediate/solve a civil war between groups who want to wipe each other off the map.  The only way that this mess can be salvaged is through diplomacy, but we seem to be destined to failure in Iraq because we refuse to seriously engage Syria or Iran, the two countries who have the means to ensure a deescalation of the conflict in Iraq.   

[Mayor McCheese]

"7th surge"-----keep in mind that this surge is accompanied by different leadership and a different plan (clear out the bad guys and HOLD).

Listening to the former generals in charge of eliminating the resistance-----they sounded more like social workers to me than military generals!

I figured the plan was always clear out the bad guys...

hate to say this, but this war is unwinnable.  This surge of sending more militay to Iraq is pointless, it truely is, I just think Bush has no other clue what to do, and it is sad that he is our president (no offense to the pro-Bush posters, but come on now, this is getting out of hand).  I thought in 2004 Bush said "Mission Accomplished".

When you lose the public's approval of the war(which I never feel they got), you lose the war.  Look at Vietnam, and now Iraq is the new Vietnam

[Murffieus]

We have never tried "clear out and HOLD"----it was always "clear out and MOVE ON" (then the insurgents would move back in those neighborhoods)----diplomacy is not a viable alternative-----we have no leverage on Syria/Iran and negotiating with Islamic Facists is useless (no leverage or honesty there either).

The solution has always been to train the Iraqis---they should be trained by now to be able to clear out while we work in a supportive role.

If this deosn't work----we'll just have to retreat to bases within Iraq and put out major fires from time to time (Ai Quida training camps etc)-----in that case we're probably there for the next 10-15 years in one form or another-----meanwhile the crapes and sunnis will keep killing each other until they get tired of it like what happened in Northern Ireland!

[mu_hilltopper]

We have never tried "clear out and HOLD"----it was always "clear out and MOVE ON" (then the insurgents would move back in those neighborhoods

Sorry, I don't buy that.  It's not like we went into cities/neighborhoods, fired off a crushing wave of bullets and grenades killing or forcing bad guys out, then we had lunch, maybe a spot of tea, then left town.   Sure, I imagine we left after some time, so it's all what the definition of "hold" is.  Is a hold a month?  6?  12?  Or is a hold only a retrospective concept.  If we left after 6 and, surprise surprise, there's a bombing, we didn't hold it long enough, and 9 months would have done the trick?

It's not clear and hold.  It's clear and hold and hold and hold and hold.  This kind of civil war/genocidal hate doesn't just disappear in a month or a year.  It's decades.

Our only two options now are slow failure or quick failure.  Enough of this "failure is not an option" stuff, unless you're going to be honest with your argument:  We need this surge, plus more, plus about 10 years and, say $8 trillion bucks.  Then we've got a decent shot.  This 6-12 month surge crap is just nonsense, and everyone knows it's worse than a 90 yard hail-mary touchdown.

This surge will occur.   Maybe it'll slow the pace of suicide bombers by 50% for a time.  Maybe even cut the death squad runs in half for a few months.  Once the "surge" is over, once the "hold" on your clear and hold, are done .. game on, once again.

[spiral97]

I pretty much agree with everything that has been said.  The clear and hold should work if the "hold" lasts until the entire country has been cleared by the iraqi (and US) force .  I stated it that way because, like Murf said, the iraqi force should be trained enough to be doing the clear out work with the US providing support.  Once the effort is done, it should be the iraqi forces left doing the holding and the US forces able to start withdrawing.

What hasn't been said and what I believe is crucial to maintaining that "hold" after the country has been cleared is the implementation of extremely effective border control, a very good Iraqi version of the FBI, and economic success.  The US forces could pretty much completely withdraw after the first two are implemented and running successfully.

The border control requires some detailed and thought out planning as well as investment in some new technologies (the US, ironically, has been slowly starting to go down this path in recent years as well) and would aim to keep the bad guys (or at least the bad equipment) out and define a unambiguous front line where 95% of the conflict would occur.  The Iraqi FBI would be involved in establishing enforcement of laws and maintaining internal security (by catching the bad guys/bad equipment that DOES get through the border). As I said earlier, once these first two items are implemented then the Iraqi forces should be sufficient to maintain the hold.

Economic success is what will bring the citizenry as a whole behind the Iraqi government in a way that would allow even the Iraqi forces to be reduced or eliminated at the hold points.  At that point, they'll be much more content and the internal civil unrest will be nearly eliminated.  Further, they'll be in support of the government and will act on their best interest to maintain the stability by assisting the Iraqi FBI with intelligence (reporting suspicious activities, etc.), shunning support any insurgent forces that might be remaining, and bringing a new generation of children up with a different attitude towards their country.  This is a long term effort, but the key is that the "clear and hold (by Iraqi troops)", border security, and internal investigative agencies are the enablers for the Iraqi government to get there.

The on-going daily violence that is instigated primarily by foreign fighters precludes the Iraqi family from feeling secure in their own homes.  Poor economic results precludes the Iraqi family from being satisfied.  Security is something the US forces can assist in achieving.  Economics is something that they'll have to create for themselves (and will oil as a driver, this should not be too difficult with the right longer-term investments).

Another comment I'd like to make is regardless of whether or not we should have gotten into this war in the first place, we are there now.  We have irreparably altered EVERYTHING over there.  We are therefore morally, ethically, and humanely responsible for following through.  Abandoning the country after what we have done is much like a child coming into a (loosely) organized toy room, pulling out all the toys, destroying half of them, rubbing the crayons all over the walls, peeing on the carpet, and then leaving the resident to clean it up.  This is behavior we expect from a 2 or 3 year old child.  This is not behavior we expect from an adult.  I would like to say that the US would metaphorically act as an adult in this situation.  Regardless of your feelings about the war itself, the mess is made (and cannot be magically unmade), now let's work on effective ways to clean it up.

[mu_hilltopper]

I pretty much agree with everything that has been said.  The clear and hold should work if the "hold" lasts until the entire country has been cleared by the iraqi (and US) force .

That made me think about something .. we're rapidlly coming up on $1 trillion dollars spent on these wars.  With the population of Iraq+Afghanistan being around 58 million, that's spending $17,200 on each man, woman, and child.

For that kind of money, we could have given each person/family a first class ticket to anywhere in the world, relocation expenses, job and language training, a year's rent, and maybe have enough money left over for a family car.

Maybe we should just buy our way out.  Free trips to Disney World for everyone.  I hear Euro Disney needs visitors!

[mufan007]

From a purely poltical perspective, the Republicans need to at the very least decrease the troop levels in Iraq by half before the election in order to have any chance of winning back the Whitehouse or gaining ground in congress.  This surge is necessary in order to work towards and eventual withdrawal.  It provides the "critical mass" necessary to battle back the terrorists enough for the Iraqi government to get, and stay, on it's feet.

I think Bush's closing comment from the 2007 State of the Union says it best:
"The state of our union is strong, the cause of our nation is right and tonight that cause goes on.”

Brandon Henak
Gop3.com: News, Politics and Marquette Basketball
http://www.gop3.com

[mviale]

Due to this over spending in iraq - only 5 out of 60 scientific grants will be approved as funding for NIH will be thrown away.  This wont effect clinical research as it will probably pick up private funding, but basic or fundamental science will be gutted.  It is not sexy to fund the study of cells and how they communicate to each other.  This President and his flawed leadership will put science back years.  However, this may be their goal.

[augoman]

  This President and his flawed leadership will put science back years.  However, this may be their goal.

I doubt this could be proven, but it certainly is in line with the current spin.
If in fact it would mean we stop funding (10's of millions of $) the UW boring holes in the polar ice cap to drop little sensors 1,000's of feet down as one of dozens of other similar tests currently being funding to prove the existence of neutrinos..., then it's a good thing!

[Murffieus]

Hey war isn't pleasant------not the type of thing that accelerates domestic agendas-----but we're in the initial stages of a very long term war that has been imposed on us and has no boundaries----not a conventional war to be sure.

It's war between the facist element of Islam and the Christian world----the facist leaders have told us----either convert (to Islam) or be exterminated. The main perpetrators are Iran and Al Quida. One reason we're in Iraq is because it's right next door to Iran. A failure in Iraq leaves that door with all it's oil open for Iran-----Iran then becomes a huge player in the manipulation of world economies.

Iran is working fast to accumulate nukes, if they succeed the whole ball game changes----Iran will bully their neighbors successfully-----gain more respect & recruits for terrorism------have an untouchable area to set up terrorist camps and to train terrorists for atacks on the USA & elsewhere)----and above all show Islamists that the USA has no staying power (paper tiger). One of the successes of the Iraq war is that we haven't had an attack here in the USA since 9/11----principally because Bush & Tony Blair have Al quida and Iran successfully bogged down in and focused on Iraq and afghanistan.

GWB and Tony Blair have the vision to see the threat and have taken pre-emptive action----they have information that you and I don't see----they're not out to do us (or themselves in)----they would not be putting us (and themselves) through this, if they weren't convinced with the information they've been presented with----that this isn't the proper course to follow!

[mviale]

This is behavior we expect from a 2 or 3 year old child.  This is not behavior we expect from an adult.

- Lying to the public about the reasons for entering the war
- not listening to other opinions
- not listening to the election results
- not admitting failure
- worrying about one's place in history rather than the 50k soldiers and families effected by these actions

Who is acting like a child?

[spiral97]

This is behavior we expect from a 2 or 3 year old child.  This is not behavior we expect from an adult.

- Lying to the public about the reasons for entering the war
- not listening to other opinions
- not listening to the election results
- not admitting failure
- worrying about one's place in history rather than the 50k soldiers and families effected by these actions

Who is acting like a child?

My statement about 2/3 year old behavior vs. behaving like an adult was applied to the country as a whole, which includes its leaders.  I was not saying that we weren't acting as children in the past (a whole separate debate in and of itself) but rather that we should act responsibly (as the adult in that metaphor should) with regards to how we proceed with regards to Iraq.  Past events should not have an influence on this burden of responsibility - we are in the here and now and in the situation that we are in.  Bemoaning what the president or anyone else did is, really, trivial to the discussion of what to do going forward.

In fact, looking for blame when approached with a situation is yet another sign of immaturity that our country should not be displaying.  Many of the debates I hear on the news networks over what to do about Iraq invariably disintegrate into a blame game over why we are here in the first place.  This contributes absolutely nothing to the discussion over what to do now.  Such debate about the causes, blame, etc. of the war IS useful in a "learning our lesson' context, but, as I said before, that is a completely different discussion.

[augoman]

The sad part is; Murf put in a nutshell-it isn't going away.  Is the best we can hope for to 'keep the lunatics occupied' elsewhere?  A depressing thought.  Sounds like the crusades were unsuccessful and the hatred has been festering ever since!  Their current strategy of infiltrating most countries and causing havoc on a regular basis (see france, germany, spain, england, et al) to advance their agenda is strangely successful.  The nightly riots and car burnings in france are considered normal.  They now compose 20% of the german populace.  The spainish have already succumbed to demands to withdraw troops.  I wish it were as simple as 'the war in iraq'..., rather than the global war against us! 

[mu_hilltopper]

Mildly off the subject .. but is anyone else completely stunned by the lack of terrorism in the US?

With the story out of the UK this week, with the plot being so simple .. kidnap a soldier and behead him .. it just amazes me that something simple like that hasn't happened yet. 

My wife thinks I'm nuts, but at least once a month, I'll start a sentence with "If I was a terrorist ..."  followed by some simple security breach.  So many acts are easy to pull off, no need to get all dramatic with bombs and poisons.  With the US and its 24/7 media frenzy, a few kidnappings here and there, or a school raid like Beslan, would bring this country to a halt.  That's why it amazes me it hasn't happened yet, as simple things like that would be hard to detect and prevent, if the guys were smart.

Perhaps we're dealing with a bunch of really dim witted guys.  That sure would be lucky.

[spiral97]

I, personally, am amazed.  And I am not sure how to explain it either.  I too have had "wow that would be something very easy to exploit if I were a terrorist" observations monthly if not weekly.

Saw a guy walk through airport security back when NO liquids were allowed.  After he got through, he promptly reached into his pant pockets and removed a  small bottle of shampoo and a tube toothpaste and put them in his bag and then pulled a water bottle out of a different pocket.  Simple and stupidly easy stuff in many opportunistic areas.. even something as simple as inserting bad stuff (tm) into a water main somewhere.. figuring out critical electrical junctions and taking those out to have a cascading blackout affect half the country.. and so many more.  I know they guys that do the planning aren't dim witted and these concerns have all been aired before in much more public forums than this..  so I definitely do wonder "what gives?"

[mu_hilltopper]

Oh, that no-liquid thing at airports .. what a preposterous policy.  So you're a terrorist and you know you can't put your explosive liquids into a water bottle.  But you're not going to be strip searched.

So you get a ziplock bag(s), fill it, and strap it to your legs, waist, back, wherever.  Presto.  What did that take, $3 and 10 minutes of time to defeat "security"?

It's kind of like when Bradley Center security wants to look into my kid's diaper bag to make sure I'm not smuggling in a bazooka or something.  Of course, he'll miss the handgun in my pocket.

[SoCalwarrior]

This thread has now been flagged by the NSA.  Watch your backs, gentlemen. 8)

[spiral97]

Of course, he'll miss the handgun in my pocket.

Now I'm not sure if I want to sit right next to/behind topper so I can keep an eye on him or if I want the furthest seat from him so I reduce my chances of getting hit......... *walks slowly backwards away from topper in the most direct path out of the building*

[mu_hilltopper]

I was thinking the same thing.  Pretty soon Chopper 4 with power zoom will be hovering over my house and John Mercure (local WTMJ hack) will be knocking at my door.