The Maliki-Obama Agreement

Maliki has made a statement on Obama's plan for withdrawal.

Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki told a German magazine he supported prospective U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama's proposal that U.S. troops should leave Iraq within 16 months.

In an interview with Der Spiegel released on Saturday, Maliki said he wanted U.S. troops to withdraw from Iraq as soon as possible.

"U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months. That, we think, would be the right timeframe for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes."Reuters.com

I think we have an agreement to end this war. What's the date today?

There's more...

British Troops Home by Christmas

Buh... Bye..

Citing the 90% drop in violence in Basra, Prime Minister Gordon Brown has announced that Basra will be handed back within two weeks during a surprise pre-Christmas visit to the troops. Having to arrive like a thief in the night, pitch dark in a RAF C-130, but he damn sure brought some good news. I know Prof. Cole will disagree with the security decrease in Basra, but I know there will be many happy English, Irish and Scottish families this Christmas.


While our troops languish in a hell that our government put them in with no end in sight.

There's more...

Grim math shows increase not drop in violence in Iraq

RedDan and I have been talking about the games that CENTCOM and the Whitehouse have been playing with the numbers out of Iraq. I couldn't understand why all the press releases about a drop in violence. Tactically it doesn't work like that. It didn't make any sense. A surge wouldn't decrease the level of violence. So we took a closer look at data.


Here you are seeing the real story. A spike that in the Baghdad area and dropping numbers in the south and Al Anbar. A drop to basically 0. Why is this happening?

British Prime Minister Gordon Brown this week announced his plan to reduce the British force around the southern city of Basra from 5,000 to 2,500 by next spring. Drawing less attention, however, is the extent to which American forces have quietly withdrawn from the rest of southern Iraq. By so doing, the U.S. is ceding huge swaths of territory -- time.com

The Brits are basically holed up in a compound with smaller numbers than reported here. From an initial presence in Iraq of 40,000 down to less than 2 battalions.

The Marines have all been completely removed from Al Anbar into Baghdad, which is why they are asking to be relocated to Afghanistan. Working with and for the Army must have them tripping over each others boots.

No, what we are seeing here is a shell game. The violence is not dropping. Its ending. It's ending wherever we withdraw from and spiking were we are digging in. It only appears to drop because violence in Al Anbar, Basra, Najaf, Karbala, Wasit, Dhiqar, etc, etc, has ended. This drop obscures the spike in Baghdad.


This information shows a trend up in the Baghdad region and shows that Iraq does not devolve into civil war when the US pulls out. Does not let al Qaeda take over in their absence. In fact the complete opposite, the local security forces quickly run to ground AQI and end them. It seems once the US forces leave the area the score settling and inter-tribal violence ends. Life seems cheap with tanks and machine guns on every corner. Remove those visual and physical reminders and people work out their differences with something other than a pistol and a power-drill. So when some tells you we have to stay, ask them why. (numbers via iCasualties.org)

Hubris Sonic & RedDan

There's more...

Reduction in violence in Basra

Predictably, and we did predict this back in August as an argument for withdrawal. The British pullout in Basra has caused a significant drop in violence. So much so even Bush's general, Petraeus was forced to comment on it.

General Petraeus, giving the Government his own assessment of the way that things are going in the south, said that he had personally blessed the decision to pull out the remaining 500 troops from the Basra Palace base, and was pleased that it had been carried out "in an orderly way". He also said that the level of violence in the city in recent weeks had dropped significantly. -- timesonline

Not that it's all hearts and flowers. There are increasingly reports of cholera outbreaks and still no regular clean drinking water and power issues. There have been a few suicide bombings that threatened the peace but that has seemed to have passed for the moment. There is also an increase in fundamentalism in and around Basra. Billboards with women being painted over, music CD's being banned. This is clearly the Iranian influence. Which is much more pronounced there in the south due to the proximity and many Iranians actually living in Basra. Between that and the support for Shiite leader Moqtada Al Sadr, there is a distinct decrease in social freedoms. Whether this translates into a radical Islamic state ala' the Taliban is unclear. My sense of the Iraqi culture would be no. The Iranians went very strict after their revolution but didn't go near as far as the Taliban. But does Petraeus think that the rise of the Sadrist's is something that should concern us?

General Petraeus said he would not put it at the top of his list, but that it was one of several factors that would dictate when conditions were right for any reduction of forces. "But I wouldn't rank it in any particular order," he said.

Sounds more like he has too much on his plate rather than good assessment. Or maybe he is getting confused by all the spin.

Once again we see (excepting the suicide bombings) removing the irritant, the focal point of the violence, foreign occupiers, causes a reduction in violence. We have seen this in Al Anbar and now in Basra. Remember all the sturm und drang we heard about the Brits pulling out? How they are betraying us and that the area would devolve into a orgy of religious murder and violence. I guess the war bloggers are wrong again. Instead of faking trend lines showing decreases in violence in other areas, the Pentagon and the administration are avoiding drawing attention to these successes because they show that disengagement is clearly becoming the most viable strategy.

There's more...

Withdrawal, mercenary withdrawal

It is time to withdraw...the contractors and mercenaries.

There are hundreds of thousands of them. They have cost the US government, meaning the U.S. taxpayers, tens of billions of dollars. They have exacerbated the cultural and political conflict through improper behavior and improper training. They have participated in massive fraud - losing billions of dollars in government allotted contract money, extorting and cheating on critical deliveries of necessary items and supplies.

They perform (actually they DON'T!) tasks that could and should be performed by the Iraqi people; tasks that could and should be performed by the US military. The Iraqi people have the expertise, know-how, and connections to do construction, rebuilding, maintenance, and security - cheaper, more efficiently, and with a better eye for their own peoples' needs. The US military can (and up until this conflict, always has) provide meals, shelter, water, and logistical support for the troops and forward bases.

Halliburton, KBR, Bechtel, Blackwater and all the other corporate leeches getting fat off of taxpayer dollars and FAILING to deliver on the promised critical supplies and support, need to go. We do not need to keep paying them to do the job: 1) Because the job cannot be done by them, and 2) Because they have patently failed to do that job, even with billions of dollars of cash, the support of the US military, and a free hand to do as they please in Iraq, regardless of the consequences of their actions.

Let's begin the immediate drawdown of the estimated 100,000 to 150,000 private contractors in Iraq. Let congress legislate the removal of the estimated 40,000 mercenaries in Iraq. I dont think Americans should be paying for the Iraqi PM's security and certainly not at the rates Blackwater charges - Iraqis can do that.

We do not think the US taxpayer should pay for overpriced, poor quality construction projects in Iraq - Iraqis can build schools, bridges, and power plants! If we want to pay for it, we should be paying the Iraqi construction companies, not the contractors. Besides, Bechtel is the same company that completely fucked up the Big Dig in Boston - how can we expect that they would be able to complete anything in a war zone, in a foreign nation?? They have not delivered on ANY of their promises...but the profits keep rolling in.

We think calling for the withdrawal of all non-essential personnel from Iraq would be a prudent thing at this stage. Democrats in the House and Senate can point to the billions we are paying these people without oversight. It's time to take these men and women out of harms way.

Using mercenaries and outsourcing war was never a good idea. Nor was
it ever, by any stretch of the imagination, cost effective. There were only 10,000 civilian contractors used in the first gulf war. This is 10- or 20-fold increase, all at the expense of the American taxpayer, with reduced results...and one could argue exceptionally bad, negative results. Remember Fallujah? That area blew up in large part due to the actions of "contractors"...and it has been these same "contractors"
(read mercenaries) who have been at the "forefront" of cultural estrangement, shooting up houses, strong-arming the locals, and even worse, on a regular basis.

We call for the immediate withdrawal of all non essential personnel, which would mean all private contractors and mercenaries in the employ of the Bush administration.

Time to stop pouring money into the (offshore) accounts of the big multinationals; time to stop letting them run roughshod over the locals, over our soldiers, and exacerbating a conflict that they had a big hand in bungling; time to remove that particular bit of salt from the wounds. Bring those "contractors" home, save a bundle of money, remove a serious irritant, and use the savings to fully protect our troops.

-- Hubris Sonic and RedDan
reprinted from thenewsblog.net

There's more...

Argument for Withdrawal (people getting it)

Other people are starting to get this too:

Is The Prospect Of Withdrawal Responsible For The Modest Security Gains In Iraq?

Much of the touted security gains have come in the Anbar province, a region that was not the target of Bush’s escalation. In fact, progress in Anbar pre-dated the surge and occurred while troop numbers were being reduced in the region.

The NIE states that local security arrangements such as those in Anbar province are being formed in response to imminent U.S. withdrawal, and that these “bottom up” security initiatives “represent the best prospect for improved security over the next six to 12 months” -- ThinkProgress

As i noted in my post from earlier this month (8/11/2007)

Argument For Withdrawal

Of all the troops sent into Baghdad for the surge a number of them came from newly deployed units. But more than a significant number were pulled from Al-Anbar. This has had the affect of reducing pressure and removing targets of opportunity there. The locals have been trying quell sectarian violence and go after AQI themselves.

The 'Surge' is working alright, working as a demonstration of the value of withdrawal.

There's more...

Group News Blog Podcast #1

Back at the News Blog, Steve always made vets feel welcome and he himself could talk about the war and military issues in a way that was lacking elsewhere in the blogosphere. Because of this, quite a few of us found a home on the net to discuss the war. And in doing so we were able to open up discussions with folks who did not know much about the military and what the situation meant but who wanted to learn.

In that spirit the GNB is starting a new Podcast Series called VET's EYE VIEW. In our 1st of a series of 3 we are discussing withdrawal and looking at the current situation and what it means and how we got there. Folks on our podcast are myself, (Hubris Sonic) fellow vet Ceabaird and Terri in Tokyo. Our plan is to continue discussing military and other issues over the coming months. If you have ideas, questions, comments or suggestions please let us know.

Direct Link (mp3): Vets Eye View #1 25:40

There's more...

Argument for Withdrawal

Americablog.com has a post up telling Petraeus to stop lying about how the surge is causing a drop in violence in Al Anbar province. Aravosis points out that the surge is not occurring in Al-Anbar. He's right, but the surge is having an effect there and its a good argument for withdrawal.

Of all the troops sent into Baghdad for the surge a number of them came from newly deployed units. But more than a significant number were pulled from Al-Anbar. This has had the affect of reducing pressure and removing targets of opportunity there. The locals have been trying quell sectarian violence and go after AQI themselves.

Administration supporters have been upbeat about the way in which some Sunni Arab populations, especially in al-Anbar Province, have turned against the foreign jihadi volunteers that were behind much mindless violence. These jihadis, styled "al-Qaida" by the Bush administration ( -- Juan Cole)

I think this shows that the Iraqi's would much rather settle their own issues without violence, like we see in other tribal warfare. The Shia and the Sunni have been living together for a very, very long time. When the US Forces are removed from view this culture tries to govern itself. Which is not surprising really. If we remove the blinders that come with assuming the 'white mans burden', it becomes obvious if we withdraw there will be little excuse for sectarian strife. The Iraqi's will find it much easier to hunt down AQI since they are familiar with the country and speak the language.

So the next time someone tells you if we withdraw it will be chaos, point out thats not what happened in Al-Anbar.

UPDATE: Ah, and as if on que here we have some Pentagon propagandistswar gamers saying if we leave its chaos! CHAOS I TELL YOU! DOGS AND CATS IN THE STREETS HAVING SEX!


DOUBLE PLUS UPDATE: But here we have a another example of what I am talking about (Basra):

Last spring, fierce clashes erupted between Fadhila and the Mahdi Army, a paramilitary group loyal to radical Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr. Several people were killed on both sides and offices and buildings belonging to the two parties were destroyed. Mediators from tribes and other political parties managed to end the fighting...

There's more...

Brits Out In October

I expected something like this after reading the FDL piece about Trash Talking Our Allies, the testosterone based name calling going on between us and the Brits.

I guess the UK Prime Minister Gordon Browns visit with Chimpy didnt go well.

US uneasy as Britain plans for early Iraq withdrawal

British officials believe that Washington will signal its intention to reduce US troop numbers after a much-anticipated report next month by its top commander in Iraq, General David Petraeus, clearing the way for Gordon Brown to announce a British withdrawal in parliament the following month. An official said: "We do believe we are nearly there."

And here is war monger and general idiot Ken Pollack taking a swipe at those dirty traitors.

He said Mr Bush would prefer the British to stay: "What Bush needs is for there to be a Union Jack flying somewhere in Iraq so he can trumpet that as full British participation, but that participation has been meaningless for some time."

Mr Pollack, who wrote on his return that there were signs that the surge was working, was dismissive of the British contribution over the past 12 to 18 months. He said: "I am assuming the British will no longer be there. They are not there now. We have a British battle group holed up in Basra airport. I do not see what good that does except for people flying in and out.

"It is the wild, wild west. Basra is out of control."

Which is funny because he told us its going just f*cking great in Iraq as I posted about yesterday

UPDATE: This cried out for a little recap.


So, we have Anbar basically is being written off, we have major bridges being damaged or destroyed in Ramadi and Baghad, and the Turks massing on the northern border and now the British are no longer helping keep our supply lines to the south clear. The same roads that we would use to leave Iraq.

UP-UPDATE: And now we are poking sticks at the Mahdi Army. Yes, sports fans, the same Mahdi Army that now controls Basra.

BAGHDAD -- US forces staged a major two-pronged attack on a neighborhood controlled by Shi'ite militia groups yesterday, killing at least 17 people, according to the military and Iraqi police. The raid on Sadr City, an area dominated by loyalists to Shi'ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, was one of the largest in a series of US attacks against Shi'ite militias.

There's more...