May 03 2007

Great News From Diyala Province

Published by at 9:00 am under All General Discussions,Diyala,Iraq

Major Update: More details here on the signed accord in Diyala that now pits key tribal leaders against al Qaeda and on the side of America and Iraq.

“The people have no confidence in the terrorists’ ways and ultimate goals for death and destruction,” said Col. David W. Sutherland, 3rd Brigade Combat Team commander and senior U.S. Army officer in Diyala. “This initiative and agreement by the tribes shows their commitment to their people, this country’s stability, and a positive vision for the future.”

al Qaeda’s days in Iraq are running out, as are the Surrendercrats chances to snatch defeat from success. – end update

The insurgency in Iraq has basically disappeared from Anbar province because the local Sheiks got fed up with the brutality and blood letting initiated by al Qaeda foreign terrorists. When the Sheiks abandoned the insurgency and changed to the side of the Iraqi government and US coalition Anbar province changed course as well. It went from an insurgent stronghold to model of success in a few short months. One of the remaining strongholds in Iraq is Diyala Province, which is where many of the terrorists from Baghdad and Anbar have run to as one of the last pockets where terrorists had a chance to survive. Apparently Diyala Province is going on the path set by Anbar:

A brigade of 3,700 U.S. Army troops arrived in Baghdad this week, part of the Bush administration’s troop buildup aimed at quelling sectarian violence.


The last combat brigade of 3,700 troops is due by late May. After it’s complete, the buildup will push the number of allied forces, predominantly from the United States, to 160,000 soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines.

he U.S. military reported Wednesday that a group of sheiks in Diyala province, east of Baghdad, had agreed to a truce among themselves and promised to fight al-Qaida and Sunni Arab insurgent groups in the province. A similar accord was reached by sheiks in Al Anbar province last month.

Don’t expect the surrender-media to note this news or understand its import. They still believe the Surrendercrats in Congress have a prayer of pulling out a victory for the insurgents and al Qaeda. They are thankfully all too late. If Diyala rises up against al Qaeda as did Anbar (and the rest of Shiite and Kurdish Iraq) then we will succeed in Iraq. There will be stabilization and an opportunity to settle the country down. Iraq has been brutalized for decades and there was a lot of pent up anger at the world for letting Saddam reign free for so long. Not to mention the sectarian divisions Saddam fostered. But that anger is dissipating as reality sets in. One look into the Kurdish terroritories and people see what is possible if they can stop the fighting. They can actually have a chance to live. The Surrendercrats, so negative on all aspects of life in general, never appreciate the power of being alive, happy and proud.

11 responses so far

11 Responses to “Great News From Diyala Province”

  1. MerlinOS2 says:

    The crackdown on the milbloggers at the same time is a two edged sword.

    They could be shouting the good news from the rooftops or be not meaning to give out hints to the plan that would hamper the surge.

    I hope their muzzle is not long lasting.

  2. Retired Spook says:

    The Surrendercrats, so negative on all aspects of life in general, never appreciate the power of being alive, happy and proud.

    I can’t think of a more accurate description, AJ.

  3. lurker9876 says:

    From what I’ve read, it appears that the milbloggers aren’t being shutdown except when in OPSEC. And they are just being consulted in what to say or not say. I suspect it had to do with the tone of professionalism.

    At least, I hope so!

    After today’s capitulation on the Democrats’ part, they continue to insist that they would fight this again on another day. As long as the surge is working and all goals continue to be met, they won’t have much of a chance other than to continue to approve the funds to finish up the work.

  4. lurker9876 says:

    Remember, soothie, that both Bush and the Democrats APPROVED the funds for the US troops, they don’t agree on the details of the bill. The Democrats lost on the timetables and won a very minor fight with the benchmarsk.

  5. ordi says:

    I don’t think the Dems won anything on the benchmark issue. Bush and the Iraqis have been working this angle for awhile. Senator Levin has acknowledge as much.

    Senate Armed Services Chairman Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.) acknowledged that an override is unlikely, but said Democratic leaders are considering other ways to force a change of course in Iraq.

    One option, Levin said on ‘Fox News Sunday,’ is to include the Iraqi government benchmarks that the White House established for reducing sectarian violence and building a democratic governing and political system. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice described the benchmarks as ‘measurable, achievable goals and objectives’ in a letter to Levin and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) in late January. But most have not yet been met, and so far the United States has not penalized the Iraqi government.

    As an alternative to withdrawal terms that Bush is sure to veto, Levin said Congress could spell out consequences, should the Iraqi government keep falling short.

    ‘Those benchmarks would hopefully have some teeth in them, telling the Iraqis that the open-ended commitment is over and that they must meet their own benchmarks which they set for themselves to reach a political settlement on the sharing of resources and the sharing of power, or else there’s going to be a response in terms of reduction in support both militarily and economically,’ Levin said.

  6. lurker9876 says:

    “Senate Armed Services Chairman Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.) acknowledged that an override is unlikely, but said Democratic leaders are considering other ways to force a change of course in Iraq.”

    It is still unconstitutional for Congress to micromanage it this way.

    Besides, even if Iraqi could not meet some of the benchmarks, now what? Pullout regardless of success? Premature pullout still signifies defeat.

  7. ivehadit says:

    It must eat away at the few who have consciences in the democrat party, that their leaders are bowing at the altars of such pathology. The democrat party is appeasing the crass, uncivil, and just plain immature (aka underdeveloped egos), not to emntion those who truly hate America. Is that something for which they should be proud?

    Not to me.

  8. crosspatch says:

    “It must eat away at the few who have consciences in the democrat party …”

    There was one of those but he ran as an Independent.

  9. Retired Spook says:

    There was one of those but he ran won as an Independent.

    Heh, heh.

  10. BarbaraS says:

    Only because he lost the democratic primary. That is the only reason. These people who bank on Liebermann doing the right thing forget he is a democrat albeit an independent at the present time. I’ll bet he will run as a democrat in his next election. He is a liberal and the only thing he agrees with us is the Iraq war and that is because of Israel and nothing else. You haven’t seen him caucusing with the republicans in any way and probably won’t on anything else.

  11. lurker9876 says:

    The good, bad, and weird:

    “But party leaders made it clear that the next bill will have to include language that influences war policy. Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.) outlined a second measure that would step up Iraqi accountability, “transition” the U.S. military role and show “a reasonable way to end this war.”

    Sorry, but they tried this time and were not quite that successful.

    The Republicans are starting to get interested in “benchmarks”?

    Well, perhaps only for rewards for accomplishments.

    But what Big Lizards think is weird:

    “But what is truly bizarre is the the Democrats don’t want to use positive reinforcement: they’re absolutely dying to enact a bill where failure to achieve these benchmarks would be “punished” by cutting off civilian funding:

    House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (Md.) indicated that the next bill will include benchmarks for Iraq — such as passing a law to share oil revenue, quelling religious violence and disarming sectarian militias — to keep its government on course. Failure to meet benchmarks could cost Baghdad billions of dollars in nonmilitary aid.”

    Not good.