Feb 16 2007

When The US Shows Up In Force, Our Enemies Leave

Published by at 8:36 am under All General Discussions,Iraq

If there ever was a better indication that (a) the Bush plan to surge forces into Baghdad and Anbar Province was correct and (b) Murtha, Pelosi and the Dems plans to run away were abysmally wrong it is in today’s news:

U.S. and Iraqi forces are meeting little resistance as they sweep through Baghdad, a U.S. officer said on Friday, a day after Iraq’s president said a Shi’ite militia had ordered its leaders to leave the country.

The head of al Qaeda in Iraq, Abu Ayyub al-Masri, was wounded on Thursday when Iraqi forces intercepted a group of al Qaeda militants heading to a volatile town north of Baghdad, an Interior Ministry source said.

In Baghdad, Iraqi and U.S. troops were out in force on Friday, manning checkpoints and searching vehicles for weapons under a new crackdown that exhausted Iraqis hope will stabilize the city after four years of war and worsening sectarian chaos.

U.S. Major Steven Lamb, a spokesman for U.S. forces stationed in Baghdad, said the offensive was going well.

“I wouldn’t say there has been a high level of resistance. I mean if you take a look at the stuff that was going on yesterday, we had relatively few incidents, but that may change today,” Lamb said.

Granted, one day is not going to make a trend, but the fact we found, attacked, wounded and nearly captured al Qaeda’s leader in Iraq coming with the news the Mahdi army has decided to blow town and hide out of country is what we needed to change the dynamics in Iraq. And we are still weeks away from full strength.

Actually, I am not surprised and I doubt the military is either. As more and more of Iraq became stable (and something like 14 out of 16 Provinces are fairly peaceful) there would be a time when the US would try and move forces to focus on the remaining hotspots. Up until now they tried to do that with forces in country, which allowed the insurgents and terrorists to move to the peaceful areas. So we adjusted by holding what we had and applying a surge of external forces. Not all that complicated – if you are looking for ways to win.

But the media should (and it won’t) be asking Democrats how retreating to Okinawa would have created these results? It is a simple question and one the begs the issue – why run away when our enemies do all the running when we show up in Force? If the Dems had their way, we would have been out of Iraq last year, and al Qaeda in Iraq would be a strengthening danger. Now its leader is injured and on the run. We are making our enemies redeploy – and someone needs to point that at to that clown Mad Murtha. If the Shia Militia have left Iraq, why should we leave and let them back in?

This goes beyond surrender. These insane ideas from the left seem more about helping our enemies survive to fight us another day, if not just letting them win without a fight. The Dems need to be pressed: why leave Iraq when our enemies our now leaving?

71 responses so far

71 Responses to “When The US Shows Up In Force, Our Enemies Leave”

  1. Steve_LA says:

    AJ

    Great news…any word on when the Iraqi Army will show up and hold the territory that US forces sweep clean? Or is that part of the plan we are going to choose to ignore, perhaps the President can fly into Baghdad soon and declare “Mission Accomplished”…No?!

    Or is it as Yogi put it, “Deja Vu all over again” with the ground gained lost eventually to the insurgents when the Iraqi Army are are NO SHOWS.

    We have enough troops in Iraq to do sweeps, conquer territory not garrison the country and Baghdad in particular. If we fail in Iraq, it’s not Democrat politicians talking about non binding resolutions, it’s not US forces not doing a great job, it’s the incompetence and cowardice of the Iraqi government and people mired in a cycle of sectarian score settling.

    When the Iraqis fail, what then, another 20,000 troops to perform garrison duty?

  2. PMII says:

    But good new never ever gets reported. For whatever reason too many on the left want to lose the GWOT beginning with IRAQ.

    And most Americans are clueless – that have no idea whats going on. If they did, the left would be out of power forever.

  3. Jacqui says:

    Here’s something from Ayman al-Zawahiri said last week in a letter as reported in WorldNet Daily- http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54273

    “The people chose you due to your opposition to Bush’s policy in Iraq, but it appears that you are marching with him to the same abyss,” al-Zawahiri said directly to members of the Democratic congressional caucus.

    Showing an understanding of American politics and the internal debate taking place inside the country, al-Zawahiri drew comparisons between Iraq and Afghanistan and the U.S. failures in Vietnam 35 years ago.

    He said “the people cooperating with the United States in Afghanistan and in Iraq would be abandoned by the Americans once they fail, the same way they did in Vietnam
    _________________________________________
    Seems Zawahiri knows who his allies are in the US doesn’t it – looking at the eagerness they(Dems) are showing to pass resolutions it almost appears as if Zawahiri is sending them their marching orders.

  4. MerlinOS2 says:

    Steve_La

    70% of the promised Iraq army contingent is on station and in place. The expectation is the balance will be there in the next two weeks.

    Holding the ground is not just on them, it will be a joint effort.

    After the surge is over the hiders and the sliders will have a much toucher time if they wish to try to establish themselves again.

    If a measure of peace can be brought to the area, do you think for one minute that the residents will not rat out those who they believe are coming back in to make their life a living hell.

  5. PMII says:

    And if I was on the left, I would really worry about our enemies quoting them all the time.

  6. Soothsayer says:

    When The US Shows Up In Force, Our Enemies Leave

    Well, duh! Isn’t that the very definition of an insurgent war? We may as well be the British saying the Colonists won’t step out from behind those trees and fight fair.

    The Viet Cong and the NVA lost every set to battle they ever fought against the US. The major problem with this loony surge is that all the insurgents have to do is to blend into the population and wait.

    In the meanwhile, IED’s and shooting missiles at choppers can occupy their time in places other than where the Surge troops are massed.

    We’ve already won the war when we toppled Saddam and his statue – now this is an insurgent struggle – and the true irony is that our prime enemy – the Sunni insurgency – is financed by our ally Saudi Arabia – and our prime ally – the government – is backed and financed in part by our enemies Iran and Syria.

    Who you gonna call – Ghostbusters??

  7. MerlinOS2 says:

    The Iraq army as it stands is less than 1/3 of the size of numbers that existed in the cannon fodder Saddam situation.

    They are only grasping at the beginning of technical competence and have little in the way of arms or equipment.

    As they stand up and others are recruited they will overwhelm and secure the land for the needs of the Iraqi’s.

    So many expect the poptart moment of instant success.

    A very wrong headed solution.

  8. dennisa says:

    “And if I was on the left, I would really worry about our enemies quoting them all the time. ”

    That is the last thing they are likely to worry about. The first thing they worry about is getting elected.

  9. MerlinOS2 says:

    How many times have you seen stories of suicide bombers attacking lines of army or police recruits.

    Even they know that this is the key to their downfall.

    Each new government soldier or police can observe the square of real estate around their position and react to it.

    Get enough and you can do enough.

    But it doesn’t happen over night.

  10. Jacqui says:

    As they did during Vietnam, the Democrats and their friends in the media, are saying to the enemy “don’t worry, we have your back – we will weaken American resolve – leak secrets and attack the credibility of our own military while saying we support them.”

    We are learning that America’s deadliest enemies are within our borders and some of them sit in Congress. The insurgents and their supporters in Iran and Syria would lose their will to fight if America was united. Unfortunately, playing “gotcha” and winning elections are far more important to many of the media and political class than our national security.

    BTW, remember the Clancy book where the terrorist attacks began with mall shootings – makes you wonder when you read about who the shooter was in Utah.

  11. roonent1 says:

    Soothie,

    If you realize that American forces never lost a battle or an engagement in Vietnam, than why did we lose the war? Because lefties like yourself gave encouragement to the enemy to continue the fight by turning against the war. Why would someone turn against the war if we were winning? We have never lost an engagment in Iraq either. You have exposed your idiocy. You understand we were winning in Vietnam but lost the war, yet lefties like yourself play the same song again to assist the enemy and cause defeat of our American soldiers. Whose team do you want to be a part of, the terrorists or the the Americans?

    If this country was united, the terrorists and insurgents in Iraq would have given up a long time ago. By calling for our withdrawal and making out right false statements, like Bush lied, from the the left, our enemies have gained encouragement once again from people like yourself. You should be damned proud that you and your compadres are playing the same game that was played during Vietnam.

    I can only hope by your continued and intentional deceit, your outright hatred for all things right and good, that someday when you meet your creator, he judges you as harshly as you judge others that are trying to make this a better world. If he does, you will not like your final destination. BTW soothie, no virgins for you because they do not exist. There is only an up and down button and unless you learn to try and help this world to be a better place, yours is going down.

  12. PMII says:

    Roonent1,

    Amen

  13. ivehadit says:

    Yes, and I spoke directly with the four star Air Force general who was in charge of Viet Nam. He told me directly that the US was not allowed to win. Ya got that? Not Allowed. He lost his son in Viet Nam. He was still angry about the politics getting in the way of victory.

    George W. Bush has saved us from the malaise of that era. He is not about to let us do that again.

    If you lefties think that we are going to let you do to us what you did in the ’60’s you got another thought comin’.

    *Right now* Iraq is the central front on the WOT ..while we are, below the radar, taking out many terrorists in many other countries…

    What part of a WOT do you not understand? Personally, I think you understand VERY WELL how important this WOT is, and you are frantic to dismiss it, for it bodes well for conservatives and republicans if they SUCCEED in this massive struggle for our very existence.

    NONE of the ballyhooing by the Left is about anything other than their desperate attempts to return to some sense of relevancy and power…to keep the Nanny State alive and well…and their kumbahya’s on the world stage…with all those innocent little dictators in the third world countries…Riiiight.

    Tantrums all. And shameless.

    This is a mammoth struggle and the United States of America will succeed…without the help of the 40% who despise us. Immigration ills? Deport this 40%. They do much more harm to our country than any hispanic ever thought about doing.

  14. pagar says:

    “The Viet Cong and the NVA lost every set to battle they ever fought against the US. The major problem with this loony surge is that all the insurgents have to do is to blend into the population and wait.”

    No, that is not what the insurgents have to do. All they have to do to wait for the American leftist terrorist supporters, such as Sen Rockefeller, Sen Kerry, Sen Reid, Sen Durbin, Sen Dodd, Congresswoman Pelosi, Congressman Murtha, and their other supporters in the Congress to defeat American. That’s what happened in Vietnam, reported here
    by Col Bui Tin. the Vietnam insurgents lost the majority of their
    people in their ill-fated Tet Offensive, but with the help of people like
    Walter Cronkite and other leftist media members, plus the aid and comfort extended by Jane Fonda, Ramsey Clark and John Kerry and his followers, they were able to regroup and claim victory.
    That is the same plan they are following today. The American military will not lose on its own, the Iraqis will not lose with the help of the American military. The only way the terrorists can win is for the American left to defeat America.

  15. Soothsayer says:

    If you realize that American forces never lost a battle or an engagement in Vietnam, than why did we lose the war?

    The reason we lost is we had no business there in the first place. Vietnam was a colony of France. During WWII, Ho Chi Minh was an ally of the US against the Japanese. When the war ended, the French attempted to reoccupy Vietnam. The Vietnamese surrounded the French army at Dien Ben Phu and defeated the French.

    At the armistice talks in Geneva, parties, including the US, agreed that the country would be temporarily partitioned into North and South, but that in 1956, elections would be held to determine the course of events.

    In 1955, John Foster Dulles, the Secretary of State, and Allen Dulles, the head of the CIA, convinced Dwight D. Eisenhower to allow the South Vietnamese to call off the elections, because Ho Chi Minh would have received 80% of the vote.

    Thus began our involvement in an occupation and participation in a civil war. We had no business there – and our strategic interests were never threatened.

    Vietnam is now a trading partner with us. They manufacture all sorts of stuff for us – and can any of you guys name me one thing the Vietnamese have done to harm the US since we pulled out? No – you can’t. They even greet vets with open arms – and are singularly forgiving for the people we killed or poisoned with Agent Orange.

    If we were still in Vietnam – they would still be killing US troops. We had to lose 58,000 US soldiers because the leadership were f***ing idiots and failed to learn a lesson.

  16. pagar says:

    “I spent two tours in Viet Nam. Not that an American general needs me to vouch for his words, But I do.
    I feel that a large part of the ROE in Vietnam was an effort not to upset the the American left and their counterparts thru out the world. I feel that much of the current Iraq rules of engagement are the same effort. The fact that we have American service members under investigation for complaints filed, and evidence provided by the very enemy they are fighting is sickening. The fact that we have American
    Congresspersons willing to believe the enemy, but not our personnel is criminal, in my opinion.
    The American leftists terrorists supporters are far more dangerous to America than the Iraqi insurgents, in my opinion.

  17. Soothsayer says:

    Ivehadit:

    Name the 4-star Air Force general in charge of Vietnam. There wasn’t one.

    Paul Harkins was initially in charge, then William Westmoreland, then Creighton Abrams and then Fred Weyand. All Army – none in the Air Force.

    Apparently you think the way to tell s*** from apple butter is to taste it.

  18. pagar says:

    “If we were still in Vietnam – they would still be killing US troops. We had to lose 58,000 US soldiers because the leadership were f***ing idiots and failed to learn a lesson.”

    The lesson that was not learned is that American leftist terrorists supporters have to be dealt with by the American government.
    They can not be left to cause the death of countless Americans just because they hate America.

    We’re still in Korea, still defending a free country. Vietnam is not
    today free, for one reason, the American left aided their conquerers.

    Meanwhile there are millions dead in the aftermath of the Vietnam War. People killed by terrorist regimes, just because the America left provided aid and comfort to these killers.

  19. Carol_Herman says:

    … And, Sadr ran, too.

    Politically speaking, partisan warfare used to end when a president was elected. But this has been hitting rocks. And, it is in conflict with our CONSTITUTIONAL BEDROCK.

    Last time? Civil War. Outcome? South overplayed it’s hand.

    Today’s president? An acknowledged expert at Texas Hold’Em.

    I’ll add Wells to that equation, too. (And, Wells isn’t betting against Bush, anyway.) Just against the losers in the media.

    As to Russert? Look over “star-board” … And, you might see the shadows of a harpooned whale. Why? Becuase in time his statement saying “I’D GO TO JAIL RATHER THAN REVEAL A SOURCE.” Is on part with substituting the word “SAUCE.” (And, it will turn out in his home he was brought up on CANNED stuff. Not the unique blends good moms worked over all day, at the stove. And, if they had the money to add some meat? Then, it was called GRAVY.)

    How soon will Russert turn up dead? I’m not out at see. So I don’t know. But Dan RaTHer also tried the same trick. And, he got labelled, too.

    Russert, ahead? Won’t be “chicken hawk.” More likely? Chicken shit. Or whatever it is they serve at KFC.

  20. PMII says:

    Ivehadit,

    Your are 200% correct.

    And they will never understand!