Increase or not? It all depends...
Inside the Beltway�-�Nation/Politics�-�The Washington Times, America's NewspaperHowever - it looks like the militias ARE being dismantled. What a shock, eh? Instead of playing PC 'gotta avoid offending them' games we're actually going after them - now that Maliki's gotten notice that 'business as usual' was going to get his support cut off.On Dec. 5, Newsweek magazine touted an interview with then-incoming House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Chairman Rep. Silvestre Reyes as an "exclusive." And for good reason.
"In a surprise twist in the debate over Iraq," the story began, Mr. Reyes "said he wants to see an increase of 20,000 to 30,000 U.S. troops as part of a 'stepped up effort to dismantle the militias.' "
"We have to consider the need for additional troops to be in Iraq, to take out the militias and stabilize Iraq," the Texas Democrat said to the surprise of many, "I would say 20,000 to 30,000."
Then came President Bush's expected announcement last week, virtually matching Mr. Reyes' recommendation and argument word-for-word -- albeit the president proposed only 21,500 troops.
Wouldn't you know, hours after Mr. Bush announced his proposal, Mr. Reyes told the El Paso Times that such a troop buildup was unthinkable.
"We don't have the capability to escalate even to this minimum level," he said.
And all of a sudden, the guy found a pair of stones. Bu-bye, Mookie!
Mahdi Army expressing siege mentality - Yahoo! News'Change of heart', eh? I'll bet.BAGHDAD, Iraq - Mahdi Army fighters said Thursday they were under siege in their Sadr City stronghold as U.S. and Iraqi troops killed or seized key commanders in pinpoint nighttime raids. Two commanders of the Shiite militia said Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has stopped protecting the group under pressure from Washington and threats from Sunni Muslim Arab governments.
The two commanders' account of a growing siege mentality inside the organization could represent a tactical and propaganda feint, but there was mounting evidence the militia was increasingly off balance and had ordered its gunmen to melt back into the population. To avoid capture, commanders report no longer using cell phones and fighters are removing their black uniforms and hiding their weapons during the day.
During much of his nearly eight months in office, al-Maliki has blocked or ordered an end to many U.S.-led operations against the Mahdi Army, which is run by radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, the prime minister's key political backer.
As recently as Oct. 31, al-Maliki, trying to capitalize on American voter discontent with the war and White House reluctance to open a public fight with the Iraqi leader just before the election, won U.S. agreement to lift military blockades on Sadr City and another Shiite enclave where an American soldier was abducted.
But al-Maliki reportedly had a change of heart in late November while going into a meeting in Jordan with President Bush. It has since been disclosed that the Iraqi leader's vision for a new security plan for Baghdad, to which Bush has committed 17,500 additional U.S. troops, was outlined in that meeting.
We'll see if the results are what are expected... but it looks pretty promising so far.
J.
Comments (2)
For those coming late to the Play of the Middle East, I do provide a quick refresher of what is going on. And a bit on dropping the 'oil drop' theory... and what we did instead. Really, though, that one poll out actually does show that Americans see this as a change in tactics with the current strategy. Perhaps more than a few do *not* want the President or Congress figuring out how to fight a war and leave that to those that actually do the fighting. Strange how no one ever gets polled on *that* question...
Almost like those making the poll were taking *sides*.
Posted by ajacksonian | January 21, 2007 11:35 AM
Posted on January 21, 2007 11:35
No! Taking sides in a poll? Why, that's UNHEARD of!
J.
Posted by JLawson | January 21, 2007 12:53 PM
Posted on January 21, 2007 12:53