This story breaks my heart on a lot of levels.

Fascinating, MJT, and as always, a very different, unexpected perspective on the situation by letting your interview subject tell it himself.

Trackbacked by The Thunder Run - Web Reconnaissance for 08/07/2007
A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention, updated throughout the day...so check back often.

Definitely heartbreaking.

The one thing that caught my attention is how he suggested we fine the insurgents families for everyone caught. This is similar to what Israel did during the first intifada, where they bulldozed the homes of the families. It worked to great effect except the international community made them stop.

Hammer's solution sounds reasonable. But I've got a better one: pay Iraqis to harass al-Qaeda with IEDs and kidnappings.

Michael,

Amazing interview. Not very encouraging, but that's not the point.

I think the Danish military contingent airlifted all their interpreters and dependents from Iraq to new lives in Copenhagen as they withdrew.

We British will leave ours behind to get killed... what of the Americans...?

By Microraptor: "We British will leave ours behind to get killed... what of the Americans...?"

I do not know but something tells me we will not be any better.

"But I've got a better one: pay Iraqis to harass al-Qaeda with IEDs and kidnappings."

How about if someone pays you $100 to plant a bomb we'll give you $500 if you give us the bomb and finger the guy who paid you - and you keep his hundred. Orif a neighborhood keeps their roads IED free for a month, by whatever means they choose, they get a nice development grant, say $10,000. If we can fight the insurgents by simply writing checks, that's right in our wheelhouse.

"pay Iraqis to harass al-Qaeda with IEDs and kidnappings."

How to ensure that whoever is being harassed is Al Queda and whoever is harassing is not?

leo: How to ensure that whoever is being harassed is Al Queda and whoever is harassing is not?

Don't use Sunnis. And ask for video footage (Arab guerillas love reality TV, so it won't be hard).

I thought that this part was the most important section:

Giving them electricity would reduce violence. If you don’t believe me, ask yourself what would happen to this Army base if the power was cut off forever and the soldiers had to spend the rest of their lives in Iraq. Do think think these soldiers would still behave normally Iraqis are paid to set up IEDs. They do it so they can buy gas for their generator and cool off their house or leave the country. Their hands do this, not their minds.

It reveals many things.

1. Iraqis want regular life. We are failing to give them that. After four years we still have not been able to give the Iraqis more than half an hour to an hour of electricity per day. That is pathetically bad!

2. Those who set up the bombs may not really be "enemies" per se, but just regular guys who need some extra money.

3. There just simply are not enough soldiers in the country. Time and time again this is said, but it continues to need saying, because we really do not seem to understand the practical aspect of this. If we do not have enough soldiers, we WILL LOSE. There is no point to continue a losing cause if we do not pursue it with the proper amount of soldiers. It is a waste of time, money, energy and priceless resources---our soldiers.

The system and infrastructure are not properly set up in Iraq. Basra is showing this quite clearly. Instead of working for the state, Shi'ite groups in Basra are splintering into tribes to see who should rule. This is because at their core, the tribe is of greater import than the nation-state. There is no way the Sunnis are going to trust Shi'ites to give them the political power to ensure Sunnis feel comfortable within the nation-state of Iraq. As such, there will continue to be instability until enough people have died.

I wonder, will America ever hold those who pressed for this failure of a war accountable? Or are we going to allow them to get away with it?

junyo,

I like that. Sort of neighborhood watch program.

One problem though.

I just remembered a movie with Charlie Chaplin where he was a guy who was replacing broken window glass and he had a boy an assistant who was breaking windows to keep his boss busy.

Michael, just awesome, as usual. I'm fascinated by Hammer's bird fixation. I was hypnotized by the birds upon awakening at Erbil’s Hawraman Hotel. And during a long convo w/Alan A. outside Suli’s Red Security Building he too waxed poetic about birds. When he & his family fled to the Iranian border during the Anfal they encountered no animals. When they returned home all the fowl in his yard were huddled in one corner, protecting their eggs.

Unusual / fascinating.

Stay safe / best regards,
Scott

"Hammer's solution sounds reasonable. But I've got a better one: pay Iraqis to harass al-Qaeda with IEDs and kidnappings."

Hilarious. It might just work, too, although as the other commentators alluded to, it's open to abuse.

Excellent article!

If we can fight the insurgents by simply writing checks, that's right in our wheelhouse.

I think we would lose a battle of the checkbooks. Remember that they've - supposedly - got KSA & other OPEC elements on their side vs. our Congress.

America needs to stop applying American solutions to Middle Eastern problems.

I'm only half-joking about paying Iraqis to attack al-Qaeda. That's the kind of thing that works: playing people off against each other. It's an extremely tricky game, to be sure, but it's the only way to do it.

Syria is master of this game. I think the U.S. should meet with the Syrians, but only for advice--not "help."

The Syrians could teach doctoral-level courses on using temporary alliances, propaganda and deception to pacify Arab populations.

Dan
I can help you out wrt #3.
Here ya go.
No mere nattering nabob of negativism, you. Right?.
You're a SOMEBODY! Right?

And let's stay focused buddy. I did my part in the jungle and am now so old and bald that they won't take me.
Hell Bruce Willis is a kid by comparison and they wouldn't take him.

Let's keep this about you Dan.
Fix this mess for us.
OK buddy?
Thanks pal.

Hmmm.

1. There is absolutely no acceptable reason why there isn't a plan already in place to give Iraqi interpreters and other valuable Iraqi workers a means of immigrating into the US. Bush et al are so intent on making every last person in Mexico a citizen and yet they cannot be bothered to offer this gift to those that work hardest for it?

outrageous.

2. I've always been concerned that we handed over self-government far too soon. Frankly I think probably should still be governing Iraq directly rather than the ignoble hodge-podge that exists there now.

I have created a Facebook Group to help raise awareness of this issue:

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=4093644522

Please join and help spread the word.

"Those who set up the bombs may not really be "enemies" per se, but just regular guys who need some extra money."

Dan, the instant you plant an explosive device who's express purpose is to kill US soldiers or your fellow countrymen, couldn't give less of a G-damn about your motives, you're a fucking enemy. There are other ways to make extra money, even in Iraq. They're just not as easy as murder.

"I just remembered a movie with Charlie Chaplin where he was a guy who was replacing broken window glass and he had a boy an assistant who was breaking windows to keep his boss busy."

That's true, and almost any system you devise will be exploitable. On the other hand, every bomb/artillery shell/block of plastic explosive turned in for reward is a weapon not in public circulation, and that won't potentially injure someone. Sometimes you don't need to plug the leak, it's enough to slow the rate at which you take on water. The real battle is the internal and external perception of security and stability; if $20 mil in local awards/bribes cuts violence by a measurable factor, that's a net win IMHO.

"I think we would lose a battle of the checkbooks. Remember that they've - supposedly - got KSA & other OPEC elements on their side vs. our Congress."
I think you're right, but I also don't think we actually need to win that battle long term. If we adopted fundamentally Reagan's strategy against the Soviets during the Cold War, simply increasing the cost of operations to the enemies financiers, we accomplish a couple of things. It squeezes their single dimensional economies more than it does ours, increasing the chances that there's not enough money to both spread around internally to prop up their regimes and support the insurgency/terror. And unlike the Soviets, they can't get the money to the foot soldiers legally or directly; by forcing them to get more illicit money into the country to suppport their operations we increase the odds of snagging a transaction or a middleman. If what the translator says is correct, and a large portion of the insurgency's manpower is motivated by profit and not idealogy, and we can even slightly disrupt their cashflow, we're golden. Dan's part-time bomber loses his profit motive and thus get taken out of the equation, and we're fighting a lot less people, and killing the most dangerous ones. Again, IMHO.

Recently there was a panel in NYC by Committee to Protect Journalists, on the topic of Iraqi fixers and translators - George Packer was on it, also Steven Vincent's widow Lisa and his translator Nour whom Lisa had just gotten into the US, and a Kurdish journalist Ayub Nuri who told his story in the NYTimes a few weeks ago.

I recorded the panel here - the sound isn't great but you can make out most of it.

More about Lisa and Nour.

Also there is the story of Khalid Hassan who was assassinated working for the NYTimes.

I hope Iraq becomes a place where all these people (the ones still alive, anyway) can live in peace, but until them we owe them refugee status and it isn't happening. Lisa testified about it to a Senatorial panel.

Also as long as I am on this topic let me plug the Steven Vincent Foundation to assist families of local fixers/stringers/reporters who have been killed in war-torn areas.

I've always been concerned that we handed over self-government far too soon. Frankly I think probably should still be governing Iraq directly rather than the ignoble hodge-podge that exists there now.

I agree. But I know why we did it. Otherwise the usual suspects would say, "see? the Americans want to rule you, they lied about letting you vote." In fact we wanted to delay the voting but Sistani insisted we hold elections when we did and he had a lot of power.

There was no good solution. We should have been less politically correct all down the line, and killed the right people like Sadr as soon as they made enough trouble. But also people like Sistani didn't want us to, and if we crossed them THEY would make trouble.

Ideally we would rule for 5-10 years and build up self-government gradually.

BTW on the panel someone asks George Packer what's the best way to learn what's really going on in Iraq and not just get spun by media, and Packer says to read Iraqi blogs. He says he reads 4-5 every day and they always know what's going on before the media does.

nd unlike the Soviets, they can't get the money to the foot soldiers legally or directly; by forcing them to get more illicit money into the country to suppport their operations we increase the odds of snagging a transaction or a middleman.

At the Media as Theater of War conference in Herzliyah (you might remember this Michael) Nitsana Darshan-Leitner gave a presentation about how her Center represents terror victims, bringing lawsuits against Iran, the Arab Bank and the PA. One result is that Iran can no longer keep its money in Europe. No bank in Europe, period. They have to carry millions of dollars in cash in suitcases.

I have audio of it here. (Look for the little blue arrows.)

Also David Paulin did a nice roundup of the Lisa/Steven/Nour story on his blog, with lots of links (Let me point out that the people who helped Nour get to the US include the UNHCR and Ted Kennedy, who some of us think of as misguided and appeasers. It is good to get an occasional reminder that life is more complex than ideology.)

Excellent post, and it describes very well our failure to understand the depth of Iraqi psychic damage is the real cause of a war gone badly. This dopey idea of every sect getting a slate of candidates was supposed to cure this?! It reinforces the divisions! In order to survive in Iraq, it's obvious that you have to hard and cold as a stone--and hence their politics.

Clearly, it goes much deeper than which sect controls the parliament. To compare their situation with Northern Ireland is so juvenile it's stunning. All I can hope and pray is that Petreaus gets it. The people need security; Jeffersonian democracy comes later.

If we - U.S., U.K. - leave these people behind, we can forget about having allies in the future. And frankly, we don't deserve them.

Why would anyone on the fence pick us, and why would potential friends stick their necks out, when even the men and women who accompany ours in to combat - endangering their families as well as themselves - are left to suffer and die?

This guy is fearing for his life and MJT gives out his eamil address, hello, if we are reading this they are too!

Stop helping the enemy!

Stop helping the enemy!

Calm down. Email addresses are not linked to physical location or identity.

America is but a dream. Our country is greedy too and only think of themselves. You see it in the food stores and driving down the highway. The American people no longer have the stomach to finish this war and the politicians feed on that.

Nuke Iraq? Nah, nuke the crap out of Iran and Syria they are the problem. While your at it nuke Pakastan and the mountains where the cowards hid in their caves. The preach religion and Alah then rape a woman. Suck my ass Al Qudia!

Excellent story! My favorite part? Clear out the 5 million decent Iraqis and nuke the rest. Simple. Worked as a response to Pear Harbor and we have never had a problem like that again with Japan. People from all over will say that this is cruel and inhumane....hate it for 'em.

The guy knows what he is talking about, after spending almost two years in the military in 2003 and 2004, and got injured by a HIED, I conquer with what he is saying. We got into this war by being too politicaly correct, what we should have done is being tough from the begining.

True, America, like any other country is filled with greed and can think only of themselves, but here in America there are a LOT of people who are noble, tolerant, and generous. JW says America is a dream, I don't believe that at all. America is filled with both good and bad, but i am willing to bet more on the good then the bad. I feel for this Iraqi man's plight. This is a man who knows what he is talking about, i say give his words SERIOUS consideration. I agree with GG that this country has become too politically correct which has severely hurt us. If we want to win, we have to change our tactics, but i do believe we can win if we start becoming more open to people like this interpreter in Iraq.

Wow. I am impressed by the meeting of the minds here on such a hotly debated issue. It's a breath of fresh air to read something different than the typical finger-pointing and politicing that goes on daily. I really appreciate the responses on these comments from really intelligent people that lay out viable solutions and discuss some of the potential pitfuls to others without becoming down right insulting.

What an amazing blog entry to hear from Hammer. Thank you, Michael, for being crazy enough to go out there and get the interview.I understand so much better why things are happening the way they are and why people are acting the way they do. Westerners really don't get it, do we? Our lives couldn't be more different from theirs. They get an hour of t.v. and if my cable goes out for an hour, I'm irritated. I will think twice and zip my lip next time. We are so spoiled. Really helps to put things in perspective.

My heart longs for the day when our nationalism and patriotism arises in us as strong as Hammer expresses it.

Todd: Stop helping the enemy!

Don't be an ass. He asked me to do that in case someone can help him.

With only a few thousand soilders dead nuking is out of the question. If I had the money I would hire this guy "HAMMER" as my body guard ASAP. He is grounded and fixated on FREEDOM. I love it. Good luck to you HAMMER, I hope to see you in the USA once you and your family get that card. I wish you the best.........JOHNNY

Considering all the hooplah here about infrastucture now imagine what those folk must feel.They have had at minimum 30 plus years of minimal power and daily rations of things we take for granted.Now,toss in the daily mental abuse they faced constantly and its no mystery that what he says of the average Iraqies state of mind can be nothing but true. If you let loose all of the criminals in this country and said
'rule thyself" ,Well,not much of a stretch to imagine the chaos here. So if we actually do give a flying fig about getting these folk a chance at a life of normalcy it behooves us to keep grinding at the small things like electricity,political cohesion,community cooperation et al that we take for granted and they have never known. Just my 2 cents.Thanks Mike from a fellow portlander who gets it.

Thanks for this interview Mike. And your nearly last question "What would you like to talk about that I have not already asked you?" Was so reasonable, simple, and yet often overlooked by the MSM, thanks. Stay safe. See you soon. -S

"Nuke Iraq"

No arguments here.

You know, as a guy who once upon a time signed on to launch nuclear devices (small, underwater ones...but still) I find it disheartening to find people tossing around the idea of using these weapons so shallowly. Killing 15 million or so people will certainly give us "street cred", but it will also demolish our capacity to respond in less than overwhelming force. In case you forgot, or just never were serious enough about modern force projection to ever learn, that is how we lost in Vietnam and afterwards were unable to respond effectively for years.

The key here is to break the tactic of terrorism, make it obsolete like heavy horse cavalry and massed longbowmen. Unless and until we can beat this tactic, we will see it used against us again and again. We have to beat this method and make brutality a bad choice. (Aggression is breaking down a door, throwing in a flash-bang grenade, and shooting anyone who doesn't stay down. Brutality is raping the wife and daughter of the man you just executed.)

For a lot of people in the military, this is a matter of honor. For a lot of people who have forgotten about, or never understood the importance of honor, this is about blowing people up. (Obviously, I'm nowhere near as frustrated with the Iraqi people as Hammer is. Of course, I have US citizenship.)

Great report MJT. Thanks.

If we leave Iraq before winning, we certainly ought not leave people who have helped us, and in doing so risked the lives of themselves and their family, to the mercy of the chaos and revenge killing that will result.

Anyone know how the American flag issue at the dining facility in Camp Taji got resolved?

"I think we would lose a battle of the checkbooks. Remember that they've - supposedly - got KSA & other OPEC elements on their side vs. our Congress."

KSA+OPEC cannot even dream of outspending Congress. :)

How about using the frozen funds of the various terrorist-front "charities" to pay for anti-al Qaeda attacks?

And here's another tactic:

Use captured insurgents as remote-controlled suicide bombers against terrorist targets. Kind of like the Israeli "good neighbor"/human shield thing, but with a twist.

Picture it. Troops surround a house and demand that the terrorists surrender using a megaphone. They refuse, so Ahmed the insurgent walks up the steps of the house.

One of the terrorists inside peers through the window and sees him coming. He crouches beside the door, and when Ahmed begins to knock, the terrorist quickly lunges at the door, opening it for a split second and pulling Ahmed in at gun point. He slams the door behind him.

They look at each other for a moment. The former insurgent smiles almost apologetically at his compatriot.

And then...

Boom.

Dan:
Thank you for what you do. I do not think there are many who would take the risks you take to bring us this perspective.
I have been a staunch supporter of the war, but not a big fan of how we have fought it. I think if more people have the opportunity to connect with an Iraqi civilian like "Hammer" they may have a better understanding of why we can not leave till we have finished the job and that country is safe for the Iraqis, and for the world.
I had no idea about "mixers" and this situation, thank you for educating me. I will do what I can to support you and those who risk their lives to get the truth to the rest of the world about what it is like over there. It is the only hope we have of getting this country and Europe to get on board with what we are trying to do in Iraq.
It is very easy to be here in our own safe cacoon shielded from the realities of life in Iraq and to say we need to quit and leave Iraqis to "fend for themselves". When quite litterally that means let them be slaughtered. Aside from the huge importance of having another democracy in the middle east, we must not walk away from Iraq any more than we could walk away from Europe when Hitler was invading.
Thank you for this perspective and I will be glad to support this cause to the best of my ablity.

First of all, kudos to Michael Totten for his excellent reporting. I hope many, many people read his words. Secondly, does Michael (or anyone else) know what is involved with sponsoring someone for a Green Card? People may be interested in helping in some capacity but know absolutely nothing about the process. Thanks!

Hey I'm In Canada, I support the USA 100 percent of the way, most Canadians do, its just not acceptable in our society to do anything but be jelous and thus hate Americans. The same people who hate on Americans 24/7 her love your money and can't understand why no Americans Vacation here anymore. I hope one of you guys is sponsering "Hammer" to come to the united states and get his green card. For the love of God if nobody that reads this site does that I will lose alot of faith in your great country.

Don't let me down guys.

Colin ( In Nova Scotia)

What we have in Iraq right now is so called primary distribution of capital. We are just trying to lessen the amount of blood it usually takes.

Americans are the best people in the world, but the US government does not always do the right thing. For example, the US govt supported Saddam Hussein for years. They gave him billions of dollars worth of weapons during the 1980s, including chemical weapons/Anthrax. When Saddam gassed the Kurds the US state department sided with Saddam. The US government has never apologized for its support of Saddam Hussein - it should.

Rick,

It is very easy to be here in our own safe cacoon shielded from the realities of life in Iraq and to say we need to quit and leave Iraqis to "fend for themselves". When quite litterally that means let them be slaughtered.

Hmmm, slaughtered by whom exactly? The 100 or so members of Al-Qaeda? Please! Just who would "slaughter" these poor Iraqis?

Dan: Please! Just who would "slaughter" these poor Iraqis?

I'm positive you just did a "line" before you "wrote" that. Time to call it a "night."

Let's begin the "list":

Sunnis "slaughtering" Shia civilians
Shia "slaughtering" Sunni civilians
Kurds "slaughtering" Arabs
Arabs "slaughtering" Kurds
Kurds "slaughtering" Turks
Turks "slaughtering" Kurds
Criminal gangs "slaughtering" people for money
Saddam's old buddies "slaughtering" collaborators
Arab Muslims "slaughtering" Arab Christians

and on...and on...

For a lot of people who have forgotten about, or never understood the importance of honor, this is about blowing people up.

Correction: ...this is more than about blowing people up.

Clarification: The US military is currently the best it has ever been, it is in the field, it is overwhelmingly staying within the bounds of strict discipline, they have the best tools, they are getting better tools, the economy they protect is growing, and their enemy is particularly despicable. Given all that, yielding the field on the basis of less than 1% casualties per year is unthinkably dishonorable.

If we cannot muster the will to win this fight, we cannot muster the will to protect ourselves anywhere. Surrender is an existential threat.

Thanks MJT & Hammer.

Just a couple of points.

1) I'm a supporter of the Iraq war for a whole bunch of reasons.

2) I was not thrilled with the way the occupation was run. I believe that we should not have been in such a hurry to form a national governmnet but should have started at a more local level instituting the rule of law, etc. But, as has been pointed out, this might not have been a good choice. Which leads me to .....

3)20/20 hindsight isn't. Sure you can say that "Gee X didn't work out well; we should have done Y." BUT how do you know that Y wouldn't have been worse? You don't know what the path would have led to if you started down a divergent path in the past. The best you can do is hope that the people in charge have their heads screwed on right, are operating on principle and are willing to make changes. We aren't face with nice clear good vs. bad decisions in most cases. We're faced with not great vs. bad or pretty good vs. a little better or, in Iraq, pretty shitty vs. brutally evil.

The same people who hate on Americans 24/7 her love your money and can't understand why no Americans Vacation here anymore

Easy, you're damn Canadian dollar is too high. Back when it was 75 cents US to 1 Can, we used to go all the time.

For example, the US govt supported Saddam Hussein for years. They gave him billions of dollars worth of weapons during the 1980s, including chemical weapons/Anthrax.

No they didn't. While relations between Hussein and the US government certainly thawed during the eighties, "billions of dollars worth of weapons" were not given to Iraq by anyone, much less the US. The USSR sold them a lot of weapons, and some equipment was sold by US companies to Iraq that was later converted to military use, but no one was giving out gifts of weaponry and chemical weapons precursors.

It's not hard to look stuff like this up before making claims about it. I encourage you to do so.

If we cannot muster the will to win this fight, we cannot muster the will to protect ourselves anywhere.

Please. Failing to win the peace in Iraq has nothing to do with the US being able to protect itself. The nation did not fall to invading commie hordes after Vietnam, and will not fall to hordes of crazed Jihadists if it fails in Iraq.

Mind you, oil might be a bit trickier to get a hold of in the long run though...

DPU: No one was giving out gifts of weaponry and chemical weapons precursors.

Oh, really.

I suppose you haven't seen the video clip of Rummy shaking Saddam's hand.

And I also don't suppose you noticed what Saddam did after the handshake?

Didn't think so.

Here's what: he put his hand in his pocket.

What did Rummy give the Iraqi dictator? Nobody really knows. But I assure you it was not a lifesaver.

Obviously, Rummsfield handed him the keys to the Lincoln bedroom.

Duh

:rolls eyes:

dpu,

Please. Failing to win the peace in Iraq has nothing to do with the US being able to protect itself. The nation did not fall to invading commie hordes after Vietnam, and will not fall to hordes of crazed Jihadists if it fails in Iraq.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Center_bombing
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11%2C_2001_attacks
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khobar_Towers
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1998_U.S._embassy_bombings
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uss_cole

We are not fighting the Vietnam war. The Vietnamese war was also a counter-insurgency, but there was no organized effort on the part of Communists to take the war in Vietnam to American shores. Nuclear brinkmanship probably had something to do with this, but Soviet culture was also in play.

In the war we are fighting, today against non-state, militant Islamic organizations and others, not forty years ago against state based communists, there is a real risk of substantial harm to US citizens at home and abroad.

Not everything is about threat of invasion. The purpose of our national security system is to protect US interests at home and abroad. Dying by arteriosclerosis is slower than execution by firing squad, but that doesn't make it more palatable as a future. We will suffer fatally if we do not vigorously defend our interests.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embargo_Act_of_1807

Not everything is about threat of invasion. The purpose of our national security system is to protect US interests at home and abroad.

Which is why many opposed the war on the grounds that it would have a paradoxical effect.

The point remains that the US will not fall apart or fail to protect itself should it fail in Iraq. And it isn't just a matter of having sufficient will to win. All the will in the world may not be enough to succeed in Iraq.

Dying by arteriosclerosis is slower than execution by firing squad, but that doesn't make it more palatable as a future.

Of course, but there's also the matter of confusing a case of hangnail with a case of arteriosclerosis.

dpu,

The point remains that the US will not fall apart or fail to protect itself should it fail in Iraq. And it isn't just a matter of having sufficient will to win. All the will in the world may not be enough to succeed in Iraq.

That is factually untrue on both counts.

The US substantially suffered after the abandonment of Vietnam. Our economy suffered, we suffered in our relations abroad because we settled for realpolitik instead of using force. Everybody knew they could push the US and we wouldn't push back, so we got pushed pretty hard and we still haven't recovered.

All the will in the world will in fact quiet Iraq, Saddam Hussein proved that. All the will in the world means abandoning your principles and identity to accomplish a set goal. It is a stupid saying unless you understand what will is. Go rent "The Usual Suspects" for a primer on will. For advanced studies, see "Triumph of the Will". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triumph_of_the_Will We do not want to have to rely on will alone, we can do better than that.

What makes your comments particularly limited is that they do not acknowledge that we are doing better in Iraq since the Surge started, and not just militarily.

By the way, blood poisoning from a hangnail is in fact fatal. Perhaps you should look into systemic failure more closely. Waiting until you are actually circling the drain is a bad plan.

All the will in the world will in fact quiet Iraq, Saddam Hussein proved that.

I had assumed that we were talking about possibilities that did not involve returning to the status quo before the invasion.

What makes your comments particularly limited is that they do not acknowledge that we are doing better in Iraq since the Surge started, and not just militarily.

I also did not acknowledge that the world is round. Did you take that to mean that I think it flat?

The Iraqi government is on the point of collapse. July's casualties are high for the time of year, but that would be true whether the surge was working or not. By which benchmarks are you claiming that the surge is improving the situation?

By the way, blood poisoning from a hangnail is in fact fatal. Perhaps you should look into systemic failure more closely. Waiting until you are actually circling the drain is a bad plan.

Yes, but someone who claims every hangnail is about to kill him has a mental disorder.

Parliamentary governments are designed to fail, if they do not fail during changing times they do not improve. There probably need to be elections held this fall or winter.

I am shocked, shocked to discover that casualties rise in the middle of an offensive! Of course, if you want to talk about real casualties...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_somme Overall, however, the first day on the Somme was a failure. The British had suffered 19,240 dead, 35,493 wounded, 2,152 missing and 585 prisoners for a total loss of 57,470.

That is what failed efforts look like.

Yes, but someone who claims every hangnail is about to kill him has a mental disorder.

And somebody who has already lost toes to hangnail and refuses to view further hangnails as serious problems is a fool.

Parliamentary governments are designed to fail, if they do not fail during changing times they do not improve.

Parliamentary governments that fail due to sectarian parties pulling out of the government while their militia death squads duke it out in the streets has little to do with improvement during changing times. I do admire the chutzpah required to give it that spin, though.

I repeat - what benchmarks are you using to claim that the surge has improved the situation?

That is what failed efforts look like.

Demonstrating that somewhere in history conditions have been worse is a particularly desperate debating technique. It also has nothing to do with the point, as I already indicated that the casualty figure prove nothing one way or the other.

Michael,

Thanks for an interview that offered a lot of information about an ally and his concerns if readers can read the lines and inbetween. Our disconnection to the occupation is tragic, and our so called discussions about 'the war' leave out the main players.

I cannot imagine the courage and desparation he must be feeling, and how hard it must be to also think his asylum an unlikely occurrance at the moment for the sake of his wife and baby. More of these would be valuable.

Be safe.

In the great scheme of consequences from Vietnam, we might also take note of the Soviet freedom of action that encouraged them to invade Afghanistan, the long-term results of which we got to all see one bright fall morning.

...we might also take note of the Soviet freedom of action that encouraged them to invade Afghanistan...

Blaming the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan on US failure in Vietnam is a bit of a stretch, isn't it?

...the long-term results of which we got to all see one bright fall morning.

Those results were caused by some of those who drove the Soviets out of Afghanistan. That is an even more tenuous connection to Vietnam.

I repeat - what benchmarks are you using to claim that the surge has improved the situation?

Military Anecdote:
http://michaelyon-online.com/wp/bread-and-a-circus-part-ii-of-ii.htm

US Poll Numbers:
http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2007/08/latest-poll-sho.html
10% shift in one month

Mainstream Media:
http://www.breitbart.com/print.php?id=D8QRMCU00&show_article=1
The new U.S. military strategy in Iraq, unveiled six months ago to little acclaim, is working.

Think Tanks:
http://www.csis.org/media/csis/pubs/080607_iraq-strategicpatience.pdf

What benchmarks are you using to show that the surge is failing...that actually matter more? How much experience do you have with conditions on the ground in Iraq?

What benchmarks are you using to show that the surge is failing...

Where did I say that it was failing? And as I haven't said that, what did I say that made you assume that I think it is failing?

So your benchmarks for success are Michael Yon's experiences, an opinion poll of Americans, a media article, and a think tank?

I would have thought that things like reduced incidents of insurgency, number of refugees returning, and increased political stability would be appropriate benchmarks. Improved polling of Americans would be a decent benchmark if the aim of the surge was to increase government popularity.

dpu,

I've cited specific references which you do not appear to have checked. This is a degree of superficiality that is insulting to the point of trollishness.

If you want to meet hot guys in your area who want to chat, go to a different web site and leave me alone.

I've cited specific references which you do not appear to have checked.

You have cited a Michael Yon piece, a poll that indicates an increase in approval of the surge, an opinion piece in the media, and a PDF file that crashed my browser.

Beyond that, I'm afraid that my mind-reading skills are somewhat lacking.

If you want to meet hot guys in your area who want to chat, go to a different web site and leave me alone.

Wow, your argument must be far weaker than I thought. I win.

DPU:Please. Failing to win the peace in Iraq has nothing to do with the US being able to protect itself.

Now how in the crap do you know that??? Osama Bin Laden believed the United States a paper tiger when he attacked us on 9/11, citing Reagan's withdrawal from Beirut THIRTY YEARS EARLIER, and you claim to know how failure in Iraq will affect us tommorow or 50 years from now?

Please, don't make me laugh.

I repeat - what benchmarks are you using to claim that the surge has improved the situation?

Read it and weep:

The morale of our GIs is higher than ever.

Civilian fatality rates are down roughly a third since the surge began.

Former allies of AQ are turning against them and asking us for help.

In the last six months Iraqis have begun to turn on the extremists and turn to the Americans for security and help.

Today the Sunni sheiks there are close to crippling Al Qaeda and its Salafist allies. Just a few months ago, American marines were fighting for every yard of Ramadi.

In some of Baghad's roughest neighborhoods life is slowly coming back with stores and shoppers.

The American high command assesses that more than three-quarters of the Iraqi Army battalion commanders in Baghdad are now reliable partners (at least for as long as American forces remain in Iraq).

Corrupt and sectarian Iraqi commanders who once infested the force have been removed.

Far more Iraqi units are well integrated in terms of ethnicity and religion.

In the past, few Iraqi units could do more than provide a few soldiers to put a thin Iraqi face on largely American operations. Today, in only a few sectors do American commanders complain that their Iraqi formations were useless — something that was the rule, not the exception in late 2005.

American military formations brought in as part of the surge and the increasing competence of the Iraqis has had another critical effect: no more whack-a-mole, with insurgents popping back up after the Americans leave.

The coalition’s new Embedded Provincial Reconstruction Teams are working. Although much more needs to be done to create jobs, a new emphasis on microloans and small-scale projects was having some success where the previous aid programs often built white elephants.

The surge has allowed the military to fashion its own advisory groups from battalion, brigade and division staffs. Dozens of military officers who before the war had known little about governance or business are now ably immersing themselves in projects to provide the average Iraqi with a decent life.

Many towns and neighborhoods are standing up local police forces, which generally prove more effective, less corrupt and less sectarian.

There's more.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/30/opinion/30pollack.html?ex=1186718400&en=79665c886df0d9fc&ei=5070

Carlos,

You have responded honorably and with a strong grasp of fact and reason. You are hereby excused from further responses to dpu. You aren't what he is looking for and he is not interested in arguing facts.

Thank you for a better response than I gave. I was already on my last nerve with him.

Patrick Lasswell: If you want to meet hot guys in your area who want to chat, go to a different web site and leave me alone.

For what it's worth, I agree with you, on political matters.

But you've just responded to a reasonable argument by a long-time commenter by calling him a homosexual.

Get a grip. And stop accusing everyone who disagrees with you a "troll." Or worse, as you've just done.

Dismissed.

Oh and Carlos,

I'm not sure what you thought about this: You are hereby excused from further responses to dpu.

But it's clear that Pat has an issue with control.

It seems to me Pat has an issue with intellectual dishonesty. DPU is an eternal pessimist in the face of progress by the surge, yet he poo poos the progress at every turn. At times, even honorable men lose their patience with whiney pessimists. This behavior tends to bring out the worst in people, especially when the stakes are so very high and the effort on behalf of some to help is so very lacking.

DPU is a pessimist, but he is not a troll.

He offered to buy me ice cream if/when I visit him in Vancouver, BC. Trolls don't offer to buy me ice cream.

3)20/20 hindsight isn't. Sure you can say that "Gee X didn't work out well; we should have done Y." BUT how do you know that Y wouldn't have been worse? You don't know what the path would have led to if you started down a divergent path in the past. The best you can do is hope that the people in charge have their heads screwed on right, are operating on principle and are willing to make changes. We aren't face with nice clear good vs. bad decisions in most cases. We're faced with not great vs. bad or pretty good vs. a little better or, in Iraq, pretty shitty vs. brutally evil.

The most frustrating thing about this whole situation is how people just can't seem to get that. Iraq is a wicked problem. It is by definition impossible to do it right. "OK" is the best we can hope for and that's better than it was. I am sure some other choices would have been better in the long run but faced with several choices all of which have both pros and cons, there is no way to know ahead of time. You just have to pick one - hopefully based on your values and experience, maybe mixed with a little intuition - and follow it through and then deal with what happens next, and next, and next....

This drives Idealists, and utopians, and anyone who hates ambiguity, nuts.

The USSR sold them a lot of weapons, and some equipment was sold by US companies to Iraq that was later converted to military use, but no one was giving out gifts of weaponry and chemical weapons precursors.

Russia supplied Saddam with most of his weapons, followed by France and then China. In case you're wondering why the UNSC resolution to depose Saddam failed.

These are the folks who were bribed with Saddam's Oil for Food money. We are not among them. Also we created and patrolled the no-fly zones which allowed the Kurdish people to survive. Other nations have way more to answer for that we do.

Totten, is this your idea of a moderate Iraqi? A sell out who thinks his country should be nuked? And who tries to comfort you by saying, "the Shia are easy to control"? I mean he is obviously doing it to beg for a Green Card, but this is really low.

For some reason, wherever you go, Lebanon, Kurdistan or Iraq, you're always looking for people like this guy.

Amused: Totten, is this your idea of a moderate Iraqi?

No. He is obviously extreme. "Nuke Iraq," come on, I don't think that's a moderate opinion and you goddamned well know it.

For some reason, wherever you go, Lebanon, Kurdistan or Iraq, you're always looking for people like this guy.

I don't look for them, they are all over the region. I run into them constantly. You have obviously never been to the Middle East.

Did you know pro-American opinion is higher in Lebanon than it is in Canada? And the Kurds are more pro-American than Americans.

Anyway, who did you expect me to meet while embedded with the Army? Iraqis who hate Americans don't work with Americans.

And the Kurds are more pro-American than Americans.

You can chalk that up to our Liberals. Besides AQ, they are the most anti-American people on the planet. With friends like them we don't need enemies.

Green card this, and green card that.
Some people seem to think the solution to the world's problems is to give everybody on the planet a green card.

No. He is obviously extreme. "Nuke Iraq," come on, I don't think that's a moderate opinion and you goddamned well know it.

He sounds like Lefty Westerners trying to be funny. "Let's nuke Amerikkka. He he he."

Did you know pro-American opinion is higher in Lebanon than it is in Canada?

Is there anywhere pro-American opinion is lower than it is in Canada?

Heck MJT, I'd buy you some ice cream, even a real milkshake, if ever you are in the Raleigh, NC area .

Kenneth: DPU is an eternal pessimist in the face of progress by the surge

And why shouldn't he be? Given the track record of "progress" so far in Iraq, it's fairly obvious the surge will not have a meaningful, long-term result. Yes, it's depressing, especially to people who supported the war and still do.

It would be great if everyone could remain optimistic, but there's definitely a case to be made that the surge won't work.

You think pessimism brings out the worst in people. I agree that it can't get much worse than hurling bigoted, anti-gay insults at another commenter.

Green card this, and green card that.

If the likes of DPU have their way, 90% of Iraqis will want and need a green card.

I don't pretend to be on par with the other commenters in my knowledge of much of anything, but I read and I learn! Thank you, Michael and stay safe!

Nor do I, Chris, but I know a commenter with a political agenda when I see one. And I know just about everyone on the Left has a tremendous amount of capital invested on a US loss. A win in Iraq would put them out of power for quite some lengthy period of time. Thus, the better things go in Iraq, the testier they become.

A win in Iraq would put them out of power for quite some lengthy period of time.

Exactly. Yet they could accuse the Right of being similarly vested politically in the outcome. To which I preemptively respond that, yes, the Right's fortunes hang on America's success (nothing wrong with that), while the Left's hang on America's failure. For shame.

Carlos: If the likes of DPU have their way, 90% of Iraqis will want and need a green card.

That's absolutely moronic. He never said he hopes that the U.S. fails in Iraq.

MJT,

I don't understand why you felt the need to defend him against "troll" accusations, but haven't said anything about people taunting him with anti-gay insults.

Gotta love when wikipedia, and media releases are favored references to prove points. That shows a complete lack of knowledge as to what a reputable reference is.

Patrick,
I don't know where you think you get off slurring anti-gay rhetoric. Is that the way you act when you have no valid response to someone's argument? Are you still in the 3rd grade? If you no good response to a solid argument, then deal with it in a manner that isn't slanderous, insulting, and bigotry.

To comment you your question as to if DPU has experience on the ground in Iraq, is that to mean that anyone who hasn't fought in Iraq has no place in commenting on the war? That's the most ludicrous assertion I've ever heard. I guess by that rational American citizens who have never had experience in politics shouldn't be allowed to vote either. Since by voting you are commenting on your political preference regarding candidates.

Hey Patrick,

I almost forgot, you still haven't cited your philosophy publications. I'd still love to read anything you've had peer reviewed. But without a citation I'll take that as you have none though. If that's the case I wouldn't go around commenting on people's argumentation style, and how yours is so much better (when in reality it's a whole lot of fluff).

DPU is an eternal pessimist in the face of progress by the surge,...

I haven't said anything one way or another regarding the success of the surge other than to ask what the benchmarks were. The fact that several commenters have taken that to mean that I oppose the surge, or think it's failing, or that I hope that it fails speaks volumes about their own mindsets, not mine.

For the record, I hope the surge succeeds. I don't think that it will because of the nature of the difficulties that Iraq faces and the nature of those who are opposed to stability in Iraq. In terms of whether it is currently succeeding or not, I have no idea. My own benchmarks for success will not be measurable for a while.

Edgar: But you've just responded to a reasonable argument by a long-time commenter by calling him a homosexual.

Not that there's anything wrong with that :) But thanks.

MJT: DPU is a pessimist, but he is not a troll.

I like to think that socialists are optimistic to the point of insanity. Besides, my pessimistic notions about how things would turn out in Iraq make me more of a realsit, wouldn't you say? But thanks, I appreciate the comment.

Heh. "realsit" == "realist" in my post above.

While dpu may not be a troll, he was astonishingly annoying yesterday, to the point where he earned the comparison to internet spam and late-night television commercials. He also failed to acknowledge any of my point or cite references of his own while continuously calling for my criteria. That's the point where it seemed to me that he was seeking out social contact more than intellectual honesty. If some people want to interpret my comments as anti-homosexual, that would be intellectual dishonesty.

Besides, I'm 43, curmudgeonly, overweight, straight, and have a bad haircut. How can you assemble that and take it seriously when I pose myself as a "hot guy?" Get real.

I almost forgot, you still haven't cited your philosophy publications.

The writer of this comment is trollish. Establishing your own requirements then hounding people across multiple threads to pursue them is trollish behavior. I do not get to require anybody to shut the hell up and then hound them across multiple threads when they fail to do so. You are not the boss of me and this is not your blog. I do not respect you and I do not respect your behavior, especially when you claim authority you clearly do not have.

DPU: Not that there's anything wrong with that

Definitely not. And it's sad because this blog has a good track record of not tolerating anti-semitism and racism.

It shouldn't tolerate outburts of vile homphobic invective either, like we heard from Patrick.

It's unfortunate that this kind of talk is often ignored and dismissed as no big deal. But it has to be combatted whenever it pops up.

Kids, don't make me pull over this car.

Edgar, I know Patrick and I know that he did not intend his comment the way you interpreted it. His brother is gay. He is not an anti-gay person.

He is not an anti-gay person.

Ah. It was a compliment then?

While dpu may not be a troll, he was astonishingly annoying yesterday, to the point where he earned the comparison to internet spam and late-night television commercials.

You must be new at this.

He also failed to acknowledge any of my point or cite references of his own while continuously calling for my criteria.

You didn't make any point that I could see. And what references should I cite while trying to identify what basis you have for saying the surge is succeeding?

Patrick,

Trollish? You commented that I was ignorant as to how a well formulated argument is organized. That if I were learned I would understand your posts were all full of essential material to explain "complex" ideas (I'd disagree about that complexity, but that's besides the point). So I only asked to show proof that you yourself are so learned and respected as an authority on anything. Having something published by a peer reviewed source isn't overly difficult, but shows that there is some original, and logical thought put into whatever has been published, as opposed to your own personal opinion of your own argumentation style (which is obviously biased).

If asking for authentic, reliable proof of something YOU claim is true is trollish, then I guess we should take everything you say is valid irregardless of how crazy it may seem.

Michael,

They can't take a joke. They won't listen to reason while they think they have right, or something they can present as injury, on their side.

I am not going to cede the point, but I regret that the quality of discourse on this thread failed your standards.

On the plus side, it appears that our diabolical plan to present ourselves as iconic figures searching for truth is working like a champ. Yesterday I presented myself as "hot guy" and nobody pointed and laughed.

If asking for authentic, reliable proof of something YOU claim is true is trollish,...

Some people feel attacked when asked to back up their opinions. I'm never really sure if that is a personality quirk, because they're not good at explaining their opinions, or because they don't have much of an argument.

At any rate, if anyone else has a cohesive reason for thinking that the surge is succeeding, I'd love to hear it. Or maybe we could at least come to a consensus as to what would demonstrate success.

Perhaps we can all refrain from engaging in personal attacks for the time being. It really isn’t a useful way to forward the discussion, although it is tempting. And enough with this Anti-Gay nonsense. The comment was not inherently anti-gay, it was Anti-DPU, and he can take care of himself. While it may have been an unnecessary swipe, it is projection to read anti-gay sentiment into it, and seems to be an attempt to discredit and deflect the discussion from the actual topic at hand with PC hypersensitivity.
Last time I checked, peer review was not a requirement to post opinions in the comments sections. Patrick’s Blog is linked to by MJT extensively and is easily accessible by clicking on his name at the end of his comments. I am sure he welcomes all visitors to his blog to judge his body of work. There are some relative newcomers to the comments sections who are not familiar with the un-written Rules of Engagement, and over reacting isn’t helpful and sets a bad precedent.
I appreciate the work MJT is doing and would rather he be allowed to focus on producing more great work than moderate squabbles in the comments.
High road, Gentlemen, Take the high road.
-L

DPU,

Don't feel so bad. Most of the time I also have no idea what the point of his posts are too until I take a few minutes to re-read the posts and filter them for substance. Oh well I guess those are the breaks!

Yesterday I presented myself as "hot guy" and nobody pointed and laughed.

On the internet, no one knows you're a dog.

I'll make it easier for everyone:

P. Laswell and co.: Surge is working. For proof look at personal experiences of people on the ground. Look at military reports, polls, and media reports, and analyses by think-tanks who are studying the conflict.

DPU: We don't know if surge is working. If it is, the proof is found by using quantititive measures (lower numbers of attacks, number of people coming back to Iraq, length of time a government stays in power, etc.).

This is a reasonable argument to have. Why are people so bothered by it?

"On the plus side, it appears that our diabolical plan to present ourselves as iconic figures searching for truth is working like a champ. Yesterday I presented myself as "hot guy" and nobody pointed and laughed."

I giggled! :)

OK, you guys posted while I was writing, so please excuse if my post is an unnecessary addition. I don't want to stir the pot...
-L

This is a reasonable argument to have.

I welcomed the surge, but felt that in order to have a long term effect, the commitment had to be far larger. The small amount of resources committed seemed to smack of a quick fix, and we've seen too many of them from this administration with poor results. And at the time, in this comment section, I predicted that in the Iraqi government would instruct the Shia militias to take a break for the duration of the surge and go after the Sunni militias instead (one commenter in this thread predictably diagnosed me with BDS for that, although the prediction seems to have come about).

At any rate, the real test of whether the surge has succeeded will be if it meets its stated goals, namely reducing the sectarian violence in Baghdad and remove al Qaeda from Anbar.

Patrick: our diabolical plan to present ourselves as iconic figures searching for truth

Uh, I don't try to present myself as an iconic figure. I'm just a person with a Web site.

DPU: I welcomed the surge, but felt that in order to have a long term effect, the commitment had to be far larger. The small amount of resources committed seemed to smack of a quick fix, and we've seen too many of them from this administration with poor results.

For what it's worth, I pretty much agree with this. I have seen positive results of the surge with my own eyes. In some cases the results are extraordinary. Will it hold? It very well may not. Americans do want a quick fix, especially America's liberals. A stable and democratic Iraq cannot be made in the microwave.

If Petraeus's report next month is positive enough, he may be able to purchase some patience from the American public. That is what we all should hope for. Otherwise, Iraq is probably finished. Anbar Province is coming along nicely, but there will be no quick fixes in Baghdad.

What I think DPU might be missing is that the current strategy actually works (for now), whereas the previous strategies did not. The American military has learned a great deal about counterinsurgency by making mistakes and learning what doesn't work. "Clear, hold, build" works well where it has been implemented. See Ramadi (or wait for my reports from Ramadi).

That's why it is such a cunning plan, milord...

Oh crap! I just cast myself as Baldrick!

In some cases the results are extraordinary. Will it hold? It very well may not.

I would still qualify the surge as working if it creates enough of a breathing space for some kind of political, economic, and social infrastructure in place that could deal with sectarian violence after the surge.

I just cast myself as Baldrick!

And I just spent the last two evenings watching Blackadder seasons one through four. Now I'm stuck with a mental image to go with the name. Things can only go downhill from here.

Little boy kisses little girl (or vise versa).

Adult sees it and make big deal out of it.

Who would be pervert in this situation?

The one who kissed or the one who had dirty thoughts?

leo: Little boy kisses little girl...Adults...make big deal out of it. Who would be pervert in this situation? The one who kissed or the one who had dirty thoughts?

Er...leo? What exactly does that have to do with fighting insurgents in Iraq?

Unless you mean it metaphorically:

The Sunnis are the "little boy," the Shia are the "little girl," and the "parents" are the American left. And the "kissing" is killing -- something that's natural in the middle east but Americans are appalled by.

Yeah, I can see that.

Answer: the kiddies are the ones with the sick minds. The parents are only trying to help them.

leo,

You also did not include a link to your philosophical underpinnings to that analogy!

The finger points at the moon...

Awwwww.. someone seems a little mad that he doesn't have any solid rebuttals. Need a hanky?

Anyway leo didn't need to cite anything. He posed a question. You seem to have issues with identifying differences between arguments and questions. But that's OK. Everyone starts out somewhere.

Peace through a shared love of Blackadder.
See, we can all get along!
Patrick, you don't look anything like Baldric, you are much taller.
-L

I'll bet Leo can respond on his own if he feels the need. I doubt he requires so much 3rd party help.

You all are correct. My last comment has nothing to do with insurgency.

It had to do with few social questions some of you have raised.

Personally, all I want is to get back to discussing issue of insurgency and not of bigotry or of sexual preferences or of anything like that.

PS. Sorry for the delay with reply. Been busy.

Some years ago Sean and I got in an argument about genetics and being Irish. Something about being named after an Irish person provided me with a genetic destiny in Sean's argument. It was some years ago but, for reasons that didn't make sense to me then, I was supposed to be mean to English people because my name was Patrick.

Finally, I explained to Sean that neither of us were sufficiently Irish because we had not adjourned to the nearest pub, gotten piss drunk, and settled the matter in the alley with our fists. (Okay, I added the pub and piss drunk part just now.) Sean accepted that argument, and I'm pretty sure he would take (or give) a friendly ass kicking with dignity if he were raised in Dublin instead of Salem, Oregon.

I get angry at Sean every once and a while, but he is still worth arguing with. He routinely acknowledges valid points when they are made and will refrain from using arguments when told that they are beyond the pale. I sometimes consider the inviting nature of Dublin pub debating rules when chatting with Sean, but I've overcome the urge.

There are some people in this thread who clearly would benefit from greater familiarity with Dublin pub debating rules. Enhancing their clarity through percussive maintenance seems like the fastest route to enlightenment.

Patrick,

Wow, well put man! That has to be by far the most awesome version of "If I knew where you lived I'd beat you up!" conveyed over the internet yet. That also says a lot since it's been said uncountable times. Congrats!

And yes, I do agree you have some good arguments. I just feel they have lots of fluff that's not needed. That's all.

My internet access has been pretty limited lately, so I'll say thanks to DPU for wading against the current for me. Picking up where he left off with Mike:

What I think DPU might be missing is that the current strategy actually works (for now), whereas the previous strategies did not. The American military has learned a great deal about counterinsurgency by making mistakes and learning what doesn't work.

I can't speak for DPU, but my personal skepticism incorporates this perspective, rather than dismissing it. I don't think you, or Ken Pollack, are making these favorable stories up as a favor to the military, but I do question "what do they mean?".

As I said in my long dissent, Mike, you're being shown tactical pictures, not strategic ones. Just because people are seeing improvements doesn't equate to 'now we can win'. Improvements can be made to a dire situation without those improvements being conclusive. Or, to put it another way, have any of these newly energized Iraqi troops, any of this "one third decline in civilian casualties in some areas" ( a statistic too secondhand and casual to be believed), any of this "high Army morale" - has any of this ended the insurgency? Moreover, does any of it genuinely threaten to end the insurgency, or are we just ***putting a lid on it***?

It's more than just "reducing civilian casualties from 3000 a month to 2000 is not victory, even if it means you can honestly say "things are looking up!". It's also, reducing civilian casualties from 3000 a month to 2000 a month doesn't mean that if you wait another six months, you'll reduce the conflict by another year, and then the year after that, it's over.

"Clear, hold and build" has been producing tactical successes since 2004 while the strategic situation continued to deteriorate. I don't have any facts that demonstrate a genuinely dramatic improvement, of the sort that promises to end the war in our favor. All I see so far is a mitigation of the conflict by degree being paraded, (not by you) as, basically, victory.

General Petraeus' public remarks indicate that he knows that the US military is in no position to force a capitulation on our enemies. That's why he admits that we're just icing to a political resolution that seems unlikely to happen until after we leave. None of the power brokers in Iraq want that resolution to include "and US forces get to stay until the whole region is rearranged to their satisfaction."

Anyone who wants to see how far the situation is from normal can look at the poor guy in this interview, who loves America and suggests, even jokingly, that we fix his home country by nuking it. This guy has no home in Iraq now, and it's clear he knows it. He's a citizen of GreenZone-ia. He's a refugee.

I should also add that although I may think Patrick's version of "If I knew where you lived I'd kick your ass" is awesome, it's also the perfect example of the fluff I've been talking about. It's 225 words to say what I said in 10.

glasnost,

As I said in my long dissent, Mike, you're being shown tactical pictures, not strategic ones.

How is the Army supposed to show Michael an expanding Gross Domestic Product?

Is there something like in Hogwarts where the different houses get points magically added and subtracted where everybody can see it? If there was such an artifact, wouldn't all the terrorist factions try to blow it up immediately?

You seem to be asking for something that cannot be answered satisfactorily. More than that, you are asking for something that the enemy is working extensively to make sure that can never be answered to your satisfaction.

I am reminded of a classic work of English Literature: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0071853/quotes
King Arthur: I command you, as King of the Britons, to stand aside!
Black Knight: I move for no man.
King Arthur: So be it!
[They fight until Arthur cuts off Black Knight's left arm]
King Arthur: Now, stand aside, worthy adversary!
Black Knight: 'Tis but a scratch!
King Arthur: A scratch? Your arm's off!
Black Knight: No, it isn't!
King Arthur: Well, what's that then?
King Arthur: I've had worse.
King Arthur: You liar!
Black Knight: Come on, you pansy!
[They fight again. Arthur cuts off the Knight's right arm]
King Arthur: Victory is mine!
[Kneels to pray]
King Arthur: We thank thee, Lord, that in thy mercy -
[Cut off by the Knight kicking him]
Black Knight: Come on, then.
King Arthur: What?
Black Knight: Have at you!
King Arthur: You are indeed brave, Sir Knight, but the fight is mine!
Black Knight: Oh, had enough, eh?
King Arthur: Look, you stupid bastard. You've got no arms left!

JohnDakota, who exactly appointed you the comments police? The unnecessary Snark is really not welcome. If you don't like Patrick’s style, DONT READ IT! These little pokes and jabs are boring. At least address the merit rather than the expository style of the comments, or better yet, keep it all to yourself.
"...the idiot looks at the finger"

What is this Iraqi national with an L3Com logo masquerading as a Titan employee doing with a US Army strip.

Impersonating a US soldier?

Huhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!

"King Arthur: Look, you stupid bastard. You've got no arms left!"

Its right about time for Black Knight to declare Divine Victory. :)

Uh, I don't try to present myself as an iconic figure. I'm just a person with a Web site.

Too late, Michael. You are an iconic Middle East War Correspondent Blogger.

I would still qualify the surge as working if it creates enough of a breathing space for some kind of political, economic, and social infrastructure in place that could deal with sectarian violence after the surge.

And the breathing space has to be a couple of years long, at least, to develop that infrastructure. And if we'd been hardass enough in the beginning we could have started that clock running in 2003.

This is frightening. Don't go to Mosul, Michael.

lq;

Who appointed me comment police? Well specifically, I've only targeted Patrick. That wouldn't really mean I'm a police, I'm a person asking about Patrick, since police means I'd be regulating everyones practices. Secondly Patrick attacked me when I kindly asked that he clarify certain things. Insinuating I was retarded (similar to his anti-gay insults, or aggressive physical threats)because I had to sift through his jargon to get to his true points.

I have no problem dealing with people's jargon, I do have problems with dealing with people's physical and bigotry insults. So if you can deal with bigotry, and inflammatory insults with a delicate nature then you're a better person than I. I on the other hand would prefer to show the bigot and inflammater why they're wrong. By no means is that Snark, it's standing up for ones self.

If you have a problem with that, then I suggest you take some of your own medicine and not comment.

ilsm: Impersonating a US soldier?

That's the uniform the Army requires him to wear. He isn't impersonating a US soldier. His "rank" identifies him as an interpreter, and he does not carry a weapon.

No they didn't. While relations between Hussein and the US government certainly thawed during the eighties, "billions of dollars worth of weapons" were not given to Iraq by anyone, much less the US. The USSR sold them a lot of weapons, and some equipment was sold by US companies to Iraq that was later converted to military use, but no one was giving out gifts of weaponry and chemical weapons precursors.

Yes - but all of this was knowingly and intentionally paid for by the US government.

When drug deals are done in the US, the buyer must generally first hand over his cash to one member of the drug gang, before a different member comes along and delivers to him the contraband.

This allows lawyers, such as double-plus-ungood, to claim that their clients are innocent. Nobody intelligent is actually fooled by the ruse - but if the defendant has friends in high places all he needs is plausible deniability.

Why the defendant in this case gave special permission for the export of WMD precursors to one of the most vicious men in the world - is something Americans deserve to know.

this is the dam that Yehudit above refers to.

thats a LOT of water being held back.

That's absolutely moronic. He never said he hopes that the U.S. fails in Iraq.

Edgar,

does anybody besides Osama Bin Laden ACTUALLY SAY they want the U.S. to fail in Iraq? Hardly ever. Yet everything some people say makes that desire more than clear. For instance, they don't say the U.S. should "fail", but they do say we should 'withdraw' or 'redeploy to Okinawa.' I'm sorry, is there a difference between that and failure? No. So spare me the intellectual dishonesty. Thank you.

People have a powerful desire to be vindicated, and only a U.S. failure will vindicate everything they've been saying for the last 4 years. They finally go on "the record" as saying they want the surge to succeed, but everything they've said prior and afterwards belies that.

Carlos: does anybody besides Osama Bin Laden ACTUALLY SAY they want the U.S. to fail in Iraq? Hardly ever. Yet everything some people say makes that desire more than clear.

In other words, DPU is praticing "taqiyya."

You are hereby excused from any further response.

Dismissed.

You are both practicing disingenuousness. A common practice on blog threads. It's our version of taqiya. And your snarkiness isn't going to stop me from noticing and commenting on it.

DPU,

Carlos has made it clear that if you say something contrary to what he thinks you believe, he'll just assume it's a lie.

Dismissed.

Carlos has made it clear that if you say something contrary to what he thinks you believe, he'll just assume it's a lie.

I have a Greasemonkey script that converts everything Carlos says into more pleasant things about pie, so I don't pay a lot of attention to him. We're both happier that way, and I don't believe that I'm missing much

It's the mark of a true fanatic when they convert whatever you say into whatever they want to believe you think. And as any dialog must begin with the premise that the other person is at least telling the truth, then the only thing that I can imagine that he is here for is to vent.

Past behavior on his part leads me to think that there are some bizarre issues that he needs to work out. We may be therapy, and that I don't mind.

Carlos has made it clear that if you say something contrary to what he thinks you believe, he'll just assume it's a lie.

I think you missed my point entirely. I base what I "think" people believe precisely on what they have said. And one little comment on "the record" doesn't erase 3-4 years of blog threads to the contrary.

But we're giving DPU more importance than he deserves. My point being only that if the likes of DPU have their way, 90% of Iraq will be clamoring for Green Cards, whether he intends for our "failure" (withdrawal, redeployment, whatever) or not.

Carlos,

You arrive at this magical number of 90% how? Contrary to what you may want to believe, the US is not the center of the universe, not everyone wants to live there. There are many other countries (western) where these people may go to, England, France, Canada, to name a few. So I don't really understand your point.

If you're afraid 90% of the people in Iraq will move to the US, you can sleep tonight knowing that's not even remotely possible. If you are associating with Iraqi's moving to the US as a twisted logic that with them will come terrorists from Iraq, I suppose that's possible. As it is also possible that terrorists