ABOUT HARDBLOGGER

Hardblogger delivers opinions and analysis on the latest political news by MSNBC anchors, correspondents, analysts and contributors. Whenever news breaks, Hardblogger will break it down, so check in often.

Hardball with Chris Matthews airs weeknights on MSNBC.



U.S. Troop Surge in Iraq: Over to You Al-Maliki…

Posted: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 10:20 AM by Hardball

By Lt. Col. Rick Francona

 

President Bush is expected to announce tonight that he will order an increase in the level of U.S. forces in Iraq by as many as 20,000 troops.  Most analysts believe that the bulk of these forces will likely be assigned the mission of establishing security in Baghdad, and some tasked with putting increased pressure on the Sunni insurgents in Anbar province.  While there is a need to continue operations against the insurgents in the western part of the country, the major focus of these forces should be resolution of the abysmal security situation in Baghdad.

Security in Baghdad is mostly a sectarian issue – Sunni versus Shia.  Although there has always been some level of sectarian violence in the capital, it was somewhat held in check by the moral authority exercised by the “moderate” Shia clerics, Grand Ayatollah Ali Al-Sistani and Ayatollah Abd Al-Aziz Al-Hakim.  That discipline evaporated in February 2006 with the destruction of Shia Islam’s fourth holiest site, the Al-Askari (or Golden) mosque in Samarra at the hands of al-Qaeda in Iraq.  Since then, Shia militias have been waging a murderous – and effective - campaign against Sunnis, with the center of their operations in Baghdad.

The main culprit in the expanding sectarian violence is the Shia militia of Muqtada Al-Sadr, known as the Mahdi Army.  Muqtada Al-Sadr, despite his relatively low standing in the Shia religious hierarchy as a hawjat al-islam (scholar of Islam), has eclipsed all other Shia leaders in terms of influence among rank and file Shiites. The cries of “Muqtada, Muqtada, Muqtada” from many of those present at the execution of Saddam Hussein are testament to that fact.

The security situation in Baghdad is an Iraqi problem that requires an Iraqi solution.  It is absolutely essential that Al-Sadr’s militia be either abolished or neutralized.  This should be a condition for the deployment of additional American forces.  The question is how that happens.  Is the Iraqi government led by Prime Minister Nuri Al-Maliki capable enough - or willing - to take on the Mahdi Army?

Up until now, there has been no indication, despite verbal assurances to the contrary, that the Al-Maliki government has the willpower to marginalize Al-Sadr.  When American forces attempted to stop operations of the Mahdi Army in its stronghold of Sadr City, the prime minister stepped in to resist or refute those efforts. 

It is time for the Al-Maliki government to act as the government of Iraq, not the government of the Shia.  If Al-Maliki does not move against Al-Sadr, why should we?

 

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

The real question for the U.S. policy makers is whether or not, we, the U.S. has the will to make the hard decisions about pulling back if the al Maliki government does not have the will to neutralize the Shia militias.
I agree. The Iraqi Army has been in training for almost 3 years. The US Military can train a raw recruit to be Combat Effective in 16 weeks. Stand aside and let the Iraqis fight their own War. Also, since the Shia are the Vast Majority of Iraqis, why shouldn't Maliki be supportive of them. After all, Iraq is now a Democracy after the Elections! They will surely be the Ruling Party after the USA leaves, whenever that will be.
I am totally against the current war in Iraq. We were lied to to get us there and too many of our troups have died. Bush does not listen to the American people. Why can't we have a democracy here? We certainly don't now. Bush needs to leave the White house in handcuffs if necessary.
If the USA moves against Al-Sadr and his militia, at what point would we be able to consider it neutralized? Would that be when Al-Maliki says to call it off? Would it take the death of Al-Sadr and his "lieutenants"? Total extermination of all male Shi'ites in Iraq? Or what? This is similar to the questions about deciding when we have "won" and can bring our troops home. Defining victory in such loose and subjective terms as "establishment of a self-governing state" or "elimination of terrorists and the insurgency" gives our CinC a blank check to run this war to the end of his second term and leave the mess for his successors to clean up over the following 2 or 3 generations!
The united states has a tiger by the tail when it lets go the tiger will attack.how can you disrespect a country and not expect the whole middle east not to reply with violence.Our so call friends in the middle east you know the ones which have NO elections.Now see that the USA former friend was HUNG when the USA had no more use of him.These dictators will turn their back on the USA soon
you want to know whats going to happen ask the man in the street in Iraq.what the hell does francona know hiding behind the green wall.do you see how the Iraqi army and police are equipped old guns and jeeps that are old and the only protection they have is a metal shield instead of a drivers window.
It's great the Americans went in to Iraq, Saddam should have been assassinated years ago. The top generals and the president need to apply more Sun-Tzu Art of War though, there still isn't a clear definition of winning and that is problem #1. 21k troops without a clear and achievable mandate will do nothing productive.
If President Bush don't have the support of the American people he will go to Iraq and get there support. Because he and his administration started something they can't finish. He is putting your son's and daughter's life in jeopardy so he can have a legacy, and the sixty million people that re-elected him should realize that they were fooled by Bush and Cheney, and they are getting the last laugh. Those 3000 something soldier's and marines died in vain, and guest what Bush thinks my daughters are secure and I will have grandkids soon. Every parent should realize it is Bush that started this war because he wanted it.
Wars have never ended until the leaders of all sides sat down to achieve a solution. If we as a country advanced alternative powered transportation, we would have no interest in the middle east politics.
sending more troops to iraq seems to contradict the current trend of 'letting them kill each other' (read arming fatah, recent conflict in somalia, stirring saudi arabia against iran, etc.). maybe we should just send more arms to iraqis and start getting the troops out... i mean, we don't have to give them ballistic war heads able to reach the us, you know. i have been an ardent supporter of my president, but i am starting to have very strong doubts iraqis want to live - and die - any other way than they do now, even if they say they do... they just want to blame everyone else for it. so, why not help out our 'friends'?
The pundits are saying that Bush's speech tonight is the most important of his presidency. It may be, but that is beside the point. The point is not his speech and its importance to his presidency. The point is that thousands of people have died and more will die because of his failed policies. The concept of going into Iraq in the first place was wrong headed and there is no way to make it right. His speech will not make it right and more troops will not make it right. We have to leave.
Please ask the question-Who controls the 5 or so billion Bush is wanting to hand over to Iraq. If its the Iraqi government, that will be like the fox guarding the hen house
If we are going to commit more troops, then we must allow them to fight a war using all weapons necessary to defeat the militias. We must take out Al-Sadr and his militia. We could do the most damage by destroying Sadr City completely. If we are not going to use our full power then we must get out now.
Al-Maliki is in bed with the shiite militias he doesn't have the cojones politically. So if Shiites don't stop killing there will be no peace. How can you have stability when the killing is state-sponsored in a backhanded way?
The Bush administration has no specific aims, no measurable goals and no concrete plans for the armed forces already deployed in Iraq. Lacking a strategy, tactical adjustments like adding more troops (even substantial numbers) is only going to result in bringing more of our soldiers home in caskets. What we need instead is to bring them home alive.
I was a former military instructor and a darn good one. My audience spoke english, were on my side, believed in what they were being trained to do, expected compensation for the training and went forth and performed the skills they were taught. Sending more instructors to Iraq to train more security isn't the answer. George its the students stupid! They have no incentive to win.
We have to either force the Mahdi army to work within the laws or crush them. I say we crush them because until they get a severe ass kicking they will not listen. Too many words and they no longer respect or believe in talk. Only once we've kicked their asses for real will we be able to negociate in good faith with them. When you have them by their ball, their hearts and minds will follow.
Bush should be either charged witb treason for lying to the American Public on the weapons of mass destruction idea or face impeachment for inducing the threat of more violence against America. We have become the most hated country in the world and Bush is solely responsible.
It's time that we, as Americans, start to support Mr. Bush and show pride in our own country to give a positive attitude to the Iraqis that have lost their hope and faith in their newfound Democratic Government. Also, some of their money should go to fund their own military equipment while boosting the moral of Iraqi troops that still have much-needed training before they can actually defend their Country.
we gave tem there country helped them form a govmt.let them run it they can do no worse than bush has here.you cant say your the boss except when i dont like what your doing.turn al-malaki loose and set back and watch.
Send Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and all his other cronies that never served in a war.
Can't congress do something to force Bush not to go forward with this surge? It will only spill more American blood in Iraq and further weaken our military. Our elected officials obviously aren't listening to their constituents. Bush is willing to sacrifice more lives and more damage in a feeble attempt to regain some credibility, and it seems he is the only person in America, who is unaware of the fact he will never get the job done. He is a desperate man.
If you can believe what you read, the Kurd section of Iraq is thriving and appreciate the efforts of the U.S. Is it time to negotiate a military base in the Kurd area, give them their independance, along with aid and jobs? Then we can tell the Shia and Sunni to get after it, may the best man win, and we will be waiting in the safety and security of our new base for the smoke to clear. The Turks won't like this, the Iranians won't like this, but who cares! Maybe a peaceful prosperous Kurdistan can be our victory!
As a soldier who spent time in Iraq I agree with Francona, Al-sadr is a thug nothing more and when and if the current Iraq government acknowledges this the whole situation will eventually get better. It will be worse at first for the simple reason that Al-sadr has so much control over the uneducated that follow him, they call him a holy man but no holy man should ever condone violence to get his twisted views of the Koran to the forefront. Simple solution will be a covert sniper team to take out this man but that will not happen as everyone is to scared of the consequences of the violence that will follow. Wake up the violence is already there so why not take him out and see what happens
When the old Soiet Union went to war with Afghanistan, they--the soviets, had the biggest most powerful military in the world & even they couldn't successfully get a foothold in the region. Why do our current leaders (political & military) think we can do any better? Because it's Iraq and not Afghanistan? Get real...get out...the sooner the better.
Al-Maliki and Al-Sadr act like they are best of friends, because they are friends, they are both Shiites with similar agendas. Maliki is part of Sadr militia in a suit. If Bush still can't understand how politics play in Iraq how can he understand the Shiites agendas and goals. More troops and more American lives is not the answer. The answer is to get rid of the militia thugs this includes Maliki. Bush can depose Saddam but he proves he can't depose a Shiite militia. Iraqi government spokesman Al-Dabagh said today at a Rich Angel interview “Iraqi government didn’t ask but we think that increasing the troops will help to improve the security situation in Baghdad,”. Of course Iraqis didn’t ask for more troops because they don’t need Americans to bid on their agendas. But the Iraqi government will play along with the Americans they can’t stand as long as they stay in power and hopefully Americans leave their soil as soon as possible. What is the top Iraqi Shiite Agenda? To clean up with the Sunnis this is their very top priority. Sunnis are their thorn and soar for their Islamic religious goals. Shiites don’t need the Americans they have their very best friends the Iranians.
What did an extra 100,000 troops do to secure Saigon? Answer: nothing. The hawks then argued that China and Russia would take over S.E. Asia in a dominos effect. Didn't happen. Now, the worry is that Islamic extremists will take over the mideast before crawling up on our shores. It's the same scam Eisenhower warned us about. The military industrial complex runs this government and its all about manufacturing arms (and war) for profit. Why else would our army reject proven Israeli defense systems and spend billions on Raytheon (and others) to develop similar weapons that won't be fielded for another 5 to 10 years?
Dear Sir: I am a Veteran who served my country for 22 years. I am retired and supported Mr. Bush to go after Sadam. Now that he has been hung, we should get out of Iraq. No amount of help can be used when they don't even help themselves.How can we justify more troops when one life given to this horror is one too many. Where is all that cheap oil I heard about, or was I just dreaming. Let's stop this night-mare and bring our boys home. Thank you,
I think those who want to fight a war should lead from the front. Give Bush and Cheney guns and let them lead. Sadam is dead. The religious wars going on in Iraq are not our business and we can't solve them anyway. It's time to come home and put Bush and Cheney in jail for getting us there in the first place.
I'm amazed at the stupidity of people who can sit here and say.. Bush needs to be tried for treason for lying to us about the reasons we went to war. I wish these people would remember that both houses of Congress voted to go to war. Yes, that means Murtha, Hillary, Kerry, Pelosi, Reid... ALL OF THEM! Just because the outcome hasnt been as positive as we all would like it to have been, doesnt mean they can go back and say they didnt want to go to war. The people of the United States need to wake up and realize that we are at war here. We are fighting for our very existence. Radical Islam is the worst enemy we have ever faced. And they are patient and willing to fight the long fight, which we seem to be unwilling to fight. I am afraid that once the too concerned with television masses realize what's happening, it will be far too late. I fear for the future of my children if we do not prevail in the Middle East. Oh, and Marilyn Mennetti... get out your history book. This isnt a democracy. It's a republic!
At this point it must be clear to even the most loyal W supporters that the war was a political maneuver to attain re-election. The Dems would have had a field day with a "do nothing" response. My vote is that we leave. There are no well defined military goals, and public sentiment at home and abroad are running more negative with each passing week. The cost is and will become even more staggering in terms of human lives, human disability, mental disability (recall Agent Orange and the Gulf War syndrome). Going forward, as much as it pains this "child of the sixties", I believe that the solution to this situation lies in a complete withdrawl of all "coalition" forces and the total outright selling (cash only) of all the small arms weapons that either or both sides wish to purchase. Our continued presence in the Middle East serves only as a focal point for blame for all social and economic ills present in these countries. The heads of the respective states must sleep sounder knowing that the anger that roils inside their borders is pointed at a foreign power rather than in their direction.
Attack Iran, that is the root of the problem. It is time for us as a nation to stop the hand wringing and solve the problem like men.
You know.I hate war.And yes it was under false pretents that we are there.I just wish there was a way our men could just come home.Without any reprecushions.But if we leave now.They will fight over here,now.Cause they hate us.And they want to kill us
George, I don't know what you were thinking when you went to Iraq. You should have listened to Powell and other voices of reason before you opened this can of worms called Iraq. This young men and women you are sending in harms way should not be your sacrificial lambs. Please acknowledge your failure and bring our troops back home. You broke it and now you own it.
Putting more troops into Iraq will be a disaster. Bush refuses to admit that civil war is happening there. How many more of our brave men and women need to die or come home with limps missing. Bush should be impeached
Impeachment must be restored as an option - Nancy are you listening?
Only about a third of the American people are with George on this. The fighting has been going on for years, the Americans aren't winning, and no victory in sight. About a third of the American people are ambivalent about the whole thing. Some americans even take the enemy's side and the American army is not properly equipped to fight the war. The troops are tired and most see no way to win this thing. Valley Forge 1778
Bush this and Bush that..everything is Bush fault and no fault of the senators and other elected officials. Well here is one scenario. Go ahead bring all the troops back. Retreat I say...and let the killers come here and bomb us. If our senators don't have the guts to let us fight and win abroad we need then to die in our own beds or at work like those poor people did on 9-11. Last time I looked we never asked congress to bring us home. Served 2 tours in Iraq and 2 in Africa.
Nicole, its a Federal Democratic Republic, as every American History or Political Science major knows. And so what, if it were a strict republic, the voting population, which would be more affluent, would actually be MORE against the war. Yes, getting out right now would cause problems, but so would a surge. THIS IS WHAT ALL THE JOINT CHIEFS ARE SAYING. THE MILITARY IS AGAINST THIS PLAN! Many members of the House and some members of the Senate voted against the war. We can't leave right away, but staying for a long period of time is just going to worsen the situation. Pretty much all the experts, on both sides of the aisle, outside neo-conservative circles, agree on this. Radical Islam is not nearly the most dangerous enemy we faced. During the Cold War, the possibility of a Nuclear Armageddon was a very real threat. We faced the real possibility of the end of the United States and even civilization as we knew it. During World War 2, Germany threatened to conquer all of Europe. Radical Islam does not even begin to have the capability to do this. It can disrupt society, but it can not destroy it. Also, "Democracies" and "Republics" are both, by nature, incapable of fighting the long war. History has shown that time and time again. War is almost never popular a few years in unless it it propagandized with out end, and that is impossible in todays world, nor would we really want it.
Two excellent books about this situation are "A Pretext For War" by James Bamford and "Imperial Life In The Emerald City:Inside Iraq's Green Zone" by Rajiv Chandrasekaran. The first goes into great detail about how the Bush administration cherry-picked intelligence from Chalabi and others with their own agendas to justify the war in the first place. The second book tells of the horrendous mistakes made by the Bush administration in the war's aftermath and how Republican party loyalists were picked for posts in Iraq over people with previous experience in anything to do with the Middle East. For example, a 24-year-old with no previous financial experience was put in charge of re-opening Baghdad's stock exchange, people applying for positions in Iraq were asked who they had voted for in the last US presidential election or what their views were on Roe v. Wade. The entire war is about oil and money for defense contractors. Plans were being drawn up to invade Iraq by Bush 41's idiot son two weeks after he was elected the first time.
The reason Maliki does not neutralize the Mahdi Army is that they will kill him if he tries, and no one can/will protect him-neither Sunni nor Kurds nor the USA. He is powerless against them, hence the intractable situation. Also, all the reasons now cited for not pulling out of Iraq are actually the reasons we never should have invaded in the first place. In that sense, not only do we find ourselves in a highly cynical and self-deceptive situation, we are also trapped by this rhetoric in an endless committment. Blood will flow copiously any way you look at it...
I think fear played a huge and unfortunate role in the debacle called Iraq and a ridiculous war on a tactic called terrorism. We are fighting a 21st century non military phenomenon with a 20th century military mentality. When fear is both a reason for and tool of policy the results are irrational and devastating. Does anyone know if the new Iraqi constitution outlaws militias? It seems to me that should be a basic piece of the agreement that al-Maliki should be held to in our next “surge” or new way forward or whatever. How do you get security if you allow armed militias to wander around your country? If the government of Iraq doesn’t agree to totally eliminate militias we should pack up and leave.
The Republican's claim that the Demorats were "cutting and running," is ironic. It took Bush 4+ years to "cut and slowly run," from the debacle in Iraq. In retrospect, what was the real reason for going into Iraq? I'm sorry I quite can't remember all of the reasons. Ernie Riverside, California
Mission accomplished!!! There were no WMD and Saddam is gone. Bring the troops home as there is clearly no other achievable and meaningful objectives. Let them all kill each other after we leave and focus the Billions of $ on our own people, education and country.
Needless to say Bush jr will get his way again and in about 2 yrs when his disastrous presidency finally winds down our total body count in the Iraq debacle may be close to if not exceed 5000. Let us not mention the maimed and handicapped or the unspoken casualties on the Iraqi side. The naivety of both this presidency and many of its diehard supporters does not cease to amaze me. To seriously think that another 21k of our troops can suddenly achieve what troop levels in the 140-160K level have not achieved in 4 yrs is simply ludricous. We went in there based on lies and a warped moral compass and opened a pandoras box..We have a Shia majority that has a generational blood fued with a Sunni minority that has lorded it over them for decades and we think we can play refree in this scenario? LOL. The one thing the Sunni and Shia insurgencies as well as the Al-Qeda operatives there can agree on is to kill as many of our troops as they can while they kill each other. This is a lost cause and the person to be pitied is the next president who will be handed a greater mess than we have now to try and sort out in that region.
Here we go again, another war lost by the press, elected officials, and politicly correct cowards nationwide. How can you win a PC war? Can a war be won by not killing the enemy? Soldiers can't shoot the enemy, chase the enemy, can't talk to the enemy, or shout harsh language at the enemy without fear of some LIBERAL journalist taking his picture and telling the world how horrible our military is. These poor guys are walking on eggshells. OK lets get out the Dems are in charge now. The killings will start on our soil, it's duck and cover time. I really feel safe with Nancy, Teddy, and the usual suspects in charge. Lets get out with no plan for the future. The Dems will hire more help for their 9/11 commission implementation, create more Departments and raise more taxes by punishing those of us who have worked hard and got a little ahead. Liberals like Matthews, Oberman and most of the Left Wing Cowards at NBC, MSNBC, and all the other media outlets should be arrested for treason. But what do I know I am just a hick from a red state in the Midwest. I am not one of the east coast or west coast enlightened thinkers.
A. Send troops, clean up Baghdad and secure it. B. Have the cleric disband his militia,or arrest him and destroy it. C. Give them until November and then move the troops to the Pakistan border & mountains and hunt down Osama (if he's still alive).
Its really sad that some americans have forgotten that part of being an american is you have freewill and freethought, and to still support this president after the lies and total incompetence this president has shown, is embarrissing as an american.It is not only costly in the form of billions of dollars, it has cost the lives of thousands of our men and women. Any supporter of this president is just as responsible for those deaths as he is. your support has empowered him. As someone who has lost family in desert storm, I am disgusted. Actually it scares me that people are so blind or ignorant of the truth and support this guy have the ability operate a motor vehicle without running off the road. Its obvious our foriegn policy has.
Support our troops - BRING THEM HOME! If Maliki is serious about democracy he HAS TO take out Sadr and any other Militia groups. He has to start providing services to the sunnis and kurds and any other group, without bias. The shia revenge party needs to be over. They're thirst for revenge should have been sated by the hanging of Saddam. It's time to stop punnishing the Sunnis and come together as a country. Anyone who stands in the way of unity should be dealt with!
Bush,Cheney and Rumsfeld(Asses of evil)have completed destroyed America's reputation around the world by invading Iraq.They were warned by the EU and others that this was a huge error,still they continued.How many generations of Americans are going to suffer because of their arrogance?


SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=29301


Syndicate This Site

Add Hardblogger to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google