Article

2004-04-30 Iraq-Jordan

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by someone 2004-04-30 3:28:58 AM|| || Front Page|| [7 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 IMHO, its way too soon to say what this means. 48 hours wont be adequate.

Several questions
1. Was this really all done by Gen. Conway, as is being reported. He didnt get ANY signoff form Bremer, let alone from Washington? Despite previous indications that Bush was following the situation in Fallujah personally???
2. The press has reported USMC promises to withdraw? What, if anything, did the local tribal sheiks et al promise in return?
3. Who does Conway think the insurgents are? Are they mainly fedayeen Saddam and foreigners, who will fight to the bitter end, and make life hell for the FPA, or try to turn the FPA? Or are they local unemployed, thugs, etc who can be bought off, and who will "dissolve" Or are they divided as the article above states, and is playing on there divisions really the key here?
4. Who the hell are the FPA? Wretchard reports they are Iraqis being trained in Jordan, with Australian help, and included Shiites and Kurds as well as Sunni Arabs. Other reports indicate many are locals from Fallujah. If we want a reliable force we want one of well trained outsiders, including lots on Shiites and Kurds. OTOH if we want to make nicey nice with the locals we want lots of locals. Presumably the force included both, to achieve both aims. Not clear how this will play out.
5. What are the goals for the FPS and the "cooperative" local notables? While folks here are going to focus on arresting the perps of the bridge outrage, in fact the USMC priorities are likely more on clearing out heavy weapons, and destroying IED/bomb factories. Apparently Fallujah was the Command control and supply center for the insurgency throughout west and central Iraq, and that was why containment was a mistake. Assuming that dealing with that can be accomplished, this may be largely focused on improving the political situation around the country. NYT reports consensus between US and Brahimi on an Iraqi PM, a secular leaning Shiite acceptable to Sistani. And on annex to the Transitional Law that would make clear no further concessions to the Kurds prior to elections - this would win Sistanis support for the transition. It is said a Kurd (!!!!!) will be appointed new head of the Iraqi army. ISTM that the admin is looking for a big WIN on the political front soon (see also the Najaf Shia turning on Sadr) and they are desperate to put Fallujah on the back burner till thats done.

We can always go back in and deal with Fallujah later.

FPA= Fallujah Postponement Army

Posted by Liberalhawk 2004-04-30 9:45:30 AM|| 2004-04-30 9:45:30 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 This policy of negotiation is retarded.

Negotiation only works where there is good faith. If we pull out, they claim a victory of driving us out.

As long as their leadership has a reasonable chance of increasing their power (and surviving) the situation will continue. Furthermore it inspires other opposition leaders.

The best strategy is to alienate the support groups for these people. Having your city leveled is a powerful disinclination.

Posted by flash91 2004-04-30 12:24:18 PM|| 2004-04-30 12:24:18 PM|| Front Page Top

17:01 Mark Espinola
14:26 Seafarious
14:08 Anonymous6089
12:57 Frank G
12:30 .com
12:14 Anonymous5203
00:06 cingold
23:41 Anonymous4731
11:52 Robert Crawford
11:45 Infidel Bob
11:43 Infidel Bob
07:06 B
06:59 Dave D.
06:49 Anonymous4617
06:29 Bulldog
05:21 Anonymous4617
05:15 Bulldog
03:26 Mark Espinola
02:45 ex-lib
01:21 ex-lib
01:19 Tresho
00:33 Super Hose
00:33 Paul Moloney
00:32 Super Hose