Article

2007-04-20 Iraq

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 Verlaine 2007-04-20 00:00|| || Front Page|| [4 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Considering his involvement (more specifically, his lack thereof) when Saddam Hussein's government massacred revolting Shiites and Kurds post GWI, Gates is no ally of the Iraqi people.

Posted by Pappy 2007-04-20 00:18|| 2007-04-20 00:18|| Front Page Top

#2 "I'm sympathetic with some of the challenges that they face," Gates said of the Iraqis. But, he said, "the clock is ticking."

Gates added, "Frankly I would like to see faster progress."

damn, did anyone ever hear Dwight D Eisenhower being so offhanded like this in front of the press during WWII? What's the fucking purpose? To light a bigger fire under Maliki?

or perhaps a reverse-morale kick in the ~~arm~~ ass for our folks? I don't get it.

Posted by RD">RD 2007-04-20 00:38|| 2007-04-20 00:38|| Front Page Top

#3 Gates is fast becoming a 'lame chick' to the 'lame duck'! The easiest money one could make for the next 21 months.

Posted by smn 2007-04-20 02:17|| 2007-04-20 02:17|| Front Page Top

#4 Gates added, "Frankly I would like to see faster progress."

Progress? Yeah, right-out-the-door progress! We gotta get outtah there quick! My real estate deals are teetering in the balnace!

Posted by Harry Reid 2007-04-20 06:51|| 2007-04-20 06:51|| Front Page Top

#5 Gates added, "Frankly I would like to see faster progress."
Frankly I'd love to see an E-type Jag in my garage, but you know what, Bob? I know that if I want that, I'll need to DO SOMETHING to make that happen.

How 'bout you, Mr. Secretary?

Posted by eLarson 2007-04-20 10:46|| http://larsonian.blogspot.com]">[http://larsonian.blogspot.com] 2007-04-20 10:46|| Front Page Top

#6 This could be a sop to the dems, basically giving them a media bone that they can chew on that says they matter and are effective. Meanwhile the firm run away dates are removed from the supplemental spending bills.

Maliki needs a kick in the ass too. It is idiotic for our guys to keep getting killed in drips and drabs if the locals aren't going to stand up and give a shit. I know logic doesn't work with these folks, but threat to survival might. The downside is if a threatened Maliki runs to another "strong man" (Iran) rather than leading his own countrymen to control their destiny.

Posted by remoteman 2007-04-20 10:51|| 2007-04-20 10:51|| Front Page Top

#7 "To light a bigger fire under Maliki? "

Yes, obviously.

With all due respect to Verlaine, who is there, while Im not, Gates has access to alot more info than either of us, including reports from Petraeus and other commanders on the ground, as well as from Khalilzad, etc.

and from defense intell, and from CIA.

Evidently some folks think there ARE Sunnis who can be won over who havent been.

I cant judge from here.

Posted by liberalhawk 2007-04-20 15:17|| 2007-04-20 15:17|| Front Page Top

#8 IIRC - Verlaine is back in San Diego, safely, thank God

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2007-04-20 16:18|| 2007-04-20 16:18|| Front Page Top

#9 Allow me to cheer your well-bespoke sentiment, Frank.

Gates added, "Frankly I would like to see faster progress."

So, why not begin destroying the ~~barracks~~ mosques that harbor ~~insurgents~~ terrorists? That'll get you some real "progress".

This lack of demonstrated resolve has been a fundamental error - perhaps the most important one - since the get-go.

I am unable to think so, Verlaine. The consistent conflict of interests that manifest in the Iraqi legislature are a Root Cause of the problem. Support for fractious assholes like Moqtada Sadr do far more to exacerbate the problem than our own lack of resolve. It's a given that our firepower coupled with greater determination could bring some substantial change, but lasting alteration to Iraq's political landscape will demand some true commitment from their politicians and that is still forthcoming.

Still - the fantasy of conflict resolution without winners and losers.

Agreed, this is one of the biggest stumbling blocks of all. It is impossible to imagine an outcome whereby all Iraqi parties come out ahead. The Baathist and Sunni factions have poisoned the well and simply cannot expect much more than lip service in their favor.

The "environment in which violence could be reduced" is one in which the Sunni rejectionists and their foreign allies have been routed through a combo of direct attrition and coercion on the surrounding communities sufficient to negate the intimidation and/or sympathy on which they rely. For southern or Shi'a areas, the issues are really quite different, more akin to warlordism and lawlessness, and will over time succumb to less military-centered responses.

Spot on, Verlaine! Finally, we are agreed upon the notion that we must become the insurgency's "worst enemy". Blasting hostile mosques and killing radical imams would be a great place to start.

Posted by Zenster">Zenster 2007-04-20 21:17|| 2007-04-20 21:17|| Front Page Top

23:50 JosephMendiola
23:45 RD
23:34 trailing wife
23:33 Zenster
23:30 Zenster
23:30 RWV
23:28 RD
23:22 RWV
23:19 JosephMendiola
23:10 Frank G
23:03 RD
22:57 USN, ret.
22:55 Frank G
22:52 JosephMendiola
22:50 Ho Chi Snusoper4439
22:49 RD
22:44 Grunter
22:39 JosephMendiola
22:36 Anonymoose
22:27 JosephMendiola
22:24 RD
22:20 Zenster
22:20 KBK
22:18 Zenster