While the Iraqi insurgency rages on, it appears all is suddenly well in Baghdad.
The good news was announced Friday in a video-teleconference interview from Baghdad between Maj. Gen. William Webster, head of the 30,000 U.S. and foreign troops and 15,000 Iraqi soldiers known as Task Force Baghdad, and reporters at the Pentagon. Webster announced yesterday that insurgents apparently are no longer capable of carrying out more than sporadic attacks in Baghdad after a seven-week security crackdown. Webster told the press (see for example “General Says Insurgency Weakened in Baghdad” in Saturday’s Washington Post)”the ability of these insurgents to conduct sustained high-intensity operations, as they did last year — we’ve mostly eliminated that.”
Interesting. It would appear that Maj. Gen. Webster is getting bad intelligence. Perhaps he should consult the internet.
According to the web site Iraq Coalition Casualty Count we suffered at least eighteen American deaths in Baghdad during the month of June, the fourth highest monthly total of the war, and the worst U.S. Baghdad casualty count since January, 2005 when twenty-four fell. Casualty figures among Iraqi civilians, military and police are not available, but based on news reports one would imagine they were also on the high side.
Meanwhile, perusing the Iraq Coalition Casualty Count site and Google News might lead one to a conclusion, contrary to the soothing words of the Major General, that all is not necessarily quiet on the Baghdad front.
Turk US News reported on July 7th : “A US soldier was killed and three others were wounded in a car bomb and rocket attack in Baghdad on Thursday. After the event, US soldiers took up tight strict security measures around the incident place. The wounded were taken to military hospitals by helicopter.” And “Iraqi Eyewitness Muhammed Musa said, `US convoys have come with Humvee vehicles to the incident place. When the last vehicle arrived at the incident place a roadside bomb blasted and the car hit it. Some people exited from cars and opened a fire on them. I was afraid of a bad escape from the incident place. However the US vehicle fell into the river’ “.
It is indeed heartening to know that all is quiet in the Iraqi capitol. Thanks for the good news Maj. Gen. Webster.
.
LONDON (AFP) – The United States and Britain are considering the withdrawal of more than 100,000 coalition troops from Iraq next year as one of many options but no decision has been made, the British defence ministry told AFP.
The spokeswoman was referring to a document by British Defence Secretary John Reid, which was leaked to the Mail on Sunday. The document said Washington hoped to hand over control of security to Iraqi forces in 14 out of 18 provinces in the country by early next year, allowing it to slash US-led troop levels to 66,000 from 176,000.
Britain, for its part, had a plan to cut its 8,500-strong contingent to 3,000.
The document — entitled “Options for future UK force posture in Iraq” and marked “Secret — UK eyes only” said London would need to reach decisions later this year on troop levels.
Britain, which heads a foreign military force in southern Iraq, wants to give back control of Al-Muthanna and Maysan provinces this October, followed by the other two provinces it handles next April, it said.
USA WELCOME: Make Yourself Known @BooMan Tribune and add some cheers!
The Brookings Institution’s Saban Center has produced a constantly updated “Iraq Index” listing, among other things, compilations of casualty reports both civilian and military. Neutral reportage from a variety of sources. [found them referenced in a CRS Report on the same subject – also .pdf]. The information is out there.
Rather than talk about troop reductions, DoD should be asking for help from the U.N., NATO, and anyone else willing to take over non-combat roles in-country. By Zinni’s count that would involve somwhere around 200,000, minus fully trained and equipped Iraqi forces.
Wow. Guess that means only 199,000!
“non-combat roles” would include the roles that all of the female casualties we’ve sustained would be assigned to.
but yes – if (IF) we are to stay – we have to find a way to internationalize the effort. Personally I think we need to leave – get a UN force led and organized by Arab nations to perform near term police work.
The recent talks between Iraq and Iran demonstrate, among other things, how little faith the Iraqi government has in our ability to bring stability – and the creation of what will most likely be another radical islamic fundamntalist state shows how incredibly badly we miscalculated.
And why I’m ranting – how, exacly, is the “well fight them there so we don’t have to fight them here” flypaper theory in any way compatible with the creation of a democratic Iraq? How does the administration get away with this crap?