Is it too soon to call the "surge" a failure?

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,561
4
0

The purpose of the surge was to reduce the violence so that the various factions in Iraq would give up trying to get a better deal on the issues that are part of the "benchmarks', the most well known of which is an agreement on oil money distribution.
Yet, despite a slight downturn in violence, NOT ONE OF THE BENCHMARKS has been reached, and no side is ready to compromise.
There is no evidence the surge is changing any sides positions, and the stalemate continues.
With US troops soon to be reduced from the surge levels, what hope is there that the sides will now compromise?
Not much.
 

ProfJohn

Lifer
Jul 28, 2006
18,251
8
0
It is amazing how all of a sudden the anti-war folks are looking at the political results in Iraq as the yard stick to measure progress by.

Yet they discounted political progress when we were holding elections and getting a constitution passed etc etc.

It sort of reminds me how certain Democrats find religion right before an election and then completely forget about it the second they are into office. (Or how a certain President started to attend church when his image was in trouble.)

Techs: the number of US deaths is one-third of what it was earlier in the year. The number of dead Iraqis is half, or more, of what it was prior to the surge. Refugees are starting to return to Iraq by the buss load. By every indication life is starting to return to normal in Baghdad and other Iraq cities. By the measures that actually count to the people of Iraq the surge has been a HUGE success. Hopefully with time political results will follow.
 

Stoneburner

Diamond Member
May 29, 2003
3,491
0
76
Correlation does not equal causation and the republican leadership knows this even if you don't profjon. Most of the trends leading to the decrease in violence are independent of the surge. Military people have flatly said the u.s army HAS to be out by this time next year. seems pretty straightforward to wait it out.
 

heyheybooboo

Diamond Member
Jun 29, 2007
6,278
0
0
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
It is amazing how all of a sudden the anti-war folks are looking at the political results in Iraq as the yard stick to measure progress by.

Yet they discounted political progress when we were holding elections and getting a constitution passed etc etc.

1) The purpose for invading Iraq was the imminent threat posed by WMD - which of course turned out to be false - not establishing a political democracy; and

2) The purpose of the surge was to buy time -- "breathing space," your president said -- for Iraqi political reconciliation.

Take your lying, fallacies, manipulation and obfuscation elsewhere, Johnnie.
 

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,561
4
0
Originally posted by: heyheybooboo
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
It is amazing how all of a sudden the anti-war folks are looking at the political results in Iraq as the yard stick to measure progress by.

Yet they discounted political progress when we were holding elections and getting a constitution passed etc etc.

1) The purpose for invading Iraq was the imminent threat posed by WMD - which of course turned out to be false - not establishing a political democracy; and

2) The purpose of the surge was to buy time -- "breathing space," your president said -- for Iraqi political reconciliation.

Take your lying, fallacies, manipulation and obfuscation elsewhere, Johnnie.

Once again, QFT
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
The OP simply made me chuckle...

Conditions in Iraq are improving. period.

Does that bother some of you?
 

Pabster

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
16,987
1
0
Amazing that OP has the naivety and tenacity to claim the "surge" a failure when all the evidence we have suggests otherwise. Even your heroes have had to adjust their political strategy to confront reality.
 

yllus

Elite Member & Lifer
Aug 20, 2000
20,577
432
126
The winner in Iraq? Colin Powell

After spending something like six to eight weeks watching liberal organs like The New York Times and the BBC admit to the success of the U.S. "troop surge" in Iraq, I was, until recently, still left in the same position vis-a-vis the Iraq war as before: convinced that there will be no "winners" or "losers" per se.

The "troop surge" really is working, to a degree that has astonished nearly every journalist in Iraq and completely reconfigured the 2008 presidential campaign. There should never have been any doubt that the U.S. could, in the short term, perform apparent prodigies of "nation-building" as a foreign occupier.

But now the first steps toward pulling the plug on the surge are being taken; the number of active U.S. combat brigades in Iraq dipped briefly from 20 to 19 this month, and a permanent reduction to 15 is scheduled for the period between late December and July. The Iraq War, in other words, is about to be Iraqicized.

Right now, it seems that every week brings news of some fresh success; the return of round-the-clock street lighting to Baghdad, the resumption of public Christian worship in the city, the discovery and destruction of enormous caches of high explosives held by insurgents. Sunni militias that once stalked the liberators of Iraq now tip them off by mobile phone to terrorist entrenchments.

Perhaps most extraordinary is the sudden return of thousands of poorer Iraqi refugees who had been languishing as unwelcome guests in Syria; these are people who are voting with their feet, albeit with Syria's grouchy encouragement, in the hope that improved conditions for commerce and intersectarian peace last.
 

heyheybooboo

Diamond Member
Jun 29, 2007
6,278
0
0
In the NeoCon Iraq group mind-think, the fifty yard line is now a touchdown worth 11 points.

And considering that analogy . . .

Go Packers!
 

Starbuck1975

Lifer
Jan 6, 2005
14,698
1,909
126
In the NeoCon Iraq group mind-think, the fifty yard line is now a touchdown worth 11 points.
...since we are playing analogies, for the anti-war crowd, every minor setback in Iraq constitutes a game losing fumble.

At this point, some people need to let go of Bush's false pretenses for "justifying" the war in Iraq, and focus instead on what we need to do now so that we can stabilize Iraq and leave the region under honorable conditions.

As many have said, there are no winners or losers in Iraq at this point...there are no victory conditions...at this point in the game, we are in risk mitigation mode.

That being said, there are positive developments as of late...militias that formerly targeted American forces have now turned on Al Quaida insurgents...refugees returning to Bagdad...infrastructure and economic conditions starting to improve...reduced effectiveness of terorrist attacks...casualty rate reductions.

You can oppose the justifications for our going to Iraq, yet still recognize that our military is making amazing progress despite the uphill battle handed to them, and still has the will and motivation to leave Iraq under honorable conditions.
 

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
5
0
Originally posted by: palehorse74
The OP simply made me chuckle...

Conditions in Iraq are improving. period.

Does that bother some of you?
They are improving, but if you feed a starving person a piece of grain, they're improving, too. That some grab on to improvement as vindication and absolution is way over the top.

 

manowar821

Diamond Member
Mar 1, 2007
6,063
0
0
You mean the "trickle"? There was no surge, only in the neo-conservative stretch of the term could it be considered a "surge".

It's kind of like how the conditions are "improving" in Iraq, it's a neo-con definition of the word. Man, not only have they fucked up our country, they're trying to rewrite history, AND rewrite language!
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
Please make sure to send all the Dem presidential candidates your memo on the failing surge.

I think they need to bring this up as often as possible.

Then, the winner of the Dem primary needs to talk about the surge failing at every possible opportunity.

I also suggest you have t-shirts printed up saying "The Surge is Failing!" and make sure the Dem canadidates wear them at every possible opportunity. This way, the message will be sure to get out even at photo-ops.

TIA,

Fern

 

FoBoT

No Lifer
Apr 30, 2001
63,089
12
76
fobot.com
it doesn't matter, Clinton isn't going to pull all troops out anyway. she knows the reality vs. what she says to the left wing nutjobs
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: FoBoT
it doesn't matter, Clinton isn't going to pull all troops out anyway. she knows the reality vs. what she says to the left wing nutjobs
QFT!

The same is true for whoever ends up in the WH.

reality > politics

Just ask the Dems who ran in '06 how well their original platform is going... :p
 

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,561
4
0
Originally posted by: Fern
Please make sure to send all the Dem presidential candidates your memo on the failing surge.

I think they need to bring this up as often as possible.

Then, the winner of the Dem primary needs to talk about the surge failing at every possible opportunity.

I also suggest you have t-shirts printed up saying "The Surge is Failing!" and make sure the Dem canadidates wear them at every possible opportunity. This way, the message will be sure to get out even at photo-ops.

TIA,

Fern

It is deja vu all over again. Republicans pounce on a small part of the picture and talk it up likes Iraq is all better. The corporate news media jumps on the bandwagon.
Then in few weeks or months the truth comes out.
And a few months later the wacky righto warmongers will find some other small part of the picture and repeat the process.
Its been done like 10 times now.

NOTHING has been done in Iraq to solve the REAL problem of a government that doesn't have the support of the people and is a fractured population that is warring with each other. That's the problem. And thats what Bush gave as his reason for the surge. And the end of the continuing stalemate between the factions was what was supposed to be the reason for the surge. And it hasn't happened.
And it has failed.
According to Bushes OWN reasons for doing the Surge.



 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
The surge somewhat get too much credit for what amounts to a natural progression in Iraqi anarchy. Violence goes down when Iraqi neighborhoods get segregated by sect.
And suddenly one group of Iraqi thugs must go onto the home turf of another group of opposing Iraqi thugs to practice ethnic cleansing. But sadly, the insurgent thugs are still there, have not been addressed in any way, and they are now better armed than before.

And meanwhile the Iraqi central government which ultimately must police they insurgent group, is making no political progress.

So in that sense, the surge is not a success, but its mot a failure either. But if the Iraqi government makes some political progress at some future date, it may be deemed a success. On the other hand, with any spark, the now slumbering Iraqi insurgencies may awaken into a full blown snit, and then we will all know the surge was a total failure.
Right now, IMHO, its way too early to tell yet.

But what is a total failure, is the lack of GWB&co. sponsored diplomatic initiatives that could get the international community involved in helping stabilize Iraq. But following any of the recommendations of the Baker Hamilton report could endanger GWB&Co's position as deciders. After all they have already decided that they and their corporate buddies get all the benefits and the American taxpayer can pay all the bills in terms of lives and treasures.
 

maddogchen

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2004
8,905
2
76

The purpose of the surge was to reduce the violence

violence reduced.

Originally posted by: techs so that the various factions in Iraq would give up trying to get a better deal on the issues that are part of the "benchmarks', the most well known of which is an agreement on oil money distribution.

deal with issues that are a part of the benchmarks not done.

so did the surge work? yes. did the iraqi government work? no. you can call the iraqi government a failure up to now but you'd be incorrect to call the surge a failure.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: maddogchen

The purpose of the surge was to reduce the violence

violence reduced.

Originally posted by: techs so that the various factions in Iraq would give up trying to get a better deal on the issues that are part of the "benchmarks', the most well known of which is an agreement on oil money distribution.

deal with issues that are a part of the benchmarks not done.

so did the surge work? yes. did the iraqi government work? no. you can call the iraqi government a failure up to now but you'd be incorrect to call the surge a failure.
QFT.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,415
14,303
136
This again?

Okay, first, the surge was declared a failure months ago. So "too soon" is just silly. When I first clicked on this post, I thought it might be old one. Instead, it seems the OP just has the usual media-induced amnesia.
Second, whether or not the surge was a failure depends on your perspective. If you see the goal from that of a strict military objective, then yes, it was a failure. If OTOH you see the surge as the political agenda that it obviously was, then it was an overwhelming success, as it bought Bush the time to pass off Iraq to his unfortunate successor.
That certain Dems continue to insist on the former when they were obviously conned like a easy circus mark on the latter, merely illustrates my ongoing frustration with that party's inability to protect us from the Republicans any more.
 

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,561
4
0
Originally posted by: maddogchen

The purpose of the surge was to reduce the violence

violence reduced.

Originally posted by: techs so that the various factions in Iraq would give up trying to get a better deal on the issues that are part of the "benchmarks', the most well known of which is an agreement on oil money distribution.

deal with issues that are a part of the benchmarks not done.

so did the surge work? yes. did the iraqi government work? no. you can call the iraqi government a failure up to now but you'd be incorrect to call the surge a failure.

HaHa. There is literally no reality among the neo-cons,
If the surge had resulted in more violence and death they would claim it had worked because it drew more of the "enemy" out into the open.
After 5 years of one delusional claim after another how long can neo-cons continue to spew their fantasies?
We are no closer to peace in Iraq.
That's the bottom line.

 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,415
14,303
136
Originally posted by: techs
Originally posted by: maddogchen

The purpose of the surge was to reduce the violence

violence reduced.

Originally posted by: techs so that the various factions in Iraq would give up trying to get a better deal on the issues that are part of the "benchmarks', the most well known of which is an agreement on oil money distribution.

deal with issues that are a part of the benchmarks not done.

so did the surge work? yes. did the iraqi government work? no. you can call the iraqi government a failure up to now but you'd be incorrect to call the surge a failure.

HaHa. There is literally no reality among the neo-cons,
If the surge had resulted in more violence and death they would claim it had worked because it drew more of the "enemy" out into the open.
After 5 years of one delusional claim after another how long can neo-cons continue to spew their fantasies?
We are no closer to peace in Iraq.
That's the bottom line.

You realize he just got you to agree for a continued and ongoing military presence in Iraq, right? So to answer your question: they'll keep spewing these delusion fantasties as long as you keep falling for them.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,265
126
Things have improved in Baghdad, largely because it has been ethnically cleansed. Neighborhoods which were mixed are no more. Sunnis and Shias don't fight when they're not mixed. May make a good model for the long term disposition of Iraq.