US Military hands over Anbar Province to Iraqi Security Forces

hellokeith

Golden Member
Nov 12, 2004
1,665
0
0
Associated Press link @ Yahoo! News

By ROBERT H. REID, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 26 minutes ago

BAGHDAD - American forces on Monday handed over security responsibility to the Iraqis in a province that the U.S. once feared was lost ? a sign of the stunning reversal of fortunes since local Sunnis turned against al-Qaida in Iraq.

But a Sunni Arab leader criticized the Shiite-led government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki for failing to embrace its newfound allies, underlining the threat that sectarian tensions still pose to a lasting peace.

Nevertheless, the transfer of Anbar province, the cradle of the Sunni insurgency and the birthplace of al-Qaida in Iraq, marked a dramatic milestone in America's plan to eventually hand over all 18 provinces to Iraqi control so U.S. troops can go home.

The 25,000 American troops remaining in Anbar will focus on training Iraq's military and police forces and standing by to help if the Iraqis are unable to cope with any surge in violence.

The ceremony was held under tight security in the center of Ramadi, the provincial capital where American troops fought ferocious battles with al-Qaida and other Sunni insurgents until the tide turned in 2007.

"This war is not quite over, but it's being won and primarily by the people of Anbar. Al-Qaida has not been entirely defeated in Anbar, but their end is near and they know it," Marine Maj. Gen. John Kelly, the senior U.S. commander in Anbar, said during the handover ceremony.

President Bush hailed the handover as a major achievement, saying the once-violent province had been "transformed and reclaimed by the Iraqi people."

"Iraqi forces will now take the lead in security operations in Anbar, with American troops moving into an overwatch role," Bush said in a statement. "This achievement is a credit to the courage of our troops, the Iraqi security forces, and the brave tribes and other civilians from Anbar who worked alongside them."

Anbar became the 11th province to revert to Iraqi security control, but it is the most significant because it borders Baghdad. The others have been in the peaceful Kurdish north or in the heavily Shiite south, which has proven less difficult for the Shiite-led government to control.
A huge :thumbsup: to our brave American military forces as well as the contributions by other coalition members for winning this war against terrorist al-Qaida and other foreign-sponsored terrorists. The reversal of Sunnis now fighting against the terrorists shows proof that the US Military has won the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people.

The surge of military forces which caused the turnaround, championed by John McCain, will be a huge public political win for McCain, and a terrible political loss for Obama who has now flip-flopped and is saying that US forces can only be withdrew on a "responsible" timeline.

As US forces continue their victory in Iraq, some units will be re-deployed to Afghanistan while others sent home, as seen by the recent reduction of tour lengths.
 

Infohawk

Lifer
Jan 12, 2002
17,844
1
0
Before we go on can we just summarize the arguments we're going to hear?

Anti-war people:
This war was never about winning over the hearts and minds of Iraqis. It was about WMDs.
Why do the Iraqis want us gone if we won their hearts and minds over?
There were no muslim terrorists in Iraq before our war.
This story doesn't prove anything.

War proponents:
The goal of the war depends on what the US has accomplished. If the US built one school, that was the point of the war. Fine, more realistically: the war was about making Iraq a democracy.
 

her209

No Lifer
Oct 11, 2000
56,352
11
0
Originally posted by: hellokeith
The reversal of Sunnis now fighting against the terrorists shows proof that the US Military has won the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people.
Um, what?
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,530
3
0
Originally posted by: hellokeith
.

The surge of military forces which caused the turnaround, championed by John McCain, will be a huge public political win for McCain.
Yeah we can just forget about all the troops that needlessly died for a war that was unnecessary and sold to the American Public by deceit perpetrated by Bush, Cheney and McCain.
 

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
3
0
Indeed great news. At this rate in a few more years Iraq will be free of Al Queda AND WMD, just like it was in March of 03. Doesn't get much better than this, folks!
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,530
3
0
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Indeed great news. At this rate in a few more years Iraq will be free of Al Queda AND WMD, just like it was in March of 03. Doesn't get much better than this, folks!
ZING!:laugh:

 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,676
136
Peachy! Can we leave yet?

Yeh, yeh- I already know the answer- we're talkin about it, kinda-maybe, and uhh, err, we'll see, but, err well... you know, uhh, that is, uhhh...
 

Perknose

Forum Director & Omnipotent Overlord
Forum Director
Oct 9, 1999
44,813
5,395
136
Originally posted by: hellokeith
The reversal of Sunnis now fighting against the terrorists shows proof that the US Military has won the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people.
Only a administration fanboy who knows little to nothing about the true balance of power in Iraq in all its complexities would avow something as howling stupid as this.

Light at the end of the tunnel, light at the end of the tunnel. Do you remember that LIE born in ignorance, OP?

When subsequent events prove you wrong, will you admit that you were lied to, and/or chose to believe this BS anyway?

 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,872
4,216
126
Originally posted by: Perknose
Originally posted by: hellokeith
The reversal of Sunnis now fighting against the terrorists shows proof that the US Military has won the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people.
Only a administration fanboy who knows little to nothing about the true balance of power in Iraq in all its complexities would avow something as howling stupid as this.

Light at the end of the tunnel, light at the end of the tunnel. Do you remember that LIE born in ignorance, OP?

When subsequent events prove you wrong, will you admit that you were lied to, and/or chose to believe this BS anyway?
I think the ethnic cleansing might have helped a bit too. He forgot about that.
 

event8horizon

Senior member
Nov 15, 2007
674
0
0
did they turn against AQ or did we buy them off to "turn against" AQ.
hey hellokeith, how much american money went into the pockets of these guys??

AMERICAN forces are paying Sunni insurgents hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash to switch sides and help them to defeat Al-Qaeda in Iraq.

The tactic has boosted the efforts of American forces to restore some order to war-torn provinces around Baghdad in the run-up to a report by General David Petraeus, the US commander, to Congress tomorrow.

Petraeus will tell Congress that there has been great progress at a local level in Iraq following a surge in the number of troops this year, but little sign of political reconciliation.

In a letter to US troops, the general wrote that ?local Iraqi leaders are coming forward, opposing extremists and establishing provisional units of neighbourhood security volunteers?.

The Sunday Times has witnessed at first hand the enormous sums of cash changing hands. One sheikh in a town south of Baghdad was given $38,000 (£19,000) and promised a further $189,000 over three months to drive Al-Qaeda fighters from a nearby camp.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/t...cas/article2413200.ece
 

quest55720

Golden Member
Nov 3, 2004
1,339
0
0
Great news 1 step closer to the united states getting the hell out of there. It will be interesting to see what happens after we leave. I hope that some sort of democracy can stick and they don't end up like Iran.

It is strange to see the almost disapointed reaction to this news by the anti-war people. I figured they would be jumping for joy over all the good news and being so much closer to being out of there. The good news at how much safer it is on the ground and our men and women in the military than it was before.
 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Administrator
Oct 9, 1999
35,052
30
86
Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: hellokeith
.

The surge of military forces which caused the turnaround, championed by John McCain, will be a huge public political win for McCain.
Yeah we can just forget about all the troops that needlessly died for a war that was unnecessary and sold to the American Public by deceit perpetrated by Bush, Cheney and McCain.
We can also forget that it was the "Suni Awakening" MONTHS before the "surge" that really turned the tables.

We can also forget that no "surge" would have been necessary in a war that should never have been started by the McCain-supported Bushwhacko cabal of liars, murderers, traitors, war criminals and war profiteers. :|

As of 8/29/08 3:57 pm EDT, 4,150 American troops have died in their war of lies, and tens of thousands more are wounded, scarred and disabled for life.
:(

McCain voted against bills intended to provide adequate equipment for our troops in the field, to ensure that troops returning from combat got adequate rest before being returned to the field and to provide adequate care for those physically and/or spiritually wounded, damaged Americans once they returned home.
  • August 2001: McCain voted against increasing the amount available for medical care for veterans by $650,000,000.
  • April 2003: McCain urged other Senate members to table a vote (which never passed) to provide more than $1 billion for National Guard and Reserve equipment in Iraq related to a shortage of helmets, tents, bullet-proof inserts, and tactical vests.
  • October 2003: McCain voted to table an amendment by Senator Dodd that called for an additional $322,000,000 for safety equipment for United States forces in Iraq and to reduce the amount provided for reconstruction in Iraq by $322,000,000.
  • March 2004: McCain once again voted against creating a reserve fund to allow for an increase in Veterans' medical care by $1.8 billion by eliminating abusive tax loopholes.
  • March 2006: McCain voted against increasing Veterans medical services funding by $1.5 billion in FY 2007 to be paid for by closing corporate tax loopholes.
  • April 2006: McCain was one of only 13 Senators to vote against $430,000,000 for the Department of Veteran Affairs for Medical Services for outpatient care and treatment for veterans.
  • May 2006: McCain voted against an amendment that would provide $20 million to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for health care facilities.
  • September 2007: McCain voted against the Webb amendment calling for adequate troop rest between deployments.
When it comes to supporting our troops, John McCain is an embarrassment to the nation. :thumbsdown:
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,530
3
0
Originally posted by: quest55720
Great news 1 step closer to the united states getting the hell out of there. It will be interesting to see what happens after we leave. I hope that some sort of democracy can stick and they don't end up like Iran.

It is strange to see the almost disapointed reaction to this news by the anti-war people. I figured they would be jumping for joy over all the good news and being so much closer to being out of there. The good news at how much safer it is on the ground and our men and women in the military are atleast a little bit safer than they were before.
Hopefully we'll learn our lesson and not elect another asshole (McSame) who'll get us in another unnecessary war
 

NeoV

Diamond Member
Apr 18, 2000
9,531
2
81
wow, half of Iraq is under Iraqi control after only 6 years.......
 

GrGr

Diamond Member
Sep 25, 2003
3,204
0
76
Originally posted by: event8horizon
did they turn against AQ or did we buy them off to "turn against" AQ.
hey hellokeith, how much american money went into the pockets of these guys??

AMERICAN forces are paying Sunni insurgents hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash to switch sides and help them to defeat Al-Qaeda in Iraq.

The tactic has boosted the efforts of American forces to restore some order to war-torn provinces around Baghdad in the run-up to a report by General David Petraeus, the US commander, to Congress tomorrow.

Petraeus will tell Congress that there has been great progress at a local level in Iraq following a surge in the number of troops this year, but little sign of political reconciliation.

In a letter to US troops, the general wrote that ?local Iraqi leaders are coming forward, opposing extremists and establishing provisional units of neighbourhood security volunteers?.

The Sunday Times has witnessed at first hand the enormous sums of cash changing hands. One sheikh in a town south of Baghdad was given $38,000 (£19,000) and promised a further $189,000 over three months to drive Al-Qaeda fighters from a nearby camp.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/t...cas/article2413200.ece
Yep, not only did the US bribe Iraqi leaders. It also hired Saddam's old Mukhabarat Police State operators... :roll:

 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
If it wasn't for the extremely obnoxious amount of money we're spending over there, would the majority of you really care?! Beyond the money, has the war truly impacted your lives at all? If so, how?

It's been my contention all along that the majority of the anger is based on fiscal expenditures, not blood; or perhaps people are simply irritated by all the negativity on their evening news (it fucks with their chi while they sip lattes or do pilates). After all, 99% of you don't even have a relative serving over there, let alone any other stake in the matter. Our casualty rates are ridiculously low compared to ANY other war or occupation in history...

So, I'm sincerely curious... why do you all care so much? Or is it simply PC to object to the war?

NOTE: I wish we'd never gone in... but, I believe some good can still come from it; and, I believe my reasons for objecting to our invasion are different than most of yours. Perhaps one of you can enlighten me... maybe my reasons are more common than I thought? I'd simply love to see yours articulated...
 

First

Lifer
Jun 3, 2002
10,518
271
136
Originally posted by: hellokeith

The surge of military forces which caused the turnaround, championed by John McCain, will be a huge public political win for McCain, and a terrible political loss for Obama who has now flip-flopped and is saying that US forces can only be withdrew on a "responsible" timeline.
http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm. This is a recent CNN/Opinion Research poll conducted August 23-24 (N=1,023 adults nationwide, MoE ± 3):

"Do you favor or oppose the U.S. war in Iraq?"

Favor: 33%
Oppose: 66%
Unsure: 1%

I'm sure Obama is shaking in his boots over the political fallout of this new supposed "victory" in Iraq (hint: this is sarcasm). Of course, intelligent people have been saying for years now that this war cannot be "won" or "turned around" in just a matter of months/years, but more like decades, and that such a commitment results in costs (blood AND treasure) that simply outweigh the benefits. Welcome to 2004.
 

First

Lifer
Jun 3, 2002
10,518
271
136
Originally posted by: palehorse
If it wasn't for the extremely obnoxious amount of money we're spending over there, would the majority of you really care?! Beyond the money, has the war truly impacted your lives at all? If so, how?
It's impossible to ignore the monetary aspect of it. Secondly, I know one person, personally, who died in Iraq. So it affects me, though certainly less so than Americans who have actually had family members die. I'm certain there are kooky leftists here that could care less about the lives of U.S. military, but since they aren't worth the time of day and don't have a significant voice or impact on politics, I don't particularly care what these ankle-biters believe.

Our casualty rates are ridiculously low compared to ANY other war or occupation in history...
Without question true, but obviously "just" 4000+ causalities still isn't acceptable without some sort of significant, tangible benefit. Reduced worldwide terrorism, vastly improved sentiment of Americans around the world, etc. Getting Saddam out of power was wonderful, but it was something that could have been done without a 160,000+ troop commitment.

So, I'm sincerely curious... why do you all care so much? Or is it simply PC to object to the war?

NOTE: I wish we'd never gone in... but, I believe some good can still come from it; and, I believe my reasons for objecting to our invasion are different than most of yours. Perhaps one of you can enlighten me... maybe my reasons are more common than I thought? I'd simply love to see yours articulated...
I cannot speak for most here, but my view is that we should have focused our efforts on terrorists/regions/countries directly involved in 9/11, and not Iraq. The thought was bold and far-reaching by this admin, and Bush certainly meant well. He and his advisers just had no clue what to do and kept on chugging along despite it.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: Evan Lieb
Originally posted by: palehorse
If it wasn't for the extremely obnoxious amount of money we're spending over there, would the majority of you really care?! Beyond the money, has the war truly impacted your lives at all? If so, how?
It's impossible to ignore the monetary aspect of it. Secondly, I know one person, personally, who died in Iraq. So it affects me, though certainly less so than Americans who have actually had family members die. I'm certain there are kooky leftists here that could care less about the lives of U.S. military, but since they aren't worth the time of day and don't have a significant voice or impact on politics, I don't particularly care what these ankle-biters believe.

Our casualty rates are ridiculously low compared to ANY other war or occupation in history...
Without question true, but obviously "just" 4000+ causalities still isn't acceptable without some sort of significant, tangible benefit. Reduced worldwide terrorism, vastly improved sentiment of Americans around the world, etc. Getting Saddam out of power was wonderful, but it was something that could have been done without a 160,000+ troop commitment.

So, I'm sincerely curious... why do you all care so much? Or is it simply PC to object to the war?

NOTE: I wish we'd never gone in... but, I believe some good can still come from it; and, I believe my reasons for objecting to our invasion are different than most of yours. Perhaps one of you can enlighten me... maybe my reasons are more common than I thought? I'd simply love to see yours articulated...
I cannot speak for most here, but my view is that we should have focused our efforts on terrorists/regions/countries directly involved in 9/11, and not Iraq. The thought was bold and far-reaching by this admin, and Bush certainly meant well. He and his advisers just had no clue what to do and kept on chugging along despite it.
Believe it, or not, you and I are almost on the exact same page -- at least with everything you wrote there.

Thank you for your response!
 

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,515
0
0
Originally posted by: palehorse
If it wasn't for the extremely obnoxious amount of money we're spending over there, would the majority of you really care?! Beyond the money, has the war truly impacted your lives at all? If so, how?

It's been my contention all along that the majority of the anger is based on fiscal expenditures, not blood; or perhaps people are simply irritated by all the negativity on their evening news (it fucks with their chi while they sip lattes or do pilates). After all, 99% of you don't even have a relative serving over there, let alone any other stake in the matter. Our casualty rates are ridiculously low compared to ANY other war or occupation in history...

So, I'm sincerely curious... why do you all care so much? Or is it simply PC to object to the war?

NOTE: I wish we'd never gone in... but, I believe some good can still come from it; and, I believe my reasons for objecting to our invasion are different than most of yours. Perhaps one of you can enlighten me... maybe my reasons are more common than I thought? I'd simply love to see yours articulated...
Perhaps my opinion is colored by the fact that I know people who have died or been seriously wounded serving in Iraq, but I find your response pretty insulting. Must everything be reduced to politics? Do you honestly think that people can't mourn the loss of life just because they don't hold the same political views you do? "Ridiculously low" casualty rates aren't the same as no casualties, and I don't think it's so unreasonable for people to be upset by people dying or being wounded in a war that probably shouldn't have happened at all. I don't think your politics are so shallow that you'd place them above concern for the lives of people who serve our country, so why can't you assume the same of others?

Honestly, I think your views seem just as objectionably PC to me as the "latte sipping Pilate" folks views appear to you. For conservatives, it's a LOT easier to dismiss the views of anti-war liberals if those liberals are cartoons left over from the Vietnam war, objecting because they are dirty hippies who spit on soldiers, rather than people who honestly care about the welfare of those who choose to serve in uniform. The fact that holding such a view is politically convenient makes me somewhat doubt how much you really believe it.

Wasted money is never a good thing, but it pales in comparison to wasted lives...don't you think? Maybe I'm in the minority of people who thinks so...but I'd like to think that's not true.
 

First

Lifer
Jun 3, 2002
10,518
271
136
Originally posted by: palehorse
Originally posted by: Evan Lieb
Originally posted by: palehorse
If it wasn't for the extremely obnoxious amount of money we're spending over there, would the majority of you really care?! Beyond the money, has the war truly impacted your lives at all? If so, how?
It's impossible to ignore the monetary aspect of it. Secondly, I know one person, personally, who died in Iraq. So it affects me, though certainly less so than Americans who have actually had family members die. I'm certain there are kooky leftists here that could care less about the lives of U.S. military, but since they aren't worth the time of day and don't have a significant voice or impact on politics, I don't particularly care what these ankle-biters believe.

Our casualty rates are ridiculously low compared to ANY other war or occupation in history...
Without question true, but obviously "just" 4000+ causalities still isn't acceptable without some sort of significant, tangible benefit. Reduced worldwide terrorism, vastly improved sentiment of Americans around the world, etc. Getting Saddam out of power was wonderful, but it was something that could have been done without a 160,000+ troop commitment.

So, I'm sincerely curious... why do you all care so much? Or is it simply PC to object to the war?

NOTE: I wish we'd never gone in... but, I believe some good can still come from it; and, I believe my reasons for objecting to our invasion are different than most of yours. Perhaps one of you can enlighten me... maybe my reasons are more common than I thought? I'd simply love to see yours articulated...
I cannot speak for most here, but my view is that we should have focused our efforts on terrorists/regions/countries directly involved in 9/11, and not Iraq. The thought was bold and far-reaching by this admin, and Bush certainly meant well. He and his advisers just had no clue what to do and kept on chugging along despite it.
Believe it, or not, you and I are almost on the exact same page -- at least with everything you wrote there.

Thank you for your response!
You are welcome sir!
 

Bitek

Lifer
Aug 2, 2001
10,422
4,857
136
I was opposed to the war before any of my family had the opportunity to go over and be blown up there, not that that accreditation should give my opinions any more weight over those that have not had to go to Walter Reed and visit severely injured and maimed troops. That experience just solidified the "realness" and consequence of our actions as citizens and voters in what the government does in our name.

Why against?
1.) Bad Strategy
2.) Obvious Fraud of threat by Saddam and links to 9/11
3.) Obvious act of vengeance, & opportunity to seize control of dwindling supplies of oil
4.) Immorality of attacking and killing the citizens of a country which pose no serious threat to ourselves, and much less provoked. This will rank at near the top in moral failings of our country since its inception.
5.) High probability of failure with far too many risks to possibly justify our involvement
6.) Distraction from finding/fighting bin Laden/AQ
7.) And yes, very very fucking expensive. And we're not even paying for it. We're letting our children pay for our moral and ethical failure. This only multiplies our failure two fold.
 

kage69

Lifer
Jul 17, 2003
23,172
23,960
136
I'm all for good news like this, but part of me wonders what tune you cheerleaders would be whistling had AQ shown a single dead tribal leader just a little more courtesy after killing him. Timing lined up nice for us, finally - but it's hardly justification or victory. We lost the minute we got conned.


How anyone, today, could look at either Cheney or Bush with an iota of sympathy at this point is just baffling to me.
 

Perknose

Forum Director & Omnipotent Overlord
Forum Director
Oct 9, 1999
44,813
5,395
136
Originally posted by: palehorse
So, I'm sincerely curious... why do you all care so much?

NOTE: I wish we'd never gone in...
We care for the very reason you just typed.

We care about the enormous amont of money that we don't have that was and is being spent on it.

We care about the senseless, needless slaughter and maiming of our sons and daughters to no good end . . . don't you? Really?

We care that the biggest beneficiary of our actions has been Iran. Don't you?

We care that the second biggest beneficiaries of our actions have been a broad and diverse group of Islamic militants who now teach their young to hate us.

We care that our invasion of Iraq, put forward by a series of lies, disrupted the large and ciritical supply of Iraqi oil on the world market, giving further disproportinate power to Venezuela, Russia, and other countries who do not with us well.

The question is, at this late date in the proceedings, WHY are you surprised that any intelligent, patriotic American wouldn't care about this colossal mistake????

Invading Iraq has undeniably weakened us. What about this can't you see, that you can even ask such a stupid question?
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY