This is from a joint statement released yesterday by US Ambassador to Iraq Khalilzad and General Casey:
Today, in another sign of progress toward a stable and secure Iraq, the Fourth Iraqi Army Division Headquarters officially assumed the lead in its area of responsibility from the 101st Airborne Division.
This achievement represents the Division halfway mark of our joint goal of putting all Iraqi Security Forces in the lead in coordinating, planning and conducting security operations in Iraq. We congratulate the Iraqi people and the Government on Iraq on this important milestone.
Five of the Iraqi Army’s ten division headquarters, 25 brigade headquarters, and 85 battalions in the Iraqi Army now have the lead for security responsibilities in their areas. Additionally, to date 48 of 110 Coalition Forward Operating Bases have been transferred to Iraqi control. These turnovers from Coalition forces to Iraqi security forces reflect the increased operational capacity of the Iraqi security forces.
Although these forces are increasingly capable of planning and conducting security operations independent of the Multinational Forces, we pledge our continued support to them and the Iraqi Government as they seek to provide peace and prosperity for all of Iraq’s peoples.
May God bless the people of Iraq.
And may God bless our American heroes putting their lives on the line to defeat Islamic fascism at the front lines of World War III.
-Bruce (GayPatriot)
Great!
So now we should be able to get our troops home sooner than later!
Oh wait…he used the words “increasingly capable”
Just like my chances of dateing Jennifer Aniston are becomeing “increasingly capable.”
What is missing is an indication if, as the Iraqi’s take responsibilty of these areas, violence increases or decreases. If responsibility shifts and violence decreases that’s great (and there would be a great potential news story there). But if the violence remains constant or increases isn’t that a greater concern.
Not to argue or anything, but I think WW4 is more accurate; WW3 was the Cold War.
#1 – Just like al-Reuters and al-AP are “increasingly capable” of running pictures that haven’t been photoshopped, right???
Seems as though the Left wants us to win the War on Terror as much as the terrorists do.
Regards,
Peter H.
“Left wants us to win the War on Terror as much as the terrorists do”
Come on Peter, stop that kind of dribble
Just because we disagree on Tactics doesn’t mean we disagree on the outcome
Jeez
oh, it’s going really well over in iraq; electricity levels are below pre-invasion levels (after 3 years), there’s little potable water, the government wouldn’t exist if it had to survive outside the green zone, and the civil war is now deep. bush created a war on false premises and we are occupiers. no flowers were thrown at our soldiers, the insurgency is not in its last throes, and there were no wmd.
yeah, it’s all good over there.
The violence in Iraq is about Sunni and Shiite Islamo-fascists fighting for control of the government. Why do supporters of the war seem to be hellbent on giving Islamofascism a pass in Iraq?
#5 – Okay keogh – what is the lib left proposing RIGHT NOW to eliminate the Islamofascist threat? You have the floor.
Regards,
Peter H.
First, I don’t speak for the left.
I speak for myself.
You asked what I would do right now:
Raise taxes to protect our borders and nimbleize our military.
Currently the Right is only asking Soldiers and their families to Sacrifice, the whole country should bear the burden of this struggle. The Right seems to think fiscal sanity does not apply to a long drawn struggle….I would love to know why…
We must engage Hamas as the legitimate rulers of Palestine (didn’t they win free elections?)
Give them a stake in the process – (as the brits learned with the IRA, you can’t destroy that type of resistance, you have to engage the political wing and be patient.) We must make the political side of Hamas a legitimate source of power in Palestine.
Only then will they have the balls to challenge the military wing.
Engage and deisolate Syria and Iran. Trade with them, build up their economies make them partners. Bring them into the world community. Give them a reason to stop funding and supporting Hezbollah – This will not only help us in the Middle East but it would make China and Russia nervous as well.
Third, put our recourses into CIA, NSA, and the like.
A full scale war does NOTHING to stop terrorism and the fascists.
Israel/Lebanon and Iraq are proofs of this.
You cannot refute this.
It would be so easy if we could stop terrorism with full scale war. But you cannot it plays right into the hands of the terrorist. Instead you must engage the parties that give them cover and make them WANT to give up the terrorist in their borders and join the world.
If I had more time to elaborate I would.
From the title of the post “WWIII”.
It’s actually WWVI. Don’t forget the Cold War (WWIII), minor skirmishes of which included Korea and Vietnam (and Beirut and Grenada). Minor, of course, unless you were KIA, on either side. As an aside, I find it amazing that Americans don’t particularly care for those presumptively on “the other side” who are not combatants but who are KIA. But then, again, as an elderly British lady once mentioned to us, Americans are very keen on themselves.
The ongoing War on (some) Drugs (WWIV), which is not going well in either Colombia or Afghanistan for the Good Guys. I had been led to believe that the US had pounded Afghanistan into being its ally, but I guess I was wrong.
The ongoing War on the Environment (WWV) which has been discussed elsewhere.
And the ongoing War on (some) Terrorism (WWVI, as long as it isn’t American-sponsored terrorism, of course).
And that ignores the ongoing skirmishes in regards nucular non-proliferation and other issues. Oh, yes, and also oil.
keogh, I asked what the LEFT would do, not you personally. What is it that the Left is proposing RIGHT NOW (besides the disproved cabal that “Bush lied” when he didn’t) to eliminate the Muslim terrorist threat?
The answer is, simply, NOTHING. Not one prominent elected demoncRAT has offered anything by way of a proactive solution.
But since you so (generously?) offered up YOUR solutions, let’s examine them, shall we?
“Raise taxes to protect our borders and nimbleize our military.”
Aside from being completely mystified as to your word “nimbleize” (have you been learning English from rajiansybilsockpuppet?), I can assure you that raising taxes is NOT the way to protect our borders.
Why raise taxes? To do what? Pay for more bureaucracy? We already have enough existing laws. We just need to enforce them. Plus, it is a common liberal “tax and spend” mantra that gets our economy in the rut to begin with. Sorry, your answer is wrong.
“Currently the Right is only asking Soldiers and their families to Sacrifice, the whole country should bear the burden of this struggle. The Right seems to think fiscal sanity does not apply to a long drawn struggle….I would love to know why…”
And frankly, I would love to know why you believe this fallacy, and where you got it from (and a few weblogs do come to mind). Of course the whole country bears – and IS bearing – the burden for this struggle in many ways: complying with transportation/safety requirements at a second’s notice, offering assistance to soldiers and their families through generous blogs and programs like the Wounded Warrior Center, adoptaplatoon.org, operationgive.com (which I am currently utilizing) etc.
And while we’re on the subject…what part are YOU playing except for being maybe a consciencious objector? And don’t be coy with me; I’ve already come clean as to how I’m doing my part.
As far as fiscal sanity goes…please name the last RAT lawmaker who ever proposed a tax CUT, not a tax HIKE. Fiscal sanity does apply – and it’s usually GOP lawmakers who are the most fiscally sane in this instance. Wrong on you again.
Let’s keep going, shall we?
1. Hamas is an elected body for “Palestine,” but remember that the UN fiat created Israel in 1948. (You remember the UN, don’t you? The one authoritarian body in the world that all libs like?) Israel is a state with the right to exist…except in the minds of Arabs, terrorists and anti-Semetics. Or in the case of the Iranian president, a case of all three wrapped up in one convenient package.
2. We cannot GIVE terrorists like Hamas, Hezbollah and al-Qaeda a stake in the peacekeeping process. Prove to me that they can be trusted first.
This war is complicated because we are fighting an entity that is all over the world, an enemy with no geographical boundaries. It’s also tough because we all know that it’s a war that will be fought for many, many generations.
Every culture understands this concept. If the bully is left alone, he never goes away. Liberals think if we leave the terrorists alone, they’ll just peacefully mind their own business, never bothering us again.
WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. Next issue:
3. Engage Syria and Iran. What rock have you been hiding under? U.S. negotiators with Iran have had offers to them coming out of their ears in three years of fruitless negotiations.
And as for our allies, we let the British, French and Germans negotiate with Iran for those three years, only to have Iran brazenly begin accelerated uranium enrichment that continues to this day.
4. Putting our resources into the NSA and CIA. Well, DUH! That would be a great start, now wouldn’t it? Welcome to the party, late again.
Except every time we try to engage our “secret” intelligence operations, we get traitors like the NYT and LA Times exposing them on the front pages of their rags. Then we get the ACLU and other bleeding hearts to demand why the American people weren’t let in on the “secret.”
This foiled attempt by terrorists to create another 9/11 was done BECAUSE we were able to conduct surveillances (through legal measures) and trace money through the SWIFT program to proactively stop the attack BEFORE it took place. But of course, now that the cat is out of the bag, we cannot use these means any more, no thanks to the NYT and its ilk, along with every civil libertarian nutjob in the USA.
Match, set, game. Goodbye.
Regards,
Peter H.
Peter, I am glad you feel the need to advertise your personal monetary sacrifices. I will abstain from promoting my self glory but I appreciate the irony.
Also,
You are exactly correct. This war is different.
YOU CANNOT STOP TERRORISTS WITH TOTAL WAR!!!
Blowing up towns and buildings does nothing. – As Iraq, Afghanistan and Lebanon has proved
You can only do it through Enforcement of law – which is EXACTLY what Righties criticized John Kerry for proposing in the 2004 election.
Syria Iran Hamas:
We have not been serious about treating Syria and Iran as open partners. That is fact. There has been fits and starts but nothing serious. The US negotiators have always held extreme conditions that no sovereign government would capitulate to. You are completely wrong about this. You must read more than the Washington Times to see that we have never been serious about bringing them out of their isolation.
– The IRA was not trustworthy when the brits began working WITH their political wing. Only after the political wing was able to show results were they able to overshadow the military wing. – This is the example we must follow!
CIA NSA DOH, and the other Alphabets – Again, this is what KERRY wanted to do. Bush has been under-funding much of the DOH and other alphabets at the expense of the military. That is fact. This has been making us much less safe. That is fact.
Civil liberties –
Democrats are not anti surveillance. They just don’t think it should be controlled by an all powerful executive.
Drudge tells me that the money transfer happened post the NYT story and much of the conversations were done through face to face contact in Pakistan. So I think you are wrong again!
Further, this bust happened by following the principles set by former presidential candidate Kerry not George Bush.
Further, we would not have known anything about it if it was not for one concerned Muslim in Britain who tipped off authorities.
Peter, you have shown that by misuseing facts you can delude yourself that you have scored points. That is the tradegy of the Right.
Open your eyes. See the problems for what they are, not for where you think they should fit.
keogh, my eyes are open. Yours are fogged from the smokescreen set up by the Left to rationalize their own miserable existence.
Your “facts” are baseless and I call them as such. Since when is war confused with law enforcement? That was the main problem with connecting the dots with 9/11 – the Jaime Gorelick wall that was built to keep the CIA and FBI from talking to each other was put there in the name of law enforcement! The Clinton regime wanted to treat the terrorists as law breakers, not as potential warmongers. This is where the trouble began.
So if you want to point fingers, point them at Slick Willie and his band of merry cohorts. They are the ones who left us open to attack.
I rest my case.
Regards,
Peter H.
Ahh,
The classic rant of the right:
When the facts are in the way,
When reality looks to real,
When the chips are down,
And when all else fails, Blame Clinton!
And the right dares to say the Left is full of hatred?
Mention a Clintonite and watch hypocrisy ensue.
401(k) plan, would you be willing to take your own advice after this president’s administration is over? Are you going to blame any future president for any particular foul-ups on his predecessor?
Yeah, I thought so.
Regards,
Peter H.