June 17, 2007
Even MSM Agrees: Barely Started Counterinsurgency On a Roll!
The elite media doesn't realize it yet, but they have given the new counterinsurgency strategy the best review they possibly could -- by admitting that, though it has barely begun, we already now "have full control" of 40% of Baghdad (our target), plus an additional 30% somewhat under control but not fully, leaving only 30% fully in insurgent hands.
In other words, Baghdad is now 40% white, 30% pink, and 30% red. Not bad for a "surge" that just began operations this week:
Odierno said there was a long way to go in retaking the city from Shiite Muslim militias, Sunni Arab insurgents and al-Qaida terrorists. He said only about "40 percent is really very safe on a routine basis" - with about 30 percent lacking control and a further 30 percent suffering "a high level of violence...."
"There's about 30 percent of the city that needs work, like here in Dora and the surrounding areas," Odierno said. "Those are the areas that we consider to be the hot spots, which usually have a Sunni-Shiite fault line, and also areas where al-Qaida has decided to make a stand."
Naturally, this being the Associated Press, they chose to see the Persian slipper as half-empty of tobacco, headlining their piece "US: 60 Pct. of Baghdad Not Controlled." But you don't need to be Sherlock Holmes to be able to do the math.
Most of the article dwelt upon the kidnapping and possible deaths of a few American soldiers a few weeks ago (airborne troops found the victims' ID cards; no word yet whether they're alive or dead) and upon the rise in American casualties that, oddly enough, seems to accompany our increased willingness to engage the enemy. As you can see, these issues fit perfectly with the theme of the article: the percent of Baghdad we control.
And frankly, the verified fact that we control or exert strong influence over 70% of the Iraqi capital, after merely preparing for a campaign, followed by one week of actual combat, is pretty darned good news presaging eventual victory.
Even if the drive-by media can't quite see beyond their front bumpers to realize it.
Hatched by Dafydd on this day, June 17, 2007, at the time of 4:31 AM
TrackBack URL for this hissing: http://biglizards.net/mt3.36/earendiltrack.cgi/2178
The following hissed in response by: KarmiCommunist
Amazing that its gone this well so soon, considering how the Dems have been calling for 'retreat', and MSM carrying that 'theme' along with them...the Dems.
The above hissed in response by: KarmiCommunist at June 17, 2007 4:48 PM
The following hissed in response by: exDemo
I still beleive that Mr. Bush will amnnounce late thsi fall that we hahve been succesful in Iraq. Despite the MSM absolutely unwilling to report it, there are still only 3 out of 18 provinces that are not wholly pacified. And all three have improved signigicantly this year.
Does anyone want t debate that Al Qqueda is a lot more insecure in their heartland province of Anbar? That province in longer Red. The local tribal politicians arcan read the tea leaves. the Sunni Iraqis are fed up wiht foreigners killing them,and have turend on them. A guerilla can only live whn he can swim in the sea of the citenry. Its white in some areas and pink in others. Al queda is losing Anbar and there is no wher else for them to bas their resistance.
In Diyallah, the third unpacified province, a mixed Sunni/Shiai province, there is al Sadr's Mahdi militias as wel as a smaller AQi presence but boith are suffering and AQi is losing there as well,
We have this article to talk about teh situation in Baghdad Province as an assessment there.
I consider it a pre-emptive attack by the Surrender-crats to say the Surge was a failure before it was even begun. They can see the handwriting on the wall.
It will be 1972 all over again. "Peace with Honor" "Victory" and a staged withdrawal removing the ONLY reason why anyone would consider voting for the Jackass Party.
The above hissed in response by: exDemo at June 17, 2007 5:38 PM
The following hissed in response by: Rovin
Why did they throw out the GOP? Why do they now seem to be rejecting the Democrats?
The democratic party sold the American electorate a "bill of goods" that promised a "change in direction"-----that feel-good phrase that led to the delusion that, (if elected to power), the war would be over and our troops would come home. Of course the Dems were never specific on how all this was going to be accomplished and only the far left anti-war crowd believed that we would cut-and-run/surrender. This is still today a large percentage of those in the democratic party that are rejecting their leadership.
Compound this with the total hypocrisy of their promise to deal with the "culture of corruption", and the lack of ability to accomplish any meaningful legislation, (again, where their party promised to cross the isle and work with the "minority" to do the "peoples work"), and you have the recipe for ineptitude.
"Change in direction"? or like the weatherman says---"there will be no change"
The above hissed in response by: Rovin at June 19, 2007 9:10 AM
Post a comment
Thanks for hissing in, . Now you can slither in with a comment, o wise. (sign out)(If you haven't hissed a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Hang loose; don't shed your skin!)
© 2005-2009 by Dafydd ab Hugh - All Rights Reserved