Source: Selected Figures from the Report of the Jones Commission on the Iraqi Security Forces
Report to Congress on the Situation in Iraq (PDF)
Charts (PDF)
From a longer exerpt;
“I will not minimize the enormity of the challenges faced by Iraqis, nor the complexity of the situation. Yet at the same time, I intend to demonstrate that it is possible for the United States to see its goals realized in Iraq and that Iraqis are capable of tackling and addressing the problems confronting them today. A secure, stable, democratic Iraq at peace with its neighbors is attainable.
“Some of the more promising political developments at the national level are neither measured in benchmarks nor visible to those far from Baghdad. For instance, there is a budding debate about federalism among Iraq’s leaders and, importantly, within the Sunni community. Those living in places like al-Anbar and Salahaddin are beginning to realize how localities having more of a say in daily decision making will empower their communities. No longer is an all-powerful Baghdad seen as the panacea to Iraq’s problems. This thinking is nascent, but it is ultimately critical to the evolution of a common vision among all Iraqi leaders.
Update: A critique from Michael Yon;
General David Petraeus’s first day of testimony was completely accurate, and consistent with my recent experiences around Iraq. Everything he said during the public hearing on Monday was measured, cogent, and demonstrably accurate. That his reputation was attacked in an entirely inaccurate full-page advertisement in the New York Times is a smear on the reputation of the New York Times.
I wonder how the Times’ regular commercial advertisers will react when they learn about this?
More thoughts on the timing of an Iraqi poll – The media’s Tet offensive – “‘Coming at a crucial moment?’ Is the BBC serious? Would they really have us believe that the release of the poll results on the day of the Petraeus/Crocker testimony was some kind of coincidence? Polling was carried out between August 17 and August 24, so the BBC and ABC have been sitting on these results for two weeks…”
Go read Soldier’s Dad’s blog. The last three entries (9/9/07 to 9/10/07) tell a good story about what is actually happening on the ground in Iraq and in the American Congress.
It’s working – and Iraq is slowly moving out of its tribal/sectarian era and into a civic mode. But, as noted, Iran is a major problem – Iran wants to stir up a lot of trouble in the ME, but the people don’t want to live within violence.
I imagine the left will be very unhappy with this report. After all, they want Islamic fascism to win.
ET:
The Left will simply ignore the report as inconvenient — Hell, even such moderate voices as Paul Wells (and in the Canadian context, he is a moderate) are already making fun of the report.
There’s two sides to every story, and by God, most of the MSM is gonna make damn sure that only their side gets told to us. Even if they have to stay in Paris for years to do so. 😉
Democrats: “Oh no, we’re winning! Run away, RUN AWAAAAAY!!!!!”
Its ok Dems, you’ve got a friend in Osama.
Incredible what is happening in Congress from the Left.
Petraeus says that his report is HIS, and not vetted, previewed, written by anyone else. The Left doesn’t believe him – ie, calling him, effectively, a liar.
He’s being told that once upon a time, Westmoreland said the same about Vietnam – that ‘it was working’ – and ‘he was wrong’. They are actually claiming that, therefore, Petraeus is lying, because he’s saying ‘it’s working’..and..once upon a time in Vietnam..
The illogic of equating two remarks as identical..incredible. It’s like saying – because I said ‘how are you’ to X and yet disliked X; then, when i say ‘how are you to Y, it means I dislike Y.
They are refusing to accept his statistics, touting, if you can believe it, ABC, NBC etc reports that claim that the surge is not working and that ‘most Iraqis claim their lives are worse off (this from an apparent poll conducted by these MSM sites)..
So- you get actual data, from a professional rejected and the suspect data from the MSM touted as acceptable.
The Left – incredible.
“even such moderate voices as Paul Wells”
Its been awhile since I’ve seen Paul saddle in here to get his ass handed to him by a girl.
Amanutjob of Iran has already said in so many words that when the U.S. pulls out, they will pull in…..if this isn’t enough incentive for the Iraqis to get it together soon, I don’t know what is.
ET: “Petraeus says that his report is HIS, and not vetted, previewed, written by anyone else.”
ET, is it possible that Petraeus himself might colour the truth a bit for the little people? Or would you assume that he’s pretty much speaking gospel?
crab – no, I don’t think Petraeus is speaking gospel – whatever that means. And I don’t think he considers he’s speaking to ‘the little people’ (?).
I think he’s speaking things as he sees and has experienced it – and based on his data base.
You are obviously pre-geared to reject what he says. Now, that’s gospel thinking.
Achieving “peace” by allowing ethnic cleansing to happen right under the nose of the foreign occupying force is as hollow a victory in Bagdhad as it was in Kosovo.
But it’s been a wild and incredibly lucrative ride for everyone on the foreign-policy end of the US government teat. Not a cakewalk, exactly, but definitely a lot of cake involved. Apparently a lot of it has been shared (rather generously I think) with Sunni insurgents and al Qaeda in Anbar Province. Schweet.
Hey – anyone got a trillion dollars or so that they’ll lend us so we can “take care of” Iran?
ET, I’m inclined to keep in mind that it might not be in the the best interests of the US authorities to disclose exactly how things are going in Iraq, particularly if the news is not good.
I’m only reminding you that the information we receive from war zones is somewhat filtered (pardon the understatement). If you don’t believe that news from Iraq might be massaged for our consumption, or at the very least carefully selected, you’re spectacularly naive. Do you in fact believe that the public here (or elsewhere) should have unfettered access to the whole truth as this conflict plays out?
By the way, I didn’t say Petraeus was lying. I asked whether we might want to be cautious about swallowing the story whole. Your dramatic reaction to that suggestion is a bit curious.
You buy the story hook, line and sinker, and I’m thinking we might want to reserve judgement. You think I’m the “pre-geared” one?
crabby:
It’s always good to question, because that’s the only way to learn.
A certain amount of skepticism never hurts either.
In this situation, I tend to believe the people who are actually in the middle of the action know a lot more about what’s going on than I do.
Anti-war activists have done their credibility a great disfavour by name-calling the General.
I always taught my kids that the person who name-calls first loses the debate, since that indicates they have run out of credible arguments and ideas.
It’s war. People get killed, people get maimed for life.
The way it’s always been.
In this case, I would say Petraeus is a credible witness.
Pelosi says the 4000 troop draw down is ‘unacceptable’.
Perhaps she can accept the complete meltdown of Iraq on a sudden US departure.
Petraeus is getting slagged because it is not what the Dems want to hear.
The simple fact is that “Gulf War Lite” as propounded by Rumsfeld was successful in dislodging Saddam but failed to keep the peace.
The surge was required to quell the sectarian violence. Iran has an interest in keeping the violence going as it is hemmed in on two sides of Afghanistan and Iraq. This makes Ahmadinejad somewhat nervous.
The surge makes the climate possible for political compromise. In the absence of the surge the parties who ‘betrayed’ their side would likely earn a bullet.
Realpolitik my friends.
See for example Walid Phares analysis here:
http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=2BE7096D-5B23-4206-ACAE-02F5CF98C6A1
“By the way, I didn’t say Petraeus was lying. I asked whether we might want to be cautious about swallowing the story whole. Your dramatic reaction to that suggestion is a bit curious.
You buy the story hook, line and sinker, and I’m thinking we might want to reserve judgement. You think I’m the “pre-geared” one?”
I’ve read and re-read ET’s posting, Crabgrass…she was NOT dramatic and she didn’t appear to be “buying the story” hook, line and sinker. As is typical of small-minded leftists, you exaggerate to try to turn a molehill into a mountain for your benefit, then turn around and obfuscate to turn mountains into molehills regarding issues negative to leftists.
Is it possible that Patraeus is colouring the story? Yes. Is it likely that he is colouring the story sufficiently to put “lipstick on the pig”? No…there are too many MSM in the war zone for him to get away with lying too much.
Is it possible that the Democrats are being outrageously stupid? Yes. Is it possible that Crabgrass is pre-programmed to slam Bush and Conservatives over ANYTHING? Yes.
Bugger off.
ugh – I don’t think you understand what is going on in the ME and you don’t know the history of the area.
Your first statement of ‘peace by allowing ethnic cleansing’ is nonsense. I presume your reference to ‘ethnic cleansing’ is tribal/sectarian conflict. Would you prefer Hussein’s ethnic cleansing? After all- that was a situation of one tribe in authority, murdering members of other tribes. That was certainly ‘peaceful’.
You ignore that Iraq (and the ME) have to move out of the only mode of sociopolitical organization they have ever known – tribalism – and into a civic mode. That can’t be done in a flick; it takes time and effort. What is going on now in Iraq is a conflict between tribes as they realize that tribalism is no longer functional. you don’t change traditional beliefs in a flick. So- I suggest you get some background knowledge in the area.
Second, your implication that this war is simply about profits for US firms is stupid. Again, you don’t know anything about the history of the area, and the larger scenario. You can’t have one part of the globe, in a global economy, operating in a mode that is suitable only for the 7th century. It’s dysfunctional – for the people within that 7th c mode, never mind for the rest of the world. They have to change – and it’s hard.
crabgrass – I suggest you are making the error of merging ‘what if’ and stating that it means ‘what is’.
You state that it ‘might not be in the best interests of the US to disclose ‘bad facts’. That’s a ‘what if’. It doesn’t mean that’s the actual case. You want to believe this because you are pre-geared to US failure.
You point out that the news is an ‘artifactual news’ rather than factual. Heh – and most of this artifactual news is bad. I’m sure you’ve seen, on kate’s blog and other blogs’, the factual news that is good. That good news doesn’t get to the MSM.
‘Unfettered access to the whole truth’? That has nothing to do with facts which are kept from us, the good facts – and only the bad gets to us. That has to do with troop deployment etc; we can’t be privy to that. You are invalidly merging different types of information – some of which we have a right to , and some which we don’t.
My ‘dramatic reaction’ and ‘a bit curious’? Wow. That’s a perfect example of someone, you, filtering and manufacturing reality. I didn’t have a ‘dramatic reaction’ – not in the least. But – you wanted to present my views as suggesting alarm or a ‘problem’ – and you informed us that my reaction was ‘dramatic’ and ‘curious (ie, worthy of thought). Now – that’s a pefect example of you, filtering and changing reality. Just like a leftist.
ugh – I don’t think you understand what is going on in the ME and you don’t know the history of the area.
Your first statement of ‘peace by allowing ethnic cleansing’ is nonsense. I presume your reference to ‘ethnic cleansing’ is tribal/sectarian conflict. Would you prefer Hussein’s ethnic cleansing? After all- that was a situation of one tribe in authority, murdering members of other tribes. That was certainly ‘peaceful’.
You ignore that Iraq (and the ME) have to move out of the only mode of sociopolitical organization they have ever known – tribalism – and into a civic mode. That can’t be done in a flick; it takes time and effort. What is going on now in Iraq is a conflict between tribes as they realize that tribalism is no longer functional. you don’t change traditional beliefs in a flick. So- I suggest you get some background knowledge in the area.
Second, your implication that this war is simply about profits for US firms is stupid. Again, you don’t know anything about the history of the area, and the larger scenario. You can’t have one part of the globe, in a global economy, operating in a mode that is suitable only for the 7th century. It’s dysfunctional – for the people within that 7th c mode, never mind for the rest of the world. They have to change – and it’s hard.
crabgrass – I suggest you are making the error of merging ‘what if’ and stating that it means ‘what is’.
You state that it ‘might not be in the best interests of the US to disclose ‘bad facts’. That’s a ‘what if’. It doesn’t mean that’s the actual case. You want to believe this because you are pre-geared to US failure.
You point out that the news is an ‘artifactual news’ rather than factual. Heh – and most of this artifactual news is bad. I’m sure you’ve seen, on kate’s blog and other blogs’, the factual news that is good. That good news doesn’t get to the MSM.
‘Unfettered access to the whole truth’? That has nothing to do with facts which are kept from us, the good facts – and only the bad gets to us. That has to do with troop deployment etc; we can’t be privy to that. You are invalidly merging different types of information – some of which we have a right to , and some which we don’t.
My ‘dramatic reaction’ and ‘a bit curious’? Wow. That’s a perfect example of someone, you, filtering and manufacturing reality. I didn’t have a ‘dramatic reaction’ – not in the least. But – you wanted to present my views as suggesting alarm or a ‘problem’ – and you informed us that my reaction was ‘dramatic’ and ‘curious (ie, worthy of thought). Now – that’s a pefect example of you, filtering and changing reality. Just like a leftist.
Eeyore, why the long face?
As hard as I look I just cannot see evidence of de-tribalization in the ME. In fact it seems to me that the very limited success Petraeus cites resulted from his realpolitik use of these very tribal forces, namely sunni militia.
me no dhimmi – again, if you think that changing a deep infrastructure – one that is the basic structure for ALL behaviour – economic, political, legal, familial, religious – and one that has been in existence for thousands of years – can be overturned in 3 years – well..what can I say.
It IS changing, and the different sects are starting to work together – with many backwards and forwards, with talks and breakdowns of talks. None of this would have happened before. no shared tasks, no shared agendas, and no talks.
The reality of a tribe is that it is the essence of your identity. It’s almost a genetic code; it’s your familial name – and unlike the west, which moved into the nuclear family rather than the extended/tribal family 600 years ago – in the ME, the tribe is family. You don’t suddenly walk out on your family; you don’t ignore the centuries of responsibilities and duties and obligations. It takes time to move from a tribal to a civic mode. It took the west several hundred years – are you already giving up on the ME after only a few years???
It has to be done; they have no choice. But, it’s not a mechanical act.
ET, as usual, has nailed it. Study of the issue has its merits, eh?
For a related comparison, look how hard we are having to work to kill gun control as a public policy. This is a policy based on a lie made up in the early 1960’s by socialists. I’ve been watching conservatives bang away on it hammer and tongs since 1992, we have only made real progress at it since 2000 in the USA and still have made none here in Canada.
Things do not happen over night. There’s a limit to what you can get people to do, even when you stick a gun in their face.
Which is of course what makes the DemocRats of the USA and Taliban Jack’s band of idiots such a pack of repulsive liars. They know their objections are baseless and insane. They are flinging monkey wrenches into the gears as a power grab, nothing more.
That’s why we call them DemocRats.
Well, anti-gun-control advocates have factual evidence to support their position, namely, that in jurisdictions where guns were controlled, the violent crime rate rose.
ET nails a lot of stuff to be sure but her premise that the ME is de-tribalizing is supported by wishful thinking and a mortal fear of being wrong about the democracy project (a pipe dream); it is not supported by any evidence I can see. In fact, I’d say that our efforts there are adding to the resurgence of paraoid Islam NOT moving the ME into “civic mode”.
That said, I’m not cursed with “pride of opinion” and fervently hope ET is right and that I’m wrong.