Major Attacks Evaporating In Iraq
I’ve been saying for some time now that Al Qaeda is on the ropes in Iraq. I’ve been explaining how Al Qaeda is unable to survive and multiply without popular support, and now that the Sunnis have almost entirely turned on them, the organization will be both killed and starved into extinction. Iraq is really a series of large villages, not true metropolae in which terror groups can hide and operate. You can’t hide in an Iraqi city if the people don’t want you there, and you sure as hell can’t recruit replacements for dead jihadis. And now the stats are proving me correct.
From USA Today:
The number of truck bombs and other large al-Qaeda-style attacks in Iraq have declined nearly 50% since the United States started increasing troop levels in Iraq about six months ago, according to the U.S. military command in Iraq.
The high-profile attacks — generally large bombs hitting markets, mosques or other “soft” targets that produce mass casualties — have dropped to about 70 in July from a high during the past year of about 130 in March, according to the Multi-National Force — Iraq.
Military officers say the decline reflects progress in damaging al-Qaeda’s networks in Iraq. The military has launched offensives around Baghdad aimed at al-Qaeda sanctuaries and bases.
“The enemy had the initiative and the momentum in ‘06,” said Jack Keane, a retired general who is a chief architect of the increase in troop levels and mentor to Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq. “We’ve got it now.”
from Iraq.
Al-Qaeda militants generally attempt large, headline-grabbing incidents aimed at symbolic targets or mass casualties. Al-Qaeda in Iraq, for example, claimed responsibility for the April suicide bomb attack on parliament.
Successes against al-Qaeda have also been helped by shifting Sunni public opinion and a growing number of insurgent defections, the military says.
“Tribes and people are starting to stand up and fight back,” said Brig. Gen. Mick Bednarek, deputy commander of the U.S. division north of Baghdad. “They are turning against al-Qaeda.”
Some of the groups have provided intelligence on their former al-Qaeda allies, Lt. Col. Rick Welch, a staff officer who works with tribes, has said.
The increased security in many neighborhoods has also prompted more civilians to come forth with tips, officers said. The U.S. military gets 23,000 tips per month from Iraqis, four times more than last year, said Army Col. Ralph Baker, a former brigade commander in Iraq now assigned to the Pentagon.
Petraeus, who will give his assessment of the boost in troop levels in mid-September, said hundreds of al-Qaeda leaders have been killed or captured in the past month. He cautioned that al-Qaeda still has the “ability to carry out sensational attacks.”
Al-Qaeda is generally behind the massive publicity-seeking attacks, but much of the sectarian violence and attacks on coalition forces is the work of Shiite militias, according to the U.S. military.
Violence from Shiite militias remains strong in some areas. In Baghdad, attacks from powerful armor-piercing roadside bombs, called explosively formed penetrators, or EFPs, increased to 35 in July from an average of 23 per month between March and June, said Maj. Steven Lamb, a spokesman for the U.S. division in Baghdad.
The U.S. military says the EFPs are supplied by Iran primarily to Shiite militias. Iran has denied the allegation.
Targeting militias has proved more sensitive than attacking al-Qaeda, since Iraq’s Shiite-dominated government draws some of its support from Muqtada al-Sadr, the anti-American Shiite cleric whose followers form one of Iraq’s largest militias.
In the past, the government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki had sometimes blocked or criticized U.S. raids in Shiite strongholds. U.S. officers say that kind of interference has diminished. Petraeus said coalition and Iraqi forces have made inroads against Shiite extremist groups.
Be respectful of others and their opinions. Inflammatory remarks and inane leftist drivel will be deleted. It ain’t about free speech, remember you’re in a private domain. My website, my prerogative.
If you can't handle using your real email address, don't bother posting a comment.
Haha what do you know we were right all along! Not like we ever doubted ourselves. Haha I love it when the democrats can’t deny the damn facts.
August 13th, 2007 at 12:00 amThat is great news.
August 13th, 2007 at 12:30 amI guess the mole holes are drying up.. So much for the stupid “whack a mole” analogy.
August 13th, 2007 at 12:32 am[…] Major Attacks Evaporating In Iraq […]
August 13th, 2007 at 3:07 amQUOTE:
I’ve been saying for some time now that Al Qaeda is on the ropes in Iraq. I’ve been explaining how Al Qaeda is unable to survive and multiply without popular support, and now that the Sunnis have almost entirely turned on them, the organization will be both killed and starved into extinction. Iraq is really a series of large villages, not true metropolae in which terror groups can hide and operate. You can’t hide in an Iraqi city if the people don’t want you there, and you sure as hell can’t recruit replacements for dead jihadis. And now the stats are proving me correct.
END QUOTE!
______
NOW WE ARE GETTING…DOWN TO THE “HEART OF THE MATTTER” (eagles)
______
Best…quote in a long time…
PUT THIS IN YOUR: LIBERAL ~ COMMIE ~ SOCIALIST…PIPE AND SMOKE IT!!!!!!!!!
______
ROCK ON AMERICA!!!!
____
Peace!
August 13th, 2007 at 3:24 amDan
http://iraqsinconvenienttruth.com/
don’t worry , the dumbacrats are already moving the goal post.now it’s the political strife that is the problem the whole time. they knew that the military would take care of the insurgents (people we call terrorist) the whole time. we the people, i think, are finally catching on who the dumbacrats and the media are for.
August 13th, 2007 at 3:53 amthe light at the end of the tunnel is getting brighter..cant wait till mid sept.
August 13th, 2007 at 5:18 amThis is no surprise here. How could anyone doubt our military esp. when they are allowed to do their job and fight the enemy? Petraeus has allowed or men and women over there to at least take one arm from behind their backs. Just imagine if the Libs let them fight with both hands. GAME ON and DONE before AQ would know what hit them.
August 13th, 2007 at 5:50 amGreg M, do not doubt for a second that the democrats will STILL try and deny the facts. They make a good living off of doing just that.
August 13th, 2007 at 5:55 amInstead of playing whackamole we can play whackaDem. The situation in Basra is troubling though. It’s a microcosm of what will happen if we pull out precipitously. The Brits are holed up in their compound, under attack daily and the streets are unruly. Imagine us leaving Iraq before they are ready to assert themselves, IF they are ever ready for that. Those jackasses are on vacation while our boys are keeping a lid on things. I am pissed about that.
August 13th, 2007 at 7:07 amI honestly cant wait for September now..I admit that for a while i wasnt looking forward to then, not because I ever doubted our troops, but because I knew the Liberal cut and run crowd are wanting to get our troops out at all cost. But now that the victories in Iraq and subsequent improvement is clear to everyone. When the New York Times says things are better in Iraq you know things are better
August 13th, 2007 at 7:27 amit takes 6 yrs to make a sgt. or a capt.either police or military,, and they are the bread and butter of security..and when the enemy(democrats) kill 10 to 25% of the recruits it will take even longer,,90% of iraqis are thankfull for the MARINES and sailors,, ohhhhh ok the soldiers and airmen toooooo… but why doesn’t the dan rather press tell us that… where is jack murtha????
August 13th, 2007 at 8:48 amThe Demolibs will indeed try and move the goal post and say yes, we’re winning (And we love out troops! Gosh how we love out troops when they’re not murdering and acting like the Khmer Rouge!! Gosh we love love love our troops God Bless them and a big apology to athests for saying that…)
They will try and move the goal post. I am just a bit skeptical that they will be able to succeed at that. Reid flat out said the war was lost. Not that we were “losing” it. It was lost. Period.
He stated Democrat policy at that time. They offered nothing besides withdrawing in defeat and humiliation. They did not say “Ok you fucked it all up, you need us to come in and WIN the damned war for you.” No. Rather, they kept pointing to the polls that showed the public weary of the war (Polls that were self fulfilling prophecies that worked in a round robin circle jerk of Reid and Pelosi, to the Liberal Media over to the Al Queda partners in Iraq. Basically there was an unspoken alliance between these groups to help win the war for the fascists. This based on the failure in Vietnam which was the first war America “lost”.
Reid didn’t ever say “Our troops can absolutely win this war. They’re the best army in the world and unbeatable. BUT the political situation is the big problem and it mandates an immediate withdrawl.”
We are currently WINNING against our primary foe in Iraq, Al Queda. To the degree that there is a civil war, if at all, it was one that was encouraged by Al Queda through sadistic attacks. Divide and counquer.
Take out Al Queda and sure, the political situation might take more time. But it’s gotta be a bit easier when you’re dodging snipers and IEDs all the time.
Reid, Pelosi and Kennedy and their rich, white liberal ilk would hand our most mortal enemy a win. And they’ll have us believe that giving that W to Al Queda will not have consequences. Osama Bin Laden’s goat brigade shot like three Russians in one single battle in Afghanistan and concluded from that that he’d single handedly defeated the Russians.
Liberals are getting Feng Shui done to their homes and that is multi cultural. The Taliban is shooting women for putting on make up and that is multi culturalism too. Besides, Bush is Hitler!!
I don’t think now saying “The political situation is not what we expected it to be. So we’re pulling out.” is gonna fly after attacking Bush personally and the military’s success specifically for so long.
As Rush says, they own defeat. If it doesn’t arrive as planned, yes they can and will try and climb back down and say they knew all along that our wonderful troops (Gosh we love them! We really really love them!) would easily defeat Al Queda (Which is only in Pakistan though….) and secure the country. BUT the political situation is impossible…
That’s not what they said. They’re out on a limb. It’s a tough tough sell. Yes, Anderson Cooper and Time Magazine are going to help them sell it. I just don’t think it will do well.
August 13th, 2007 at 8:51 amJust wait for the Petraeus report next month. The Dems will spin it and blame everything on the Iraqi government then claim that our military victory means nothing.
August 13th, 2007 at 9:11 amHells bells, just check the drive bys comments of late and it is easy to see that they are beginning to cover the demasses dumbasses. Stories are coming out daily that the demasses support the surge in Iraq,and they know the US won’t be able to leave Iraq anytime soon. Whatever way the wind blows. The demasses blow–that’s what blows.
August 13th, 2007 at 11:22 amWhere’s Harry Reid been lately?
August 13th, 2007 at 11:56 amIt is refreshing to finally hear that this type of news is starting to pour out of Iraq. I was beginning to think that there would never be an indication that we were fixing the mess that we started there. I only hope that we can begin to redeploy our troops back to where they are needed- back in Afghanistan patrolling the border with Pakistan where Taliban and Al Qaeda are hiding and regrouping.
August 13th, 2007 at 12:04 pmC through U
I heard an almost identical comment come out of Nancy Pelosi’s pie hole back in March: “Our bill calls for the redeployment of U.S. troops out of Iraq so that we can focus more fully on the real war on terror, which is in Afghanistan”.
From a silly bitch like Pelosi, I understand that statement. But from a real person? Does anyone actually believe that Afghanistan is strategically more important than Iraq?
Sheesh!
August 13th, 2007 at 1:26 pmJam-
Regarding your question: “Does anyone actually believe that Afghanistan is strategically more important than Iraq?”
“Strategically more important” can mean many things, but I will answer with regards to the war in terror. ie. Does anyone actually believe that Afghanistan is strategically more important IN THE WAR ON TERROR than Iraq?
Considering that Afghanistan and Pakistan are where Al-Qaeda was born, yes. Considering that Pakistan and Afghanistan are where the majority of these terrorists are still residing, yes. Also, considering that Afghanistan is in the process of reverting back to the pre-911 Afghanistan, YES!
Now, if you want to ask your question in the broadest sense of “strategically more important” then you have to determine the importance of a number of things and compare the two countries regarding these criteria (among others). 1. Terror and terrorists
2. Oil reserves and other natural resources
3. Ease of American influence
4. Governability
5. Sustainability
If you determine that Iraq is strategically more important, then the next question you have to ask yourself is: where do we draw the line at invading “Strategically important countries?”
August 13th, 2007 at 1:57 pmCthruU, read the report from Ann Marlowe about Afghan progress in the WSJ today. Just because the MSM doesn’t report it, doesn’t mean it’s not happening. USAToday finally reports “progress” in Iraq. Glad of them to finally get the story. Of course, there’s still lots and lots for the Iraqis to do government wise. Oh, and if Afghanistan was so strategically important, why did your hero Clinton (because I know he’s your hero, despite his personal proclivity to commit crimes against women) let a rogue terrorist group set up shop and take over that country during his Presidency with nary a peep? Didn’t he see the strategic importance? Oh, and actually, al Queda was born in Somalia, and your hero Clinton let Usama go to Afghanistan and set up shop. I have personal knowledge of persons who were tasked with taking out Usama at the time, and Clinton refused to give the order.
August 13th, 2007 at 3:51 pmC through U:
Now folks here is an excellent example of a head fuck. Paralysis through over analysis. What are you stupid or something?
August 13th, 2007 at 5:19 pmLibtard-
To answer your questions:
Q1) Why did your hero Clinton (because I know he’s your hero, despite his personal proclivity to commit crimes against women) let a rogue terrorist group set up shop and take over that country during his Presidency with nary a peep?”
A) Because he was a foreign policy pussy (see Somalia)! Also, crimes against women- What a joke! He got a blowjob and committed adultery along with millions of other men around the world. You seem to have a broad definition of “crimes against women” LMFAO
Q2) Didn’t he see the strategic importance?
A2) Apparently not.
Now that we cleared that up…
Back to Afghanistan, I read your article and can see how there are improvements on the economic front in Kabul. However, outside Kabul the country is run by warlords who are sustained on a record opium crop. This was conveniently left out of the article. Also left out was the fact that the 50-60 IED deaths along the Pakistan border represents the highest figure since we invaded in 2001. Some things can get better while others get worse, but if the things getting worse are more important than the things getting better, then overall things are getting worse.
August 13th, 2007 at 5:20 pmCthruU: I know it seems like a technicality, but there were witnesses after Bill’s rape of Juanita Brodderick, assault on Miss Arkansas and on that one that went to the WH looking for a job and her husband committed suicide the same day (can’t remember her name). These are well documented, with witnesses immediately preceding and after the events. You really have to search out the facts, because the media certainly doesn’t publicize it. He would have been a covicted rapist after Juanita and never made it to be AR governor, if she hadn’t been so scared to report it.
August 13th, 2007 at 7:33 pmFirst things first! Kill the AQ in Iraq and don’t worry about why or how or when they came there. Iraq is the heart of the Arabic Islamic world, not Saudi Arabia (in spite of Mecca), not Egypt, not Syria, and certainly not Afganistan. Iraq is the big battle going on in this war right now and must be won as decisively as Germany was defeated and rebuilt after WWII. Afganistan is only the equivalent of Italy in this war, a tough battle but not THE battle.
August 13th, 2007 at 11:44 pmC through U
Don’t give me “can mean many things”. All we are talking about is the GWOT. Do you think the U.S. military can’t fight on 2 fronts? Now I just ask you to consider whether Iraq or Afghanistan is more important (now, today) to the overall strategy to crush the fucking jihadis.
And how did Clinton’s Johnson get into this? Who gives a fuck about that anymore?
August 14th, 2007 at 5:08 amWhy do dems think Aghanistan is the central front in the war on terror when
A Bin Laden is dead or a lame duck terror leader
August 14th, 2007 at 5:16 amB 9/11 was done by Saudis trained in the US (not Afghans trained in Afghanistan)
C AQ in Iraq is getting killed in bigger numbers than AQ in Afghanistan
D AQ in Afghanistan and AQ in Iraq (eg Zarcowpee) communicated and coordinated their activities.
The GWOT consists of many fronts. It doesn’t matter where they are. The irahis are only interested in the death or subjigation of everyone not like them. (See Das Koran or Das Sunna for references). They’re strategy is victory or death. Ours should be the same. Our victory and their deaths.
Whether we leave or stay in Iraq, the irhabis will continue their jihad against us. There is no line to be drawn except victory, death or Dhimnitude for the West.
We quit, when they quit. We draw the battle lines wherever they are. We fight them wherever they are.
This ain’t a fucking political game for power. This is a 15 round fight to the finish…winner take all. We can fight this war now or we can fight it later in the streets of America, or return to the mideast. But either way we’re in this war for the long-haul, like it or not.
The Dems can bitch all they want. At least this guy isn’t throwing million dollar missiles at aspirin factories.
Where we are the terrorists are. Where we go, the terrorists will follow us, with an eye towards more 9-11 ops.
Defeating them in Iraq will go along way toward defeating them elsewhere. If they can’t beat us there, they won’t beat us anywhere else either.
And Afghanistan is heating up, because Musharaff hasn’t done shit, to stop the terrorists in his back yard. He let them get stronger and now he is paying the price…and so is Afghanistan.
And despite some 17,000+ deaths the irhabis continue their religious jihad against the west…with encouragement from the mustifoon Whahabiists, and the apostate regime of Ahmedinajacket…or from his puppets in Syria.
Iraq is a crucial battle in the GWOT. It sits between Syria and Iran. If the irabis lose in Iraq, they have to try going after softer targets elsewhere. That somewhere else is in Pakistan and Lebanon.
In Afghanistan, they lose everytime they attack coalition targets. They do better against Afghan Police outposts.
Overall, they achieve nothing.
In Pakistan, even some of their military leadership is irhabi. Pakis are an easier target. Kill off a few military outposts, and the Pakis pull back.
In Lebanaon, they own the terrain.
In the end, the irhabis will have to rethink their jihad and direct it more towards places where they can be effective.
However, with political will in Congress suspect…the irhabis are hoping the the Americans pull another political 1968, and shoot themselves in the foot. That’s what is making them hold on in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Only politics will stop victory in this war…it won’t be some muj with an RPG.
Fortunately, the left doesn’t have their monopoly on the news anymore like they did in 68. We didn’t have anyone countering Walter Cronkite’s wrong-headed views in 68. Now we got plenty of Cronkites, and plenty more counter-Cronkites. This and our troops are what’s going to gain the victory in the GWOT.
Fuck the slumber party. Fuck their panty-waste politicians.
Fuck Hairy Weed and the mother that bore him. Fuck em all.
And fuck you Shillary and Barney OsamayoMomma.
August 14th, 2007 at 6:57 amjam: you should care because Hillary is running for Pres., is the most likely next Pres. of this country, and she was part and parcel of Bill’s machine in AR and DC to cover up and lie to get and keep power. It demonstrates her moral bankruptcy.
August 14th, 2007 at 12:08 pm