Irvine511 said:
did you just ignore this:
[q]The Pentagon report, released on the same day Robert M. Gates was sworn-in to succeed Donald Rumsfeld as Secretary of Defense, paints a bleak picture of a nation on the edge of chaos with 959 attacks a week attributed to militias, death squads and insurgents. According to the report, attacks increased 22 percent between August and November with more than half taking place in the major population centers of Baghdad and Anbar provinces. The high attack rate resulted in an average of 93 civilian deaths a day.[/q]
slightly more than half is taking place in Baghdad an Anbar provinces (and please note how big Anbar is). Abizaid is not correct, and we've pointed out repeatedly how the US military is not the best source of information on their own progress.
it's like asking Enron to report on how well their stock is doing.
[q]Those are facts, and there is NOTHING disingenuous or distorted about stating them. What is disingenuous, distorted and completely inaccurate, is to extrapolate what is going on in Baghdad and the 5 Sunni majority provinces as being the condition that all of Iraq is in. To hell with the facts and attempting to understand that there a huge differences in conditions between various provinces in Iraq. It is a fantasy to assume that conditions in the Kurdish north and the Shia south are as bad as they are in Baghdad.[/q]
it is TOTALLY disingenuous to pretend that 90% of Iraq -- which we've already debunked -- is a democratic fantasy land. it is TOTALLY disingenuous to say that a 40% decrease in American casulaties between October and November is somehow progress when October was the 4th highest month ever and November was a fairly typical month. it is TOTALLY disingenuous to continue to talk about "the insurgency" when the issue is the sectarian violence. it is TOTALLY disingenuous to only point to American casualties when the real issue are Iraqi victims of sectarian violence. it is TOTALLY disingenous to give the same weight to a small Shiite province as to Baghdad. it is TOTALLY disingenuous to equate Kurdistan and Baghdad. it is TOTALLY disingenuous to point to the Shia south as a model of democracy when it's slowly being turned into a theocracy where women can't drive, go to school, vote, or have their faces uncovered in public. it is TOTALLY disingenous to dismiss any Iraqi civilian casualties because you don't have an "accurate" number -- does it matter if it is 50,000 or 500,000? it's all grotesque. it is TOTALLY disingenuous to ignore the deliberate underreporting of the nearly 100 casualties a day. it is TOTALLY disingenuous not to understand the 1.6 MILLION iraqi refugees as a commentary that speaks louder than any poll about the lawlessness and violence in Iraqi society.
[q]The Generals are saying that the United States needs to use the National Guard and Reserves more in order to help out the active duty compenents and I agree.[/q]
and does this not totally change the mission of the national guard?
god forbid another hurrican hit New Orleans.
almost as amazing as your unwillingness to call a spade a spade and acknowledge that your occupation is a disaster, no matter how you try to obfuscate.
and your dismissal of the dead, Iraqi and American.
I did not ignore the report and it does not contradict ANYTHING that I said. The vast majority of violence in Iraq happens in the 5 Sunni majority provinces. The report goes into more detail saying that MORE THAN HALF THE VIOLENCE occurs in just two provinces. The report you site makes my point even more clear.
The US military is by far the best source of information, because they have access the largest amount of accurate information of any other group in the world. They are also deployed on the ground in Iraq in numbers and in area's that vastly exceed any other organization. Their job is one of service and has nothing to do with making a profit. You will get a far more intelligent and honest perspective from those serving than those attempting to report on things they often don't understand or have made little attempt to understand. Conflict after conflict, civilian journalist repeatedly make factual errors in their reporting on the military and the conflict.
I have never once said that 90% of Iraq is a democratic fantasy land. Now your distorting what I have said. The 90% figure refers to the sectarian violence in the country, which you say is the majority of the violence. 90% of it occurs within 30 miles of Baghdad.
You went to great lengths to use the month of October and its higher casualty total as an example of how the insurgency was rising and the US was losing. November's figure proves that was simply false.
The insurgency and the sectarian violence overlap each other. American casualties continue to be the best gauge of violence in the country because there are not yet any comparably accurate figures for civilians. Its TOTALLY disingenuous to be equating Baghdad with the rest of Iraq. Kurdistan is the same size as Baghdad. I've never said the Shia south was a model for democracy, but it is a much more stable area' relative to Baghdad where most people site lack of services as the most important problem, rather than security. Its disiingenous not to realize the inability to accurately compare various months on civilian casualties in Iraq, when the data is so inaccurate. More disingenous is to make grand statements based on such inaccurate data. Its also disingenous to ignore the fact that despite all this violence, Iraq still has annual population growth rate of nearly 3%. Historically, rising populations are not seen in war zones.
The National Guard combat Brigades are equipped the same way that Active Army Brigades are. They have M1 Tanks, Bradley Fighting Vehicles, Palliden Artillery systems, MLRS systems, light anti-tank weapons, small arms, scout and attack Helicopters etc. They train and are designed to perform the same missions that the Active Army Brigades engage in.
This is why the occupation is NOT a disaster as you claim:
1. two successful democratic elections in which the majority of the population participated.
2. the passing of a constitution
3. Iraq's first elected government coming into office.
4. Over 300,000 military and police forces in training.
5. compromises between the various ethnic groups of Iraq including Sunni acceptence of Maliki as the new leader of the government when Jafferi was seen as unacceptable.
6. Iraqi military units that have performed very well in combat in various operations in Anbar province with little or no support from the US military.
7. The continued professionalism of the Iraqi military and non-sectarianism compared with police forces which have sometimes been caught in engaging in sectarian violence. The problems in the police forces are not seen anywhere near to that degree in the military.
8. Substantial GDP growth across the country.
9. Relative calm and peace in 13 of the 18 provinces of Iraq.
10. Polls in those provinces showing that "security" is not a top concern for the people that live there.
11. The distribution of humanitarian aid, electricity, and other services to many parts of Iraq that had often been denied such items for decades.
12. The standard of living of the average Iraqi in Shia and Kurdish area's of Iraq has improved since the removal of Saddam. Iraq, despite all the violence, still has a standard of living much higher than countries without any such violence, which is unusual historically.