Believe it or not, the McCain Campaign, as reported by MSNBC, has just released a statement claiming that John McCain's timeline on the Iraq Surge vs the Sunni Awakening is the correct one.
"McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds said late Tuesday, ‘Democrats can debate whether the awakening would have survived without the surge ... but that is nothing more than a transparent effort to minimize the role of our commanders and our troops in defeating the enemy, because to credit them would be to disparage the judgment of Barack Obama and praise the leadership of John McCain.’"
Are you kidding me? It doesn't minimize our troops, McCain is minimizing the efforts and success of the Iraqis, because if they're remain "incompetent" he can have his glorious 100 Year Occupation. Problem is, they aren't incompetent and the everyone has started to realize that would be Emperor McCain isn't wearing a stitch.
Via the AP, McCain stated this.
"‘Because of the surge we were able to go out and protect that sheik and others. And it began the Anbar awakening,’ McCain said, referring to the U.S.-backed revolt of Sunni sheiks against al-Qaida in Anbar province. ‘I mean, that's just a matter of history.’ The problem with McCain's statement -- as Obama's campaign quickly noted -- was that the awakening got under way before President Bush announced in January 2007 his decision to flood Iraq with tens of thousands of additional U.S. troops to help combat violence."
I don't yet have a full transcript of the entire statement which was read on the air but the gist of it was that the Sunni Awakening would have been "Crushed by Al Qeada" if not for the support of U.S. Troops in the Surge. Continuing their arguements that Obama opposed the surge they continued to state that neither the awakening, which they avoided admitting started months before the surge was even conceived, as well as the cease fire by the Mahdi Army would have both failed - if not for the judgement and leadership of John McCain.
What a Flaming CROCK!
There is no evidence - NONE - that the Sunni Awakenening where Tribal leaders turned against Al Qeada on their own would not have succeeded without American Troops. Let's just point out that The Surge was largely focused on reducing violence in Bagdad, not in Anbar Province.
Years ago U.S. Commanders reported that there were only about 2,000 Al-Qaeda fighters in all of Iraq, PERIOD.
Last October U.S. Commanders reported that they had "Defeated Al Qeada in Iraq.
The U.S. military believes it has dealt devastating and perhaps irreversible blows to al-Qaeda in Iraq in recent months, leading some generals to advocate a declaration of victory over the group, which the Bush administration has long described as the most lethal U.S. adversary in Iraq.
Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, head of the Joint Special Operations Command’s operations in Iraq, is the chief promoter of a victory declaration and believes that AQI has been all but eliminated, the military intelligence official said.
So why can't our troops come home now?
There is also the fact that violence is down in Iraq, sadly because, they started to Run Out of People To KILL
Joe Christoff of the GAO: I think that’s [ethnic cleansing] an important consideration in even assessing the overall security situation in Iraq. You know, we look at the attack data going down, but it’s not taking into consideration that there might be fewer attacks because you have ethnically cleansed neighborhoods, particularly in the Baghdad area. [...]
Over 2 Million Iraqis have been either killed or displaced by the War, many have simply left the country, but those who've remained have gathered into ethnic enclaves to increase their own personal security. Prisoners in their own homes.
The Iraq NIE for 2007 stated the following.
August 24, 2007 : Yesterday, the National Intelligence Estimate reported "measurable but uneven improvements" in the security situation in Iraq. While the White House has rushed to suggest that the modest gains were the result of escalation, the improvement can more plausibly be the product of Iraqi expectations of a U.S. withdrawal.
" "[F]earing a Coalition withdrawal, some tribal elements and Sunni groups probably will continue to seek accommodation with the Coalition to strengthen themselves for a post- Coalition security environment" [...]
"The IC assesses that the emergence of ‘bottom-up’ security initiatives, principally among Sunni Arabs and focused on combating AQI, represent the best prospect for improved security over the next six to 12 months, but we judge these initiatives will only translate into widespread political accommodation and enduring stability if the Iraqi Government accepts and supports them.""
In other words, what made the difference was the 2006 Elections and the prospect of the implementation of the strategy that John Murtha and Barack Obama have been advocating.
We need to set a DATE CERTAIN, and that will force the Iraqis to stand up - not the other way around.
There's also been a lot of Huffing and Puffing over the statements by Iraqi Prime Minister Al Maliki, but way back in April - during the middle of the Ryan Crocker/David Petreaus hearings - a Maliki Aide said this.
The prime minister told Bush during a 20-minute telephone conversation on Wednesday that Iraqi security forces are capable of carrying out their duties and U.S. troops should be pulled out as the situation permits, according to a senior government adviser who sat in on the phone conversation. He spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to disclose the confidential details.
The idea that the Iraqis can not tie thier own shoes without our finger in the mix is a deluded fantasy of the right wing. And I thought Neo-Cons were all about self-sufficiency? Apparently not so much, when $Billions in lucrative government contracts are on the line.
It's well past time we took off the training wheels and the let the Iraqis ride on their own. That isn't "Losing" - that's Victory!
Vyan