Do you see any hope in bush's new plan in Iraq?

Answer 1

[From the Wall Street Journal]
Progress in Baghdad
Capitol Hill has probably been too busy running for political cover to notice. But the last few days in Iraq have actually featured good news, as the government seems to be making some progress on key political and security issues.
One step forward is that Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has won parliamentary backing for his Baghdad security plan. This means the elected representatives of Iraq's Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds remain capable of compromise and are willing to give the new strategy a chance to work.
There's also evidence that the Baghdad plan is having an effect. Yes, al Qaeda bombs targeted the Shiite Ashoura holiday as expected. But there are also widespread reports of Sunni jihadists fleeing the capital in anticipation of a crackdown. Prime Minister Maliki has already started moving against Shiite militias, which might explain an apparent drop in sectarian violence. No one should get overconfident, but clearly the bad guys are taking the joint U.S.-Iraqi effort to pacify the capital seriously. Meanwhile, the weekend saw an encouraging performance by the Iraqi security forces who took control of the Najaf area only about a month ago. Acting on their own intelligence, Iraqi police
and a battalion from the Eighth Army Division confronted a radical Shiite sect calling themselves the Soldiers of Heaven who had reportedly planned to assassinate mainstream Shiite clerics, including the moderate Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani.
Some observers are trying to spin this battle as a defeat for the government, because the first Iraqi units on the scene had to call for reinforcements and for American air power. But the fact that Iraqi forces were able to pre-empt the attack on Najaf before it began, and that everyone involved was able to coordinate the operation and soundly defeat the enemy makes it sound like a success to us. Hundreds of the insurgents were killed, compared to a handful of Iraqi and U.S. troops. This may well be a model for how U.S. troops might play a supporting role down the road--assuming Washington gives them a chance to get Baghdad under control first.
For the moment at least, Iraq seems to be inching in the right direction. After a week of Western lamentations about the gracelessness of the Saddam hanging, it became clear that the primary effect of the execution was to enhance Prime Minister Maliki's stature in Iraq. Mr. Maliki, in turn, is using that political capital. The last thing he needs is to have his efforts undermined by votes of no-confidence in Washington--or meddling by Congressmen with ``benchmarks'' who pretend to know better than he does how to deal with the most difficult issues, such as how best to marginalize Moqtada al-Sadr.
The Bush Administration has itself made many mistakes trying to micromanage Iraq's political development, but it now seems to understand that it is fated to deal with the Shiite-led government it has. Congressmen who are sincere in wanting to take the Iraq issue off the table in 2008 could help by showing a similar combination of resolve and humility

Answer 2

Criticizing is permitted, yet Democrats additionally are exposing George W. Bush and his "good previous boy" cronies for attempting to be no longer in basic terms the administrative branch of government, however the Judicial and Legislative branches besides. Iraq develop right into a mistake, and liberals besides as conservatives are conscious that struggling with a conflict on terrorism, which the USA of united statesa. is doing in Afghanistan the place Osama bin encumbered, and Muhammad Atef, Al Qaeda and the Taliban have been until the Bush regime desperate to make the assaults of 9-11 their "own precedence conflict". With the Republican occasion on top of problems with the Presidency, and the two homes of congress, Democrats won't be able to sh*t or get off the pot until George W. Bush is censured, so enable's roll!

Answer 3

I see some hope and something else that I find encouraging is that even McCain agrees with this move. I don't like McCain too much but I believe that the fact he agrees with it is good because I do believe that at least McCain gives an honest opinion and doesn't just speak the party line. I would like to see even more troops but if the generals on the ground say 21000 is enough they should know best.

Answer 4

Yes, I'm more excited about Rumsfeld being out than the troop surge. Hopefully there are more plans in the works behind the scenes to stabilize Iraq and speed up the completion of the mission.

Answer 5

YES
Counterinsurgency by the Book The lessons of a new Army Field Manual. Author—Lt. Gen. David Petraeus


Counterinsurgency involves rebuilding a society, keeping the population safe, boosting the local government's legitimacy, training a national army, and fighting off insurgents who are trying to topple the government—all at the same time.

The manual cites other longstanding principles of counterinsurgency that U.S. planners and commanders violated, especially in the crucial early phases:

*
"The More Force Used, the Less Effective It Is."
*
"An operation that kills five insurgents is counterproductive if the collateral damage or the creation of blood feuds leads to the recruitment of fifty more."
*
"Only attack insurgents when they get in the way. Try not to be distracted or forced into a series of reactive moves by a desire to kill or capture them. Provoking combat usually plays into the enemy's hands."
*
"A defection is better than a surrender, a surrender better than a capture, and a capture better than a kill."

One page of the manual summarizes Napoleon's occupation of Spain in 1808: Conditioned by the decisive victories at Austerlitz and Jena, Napoleon believed the conquest of Spain would be little more than a "military promenade." [He achieved] a rapid conventional military victory over Spain's armies but ignored the immediate requirement to provide a stable and secure environment for the people. … The French failed to analyze the history, culture, and motivations of the Spanish people, or to seriously consider their potential to support or hinder the achievement of French political objectives. Napoleon's cultural miscalculation resulted in a protracted struggle that lasted nearly six years and ultimately required approximately three-fifths of the French Empire's total armed strength.

Answer 6

What new plan? He's just recycled failed policy with a new name. This is the FIFTH time they've tried this.

What is the definition of insanity? Trying the same thing over and over again hoping for a different result.

Answer 7

The hope is in the ability of our country to come together & stand beneath the banner of "victory"...could the Bush plan work if everyone would get behind it? yes it could...if those who are so against Bush, would put their party politics aside for the greater good of this country - we most definitely could be successful. There are alot of smart people on both sides of the aisle - if they would put their efforts & energy into finding answers, solutions, etc that would generate Success not just withdrawal - Victory would belong to us. (i think they really want us to fail, just so they can look right & get elected.....& that should be Treason...)

Answer 8

No, Just 20000 more funerals for the loved ones back here at home to play. He is sending them in to be sent home in a box

Answer 9

Yes I totally have hope that his new plan will convince people to never vote in a Republican President again.

Answer 10

No.

I'm trying to be like a Liberal and void myself of all hope.