Top U.S. general: We can stabilize Iraq (1 Viewer)

[Navy Pride]

This not what the "Cut and Run" Democrats in the Senate wanted to hear:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11/15/senate.abizaid/index.html

Top U.S. general: We can stabilize Iraq
POSTED: 5:54 p.m. EST, November 15, 2006

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East said Wednesday he is optimistic that "we can stabilize Iraq."

Gen. John Abizaid, head of the U.S. Central Command, rejected a call from some Democrats for a phased redeployment of forces beginning in four to six months.

Testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Abizaid said such a move would result in an increase in sectarian violence.

The redeployment has been sought by a number of Democrats, including Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, who is in line to replace Republican Sen. John Warner of Virginia as chairman of the committee in January

 

[G-Man]

This not what the "Cut and Run" Democrats in the Senate wanted to hear:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11/15/senate.abizaid/index.html

Top U.S. general: We can stabilize Iraq
POSTED: 5:54 p.m. EST, November 15, 2006

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East said Wednesday he is optimistic that "we can stabilize Iraq."

Gen. John Abizaid, head of the U.S. Central Command, rejected a call from some Democrats for a phased redeployment of forces beginning in four to six months.

Testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Abizaid said such a move would result in an increase in sectarian violence.

The redeployment has been sought by a number of Democrats, including Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, who is in line to replace Republican Sen. John Warner of Virginia as chairman of the committee in January

Of course its not - I don't want to hear a general say he's optimistic we can stabilize Iraq, I want him to say he's CERTAIN we can end the violence and then take the troops home. Unfortunatley this looks like the best we can achieve now after all the mistakes of the Bush administration.

However saying he's 'optimistic' is hardly a sign of great confidence and I would be interested in his definition of 'stabilize' i.e does he just mean he's optimistic we can train enough Iraqi forces to fight the terrorists and then we're going (which isn't really a great success) or does he mean we can end the violence. I'm betting he means the former.

 

[KidRocks]

This not what the "Cut and Run" Democrats in the Senate wanted to hear:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11/15/senate.abizaid/index.html

Top U.S. general: We can stabilize Iraq
POSTED: 5:54 p.m. EST, November 15, 2006

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East said Wednesday he is optimistic that "we can stabilize Iraq."

Gen. John Abizaid, head of the U.S. Central Command, rejected a call from some Democrats for a phased redeployment of forces beginning in four to six months.

Testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Abizaid said such a move would result in an increase in sectarian violence.

The redeployment has been sought by a number of Democrats, including Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, who is in line to replace Republican Sen. John Warner of Virginia as chairman of the committee in January

So stabalize Iraq already, what are you waiting for?

You've got 2 years left to do that General, after that it's adios to Iraq.

That's exactly what I would tell the 'top' U.S. General.

 

[Iriemon]

This not what the "Cut and Run" Democrats in the Senate wanted to hear:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11/15/senate.abizaid/index.html

Top U.S. general: We can stabilize Iraq
POSTED: 5:54 p.m. EST, November 15, 2006

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East said Wednesday he is optimistic that "we can stabilize Iraq."

Gen. John Abizaid, head of the U.S. Central Command, rejected a call from some Democrats for a phased redeployment of forces beginning in four to six months.

Testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Abizaid said such a move would result in an increase in sectarian violence.

The redeployment has been sought by a number of Democrats, including Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, who is in line to replace Republican Sen. John Warner of Virginia as chairman of the committee in January

Why do you reckon there is any more reason to believe this guy's assessment than any of the other yahoos in this administration that have been consistently and completely wrong about Iraq over and over again?

 

[hipsterdufus]

Why do you reckon there is any more reason to believe this guy's assessment than any of the other yahoos in this administration that have been consistently and completely wrong about Iraq over and over again?

Right. When you keep "turning the corner" you end up going in circles.

These guys have been wrong since day one. No reason to believe them now.

The toothpaste is out of the tube.

 

[jujuman13]

If I hear - "Just give us 6 more months in Iraq" one more time, I'm going to puke!
If I hear - "Just give us 6 more months in Iraq" one more time, I'm going to puke!
If I hear - "Just give us 6 more months in Iraq" one more time, I'm going to puke!
If I hear - "Just give us 6 more months in Iraq" one more time, I'm going to puke!
If I hear - "Just give us 6 more months in Iraq" one more time, I'm going to puke!
If I hear - "Just give us 6 more months in Iraq" one more time, I'm going to puke!
If I hear - "Just give us 6 more months in Iraq" one more time, I'm going to puke!
If I hear - "Just give us 6 more months in Iraq" one more time, I'm going to puke!
If I hear - "Just give us 6 more months in Iraq" one more time, I'm going to puke!
If I hear - "Just give us 6 more months in Iraq" one more time, I'm going to puke!



Heh heh heh heh

 

[jujuman13]

"Just give us 6 more months in Iraq"
"Just give us 6 more months in Iraq"
"Just give us 6 more months in Iraq"
"Just give us 6 more months in Iraq"
"Just give us 6 more months in Iraq"
"Just give us 6 more months in Iraq"
"Just give us 6 more months in Iraq"

Heh heh, go on then.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

General Abizaid rejects Levin's call to withdraw troops in 4-6 months

November 15, 2006

WASHINGTON Sen. Carl Levin got a negative response from the top U.S. commander in the Middle East Wednesday after the Michigan Democrat said during committee hearings that the United States must tell Iraq it'll begin withdrawing troops in 4 to 6 months.

Gen. John Abizaid warned the Senate Armed Services Committee against setting a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, saying it would impede commanders in managing U.S. and Iraqi forces.

That assertion seemed to put Abizaid at odds with Levin and some Democrats pressing the Bush administration to begin pulling out of Iraq.

In arguing against a timetable for troop withdrawals, Abizaid told the committee that he and other U.S. commanders need flexibility in managing U.S. forces and determining how and when to pass on responsibility to Iraqi forces.

Specific timetables limit that flexibility, the general said.

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061115/NEWS99/61115026

General Abizaid was not alone in rejecting the Democrats plan for immediate withdrawal retired General's Batiste and Zinni, also, chimed in rejecting the Democrats disastorous plan:

Get Out of Iraq Now? Not So Fast, Experts Say

By MICHAEL R. GORDON
Published: November 15, 2006

Anthony C. Zinni, the former head of the United States Central Command and one of the retired generals who called for the resignation of Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, argued that any substantial reduction of American forces over the next several months would be more likely to accelerate the slide to civil war than stop it.

“The logic of this is you put pressure on Maliki and force him to stand up to this,” General Zinni said in an interview, referring to Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, the Iraqi prime minister. “Well, you can’t put pressure on a wounded guy. There is a premise that the Iraqis are not doing enough now, that there is a capability that they have not employed or used. I am not so sure they are capable of stopping sectarian violence.”

Instead of taking troops out, General Zinni said, it would make more sense to consider deploying additional American forces over the next six months to “regain momentum” as part of a broader effort to stabilize Iraq that would create more jobs, foster political reconciliation and develop more effective Iraqi security forces.

John Batiste, a retired Army major general who also joined in the call for Mr. Rumsfeld’s resignation, described the Congressional proposals for troop withdrawals as “terribly naïve.”

“There are lots of things that have to happen to set them up for success,” General Batiste, who commanded a division in Iraq, said in an interview, describing the Iraqi government. “Until they happen, it does not matter what we tell Maliki.”

Before considering troop reductions, General Batiste said, the United States needs to take an array of steps, including fresh efforts to alleviate unemployment in Iraq, secure its long and porous borders, enlist more cooperation from tribal sheiks, step up the effort to train Iraq’s security forces, engage Iraq’s neighbors and weaken, or if necessary, crush the militias.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/15/wa...5military.html

Abizaid also, rejected McCain's proposition that we need to add more troops:

MCCAIN: Did you note that General Zinny who opposed of the invasion now thinks that we should have more troops? Did you notice that General Batise, who was opposed to the conduct of this conflict also says that we may need tens and thousands of additional troops. I don’t understand General. When you have a part of Iraq that is not under our control and yet we still — as Al Anbar province is — I don’t know how many American lives have been sacrificed in Al Anbar province — but we still have enough and we will rely on the ability to train the Iraqi military when the Iraqi army hasn’t send the requested number of battalions into Baghdad.

ABIZAID: Senator McCain, I met with every divisional commander, General Casey, the core commander, General Dempsey, we all talked together. And I said, in your professional opinion, if we were to bring in more American Troops now, does it add considerably to our ability to achieve success in Iraq? And they all said no. And the reason is because we want the Iraqis to do more. It is easy for the Iraqis to rely upon to us do this work. I believe that more American forces prevent the Iraqis from doing more, from taking more responsibility for their own future.

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/11/15/...d-mccain-iraq/
​

The one thing that the generals agree on is that the cut and run strategy is not the solution but rather the catalyst for an unmitigated disaster.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Right. When you keep "turning the corner" you end up going in circles.

These guys have been wrong since day one. No reason to believe them now.

The toothpaste is out of the tube.

Actually if they had listened to the Generals since day one IE General Powell and the Powell doctrine the insurgency would never have materialized or would have been quickly defeated.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

We can stabilize Iraq, if we would dedicate sufficient resources and proper strategy to doing so; I would argue that at this point, we're both morally obligated and strategically compelled to.

The time for cold feet was before we plunged them into anarchy. Now, we can either finish the ill-advised and unappreciated task we've set for ourselves, or we can brace for another round of preventable blowback in ten or twenty years.

 

[PeteEU]

Of course he would say that, its after his fault its such a mess in Iraq.. the republicans are say so, so it has to be true no? Republicans are of course the "blame everyone else" party.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Of course he would say that, its after his fault its such a mess in Iraq.. the republicans are say so, so it has to be true no? Republicans are of course the "blame everyone else" party.

WTF? Is General Abizaid a Republican now? Haven't you been paying attention the consensus view of General Powell, Batiste. Zinni, and Abizaid is that it's Rumsfeld's fault for trying to adapt the limited force strategy that suceeded in Afghanistan to Iraq.

 

[NYStateofMind]

The general also said that we need to focus more on training troops.

He suggested that we need to put troops in with Iraqi troops. Does this sound familiar? It should, it was something we did early on. His suggestions sound like more of the same old thing, only a step back in time. We should go backwards? It didn't work the last time, why should we do it again? Why should we continue along the same path that has brought only chaos?

I was totally against this war from the time Bush began to bang the drum for it. It appears to me that we have ended up exactly where I feared we would. I think that Sen. Levin is right in that the Iraqis have not stepped up to the plate politically, and until they do the situation will continue to deteriorate. We continue to train troops and police, and they continue to be killed, or use the training to kill other Iraqis. We are feeding the insurgency the training that they need to kill more effectively. The civil war continues to escalate. At some point, we will be forced to retreat in order to get our troops out of the middle. Should we not set timetables and just sit back and watch Iraq continue to deteriorate? How are we to get the Iraqi government to get serious about resolving the political issues, if not with timetables? We've tried asking them to pretty please deal with it, that hasn't worked.

I agree that we bear responsibility for the mess we have created in Iraq. I don't think pulling our troops out immediately is the way to go, regardless of what the American people want. We destabilized the country, and we need to try to help re-stabilize it. But more of the same failed policy isn't going to work. And time is running out. Things are NOT improving, regardless of this general's rose colored glasses. Our troops are dying at a much higher rate, the Iraqis are piling up in the morgues, and more of the same is not going to stop that.

With all due respect to the general, he is trying to address a political problem with a military solution.