The administration has released its statement on progress in Iraq 100 days since the end of major combat operations.

100 Days of Progress In Iraq

Is the US making a reasonable amount of progress in the reconstruction of Iraq?

I think only somebody that is completely blind or works for GW Bush personally could possibly put a positive face on the last 100 days.

Progress would be a oxymoron at this point.

Looks like they are grasping for straws to me.

From their 10 Ways the Liberation of Iraq Supports the War on Terror section, numbers 1 and 10 are the same thing in different wording. The first claims they are no longer a listed state sponsor of terror while the last explains why they were listed as one in the first place (contributions to families of Palestinian suicide bombers).

The second reason has yet to be affirmed and actually has nothing to do with terrorism -- neither does the third. Broad grievances against Iraq do not automatically become issues of terrorism. Considering all the steps it took people to reach the White House, it's reasonable to assume the authors of this report know this.

While the fourth and fifth reasons touch on al-Qaeda, it is good to note that they did not receive assistance from the Iraqi government. While WMD were reportedly pursued by one al-Qaeda leader, they were not acquired. And while al-Qaeda agents may have stayed in Baghdad, that is no more an indication of regime compliance than terrorist planning done within our borders implicates the United States.

Their 10 Signs of Better Security doesn't look much better from my perspective. Maybe it's just me.

The tenth and final reason claims:
I wouldn't consider downtown Baghdad an isolated area.

Despite all the numbers of weapons discovered, militants killed or captured or Coalition soldiers in Iraq, attacks continue on a daily basis. These numbers look good by themselves, but they don't appear to have any overwhelming effect on the resistance Coalition forces have faced since the end of major combat. It also fails to take into account the thousands of foreign nationals believed to be slipping into the country through porous border security. Saudi Arabian officials believe some 3,000 men may have left for Iraq from their country alone.

Much of the Better Infrastructure and Basic Services have only been necessary as a result of our actions against Iraq. I hardly think we should slap ourselves on the back for fixing problems we played a hand in creating. That water and oil bit is having new problems as a result of recent attacks, which might also be lumped up with the previous bit about better security.

10 Signs of Democracy is slightly comforting with all the talk of steps toward elections. Hopefully this will progress rapidly and without intervention from U.S. forces. None of us should act surprised if people aren't slightly skeptical about the possibility of the U.S. disrupting the electoral process of another country. But at least we can hope for the best in Iraq.

I think the 10 Improvements in the Lives of Iraqi Children still has a way to go. While it sounds comforting to know enough vaccines have been provided for 4.2 million people, it's important to remember that the country of some 20 million or more people is mostly children. And of course, much of that malnutrition "contributing to high mortality rates" has already been directly linked to the effects of crippling U.S. sanctions. Again, I don't think we should pat ourselves on the back for fixing a problem we had a hand in.

Possibly linked to my problems with security, the pretty pictures painted about children back in schools doesn't take into account the large number of young girls being kept out of school for fear of being raped in public.

And while there have been reports of higher birth defects possibly linked to the use of DU munitions from the first war, it gets little mention by the administration. But hey, at least they got 3,000 soccer balls to play with! (#10)

I've covered the first five categories in the list, and I must say I'm unimpressed. I'll gladly go over the remaining half if anyone likes. From what I can tell, the authors of this report nitpicked for any positive thing they could possibly include, all while systematically ignoring many of the ongoing problems in Iraq. I do not think we are making reasonable progress. I doubt either if those in control do either, or they wouldn't be grasping at straws to say so.

Maybe 100 days isn't the best time to set out evaluating success.

I read the article released by the White House. Some progresses are very welcome, others are just plain, self-satisfying propaganda.

The signs were very optimistic, but they don't show two aspects in the lives of Iraqis. First, the first preoccupation of many is to have access to food and water. One can't think of the wonders of democracy with an empty belly, can he? So far, the Coalition hasn't been able to solve these problems.

second, the country is shattered. Infrastructures have been destroyed. Therefore, it's extremely difficult to run a business and live from it in an environment where administration and police have disappeared. Bring back the administration, bring back the police and give Iraqis something to do! If they are satisfied with their efforts, they'll think less of attacking Americans, British and even the UN.

Finally, the NGOs are not being granted access to many areas of Iraq, because the Coalition refused. This must be changed quickly.

Every day I see more and more of an indication that, yet again, all of the words and promises being made are directly opposed to the actions being taken. It's almost pathological. Saying we won't touch the oil and then taking control of it, handing out contracts for it, and then mortgaging off future profits of it is not exactly keeping our hands off.

We are not allowing the Iraqi's to choose their own leaders...why will that take two years but passing out contracts for everything under the sun can be done right away? Only the basics should have been touched and those were electricity and water. There is much work to be done. But we are doing it completely backwards.

The unemployment rate there is 50%. The amount of work that needs done means they should have work. But since we are giving all the work to US corporations and they bring in their own employees we are paying twice as much, leaving the Iraqi people in poverty, and taking away their ability to help rebuild their own country and increasing the growing anger and mistrust that is taking it's toll on our troops.

They have college educated people, electricians, and everything else. So you can't say they aren't able to do anything that needs to be done. That would be a lie. If they were giving only highly specialized jobs to a small percentage of outsiders I might believe it was legit...but they are taking the majority of the jobs that Iraqi's could do and WANT to do.

The World Com issue is just the latest in the galling grab fest we are doing in that country.

Not allowing the Iraqi's to protest the lack of jobs is not democratic...I understand the situation on the ground is tense and protests aren't the best idea...but telling them to be grateful for their freedom to speak out and then silencing them isn't a solution either.

And then there are the fundamentalists who are forcing women to stay inside and not come out without male escorts and to cover their arms and legs and heads. They can no longer have jobs and they are now living in fear when before the war they were more like us...they had jobs and college educations and wore what they wanted. One woman refused to stay inside and stop working...she had to help rebuild the country. She was blown up in front of her home a few days later. I wonder if we are tracking down the extremists that are killing and attacking women and alcohol sellers and spreading the exact kind of Islamic terrorism we are fighting in Afghanistan. Will we wait until it's a problem that's gotten so big we can't stop it before we do anything? Like the lootings? I think so.

I started to agree with the people who said that now we're there we have to finish the job. But as time passes it just looks like 'finishing what we a started' will do nothing but prolong the misery and rack up more deaths. We need to find a way to hand this over to the UN with the US under THEIR authority but in a way that allows us to leave gracefully and without losing face. The entire world would sigh a collect breath of relief if we did. But we won't.

I just heard on the news that the death toll since May 1st is now officially higher than the death toll of the war on Iraq for our troops. Seems like a rather hollow victory.

Timing is everything when doing a victory dance, as President Bush demonstrated aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln.

Gasoline has hit the $2.00 per gallon mark, the economy still sucks, and we don't know when the US will be leaving Iraq.

How much is it worth to us to finish the job? How much do the Iraqis want us out?

How much more must our economy suffer?

Since when have we NOT let them protest about lack of jobs? Give me a break. I have heard about all the protests on the news. Doesn't seem like we are supressing their right to protest to me.



Never heard any of this coming from Iraq. Sounds like it's only coming from Afghanistan. Unless, of course, the Taliban is in Iraq as well.


P.E:


You think the reason gas is up is because of Iraq?

Think about it. It's near a holiday & also a pipeline burst in Phoenix.

Why the hyperbole? I think we can all admit the coalition has made at least some progress in Iraq. The question to debate is: are they doing as well as could be expected?

Edited to add:

There is a thread to discuss just that here.

It seems to me that we are making progress in Iraq, maybe not as quickly as some would desire. It seems to me that the very act of the Iraqi people demonstrating about their current living conditions is a sign of progress. That's freedom and liberty, and if they had done that while Saddam was in charge, they'd have been tortured and killed. According to reports, electricity is being restored to pre-war levels and above, people are getting medical attention although not at a level they may need, and the people are returning to the streets of Iraq, not to praise Saddam out of fear of their lives, but rather to conduct commerce and socialize, saying whatwver they wish to say.

No question it's going to take some time for Iraq to count itself among the free nations of the world, there is much to be done after decades of oppression, but they will get there I think. At least the vast majority of the people no longer live in fear of the knock on the door, the rape of their wives and daughters, the slaughter of their children.

I'd call that progress. Real progress.

Impatient Americans expect a miracle. Wave the magic wand and POOF....Iraq is a paradice.

It's hard to fix the electricity when terrorists are blowing up the power stations or grids & it's hard to make oil revenue when they are blowing up the pipelines.

[/QUOTE]

This is so not the case.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2986962.stm

http://www.rnw.nl/hotspots/html/ira030716.html

http://www.rnw.nl/hotspots/html/ira030716.html

http://www.cidi.org/humanitarian/hsr/iraq/ixl3.html

These links could go on and on. In wartime rape and female abuse is always a factor. Children suffer most from lack of medical attention, services and malnutrition. You can tout dreamlike successes all you want, the situation is a disaster. If we cannot get electricity running in 3 months what do you suspect the hospital situation to say the least is like? Lack of clean water is killing or sickening thousands. Women cannot walk the streets without fear of kidnapping or rape. Hardly anyone is working and people ARE living in fear, of US soldiers breaking down their doors or shooting them in the streets.
Oh yeah, they are returning to the streets alright, talking about how to get rid of an invader that is negotiating sending Iraqi oil to Israel while pumping it to Turkey for the time being but cant get the electricity back on or clean water to the citizens.



I think a good portion of the American population is totally DAFT because they dont get anything beyond the television set.
What good is freedom and 'liberation' when you cant feed your children and they are dying of any number of things? Is freedom to protest the most important, or the things themselves that are killing your family?

We have caused such incredible suffering to the Iraqi people due to OUR hatred of Saddam Hussein and only Saddam Hussein, not HIS hatred of us, not the Iraqi people, not WMD, not imminent threat, that we now have a huge responsability to them, and we better clean up OUR mess post haste.

There is talk around the country of pulling out now. That is oh so convenient in a country that backed the war despite all evidence that it was a ridiculously bad move. It just shows our collective superficiality. You do not invade, overthrow, and leave them to pick up the pieces. There IS NO VICTORY in Iraq. Flight suit Ken did not make it so by parading around looking handsome. You make a big mess, you have to clean it up. America will pay through the teeth for this debacle and supposedly the majority backed it, now all of us must pay and see it through to the end.

We must set up basic services and medical needs, set up government and get Iraq on its feeet again, and how many years do you think that will take?
Those who supported the war, and those that didnt , must now take Iraq as our adopted sister to 'freedom and democracy' at all cost.
Live it and love it, Iraq with us for a long time.

I would agree with you on the DAFT part, although I strongly suspect your "daft list" would be considerably different than mine. All of the links you supplied described conditions in Iraq that pretty much existed before the war and have continued, albeit it by some different people. I could supply an equally long link of stories about pre-war conditions in Iraq, mass graves, torture, etc. We are hearing stories of an infastructure that hasn't been maintained for decades, so what do we expect? Malnutrition and starvation don't happen overnight, that was there before, but we're trying to make it better. You can't fix 25 years of oppression in a few months, especially when there are still terrorists (or as some on my "daft list" might call them, "freedom fighters") bombing humantarian headquarters, oil pipelines and electrical infastructure. Saddam let 300,000 criminals lose prior to the war, some of them pretty bad people. It's going to take some time to round them up I would think.

Ok Aquilla, what do you care about oppression in Iraq? Do you/ have you ever cared about it in Zimbawe or Namibia, Columbia or Tibet? Enough to go to premptive war ?(rhetorical) Do you see how you have been led to believe you care about things you never did before, and never would if not pertaining to 'other' US needs and greeds.

Artemise, yes I do care about oppression, in the US and elsewhere. I've seen it up close and personal and it is evil. Do I care about these other places? You bet I do. I wish that my country, the most powerful nation in the history of the world had the power to end it everywhere. I wish we could end it in the places you mentioned and more. I wish we could end it in North Korea and China and Russia and Pakistan and Indonesia and Vietnam and Cambodia and South Africa and goodness knows how many other places, especially in the middle east. I wish the rest of the world could be like us where we argue about election results on debate boards instead of shooting each other inthe streets. I really wish the world was like us, and I wish we could make it better, all at once.

But we can't, not all at once. I wish we could, but we can't, not even with our power......

This thread is about Iraq and we're doing our best there. We're restoring power best as we can, trying to pump some oil and get that country back on it's feet. We have some amazing organizations like Doctors without Borders that can go there and make a real difference, but we can't let them to go until we can provide for their security.

Still though I think it's unfair to blame the US for what the conditions are in Iraq. Pre-war, 60% of the children in Iraq were malnourished. That our fault? No, it's not, but we can make that better, but it's going to take some time. It honestly seems to me that people here are more interested in dissing Bush over Iraq than they are in really taking a pragmatic view on the situation there.

I must interject here to clear up some of the way we debate, the insistance of repeating rhetoric as absolute truth and embellishment, its infuriating.



Where do many of you come up with these kinds of statements? I saw this the other day on another thread, it was to the tune of ," America is the freest nation in the world.' I didnt post about it because it would be off topic, as this is, but these kind of statements are simply repeated rhetoric which have NO BASIS IN REALITY, they are untruths.

IE:Spain, one of the countries that held world power for less than ANY other, held power for 3-400 years.

I could go on, but not to anger the mods, Ill skip it, but these overtly patriotic statements are not getting anyone anywhere, and Im tired of reading through them and trying my best to ignore the ignorance in so many posts.
How powerful were the Greeks, Romans, for how long?( The Roman Empire held power for 1,200 years) Lets just start there. I really wish I did not have to weed through basic high school american rhetoric when debating. It insults everyones intelligence and is tiresome.
I apologise and probobly should have started a new topic, but its a momentary thing although seen all too often.

Yeah, and that pipeline burst in Phoenix is going to affect gasoline prices all over the country that much, right???

Gas prices are up because the companies can raise prices with impunity, citing any and every excuse under the sun to get that extra pound of flesh from people who depend on gasoline-powered transportation. And gasoline prices have been rising steadily, so it is neither the pipeline nor the upcoming holiday that is truly to blame for the price rise. We might as well blame the occupation of Iraq for our gasoline prices along with the sorry state of the American economy.

(The real reason for the gas prices? Gas barons are a greedy bunch. They could keep the prices down if they wanted to, but they don't. They like their money and power. Who? Whoever owns the companies, some of them being Supreme Leader Bush's cronies. Now, enough of derailing this thread.)

DISPROVE THE REST OF WHAT I SAID, IF YOU CAN.

Prove to me that we're really making progress in Iraq, and not just bleeding lives and money like a hemophiliac.





Actually, I've posted links in the Iraqi Resistance thread, so I've got a pretty good idea how much they want us out, especially considering that the US has lost more soldiers since May 1st than during the invasion when there was organized military resistance.


(edited to rework the post)

I'm gonna start a new thread to debate this


Aquilla:

Don't bother trying to explain to Artemise that the reason we are having problems is not because of our incompetense but of Saddam's regime.

Now, can we please get back on topic? I'd hate to see this closed.

I think part of the source of the amazing amount of hyperbole one can come across in this debate is a lack of perspective. Our media focuses on Baghdad as a matter of course. But let's look at Iraq as a whole. Baghdad may be the largest city, but most Iraqis do not live there...

Not great, certainly not disastrous...

More problem here, for much of which we can blame the terrorists (I mean insurgents )


No disaster here either...

A real problem...
Crime is, of course still a problem, but one the coalition is clearly acting to solve.

Instead of saying how great it is they get to protest you might actually try to understand WHAT they are protesting in order to see WHY we are failing so miserably. (and there have been arrests for protesting, and cases where protestors have been shot by our forces.)

These are not ignorant, uneducated people and nothing like the people in Afghanistan were. These people lived in a secular progressive Arab state that may have been poor but it was still a functioning society without religious extremists or terrorism. Looking at Iraq today makes it seem the brand of freedom we've given them has been a curse instead of a blessing...they didn't get new rights they got new anarchy.

All of these trained and educated hungry people are restive and angry and should be hired to do the massive work we need help doing. But we are hiring American corporations who know little or nothing about their needs and wants to come and and fix everything. IMO, this is not only part of why it's costing us 4b a month (Bremmer to ask for an increase soon) but why we are not progressing enough to have anything to show for such an unbelievable cost. It also shows why we have no clue on how to ease the rising tensions and misunderstanding between the CPA and the Iraqi people...we aren't listening to them.

I don't know if anyone watched Bush's speech yesterday but he mentioned how great it was that next year they will be training Iraq's new army. It's amazing that he would turn one of the biggest mistakes we appear to have made by dissolving the Iraqi army into a sign of progress. We can see that A) This is going to cost a ton of time and money to accomplish and B ) it isn't even expected to begin until sometime next year. If Bush counts this as a sign of the progress he is not comprehending the seriousness of this situation. He also seems to have a very low standard for judging progress.

But it's worse than that because the decision hurt us in so many ways. First of all it added to the 65% unemployment rate in the country. It angered the soldiers so much they first protested and then threatened to mobilize action to drive out the US completely.

Now there are over 400,000 trained, armed men with families that need to be fed
with nothing to do. Why weren't they used for the increased security we are asking other nations to donate. By mobilizing them against us we have instead increased our need for those services. Soldiers are paying for this mistake with their lives. If Saddam was never coming back, as we say, what was the fear of keeping on the army?

I also heard Bush say something yesterday about recruiting Iraqi volunteers to help them rebuild their country. I really hope that isn't what it sounds like...but trying to recruit people to volunteer to work for free instead of paying them wages and giving them jobs or part of the infrastructure we are failing to fix. unemployment and poverty are part of the economy they must rely on. I have to wonder what progress has been made in that area?

Are we doing everything one project at a time? We have to work at all of it...not just wait till the power is on to fix the judicial system or the economy or the future elections and constitution. None of which seem to be currently in the works and all of which would give tremendous hope to the Iraqi people.

The meager profits they will eventually have from the oil sales are being eaten up with production costs and repairs for attacks on pipes not to mention going towards paying off the reconstruction costs. Bush is privatizing many of their government services as well. So, who's getting those jobs?

We have been patient enough...none of this is being addressed. Progress is not just in electricity and even that STILL hasn't been accomplished. If Bush were giving real progress reports instead of rhetoric and dreams maybe I could be patient.

Well, yesterday we surpassed the dead soldier body count in the actual operation by the "declared peace"- there were 138 men/women killed in the actual "armed conflict" vs the today number of 141 men/women killed during the "peace"- not progress by any means. Whatever the opposite of progress is, we have found it!

I was reading a story on the NY Post website and saw this ad for an interesting publication.

Apparently, rebuilding Iraq is considered a huge industry of it's own. According to the ad you can subscribe to this twice monthly newsletter that can inform you on how to get in on it. They highlight the fact that:


CHING CHING!

This letter will include targeted projects and bidding procedures for contracts and sub contracts and much more. How valuable is this information you ask? One year subscription price is $1495 or six months for $822.25

Maybe the Iraqi people could pool their money and subscribe if they really want to work. You must admit those are some expensive want ads but apparently the only way to find work in the country.

The Iraq Reconstruction Report will keep you informed of developing business opportunities and provide the business intelligence needed to compete for this business.

As usual, just like here in America, it's all about profit and opportunity for US Corporations. Which is why Iraq's economy is in for the same fate we suffer.
WTEXEC

I love the web name. It reminds me of another way to say Dubya's Texas Executives or other similar variations.

Since you don't seem to think capitalist-style efforts will suffice, what do you suggest? Socialism?

That's an interesting idea, Passion51. Maybe it could work to some extent.

The old Saddam's regime was often compared to a communist rule where every aspect of the life of the citizens was watched and cared for. I think that the Iraqi people have grown very dependent on this system and today they're lacking the energy to hope for themselves.

Therefore, one way of bringing the country together could be to rally Iraqis around their administration. But first of all, this administration has to run again. Second, the Iraqi council could decide a massive program to rebuild Iraq. The task is tremendous since most buildings are shattered ruins, but at least it would give the Iraqis a sense of achievement, self-worth and satisfaction.

Look up the figures for post-WWII Germany...they were a lot higher.


You all whine that no progress has been made but i see YOU not going over their and helping re-build or donate supplies like foodfor Iraqis. You sit back in your cozy atmosphere eating whatever you want while Iraqis starve when you could be asking for food donations to send to Iraq for the people.

goamerica - we ALL pay taxes; We ALL contribute to the rebuilding of Iraq whether we like it or not. Why would you act as if those who are upset with the 'progress' in Iraq are just whining babies?

I am also curious as to why you quoted CruisingRam, but then failed to provide anything substantive to the debate. Telling someone else to do the research for you? That's not very constructive. Why even bother quoting?

As long as our tax dollars are being spent on this war, we all have a right to an opinion on it's progress. I'm sorry if you are upset because some can't even bring themselves to use the word progress in relation to what is happening over there.

I do actually have a problem with that particular aspect of the debate. We have all heard the hyped-up partisan lines on this subject. The one that seems to be the most popular in this thread is the "Iraq is a unmitigated disaster. The foreign occupiers have brought Iraq to ruin and have done nothing to aid ordinary Iraqis. There is no progress."

I think we all can see that has little bearing on reality. Progress in Iraq (as in all situations) is limited. This thread is here so we can discuss the amount of progress (we all know it is neither zero nor one hundred percent). The hyperbole is useless. Better to discuss the reality of the situation as the basis of the evaluation of progress in Iraq.

It's not only that it's a disaster, which I feel safe to say it is, but that the administration and CPA don't seem to grasp the seriousness of the situation. We are still hearing the same thing out of them and they are still resisting any kind of compromise. We still hear that the number of troops is constantly under review. We still hear that the UN can't offer anything that we can do better in the area of nation building. We hear vague things about progress in one area while things fall apart in several others. The stubborn incompetence is breathtaking.

You hear nothing about progress from the side of the Iraqi people or the soldiers on the ground. Almost having the electricity finished is not an accomplishment until it's actually finished. Other than that what has been done that can be considered substantial progress that overshadows the things that are going wrong?

It depends on what you mean by disaster. If you mean drastically worse than it was under Saddam (excluding politically, I'm not trying to make a sympathy argument). I would disagree. It clearly not up to what the Iraq people need, but then again, it hasn't been for a long time.

As for whether or not the coalition grasps the seriousness of the situation. Not giving in to the language of defeat (would you rather they scream "Were all doomed!" from the rooftops?) is not exactly what I would call incompetence. Whether or not the UN is better suited for rebuilding is a topic for another thread (though I think the recent terrorist attack gave us a hint as to what the Iraqi extremists think of that )

You might feel 'safe' to say it, but you certainly aren't qualified to. None of us are. None of us have sufficient, credible information on which to formulate that kind of opinion. And I'd love to hear what you base your 'not taking it seriously' comments on.

As for 'compromising', that's not what you've been arguing for. You've argued that we should be abdicating control and that's quite different. And that's not going to happen. Particularly when it comes to command of our troops. The most rudimentary understanding of chain-of-command negates that possibility.

And you seem upset that the 'number of troops is constantly under review'. That seems like a very smart and responsible postion for us to be taking. Of course, if you have a better idea then I'd love to hear it.

Now, I'm sorry you're not satisfied with a state of affairs where progress is being made in some areas while it's 'falling apart' in others. But being as this ain't Kansas Toto, there's no magic wand to be waved to make everything better overnight. If there was then that might qualify as breathtaking.

Turnea, I don't need Bush to say anything at all...I would prefer he said nothing. I can watch events unfold from here quite nicely and compromise is not in his vocabulary.

Passsion, Again, what is this progress you speak of? And please remember this isn't the first war ever fought and we have many times been able to fight wars as allies. But this is supposed to be the peace remember?

What is our army doing nationbuilding when traditionally that's something the UN does? We obviously can't say we're better at it by ourselves. Not in this kind of environment which is much different the the ones we had in Germany and Japan.

More exaggerations... There have been a few post in the thread outlining some progress in Iraq (and not all from supporters of the war). If you feel the progress is not enough, fine. There is no reason to act like it doesn't exist.

What kind of expert do you have to be in order to formulate a personal opinion of what you think is happening on the occupation? I have never claimed to be an expert. This is a debate and I have put forth evidence supporting my pov. This does not make me right, it only supports my argument.

You, otoh, are not offering anything except denials and 'no one can say for sure'. If that's your argument that's fine.

Turnea, if you think I am dismissing the amount of progress made as being substantial enough to make any difference what do you think the troops and the Iraqi people think about it? None of them are happy either.

I'm sure they do. Give them the benefit of the doubt at least! So they were unprepared for this type of situation...THAT IS THEIR FAULT!!



True. But i think it is the other way around. Progress in several areas while things fall apart in one area. It also depends on who you get your news from. Al-Jazeera or CNN.

We have had this problem in many past re-building scenarios, so it is not like this is something new.



Because the UN didn't want to get involved remember?!

Excuse me? The word is incompetance.

Some of you should read some Iraq history, Saddams history, US involvement, how and why the country now finds itself in ashambles when it was once recently wealthy, and a center for FREE education for many in the region, including women.
Repeat, rinse, repeat. We fought Saddam over Kuwaiit and won. We then sanctioned and bombed them for 12 successive years and decided to have another go at it in 2003 without the least BIT of new evidence or threat as far as is known at this time.
The reason WE are having problems is directly attributed to OUR incompetance, in extremely bad planning and over zealous idealism.

Can you list some progresses?

More U.S. soldiers have died since President Bush declared the war was over than died when the war was being waged.

Columnist Gwynne Dyer wrote this week that the Iraqui resistance has a much easier task than the U.S. forces. We have to build. All they have to do is destroy.

I wouldn't say there's been no progress in Iraq, but there's not a lot to brag about. That is unless you think four months since the war's end and water and electricity still hasn't been restored is some kind of progress.

Ahem- just visited the recruiter last weekend, I have to lose some more weight, then I am back in. Not in a unit that is likely to be called up, but in the medical field covering for the active duty positions normally doing some of the work here in Alaska. Very short handed here due to deployment. They will be restoring me to my old rank of E-5 as well. I will be a combat medic again.

Please, no high horses on this board, okay? LOL

Bush never declared the war 'over', so please don't put your words in other people's mouths in an effort to make your point.

Bush declared 'victory' so lets not get into really petty semantics because there is no other leg to stand on.

Here's a little progress: The US has rediscovered that police work a heck of a lot better than soldiers for police duties.

But that's why the military is barred from doing police duties in the states, with the exception of National Guard, but these are citizen/soldiers, less trained for war than Marines.

See, we knew this before the war but our leadership thought a miracle would happen--that all Iraqis would be pleased with the occupation.

I know of no population that would react that way. Human nature is to rebel against foreign occupation. Using military personnel to do police work worsens the situation. Soldiers are trained to kill, not to control.

But now that huge mistake in planning by our administration is starting to be rectified.

I'll just say this: If I as an IT contractor were to pull something like this in one of my projects, my butt would soon be out the door. Poor planning in business is unacceptable, but apparently to many, it's just fine for the Executive.

He declared victory in the major combat. Now he has to declare victory in the peace combat.

Okay. How about putting Bush's own words in his mouth?

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you all very much. Admiral Kelly, Captain Card, officers and sailors of the USS Abraham Lincoln, my fellow Americans: Major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20...0030501-15.html

Now you can spin that any way you want to Passion 51. I, and many other citizens, interpreted Bush's remarks to mean the war was over. 142 U.S. troops have died since May 1, the date President Bush declared that major combat operations had ended. (Sources: Defense Department, Associated Press)

Additionally, what about the hundreds (or possibly thousands) of wounded American soldiers? I haven't seen any photo ops lately of Bush in his Top Gun flight gear by the bedside of a wounded soldier.

The numbers of soldiers wounded in action are hard to come by. Since the start of Operation Iraqi Freedom, the Pentagon has put the figure at 827. But Lieutenant-Colonel Allen DeLane, the man in charge of airlifting the wounded into Andrews Air Force Base, recently mentioned much higher numbers in an interview with National Public Radio.

"Since the war has started, I can't give you an exact number because that's classified information, but I can say to you over 4,000 have stayed here at Andrews," he said. "And that number doubles when you count the people that come here to Andrews, and then we send them to other places like Walter Reed and Bethesda..."

Some journalists also dispute the Pentagon's official count. Julian Borger of The Guardian claims "unofficial figures are in the thousands." Central Command in Qatar talked of 926 wounded, but "that too is understated," Borger maintains. And in fact, a mid-August report in The Salt Lake City Tribune claims that Central Command has acknowledged 1,007 U.S. wounded. (The Pentagon did not respond to inquiries.)

Whatever the actual numbers of wounded, military hospitals are being overwhelmed. "Staff are working 70- or 80-hour weeks," Borger reports. "[T]he Walter Reed army hospital in Washington is so full that it has taken over beds normally reserved for cancer patients to handle the influx, according to a report on CBS television." Some of the outpatient wounded are even being placed at nearby hotels because of the overflow, according to The Washington Times.

(TomPaine.com)

Meanwhile, back in Iraq, the bill to occupy the country has spiraled to $4 billion a month. Paul Krugman reports in today's New York Times that our military forces have been stretched to the breaking point by the Iraq adventure.

The rule of thumb, according to military experts, is that except during crises, only one brigade in three should be deployed abroad. Yet today 21 of the Army's 33 combat brigades are deployed overseas, 16 of them in Iraq. This puts enormous stress on the troops, who find that they have only brief periods of rest and retraining between the times spent in harm's way. For example, most of a brigade of the 82nd Airborne that is about to go to Iraq returned from Afghanistan only six months ago.

Progress? What bloody progress?

http://www.bringthemhomenow.org/

Concerning Bush's speech on the Lincoln, a thread has been started:
"Major Combat Operations"

Concerning progress. Since we can not deal with the reality of the situation and must instead contend with sweeping generalizations...


Certainly not a shining review... but at least signs of progress were acknowledged

Again acknowledges progress without supportimg the administration's position. Such things are possible you know...

These are some of the first posts in this thread. I think they show this issue can be disscused without the gross exaggerations...

With the latest bombing of one Muslim sect by the other the need to stop that will become a massive priority if not the country could easily slip into religious civil war or a state of matters currently like Israel/Palestine.

Restoration of basic things the Iraqi people somewhat enjoyed prior to war like electricity and water would be very nice, then again before the war the Iraqi markets lit up with provision purchases, maybe they knew something we did not.

More and more the trust if any between the Iraqis and the coalition forces seems to be slipping, i think that’s a more important battle then most would think. Especially concerning the ability for terrorists to run around/make recruits. Is it true that most of the terrorists there do not even care about saddam but have other issues? The point being is the progress the coalition makes in regards to fighters there will be quickly replaced, like fighting for a hill, winning then giving it back to the enemy type thing could arise maybe?

This bombing has certainly dealt a blow to political progress because it is obvious that there are some groups in Iraq that do not like what Muhammad Bakr al-Hakim, the man who was assasinated today, proposed as a government, which was a democracy with a bit of Islam mixed in but no Islamic garbage like Iran has.

If not handled properly, this could, like Nileriver has mentioned, turn into a religious/political civil war, which we hope to avoid.

Also, even though the levels of basic services are not at pre-war levels, you have to give credit to our guys for trying hard, considering they have to deal with sabotage & terrorists

No. He was the head of SCIRI (Supreme Council of the Islamic Revolution in Iraq) which had a huge following and backing from many Shi’a fundamentalists sympathetic with Iran. SCIRI was the group responsible for making sure the women could not dress in western clothes and people were not allowed to consume or sell alcohol. He ran the Badr Brigade that, if you remember, was constantly warned by Rumsfeld and others to stay out of things during the war phase. Yes the US is working with their faction. But they were as much a threat to democracy as the worst of them.

http://www.sciri.btinternet.co.uk/English/.../Badr/badr.html

The civil/religous wars are beginning to show up which was the only thing that hadn't happened that everyone was afraid of before.

Let's start with the troops. Although many stories have mentioned troop morale in passing. I haven't seen many deal with the matter in any sort of detail (ie. asking more than one solider...)
Here's a recent story from Tikrit:

'This isn't the Viet Cong we're fighting here'
and this is is Saddam's supposed refuge. So none of the troops are happy, right?

Turnea,
You're right. I used a broad generalization by saying 'none' are happy. There are the Rambo freaks that do enjoy combat as if they're playing a video game or hunting deer. The ones this gung ho probably should never be allowed around weapons of any kind. But I'm sure the army finds them useful. There must be a few troops that aren't completely miserable so you win. The situation is bad enough that something has to change. Every story coming out of Iraq pretty much agrees about the ongoing kidnappings, car-jackings, looting, rapes and murder. People are afraid to leave their house. Not even the CPA, military bases, police stations, or the Puppets are safe.
Rumsfeld is still not on the right page. He's Blaming Saddam remnants and asking Iraqi's to start informing on the bad guys. That's like so six weeks ago. There are all kinds of groups and militias coming in from outside, the Iraqi's probably couldn't inform on them if they wanted to. Maybe Rummy can send his Defence Intelligence Agency to figure it out. He's supposed to be the expert. His bright happy picture of how things are improving in Iraq make it seem like he is refusing to face the problems are is just so used to lying to the American people he can't help it anymore. CNN

Maybe that's why people are starting to demand his resignation. France wants him to be replaced with someone from the UN and clearly wanted him to have nothing to do with the Iraq reconstruction efforts according to a TV soundbite I heard earlier today. Not that the Hawks care what the French say but they don't normally come out demanding things publicly or get personal about it.

Another demand came from David R. Obey, the ranking minority member of the House Appropriations Committee, who sent a letter to Bush saying both Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz should go. Even the troops were still showing some disrespect for him yesterday.

A lot of ordinary people could foresee some of the problems going on in Iraq so what's his excuse? He had experience and staff and was so committed to PNAC he should have had war all figured out. Maybe he was too busy telling lies about WMD's and mugging for the press and just forgot. I too think he should go and Gen. Abazaid, who gave him this break down the year before the war, should replace him. It's bad enough he failed but knowing that he had been told what to expect and STILL failed to even plan for these things is almost criminal. I wonder how many lives would have been spared if he had been a little less eager and a little more responsible.

General Accurately Predicted Many Problems in Postwar Iraq
A few excerpts from “Doctrine for Joint Urban Operations,” by U.S. General John Abizaid, published by the Office of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, September 2002:
• Urban operations increase support demands due to the high level of injury and exhaustion of personnel, damage to equipment, and to the potential need to provide support to noncombatants.

• In combat operations, the need to secure cities building by building, room by room, requires large numbers of infantry.

• Nearly all operations in urban areas, including predominantly air operations, take significantly longer than originally expected.

• Urban operations result in a significant increase in ammunition expenditure, need for personnel replacements, medical personnel and supplies, casualty evacuation, and food and water. ... Commanders and planners must make every effort to anticipate and specifically plan for these resources.

• Forces will need reconstitution more frequently. ... Historically, it is necessary to pull units back for rest and reconstitution far more frequently in urban combat than in other types of operations. ... When that is coupled with the high casualty rates normally associated with urban combat, the problem of reconstitution becomes a serious one, requiring foresight and prior planning and preparation.

• Urban combat is mentally, physically, and emotionally exhausting, and the psychological effects on all participants (including health-care personnel) can be devastating.

• Seven factors that have historically led to the commission of war crimes: (1) high friendly losses; (2) high turnover rate in the chain of command; (3) dehumanization of the adversary; (4) poorly trained or inexperienced troops; (5) the lack of a clearly defined adversary; (6) unclear orders; and (7) high frustration level among the troops.

• Urban operations may impact the abilities of national and theater strategic assets and can easily affect coverage of other geographical areas.

• The severe drain that urban operations can have on resources can cause either attacker or defender to exhaust capabilities earlier than anticipated.

• Quoting a book about the 1994 Russian invasion of Grozny: Instead, [the Russian battlefield generals] believed the erroneous assumptions generated at the strategic level and subsequently directed a woefully inadequate effort to understand the battlespace in all its complexity. This disregard for intelligence adversely affected virtually every other warfighting function at the operational level.

• Rapid urbanization is changing the physical and political face of nations. ... In many places, this rapid urbanization has overburdened already weak infrastructure, scarce resources, and fragile economic bases.

• In all operations, it is essential that routine activities such as providing sanitary services, food, law enforcement, and health services be returned to civilian agencies as quickly as possible because of the demand they can place on joint force resources.

• Quoting from Joint Military Operations Historical Collection: The importance of understanding local politics and integrating indigenous decision makers into an urban operation cannot be overstated.

• Faced with superiority of U.S. forces, most adversaries seek an asymmetrical advantage. Urban areas are the natural battleground for terrorists.

• Quoting George Wilson, Air Force Times: If you don’t understand the culture you are involved in; who makes decisions in these societies; how their infrastructure is designed; the uniqueness in their values and in their taboos – you aren’t going to be successful.

• The Joint Force Commander must give great care in the establishment of population-control measures, depending on the situation and characteristics of that population. Inappropriate controls could exacerbate the populace and resources control problem. link

I see...
So all troops that don't fit in with your largely unsubstantiated assumption about US troop morale must be criminally insane.

Allrighty then, glad we got that cleared up...

Turnea- have you served in the military? Look at the rank of all the poeple you quoted- they are all senior staff! A Sgt major probably FOUGHT in vietnam, and loves this stuff LOL- My dad was COMMAND SGT MAJOR (you always yell that if you are military and enlisted- ask your favorite enlisted soldier why- it is well known that god takes orders from CSMs) , my Dad would be gung-ho about anydamn thing the Army told him to be gung ho about "The army is cleaning all the poop from every majory sewage center in the US and we are STOKED" LOL

There is very few poeple below the rank of E-5 I have spoken too who would be considered having a high morale. My cousin is special forces (has been in afghan and now Iraq, I think he is still there, never know with him) and HE thinks the upper command has thier heads up "thier four point of contact" (military slang for butt)

The article also makes mention of the general morale of the troops patrolling Tikrit.


That is the largest sample of troops in Iraq I've seen referenced in terms of morale in a news story (excluding vast, unsubstantiated generalities). All the evidence we have seen of plunging troop morale (now a certainty according to much of the media) is usually based on a single soldier's comment. Hardly proof of anything...