March 15, 2007
Some areas in Iraq are involved in a Civil War, according to a report titled "Measuring Stability and Security in Iraq" that the Defense Department released yesterday.
The quarterly report to Congress goes on to agree with the January 2007 National Intelligence Estimate, however, that the term "Civil War" does not adequately convey the complexity of the conflict in Iraq or the fact that different parts of the country have different challenges.
[Note to everyone reading this post. Remember this...] Most of the information in the report is from January, before the new joint Iraqi-coalition strategy had time to gel, DoD officials said.
"Some elements of the situation in Iraq are properly descriptive of a 'civil war,'" the report says. It notes that ethnic and religious lines have hardened in Iraq, the nature of the conflict has changed and the number of refugees from the fighting has increased.
Militias continue to stoke the ethnic divide between Shiia and Sunni Arabs, the report says. Militias, al Qaeda in Iraq and associated groups have used indiscriminate bombings to murder vast numbers of innocent Iraqis in an attempt to deepen ethnic and sectarian divides. "An Iraqi-conceived and -led Baghdad security plan is the centerpiece for addressing the escalating violence," the report states.
The report details the different nature of conflicts in different parts of Iraq. It says the conflict in the northern part of the country is characterized by sectarian tensions, insurgents launching extremist attacks and competition among Kurds, Arabs and Turkomen. The violence in the north is concentrated in Kirkuk, Mosul and Tal Afar.
Sunni Arab insurgents and al Qaeda in Iraq are the main problems in Anbar province to the west, according to the report. An encouraging sign in the province is the emergence of local sheikhs who are leading recruiting efforts for Iraqi security forces in the region.
In Baghdad, Diyala and Balad, the violence is centered on sectarian divisions and competition for resources. Crime also enters the violence equation in Baghdad.
In the Shiia-dominated southern part of the country, tribal rivalries and factional divisions dominate the violence.
The picture in the country is complicated by Iranian and Syrian support for insurgent groups in Iraq, the report said.
Attacks in Baghdad, Anbar, Salah ad Din and Diyala provinces account for roughly 80 percent of the attacks in Iraq. The other 14 provinces in the country have comparatively low levels of attacks.
Coalition forces attract the majority of attacks, the report says, but Iraqi security forces and Iraqi civilians suffer most of the casualties. The United Nations issued a report saying that insurgents, death squads and terrorists killed or wounded roughly 6,000 Iraqis in December, the report states.
"The total number of attacks on and casualties suffered by coalition forces, the (Iraqi security forces) and Iraqi civilians for the October through December (2006) reporting period were the highest for any three-month period since 2003," according to the report.
Baghdad is the center of gravity for the struggle in Iraq, the report says. In January, there were about 45 attacks a day in the capital city.
Surveys say the vast majority of the Iraqi people continue to reject violence. "More than 80 percent of the population rejects violence against the government under any circumstance, and more than 90 percent rejects attacks against women and children," the report states. "However, two-thirds of Iraqis express a sense that conditions for peace and stability are worsening, and the population is roughly split on whether the government is moving in the right direction to quell the violence."
(Taken from a news article by DoD’s American Forces Press Service and was written by Jim Garamone)
**************************
>>> Now... the reason I put the following into the above news article... (Note to everyone reading this post. Remember this... Most of the information in the report is from January, before the new joint Iraqi-coalition strategy had time to gel...) was so I could follow-up with a few points and questions...
All the arguments over the war that you hear the Dems pumping out there today is based on old... and the way they are spinning it... mostly false news. It’s just not the realities on the ground today.
The way I see it is no matter how the Dems try to say it... the bottom line is they want us to lose this war... or at best they think it is lost already.
The Dems keep saying... move the war somewhere else. Get OUT NOW!!!
Then what, I ask...?
What do the Dems PLAN TO DO when all these crazies follow us, no matter where we run? What do the Dems plan to do when our enemies continue to blow everything up and continue to keep up the killing of our Troops and the killings of innocent men, women and children? What do the Dems PLAN TO DO... if they get their way and bail on Iraq... and because of THEIR ACTIONS... this war flows out of Iraq and into all of the Middle East and then throughout Europe?
.
When... no that’s the wrong way to ask it... DO the Dems even have the backbone to take a stand anywhere??? If recent history holds true... the answer is NO!!!
Let’s take a look at the far left. Many of them are saying Puuuuull Ouuuuut Noooooow!!! Bring Them Home NOOOOOW too!!! What do these people HOPE to do when our enemies follow us home? WHAT??? Let's see... Blame the Government.
What are all the American/Bush bashing people in Europe going to do when our and their enemies (having become so embolden by the Cut and Run Policies of the United States Dem Party, who by the way are basically giving our enemies a win on this part of the war,) going to do when things start blowing up on a regular basis in their Back Yards. Let’s see... Something new like Blame Us for everything maybe!!!We didn’t start this war. (Ted Koppel’s Shocking Truths on Iraq and War on Terror) But we sure the heck better be the ones to end it.
AubreyJ..........
*******************************
...
>>> Miss Ladybug did this post for The Victory Caucus
