Centerfield

See my links on the thread right below. I will post more here instead of littering elsewhere.

Thanks

Iraq VP wants Shia militia listed as terror group

Here's my weekend link list related to the general topic.

New York Times article on the rationality of Iranian thinking

Fukuyama weighs in on Iranian pragmatism

Clinton chimes in playing both sides Compare this speech to the one given AIPAC a few weeks ago. Yes, sniper rifles and IED are troubling but beefing up the stick is the worst idea of all.

Brits on the Iraq/Iran border

a blogger's Iran calculations

Syria and Iran reaping what they have sown. It doesn't look like things are going their way, though judging from the NYT, Washington Post and Cable News, the opposite is true. Looks like Iran and Syria are feeling alot of pressure as Democrats try to pull the plug or say the sky is actually falling.

Kossak Test 1 Who do you believe, Iran or the US?

Kossak test 2 Have you ever supported GreenPeace? P.S. Iran just turned down their port visit. I guess they don't like GreenPeace.

Anything is possible Of course, world events (our adversary's escalation) and Democrat's stupidity (over-reach, lack of anticipation, loose talk etc.) hold many of the cards. McCain will need this to happen.....

That's it for my weekend links related to the topics of the thread.

Brits on the Iran/Iraq border

Juan Cole, who supports claims that the US is linked to bombings in Iran, denies sniper rifle report is true.

serial numbers would clear this picture up.

What happens when Congress dumbs down intelligence?

If we'd clone 'em, all our soldiers would be the same height. Wait, not supposed to mention troop levels...

I'll wait for Tufte to come out with an elegant chart showing oil, troop levels, dollars spent on the war and the length of Brittany Spears hair.

If we'd clone 'em, all our soldiers would be the same height. Wait, not supposed to mention troop levels...

Actually, if you're getting at something related to how the troops are used, it would be within topic.

What Bobby said about where insurgents go leaving the capital.

The first rule of Fight Club is you DO NOT talk about Fight Club.

The second rule of Fight Club is you DO NOT talk about Fight Club.

McCain's Iraq position

Will pressure work on Iran?

Our "partner" helping us in Iraq, Gaza, Iran, Syria and Lebanon? Russia draws rebuke from Poland today. What can we do to exert more pressure while the international community IS alarmed by Putin?

Hillary the centrist

Clinton Plan in greater detail.

A reminder of what Hillary said on January 19th, 2006

Okay, so what do you think? As I said before, Kirkuk and the Iranian deadline; two things likely to fan the fire. (candidates anyone?) How will this effect the ground game?

One of the wars in Iraq is certainly the one being waged against the Kurdish aspiration to incorporate Kirkuk. Turkey, Iran and AQ all on the same team? This will strain the Islamic State (and the US?) if Iraq's effort against AQ. Angry Kurds will also hurt Sunni effort against Iran. Attacking the Kurds will make them less likely to attack Shia militias in Maliki's strategy.

Talk about a five way.....

Media makes the opposite claim. Today Iranian naval patrols entered Iraq waters. It is funny that despite the visible shows by Iran for more than a year, media sees Iran "reacting to our deployment" despite reporting every day that we are stretched to the breaking point. Yep...great reporting.

"This will strain the Islamic State of Iraq's (and the US?) effort against AQ."

military fuel . America and Canada should start building that first plant complex using carbon sequestering from coal conversion to pump remaining oil out from northern oil fields. This technology has been tested. The airlines could switch to new fuel. I think there is even more money to make licencing this technology globally than arming the Gulf States, but then what do I know? Right now Raytheon and Lockheed must be selling hot. here

How does this figure into Iraq? It seems obvious. Still, rail cannons, fuel cell lasers, synthetic fuel plants seem a decade away. We certainly need alternative fuels and fuel cells.

For now, the Saudis say they will spend 100 Billion on Sunni defense throughout the region. Several billion on naval capabilities would be a good start. How much of the money falls into AQ, Hamas, the Brotherhood etc. will be seen. There is a great chance the Saudis will end up supplying as much to Iraqi Sunnis that kill US soldiers as Iran.

It doesn't seem like things will improve as quickly as media says is necessary to stop a de-funding push. Unfortunately, the entire region is at chaos's edge. De-funding will require a strategy debate about the Middle East that I think Democrats are worried about having.

related to Iran and Democrats position on "prevention" v "retreat"...

Nothing will stop the achievements of Iran

well, money perhaps.

from "Marxist thoughts blog" Notice the dots...Marxist...anti-war.....Boland Amendment.....Bush evil, Iran good.
Please note the political mantras at the end of the anti-war rant. This is not Liberal. Quite clearly, it is posted on a Communist site. I don't think many Democrats THINK they are communists. Do you?

This is the linkage Democrats ought to fear. They have mustered this group to wage war on Iraq policy as a means to win political power. Other socialist sites have re-printed Obama's speech in 2004 regarding Iran. It has been five years of diplomacy in which nuclear reactors and normalization were offered. Democrats have NOT stood tall in pushing for sanctions and have tried to have it both ways on Iran. Let's see their talking points on today's IEAE release.

In the sense of "mission", Republicans have been far more consistent, despite the habitual mangling of strategy. I am not sure what leadership Democrats are proposing. As far as the Axis of Evil: The score card excluding evil's little helper's.

IAEA that is...LOL

Just wanted to post a confessional.
I was so totally wrong about how strongly the USA would go after Sadr's militia.
Past results are not always a good guide to the future.
Have to say the result is very encouraging, feeling a bit more optimistic on Iraq.

Insanity : the act of repeating mistakes over and over. Now defined as a Republican in Iraq.

Brit troop drawdown..
Well it is National Contraceptive Week in England which is why Blair is performing a premature withdrawal.

Can we drop the "coalition" than? Or is it still a coalition when it's all American troop and the Romanian janitor in the Green Zone?

From a guest release by StratFor dated Feb. 21 "Iraq update" (from Google search):

“While more of Baghdad is brought under control, the fighting outside of Baghdad is intensifying. Sweeps in Babil, Anbar and Diyala provinces over the past week have not been enough to catch Sunni fighters fleeing Baghdad or to prevent them from carrying out sophisticated attacks in the area.

The most sophisticated attack in the past week targeted a U.S. facility at Tarmiyah in Salah ad Din province north of Baghdad on Feb. 19. Insurgents used a suicide car bomber to blow a hole in U.S. perimeter defenses, then drove two more cars through and detonated them inside the U.S. base. With what was about a platoon-sized element, insurgents followed up their attack with a rocket barrage and small-arms fire. Only coalition air power brought the situation under control.

In Baqubah, Sunni insurgents launched a coordinated attack with rockets and small-arms fire against a coalition-occupied garage in Baqubah on Feb. 17. The insurgents used indirect fire to draw coalition forces out of the building, and then fired at them.

In Al Anbar province, insurgents have started to attack Marine Corps patrol boats on the Euphrates River. Insurgents ambushed a patrol boat Feb. 17 near Hadithah with such intense small-arms fire that air support had to be called in. Insurgents then hit a second patrol boat near Al Fallujah with a water-borne improvised explosive device (IED) that detonated when the boat passed over it Feb. 18. Patrol boats are a convenient way for coalition forces to patrol the more densely populated banks of Iraq's rivers and canals without fear of IED fatalities. If insurgents are capable of targeting coalition patrol boats on a consistent basis, it will force coalition forces to patrol either less frequently or in a more exposed manner.”

My Comments:

1. It appears that numerous well-organized militias will soon possess certain advanced naval and anti-ship capabilities.

2. It appears that anti-aircraft capabilities will be also up-graded as well as further dissemination of EFP and perhaps, unconventional IED. This is nothing new or missed. Considering the long borders and the proximity to several supply lines including international arms dealers, four years is a long time for advanced weapons to get into Iraq. There are billions of dollars and a vast weapons market. Saddam had left hundreds of tons of munitions. Drones, advanced IED, sniper rifles, advanced anti-ship/aircraft/tank missiles represent serious challenges to the force disposition required to protect ports, Gulf and military assets in and outside of Iraq. The introduction of new weapons in Iraq certainly puts counter-insurgency operations under greater pressure as our adversary’s advanced tactics, weapons and local support networks mix under the sectarian sun.

3. Fall back position in Iraq if the surge springs a leak?

1. Move some troops to protect the Kurds and Kirkuk. Shut down the PPK.
2. Keep Baghdad calm.
3. Protect oil and ports against possible military escalation (including coalition air fields and bases) and build up Port and Gulf Security.
4. Conduct military strikes with Iraqi Army against AQ and extremists building local support against the bad guys.
5. Build up force near borders as leverage in negotiations with Iran and Syria
6. Continue to train Iraqi army, navy and air force along with sensible implementation of various recommendations from the ISG concerning institutions, counter-insurgency and political reconciliation (oil bill and human rights issues).
7. Set verifiable benchmarks for continued help in isolating extremists and holding Baghdad

In his written testimony prior to his appearance before the Senate Armed Services committee, Gen. David Petraeus highlighted four missions for our country (both military and civil) in Iraq: providing security to reduce the cycle of violence in Iraq, building the Iraqi Security Forces relatively free of ethnic and sectarian bias, integrating the interagency effort to ensure progress along all lines of operation (including economic, governance and rule of law in addition to security) and improving the capacity of the Iraqi government. Petraeus later wrote of his long-term goals for Iraq: "an Iraqi state that is a stable, reasonably representative democracy that respects the rights of all Iraqis and can provide for its own security, with Iraqi security institutions that act professionally and according to the interests of all Iraqi people."

The discussion I'd like to see: Is Petraeus' goal a worthwhile one? Are his short-term objectives a viable path towards reaching that objective, that is, would achieving those short-term goals help us achieve our long-term goals? Are there other tasks needed in order to reach the long-term goals? How sound is Petraeus'/Bush's approach towards achieving those short-term goals?

There are others who suggest different long term and short term solutions

There are others who say escalating arms and regional players count

There are others who say regional conflict color the short term objectives in Iraq

Your suggestion sounds smart. With tempers flaring and the vote on Kirkuk approaching, we will revisit this debate soon. Perhaps the Kurds might want to make an oil sharing deal with the Sunnis with US and Arab blessings. Maybe the Saudis and Egyptians might send security forces into Sunni strong holds.

I still would like to know what the spectrum of options is and if the Arab world is ready to act.

See these interesting links on the squeeze facing the Arab world.

Saudis react to "reformers" Free Speech v sending a message
The weapon the Saudis can use
The plight of women in Arab countries Notice the fault Saudis place on clerics, but call for equality.
Possible effect of Arab solidarity and US pressure on Iran

I placed these here to show that cultural problems are a draw back to promoting Liberal Democracy in the Middle East. There are signs moderate regimes see an important difference between religious conflict and nationalist conflict. Suadis, Jordanians, Egyptian leaders want their people to be loyal to the State, not to a religious faction. This is a good sign. The following explains this in greater detail:
If the Brotherhood wins in Gaza peace may be far away. Perhaps it is time for Saudi Arabia and Egypt, Jordan and Yemen to declare the Israeli/Palestinian conflict to be a nationalist conflict. They should explain they do not hate Jews and reject any effort to make the conflict a religious one. They must opt for a more secular approach as evidenced in the above links, and assail ALL ideology, which seeks religious warfare.

The time is right and without our "allies" taking such a stand, it is hard to see how conflict will be averted. Perhaps the Arabs are feeling the heat. They should see that although AQ is our enemy, we have not sided with the Shia or Iran.

These options go back to Iraq.

Thanks for allowing the links in this discussion of Iraq.

The Kurds accept oil sharing plan with Kirkuk vote coming up

There are others who suggest different long term and short term solutions

Max: could you put some of your own words in to summarize the articles you link to? I'll try to summarize what I see as the difference between Peter Galbraith's view and Gen. Petraeus' view.

Galbraith focuses on the need for separate Sunni, Shiite and Kurdish states. Petraeus focuses on the nature of the emerging state. There are legitimate, though not necessarily convincing, reasons to seek partition. However, even if those reasons were to win out, it would be necessary to make sure that those states live at peace with each other, respect each other's rights and have security institutions able to act without sectarian bias (as there will almost certainly be minorities in each state). It would further be a grievous situation if post-separation, the minorities in each state would be completely marginalized.

Galbraith further raises the issue about the Iraqi forces being sectarian in nature. That is the reason Petraeus added the qualification "without sectarian bias" to his objective of training Iraqi forces. However, that does demonstrate how difficult it would be to build such a force.

Galbraith doesn't address Petraeus' other intermediate objectives.