NYT survey: Surge has largely failed
posted at 4:34 pm on September 8, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
Simply brutal. Some of our commenters are already crapping on it in headlines but one of the authors is Damien Cave, who was last seen breaking Bill Maher’s heart and of whom InstaGlenn has said, “I’ve known Damien Cave since long before the InstaPundit days, and he’s an honest reporter.” It’s a long piece but read at least the first half dealing with the Mahdi Army’s ascendance as a “shadow government.” Sample quote from an officer with whom MM and Bryan are personally acquainted from their time at FOB Falcon earlier this year:
Lt. Col. Steven M. Miska, deputy commander of a brigade of the First Infantry Division that is charged with controlling northwest Baghdad, said, “We’ve done everything we can militarily.”
He said, “I think we have essentially stalled the sectarian conflict without addressing the underlying grievances.”…
A recent American report concluded that Mahdi Army leaders in Shula enjoy “freedom of movement” in part “because of a lack of permanent CF presence,” referring to coalition forces.
Colonel Miska, Captain Feese’s commander, who oversees Shula, Huriya and other Shiite-dominant areas, said that units regularly entered the neighborhood for raids, which had killed or captured many prominent Mahdi fighters. But, he said, referring to joint security stations, “We do not have a J.S.S. in Shula, due to lack of combat power.”
The boldface part sums up the dilemma: if they’re not making things better but they are keeping things from getting worse, is that in itself enough of a justification to keep troops there long term? More:
Abu Sajat, one of several Mahdi leaders known to Captain Feese’s unit, claims to command several hundred fighters in Huriya, Washash, Iskan and Topchi, a cluster of middle- and working-class areas that have become increasingly violent, and more Shiite, in recent months. He showed up wearing a brown shirt unbuttoned to his sternum, dark sunglasses and brown polyester pants with a belt that had missed several loops toward the back.
Pulling his belt over a sizable stomach, he bragged that they were playing a game of cat and mouse with the Americans in which the Mahdi Army always has more men, more loyalty among Baghdad’s residents and more freedom of movement. Huriya, he said, was stable because the Sunnis were gone, not because the Americans had arrived.
“They can’t break up our organization,” he said. “If you count all the Americans in Iraq, they are really just prisoners.”
A new report from the U.S. Institute of Peace calls, predictably, for a total withdrawal — but, unpredictably, over the course of five years. Bush will get some mileage from that, as well as from this companion piece to the Cave article in the Times by Michael Gordon noting some progress in reducing the amount of sectarian killings. Even Iraq Body Count agrees that the violence is decreasing, albeit not enough and for complicated reasons.
I’ll leave you on a hopeful note with Bill Ardolino’s first photo essay from Fallujah, where the locals continue to sign up with the military to fight AQ. Quote:
“Now we start to know what is right and what is wrong,” said another recruit. “The picture is so clear now. When things started and the [initial] invasion came to Fallujah, we said, ‘It’s OK for civilians to [take up arms] and fight the invasion and throw [the Americans] out from Fallujah.’ We said, ‘OK, they are the enemy and that’s our friend.’ But things were confused, and the enemy has become the friend and the friend became the enemy.”
Read the very last few paragraphs of the Cave piece if you want the flip side of that.
You must be logged in to post a comment.

















Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
Again will make the assumption that the primary thing we should expect out of the surge isnt Iraqi stability but rather some last body blows to the Insurgency before we leave.
I doubt we can stay much longer. The sad thing is that we will turn Iraq into 2000’s version of 1970s cambodia.
I wish it were otherwise but the truth is the left is hardcore insane right now and we cant win until we discredit them.
William Amos on September 8, 2007 at 4:38 PM
I saw OBL’s video yesterday. He didn’t surrender. So if Iraq’s not today’s battle, where are the soldiers going next? Cause if the war’s not over, the soldiers are not coming home.
JiangxiDad on September 8, 2007 at 4:38 PM
I say move the troops back into Saudi Arabia. That would drive the islamonuts INSANE with rage !
They hate us in Iraq but that would be the ultimate insult
William Amos on September 8, 2007 at 4:41 PM
Was always in favor of a HUGE base in the Negev, for a lot of reasons (tripwire for a start). But somehow don’t think the powers that be think that’s kosher. But I think it may be smart.
JiangxiDad on September 8, 2007 at 4:47 PM
The problem is we don’t have the initiative and don’t seem willing to take it. All forting up is getting us is martyrs and America doesn’t react well to that. Warriors we understand, martyrs are for the other guy. While the surge is trying to point us in the right direction I fear it has one foot in a block of political cement.
Limerick on September 8, 2007 at 4:52 PM
New York Times…. consider the source.
I bet I could go and find all kinds of folks over there who say just the opposite.
Its very easy in any population to find people who are saying exactly what you want said…
Romeo13 on September 8, 2007 at 4:59 PM
Allahpundit
OK, you’re right, lets just admit that we failed. Time to bring our troops home, not next year not next month but tomorrow, and not some of them all of them Screw the Iraqi people Bin Laden and Al Queda can have Iraq.
doriangrey on September 8, 2007 at 4:59 PM
If taking out Iran doesn’t send a very clear message to Saudi Arabia, then perhaps we will eventually have to invade them as well.
I wonder… I wonder if we destroyed the tyrannical military infrastructure of a place like Iran and Saudi Arabia, then followed up with dropping food and instruction manuals for revolution, what would happen?
unamused on September 8, 2007 at 5:01 PM
Didn’t the operations of the Surge start this month? Have they even started yet?
Given that this is a counter-insurgency operation, and it’s a new direction for military operations in that theater, how can they claim it’s “largely failed” when the operation is still ongoing?
Nethicus on September 8, 2007 at 5:03 PM
I’m not real sure what to think, I’m gonna wait on judgement until Petraeus puts out his full official report. Its impossible to tell what the hell really is going on in the place, but I’m guessing our top General there has the best idea.
Bad Candy on September 8, 2007 at 5:10 PM
Funny, the NYT headline is “Troop Buildup, Yielding Slight Gains, Fails to Meet U.S. Goals,” not “Surge has largely failed.”
Read together with Gordon’s piece yesterday, and a look at the overall stats, it seems like the surge has turned the trendline on civilian deaths (and, apparently, sectarian muders) downward for the first time sive about 2005. Some of it is due to the US, some of it due to displacement — not uncommon in a war (aske the Germans in Eastern Europe after WWII). The improvement is not uniform, so you will find areas that have gotten worse as others got better. You saw both sides of this at Totten’s blog already (which AP linked), so I don’t know why AP sees it so much more grimly today.
The national gov’t is a mess — though, imho, that’s in part because the surge and the Sunni tribes turning are forcing all parties to reassess their political leverage. That’s also why you have Sadr trying to rein in the JAM and (allegedly) attending a reconciliation seminar with Sunni leaders hosted by the CMI in Finlans.
Karl on September 8, 2007 at 5:23 PM
I have to admit, this is a tough one for me. My husband is over there. I can’t say I’ve ever been particularly compelled to help the Iraqis oust Saddam, horrible though he was, not only because I believe sovereignty is important, but also because I think there is a price attached to propping up a dictator (after all, our founders took it upon themselves to depose a tyrant–even though we welcomed help, we invested ourselves in the effort first and foremost). And in my most honest moments, I’ve said that I’d rather see every man, woman, and child in Iraq dead before I saw the death of one American. I know that may not sit well with many, but I don’t think I’m alone in my sentiment that my husband is worth the entire population of Iraq. I thought Saddam had to go because he was a threat to the U.S. If he didn’t have WMD’s, he certainly worked mightily to convince the world he did.
And yet. There we are, and the Iraqis are human beings, many of whom are risking their lives to have something better. It is hard to believe they will get that without our help. And more important to me, we have the weighty task of deciding whether the risk is greater to us if we stay or if we go. Do we have any hope of creating a free Iraq? Of influencing the Middle East? Or even, of protecting our country from terrorists by being over there? I wish I knew the answers. All I really know is that I want my husband to come home.
DrMagnolias on September 8, 2007 at 5:27 PM
I thank your husband a lot, sincerely. I know my family is much safer in bed at night because of him. His replacement is now at home, where your husband will be again. Then sometime in the future, we will win.
JiangxiDad on September 8, 2007 at 5:37 PM
There is no reason we need to leave Iraq, but I can see where we can pull back to some key bases and send out a QRF when something flares up. A heavily armed, well supported force.
In the end it’s up to the Iraqis, but we can be there to help them out, keep Iran at bay, keep the oil flowing, kill terrorists and provide training, etc…
I do think a multi-state solution is worth looking into, but that’s another topic.
reaganaut on September 8, 2007 at 5:43 PM
The surge is going to go on for a while, probably to near spring.
By the time we start rotation down of the manning levels of our troops they will be out numbered by the fresh recruits to the IA and the ISF.
The total boots on the ground will be going up even with our withdrawals by the time we move it back to pre surge numbers.
The local forces are getting experience and as the belts get stabilized and held, it will free up a lot of the IA to roll into Baghdad post surge or even part of the way through to bump up the security plan city wide.
That is when the rubber will meet the road.
CommentGuy on September 8, 2007 at 5:53 PM
We ‘fail’ when we quit. It’s a pity that no one seems to have any perspective when it comes to this action.
If we leave now or in the near future, the situation in Iraq will become more dangerous for US safety. Things will not get better, they will get worse…much, much worse.
We broke it…it’s our job to fix it.
Asher on September 8, 2007 at 6:03 PM
Thank you, JiangxiDad. Some days are better than others for me. Today happens to be a bad day. But a bad day in America is better than the best day anywhere else.
DrMagnolias on September 8, 2007 at 6:04 PM
The New York Times is a dishonest, traitorous piece of garbage intent upon working for the defeat of America in Iraq because the “people” at the New York Times think that such defeat will help their left wing and Democrat Party causes. They should be regarded as low life scum and ridiculed as such. I know that I have a certain amount of passion because my older son is a U.S. Army First Lieutenant (with Ranger tab) serving as a platoon leader in Iraq. But the way I see it, the passion just makes it intolerable for me to accept the deceitful disloyalty of the New York Times.
Phil Byler on September 8, 2007 at 6:19 PM
The Muslims are eternally at war with Jews/Christians so we must be eternally vigilent. Anybody who calls this something other than a religious war is not being authentic.
Mojave Mark on September 8, 2007 at 6:22 PM
Attempt to pre-empt. Typical.
Connie on September 8, 2007 at 6:26 PM
Monday – The surge is working!
Tuesday – The surge isn’t working.
Wednesday – The surge is working!
Thursday – The surge isn’t working.
Friday – The surge is working!
Saturday – The surge isn’t working.
etc……
For every person who says the surge isn’t workig, there’s one who says it is, and vice versa. The constant back and forth of trying to shape public opinion before Patreus’ report is predictable and tiresome. Damien Cave may have broke Maher’s heart, but he certainly didn’t endorse the surge. At best he admitted that things were’nt getting worse, so to insist he somehow gives this article credibility is idiotic. I’m looking forward to the article tomorrow that conclusively shows the surge is working, and the article the day after that which conclusively shows the surge isn’t working, and so on………
forged rite on September 8, 2007 at 6:26 PM
“without addressing the underlying grievances” in this sectarian conflict?
You mean with 7th century schism between the Sunnis and Shi’ites that has been a source of internecine warfare for 1400 years because each side claims to be heir to the mantle of Mohammad?
And how do they suppose to solve this, exactly?
Weave another mantle?
Just stabilize the chaos as much as we can, control the oil wealth, kill jihadis, and keep Iranian and Syrian influences at a miminum.
Anything more would be a miracle.
profitsbeard on September 8, 2007 at 6:38 PM
Well said.
Connie on September 8, 2007 at 6:42 PM
The general is who counts…Listening to the other people is pussy…this site is turnig into a bunch of quitters. atleast, the people who run it.
They quit on the troops, they quit on the pres, they quit on every republican candidate. Bad bad bad.
tomas on September 8, 2007 at 6:55 PM
Penitentiary inmates say the same crap about Corrections Officers.
And I remember Black Panthers who used the same rhetoric.
In the NYTimes.
Stephen M on September 8, 2007 at 6:55 PM
Many in America and many here in your shoes. While it may get old to hear here it is……..Thank you. Thank him. Thank them all. Gods speed to them and bring em home safe.
They are the part of America our enemies fear most. Not because of their guns as much as their unwillingness to bow to any king or prince, man made godhead or not.
Limerick on September 8, 2007 at 6:56 PM
That is the nub of the problem, isn’t it?? I understand that fundamental Sunni and Shia think of each other as no better than the “pigs and monkeys.”
It is ironic that 2 or 3 years ago, most Americans thought that the nasty Sunni would be the problem, and the down-trodden Shia would love us. Then came Sadr and friends – we should have let the Marines finish the job in Najef(?) when they had a chance (darn those ‘truces’). Sunnis don’t have a Sadr, so we can take them on city by city and square them away, as in Fallujah (great to read this dispatch!).
Unfortunately, 70% are Shia. Do we need to get rid of Sadr before any substantive progress in Shia areas??
fred5678 on September 8, 2007 at 7:02 PM
It never gets old, I promise you. Thank you. It gives me courage, come what may, knowing we will never submit.
DrMagnolias on September 8, 2007 at 7:03 PM
It’s the “Black Knight” scenario from Monty Python’s Holy Grail all over again.
America: “We have killed tens of thousands of your bad guys and put thousands more in prisons all over the world.”
Abu Sajat: “No you didn’t”
America: Yes we did. Look at the crowded prisons full of your lunatic brothers.
Abu Sajat: Liar!
Guardian on September 8, 2007 at 7:03 PM
Thanks. I hate them too. If my son was there, I’d be enraged. So many people are with you and with your son. I hope you know that we are grateful.
JiangxiDad on September 8, 2007 at 7:09 PM
Of course, political obstacles remain, right? Well, check this out:
Former IRA Commander helps hammer out Iraq “road map” to peace
Hopefully, from this seed…
DubiousD on September 8, 2007 at 7:11 PM
If I may be so presumptuous as to speak for those who have someone–husband, wife, son, daughter, father, mother–over there, let me just say that you here, who support us without fail, mean more to us than any number of people who “support our troops, but…” If you must say “but,” please don’t bother.
DrMagnolias on September 8, 2007 at 7:37 PM
The NYT is the purveyor of virtual reality.The manufacturers of doom and gloom.Cheer up these are the facts as per the Iraq Study Group.
sonnyspats1 on September 8, 2007 at 10:55 PM
Hey main stream media, the surge IS working. Less violence. Casualties down. Anbar is in a better state. Former insurgents are joining America in fighting off Al Qaeda. But of course I guess it’s just too much to ask for liberal outfits like the New York Times to give any support to this mission. Especially with an election coming up.
SoulGlo on September 8, 2007 at 11:02 PM
Mr. Cave article is compatible with Krauthammer’s piece on the de facto partition of Iraq and Baghdad in particular. How well a partition would stabilize the place is a decent question, but Cave gives no reason to think that the slow-motion partition will be worse than what Iraq is dealing with right now.
Half a year ago Anbar was written off by people on the ground with experience and intelligence. Their projections did not bear out. Same is true of the Baghdad political situation. A unity gov’t may be impossible after the Samarra bombing and its aftermath, but that does not mean Sadr has a lock on anything or that we inevitably will witness a Rwanda redux.
jaychandra on September 9, 2007 at 12:12 AM
AP Buries: Iraqis End All Parliament Boycotts
Stephen M on September 9, 2007 at 12:44 AM
The NY Times is reporting the surge has failed because they want it to more than anything, not because of the reality on the ground.
Yakko77 on September 9, 2007 at 1:08 AM
Lt. Col. Steven M. Miska, deputy commander of a brigade of the First Infantry Division that is charged with controlling northwest Baghdad, said, “We’ve done everything we can militarily.”
Yes, the troops are like a doctor who has succeded in getting the patients blood sugar down, but can not do a whole lot more for the patient if he insists on drinking himself to death.
The boldface part sums up the dilemma: if they’re not making things better but they are keeping things from getting worse, is that in itself enough of a justification to keep troops there long term?
I guess it all depends on what value you put on the troops.
MB4 on September 9, 2007 at 1:58 AM
Didn’t the operations of the Surge start this month? Have they even started yet?
Nethicus on September 8, 2007 at 5:03 PM
The “surge” was a “rolling surge” and started last February/March.
MB4 on September 9, 2007 at 2:03 AM
Screw the Iraqi people Bin Laden and Al Queda can have Iraq.
There are not enough AlQ in Iraq to take over the country. Even most minority Sunnis do not like AlQ in Iraq much and the majority Shiites do not like them at all. The Kurds don’t like em either.
MB4 on September 9, 2007 at 2:06 AM
We broke it…it’s our job to fix it.
Asher on September 8, 2007 at 6:03 PM
Mohammad broke Islam. Let him fix it.
MB4 on September 9, 2007 at 2:14 AM
For every person who says the surge isn’t workig, there’s one who says it is, and vice versa.
forged rite on September 8, 2007 at 6:26 PM
And then there is another group that says that it doesn’t make much difference if the “surge” is working or not as it is but a tree in the forest.
MB4 on September 9, 2007 at 2:17 AM
Excerpt:
Among Top Officials, ‘Surge’ Has Sparked Dissent, Infighting.
“Lawmakers were not alone. Fallon, who took command of Centcom in March, worried that Iraq was undermining the military’s ability to confront other threats, such as Iran. “When he took over, the reality hit him that he had to deal with Afghanistan, the Horn of Africa and a whole bunch of other stuff besides Iraq,” said a top military officer.
Fallon was also derisive of Iraqi leaders’ intentions and competence, and dubious about the surge. “He’s been saying from Day One, ‘This isn’t working,’ ” said a senior administration official. And Fallon signaled his departure from Bush by ordering subordinates to avoid the term “long war” — a phrase the president used to describe the fight against terrorism.
To Bush aides, Gates did not seem fully on board with the president’s strategy, either. As a member of the congressionally chartered Iraq Study Group before his selection to head the Pentagon, Gates embraced proposals to scale back the U.S. presence in Iraq. Now that he was in the Cabinet, he kept his own counsel.
But he consulted regularly with former national security adviser Brent Scowcroft, a noted critic of the Iraq war; told Army audiences privately that a troop decrease was inevitable; and tried to avoid Sunday talk shows during the fight over the war spending bill to preserve relations with lawmakers, according to administration sources. “With Fallon, it’s pretty much in your face,” said a senior official. “Gates is quieter.”
A Pentagon official said Gates is “very concerned about all of our energy” being devoted to Iraq, an “overcommitment that is consuming and distracting us from everything else. On the other hand, he knows there can’t be another Saigon. There’s this balance.”
He was not the only skeptic. More than half a dozen retired four-star generals turned down Hadley in his search for a “war czar” who could knock heads and make sure requests from the field survived the Washington bureaucracy.”
MB4 on September 9, 2007 at 3:02 AM
The New York Times is nothing more than a blatant left wing propaganda machine and it, in all its leftist glory, is the true failure. Believe no words flowing from that anti-American sludge pot.
rplat on September 9, 2007 at 10:00 AM
NYT Reporting was contributed by Ahmad Fadam, Karim Hilmi, Ali Hamdani, Mudhafer al-Husaini, Wisam A. Habeeb, Sabrina Tavernise, Diana Oliva Cave, Johan Spanner, James Glanz, Michael R. Gordon, Khalid al-Ansary, Ali Fahim, Ali Adeeb, Qais Mizher, Hosham Hussein and Sahar Najeeb.
Heh Heh WTF?
sonnyspats1 on September 9, 2007 at 11:48 AM
Well in that case please allow me to reiterate what Limerick said…
doriangrey on September 9, 2007 at 12:02 PM
Time to pack up and mosey on out. How on earth is a few more years or thousands more troops gonna keep these people from hating each other? It won’t. We are delaying the inevitable, time to go and let them sort it out.
The Sinner on September 9, 2007 at 7:39 PM
I think progress is being made,the surge is working,but
if you look at the real big picture,I mean,I could be wrong,
didn’t OBL’s original message was leave the middle east and all would be well.
And his latest tape,is embrace Islam,and all would be well.
So,while the left is in denial,the big picture is Iran(Prussia)and AQ want another crack at Islamic world conquest.
So while the left wants to retreat,the front lines of this
war is truly Irag.
canopfor on September 9, 2007 at 10:23 PM
Comment pages: