Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
January 10, 2007
Escalation

The plan is to add one brigade of combat troops per month in Iraq over the next five month and to prolong the tours of formations already in Iraq. From a military point of view such a buildup is too slow and too small to achieve "securing the population" even in limited parts of Baghdad.

Being short on infantry troops the commanders on the ground will have to resort to those tools that are available to them but not to the insurgency, air-power and heavy artillery. Yesterday fighting, a mere 1,000 yards from the Green Zone, will repeat on a daily base and such will turn huge chunks of Baghdad into blood drained rubble.

The troops encountered strong resistance as the well-organized insurgents appeared determined to protect their turf or fight their way out, surprising U.S. soldiers who fought in the battle.

[…]
From rooftops and doorways, the gunmen fired AK-47 assault rifles and machine guns. Snipers also were targeting the U.S. and Iraqi soldiers. U.S. soldiers started firing back with 50-caliber machine guns mounted on their Stryker armored vehicles. They used TOW missiles and Mark-19 grenade launchers. The F-15 fighter jets strafed rooftops with cannons, while the Apaches fired Hellfire missiles. But the insurgents kept fighting.

[…]
"We fired a TOW missile into a building," he said. "A few minutes later we started taking fire again from the building. Normally, that would have pretty much ended the whole engagement. They were fighting pretty persistently."

"The terrain was in their favor," he added. "It is about as defensible a terrain as you can get."

A determined opposition could be able to stop Bush’s escalating. But the Democrats will only come up with some nonsense like an unbinding Congress resolution.

With the forces the U.S. is able and willing to commit, there can be no strategic relevant military achievement in Iraq. Meanwhile the needed political solution is further pushed down the road. This escalation will result in more death, more broken lives, more refugees and more profiteering by the war industry.

What it may achieve is the justification for the next surge to come. What it will certainly not achieve is anything positive for the people of the U.S. or Iraq.

Comments

One word: IRAN.

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Jan 10 2007 15:27 utc | 1

Any Democrat who doesn’t favor the insurgency–doesn’t, shall we say, respond to its “declaration of independence” (from us)–is really in favor of this surge, and will favor still further surges yet to come. I don’t see any middle ground on this point.

Posted by: alabama | Jan 10 2007 15:36 utc | 2

The only way to stop this is to call your congressional representatives today and voice your opinion (reminding them that they work for us). Toll free: (800) 614-2803. Tell them first to support Senator Kennedy’s resolution and then to initiate a resolution to remove US troops from Baghdad. Then tomorrow join an action to oppose the escalation. Let your government know that you want the US out of Iraq.

Posted by: conchita | Jan 10 2007 15:50 utc | 3

Jeeze, this is Haifa Street, Purple Heart Alley, Juan Cole wrote about this today also but I hadn’t realized it was that close to the Green Zone.
If I read correctly, there were 50 “insurgents” and no American or Iraqi army troops killed. How to put this? It’s good we don’t need to send any more flag-draped boxes home, but still, it’s hard to believe the figures.

Posted by: Chuck Cliff | Jan 10 2007 16:17 utc | 4

don’t have time to find the links right now, but when pelosi said bush will have to get our approval to pay for the escalation – we will continue to fund the troops there now, but not an increase, I thought ok, great, go for that. but as sen. kennedy pointed out, the troops will already be moved in by the time the budget requests get to congress in february and then it becomes: we have to support the troops who ARE ALREADY THERE. so obvious.
conchita is right – time to put pressure on on your local rep and sen with a flood of calls. oh for a repeat of the half million surge on wash dc in the early 70s against that other war.
the back side of this story is told in a WaPo article I linked to at the bottom of OT. please take time to read it. gotta go.

Posted by: Hamburger | Jan 10 2007 16:29 utc | 5

Distracting Congress from the Real War Plan: Iran
Paul Craig Roberts

Two US carrier task forces or strike groups will certainly congest the Persian Gulf. On January 9, a US nuclear sub collided with a Japanese tanker in the Persian Gulf. Two carrier groups will have scant room for maneuver. Their purpose is either to provide the means for a hard hit on Iran or to serve as sitting ducks for a new Pearl Harbor that would rally Americans behind the new war.

I suspect it’s not congress this “surge” is supposed to distract, as most members have long been acquired by certain elements which do not put the needs and desires of Americans first.
I would suggest that it’s the American people they’re trying to bamboozle with this “surge” farce.
I think this pretty much shows that the Democrats have sold us all out to Israel just as much as the Republicans. Those that have not been bribed are being blackmailed, probably by Cheney’s NSA program and with with the truth behind 9-11, and it is clear that our nation is on trouble so long as either of these parties has any power at all.

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Jan 10 2007 16:36 utc | 6

The new slogan for the escalation is out – Bush will probably use this tonight:

One senior White House official said this week the president concluded that more troops are not the only ingredient of a successful plan — but they are a precondition to providing the security the Iraqi government needs for political reconciliation and other reforms.
Tonight, this source said, the president will explain “that we have to go up before we go down.”

With Iraq Speech, Bush to Pull Away From His Generals
“we have to go up before we go down”
Isn’t this like: “my old car went up when it broke down?”

Posted by: b | Jan 10 2007 17:39 utc | 7

AIPAC Excempt from Ethics Rules

Major loophole in Democrats’ ethics bill will benefit controversial lobbying groups
Brian Beutler
Published: Tuesday January 9, 2007
Print This Email This Print page sponsored by Velvet Revolution.
Democrats’ own Rules Commmittee chair criticizes exemption, bill architecture
WASHINGTON — A major loophole in the Democrats’ recently unveiled ethics package will allow non-profit arms of controversial lobbying organizations to fund travel excursions for members of Congress, RAW STORY has discovered.
Though tasked with authoring the legislation, Rules Committee Chair Louise Slaughter (D-NY) said she disagreed with the exemption in an exclusive interview.
“I would’ve done it straight out,” Slaughter said, noting that the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and the Aspen Institute are exempt from many of its harshest restrictions.
Slaughter didn’t say who, if anyone, had pushed for the exemption. As chair, the New York Democrat was responsible for pulling together the ethics reform package, which was hammered out between members of the Democratic caucus.
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) declined to comment.
Washington ethics watchdog Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington – a nonprofit that has loudly decried Republican ethics scandals and enforcement – also declined to comment.
The Aspen Institute, which does not technically employ lobbyists, describes itself as an organization that runs “seminars, policy programs, conferences and leadership development initiatives” intended “to promote nonpartisan inquiry and an appreciation for timeless values.” The group concentrates on a wide range of public policies, but its foreign policy and weapons control arm — known as the “Aspen Strategy Group” — have included high-profile and arguably partisan fellows including Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, former Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, former Vice President Al Gore Clinton Secretary of State Madeline Albright, and former New York Times reporter Judith Miller.

story continues at link…

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Jan 10 2007 17:45 utc | 8

chuck #4, we are ethnically cleansing baghdad. the link is chilling.

Posted by: annie | Jan 10 2007 17:59 utc | 9

Also Tuesday, at least 31 people were killed when a cargo plane carrying Turkish citizens crashed while trying to land in thick fog at an airport in Balad, about 50 miles north of Baghdad, Turkish officials told news services.

and interesting insertion in b’s link. wonder if they are related to the Peshmerga militia being imported for the ‘sweeps’.

Posted by: annie | Jan 10 2007 18:14 utc | 10

@chuck – I added a link in the piece above to a NYT map – the Haifa Street is a northern supply line between the Green Zone and the northern Baghdad FOBs (a dated map of Baghdad FOBs)
The area of the fighting is near enough to lob mortars into the green zone and a good sniper could probably take out green zone inhabitants from the high rises there too.

Posted by: b | Jan 10 2007 18:21 utc | 11

Where’s Froomkin? I can’t find his blog at WaPo.

Posted by: alabama | Jan 10 2007 18:26 utc | 12

Chuck and Annie,
That’s the conclusion I came to as well- Pre-dawn raid with no offensive casualties. Just firing missiles into buildings until the blood flows out. No civilians, of course, in an area equivalent to Times Square.

Posted by: biklett | Jan 10 2007 18:31 utc | 13

He’s back. Weird.

Posted by: alabama | Jan 10 2007 18:33 utc | 14

Froomkin’s here.

Posted by: ran | Jan 10 2007 18:37 utc | 15

Tonight, this source said, the president will explain “that we have to go up before we go down.”
IDIOCRACY, THE REALITY.

Posted by: anna missed | Jan 10 2007 18:40 utc | 16

Pre-dawn raid with no offensive casualties. Just firing missiles into buildings until the blood flows out. No civilians, of course, in an area equivalent to Times Square.
badger
The model for this is Palestine, is it not, where “terrorist” and/or “militia” violence triggers high-tech military reactions via a US client government, and these military operations don’t have any conclusive result, and merely help to perpetuate the cycle. Reports from one side will describe these military operations as pinpoint affairs (as Al-Mada does this morning)…

Posted by: Anonymous | Jan 10 2007 18:45 utc | 17

Cut off essential utilities.

There is no electricity in Baghdad and the city of nearly 6 million people spends its nights in total darkness.
The Ministry of Electricity says the total outage is the result of sabotage in which power lines feeding Baghdad were knocked out.
Nearly four years after the U.S. invasion, the country still has less electricity than under the former leader Saddam Hussein who was executed last month.
It is not only Baghdad that is plunged into darkness. The national grid is so rickety that no province in the country now enjoys non-interrupted supplies.
A source at the ministry said two high-voltage power lines feeding Baghdad were sabotaged.
He said technicians were working to have them repaired.
But even under normal circumstances the national grid is off for nearly 20 hours a day in Baghdad.
The outage comes as Iraqi forces aided by U.S. troops are battling anti-U.S. rebels in streets just a stone’s throw from the heavily fortified Green Zone where the Americans and Iraqi government have their headquarters.

I just wonder when the Emerald City will be hit.

Posted by: Cloned Poster | Jan 10 2007 18:54 utc | 18

decider says “go up”
decider says “go down”
decider says “go up”
“go down”
whoops!
decider didn’t say “go down”
have to sit this one out
once, more georgie, from the top!

Posted by: b real | Jan 10 2007 18:57 utc | 19

Oh the Grand old Duke of York
He had ten thousand men
He MARCHED them up to the top of the hill
And he marched them down again.
CHORUS:
And when they were up they were up,
And when they were down they were down
And when they were only halfway up
They were neither up nor down.

Posted by: catlady | Jan 10 2007 19:19 utc | 20

[spam deleted – b.]

Posted by: 5th of November | Jan 10 2007 20:17 utc | 21

[b- #21 has been spamming here on a more frequent basis as of late]

Posted by: b real | Jan 10 2007 20:23 utc | 22

Tell ya what 5th of nov, I’ll make ya a deal , I give ya $11.95 or what ever it is, you can keep the pdf, however, you have to promise to NEVER RETURN, and never ever mention your book agaIn in our humble bar. Deal?

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Jan 10 2007 20:50 utc | 23

“Seeking support for a retooled strategy to win support for the unpopular war, the president will acknowledge that the rules of engagement were flawed because certain neighborhoods in Baghdad were put off limits by the government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, White House counselor Dan Bartlett said.”
Translation: We’re STILL not killing enough civilians.

Posted by: Peter Principle | Jan 10 2007 22:22 utc | 24

I think this potemkin escalation is primarily to try and reduce support for al-Sadr – the tentpole of efforts to resist a “political settlement”. The settlement being of course one which allows the US to retain its permanent bases and control of all oil; and nothing to do with government or democracy. Sort of a “please let us win even if we’re fucked” strategery.
One can fantasize that the aircraft carriers in the gulf can sway Iran-SCIRI, the Saudi’s can momentarily curb the Sunni’s; perhaps the Kurds are already bought (and sold). A window to install a “strong-man” junta and permanent martial law; something like the Tito in Yugoslavia… or Saddam in Iraq.
But al-Sadr is in the way of all that.

Posted by: PeeDee | Jan 10 2007 22:40 utc | 25

Perhaps it’s also just to rub the US electorate’s faces in the unsavory fact that the Democrats they have elected to Congress aren’t going to do anything about it other than whine.

Posted by: PeeDee | Jan 10 2007 22:45 utc | 26

catlady #20
You got a melody for that? Sort of has an RAW ringg.

Posted by: Juannie | Jan 10 2007 23:20 utc | 27

Enormous pit in my stomach once again.

ABC News is reporting that the “surge” Bush is expected to announce in a prime time speech tonight has already begun. Ninety advance troops from the 82nd Airborne Division arrived in Baghdad today.
An additional battalion of roughly 800 troops from the same division are expected to arrive in Baghdad Thursday.

Bush has said yet another giant fuck you to the American public.
According to the ABC article,the plan is to divide the the city of Baghdad into nine separate sections supposedly at the request of Iraqis who want one Army and police battalion devoted to section.

The additional U.S. troops being sent to Baghdad will be divided among those nine sections of the city, nearly doubling U.S. combat power in the region.
In a switch from the current course of action, these U.S. forces will be housed in the very neighborhoods they patrol. Military planners tell ABC News there will eventually be about 30 mini-bases, called joint security stations, scattered around Baghdad housing both U.S. and Iraqi troops.

They have the audacity to admit they are sending bodies to the slaughter house, admitting “the new approach is riskier and will likely mean more U.S. casualties in the short-run”… “we don’t know if this will work, but we do know the old way was failing.”
They have beaten the Dems at their game. Binding or non-binding resolutions – what are they worth now? Bush/Cheney have basically said they don’t give a rat’s ass about the constitution, the people of this country, it’s military, and the many more Iraqis who too will die. Somehow I don’t believe the Dems have it in them to fight this. There is a feeling of finality that I can’t shake. It is insane to think that my only hope is that the military will revolt and refuse to go.
What kind of madman do we have at the head of this country!

Posted by: conchita | Jan 10 2007 23:24 utc | 28

Conchita, if I may be allowed to repeat myself (and when did I ever do otherwise?): it’s not yet in the hearts of the Democrats to get us out of Iraq, in the sense of the word “out” that you and I have in mind (i.e. no more Americans in Iraq).
The only force that can bring this off is the insurgency itself. It has to keep killing Americans faster than they can be replaced; it has to find Americans in their hiding-places and kill them on the spot; and it has to show that it can, and will, do this until such time as the American’s can’t take it any more (by continuing to replace its own fallen, by refining upon its practices of warfare). At home, Americans must be kept uneasy, unhappy, and fearful about the whole exercise, and for how long? Well, if Viet Nam is any indication, it may take two or three congressional elections to assemble enough representatives–Democrats and Republicans alike– to stop this thing.

Posted by: alabama | Jan 10 2007 23:47 utc | 29

Alabama, not disagreeing, but I also favor the other “I” word.
To support your point, I went to a townhall meeting of People For the American Way last night and witnessed the same avoidance of the real issue – removing Bush/Cheney from office. They are justifiably concerned about election reform, ethics, minimum wage, universal healthcare, etc., but they were unwilling to embrace impeachment at the same time. I kept hearing the phrase “balancing act”. Finally, I left. If they can’t get behind getting rid of these guys I can’t waste my time.
Bush/Cheney have just thumbed their noses at us all.

Posted by: conchita | Jan 10 2007 23:56 utc | 30

Bush is willing to sacrifice American lives on the altar of his success. I’ve reached the point where I’m willing to let him sacrifice American lives on the altar of the insurgents’ success. this is not a healthy thing….

Posted by: alabama | Jan 11 2007 1:45 utc | 31

Either the Surge is a big con job; or the US Army is going to take on the Mahdi Militia. Some the militia fighters will disperse out of Bagdad but if human pride is taken into account, most will follow the leadership of Hezbollah and turn Sadr City in to rubble filled Hell; right in front of Al Jazzera’s cameras.
The only logical purpose of destroying Baghdad, is to provoke retaliation to allow the start of the Draft and Invading Syria and Iran; creating the Greater USA-Israel Oil Co-Prosperity Sphere.

Posted by: Jim S | Jan 11 2007 1:52 utc | 32

juannie: old british folk tune:
SO | DO DO DO DO | DO-O-O, DO | RE RE RE RE | RE-E-E, RE |
| MI MI MI MI-MI | FA FA-FA FA FA-FA | MI MI RE RE | DO-O-O
SO |DO DO-DO DO DO-DO | DO-O-O, DO | RE RE-RE RE RE-RE | RE-E-E, RE |
| MI MI-MI MI MI | FA FA FA, FA-FA | MI MI RE RE | DO-O-O ||

Posted by: catlady | Jan 11 2007 6:39 utc | 33