General: Anbar Ready for Handover

[kinggovernor]

General: Anbar Ready for Handover
By ROBERT BURNS – 56 minutes ago
WASHINGTON (AP) — Iraq's western province of Anbar, hotbed of the Sunni Arab insurgency for the first four years of the war, will be returned to Iraqi control in March, a senior U.S. general said Thursday.
In a telephone interview from Iraq, Marine Maj. Gen. Walter E. Gaskin, commander of the roughly 35,000 Marine and Army forces in Anbar, said levels of violence have dropped so significantly — coupled with the growth and development of Iraqi security forces in the province — that Anbar is ready to be handed back to the Iraqis.
Thus far, nine of 18 Iraqi provinces have reverted to Iraqi control, most recently the southern province of Basra in December. The process has gone substantially slower than the Bush administration once hoped, mainly because of obstacles to developing sufficient Iraqi police and army forces. But Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Thursday that he expects the process to continue.
Gates also said he was encouraged by security gains achieved in Anbar and Baghdad in the year since President Bush ordered an extra 30,000 U.S. troops to those areas of Iraq in what became known as a "surge." Gates said it has created new promise for long-delayed political reconciliation.
"We clearly are hoping that the reconciliation and improvement in the political environment that has taken place at the local and provincial level over the past number of months will now meet further progress coming at the national level," Gates told a Pentagon news conference.
Gates ticked of a list of statistical indicators of recent security improvements in Iraq. He did not mention the plan to return Anbar to Iraqi control in March, but did say the province has seen a remarkable turnaround on the security front over the past year.
"Anbar province, once considered a stronghold of al-Qaida, has been reclaimed for the Iraqi people," Gates said.
Having been largely driven out of Anbar, insurgents shifted first to Baghdad and more recently to the northern provinces of Diyala and Ninewa.
Gaskin said that a provincial security committee under Anbar's governor has been established and has rehearsed procedures for handling any security crisis that might develop.
Under a plan accepted by the Iraqi government as well as the top two American authorities in Iraq — Ambassador Ryan Crocker and Gen. David Petraeus — the U.S. military will transfer control of Anbar to provincial authorities in March, followed by a ceremony in April, Gaskin said.
"We all agree that, based on the requirements, Anbar will be ready by that time," Gaskin said, speaking from his Multi-National Force West headquarters in Fallujah, about 25 west of Baghdad.
The return of security control to Iraqi authorities in March does not mean U.S. troops will leave Anbar. Two Marine battalions, numbering roughly 1,500 troops, that were sent as part of the 2007 buildup are due to leave Anbar in about May, Gaskin said. But he would not forecast any additional cutbacks.
U.S. forces will remain in Anbar, for the time being, as partners with Iraq's army and police.
Nearly five years into the Iraq war, the demand for U.S. combat forces remains high. At his news conference, Gates cited the strain on the military as one factor as he weighs a proposal to send an additional 3,000 Marines to Afghanistan this spring to bolster NATO-led defenses against the Taliban.
"I have asked a number of questions that I expect to be answered before I make up my mind," Gates said. "I am concerned about relieving the pressure on our allies to fulfill their commitments. I am concerned about the implications for the force, and I also am very concerned that we continue to be successful in Afghanistan," and to keep the Taliban "on their back foot," Gates said.
Visiting Iraqi Defense Minister Abdul-Qader al-Obeidi, appearing with Gates, also mentioned the turnaround in Anbar. He asserted that the situation has improved to the point where Iraqi forces are able to fight on their own, although that is a view not shared by U.S. commanders.
"I can say that the Anbar province, which was the hottest area of Iraq, does not now need any (U.S.) forces because the (number) of the attacks is now zero for months now, the Iraqi minister said, speaking through an interpreter.
As recently as 18 months ago Anbar was the central stronghold of al-Qaida in Iraq, the shadowy insurgent group that U.S. officials say is largely led by foreign terrorists but populated mainly by Iraqis.
What recently has developed into a broad-based backlash against al-Qaida among Iraq's Sunni Arab community began in Anbar in late 2006. Americans recruited Sunni sheiks to help oust al-Qaida from their home turf, and the movement spread to former militants who once fought U.S. and Iraqi soldiers.
Gaskin, who is scheduled to return to his home base at Camp Lejeune, N.C., in February when he is replaced by Marine Maj. Gen. John Kelly from Camp Pendleton, Calif., arrived in Anbar in February 2007. That was a turning point in the security situation in the provincial capital of Ramadi. The city is now largely pacified — a state of affairs that few would have predicted a year ago.
Referring to the decision to return all of Anbar to Iraqi provincial control in March, Gaskin, recalling the unsettled situation he faced when first arriving, said, "I didn't expect it to happen so fast."

The Associated Press: General: Anbar Ready for Handover

Great news, it has been a long time coming

This is just one more step towards self-automony for Iraq, and now with the lack of violence the focus can shift towards building the civilian government.

[JaJae]

Excellent news!

[RMNIXON]

Al Qaeda had a bad day today in Iraq:


Massive US Air Attack South of Baghdad

By HAMZA HENDAWI – 2 hours ago

ZAMBARANIYAH, Iraq (AP) — U.S. warplanes unleashed one of the most intense airstrikes of the Iraq war Thursday, dropping 40,000 pounds of explosives in a thunderous 10-minute onslaught on suspected al-Qaida in Iraq safe havens in Sunni farmlands south of Baghdad.

The mighty barrage — recalling the Pentagon's "shock and awe" raids during the 2003 invasion — appeared to mark a significant escalation in a countrywide offensive launched this week to try to cripple remaining insurgent strongholds.

But it also fits into the endgame strategy of last year's U.S. troop buildup, which seeks to regain control of Baghdad and surrounding areas as a buffer zone for the capital. U.S. commanders are now attempting to subdue the last insurgent footholds around Baghdad before the Pentagon faces a possible reduction in troop strength.

Some of the additional 30,000 troops have been pulled out and the remainder are expected to depart by June, military officials have told The Associated Press. With insurgents still holding pockets south of the capital in the north — including areas around the key northern city of Mosul — the military apparently wants to take the remaining four months or so to use the expanded military muscle against al-Qaida.

After Thursday's fierce airstrikes, U.S. and Iraqi soldiers advanced through smoldering citrus groves into areas that were considered important al-Qaida enclaves around Arab Jabour, southeast of Baghdad. An Iraq officer said the soldiers discovered two houses used to torture kidnap victims and arrested at least 12 suspected insurgents.

Little initial resistance was reported. At least nine U.S. soldiers have been killed since the offensive began Tuesday — the deadliest days for American forces since last fall.

In the farming village of Zambaraniyah, on the outskirts of Arab Jabour about nine miles southeast of the capital, scenes of neglect and devastation were testimony to years of fighting between militants and U.S. and Iraqi troops. Most of the land is torched or left fallow along small roads that were once laced with booby traps and bombs. Fields are strewn with trash and the blackened hulks of cars. Many buildings are pockmarked by gunfire, and most homes are abandoned.

Maj. Alayne Conway, a spokeswoman for troops in central Iraq, said the amount of ordnance dropped in 10 minutes nearly exceeded what had been used in that region in any month since last June.
Conway said the air attack "was one of the largest airstrikes since the onset of the war" in March 2003.

A military statement said two B-1 bombers and four F-16 fighters hit 40 targets in Arab Jabour in 10 strikes. Al-Qaida fighters are believed to control Arab Jabour, a Sunni district lined with citrus groves.

"Thirty-eight bombs were dropped within the first 10 minutes, with a total tonnage of 40,000 pounds," the statement said.

The Iraqi army officer, whose unit is in the Arab Jabour area, said the airstrikes began at 8 a.m. and set several groves ablaze and destroyed two houses used by gunmen. He said soldiers confiscated documents and weapons including AK-47s.

The army officer spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the media. But Sheik Mahmoud Kamil Shebib, a local Sunni leader who has turned against al-Qaida in Iraq, independently gave a similar account.

Moahmoud Chiad, who lives on the edge of Arab Jabour, said he was surprised to see many U.S.-Iraqi checkpoints with Iraqi security forces. The Iraqis used loudspeakers to order residents to stay home.

"After this, we saw U.S. helicopters hovering over the area while the sounds of jet fighters were also heard," he said. "Minutes later, there was the sounds of big explosions. We saw fire and smoke coming out from some groves. Then, the gunfire crackled in the groves, but it ended by noon."
An AP reporter in Zambaraniyah observed bombing continue until Thursday evening.

"This is about as far as our offensive has come to at this point," U.S. Army Lt. Col. Mark Solomon told a small group of reporters on a six-hour tour.
"The enemy is a 100 yards from where we stand and snipers have taken position in the houses you see some 200 or 300 yards away," the 40-year-old Massachusetts native said as he stood on a dirt road in Zambaraniyah, a rural area where farmland is dotted with date palms and small houses. "I believe they are looking at us now."

Solomon, with the 3rd Infantry Division, said two or three dozen militants were holding out in the area and that about 30 of them were killed in recent fighting. He said a force of about 50 men who live in the area are actively supporting the U.S. and Iraqi forces in policing the area — part of the "Awakening Council" movement that has brought Sunnis in alliance with Washington to battle al-Qaida and other groups.

Even before Thursday's massive attack, Solomon said residents were returning to their homes and that stores and schools were reopening. "This is a very encouraging," he said, pointing to a family of four carrying bags brimming with clothes and food supplies.

Despite the apparent success to move quickly into suspected al-Qaida zones, the overall impact of the current campaign remains unclear.

Before the beginning of the offensive, many militants apparently fled U.S. and Iraqi forces massing north of Baghdad in Diyala province — another area around the capital where insurgents continue to hold sway. The retreat left open the possibility that al-Qaida and its backers will seek new staging grounds in northern Iraq, where U.S. troop levels are lower.
Brig. Gen. James Boozer, speaking on CNN, said al-Qaida fighters relied on Diyala "as a sanctuary, a safe haven where they go refit, rearm and plan some of their spectacular attacks."

Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, a Shiite, lauded the help of the Sunnis in the awakening council movement in Diyala and Anbar. But he said the decisive battles against extremists are still to come.

He predicted the crucial showdown could take place in Nineveh, a diverse area of desert, farmland and mountains bordering Turkey in Iraq's northwest. It includes Iraq's third-largest city, Mosul.

"We hope the decisive battle would be in Nineveh province, where terrorism had fled from Baghdad," he said in Baghdad.

[Stylerod]

Wow. Great news. Even NPR had a 100% positive story about Iraq this morning.

[7960]

Originally Posted by kinggovernor

Thus far, nine of 18 Iraqi provinces have reverted to Iraqi control.......

Great news, it has been a long time coming

It is great news.

But I keep reading where we're giving "control" in name only, *OUR* forces are still 90% of the safety/security. So does "iraqi control" mean we're out for the most part, or does it just mean they're coordinating our troops?

[kinggovernor]

Originally Posted by 7960

It is great news.

But I keep reading where we're giving "control" in name only, *OUR* forces are still 90% of the safety/security. So does "iraqi control" mean we're out for the most part, or does it just mean they're coordinating our troops?

When I was there 2 years ago, the Iraqi soldiers were basically tag alongs on our patrol. I would think that a hand over would mean the opposite, with US forces tagging along on patrol.

[DosEquis]

Sweet.

The only thing that confuses me is why we are leaving so many soldiers there risking their lives. If 9 of 18 are in control, why can't we reduce our count by 30 or 40k. I think people would tolerate the slow progress as long as we brough soldiers home when significant milestones were achieved.

[kinggovernor]

Originally Posted by DosEquis

Sweet.

The only thing that confuses me is why we are leaving so many soldiers there risking their lives. If 9 of 18 are in control, why can't we reduce our count by 30 or 40k. I think people would tolerate the slow progress as long as we brough soldiers home when significant milestones were achieved.

they are reducing the number of Marines in Iraq, however they are going to Afghanistan instead.

[bheld]

Originally Posted by kinggovernor

they are reducing the number of Marines in Iraq, however they are going to Afghanistan instead.

And that was decided long before this happened. They were going either way and this situation is probably a good example of how timelines can work.

[kinggovernor]

Originally Posted by bheld

And that was decided long before this happened. They were going either way and this situation is probably a good example of how timelines can work.

How can you say that it was decided long before this happened?

[7960]

Originally Posted by kinggovernor

How can you say that it was decided long before this happened?

Well, they're there now aren't they? So it must have been decided long before this happened!

[bheld]

Originally Posted by kinggovernor

How can you say that it was decided long before this happened?

The decision to redeploy marines to Afghanistan was made months ago.

[RMNIXON]

Originally Posted by Stylerod

Wow. Great news. Even NPR had a 100% positive story about Iraq this morning.

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by RMNIXON

Yeah I don't see many Democrats posting these good news stories in the forum. Why not? Don't they want good news in Iraq too?

[kinggovernor]

Originally Posted by bheld

The decision to redeploy marines to Afghanistan was made months ago.

link?

[RMNIXON]

MANAMA (Reuters) - President George W. Bush said on Saturday that America's new strategy had reversed Iraq's descent into mayhem and the United States was on track to complete the withdrawal of 20,000 troops by mid-year.

After talks at a base in the Kuwaiti desert with his military commander in Iraq, General David Petraeus, and the U.S. ambassador in Baghdad, Ryan Crocker, Bush said security gains in Iraq "are allowing some U.S. forces to return home."

He added: "Any additional reduction will be based on the recommendation of General Petraeus, and those recommendations will be based entirely on the conditions on the ground in Iraq."

Bush conceded that until last year, "our strategy simply wasn't working," with Iraq riven by sectarian violence and al Qaeda militants strengthening their grip in many areas. He said the new strategy, involving a troop buildup and a focus on counter-insurgency warfare, was turning things around.

Bush later flew to Bahrain, a close U.S. ally which hosts the U.S. Fifth Fleet, where he was greeted by King Hamad bin Isa al-Khalifa.

Bush praised the king for Bahrain's efforts on democratic reforms, citing the holding of elections and that a woman was elected to the parliament. "Bahrain's reforms are making your nation stronger, you're showing strong leadership, you're showing the way forward to other nations," Bush said.
About 200 demonstrators gathered near the U.S. embassy in the capital Manama, carrying anti-U.S. placards and some chanting slogans against the ruling family. "State terrorism - Made in USA," read one placard.

In Kuwait, Bush said: "Iraq is now a different place from one year ago. Much hard work remains, but levels of violence are significantly reduced. Hope is returning to Baghdad, and hope is returning to towns and villages throughout the country."

"Al Qaeda remains dangerous, and it will continue to target the innocent with violence. But we've dealt al Qaeda in Iraq heavy blows, and it now faces a growing uprising of ordinary Iraqis who want to live peaceful lives."

With the Iraq war nearing the five-year mark, Bush has refused to discuss any further troop cuts for now, saying that will depend on his commanders' judgments. The limited phased withdrawal of 20,000 troops was announced by Bush in September.

But he gave a sense of the long-term U.S. commitment when he said in a television interview on Friday that the United States would have a presence in Iraq that could "easily" last a decade.

The war remains deeply unpopular among Americans, keeping Bush's approval ratings stuck around 30 percent and below.

But a fall in violence has taken much of the steam out of efforts by Democratic congressional leaders to try to link war funding to troop withdrawal timetables, something Bush refuses to accept. Most Democrats maintain, however, that dramatic changes are needed in Bush's Iraq strategy.

TROOP REDUCTIONS

Petraeus is due to report to the U.S. Congress in March on whether more troop reductions are advisable. Asked on Saturday whether more troops could be withdrawn this year, Petraeus said it was possible but no decision had been made.

Despite heavy U.S. pressure, Iraq's main Shi'ite, Sunni Arab and Kurdish political blocs have failed to agree on major laws seen by Washington as crucial to bridging the sectarian divide. Bush conceded the Iraqi government had to do more.

"Have they done enough? No," he said.


Bush earlier made his first presidential visit to Israel and the occupied West Bank, predicting a peace treaty within a year but with no major breakthroughs. Bahrain was the second of five Arab states Bush will visit to enlist their help in containing Iran's growing regional clout.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said talks would now turn to "the threats that we've seen in the Gulf, the problem of extremism, whether it be extremism from al Qaeda, Sunni extremism, or whether it be Iran and its tentacles, like Hezbollah and the part of Hamas that Iran supports."

Gulf states have battled al Qaeda militants in recent years, but they are also concerned about the crises in Lebanon and Iraq, as well as the standoff over Iran's nuclear program.

Local media said Kuwait's emir would tell Bush of his concerns that a U.S. strike on nearby Iran would destabilize the Gulf, key to world oil supplies. Bush is likely to hear a similar message from other Gulf Arab leaders fearful of war.

Bush said in Kuwait that Iran and Syria had to stop promoting violence in Iraq. "Syria needs to further reduce the flow of terrorists to the territory, especially suicide bombers. Iran must stop supporting the militia special groups that attack Iraqi and coalition forces and kidnap and kill Iraqi officials," he said.

[kinggovernor]

the surge > *

which is why John McCain should be elected President

[bheld]

Here you go, I assume this is the last I'll hear from anybody on the subject just like it is with every other thread.

October 11, 2007
Marines Press to Remove Their Forces From Iraq

By THOM SHANKER
WASHINGTON, Oct. 10 — The Marine Corps is pressing to remove its forces from Iraq and to send marines instead to Afghanistan, to take over the leading role in combat there, according to senior military and Pentagon officials.

The idea by the Marine Corps commandant would effectively leave the Iraq war in the hands of the Army while giving the Marines a prominent new role in Afghanistan, under overall NATO command.

The suggestion was raised in a session last week convened by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates for the Joint Chiefs of Staff and regional war-fighting commanders. While still under review, its supporters, including some in the Army, argue that a realignment could allow the Army and Marines each to operate more efficiently in sustaining troop levels for two wars that have put a strain on their forces.

As described by officials who had been briefed on the closed-door discussion, the idea represents the first tangible new thinking to emerge since the White House last month endorsed a plan to begin gradual troop withdrawals from Iraq, but also signals that American forces likely will be in Iraq for years to come.

At the moment, there are no major Marine units among the 26,000 or so American forces in Afghanistan. In Iraq there are about 25,000 marines among the 160,000 American troops there.

It is not clear exactly how many of the marines in Iraq would be moved over. But the plan would require a major reshuffling, and it would make marines the dominant American force in Afghanistan, in a war that has broader public support than the one in Iraq.

Mr. Gates and Adm. Mike Mullen, the new chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have not spoken publicly about the Marine concept, and aides to both officials said no formal proposal had been presented by the Marines. But the idea has been the focus of intense discussions between senior Marine Corps officers and other officials within the Defense Department.

It is not clear whether the Army would support the idea. But some officials sympathetic to the Army said that such a realignment would help ease some pressure on the Army, by allowing it to shift forces from Afghanistan into Iraq, and by simplifying planning for future troop rotations.

The Marine proposal could also face resistance from the Air Force, whose current role in providing combat aircraft for Afghanistan could be squeezed if the overall mission was handed to the Marines. Unlike the Army, the Marines would bring a significant force of combat aircraft to that conflict.

Whether the Marine proposal takes hold, the most delicate counterterrorism missions in Afghanistan, including the hunt for forces of Al Qaeda and the Taliban, would remain the job of a military task force that draws on Army, Navy and Air Force Special Operations units.

Military officials say the Marine proposal is also an early indication of jockeying among the four armed services for a place in combat missions in years to come. “At the end of the day, this could be decided by parochialism, and making sure each service does not lose equity, as much as on how best to manage the risk of force levels for Iraq and Afghanistan,” said one Pentagon planner.

Tensions over how to divide future budgets have begun to resurface across the military because of apprehension that Congressional support for large increases in defense spending seen since the Sept. 11 attacks will diminish, leaving the services to compete for money.

Those traditional turf battles have subsided somewhat given the overwhelming demands of waging two simultaneous wars — and because Pentagon budgets reached new heights.

Last week, the Senate approved a $459 billion Pentagon spending bill, an increase of $43 billion, or more than 10 percent over the last budget. That bill