More on Al Qaeda In Iraq

[Christians4LessGvt]

Iraq Report: Al Qaeda strikes in Baghdad
July 26, 2007

After a lull of several weeks in major mass casualty suicide attack inside Baghdad, al Qaeda in Iraq struck three times against Iraqi civilians over the past 24 hours. Yesterday's attacks occurred during the celebration of the Iraqi soccer team's victory at the Asia Games, which advanced the club to the finals.

Two suicide bombers, sitting in parked cars, struck within a half hour of each other. At least 50 Iraqis were killed and 130 wounded in the dual attacks in the Mansour district in the west and the Ghadeer neighborhood in the east. Today's car bomb attack in the eastern district of Karradah resulted in at least 20 Iraqi civilians killed and 60 wounded.

The attacks on the Iraqis celebrating the soccer victory are classic terrorist events. Al Qaeda piggybacked off of a rare moment of national unity and grabbed the media headlines by turning a positive story into one of despair. The two suicide bombs sat in parked cars, instead of detonating their bombs remotely. Al Qaeda wanted to put its signature on this attack. Also, al Qaeda in Iraq demonstrated that while its capacity for large strikes may have diminished, it still possesses the ability to attack inside Baghdad.

Despite al Qaeda's successful attacks in Baghdad, Coalition and Iraq forces continue efforts to degrade al Qaeda in Iraq's command network, as well as its facilitators and IED cells continue. U.S. and Iraqi special operations forces captured 61 suspected al Qaeda in Iraq operatives during targeted raids nationwide over the past two days. Wednesday's raids in Mosul, Tarmiyah, Samarra, and Baghdad resulted 20 al Qaeda operatives detained, including the administrative emir for Mosul and an IED cell leader in Tarmiyah. Iraqi Special Operations Forces also captured a car bomb cell leader in the Jamia neighborhood in Baghdad. Today's raids in Tarmiyah, Taji, and Mosul resulted in 36 operatives detained.

Iraqi and U.S. forces maintain the pressure on the Shia terror cells as well. Two cell leaders were captured over the past several days. A raid near Hillah on July 23 resulted in the capture of the leader of the Mahdi Army "political wing in Al Imam responsible for emplacing improvised explosive devices and explosively formed penetrators along supply routes targeting Iraqi and Coalition Forces."

A raid in southwestern Baghdad on July 25 resulted in the capture of a Mahdi Army cell commander "allegedly responsible for the death squad killings of more than 150 Sunni Arab Iraqis."

http://billroggio.com/dailyiraqreport/2007/07/iraq_report_al_qaeda_strikes_i.php

[The_Professor]

It is clear to me that Al Qaeda does indeed exist in Iraq and in sizable numbers. Of course, in Iraq there are also thousands of Suuni, Shia and, yes, Gracie, even Kurds, who hate our guts. And, Al Queda exist in many other countires such as Sudan, Kenya, well, the list is loooooong.

So, to go into Iraq on the basis of getting Al Qaeda is weak, real weak.

[BT]

So, to go into Iraq on the basis of getting Al Qaeda is weak, real weak.

You must watch Fox News. We didn't go into Iraq to get Al Queda . We went to throw out Saddam.

Al Queda came to Iraq to get us.

I doubt they will beat the US Military there but they very well could win the battle for hearts and minds here at home.

[Michael Tee]

<<I doubt they will beat the US Military there but they very well could win the battle for hearts and minds here at home.>>

I assume you mean they will convince the home front to pull out the troops, not to lock up their wives and burn all their lipsticks and thongs.

[The_Professor]

Hostly, I feel the MAJOR reason we went into Iraqi is due to the perception that WMDs were being produced and soon to be used by a despot, e.g. Hussein. Al Queda is indeed a secondary reason. And, I still believe that President Bush honestly felt there were WMDs there. And Colin Powell and our intelligence services and much of the world, not just the U.S. (the liberals seem to have conveninetly forgotten this part).

So, if this is the case, then is it ENOUGH to do exactly what we did, e.g. invade? And, I know, we have discussed this issue at depth in here before.

[The_Professor]

<<I doubt they will beat the US Military there but they very well could win the battle for hearts and minds here at home.>>

I assume you mean they will convince the home front to pull out the troops, not to lock up their wives and burn all their lipsticks and thongs.

MT, as in the Vietnam conflict, where the Soviets, and their Vietnemse lackeys, turned U.S. public opinion against us and so we did not have the will to persevere. Vietnam was winnable, militarily, if the military would have been allowed to do what they wanted, but the political will just was not there.

[Christians4LessGvt]

(the liberals seem to have conveninetly forgotten this part).

no they haven't because we have them on video, click below

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePb6H-j51xE

[Christians4LessGvt]

Iraqi security forces & U.S. advisors battle Mahdi Army in Karbala
July 27, 2007
 
 
Karbala raid leads to pitched battle; five more members of Iranian-backed cells captured in separate raids

While al Qaeda in Iraq has been identified as the primary enemy by the U.S. military leadership in Iraq, Coalition and Iraq security forces have aggressively pursued the Iranian-backed "rogue" elements of the Mahdi Army and the Special Groups. Over the past two days, Iraqi security forces, backed by U.S. Special Forces advisors, conducted two raids against the Shia terror groups in Karbala and Baghdad, while another Coalition-led raid occurred in Diyala province. The Karbala raid sparked a large firefight, which resulted in 17 Mahdi Army fighters killed, with no U.S. or Iraqi military casualties reported.

The Karbala raid targeted the leader of "a rogue Jaysh al-Mahdi [JAM or Mahdi Army] assassination cell of over 100 armed members," Multinational Forces Iraq reported. The cell leader attacked Coalition forces with roadside bombs, mortars, and the deadly, armor-piercing, Iranian-supplied explosively formed penetrators. The cell was responsible for the assassination of two Iraqi government officials and several civilians.

The cell leader and two other suspects were captured, but the Iraqi and U.S. raiding force was attacked by Mahdi Army fighters with RPGs and machineguns. Five Mahdi Army fighters were killed in the gun battle, and another 12 were killed in a follow up airstrike.

Coalition forces also captured four members of the Iranian-backed Special Groups terror cells during a raid in the village of Qasarin in Diyala. The raid targeted a senior leader of a Special Groups smuggling cell. "The captured terrorists are suspected of facilitating the transport of weapons and personnel from Iran into Iraq," including explosively formed penetrators.

On July 26, the Iraqi Army captured a Mahdi Army cell leader in the Bayaa neighborhood in Baghdad. "The primary suspect is believed to command a rogue JAM improvised explosive device cell that is allegedly responsible for attacks on Coalition Forces," the Multinational Forces Iraq press release stated. "He is also alleged to have received financial support and explosively formed penetrators from Iran, which were distributed to other JAM cell members in the Bayaa and Aamel areas of Baghdad."

Multinational Forces Iraq and the Iraqi military have intensified the attacks on the Special Groups and the Iranian-supported elements of Mahdi Army since General David Petraeus briefed on the nature of the network on April 26, 2007.

The U.S. has been working to divide the Mahdi Army for well over a year, and have conducted numerous operations against the extremist elements of Muqtada al Sadr's militia. The Mahdi Army split apart shortly after Sadr and the Mahdi Army leadership fled to Iran after the onset of the Baghdad Security Plan. The Iranian-backed elements, called the "rogue Mahdi Army" by Multinational Forces Iraq, have been targeted at every opportunity by U.S. and Iraqi forces in Baghdad, Diwaniyah, Samawa, Karbala, Basra and throughout the South.

http://billroggio.com/archives/2007/07/iraqi_security_force_2.php

[Michael Tee]

<<MT, as in the Vietnam conflict, where the Soviets, and their Vietnemse lackeys, turned U.S. public opinion against us and so we did not have the will to persevere. Vietnam was winnable, militarily, if the military would have been allowed to do what they wanted, but the political will just was not there.>>

Professor, I think you're dead wrong about Nam being "winnable" because in the first place the U.S. was engaging in a "people's war" against a nation of some 80 million people (in contrast, say, to Iraq's 23 million) and moreover because behind Viet Nam was China with a virtually inexhaustible reservoir of manpower.

One little anecdote, something that I  learned only recently.  My wife and I know a young Vietnamese woman of Chinese background, from the North.  Her father (whom we had never met) had participated in the war and claimed that many young Chinese men had come over the border to join in the struggle.  The joke (not all that funny) was "Once they take their shirts off, they're Vietnamese." 

There is no doubt in my mind that once the U.S. had come near the Chinese border, the Chinese would have reacted exactly as they had in Korea.  The U.S. was doing exactly what MacArthur had told JFK not to do - - they were involved in a land war in Asia.  There was no way for this to have had any favourable outcome for the Americans.

[The_Professor]

"There is no doubt in my mind that once the U.S. had come near the Chinese border, the Chinese would have reacted exactly as they had in Korea. "

Didn't help them in Korea. Once they pushed us back  to the Pusan Perimeter, we smacked their fannies and push them back. And, if necessary, we could have done it a thousand times again, including during Vietnam.

[Michael Tee]

<<Didn't help them in Korea. Once they pushed us back  to the Pusan Perimeter, we smacked their fannies and push them back. >
>
That's not how I remember it.  You didn't push them back a tenth of the distance they pushed you back.  And if they wanted to keep it up, you don't want to even think where their next push would have landed you.  Neither did the American people.

<<And, if necessary, we could have done it a thousand times again, including during Vietnam.>>

With all due respect, Professor, you were tangling with 80 million fully-committed Vietnamese backed by China.  They kicked your asses out in a contest you didn't have the guts to pursue, and what's most amazing about all of that to me is, they did it all without airor naval support of any kind against the most powerful air force and navy on the planet.   Your land forces, even with uncontested air and naval support, were beaten like a pack of whipped dogs by the superior might of the Vietnamese fighting men and women.  A truly glorious moment in the history of the human race.

[The_Professor]

"A truly glorious moment in the history of the human race."

MT, again, you mistake military prowess for political will. Today, our military is the greatest fighting force this world has known for 1000 years. The problem is that conflicts such as Iraq are not a good fit for this type of military might.

And some say Canada is one of our most trusted friends in the world. With friends like these, who needs enemies?

[Michael Tee]

<<And some say Canada is one of our most trusted friends in the world. With friends like these, who needs enemies?>>

Hey.  We went to Afghanistan for you and we're still there.  You need friends like us.  Our ass-hole Prime Minister kisses Bush's ass every morning (figuratively speaking, I hope) but even I supported the Afghanistan mission.  You're on the wrong track and you have been on the wrong track for a long time.  Better friends who tell you when you're doing something really fucked up than friends who don't.  Bush is a disaster.  Even your enemies won't tell you how bad because they know he's fucking you up worse than they ever could.

[Christians4LessGvt]

The problem is that conflicts such as Iraq are not a good fit for this type of military might.

the type of conflict is not really the problem
the problem is the will or lack of to destroy an enemy
if we cut and run and the iranian military rolls into iraq
i assure you their military will not put up with the stuff we are putting up with
iran has the will to destroy their enemies
we don't, at least not yet
it's a bit ironic
we have the hardware
but not the will
iran has the will
but not the hardware

[The_Professor]

iran has the will, but not the hardware

They will get the hardware soon enough.