WASHINGTON, D.C.—Even the most bitter skeptics about the U.S.-led war in Iraq must have paused, ever so briefly, over their morning coffee. The lead story in today’s New York Times, placed above the fold, carries this headline: “Baghdad Starts to Exhale as Security Improves.” The article, by Damien Cave and Alissa J. Rubin, reported undeniable progress in the security situation in Baghdad, with significant numbers of families returning to their homes:
“The security improvements in most neighborhoods are real. Days now pass without a car bomb, after a high of 44 in the city in February. The number of bodies appearing on Baghdad’s streets has plummeted to about 5 a day, from as many as 35 eight months ago, and suicide bombings across Iraq fell to 16 in October, half the number of last summer and down sharply from a recent peak of 59 in March…As a result, for the first time in nearly two years, people are moving with freedom around much of this city.”
The forces of religious extremism, including those of al Qaeda, appear to be in retreat. This assessment from America’s most influential liberal newspaper, based in part on at least 50 interviews of residents throughout Baghdad, echoes Sunday's editorial in the liberal Washington Post:
“The evidence is now overwhelming that the ‘surge’ of U.S. military forces in Iraq this year has been, in purely military terms, a remarkable success. By every metric used to measure the war—total attacks, U.S. casualties, Iraqi casualties, suicide bombings, roadside bombs—there has been an enormous improvement since January.”
This breath of good news demands sober qualifications, of course: We don’t really know how firm or fragile the security situation remains, and we still don’t know what political progress toward reconciliation and a stable, representative government is being made—or is possible in the short term. The roughly 20,000 Iraqis who have returned to their Baghdad homes represent a fraction of the more than 4 million who reportedly fled nationwide. Some supporters of the Iraq war, though noting these uncertainties, are nevertheless sanguine: “What we are seeing unfold in Iraq, under the leadership of General David Petraeus and his team,” writes Pete Wehner, for Commentary magazine, “may well rank as among the most extraordinary military turnabouts in our history.” See here for more.
Given the fumblings, miscalculations, delusions, and heartbreaking violence over the last three years, any speculation about “the most extraordinary military turnabouts” in American history seems premature. A fuller admission by the Bush administration of the extraordinary failures of its strategy in Iraq would be in order—and may be a more prudent way to help shore up American support to sustain and exploit these real and meaningful gains in security.
Joe Loconte
Oh really, a reprieve in violence, maybe its inevitable, What with almost a Million dead and radiation sickness and stuff like that. It's bound to catch up with them sooner or later.
D U Munitions
http://prisonplanet.com/articles/november2007/201107_b_Radioactive.htm
Blair, No Remorse
http://www.truthnews.us/?p=882
Posted by: British Patriot | November 21, 2007 at 01:35 AM
We will need copious amounts of soft diplomatic power to exploit the opening presented to us.
However, we don't seem to do diplomacy and soft power too well nowadays.
I fear.
Posted by: Maduka | November 21, 2007 at 06:43 AM
Gateway Pundit has the round-up of all the stories coming out about the Iraqi's returning to Iraq by the thousands over the past days.
Hundreds of thousands are returning!
The Damascus neighbourhoods once dominated by many of the 1.5 million Iraqi refugees, ares almost deserted.
The UN High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) was scrambling to assess the transformation last night. An interim report is expected today. “There is a large movement of people going back to Iraq."
BBC reports thousands a day returning.
Here is the link:
http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2007/11/baghdad-or-bust-iraqi-refugees-surge.html
And, Times Online reports on the "Bagdad or Bust" remarkable return of Iraqis:
Road From Damascus
Iraqis are voting with their feet by returning home after exile
The figures are hard to estimate precisely but the process could involve hundreds of thousands of people. The numbers are certainly large enough, as we report today, for a mass convoy to be planned next week as Iraqis who had opted for exile in Syria return to their homeland. It is one of the most striking signs that not only has violence in Baghdad and adjacent provinces decreased dramatically in recent months, but confidence in the economic and political future of Iraq has risen sharply. Nor is this movement the action of men and women who could easily reverse course and turn back again. Tighter visa restrictions imposed by Damascus mean that those who are returning to Iraq cannot assume that they could quickly retreat again to Syria if that suited them. This is, for many, a one-way decision. It represents a vote of confidence in Iraq.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/leading_article/article2910230.ece
Trully good news to hear!
Posted by: Frogg, USA | November 21, 2007 at 08:50 PM
"However, we don't seem to do diplomacy and soft power too well nowadays"
Sometimes "diplomacy" and "soft power" (i.e. appeasement) doesn't work. It failed miserably in the 1930's with Hitler.
And some people never learn from history.
Posted by: atheling | November 21, 2007 at 09:02 PM
Atheling,
This is not 1938. The lessons of 1938 still apply, though. However, I think the word "appeasement" is used too often in lieu of a balanced discussion.
We could dismiss the World as being virulently anti-American and unreasonable or blame China for bribing half the World. (Afterall, we have 11 aircraft carriers). Or we could ask ourselves deep questions like:
1. Six years into the "War against Terror", how effective is our response to Aljazeera?
2. Why have we reduced funding for the USIS (United State Information Service)?
3. Why did our public diplomacy effort in the Middle East (lead by Karen Hughes) fail?
4. Why have we abandoned Latin America to Chavez?
5. Are there any lessons we can learn from China's engagement with the developing world?
Posted by: Maduka | November 22, 2007 at 12:20 AM
Frogg, its great to read. Thanks. I haven't been to his site in a while, shame on me.
Posted by: Steevo | November 22, 2007 at 04:09 AM
Maduka,
1. Six years into the "War against Terror", how effective is our response to Aljazeera?
Why on earth shoud we have a "response" to a news agency? If you misspoke and meant Al Qaeda, we're kicking their butts.
2. Why have we reduced funding for the USIS (United State Information Service)?
Funding for government agencies is rarely, if ever, "reduced". What gets reduced is the rate of increase. IE: They ask for a 10% increase, and we give them a 4% increase. To a Democrat, this means we "cut" their funding by 6%. But only Democrats use this new math.
3. Why did our public diplomacy effort in the Middle East (lead by Karen Hughes) fail?
When has diplomacy in the Middle East ever worked?
4. Why have we abandoned Latin America to Chavez?
Who says we have?
5. Are there any lessons we can learn from China's engagement with the developing world?
Yes... completely ignore the environmentalists and pollute the entire world. But that's not a lesson you want bandied about, I think.
Posted by: mamapajamas | November 24, 2007 at 12:17 AM
Hopefully the security situation in Iraq becomes a reality soon! because the suffering of these poor people must stop
Posted by: fingering girls | May 05, 2010 at 01:03 AM
Car bombs in Iraq in a matter of every day, death, cries of desperation for children. I hope this improves and security for the population is normal.
Posted by: clitoral stimulation | May 05, 2010 at 01:09 AM