Hoo-ah: The Kurds Show The Way

The sudden collapse of al Qaeda operations in western Iraq was largely due to tribal politics. There are only a few tribes, or major clans, in western Iraq (Anbar province), and once U.S. commanders had finally convinced the tribes to switch sides, it was like hitting a light switch. Discipline within the tribes is pretty good, and many tribesmen had been on bad terms with al Qaeda for years. The terrorists had killed several tribal leaders, in an effort to insure support for terrorist operations. This backfired, and the tribes went after al Qaeda, literally, with a vengeance.

Now the remaining al Qaeda member, and their Iraqi Sunni Arab allies, are making their last stand in northern Iraq (Kirkuk, Salah ad Din, Nineveh and Diyala provinces). This is a much more complex situation. While Anbar was almost exclusively Sunni Arab, the four provinces up north also have Kurds and Turks, as well as some Shia Arabs, Christians and other religious minorities. This is made even more complex by the presence of over a hundred tribal and clan organizations. No one-stop deal making here.

Many of the Sunni Arabs up north are some of Saddam's most enthusiastic supporters. That's because Saddam spent over a decade expelling Kurds from the area, and turning the Kurdish property over to poor Sunni Arabs from down south. All Saddam asked for was loyalty. Saddam's immigrants are still loyal, especially since many of the disposed Kurds returned after 2003, looking to get their property back.

The Iraqi Army and police are doing most of the fighting up north, which is bad news for al Qaeda. Iraqi security forces speak the language, and have a good understanding of the social dynamics. Many of the tribes and clans (including some of the Sunni Arab ones) up north are pro-government, and as the terrorist organizations get chewed up month after month, more and more locals decide that loyalty to Saddam just isn't worth it any more. The Iraqis know this process has long term benefits. All they have to do is look at northernmost Iraq, the autonomous Kurdish territory. There, several million Kurds have, for fifteen years, lived without Sunni Arab terrorists, and have prospered mightily. They still have the infamous Middle Eastern corruption and cronyism to worry about, but even those ancient curses are openly discussed and attacked.

Iraqis now have something they have not experienced for decades; hope.

Hoo-ah: Lessons Of The Iraq War

As the U.S. armed forces have done so many times before, they entered the uncertainty of a new war in 2001, and are now trying to figure out what they gained from it. Most of what went on during this war was unreported or misreported. This is nothing new. The important details, and lessons, of all past American wars were poorly reported, and what the military is trying to avoid is taking away the wrong lessons.

Throughout the current conflict, the military made no secret of what they were doing, and just kept focused on winning. They knew they would be dealing with an unusual enemy, a stateless force based on ideology and religion based hatred. This foe was weak, in the conventional military sense, but was armed with two powerful weapons. First, there was the suicide bomber, and terrorism in general. Against civilian populations, this was a very effective weapon. Against a professional and resourceful military foe, it was much less so. But the enemy had another weapon; the media and political opposition in their opponents homeland. The media is eager to report real or imagined disasters and mistakes. This is how the news business has stayed solvent since the mass media first appeared in the mid 19th century. Al Qaeda was run by people who were aware of this, and knew how to exploit it, both among friendly (Moslem) populations, and in nations they had declared their enemy. This they did by exploiting the proclivities of the political oppositions in the West.

Many in the West considered terrorism a police matter. But al Qaeda believed that if they could turn it into a military campaign, by getting Western nations to use military force, they would trigger an angry reaction among Moslems. Al Qaeda had long preached that the West was the enemy of Islam, and a Western invasion of Moslem nations would prove this. They also knew that many in the West would not approve of military action. These politicians, and their followers, would continue to insist on treating Islamic terrorism as a police matter. This would cause political turmoil in the West, and weaken counter-terror operations.

The invasion of Afghanistan, after September 11, 2001, did indeed enrage many Moslems, even though many of them admitted that the Taliban government there had provided bases for al Qaeda. But the Islamic terrorists also took advantage of the fact that Moslems did not use the same logic as Westerners. Even after the Taliban government quickly fell in late 2001, to an "invasion force" of only 300 NATO troops (U.S. Army special forces and CIA agents), many Moslems insisted this was an unwarranted attack on a Moslem nation. This despite the fact that most Afghans wanted to be rid of the Taliban. And then it got worse, as many Moslems insisted that al Qaeda did not carry out the September 11, 2001 attacks. Many Moslems(and some in the West) still believe that the Israelis were behind it, or that the Americans staged an attack on themselves to provide an excuse to make war on Islamic nations. Al Qaeda knew how to exploit fantasies and cultural biases, even while al Qaeda leaders were taking credit for the 911 attacks.

The invasion of Iraq was even more contentious. In hindsight, the Iraq operation was essential to the defeat of al Qaeda, and the shattering of their popular support in the Moslem world. Al Qaeda, true to its own beliefs and tactics, tried to use terror attacks against the Shia Arab majority in Iraq, after 2003, as a way to put the Sunni Arab minority back in control. All this did was kill thousands of Moslem civilians and deflate popular support for al Qaeda. This could be seen, year by year, as opinion polls in Moslem countries revealed declining al Qaeda popularity.

But al Qaeda still had a lot of Support in the West. The political opposition in the United States, true to form (as in all past American wars) found ways to criticize the Iraq operation without actually joining the enemy. The media in the West backed the opposition, as that's where the headlines, and the profits, were.

Out of all this, the American military found other lessons. Their professional and resourceful troops found ways to neutralize enemy weapons (suicide and roadside bombs) while keeping their casualty rate at less than half what it was in Vietnam and pervious wars. The generals got no credit, in the media, for that, but the troops sure appreciated it. This resulted in the volunteer military to maintain its strength in wartime, the first time the U.S. had accomplished that since the American Revolution.

The troops developed a wide array of new techniques for fighting "irregular wars" (where the opponent is not a regular army.) The military adapted many new technologies to this new kind of war (smart bombs, data mining, forensics, persistent surveillance and lots of modern police techniques). The new problem is transferring as much of this new knowledge to future conventional wars. And there will be a transference. Most other major military powers are also trying to figure that out, so they can also profit from the American success.

Finally, the continued hammering the military is taking, for "failing" in this new kind of war, at least makes it less likely that there will be a problem with the victory disease (where winning brings with it complacency and all the ills that follow believing your own press releases.)

HOO-AH: The war is basically over...

The war is basically over in Iraq, but the peace brings with it a return to the corruption and inefficiency that has cursed this part of the world for centuries. There are other annoying habits, like demanding "compensation" for any real or imagined loss that might possibly be pinned on U.S. troops. It's also popular to demand, with a straight face, that U.S. troops fix utilities, schools and whatever else people want, but are unwilling to take care of themselves. Peace has not brought out the best in the Iraqi people.

The war is still going on, but now it's more of a police operation. U.S. and Iraqi forces are searching for several hundred known terrorists. Some of them are showing up outside the country, giving rise to the belief that al Qaeda has abandoned Iraq. This is apparently the case, but there are several other Sunni Arab terrorist organizations that will never give up. For these groups, tolerating Shia Arab rule of Iraq is a sin, and the sinners must be punished. Terror attacks are way down, but they can be expected to continue for years.

The U.S. is negotiating, with the Iraqi government, a renewal of its authority to operate in Iraq. This authority expires at the end of the year. As part of the negotiations, the Iraqis are asking for a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. troops. This is popular with many Iraqis, especially those in the government who are getting rich by stealing oil money. As long as the American troops are in the country, auditors have armed protection and can be very effective at revealing the thefts and getting the thieves punished. This makes thieving government officials very uncomfortable. Corruption in general remains a major problem (as it is in all Middle Eastern countries). While many Iraqis would like to see clean government, they are usually not the ones who get elected (elections involve a lot of bribery and trading of favors.)

The Iraqi Sunni Arabs (less than 15 percent of the population) and the Kurds (about 20 percent), want U.S. troops to stay. If the Americans leave, the Shia majority will likely resume revenge (for decades of abuse) attacks on the Sunni Arabs. The Kurds have been autonomous for over a decade, under U.S. protection, and are developing new oil fields in the north. Shia politicians have said that this oil belongs to "the Iraqi people" (or the Shia politicians running the government.)

The Shia majority is not monolithic either, and several large factions could form, attract part of the security forces and create new militias, and have a civil war. That would, in typical Middle Eastern fashion, lead to another dictatorship, this time run by a Shia tyrant. The Shia can do a Saddam, they just want a chance.

Iraqi politicians also want U.S. forces gone in order to halt improvements in the security forces. Iraqi troops and police are now strong enough to deal with the Sunni Arabs, but still a long way from Western standards of efficiency and honesty. The politicians do not want the troops and officers to be too effective, lest the generals be tempted to take over "for the sake of the country" and try to run a more efficient government.

Freedom Journal Iraq - 01 July 2008

Iraq Freedom Minute - 25 June 2008

Hoo-ah: No Cure For The Arab Curse?

In East Baghdad, and Shia cities throughout the south, the Mahdi Army is no more. The Iran supported group was taken apart by government security forces during the last two months. All that's left of radical cleric Muqtada al Sadr's private army are a few hundred die hard members who are, for the moment, keeping their heads down. And for good reason. While appreciated in 2006 -7 for keeping Sunni Arab terrorists out of Shia neighborhoods, the Mahdi Army quickly evolved into a collection of self-serving thugs. Once civilians realized that the army and police were stronger, and moving in to stay, the cell phones came out and the police were buried in tips about Mahdi Army safe houses and arms caches. Sadr has been hiding out in Iran through all this.

Sunni Arab terrorist diehards are undergoing the same experience up north, but with more violence. Around Mosul, U.S. Special Forces ODA's, which have been chasing al Qaeda leaders for years, are having enormous success. The surge offensive drove many al Qaeda, and Iraqi Sunni Arab terrorist leaders to the Mosul area, where a spectacular last stand was supposed to give the terrorists a badly needed victory. Didn't work out that way, and now the terrorist leaders are either hunkering down, or running for the border. Either way, they are getting caught. The combination of wide spread cell phone availability, and anti-terrorist Iraqis, is giving the police and Special Forces the tips they need.

The downside of all this is that U.S. troops are now regularly travelling to areas, long been labeled "extremely hostile", they have never been in before. While those Sunni Arab towns are generally considered safe and well policed for Iraqis, there are still scattered groups of terrorists about, capable of pulling off an impromptu ambush or suicide bombing against foreigners. The terrorists are also using more women as bombers, there having been an outbreak of Islamic feminism on the Internet, where the women demanded that they be allowed to participate and die for the cause. Since women suicide bombers have been, and still are, quite rare, their chances of evading security are better. The overall result of this new freedom-of-movement is a near doubling of American combat deaths (from the record low last month of 19).

Several terrorist groups are trying to negotiate some kind of amnesty deal, using kidnapping victims as trade bait. These hostages have, in some cases, been held for a long time. The most prominent of these, five British citizens, have been captives for a year (as terrorists demanded the release of nine pro-Iran killers). This has put the government in a difficult position, as hundreds of Iraqis are being held (some may actually be dead, but even getting "proof-of-life" requires giving the kidnappers something.) While most Iraqis want the hostages released, they also do not want to reward the terrorists.

The defeat of the major terrorist organizations is bringing the spotlight back to Iraq (and the Arab worlds) primary problem; corruption. With reconstruction money and police pouring into Sunni Arab towns for the first time in seven years, there's been some culture shock. The Sunni Arabs have long been accustomed to the old rules (which Saddam Hussein exploited artfully) whereby local strongmen were paid off, and then these tough guys did whatever it took (murder, kidnapping, mutilation, etc) to keep the locals quiet. The new Shia government is trying (with mixed success) to get away from the old ways. It isn't easy. Centuries of tradition don't willingly change overnight. There will be more violence, as corrupt locals decide old school customs are worth killing for. Actually, they always have been, which is why most Arab nations are police states, where murder, or the threat of it, is the final arbiter of disputes with the government. Meanwhile, reconstruction efforts are delayed, or derailed, by rampant theft, lies and deception supplied by local officials.

U.S. troops are back to their pre-surge strength of 15 brigades, although troop strength is a little higher (142,000 versus 135,000) because some additional support units are still around. The surge offensive that began in early 2007 has reduced Iraqi civilian casualties by 80 percent and lowered violence against U.S. troops to 2004 levels. But a lot of this security is held together by U.S. troops, who still advise and assist Iraqi troops and police. U.S. Commanders believe that it's only a matter of time before all Iraqi units are capable of doing their jobs on their own, but for now only about ten percent of Iraqi police and military units are in that category. It may take 5-10 years to get everyone able to operate on their own. Meanwhile, ten of Iraq's 18 provinces have their security provided by Iraqi security forces, with Iraqis in charge (and U.S. forces just on call.)

Hoo-ah: Freedom Journal Iraq - 25 June 2008

Hoo-ah: Was the Iraq War Worth It?

Was the Iraq War Worth It?

By Jeff Lukens

They say if it bleeds, it leads on the nightly news. The recent silence from the mainstream news media on Iraq, however, is speaking volumes. While the war remains unpopular, our success there has been unmistakable.

The Iraqi people, with the help of the U.S. led coalition, have succeeded in establishing the world’s first Arab democracy. Their achievement is a milestone in the war on terror and for the cause of liberty.

Beyond the Iraqi Constitution and the elections, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has emerged as the true leader of the governing coalition. He has battled and won against fellow Shiite and problem child Muqtada al-Sadr and his militia. The Sunni, Shiite and Kurd people work together in a national Iraqi Army. Together, they are taking their county back from the foreign insurgents that have invaded their homeland. Iraqi troops took the lead in clearing Basra and Sadr City, and are now finishing off the insurgent remnants.

No one likes to go to war, but even an elective war is sometimes necessary. With all the consternation these past years, President Bush may finally be able to say “Mission Accomplished” to what he originally set out to do.

This we know, Saddam had Weapons of Mass Destruction. He even gassed his own Kurd and Shiite populations in the 1980s. What happened to those chemical weapons? Who knows? Whether they buried them in the ground somewhere or trucked off to Syria, we had every reason to believe he had them.

In the months leading up to the war, Saddam acted as if he were hiding a nuclear program by obstructing UN inspectors visiting his installations. We have since concluded that his nuclear program was still in its infancy, but we could not have known that then. Saddam’s power was in his bluff, but his bluff was called.

Following 9/11, we had to show we meant business in the fight on terror. Afghanistan fell quickly, but it was a sideshow. Look at any map of the Middle East and smack in the middle of it is Iraq. Think about it, if we could flip Iraq form a dictatorial state that sponsored terrorism to a democratic republic, there would be profound implications throughout the region. When most of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudi, we needed to show Saudi Arabia, as much as anyone, our resolve. Regime change in Iraq was militarily and politically feasible, so Iraq was where Bush chose to make his move.

Saddam fell quickly too, but the subsequent insurgency dragged on for another five years. Though our casualties have been mercifully low, the political angst against Bush has grown virulent. Maybe Bush could have handled the occupation better, and the war should have been over more quickly, but our reason to go there was strategically sound. Bush made the proper decision with the urgency of 9/11 still fresh, and with the information available to him at that time.

In the early years of the Civil War, Lincoln lost battle after battle with a revolving door of generals who could not or would not fight Robert E. Lee. Lincoln finally found his general with Ulysses S. Grant who took after Lee’s army and ground it down.

Bush had a similar problem with Don Rumsfeld and generals who would not adapt to insurgents who did not wear uniforms and hid among the people. Bush finally replaced Rumsfeld and found his Generals in David Petraeus and Ray Odierno. The counterinsurgency strategy they employed made quick work of our enemies in Iraq.

Back in the U.S., however, liberal opposition to the war has at times reached hysterical levels and threatened to unravel all that we sought to achieve. Some things do not change. They have been acting this way since our days in Vietnam. And like our experience there, instead of finding ways to win they sought the worst possible outcome by unilateral surrender.

Liberals have never considered Bush a legitimate president. They have never gotten over the myth that the 2000 election was stolen. For them, Bush’s decision to enter into an elective war that took longer than expected was just too much. His presidency is too emotional a subject for them, and reasoning with them about any aspect of it has become nearly impossible. But for anyone who still cares and is willing to listen, what we are seeing in Iraq today is exactly what we set out to accomplish from the beginning — establish a beachhead for democracy in the Middle East.

Before the war, state sponsors of terrorism in the Middle East were Iran, Syria, Libya and Iraq. Today, only Iran and Syria remain — with a democratic Iraq located between them. And in the information age, don’t believe for a moment that the infectious seeds of freedom are not being sown in those countries and throughout the region. The promise of freedom for the oppressed is America’s greatest strategic weapon in this war. In due time, tyrants in those countries may come to fear their own people more than any army that may threaten them.

We must remember that the struggle in Iraq is only one campaign in the larger global war on terror. History will intimately judge, but yes, early indications are that President Bush’s victory was a worthy step in that overall goal.

Radical Islam is at war with the civilized world because of our tolerant values toward women, different lifestyles and different religions. For Americans, understanding the threat posed by this enemy, finding ways to triumph over them, and mobilizing public opinion to support that effort remain as challenges for the years ahead.

Hoo-ah: Iraqi armed forces and police are rebuilt and kicking ass !

The U.S. is beginning its withdrawal from Iraq. U.S. troops strength is expected to decline from 170,000 to 140,000 by the end of the Summer. The reduction is made possible by the growing number of Iraqi army and police units that can do the job. U.S. military advisors have seen this coming for years, as they tracked dozens of different metrics (statistics on various aspects of Iraqi performance).

The Iraqi armed forces and police had to be completely rebuilt. That's because the Saddam era army and police existed mainly to keep Saddam in power. Most of the leadership in that force was Sunni Arab, and the new Shia and Kurd dominated government did not trust these guys to serve a democratic Iraq.

These metrics are kept secret, as the enemy would love to have some insight into the effectiveness of the security forces. But in the last year, many Iraqi army and police units have revealed their capabilities through their performance. The greater number of capable soldiers and cops was a big reason why the Sunni Arabs turned on the Sunni Arab terror groups (especially al Qaeda) they had long supported. A year ago, it finally became obvious to most Sunni Arabs that the Shia majority had finally done the impossible (according to Sunni Arab beliefs) and created a large number of effective soldiers and police. That force, backed by the Americans, could not be defeated.

The attitude towards the U.S. troops had also changed. For five years, the American troops consistently demonstrated their superior combat ability, while also observing strict ROE (Rules of Engagement) that protected civilians far better than Arab terrorists or soldiers ever did. Many Sunni Arabs had come to see the Americans as protectors (from Shia and Kurd death squads, out for revenge).

When the security forces went after the Shia militias earlier this year, the militiamen were dismayed. It was widely known that the Iraqi army and police were defeating al Qaeda, and a few hold-out Sunni Arab militias.

Now these forces were moving into Shia Mahdi Army strongholds, and the Mahdi gunmen quickly discovered they could not hold out against these Iraqi troops who dressed like American troops, and fought a lot like them as well. Worse, the Shia militias could not exploit the U.S. ROE (and hide out in mosques or use civilians for cover) when confronted by Iraqi forces. The "new" Iraqi troops were also systematic and relentless like the Americans. Mahdi Army strongholds in Baghdad and Basra are being taken apart, week by week. By the end of the Summer, the Mahdi Army will be reduced to weak remnants.

Iraq still has the corruption and tribal loyalties, but at least the police are now able to go after the many criminal gangs that have made life miserable, for more people, than the terrorism of the last five years. That leaves the corrupt politicians to be taken down. That depends on trained and disciplined voters, which are less numerous than the newly reformed security forces.

Hoo-ah: What you are NOT hearing about Iraq from the Media !

Al Qaeda web sites are making a lot of noise about "why we lost in Iraq."

Intelligence agencies are fascinated by the statistics being posted in several of these Arab language sites. Not the kind of stuff you read about in the Western media.

According to al Qaeda, their collapse in Iraq was steep and catastrophic. According to their stats, in late 2006, al Qaeda was responsible for 60 percent of the terrorist attacks, and nearly all the ones that involved killing a lot of civilians. The rest of the violence was carried out by Iraqi Sunni Arab groups, who were trying in vain to scare the Americans out of the country.

Today, al Qaeda has been shattered, with most of its leadership and foot soldiers dead, captured or moved from Iraq. As a result, al Qaeda attacks have declined more than 90 percent. Worse, most of their Iraqi Sunni Arab allies have turned on them, or simply quit. This "betrayal" is handled carefully on the terrorist web sites, for it is seen as both shameful, and perhaps recoverable.

This defeat was not as sudden as it appeared to be, and some Islamic terrorist web sites have been discussing the problem for several years. The primary cause has been Moslems killed as a side effect of attacks on infidel troops, Iraqi security forces and non-Sunnis. Al Qaeda plays down the impact of this, calling the Moslem victims "involuntary martyrs." But that's a minority opinion. Most Moslems, and many other Islamic terrorists, see this as a surefire way to turn the Moslem population against the Islamic radicals. That's what happened earlier in Algeria, Afghanistan, Egypt and many other places. It's really got nothing to do with religion. The phenomenon hits non-Islamic terrorists as well (like the Irish IRA and the Basque ETA).

The senior al Qaeda leadership saw the problem, and tried to convince the "Al Qaeda In Iraq" leadership to cool it. That didn't work. As early as 2004, some Sunni Arabs were turning on al Qaeda because of the "involuntary martyrs" problem. The many dead Shia Arab civilians led to a major terror campaign by the Shia majority. They controlled the government, had the Americans covering their backs, and soon half the Sunni Arab population were refugees.

Meanwhile, the "Al Qaeda In Iraq" leadership was out of control. Most of these guys are really out there, at least in terms of fanaticism and extremism. This led to another fatal error. They declared the establishment of the "Islamic State of Iraq" in late 2006. This was an act of bravado, and touted as the first step in the re-establishment of the caliphate (a global Islamic state, ruled over by God's representative on earth, the caliph.) The caliphate has been a fiction for over a thousand years. Early on, the Islamic world was split by ethnic and national differences, and the first caliphate fell apart after a few centuries. Various rulers have claimed the title over the centuries, but since 1924, when the Turks gave it up (after four centuries), no one of any stature has taken it up. So when al Qaeda "elected" a nobody as the emir of the "Islamic State of Iraq", and talked about this being the foundation of the new caliphate, even many pro-al Qaeda Moslems were aghast. When al Qaeda could not, in 2007, exercise any real control over the parts of Iraq they claimed as part of the new Islamic State, it was the last straw. The key supporters, battered by increasingly effective American and Iraqi attacks, dropped their support for al Qaeda, and the terrorist organization got stomped to bits by the "surge offensive" of last year. The final insult was delivered by the former Iraqi Sunni Arab allies, who quickly switched sides, and sometimes even worked with the Americans (more so than the Shia dominated Iraqi security forces) to hunt down and kill al Qaeda operators.

If you can read Arabic, you can easily find these pro-terrorism sites, and see for yourself how al Qaeda is trying to explain its own destruction to its remaining supporters. While it's common to assume the Information War has been going against the West, this was not the case when you checked with what was going on inside the enemy camp.

Hoo-Ah: In Iraq, Good News Isn't News

JD Johannes interviewed (then) Colonel Gurganus about a reporter who doggedly pursued the preferred media narrative.

HOO-AH: Toby at LSA Anaconda, Iraq with the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault)

Instead of touring the world or recording his next blockbuster album, country singer Toby Keith decided to take a detour from music making and visit with Soldiers from 2nd Battalion, 320th Field Artillery Regiment, 1st Brigade Combat Team, 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault) April 28.

During his trip to Logistical Support Area Anaconda, the award-winning music star spent a few hours with Soldiers, and took part in a re-enlistment ceremony that saw five "Redlegs" re-up with the battalion.

"It's an honor to be here with these fine Americans today; I wouldn't want to be anywhere else," said Keith after the ceremony.

For the Soldiers of the 2-320th FAR, it was an honor to have to get the opportunity to meet the country music singer and for him to participate in the re-enlistment ceremony.

"It was pretty awesome to meet Toby Keith; it made my re-enlistment that more special," said Spc. Justin Troutman, a 22-year old communications specialist with the battalion's Headquarters and Headquarters Battery.

I re-enlisted, because of the Army I have a future, and I'm able to do a lot of things in the military that I wouldn't be able to do in the civilian sector," said Troutman.

According to Keith, getting to meet people like Troutman is why he frequently visits Soldiers in Iraq.

"I'm proud that I took part in this ceremony today, these Soldiers are great Americans," said Keith.

Key leaders within the battalion also felt that Keith's appearance during the ceremony made it much more special for the re-enlisting Soldiers.

"The fact of the matter is, it's special for someone like him come over here and meet with these Soldiers. It's also special to see these 'Balls of the Eagle' Soldiers re-enlist, too," said Maj. Elton Crawford, 2-320th FAR's executive officer.

Crawford went on to add that what every Soldier does on a daily basis is extraordinary, and that it takes a unique and exceptional individual to reaffirm their commitment to this fight.

Troutman added, "This battalion is making a difference here everyday and I believe in our mission. That's the main reason why I enlisted."

Hoo-ah: Mahdi Army Fades Away

After a month of fighting, the Mahdi Army has disappeared from the streets of Basra, the largest city in the south. The army and police are everywhere, and people are providing information on where Mahdi Army personnel are hiding out, and the locations of their weapons caches. Up north, in the Sadr City section of east Baghdad, the Mahdi Army is still fighting hard. But the army and police have the upper hand, and are pushing the Shia militiamen back block by block. Mahdi Army leader Muqtada al Sadr has responded by threatening to order his men to go after American troops if the government does not back off. That's won't work, because the Mahdi Army is not particularly skillful, and not very united either. He recently ordered his troops to stop fighting Iraqi soldiers and police, and concentrate on the Americans. The Iraqi security forces have not reciprocated, and continue coming after the Mahdi Army.

The dozen or so factions of the Mahdi Army vary in their loyalty to Sadr, or to political solutions. Several of the Mahdi Army factions are basically criminal gangs masquerading as religious zealots. Sadr denies he is a pawn of Iran, but as Mahdi Army houses are captured, more Iranian weapons and equipment show up, as well as religious propaganda from Iran. Iraqi president Maliki has told Sadr that the offensive would halt if the Mahdi Army surrenders all its weapons, stops attacking, or trying to infiltrate (by joining) the security forces, and hands over members wanted for crimes. So far, Sadr refuses, probably because many of his followers would turn on him if he tried. But Sadr also realizes that the Iraqi soldiers and police are capable, eventually, of grinding the Mahdi Army into nothingness. Another month or so of fighting and the Mahdi Army will be no more.

Al Sadr, and many of his followers, see all this violence against them as a plot by the Badr Organization to be the last major militia standing. The Badr Organization began as a Shia anti-Saddam exile group, in Iran, a quarter century ago. But the Badr "Brigade" renounced the use of force, formed a political party, and urged its Brigade members to join the army and police. This they did, and many believe these former militiamen are still loyal to their Badr Brigade bosses. But the Badr leaders insist that the Brigade is no more, and the Badr Organization is strictly political. In any event, the Badr people have been more cooperative with the government than the Sadr crew.

Meanwhile, Sunni Arab politicians have returned to the government. These Sunni Arab political parties had walked out of the government nine months ago, angry over the failure to guarantee their rights, safety and share of the oil revenue. Since then, the Sunni Arab terrorism effort has been shattered, with many of the Sunni Arab terror groups switched sides and joined the war against al Qaeda.

Iraq is trying to get its Arab neighbors to forgive some $65 billion in Saddam era debts, without much success. Most of the money was borrowed in the 1980s, when Iraq was at war with Iran. Iraq has already had some $65 billion in debts, mostly to Russia and European nations, forgiven. But the Arabs want their money. The other Arab states in the region see Shia dominated Iraq as a potential ally of Iran, and not "real" Arabs. Conservative Sunni Arab clerics regularly preach that Shia Moslems (like most Iraqis and nearly all Iranians) are heretics and not to be trusted.

The government is openly proclaiming the decline, if not complete destruction, of Sunni Arab terrorist group al Qaeda, at least in Iraq. There are far fewer suicide bomb attacks, and most of them are individuals wearing explosive belts, rather that more elaborate car or truck bombs. Moreover, the targets are all "soft" (easy to reach civilians). Al Qaeda is trying to be selective, going after the leaders of Sunni Arab groups that switched sides in the past few months. It is this kind of brutality that caused Sunni Arab groups to turn on al Qaeda, but that kind of logic is lost on the remaining terrorists.

Up north, Turkish warplanes and artillery continue to hit suspected PKK bases along the Iraqi border. The Kurdish government in the north protests, but quietly. No one in the region wants to get into a squabble with the Turks, especially not the Turkish army.

HOO-AH: Toby perform at Camp Liberty/Victory Base, Iraq

It look like my High School Buddy Toby is in Iraq, From a email a Army Buddy sent me - Country music star Toby Keith visited and performed for troops on Victory Base Complex April 25 and 26 as part of his sixth United Service Organizations tour. Keith is spending his time meeting with and playing for Soldiers, Sailors, Marines and Airmen across Iraq and Afghanistan.


"It's just pretty much get up early, pack a light bag, grab a couple of guitars and hit a couple of forward operating bases," Keith said. "It's always play for a bit and then shake as many hands and take as many pictures as I can before the birds hit."

One thing brought the famous musician here, and that was his vast patriotism, and sincere support for servicemembers and the difficult job they do while deployed, which is evident in his music and performances for military members.

"I just want [the troops] to have a good time, and I want to know when we leave that we brought some sense of home to them, and for a little while maybe it'll lighten their world up and they'll remember what they're fighting for," Keith said. "My father was a Soldier and he set an example, so this is more of a tribute to him than it is to me that I came over here. He taught us when we were kids to respect veterans and the people who serve our country."

Overall, Keith was impressed with how well U.S. forces have adapted over the years since Operation Iraqi Freedom began, and highly confident in their abilities.











"It's a tough war to fight," Keith said. "It's not very conventional, and it's hard to figure out who the enemy is, and these guys get out on the streets and do a hell of job. I'm amazed."

Just as Keith looks up to the troops on the ground, they too look up to him for the inspirational music he writes.

"His songs are an inspiration to all the troops over here," said Capt. Nicole Van Benken, 62nd Medical Brigade. "It makes you motivated to do your job because you feel like you're over here for a purpose. It's great to know that people support you."

While wars may change and the U.S. military may have to readapt numerous times, one thing will always remain, and that's Keith's strong support for all the guys and girls deployed to war zones.

"[Servicemembers] are the never-ending battle for freedom," Keith said.

HOO-ah: Petraeus-Odierno Team Nominated to Lead in CentCom, Iraq

The White House will nominate Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, currently commander of Multinational Force Iraq, to be the next U.S. Central Command commander, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates announced today.

"I recommended him to the president because I am absolutely confident he is the best man for the job," Gates told reporters. He cited Petraeus' in-depth understanding of the situation in Iraq as well as counterinsurgency operations, and the successes seen in Iraq under his leadership.

"The kinds of conflicts we are dealing with not just in Iraq, but in Afghanistan and some of the challenges that we face elsewhere in the region in the CentCom area, are very much characterized by asymetric warfare," he said. "And I don't know anybody in the United States military better qualified to lead that effort."

Gates also announced today that the White House will nominate Army Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, who commanded Multinational Corps Iraq until just two months ago, to succeed Petraeus as Multinational Force Iraq commander.

Odierno served as Petraeus' right-hand man in Iraq, Gates said, and like Petraeus, has the experience required for the job.

"I believe in most parts of the world, especially the Middle East, personal relationships make a difference," Gates said. "And General Odierno is known recently to the Iraqi leadership, he's known to the Iraqi generals, he's known to our own people. He has current experience, so the likelihood of him being able to pick up for this baton-passing to be smooth – the odds of that are better with him than with anybody else I could identify."

Odierno had been nominated as Army vice chief of staff. That nomination will be withdrawn, with Army Lt. Gen. Peter Chiarelli, currently Gates' senior military advisor, to be nominated for a fourth star and to serve in that position, the secretary announced.

Gates said Navy Adm. William J. Fallon's decision in March to step down as CentCom commander came unexpectedly, creating a big hole at "one of our most important combatant commands, one engaged in two wars and on many fronts and perhaps the most sensitive part of the world."

Gates said he turned to the person most up to speed on the region to fill the post quickly without losing momentum.

Petraeus said he is "honored to be nominated for this position and to have an opportunity to continue to serve with America's soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines, Coast Guardsmen and civilians."

Gates said he expects the Petraeus-Odierno team to work together to continue building on progress taking place in Iraq. "I think the course ... that General Petraeus has set has been a successful course, so frankly I think staying that course is not a bad idea," he said. "I would say it's a good idea."

Because Odierno served directly under Petraeus for the past year, his assumption of the Iraq command with Petraeus at CentCom "probably preserves the likelihood of continued momentum and progress," Gates said.

The secretary urged the Senate to move quickly on the nominations, confirming them by Memorial Day, if possible, to pave the way for Petraeus to take the CentCom helm. Gates cited the "high respect" many Senate leaders have for Petraeus and said he expects a fairly smooth confirmation process.

Meanwhile, Petraeus will remain in the Multinational Force Iraq job through late summer or early fall to ensure a smooth hand-off to Odierno. Gates said he expects Petraeus to be on site to evaluate ground conditions following a 45-day pause to begin after the final surge forces withdraw from Iraq.

"I would expect that General Petraeus would carry out not only the evaluation, but that first decision in terms of are we able to draw down another brigade combat team or not, depending on conditions on the ground," Gates said.

At CentCom, Petraeus will broaden his responsibilities to address challenges not only in Iraq, but also in Afghanistan and elsewhere in the region. Gates said he expects Petraeus to follow in Fallon's footsteps building relationships throughout the region.

Gates said he believes Petraeus, Odierno and Fallon all share the same views about the dangers of Iranian interference in Iraq. "What the Iranians are doing is killing American servicemen and women inside Iraq," he said.

The secretary expressed special appreciation to Odierno for his willingness to accept another tour in Iraq so soon after returning home, and to his family for supporting the decision.

"I think his extraordinary sense of duty that has led him to accept this tough assignment," he said. "I am personally very grateful to him and to his family for their remarkable service to this country."

Army Lt. Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, who was Fallon's deputy commander, has served as acting CentCom commander since Fallon handed over the reins March 28.

Politics vs. Petraeus

HOO-AH: David Bellavia: Speak about the war in Iraq and the progress we have made

Thank You to my YouTube Buddy UNCLE JIMBO @ Blackfive.net for pointing this out
David Bellavia gets the chance to speak in front of the Goldwater Institute about the war in Iraq and the progress we have made

Media Doesn’t Get Why Hollywood’s Dismal Iraq War Pics Are Flopping

Media Doesn’t Get Why Hollywood’s Dismal
Iraq War Pics Are Flopping

By Warner Todd Huston

On the 25th, the Washington Post served up a lament for Hollywood’s dismal box office returns for the many Iraq war pictures it has churned out over the last several years, wondering why they have all failed so spectacularly? The whole article amounts to the Post just not understanding why moviegoers have stayed away in droves from these dark and dismal movies. But with the anti-Military, anti-American point of view depicted in every single one of these movies, it is no surprise that Americans have ignored these self-denigrating flicks. After all, with soldiers really taking casualties on the battlefield, who wants to see a film that tells us all it’s OUR fault?

Still, the Washington Post is mystified.

After five years of conflict in Iraq, Hollywood seems to have learned a sobering lesson: The only things less popular than the war itself are dramatic films and television shows about the conflict… A spate of Iraq-themed movies and TV shows haven’t just failed at the box office. They’ve usually failed spectacularly, despite big stars, big budgets and serious intentions.

The Post then goes on to wonder if audiences are “turned off by the war, or are they simply voting against the way filmmakers have depicted it?” As the post asks that question, you’d think they are on the verge of understanding. But, this question is dropped right away as the story details one flop after another. Ridiculously, the Post seems puzzled by the fact that audiences have not just mindlessly followed into the theater the “big stars, big budgets and serious intentions” of these failed flicks and no further attempt is made in this story to explore the public’s disinterest.

The Post quotes TV legend Steven Bochco who imagines that his TV series “Over There,” which failed after only 13 episodes, was not well received because Americans felt “a certain sense of powerlessness” about the war. The Post also quotes film historian Jonathan Kuntz of UCLA that the whole thing is just a “bummer.”

For now, Kuntz agrees with Bochco: “We’re bombarded by information about [Iraq] 24 hours a day,” he says. “We already know plenty about it. We don’t need to learn more about it from the movies. Right now, it’s something people want to forget and escape from. I speak for the American public when I say, ‘What a bummer.’

The American people are saying “what a bummer,” but you don’t speak for them, Mr. Kuntz. The “bummer” is coming from how the films depict every aspect of our current action as wrong, bad, even evil. Too bad the Washington Post dropped their initial inquiry because they might have had something interesting to explore with the question of how these movies portray the war and those participating in it.

Each and every film discussed by the Post portrays the war as wrong, the soldiers as dolts, mislead, murderers, drug addicts or victims of one sort or another. These films also constantly show a U.S. government uncaring and uninterested in the welfare of soldiers, their families or the people living in war torn areas.

There is nothing good depicted in any of these movies and that is why Americans don’t want to pay their hard earned money to go see them. The “bummer” is that each and every one of these movies are aimed at bringing down America’s spirits as far as possible in order to spur the public to acquiesce to Hollywood’s political agenda of ending the war and tearing down the U.S. military.

So, it is a “bummer,” Mr. Kuntz. It is a “bummer” that you and your friends in Hollywood want to make films that attempt to tear this country down and dispirit its people.

Fortunately, most Americans don’t seem to be dumb enough to waste their money on the garbage Hollywood is foisting upon them. But, too bad that the Washington Post eschewed the more interesting and probably more correct angle to this story just to give us the boring lament that America is merely “war weary” as opposed to detailing how Hollywood is failing because of its political agenda.

In the end, there is one thing that isn’t a “bummer.” It is good that Hollywood is losing their financial rear ends with failure after failure letting them know that America isn’t interested in their junk.

About the author
Warner Todd Huston is a Staff Writer for the New Media Alliance, Inc. (www.thenma.org).

HOO-ah: What you will NOT see about Iraq today, by 'old media'

Hoo-ah: 45th Infantry BCT doing a great job. Running a City in Southern Iraq

Sewers, water, electricity, trash and fuel are services vital to any city in the United States, and urban populations simply cannot function effectively without proper city management oversight.

Approximately 30 members of Oklahoma's 1st Battalion, 160th Field Artillery, 45th Infantry Brigade Combat Team face these same challenges in the middle of a desert in southern Iraq. The Guard members manage a facility with a population of more than 26,000 soldiers, sailors, airmen, contractors, Department of Defense civilians and detainees at Camp Bucca, Iraq. The camp sits starkly in the middle of the desert -- all commodities and goods must be trucked into the desolate base camp.

"We are running a city," said 160th Rear Area Operations Center commander, Lt. Col. David Jordan, of Midwest City.

Many of Oklahoma's 45th soldiers work in the Theatre Interment Facility, which holds about 20,000 detainees. The detainees are being detained as an imperative threat to the country's security in accordance with a United Nations Security Council resolution.

In addition to managing services and life support for the camp, the soldiers will also work to improve living conditions at the facility. "We're going to increase our gym space to 5,700 square feet," said Jordan. Other projects include a multi-sport field, boxing ring, new office space, ice factory, wastewater treatment plant, improvements to the chapel and a new housing area called Knoxville.

Among the numerous projects to be supervised and managed by the RAOC soldiers are 1,000 new beds for service members -- many soldiers currently live in tents. "The goal is to provide more containerized housing units on our base," said Jordan.

"We have several couples waiting on the new housing in Knoxville," said Sgt. 1st Class Mitchell Brickey, of Mustang, who supervises the housing of all troops in and out of the base camp. The camp's married couples serve together, but can't live together due to a lack of married housing.

The Oklahomans work hand in hand with Iraqi contractors to oversee the construction of all new projects. "We still function on time, on target in the field artillery; any projects we've got are focused on time and on target. We will continue to get things done on time - deliver fire at the right time and right place," said executive officer Maj. Woody Elmore, of Chandler.

The camp's concrete brick making facility is run by Iraqi contractors, and the bricks are used throughout the various construction projects on the camp. "The local Iraqi men are good to work with, and we have great cooperation with them. They take great pride in their work; it's their reputation," said Sgt. 1st Class Rafe Cummings, of Chandler.

"It's very beautiful - a system for everything, we work through the process and get what we need to do the project with the correct assets," said Ali Jihad, an Iraqi project manager. The Iraqi company lacked modernization during Saddam's reign. "Now we are bringing construction up to new standards," he added.

Staff Sgt. Russell Hale, of Chandler (left), Ali Jihad, an Iraqi construction supervisor, and Sgt. 1st Class Rafe Cummings, of Mustang (right), in front of a construction site at Camp Bucca, Iraq. The Oklahoma National Guard soldiers will participate in several construction projects, working closely with local Iraqi contractors. (U.S. Army photo by Lt. Col. Rhonda McGuire, 45th IBCT)