U.S. troops target bomb networks By KIM GAMEL, Associated Press Writer
2 hours, 50 minutes ago
JISR DIYALA, Iraq - Newly arrived U.S. troops southeast of Baghdad are destroying boats on the Tigris River and targeting networks believed to be bringing powerful roadside bombs from Iran as the military cracks down on extremists from all directions, military officials said.
But a top U.S. commander warned on Monday that three or four times more Iraqi security forces are needed to sustain the progress in clearing the area and stanching the flow of arms and makeshift bombs into the capital.
Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch, whose command covers the southern rim of Baghdad and mostly Shiite areas to the south, said the reinforcements who arrived as part of a troop buildup have had success in rooting out militants from their sanctuaries and preventing them from fleeing the area in an operation called Marne Torch — one of a quartet of offensives in the capital and surrounding areas.
"All along the Tigris River valley, people knew this is where the Sunni extremists were storing munitions, training for operations, building IEDs to take them into Baghdad," he said, referring to improvised explosive devices, the term the military uses for roadside bombs.
"They just didn't have the reach to get down there. Now with the surge brigades they've got the reach. But the issue is we can't stay here forever and there's gotta be a persistent presence and that's gotta be Iraqi security forces. And that's always our biggest concern," he said while visiting troops from the 3rd Infantry Division's 3rd Brigade Combat Team at a U.S. patrol base on the southeastern edge of Baghdad.
The dusty base is nestled between high sand berms on what was the Tuwaitha nuclear complex, which was bombed during the U.S.-led invasion and subsequently looted, near the mainly Shiite village of Jasr Diyala, 12 miles southeast of Baghdad.
Lynch said his units had been successful in preventing the militants from fleeing the area ahead of the offensive and overall detained 150 people, including at least 30 high-value targets — most from the rural Arab Jubour area just south of the capital.
"In the past they had exit routes so they saw the operation coming," he said. "What we did is establish blocking positions all around Arab Jubour so the enemy couldn't leave but they had to stay and fight and as a result to either die or be captured."
Lynch's comments were the latest to signal a growing impatience among U.S. commanders with Iraqi security forces amid calls in the U.S. for the Bush administration to start bringing troops home. The Americans have expressed confidence in a new strategy aimed at flooding volatile areas with U.S. troops to quell the violence, but also concern that the progress could be reversed once U.S. troops leave.
Underscoring the dangers, Lynch said two helicopters adjacent to his came under "significant small-arms" fire while flying low over the desert landscape to the patrol base, causing no injuries but leaving one aircraft severely damaged.
The brigade commander, Col. Wayne W. Grigsby, Jr., said 21 boats had been destroyed on the river and in the reeds on the banks since the operation began in force on June 15, most with secondary blasts indicating many were filled with explosive material.
He also said the military had gained intelligence from a local sheik about networks bringing armor-penetrating explosively formed projectiles, known as EFPs, on a major road that travels from the border with Iran through Shiite areas to Baghdad. The U.S. has accused Iran of supplying mainly Shiite militias with EFPs, but Tehran has denied the allegations.
Lynch said the area had two battalions from the 8th Iraqi army division but added "there needs to be three or four times more Iraqi security forces than are currently present to provide for sustained security. That's the critical piece in all of this."
Lynch said the Iraqi soldiers with whom he had worked were professional, although many still lacked training and equipment more than four years after the war started in March 2003. He said the main problem was with Iraqi police, a predominantly Shiite force that has been accused of being infiltrated by militias.
"In my battlespace my concern is police, local police. Either they're nonexistent or the ones that are there tend to be corrupt," he said.
"Then there are large portions of the battlespace where there are no Iraqi security forces at all. And the Iraqi security forces have to be grown to a level where they can occupy these places. This is an enemy sanctuary because nobody's been out there. There are no Iraqi security forces so the enemy fills the void."
He said the extra U.S. troops had provided the numbers to curb the militant activity, which included storing munitions, training and building roadside bombs.
"But if someone doesn't secure that presence, I mean have sustained security then it's not going to work. that's the concern," he said.
The Iraqi military isn't ready to shoulder the burden by themselves, and to be honest, I don't think they ever will be as long as this current government remains in "control". Too many sectarian divisions and corruption. The Iraqi people have very little(if any) faith in their own elected government. That is why democracy takes practice.
"Imagination was given to man to compensate him for what he is not, and a sense of humor was provided to console him for what he is."
It strikes me as very wrong when US politicians declare that the horrors in Iraq is the fault of the Iraqi government not standing up rather than any action on the part of the US. The US invaded and destroyed Iraq, then installed this government. And now it seeks to blame these people who were just given control of this chaotic place, and absolve the US of any responsiblity?
It strikes me as very wrong when US politicians declare that the horrors in Iraq is the fault of the Iraqi government not standing up rather than any action on the part of the US. The US invaded and destroyed Iraq, then installed this government. And now it seeks to blame these people who were just given control of this chaotic place, and absolve the US of any responsiblity?
Talk about blaming the victim!
was this government not elected by over 90% of the people of Iraq? Did this government since not make promise after promise that it would get its police and military force up to where it could maintain certain areas? They are making promises and not following through and it is at the cost of US soldiers lives. The US has the responsibility and takes responsibility for the invasion which is why we are still in that garbage country, to continue to help provide security. We are following through on our end as far as what that government is requesting, but they are not following through on theirs, especially when they take 2 month recesses in the middle of all this.
"War does not determine who is right - only who is left."
- Bertrand Russell
"He who fears being conquered is sure of defeat." - Napoleon Bonaparte
"There is nothing so likely to produce peace as to be well prepared to meet the
enemy." - George Washington
It strikes me as very wrong when US politicians declare that the horrors in Iraq is the fault of the Iraqi government not standing up rather than any action on the part of the US. The US invaded and destroyed Iraq, then installed this government. And now it seeks to blame these people who were just given control of this chaotic place, and absolve the US of any responsiblity?
Talk about blaming the victim!
Bravo, man. I completely agree with you.
Also, here's a very interesting story. I wonder where the PentaCON, has diverted the $19 Billion, to?
Did you even read the article? LOL The article states
[PIE]The Pentagon "cannot report in detail how many of the 346,500 Iraqi military and police personnel that the coalition trained are operational today," according to the 250-page report. Details of the document were provided to The Washington Post by congressional staff members.
"We have no idea what our $19 billion has gotten us," said Rep. Martin T. Meehan (D-Mass.), chairman of the Armed Services subcommittee on oversight and investigations, noting that the United States investment represents $55,000 per Iraqi recruit.
"The DOD can't tell us how well the Iraqis perform their missions or even plan them," he said in an interview. "The police are in particularly bad shape, although they are critical to counterinsurgency."
The lack of transparency is especially worrisome, the report said, because of the possibility that Iraqi forces trained and equipped by the United States have joined the insurgency or sectarian militias.
"This report details the complete lack of understanding of who we have trained and what happens to them after we train them," Meehan said. "Many of the forces we have trained are unaccounted for, and others are on the rolls but haven't been vetted," he said, adding that forces "could actually be fighting against us."
The subcommittee's report found "strong evidence" that some Iraqi forces trained by the U.S.-led military coalition are involved in sectarian violence and other illegal activities. In addition, the Pentagon "cannot account for whether coalition-issued weapons have been stolen or turned against U.S. forces," the report said.
The $19 billion in appropriations -- about $5 billion each fiscal year since 2004 -- has primarily gone toward recruiting, training and equipping Iraqi security forces but also includes funding for building training centers, managing logistics and creating an Iraqi leadership structure in the ministries of defense and the interior.
I think that statement alone shows where the money has been appropriated dont you?
[/PIE]
I also like how you twisted the headline to make it appear as though the money has been embezzled, when the articles actual headline is
"House Report Faults Pentagon Accounting of Iraqi Forces"
Maybe you should work for informationclearinghouse or prisonplanet, you seem to be able to twist credible news to suit your own agenda pretty well.
For anyone who doesnt care to read the article it basically is saying that the money that we are spending on the Iraqi police and military may well be going to fund insurgent groups that are fighting against us. Which goes back to my original post, of why the Iraqi government is failing in its task to get their own police and military in a position to take care of their own country.
Last edited by MTAFFI; 06-28-2007 at 04:14 PM.
"War does not determine who is right - only who is left."
- Bertrand Russell
"He who fears being conquered is sure of defeat." - Napoleon Bonaparte
"There is nothing so likely to produce peace as to be well prepared to meet the
enemy." - George Washington
The US government and so called military has lost what little credibility they had. Those murderous tyrants and their army of barbaric invaders has been exposed. Nothing coming from them holds any value, these scum bags should not be there in the first place, now they gonna dictate to us how Iraqis should run their country
Mtaffi how dare you propagate this nonesense, these barbarians the sooner they leave the better for our Iraqi brothers and sisters. May Allah destroy them and return them in body bags. Ameen. Enough is enough.
"By time, Indeed, mankind is in loss, Except for those who have believed and done righteous deeds and advised each other to truth and advised each other to patience."Quran 103
It strikes me as very wrong when US politicians declare that the horrors in Iraq is the fault of the Iraqi government not standing up rather than any action on the part of the US. The US invaded and destroyed Iraq, then installed this government. And now it seeks to blame these people who were just given control of this chaotic place, and absolve the US of any responsiblity?
Talk about blaming the victim!
i couldn't agree with you more.
each man thinks of his own fleas as gazelles
question authority
It's not the Iraqi Governments fault, they have the public support. It's the "Insurgants".
Al Quada has succeeded in setting sunni against shia, thats not the Iraqi Govts fault or indeed the coalition's. People have to take responsibility for their actions and see each other as humans first rather than tribe or sect.
AlQuada has found fertile ground amongst Sunnis to spread their hate, the Shia are lashing back.
Noblemuslim would support the death squads having free reign just because his racism cant tolerate white skin in Iraq, even if these hated, despised Kuffar are rebuilding the place after saddams demolition and trying to protect the innocents. He will, after the coalition do pull out, blame them for leaving.
Occupation: The term of control of a territory by foreign military forces: Iraq 2003-2005 Liberation:when something or someone is freed: Operation Telic 2003
Or did they just try to do good and failed because of Arab & Persian influences and a mighty big heapin' helpin' of tribal hate?
Occupation: The term of control of a territory by foreign military forces: Iraq 2003-2005 Liberation:when something or someone is freed: Operation Telic 2003
do you believe the u.s. attacked iraq for the sake of the oppressed iraqi people - to bring them democracy?
there were no insurgents and there was no shiah-sunni fighting before the invasion as far as i know.
each man thinks of his own fleas as gazelles
question authority
do you believe the u.s. attacked iraq for the sake of the oppressed iraqi people - to bring them democracy?
there were no insurgents and there was no shiah-sunni fighting before the invasion as far as i know.
Nope...Self interest. But the fact that Saddam wasnt going to win any "Most Pacifistic Leader" awards leant a great moral weight to it.
If you say that it's the US's fault that sunni's and shias are ripping each other to bits, then IMO, your way off mark.
Occupation: The term of control of a territory by foreign military forces: Iraq 2003-2005 Liberation:when something or someone is freed: Operation Telic 2003
i didn't say that - i said the u.s. has created the conditions that made anarchy possible. this does not mean that the sunnis and shiahs killing each other are innocent of the blood they spill. but this was not happening before the u.s. invaded their country and i find that hard to overlook.
each man thinks of his own fleas as gazelles
question authority
If the Iraqi people would have voted for Qu'ran and Sunnah and NOT Democracy, and been odedient to Allah, then this mess wouldn't be what it is. But people always seem to overlook the obvious.
this does not make the people doing these horrendous things blameless. but the fact remains, this is not what was going on in iraq before the u.s. invasion so i think it is a bit absurd to only carry on about how horrible these people are and leave the americans completely out of the equation.
each man thinks of his own fleas as gazelles
question authority
i didn't say that - i said the u.s. has created the conditions that made anarchy possible. this does not mean that the sunnis and shiahs killing each other are innocent of the blood they spill. but this was not happening before the u.s. invaded their country and i find that hard to overlook.
This is true...but you are obliged to ask yourself why it wasn't happening. I will volunteer an answer...it is because a secular, murdering, souless, sociopathic dictator brutally suppressed any Shia dissent. Other than that everything was fine....well except for the Kurds too..I forgot about them...oh yeah, Uday..I forgot about him too....
If the Iraqi people would have voted for Qu'ran and Sunnah and NOT Democracy, and been odedient to Allah, then this mess wouldn't be what it is. But people always seem to overlook the obvious.
Guy..the Iraqis didn't vote for democracy. They voted in a democratic fashion. Their elected representatives could pass laws making Shaira the law of the land but that doesn't solve the problem that the Al Quaeda boys regard the Shia with derision.
This is true...but you are obliged to ask yourself why it wasn't happening. I will volunteer an answer...it is because a secular, murdering, souless, sociopathic dictator brutally suppressed any Shia dissent. Other than that everything was fine....well except for the Kurds too..I forgot about them...oh yeah, Uday..I forgot about him too....
dictators are very good at holding countries together. tito in yugoslavia, for example.
i have yet to hear anyone say anything good about saddam hussein, but the fact is the u.s. has no problem with dictators.
to be opposed at what the u.s. is doing and its responsibility for what is happening is not the same as condoning the violence that is happening there, or relieving the perpetrators of any responsibility for their actions or thinking that saddam hussein was lovely, either for that matter.
each man thinks of his own fleas as gazelles
question authority
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks