BLACKFIVE: Good Stuff

« Badass Medic Paratrooper Fights and Saves at "The Ranch House" | Main | The Castle Solves a Mystery »

Good Stuff

Posted By Uncle Jimbo

Bill Ardolino points out some good coming around.

You might remember Travis Manion, a fallen Marine I met on my first embed who I wrote about here:

http://www.indcjournal.com/archives/003114.php

Turns out, his parents have raised over $200k for his memorial fund, and are allocating money to help the families of fallen servicemembers:

http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/111-04132008-1518299.html

Also, Manion's dad (a Marine reserve Col.) is running for congress in his district in PA. FYI, thought you might find the story interesting.

The son and the family are all a class act.
Regards,

Bill

Thanks for reminding us Bill. And 1LT Fishman provides the full good news from Iraq.

1) Iraqi political effort targets Muqtada al-Sadr BAGHDAD (AP) — Iraq's major Shiite, Sunni and Kurdish parties have closed ranks to pressure anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr into disbanding his Mahdi Army militia or be barred from political life, lawmakers and officials involved in the effort said Sunday. They said a first step would be to add language to a draft election bill banning parties that operate militias from fielding candidates in provincial balloting this fall. "We want the Sadrists to disband the Mahdi Army. Just freezing it is no longer acceptable," said Sadiq al-Rikabi, a senior adviser to Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. "The new election law will prevent any party that has weapons or runs a militia from contesting elections." Such a bold move risks a violent backlash by the Mahdi militia. If it succeeds, however, it would mark a major realignment of Iraq's political landscape.

U.S. officials have been pressing Iraq's government for years to disband the militias, including the Mahdi Army. All major political parties are believed to maintain links to armed groups, and previous efforts to disband them have failed. But the militia issue has taken on new urgency after the flare-up of fighting which began after al-Maliki launched a major operation March 25 against Shiite extremists in Basra. The fighting quickly spread from the southern port city to Baghdad and elsewhere. Fighting eased after al-Sadr ordered his fighters off the streets March 30 under a deal brokered in Iran. But the truce did not address the long-term threat posed by militias.
Broad outlines of the strategy to combat the militias were made public late Saturday in a statement by the Political Council for National Security, a top leadership body including the national president, prime minister and leaders of major parties in parliament.
The statement called on parties to disband their militias or face a political ban. Although the statement did not mention the Sadrists, the intent was clear. President Jalal Talabani said Sunday that the statement was adopted after "heated, cordial, frank and transparent discussion" and that the two Sadrist lawmakers who attended Saturday's meeting objected to the call for militias to disband. One of the Sadrists who attended, lawmaker Hassan al-Rubaie, confirmed Talabani's account and said "our political isolation was very clear and real during the meeting."
"We, the Sadrists, are in a predicament," he said Sunday. "Even the blocs that had in the past supported us are now against us and we cannot stop them from taking action against us in parliament." Al-Sadr controls 30 of the 275 parliament seats, a substantial figure but not enough to block legislation. Al-Rubaie said the threat was so serious that a delegation might have to discuss the issue with al-Sadr in person. The young cleric is believed to be in the Iranian holy city of Qom. In a rare public signal of dissent in Sadrist ranks, al-Rubaie complained that "those close" to al-Sadr "are radicals and that poses problems." "We must go and explain to him in person that there's a problem," he said. Senior Kurdish lawmaker Mahmoud Othman said the Sadrists must either disband the militia "or face the Americans." The anti-American cleric has called on supporters to stage a "million-strong" protest in Baghdad on Wednesday to mark the 5th anniversary of the city's capture by U.S. troops. "We will watch it carefully," said Reda Jawad Taqi, a senior member of the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council, al-Sadr's leading Shiite rival.
Al-Sadr led two uprisings against the U.S.-led coalition in 2004 — a move that cost his Mahdi Army thousands of fighters. The fighting was ended through mediation by Shiite clerics, who stopped the fighting but allowed al-Sadr to remain in politics. The hardline stand against al-Sadr represents a major shift in Shiite politics. Since 2005, Shiite leaders had attempted to bring the Sadrists into the political mainstream, offering them Cabinet posts and deferring to them on some major security issues. Last year, ministers loyal to al-Sadr quit al-Maliki's government and the 30 Sadrist lawmakers pulled out of the Shiite faction in parliament. Last August, al-Sadr declared a truce — a move which helped bring down violence in Baghdad and elsewhere. But attacks by Shiite extremists continued, allegedly carried out by pro-Iranian splinter groups. The recent fighting, however, was believed to include Mahdi Army units loyal to al-Sadr. The Sadrists believed the Basra crackdown was aimed at weakening their movement before the fall elections. They insisted al-Maliki was encouraged to move against them by their chief Shiite rivals — the Supreme Council — whose followers have penetrated the ranks of Iraq's security services.

2) Let's 'Surge' Some More http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120787343563306609.html?mod=djemEditorialPage
By MICHAEL YON April 11, 2008; Page A17 It is said that generals always fight the last war. But when David Petraeus came to town it was senators – on both sides of the aisle – who battled over the Iraq war of 2004-2006. That war has little in common with the war we are fighting today. I may well have spent more time embedded with combat units in Iraq than any other journalist alive. I have seen this war – and our part in it – at its brutal worst. And I say the transformation over the last 14 months is little short of miraculous. The change goes far beyond the statistical decline in casualties or incidents of violence. A young Iraqi translator, wounded in battle and fearing death, asked an American commander to bury his heart in America. Iraqi special forces units took to the streets to track down terrorists who killed American soldiers. The U.S. military is the most respected institution in Iraq, and many Iraqi boys dream of becoming American soldiers. Yes, young Iraqi boys know about "GoArmy.com." As the outrages of Abu Ghraib faded in memory – and paled in comparison to al Qaeda's brutalities – and our soldiers under the Petraeus strategy got off their big bases and out of their tanks and deeper into the neighborhoods, American values began to win the war. Iraqis came to respect American soldiers as warriors who would protect them from terror gangs. But Iraqis also discovered that these great warriors are even happier helping rebuild a clinic, school or a neighborhood. They learned that the American soldier is not only the most dangerous enemy in the world, but one of the best friends a neighborhood can have. Some people charge that we have merely "rented" the Sunni tribesmen, the former insurgents who now fight by our side. This implies that because we pay these people, their loyalty must be for sale to the highest bidder. But as Gen. Petraeus demonstrated in Nineveh province in 2003 to 2004, many of the Iraqis who filled the ranks of the Sunni insurgency from 2003 into 2007 could have been working with us all along, had we treated them intelligently and respectfully. In Nineveh in 2003, under then Maj. Gen. Petraeus's leadership, these men – many of them veterans of the Iraqi army – played a crucial role in restoring civil order. Yet due to excessive de-Baathification and the administration's attempt to marginalize powerful tribal sheiks in Anbar and other provinces – including men even Saddam dared not ignore – we transformed potential partners into dreaded enemies in less than a year. Then al Qaeda in Iraq, which helped fund and tried to control the Sunni insurgency for its own ends, raped too many women and boys, cut off too many heads, and brought drugs into too many neighborhoods. By outraging the tribes, it gave birth to the Sunni "awakening." We – and Iraq – got a second chance. Powerful tribes in Anbar province cooperate with us now because they came to see al Qaeda for what it is – and to see Americans for what we truly are. Soldiers everywhere are paid, and good generals know it is dangerous to mess with a soldier's money. The shoeless heroes who froze at Valley Forge were paid, and when their pay did not come they threatened to leave – and some did. Soldiers have families and will not fight for a nation that allows their families to starve. But to say that the tribes who fight with us are "rented" is perhaps as vile a slander as to say that George Washington's men would have left him if the British offered a better deal. Equally misguided were some senators' attempts to use Gen. Petraeus's statement, that there could be no purely military solution in Iraq, to dismiss our soldiers' achievements as "merely" military. In a successful counterinsurgency it is impossible to separate military and political success. The Sunni "awakening" was not primarily a military event any more than it was "bribery." It was a political event with enormous military benefits. The huge drop in roadside bombings is also a political success – because the bombings were political events. It is not possible to bury a tank-busting 1,500-pound bomb in a neighborhood street without the neighbors noticing. Since the military cannot watch every road during every hour of the day (that would be a purely military solution), whether the bomb kills soldiers depends on whether the neighbors warn the soldiers or cover for the terrorists. Once they mostly stood silent; today they tend to pick up their cell phones and call the Americans. Even in big "kinetic" military operations like the taking of Baqubah in June 2007, politics was crucial. Casualties were a fraction of what we expected because, block-by-block, the citizens told our guys where to find the bad guys. I was there; I saw it. The Iraqi central government is unsatisfactory at best. But the grass-roots political progress of the past year has been extraordinary – and is directly measurable in the drop in casualties. This leads us to the most out-of-date aspect of the Senate debate: the argument about the pace of troop withdrawals. Precisely because we have made so much political progress in the past year, rather than talking about force reduction, Congress should be figuring ways and means to increase troop levels. For all our successes, we still do not have enough troops. This makes the fight longer and more lethal for the troops who are fighting. To give one example, I just returned this week from Nineveh province, where I have spent probably eight months between 2005 to 2008, and it is clear that we remain stretched very thin from the Syrian border and through Mosul. Vast swaths of Nineveh are patrolled mostly by occasional overflights. We know now that we can pull off a successful counterinsurgency in Iraq. We know that we are working with an increasingly willing citizenry. But counterinsurgency, like community policing, requires lots of boots on the ground. You can't do it from inside a jet or a tank. Over the past 15 months, we have proved that we can win this war. We stand now at the moment of truth. Victory – and a democracy in the Arab world – is within our grasp. But it could yet slip away if our leaders remain transfixed by the war we almost lost, rather than focusing on the war we are winning today.

3) Al-Qaeda in Iraq training camp destroyed http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,23513728-954,00.html
Agence France-Presse From correspondents in Baghdad April 09, 2008 US special forces have destroyed an al-Qaeda in Iraq training camp and a massive cache of weapons, including surface-to-air missiles, the American military said today. The camp was discovered during an operation between April 2 and 5 in the Jazeera desert in central Iraq, a military statement said. The camp was set up at an old radar station which was being used "as an insurgent training camp and weapons cache site,'' the statement said. The cache included more than 20,000 rounds of ammunition, surface-to-air missiles, machine guns, rockets, suicide-vest charges, hand grenades and other explosive materials. The camp and the weapons cache was later destroyed by air strikes, the military statement added.

4) Al-Qaeda’s deputy leader captured in Anbar http://www.aswataliraq.info/look/english/article.tpl?IdLanguage=1&IdPublication=4&NrArticle=75937&NrIssue=2&NrSection=1 Baghdad - Voices of Iraq Baghdad, Apr 10, (VOI) - Iraqi security forces arrested Nezal Sabar surnamed Abu al-Jerah, assistant of al-Qaeda in Iraq’s leader, the group's emir of the armed group in Anbar, the Interior Ministry said on Thursday. “Iraqi security forces arrested Abu al-Jerah on April 8 in Eishreen street in Ramadi while roaming the city’s streets. He has been a fugitive for two years,” the Ministry said in a statement received by Aswat al-Iraq Voices of Iraq – (VOI). Abu Ayoub al-Masri is the leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq. He succeeded Abu Musaab al-Zarqawi, who was killed in a U.S. raid in 2006.
5) Report: Security in Iraq Is Improving http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/feedarticle/7436019 Friday April 4 2008 By PAMELA HESS Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) - A new classified intelligence assessment on Iraq says there has been significant progress in security since the last assessment was delivered in August, a senior military official said. In most ways the new National Intelligence Estimate hews closely to the one delivered nine months ago. That document spoke of security gains since the increase in troop levels began in January 2007, the continued high rate of violence and uneven progress on the part of Iraqi security forces. ``It does not differ significantly from August's NIE,'' a congressional official said in describing the document. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because the report is classified. They noted that many of the conclusions of the report are already reflected in public statements and press reports. Since the August report, Sunni tribes have solidified their resistance to al-Qaida-associated insurgents in Anbar and Diyala provinces, which has weakened the movement. The National Intelligence Estimate is part of a series of periodic reports that offer the best consensus judgment of top analysts at all 16 U.S. spy agencies on major foreign policy, security and global economic issues. Congress received the new report this week in advance of congressional hearings April 8-9 at which war commander Gen. David Petraeus and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker are scheduled to testify. Similarly, the August report was delivered shortly before Petraeus' highly anticipated September testimony. The report does not take into account the recent battle in Basra, the unruly Shiite port city in the south, according to another congressional official. The central government's recent attempt at cracking down on lawless militias there, especially those that profess loyalty to firebrand cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, could be a turning point for Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's government in Baghdad. Maliki, also a Shiitra last week to confront the militias and assert Baghdad's authority over the area. In a departure from the January and August 2007 intelligence estimates, the intelligence agencies have declined to release an unclassified summary of its key points. National Intelligence Director Michael McConnell decided last fall that NIEs should not as a rule include an unclassified section because he believes analysts are less likely to be forthright in their writing if they believe the language will become public.
6) Airstrikes kill Mahdi Army Fighters in Sadr City http://patdollard.com/2008/04/airstrike-continues-us-killing-spree-in-sadr-city/ BAGHDAD (Agencie France Presse) — A US air strike in Baghdad’s Shiite bastion of Sadr City on Thursday killed at least four people as U.S. targeting and killing of Mahdi Army militants and their leaders continued for a fifth straight day in the radical cleric Moqtada Al Sadr’s center of power. Six people were wounded in the air strike just after midnight near Al-Albaith mosque in the centre of Sadr City, stronghold of the Shiite radical clericwhose Mahdi Army militiamen are fighting with Iraqi and US forces. Residents of the sprawling eastern Baghdad district which has been under vehicle curfew since March 28 reported sporadic firefights punctuated by mortar fire through the night and into the morning. Around 70 militants have been killed and scores wounded since the U.S. began an offensive in Sadr City on Sunday, more than 20 on Wednesday alone, according to security and medical officials. The US military says it is chasing “criminals” firing rockets into Baghdad and the heavily-fortified Green Zone where the Iraqi government and US embassy are based. It said on Thursday it had killed 13 “criminals” in operations the previous 24 hours in Sadr City and northwest Shuala neighbourhood, another Mahdi Army stronghold. In one incident, a combined US-Iraqi checkpoint was attacked from a nearby rooftop by small arms fire and troops retaliated, killing one of the attackers, a military statement said. Another four fighters were killed when troops retaliated after they were attacked with rocket-propelled grenades at a checkpoint, while an airstrike on Wednesday night killed four gunmen after they attacked Iraqi troops. Another four militiamen were killed in firefights, the US military statement said.
7) Iraqi Shia leader wants to disband Mahdi army http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/04/08/wiraq108.xml
By Damien McElroy UK Telegraph Gunmen from the increasingly powerful militia have been fighting US and government forces in Basra and Baghdad for two weeks after being targeted in an operation launched by Nouri al-Maliki, Iraq's prime minister. Yesterday's announcement came just hours after Mr Maliki said that if the militia was not disbanded its political wing would be banned from provincial elections. "They no longer have a right to participate in the political process or take part in the upcoming elections unless they end the Mahdi army," said Mr Maliki.
"We have opened the door for confrontation, a real confrontation with these gangs, and we will not stop until we are in full control of these areas." Sadr replied that he would seek guidance on the issue from senior religious authorities including Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, the moderate Shia leader. By putting the fate of his powerful militia in the hands of the religious hierarchy, the radical cleric appears to be gambling that he will establish his credentials as a figure capable of unifying Iraq's majority Shia community under his leadership. Ayatollah Sistani is revered as a "source of emulation" and his pronouncements are closely followed by believers. However, Sadr also announced that ayatollahs in the Iranian city of Qom would have a say on the future of the Mahdi army. This is likely to mean that known hard-liners, including Grand Ayatollah Kazim al-Haeri, Sadr's spiritual mentor, will have an input. The Mahdi army controls large slices of Iraq's big cities, and widespread violence has engulfed both Baghdad and Basra in recent weeks.
This increase in fighting has cast a shadow over today's progress report at the US Congress by America's top officials in Iraq. Both General David Petraeus and Ryan Crocker, the ambassador, face questioning from the three candidates for the White House. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, the Democratic hopefuls, have both promised a hostile cross-examination. However, John McCain, their Republican rival, said yesterday: "There is no doubt about the basic reality in Iraq: we are no longer staring into the abyss of defeat, and we can now look ahead to the genuine prospect of success." Sadr's hostility to the US will be on display tomorrow when his supporters attempt to mount a "million-strong" march in Baghdad to mark the fifth anniversary of the city's fall.

8) Iraqi troops find largest EFP cache http://www.edmontonsun.com/News/World/2008/04/06/pf-5212026.html
By The Associated Press Edmonton Sun Newspaper
BAGHDAD — The U.S. military says the largest cache of armour-piercing roadside bombs known as explosively formed penetrators has been found south of Baghdad. A statement says Iraqi troops acting on a tip Wednesday found more than 1,000 bomb components in a six-ton truck in a garage in the town of Qassim. American commanders allege that the EFPs come from Iran. Tehran denies the allegations. The military says the cache included more than 1,360 kilograms of explosives, multiple 107 mm rockets and stands along with other munitions. Sunday’s statement says the cache has been moved to the nearby city of Hillah, which is about 95 kilometres south of Baghdad. The powerful bombs have killed hundreds of American forces.
9) Maliki demands Al Sadr disband his Militia entirely http://patdollard.com/2008/04/maliki-demands-al-sadr-disband-mahdi-army-entirely/ BAGHDAD (Associated Press) - The prime minister issued his strongest warning yet to radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr to disband his Mahdi Army militia or face political isolation. The Sadrists said Monday a move to ban them from elections would be unconstitutional.With tensions rising, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, himself a Shiite, told CNN Sunday that al-Sadr’s followers would not be allowed “to participate in the political process or take part in upcoming elections unless they end the Mahdi Army.” He was referring to provincial elections expected in the fall that are likely to redistribute power in Iraq. The Sadrists have accused al- Maliki’s government and rival parties of trying to diminish their standing ahead of the vote. The prime minister, who took office in May 2006 with al-Sadr’s support but later broke with the powerful cleric, had in the past repeatedly promised to disband militias but his comments on CNN were the first time he publicly singled out the Mahdi Army. Senior Sadrist lawmaker Baha al-Aaraji called for calm but said the prime minister had no constitutional right to interfere with the elections. “The Supreme Electoral Commission is the one to decide, not the prime minister, so the prime minister should not interfere in the work of this commission,” al-Aaraji said Monday at a news conference. He also called for a restructuring of government security institutions, saying any move to disband militias had to be applied to all political parties as well—a reference to the Badr Brigade of the Sadrists’ main rival, the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council, which dominates the Iraqi security forces. “We say that we are with the law, but it has to be applied to all,” al-Aaraji said during a news conference. Lawmakers and officials involved in the effort to isolate the Sadrists politically have told The Associated Press that the first step would be adding language to a draft election bill banning parties that operate militias from fielding candidates in the provincial balloting due this fall. The government intends to send the draft to parliament within days and hopes to win approval within weeks, they said Sunday. Such a move risks a violent backlash by the Mahdi Army. But if it succeeds, it could cause a major realignment of Iraq’s political landscape. The fighting in Sadr City has been the fiercest since al-Sadr ordered a cease-fire a week ago Sunday in a bid to restore calm amid growing anger over a government crackdown against militias in the southern Shiite city of Basra. The cleric stopped short of asking his fighters to surrender their weapons, and sporadic clashes have continued as the Iraqi government issued a series of conflicting statements over how to deal with the militia. Suspected Shiite militants also lobbed rockets and mortar shells into the U.S.-protected Green Zone and a military base elsewhere in Baghdad on Sunday, killing three American troops and wounding 31, officials said. In his remarks, al-Maliki said he had a wide spectrum of political support for his efforts against the Mahdi Army. “Solving the problem comes in no other way than dissolving the Mahdi Army,” al-Maliki said. “We have opened the door for confrontation, a real confrontation with these gangs, and we will not stop until we are in full control of these areas.” But he acknowledged that Iraqi security forces faced obstacles but he said he was surprised the militia fighters had not mounted a fiercer response. “Confronting the militias does still need more effort,” he said. “Our readiness is not at full level yet, but what is happening in Sadr City is still less than what people expected the militias to do.”Al-Sadr plans to hold a “million-strong” anti-U.S. demonstration on Wednesday in Baghdad to protest the fifth anniversary of the capture of the Iraqi capital by invading U.S. troops.
10) Moving Goalposts In Iraq http://www.nypost.com/seven/04082008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/moving_goalposts_105571.htm By RICH LOWRY April 8, 2008 -- EVEN in the age of instant communication, it takes three months or more for developments in Iraq to have any impact on the US political debate. The war is like a distant star whose light we only see well after the fact. So Democrats still warn that we'll never be able to police a sectarian civil war, even after violence has significantly declined in Iraq - because we have successfully policed a sectarian civil war. Some critics of the war have seamlessly passed from lamenting the unstoppability of the Iraqi civil war to warning that the rise of Sunni security volunteers could be a harbinger of . . . a civil war. The outdated anti-war sound bite of the moment is that the surge has failed because the Iraqi government hasn't met 18 benchmarks set out for it by Congress last year. It is routinely asserted that only a handful of the benchmarks have been met. In Newsweek in March, columnist Fareed Zakaria darkly noted that a few newly passed laws "add up to only three or four of the 18 benchmarks." The benchmarks are much cited, but apparently little read. Of the 18, seven have to do with supporting the surge and the effort to establish security in Baghdad: things like providing three brigades to support operations in the city; establishing joint security stations with US forces in neighborhoods; and reducing sectarian violence and eliminating militia control of local security. By any standard, almost all these security benchmarks have been met. They were formulated at a time when the Iraqi government's will to secure Baghdad was in question. Forget three brigades - as Fred Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute points out, soon enough the Iraqis will have three divisions in and around Baghdad. The neutralization of militias has been more problematic, but now Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has declared himself against the most dangerous Shia militia, Moqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi Army. The highest-profile benchmarks are the seven legislative ones. Four of the key ones have been passed: a law undoing the excesses of de-Baathification; a provision granting amnesty to former insurgents; legislation allowing the formation of semiautonomous regions; and measures setting out provincial powers and a date for provincial elections. Another important one, a hydrocarbons law, is stalled, but the passage of a budget sharing oil revenues around the country serves some of the same function.
The balance of the other benchmarks has to do with the performance of the Iraqi government and protecting minority rights. They are harder to evaluate. Of course, all the grading is somewhat subjective, but roughly 12 of the 18 benchmarks have been met (and there's been movement on the others), which makes a much less seductive anti-war talking point. As the reality on the benchmarks slowly sinks in, opponents of the war will surely move on to something else - probably the war's cost. Needless to say, if a benchmark has been met, it doesn't necessarily mean the underlying law is wise or will be effective. The war's critics argue that, in its fine print, the new de-Baathification law may exclude as many Sunnis from government as the original, offending law. They're right. Which is why it was always foolish to try to judge the progress of a nascent, violence-plagued democracy by a crude checklist. Already, there has been a shifting of goal posts. Zakaria warned that some of the new laws passed only "after months of intense wrangling." Horrors! What was so remarkable about the Feb. 13 passage of a package including a budget, provincial-powers law and amnesty provision wasn't the intensity of the wrangling but the cross-ethnic and -sectarian logrolling that produced a grand compromise unlocking the stuck wheels of the Iraqi parliament. Logrolling, alas, is not one of the benchmarks. The last time Gen. David Petraeus came to Washington, he heralded tentative but widely discounted security gains. Now he brings news of tentative but widely discounted political progress. We'll know he's had an impact when the benchmarks fade away from anti-war discourse.

11) US and Iraqi forces take the battle to Moqtada al-Sadr's doorstep http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article3694832.ece
James Hider in Baghdad US and Iraqi forces killed 22 people yesterday in a raid on the Baghdad stronghold of al-Mahdi Army, the Shia militia that fought Iraqi government forces in Basra last week, while kidnappers captured 40 students on a university outing. The violence flared as the US Ambassador to Iraq and the commander of American forces prepared to testify to Congress tomorrow on the security and political progress of the American surge of forces in the past year. In the north, where Sunni insurgents are still holding out against an Iraqi government offensive, gunmen set up a fake checkpoint between Baghdad and the city of Mosul and kidnapped 40 students in a bus. While most such mass kidnappings have ended with the victims being butchered, Iraqi security forces said that they had freed the hostages within hours. Their claim would bolster the case for Ryan Crocker, the US Ambassador, and General David Petraeus, when they report to Congress on the security gains made by the deployment of about 30,000 extra US soldiers last year. The improvement in daily life in the capital after years of horrific bloodshed is largely seen as a result of the US surge, as well as by Sunni insurgents turning away from alQaeda to form US-backed militia groups in their own neighbourhoods. A freeze on al-Mahdi Army militia called by its leader, the hardline Shia cleric Hojatoleslam Moqtada al-Sadr, has also helped. But a week-long battle between his militias and government forces commanded personally by Nouri al-Maliki, the Prime Minister, appeared to undermine the freeze, especially after Mr al-Maliki’s forces failed to crush the rogue militia fighters and had to agree to a peace deal. However, Mr al-Maliki later swore to fight on against what he terms criminals and appears to be rallying many Iraqi politicians and ordinary civilians tired of the endless violence perpetrated by unaccountable militias. Mr Crocker said that despite the poor result of the battles that spread across the Shia south during the Basra offensive — about 1,500 Iraqi soldiers and police refused to fight — Mr al-Maliki’s resolve had made a significant impression. “We have always said that gains here are fragile. But in this instance, when the fighting in Iraq came about because the Government was taking on militias, I think the net result was a positive step forward for the Government,” he said before leaving for Washington. Parliament was also planning to isolate al-Mahdi Army by drafting a Bill banning parties that maintain militias from running for office. It was backed by a rare alliance of Shia, Sunni and Kurdish parties, although several of the parties involved run militias themselves. Mr al-Maliki’s main backer in government, the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council, has its own militia, the Badr Brigades, which has often fought a more powerful al-Mahdi Army. “We want the Sadrists to disband al-Mahdi Army. Just freezing it is no longer acceptable,” an adviser to Mr al-Maliki said. “The new election law will prevent any party that has weapons or runs a militia from contesting elections.” With the Sadr bloc politically isolated, the US and Iraqi military launched a fresh raid on Sadr City, its main Baghdad fiefdom, yesterday, triggering heavy fighting. A vast pall of smoke stretched across the capital from a market that was set ablaze by militia mortar fire, targeting a nearby US-Iraqi security base. Yesterday three US soldiers were killed and 31 people injured in two separate mortar attacks in the capital. Hojatoleslam al-Sadr has called upon his huge network of supporters to rally a million people in Sadr City on April 9, the fifth anniversary of the fall of Baghdad, to protest at the continued presence of US troops in Iraq. But in some areas of Baghdad support for Mr al-Maliki and even the American military has grown since the Prime Minister launched his struggle against militias. “I think al-Maliki is the most brave and honest politician I’ve seen in my life,” said Sajar Abu Zeinab, the owner of a sweet shop in Mansour, a district of central Baghdad that was until recently under the control of Sunni militias who terrorised the population.

12) Iran joined militias in battle for Basra http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article3690010.ece
Sarah Baxter and Marie Colvin UK Times Newspaper IRANIAN forces were involved in the recent battle for Basra, General David Petraeus, the US commander in Iraq, is expected to tell Congress this week. Military and intelligence sources believe Iranians were operating at a tactical command level with the Shi’ite militias fighting Iraqi security forces; some were directing operations on the ground, they think. Petraeus intends to use the evidence of Iranian involvement to argue against any reductions in US forces. Dr Daniel Goure, a defence analyst at the Lexington Institute in Virginia, said: “There is no question that Petraeus will be tough on Iran. It is one thing to withdraw troops when there is purely sectarian fighting but it is another thing if it leaves the Iranians to move in.” US defence chiefs are concerned that the troop surge has overstretched the military. Admiral Mike McMullen, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, warned that the army and marines were at risk of crossing an “invisible red line” if the burden on forces remained. He said deployments of 15 months had to be reduced to a year “as fast as possible”. Petraeus is likely to announce that combat tours will be reduced from 15 months to 12 months. The number of US troops in Iraq is set to fall from 160,000 to 140,000 by July, but Petraeus is expected to recommend an indefinite pause in further troop cuts. Moqtada al-Sadr, the radical Shi’ite cleric, has called for 1m people to march on Baghdad on Wednesday – the fifth anniversary of the fall of the capital – when Petraeus and Ryan Crocker, the US ambassador to Iraq, will be briefing Congress. A senior Iraqi official who met Petraeus last week said, “It will be difficult to show that the situation is improving.” Another Iraqi source described the US general as “furious” that al-Maliki moved against the militias into Basra without consultation and had to rely on US forces to bail him out. Abu Ahmed, a senior military commander with the Awakening, the Sunni tribal movement cooperating with US forces, said progress was largely the result of al-Sadr’s Mahdi Army ceasefire. “When the Mahdi Army decides to resume its activities, neither the American troops nor the Iraqi government will be able to stop it,” he said.
13) On the Ground With U.S. Troops in Sadr City http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=4600258 Facing Fierce Enemies 'Who Just Want to Shoot at Americans' By MIGUEL MARQUEZ BAGHDAD, Iraq, April 6, 2008—
Sadr City, the oppressively poor Shiite neighborhood on the north end of Baghdad, is now the front line in the fight create security in the Iraqi capital. Since September, U.S. troops have been operating together with Iraqi police out of a heavily guarded Joint Security Station on the southern border of Sadr City. In the last two weeks they have started moving north. About a thousand U.S. and Iraqi soldiers are moving house to house, street by street northward into Sadr City in some of the toughest urban fighting U.S. troops have seen in Iraq. "In this area there are some real knuckleheads that just want to shoot at Americans," Command Sgt.-Maj. Michael Boom said. Despite the fierce resistance and the tough conditions they are facing, U.S. troops are giving no ground. As U.S. troops make progress, Boom said, "they are living in abandoned buildings." The 50-year-old officer from Sacramento, Calif., admitted he might be too old for this sort of fighting. "We can't get supply to them," he said. "They come back on their own but we can't push the normal supply lines to them because it would endanger the soldiers. The combat soldiers load up with everything they need to go back out there... drinking water, they're good with it; no bathrooms, no plumbing, very austere conditions."
'Criminal Gangs,' but Worse
Iraqi Gen. Abboud Qanbar, the head of the Baghdad Security Plan, and his American counterpart Maj. General Jeff Hammond said during a press conference at JSS Sadr City that they are fighting "criminal gangs." As they spoke there was a sharp reminder of the fight raging just a few blocks away. A rocket passed overhead. Reporters hit the ground; the generals started to react but then continued talking: just another day on the front line. The aim of the operation was to put an end to the volleys of rockets and mortars that had been slamming the U.S.-occupied Green Zone in Central Baghdad. Today three U.S. soldiers were killed and 31 Americans were injured in three separate rocket attacks, two on the Green Zone and a third at Camp Rustimiyah in southeast Baghdad. The U.S. and Iraqi units in Sadr City are also coming under heavy fire as they have moved deeper into the neighborhood, engaging anyone that faces them. Nine Shiite extremists were killed today after U.S. Hellfire missiles targeted them for attacking Iraqi troops.
Lieutenant Col. Dan Barnett, the main battlefield commander, knows the enemy well and said dismissing them as "criminal gangs" doesn't do justice to the sophistication of the opposition American troops are facing. "These are not just pure, in my opinion, just criminals," Barnett said. "They are clearly organized they have a command and control structure. They have a plan in place. We call them the special groups." Who Is Pulling the Strings?Special Groups is a term used by the U.S. military to suggest Iraqi militias that are trained and supplied by Iran. But who is actually directing the activities of those militias is "the million-dollar question," Barnett said. "We know some the names of the high-value targets in the area," he said. "We think we know who is pulling the strings on some of these guys. And I guess what we don't know for sure is there a direct link between that individual and [radically anti-American Shiite cleric] Moqtada al Sadr or is he is an agent working on the side just doing his own thing. That's what we are asking." It is question of grave importance here, with the political stakes being raised daily. During his press conference, Gen. Abboud issued an ultimatum to Shiite extremists: Surrender your weapons or else. Abboud said discussions are under way to impose a deadline by which all medium and heavy weapons in Baghdad must be turned in or they will be taken by force. Politicians loyal to al Sadr called the U.S. operation in Sadr City "unacceptable" and claim that U.S. forces are using Iraqis as "shields" to establish control of the area. As for al Sadr, he remains in Iran and has so far remained quiet on the U.S. operation, but he is still calling for a million Shiites to protest what he calls the U.S. occupation of Iraq by marching this Wednesday in Baghdad. U.S. commanders on the ground say they are weighing how to protect their forces if such a large number of Iraqis demonstrate against them.
14) The Iraqis Step Up http://www.nypost.com/seven/04072008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/the_iraqis_step_up_105417.htm WHY PETRAEUS SEES GAINS April 7, 2008 --
WITH Gen. David Petraeus returning to Capitol Hill tomorrow, I asked a senior Coalition officer in Baghdad late last week what key trends he sees in Iraq. I suspect my friend's views resemble those of the general, so I'll let him speak for himself: "Overall, civilian deaths remain substantially below those at the height of the sectarian violence. Security incidents were [down to] levels not seen since early 2005. Thanks to help from local civilians [in] former al-Qaeda-in-Iraq safe havens, we've found more arms caches so far this year than were found in all of 2006." My old comrade went on to lay out the beating that al Qaeda's getting up in Mosul - the last major city where the terrorists have much influence. "There has been a significant chipping away at the leadership and operators of al Qaeda . . . at their safe havens and caches. In the past week, special-operations forces detained one of the top al Qaeda leaders in the city, along with a number of his subordinates and fighters. "The Coalition and Iraqi forces are also putting considerable pressure on the networks that support the foreign-fighter flow . . . Helping in all this are tens of thousands of so-called 'Sons of Iraq,' who secure their local areas to keep al Qaeda out. The progress against al Qaeda is a key reason for the significant reduction in civilian deaths." But what about the recent fighting in Basra, portrayed as a disaster by the media? "The Iraqi Security Forces conducted a number of targeted operations, took over the ports [key prizes that had been funding the militias] and are in the process of reestablishing checkpoints and security positions in the city. "The Iraqi operation did reflect a willingness to take tough decisions about tough problems. It also displayed the Iraqi capability to deploy two brigades' worth of conventional and special-operations forces on less than 48-hours' notice, with another brigade following. That would not have been possible a year ago." My source acknowledged that "the planning for Basra was incomplete and some of the local forces were incapable of standing up to the Iranian-supported rogue-militia elements." The quality of Iraq's security forces remains uneven - but he sees them as remarkably improved, in general. Their performance in Basra was more impressive than feature-the-bad-news reporting implied. This officer doesn't paint over the cracks in the Iraqi house, but he's convinced that the Basra operation did "reflect a determination of a Shia-led government to deal with Shia extremist challenges." For myself, I watched the Basra dust-up from Panama, amazed at the willful obtuseness of "war correspondents" who still refuse to acknowledge basic military realities. They demanded a level of effectiveness from Iraqi troops that the British had been unable (and unwilling) to deliver over the last five years. Unlike the Brits, who faked it, the Iraqis went into the city and fought. Was their performance perfect? Of course not. But this is where the punditry got really interesting. Many of the critics had previously lavished praise on the counterinsurgency manual that Petraeus midwifed. One of the most-quoted maxims from that document was T.E. Lawrence's admonition that it's better for our local allies to do something imperfectly themselves than for us to do it perfectly for them. Well, the Iraqis stepped up to the plate. A few units folded. Others fought ferociously. They did what we said we wanted - and the critics raised the bar again. (Unfair criteria for success now may pose a greater obstacle in Iraq and Afghanistan than do al Qaeda or the Taliban.) And, by the way, it was Moqtada al Sadr, not the Iraqi government, who requested a cease-fire - after being urged by the Iranians to opt to let those militias live to fight another day.
Partisan critics refuse to accept that war is tough and results are never perfect. They want it all wrapped up neatly at the end of the two-hour movie so we can all walk out of the theater feeling good. When Petraeus gets to the Hill, he'll answer every question honestly. A disciplined soldier, he'll refrain from responding: Senator, that is a phony question - and why haven't I seen your well-padded butt in Baghdad? He'll speak soberly - detailing the indisputable gains on the ground, while acknowledging that many difficulties remain. He'll warn that the progress to date could still be reversed. But the truth won't be enough in an election year. The theatrics won't come from the general, but from histrionic legislators. (That said, Sen. Hillary Clinton, having been caught in her lie about dashing through sniper fire, is unlikely to reprise her accusation that Petraeus is weaving fantasies.) The general will also be needled about the recent mortar attacks on the Green Zone and on Iran's role in the Iraqi muddle. We'll have to wait and see how he responds tomorrow - but my contact had this to say, after I mentioned that the real target of those mortar rounds seemed to be media headlines: "The attacks on the Green Zone were carried out by the Iranian-trained, Iranian-equipped, Iranian-funded and Iranian-directed Special Groups . . . They prompted many Iraqi leaders to take a hard new look at their neighbor to the east, especially in light of promises by President [Mahmoud] Ahmedinejad to stop the flow of lethal accelerants into Iraq."
Iraqi legislators, who also inhabit the Green Zone, were incensed that many of the "rockets and mortars fell short or wide and killed or wounded innocent civilians." That last point is a good note on which to end as we await the congressional circus. Anyone who's served in the Army or Marines knows that, while mortars require skilled operators to deliver accurate fire, they're among the easiest weapons to use if all you want to do is make a noise and get attention. In other words, those mortar attacks on the Green Zone were the equivalent of the questions Gen. Petraeus is going to face: Full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

15) Iraq and Its Costs http://online.wsj.com/public/article_print/SB120752308688293493.html
By JOE LIEBERMAN and LINDSEY GRAHAM
April 7, 2008; Page A13 When Gen. David Petraeus testifies before Congress tomorrow, he will step into an American political landscape dramatically different from the one he faced when he last spoke on Capitol Hill seven months ago.This time Gen. Petraeus returns to Washington having led one of the most remarkably successful military operations in American history. His antiwar critics, meanwhile, face a crisis of credibility – having confidently predicted the failure of the surge, and been proven decidedly wrong. As late as last September, advocates of retreat insisted that the surge would fail to bring about any meaningful reduction in violence in Iraq. MoveOn.org accused Gen. Petraeus of "cooking the books," while others claimed that his testimony, offering evidence of early progress, required "the willing suspension of disbelief."
.
No one can deny the dramatic improvements in security in Iraq achieved by Gen. Petraeus, the brave troops under his command, and the Iraqi Security Forces. From June 2007 through February 2008, deaths from ethno-sectarian violence in Baghdad have fallen approximately 90%. American casualties have also fallen sharply, down by 70%. Al Qaeda in Iraq has been swept from its former strongholds in Anbar province and Baghdad. The liberation of these areas was made possible by the surge, which empowered Iraqi Muslims to reject the Islamist extremists who had previously terrorized them into submission. Any time Muslims take up arms against Osama bin Laden, his agents and sympathizers, the world is a safer place. In the past seven months, the other main argument offered by critics of the Petraeus strategy has also begun to collapse: namely, the alleged lack of Iraqi political progress. Antiwar forces last September latched onto the Iraqi government's failure to pass "benchmark" legislation, relentlessly hammering Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki as hopelessly sectarian and unwilling to confront Iranian-backed Shiite militias. Here as well, however, the critics in Washington have been proven wrong. In recent months, the Iraqi government, encouraged by our Ambassador in Iraq, Ryan Crocker, has passed benchmark legislation on such politically difficult issues as de-Baathification, amnesty, the budget and provincial elections. After boycotting the last round of elections, Sunnis now stand ready to vote by the millions in the provincial elections this autumn. The Iraqi economy is growing at a brisk 7% and inflation is down dramatically.
And, in launching the recent offensive in Basra, Mr. Maliki has demonstrated that he has the political will to take on the Shiite militias and criminal gangs, which he recently condemned as "worse than al Qaeda." Of course, while the gains we have achieved in Iraq are meaningful and undeniable, so are the challenges ahead. Iraqi Security Forces have grown in number and shown significant improvement, but the Basra operation showed they still have a way to go. Al Qaeda has been badly weakened by the surge, but it still retains a significant foothold in the northern city of Mosul, where Iraqi and coalition forces are involved in a campaign to destroy it. Most importantly, Iran also continues to wage a vicious and escalating proxy war against the Iraqi government and the U.S. military. The Iranians have American blood on their hands. They are responsible, through the extremist agents they have trained and equipped, for the deaths of hundreds of our men and women in uniform. Increasingly, our fight in Iraq cannot be separated from our larger struggle to prevent the emergence of an Iranian-dominated Middle East.
These continuing threats from Iran and al Qaeda underscore why we believe that decisions about the next steps in Iraq should be determined by the recommendations of Gen. Petraeus, based on conditions on the ground. It is also why it is imperative to be cautious about the speed and scope of any troop withdrawals in the months ahead, rather than imposing a political timeline for troop withdrawal against the recommendation of our military. Unable to make the case that the surge has failed, antiwar forces have adopted a new set of talking points, emphasizing the "costs" of our involvement in Iraq, hoping to exploit Americans' current economic anxieties.
Today's antiwar politicians have effectively turned John F. Kennedy's inaugural address on its head, urging Americans to refuse to pay any price, or bear any burden, to assure the survival of liberty. This is wrong. The fact is that America's prosperity at home and security abroad are bound together. We will not fare well in a world in which al Qaeda and Iran can claim that they have defeated us in Iraq and are ascendant. There is no question the war in Iraq – like the Cold War, World War II and every other conflict we have fought in our history – costs money. But as great as the costs of this struggle have been, so too are the dividends to our national security from a successful outcome, with a functioning, representative Iraqi government and a stabilized Middle East. The costs of abandoning Iraq to our enemies, conversely, would be enormous, not only in dollars, but in human lives and in the security and freedom of our nation. Indeed, had we followed the path proposed by antiwar groups and retreated in defeat, the war would have been lost, emboldening and empowering violent jihadists for generations to come. The success we are now achieving also has consequences far beyond Iraq's borders in the larger, global struggle against Islamist extremism. Thanks to the surge, Iraq today is looking increasingly like Osama bin Laden's worst nightmare: an Arab country, in the heart of the Middle East, in which hundreds of thousands of Muslims – both Sunni and Shiite – are rising up and fighting, shoulder to shoulder with American soldiers, against al Qaeda and its hateful ideology. It is unfortunate that so many opponents of the surge still refuse to acknowledge the gains we have achieved in Iraq. When Gen. Petraeus testifies this week, however, the American people will have a clear choice as we weigh the future of our fight there: between the general who is leading us to victory, and the critics who spent the past year predicting defeat.

16) Tiger Regiment Sinks Its Teeth Into Ninewah Province AL QAYYARAH — Iraq’s second largest city, Mosul, with nearly 2 million people has been called the last terrorist stronghold in Iraq. Combating the insurgents in the city is a constant operation, which is handled by 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment. When the fighting in the city takes its toll on the insurgents or they need to rest and re-supply, they run to the outlying rural areas of the Ninewah province to bed-down. It is in these outlying areas that Tiger, 1st Squadron, 3rd ACR, takes the fight to the insurgents on the run from the city and works to keep the influx of fighters and supplies from making it back into Mosul. “Our mission is to disrupt foreign fighter flow from the south and west areas of Mosul as safe havens and support zones,” said Maj. Matthew Dooley, Tiger Squadron’s executive officer. “They come south and use these areas to bed-down and to gather and rest before going back into Mosul to cause trouble.” Tiger and its roughly 800 Soldiers have been working in the Vermont-sized area of the Ninewah province for almost four months, and in that time they have seen a lot of progress. “We have taken our number-one high-value target and a couple other guys on our list,” said Dooley “They are senior leaders that have influence on foreign fighters and flow of weapons into Mosul.”
Tiger has also captured almost 50 caches of weapons, ammunition, bombs and bomb making material, which has forced the insurgents to move, said Dooley. Of the 40 or so suspected insurgents Tiger has captured, less than 10 have been released. This is due to Tiger making sure they have solid intelligence and enough evidence to put the insurgents away for a long time, said Dooley. While the main focus for Tiger Squadron in this largely rural area is combating the insurgency to help keep the peace in Mosul, they are also putting an emphasis on helping rebuild the villages and towns that have lived under the shadow of terror for years. To accomplish this, Tiger’s Soldiers perform missions such as presence patrols, logistical convoys, bridge security, kinetic operations and working with locals to meet the needs of the Iraqi people in the area.“We are continuing to put pressure on all fronts, directly attacking insurgents in their safe havens,” said Lt. Col. Thomas Dorame, Tiger’s commander. “We are out providing security for the people with the Iraqi army and Iraqi police and partnering with the local community and government to help develop essential services and economic progress. All of those things have a multiplying effect on each other and continue to push this mission in the right direction. That progress is working, but it is a slow, hard process, said Dorame, who added that each time Tiger takes down a cache or a high-value target, it adds to the progress they are making. Part of the progress is being made by partnering with the IA and IP in the province. Tiger works with one brigade-sized and four battalion-sized IA elements, and around 2,000 IPs. “I would love to see more IA and IP throughout the area,” said Dorame. “That would be a tremendous success here.”The IA and IP in the area have the fundamental skills, but they still need continued support to develop, said Dorame. Tiger is working side by side with the IA and IP, including training at the Iraqi non-commissioned officer academy, now in its third class of about 30 IA Soldiers. The squadron is making sure to allow the Iraqis to take the lead in their area.
“Truly part of the success is from the IA and IP,” said Dorame. “We have been very clear with them that we are the supporting role, and this is their mission that we support.” The success Tiger is seeing has to do with being proactive when it comes to securing their area.“You have to get off the forward operating base and get out there,” said Dooley. “We get out there into combat outposts among the population. It puts a constant presence. They see us there every day. The longer you are there, the better it gets, the more you get. The more it builds. You get to a point where there is a continuous information flow, and we are getting to that point now.” One of the things Tiger has learned by being with the Iraqis every day is that the security issues they face are directly connected to the local economies. “Part of the security issue is the high unemployment rate,” said Dooley “There is a disconnect between local governments and their needs and the time it takes the Iraqi government to respond. If you don’t do something about that, the insurgency finds a way to exploit that by paying people to do things that they might not normally do, but because they need money, they go out and do it.” Finding an economic answer to their immediate needs is part of the security rather than just kinetic action, said Dooley, who believes the way forward is to help them stand up, improve their economy and their governments. For 3rd ACR, there are two fights, said Dorame. The fight in Mosul, which is urban street to street fighting, and Tiger’s fight in the areas outside the city where the enemy would prefer to hide out. “This fight out here is really a true counterinsurgency fight,” said Dorame. “It is our ability to get in there and partner with the local police and army to collect information from the local people to find them and get them out of there. It is working extremely well.” Tiger has been working hard in the province since December to deny the insurgency from threatening the people and to keep the insurgents from moving freely in and out of the city. A diverse mission, which his Soldiers are doing remarkably well at accomplishing, said Dorame. “The area that Tiger Squadron fights in is different in dynamics because it doesn’t have the sectarian issues or a large population center,” said Dorame. “This area is an area where the insurgents have tried to fight the U.S. forces in the population centers and use these areas to control and dominate for use as safe havens. Although it is less intense at times and less dynamic, it is a very complicated problem and it takes the true Soldier-statesmen mentality of partnering with the community to provide for the local people, but at the same time staying vigilant in tracking down the insurgencies. You have to win in both areas simultaneously if you are going to solve the problem in Iraq.”