Just in case the left didn't hear this...our Strategy for Winning in Iraq..

Silly me I thought we didn't have any, becasue the left keeps asking for it...

Just in case you ever hear someone say we do not have a strategy for winning in Iraq, you can ask them to read this.

Victory in Iraq is Defined in Stages

* Short term , Iraq is making steady progress in fighting terrorists, meeting political milestones, building democratic institutions, and standing up security forces.
* Medium term , Iraq is in the lead defeating terrorists and providing its own security, with a fully constitutional government in place, and on its way to achieving its economic potential.
* Longer term , Iraq is peaceful, united, stable, and secure, well integrated into the international community, and a full partner in the global war on terrorism.


Strategy for Victory is Clear

* We will help the Iraqi people build a new Iraq with a constitutional, representative government that respects civil rights and has security forces sufficient to maintain domestic order and keep Iraq from becoming a safe haven for terrorists. To achieve this end, we must pursue an integrated strategy along three broad tracks , which together incorporate the efforts of the Iraqi government, the Coalition, cooperative countries in the region, the international community, and the United Nations.

* The Political Track involves working to forge a broadly supported national compact for democratic governance by helping the Iraqi government:

o Isolate enemy elements from those who can be won over to the political process by countering false propaganda and demonstrating to all Iraqis that they have a stake in a democratic Iraq ;

o Engage those outside the political process and invite in those willing to turn away from violence through ever-expanding avenues of participation; and

o Build stable, pluralistic, and effective national institutions that can protect the interests of all Iraqis, and facilitate Iraq 's full integration into the international community.

The Security Track involves carrying out a campaign to defeat the terrorists and neutralize the insurgency, developing Iraqi security forces, and helping the Iraqi government:

o Clear areas of enemy control by remaining on the offensive, killing and capturing enemy fighters and denying them safe-haven;

o Hold areas freed from enemy influence by ensuring that they remain under the control of the Iraqi government with an adequate Iraqi security force presence; and

o Build Iraqi Security Forces and the capacity of local institutions to deliver services, advance the rule of law, and nurture civil society.

The Economic Track involves setting the foundation for a sound and self-sustaining economy by helping the Iraqi government:

o Restore Iraq 's infrastructure to meet increasing demand and the needs of a growing economy;

o Reform Iraq 's economy, which in the past has been shaped by war, dictatorship, and sanctions, so that it can be self-sustaining in the future; and

o Build the capacity of Iraqi institutions to maintain infrastructure, rejoin the international economic community, and improve the general welfare of all Iraqis.

Our Victory Strategy Is (and Must Be) Conditions Based

* With resolve, victory will be achieved, although not by a date certain.

o No war has ever been won on a timetable and neither will this one.

* But lack of a timetable does not mean our posture in Iraq (both military and civilian) will remain static over time. As conditions change, our posture will change.

o We expect, but cannot guarantee, that our force posture will change over the next year, as the political process advances and Iraqi security forces grow and gain experience.

o While our military presence may become less visible, it will remain lethal and decisive, able to confront the enemy wherever it may organize.

o Our mission in Iraq is to win the war. Our troops will return home when that mission is complete.


Oh and in case you are interested in where this came from.. LOL of all silly places our Presidents Office.
7,097 views 22 replies
Reply #1 Top
These are wishful objectives; strategy must have options to address resistance to these objectives.
Reply #2 Top
Great. Now all they need to do is pay someone to print the "Happy Story" about how successful the execution of this strategy has been and maybe a few more of us will begin to believe it.

God knows reporting the facts wont cut it.

of all silly places our Presidents Office


Nothing quite like an independant news source.

When was this strategy released? Just recently or sometime ago? I can only get a date of 30 Nov 2005. In which case i'd have to say "Thank god for the "liberals", without their constant pressure it seems there wouldn't be one [strategy]"
Reply #3 Top
Victory in Iraq is Defined in Stages


lmao. Hasn't Bush already paraded himself about on an aircraft carrier and proclaimed "Victory"?

Victory in Iraq is a Vital U.S. Interest


Doesn't that say it all. So whats woith all thr rhetoric about "democracy for the Iraqi people."
Reply #4 Top
Victory in Iraq is Defined in Stages


lmao. Hasn't Bush already paraded himself about on an aircraft carrier and proclaimed "Victory"?

Victory in Iraq is a Vital U.S. Interest


Doesn't that say it all. So whats woith all thr rhetoric about "democracy for the Iraqi people."
Reply #5 Top
Victory in Iraq is Defined in Stages


lmao. Hasn't Bush already paraded himself about on an aircraft carrier and proclaimed "Victory"?

Victory in Iraq is a Vital U.S. Interest


Doesn't that say it all. So whats with all the rhetoric about "democracy for the Iraqi people."
Reply #6 Top
Reply #7 Top
Rick:
Here's the link to the website hosting the National Strategy for Victory in Iraq, including a complete PDF file of the document. You are right, it was published on November 30th.

Victory in Iraq is a Vital U.S. Interest

Doesn't that say it all. So whats with all the rhetoric about "democracy for the Iraqi people."


No, Rick, it doesn't say it all. You quoted, let's see... eight words from a mega document. It looks like a headline, too - taken from a chapter heading from Part I, the Overview of the War.
This is clearly written for those favoring an immediate troop withdrawal and addresses their concerns about why it's in our own best interest to stay. The Iraqis are being helped, and their concerns are being addressed in the book, too.
Like in other chapter headings from the same section: Our Enemies and Their Goals, Why Our Strategy Is (and Must Be) Conditions-Based, and Our Strategy Tracks and Measures Progress.
Part II goes into precise strategies for the defeat of the insurgency and the eventual establishment of democracy in Iraq.

In which case i'd have to say "Thank god for the "liberals", without their constant pressure it seems there wouldn't be one [strategy]"

I will definitely concede that point, since if it wasn;t for the constant name-calling, demeaning language, dissing of the troops, personal attacks on the president, calling for troop withdrawals, justification for more money, umbrage taken for that more money...
then no, a published document wouldn't have been needed.

Reply #8 Top
You know how people are these days. They think because we have better weapons than before that wars should be done in a 1 2 3. But here's the funny part, sure we could have finished this a few weeks after we started, but that would have meant that every building in Iraq would not be standing, every animal would be dead, but worst of all the only Iraqis alive would have been those outside of Iraq. But then if we had done that we would have been considered monsters. So it's a lose lose situation. No pleasing the Dems.

In which case i'd have to say "Thank god for the "liberals", without their constant pressure it seems there wouldn't be one [strategy]"


In the words of Manson himself:

"I don't want you and I don't need you
Don't bother to resist, I'll beat you
It's not your fault that you're always wrong
The weak ones are there to justify the strong"

Lyrics from The Beautiful People by MARILYN MANSON
Reply #9 Top
The Democrat party is too busy figuring out the best way to lose to pay any attention to the strategy for winning. Apparently, the only definition of "winning" they recognize includes a Democrat in the oval office in 2008.
Reply #10 Top

Reply By: Island Dog
Posted: Friday, December 09, 2005

Great one!

Reply #11 Top
No, Rick, it doesn't say it all. You quoted, let's see... eight words from a mega document. It looks like a headline, too - taken from a chapter heading from Part I, the Overview of the War.


Precisely. I dunno they bothered to wrap these "8 words" with so much other guff when these are so clear,concise and succinct.

Heres a more realistic article about the future of the US in Iraq. Note that name again: Halliburton.

Link
Reply #12 Top
then no, a published document wouldn't have been needed.


I know it's a terrible thing when the tax paying public demand reasons why thousands of lives and billions of dollars are being wasted in an invasion predicated on a lie isn't it.

Lifes such a bitch for those who preach democracy and invade other nations states to "install" democracy when they actually have to turn around and go through some of the motions of an actual democracy. Why oh why cant the public just learn to shutup and do as they are told? This free thinking is a very unpatriotic exercise.

If theres such concern for attacking the origins of "9-11 evil-doers" then why didn't the US invade Saudi Arabia?
Reply #13 Top
Precisely. I dunno they bothered to wrap these "8 words" with so much other guff when these are so clear,concise and succinct.


Well, if you were not ESL, you could probably understand more of the document.
Reply #14 Top
Well, if you were not ESL, you could probably understand more of the document.


Merry Christmas DG.
Reply #15 Top
Is this familiar to you DG?

"We have seen many instances of a liberal, challenged in their beliefs, resort to name calling (and some conservatives, I will grant) and what in essence amounts to yelling here on both JU and the Internet in general."

Not only can you grant but you can also demonstrate.
Reply #16 Top
what in essence amounts to yelling here on both JU


Yelling? You mean like "Im number 1! Im number 1! Im number 1!".
Yelling like that DG?

lmao.
Reply #17 Top
Heres a more realistic article about the future of the US in Iraq.

First of all, I took the time to actually click through your link and read the article. Did you take equal time to actually read the Strategy which link I provided for *your* convenience? Thought not.
Now back to the Mother Jones article: What a hilarious piece of crap. Full of speculation, no hard facts, just opinion. For example, the author, Joseph Hammer, sattes astutely, "Camp Victory North appears to be a harbinger of America's future in Iraq." The article then goes on to ask why they're building Pizza Huts and Burger Kings if we have a stated short term presence in country. One word, Mr. Author: morale. Three words: soldiers need downtime. If they weren't building these Morale, Welfare, and Recreation Centers, then the soldiers would have no place to decompress. Been in a war, Rick? Been stressed out from being under fire 24 hours a day for the past seven months?
I don't go to Mother Jones Magazine for my foreign policy takes, and after reading this article, I can see why. But at least I had enough of an open mind to read the tripe instead of dissing it out of hand.

Note that name again: Halliburton.


Michael Moore will be happy that his Halliburton stock's price is on the upswing.
Reply #18 Top
No, Rick, it doesn't say it all. You quoted, let's see... eight words from a mega document. It looks like a headline, too - taken from a chapter heading from Part I, the Overview of the War.


Precisely. I dunno they bothered to wrap these "8 words" with so much other guff when these are so clear,concise and succinct.

Heres a more realistic article about the future of the US in Iraq. Note that name again: Halliburton.

Link


Do you really expect us to take this linked story seriously? I mean come on half way down the page is an ad for "Air America". Talk about biased! Anyone that posts ads fo "Airhead America" can not be taken seriously!
Reply #19 Top
First of all, I took the time to actually click through your link and read the article. Did you take equal time to actually read the Strategy which link I provided for *your* convenience? Thought not.


Yes. I did. Which is why i asked about it's publication date. Is there something you wanted to ask me about it? Im not sure what the point of your little splutter here was?

For example, the author, Joseph Hammer, sattes astutely, "Camp Victory North appears to be a harbinger of America's future in Iraq." The article then goes on to ask why they're building Pizza Huts and Burger Kings if we have a stated short term presence in country. One word, Mr. Author: morale. Three words: soldiers need downtime. If they weren't building these Morale, Welfare, and Recreation Centers, then the soldiers would have no place to decompress. Been in a war, Rick? Been stressed out from being under fire 24 hours a day for the past seven months?


Yes Im sure it must be great to have a "slice" of home when your engaging on a daily basis. Again what is your point?

The article DOES NOT then goes on to ask why they're building Pizza Huts and Burger Kings if we have a stated short term presence in country. The article goes on to talk about the overly optimitic assertions that the Administration made about the timetable for withdrawl. It talks about the massive amounts of military base construction being undertaken in large part by KBR. Its questions the wisdom of this (large US military footprint) if the idea is not a long term committment. It asks what the possible fallout might be from antiUS sentiment as a result of these bases.

It then goes on to raise other possible motives (and lets face it, more than likely reasons)for the buildup of military bases in Iraq and then latterly it even provides a direct rebuttal to any assertion that any of this is an Imperialist at work.

But if all you want to counter with is "I like pizza" then I guess I'll leave you to it.

Besides we've seen the photos. I dont think theres any doubt about just how much pizza you like.

no hard facts, just opinion


Lets see numbers, dates, quotes and locations detailing US military bases in Iraq. None of these are facts in your opinion? This is not surprising. The document you posted from the Whitehouse deliberately avoids any real mention of these things because they dont want to be committed to anything. I guess it's only a fact to you if its said by George Bush in front of the red, white and blue huh?

But at least I had enough of an open mind to read the tripe instead of dissing it out of hand.


What a load of nonsense. You dont even have enough of an open mind to think that id read it in the first place. Dont kid yourself. You are not open minded.

Talk about biased! Anyone that posts ads fo "Airhead America" can not be taken seriously!


You want to talk about the advertising do you?
Yeah o.k whatever Miliar.
Reply #20 Top
You want to talk about the advertising do you?
Yeah o.k whatever Miliar.


My guess is that you either have a reading comprehension problem or a speech impediment I can't really tell which it is. Since you can't seem to spell my name even remotely correct.
Reply #21 Top
My guess is that you either have a reading comprehension problem or a speech impediment
Perhaps all it takes is your "free speech" Logo.

.
Reply #22 Top
My guess is that you either have a reading comprehension problem or a speech impediment
Perhaps all it takes is your "free speech" Logo.


I'll tell you the same thing I told dabe about my avatar. You don't like it? Then don't look.