Posted on 02/16/2007 7:43:31 AM PST by advance_copy
The number of Iraqi civilians killed in Baghdad's sectarian violence fell drastically overnight, an Iraqi military official said Friday, crediting the joint U.S.-Iraqi security operation that began in force just days ago.
Iraqi army Brig. Gen. Qassim Moussawi, a spokesman for the Baghdad commander, said only 10 bodies had been reported by the morgue in the capital, compared to an average of 40 to 50 per day.
"This shows a big reduction in terror and killing operations in Baghdad," he said on Iraqi state television.
A U.S. military spokesman, meanwhile, said there were no indications that the al-Qaida in Iraq leader had been killed or wounded in a raid, contradicting reports from the Iraqi government. Further calling the reports into question, an Iraqi army officer said the al-Qaida leader's deputy _ said to be killed in Thursday's raid north of Baghdad _ has been jailed for a week south of the city.
Interior Ministry spokesman, Brig. Gen. Abdul-Karim Khalaf said earlier Friday that terror leader Abu Hamza al-Muhajir, also known as Abu Ayyub al-Masri, was wounded and an aide killed Thursday in a clash with Iraqi forces near Balad, north of Baghdad.
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
"...only 10 bodies had been reported by the morgue in the capital..."
New Orleans will have more than that during Mardi Gras weekend.
Ain't that the truth? You can add L.A., Detroit, D.C. and many other American cities.
The democrats and media will be criticizing a plan as it is working, and then they will have to try and cause its failure, or manufacture evidence of failure. A very sorry state of affairs.
Well-stated.
I'm glad it's working but why did we wait so long?
Geez, kill the enemy already!
We need to pull out of New Orleans, L.A., Detroit and D.C. ASAP.
Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh The MSM may be forced to report.
Bush the Politician was locked in to the "our leaders on the ground agree that we have all the troops we need" mantra.
It's what happens when politicians and political correctness trump the decisions of Generals in the combat zone.
In that case, you can count on the media/liberals to seriously play UP those that do occur.
You can also expect them to set the standard: "Even one is too many."
They'll never do the same for US cities, for other countries, but they will for Iraq.
I detest the MSM/liberals.
Wrong.
Let's hope and pray that the good news continues every day.
"I detest the MSM/liberals."
Same here. A plague on them. They wasted four years of our time with the "Joe and Val are being persecuted" crap, when there were journalists who could have told us it wasn't true. The MSM is just a business, and they are in the business of getting people to watch. Any old crap that accomplishes that is okay.
I believe that this is a result of sacking General Casey. Casey should have been sacked long ago. His "plan" and vision were to simply manage the war until such time as a withdrawal could take place. In other words, Casey managed the war to LOSE!
We are seeing results now because we have - finally - taken the gloves off and General David Petraeus is prosecuting this war to win!
Are we waiting to see if the reporting of a good event continues??? ;-)
Bump for an AP aberration. Let's hope it's contagious! :-D
This current strategy is no different than that which has been used throughout this campaign in Iraq.
The idea is to clear a city and then to hold up.
All along the president said that we were awaiting the numbers of Iraqi troops to make this viable.
One huge difference is that we're trying to hold Iran and Syria accountable.
The generals didn't need more troops before this. We didn't have the number of troops to dedicate to this mission if we were to try it just with American forces.
We needed a trained Iraqi Army to grow up to the point that they could participate in this.
One of the U.S. commanders thinks it won't last. He feels it's a the lull before the storm. Let's hope his concern is unfounded.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070216/pl_nm/iraq_usa_violence_dc
Sadly, Newark, NJ
A political strategy.
Military strategy would have been to immediately close the borders. With troops, tanks, aircraft, etc.
Let us hope.
I was going to say that at the rate Baghdad was going it would be tied with New Orleans by summer and with Philadelphia by fall.
"Even as Democrats force their "non-binding resolution" to undermine the mission through Congress..."
They are all in favor of giving the terrorists a fair chance. Unfortunately there are a pot full of republicans on their bandwagon.
"We need to pull out of New Orleans, L.A., Detroit and D.C. ASAP."
LOL!
*and maybe a good idea :)
During this phase of Operation Law & Order the government announced it is closing the borders with Iran and Syria. (Iran 72hours; Syria no length was given...indefinite?)
Other way around I believe. Syria 72 hrs and Iran unlimited.
No.
And yet the Democrats are flabergasted.
You wrote - "One huge difference is that we're trying to hold Iran and Syria accountable."
I think that would have been best acheived by first securing the borders.
I have faith in our CIC, but I'm not so blinded by party loyalty (not saying you are BTW) that I can't consider that the President is constrained by political circumstances.
They always said if I had to screw my head on that I'd screw it on backwards.
:>)
I agree about the political stuff.
We havent't been getting it on with Syria and Iran for the same reasons we held back on Laos and Cambodia during Vietnam....politics.
I think if our guys get attacked by anyone, they should AUTOMATICALLY be allowed to take it all the way back to its source. That would keep a lot of that crap from happening.
It would be preferable if they did not report overnight stats as any kind of trend. This is poor tactics, although the MSM might be doing it deliberately.
AMEN! May God bless and protect our soldiers!
"non-binding resolution"
what is the purpose of such an act?
The enemy are not dying, they are bugging out for the time being. This may be accomplishing nothing. We don't know.
I'd screw mine on upside down.
I agree RightWhale, we need to be very cautious here. The enemy TTP (Tactics Techniques and Procedures) has always been to study their targets thoroughly prior to launching any significant counteroffensive. You can bet your entire life's savings that GEN Petraeus is not claiming victory just yet. He understands that this thing has only just begun.
Maj. Gen. Joseph Fil, commander of U.S. forces in Baghdad, also reported a reduction in violence, attributing it to both the increased U.S. and Iraqi security presence and an apparent decision by the militias and insurgents to lay low. - AP
Should we be cautiously optimistic? Yes. Should we jump to conclusions about such spectacular and immediate results? Probably not just yet. Let's hold on to this excitement everyone...if we can be just as excited a month or two months from now it will be much sweeter.
Oh and by the way...I am starting a campaign to end "MSM" as the acronym for the Media Jackals. An "MSM" is a Meritorious Service Medal! Who's with me?
:>)
I am glad for anything that saves more innocent Iraqi lives.
>>It's not the surge that working, it's the aggressive sweep.<<
Frankly, for me, the new rules of engagement are much bigger news than the "surge". I am reminded of this line:
"Do we get to win this time" - Rambo
Looks like someone is deciding we might want to actually treat this like a war and not a "humanitarian thing".
What I'm worried about is that we don't seem to be engaging in any major combat with insurgents and militias; they seem to be just melting away. I might have missed some reports, but I don't get the sense that we're killing many bad guys or finding many weapons.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.