Iraq in two years' time: your predictions

Repeated attempts to impose an Islamist constitution will be furiously opposed by the Kurds. Kurdish areas will again be described as "enclaves" and the Iraqi government will have no power within them. Checkpoints will be set up at the borders of Kurdish areas, manned by armed Kurds. A tacit understanding of Kurdish independence will prevent civil war, but the northern oil fields will be a flashpoint that constantly exposes the rift. Animosity will run high.

The schedule for removing US soldiers will constantly fail to meet rosy public projections and stall out with somewhere between 80,000 and 60,000 staying on for the "long, hard slog" - now a catchphrase.

As nailclipper predicts, the troops will be concentrated in Baghdad and the oil fields and scarcely anywhere else. A few units will make showy forays in force into the Sunni areas around Falyuja and Tikrit. Nothing will come of this. The death total will be nearing 1500. No one will talk about the 10,000 maimed and wounded, except as heartwarming stories of courage and perseverance.

Whoever is in the White House, their strategy will be to emphasise our commitment to making democracy work in Iraq, the need to stay the course and not turn tail and run, or it will embolden terrorists to attack us even more, while continually trying to keep the news focus on the Iraqi government's efforts and failures, so as to distance the blame from Washington.

If it is President Kerry, he'll forthrightly embrace the Bush policies, talk tough, but always manage to remind people it was Bush who handed him this mess.

There will be continuing violence and rebellions for another year, but Iraq won't turn into Afghanistan because its history and culture is nothing like Afghanistan's tribal clusterfuck. Once the oil money starts pumping into the Iraqi economy instead of Husseini palaces and Franco/Russo bank accounts, we'll see the return of Iraq's historically large, stable, relatively secular middle class. And they'll make a Turkey-style democracy possible.

haha anybody remember the "Basra uprising" in ye olde earlye days of the invasion? how heartwarming it was?

http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0405/dailyUpdate.html?s=entt

I wonder if the situation in Iraq is actually going according to secret plan to create total chaos and thus the need to set up a permanent presence, basically taking it over as a territory and eventually expand from there in due time. We know Bush and Cheney are total liars and they keep saying everything is going "according to plan," but maybe this time they're telling the truth. We just don't know what they mean, so we laugh at this idea and criticize them for having a terrible war strategy and refusing to admit it, which really doesn't make any sense, if you think about it. That's the kind of thing you might do while your temping somewhere, not when your in charge of a huge war. But withholding this strategy does make sense. People get good and fed up and are willing to accept whatever works to end the war, an Iraq America, Jr. Then, it doesn't seem so much like we just invaded them and took them over.

In an interview with Amy Goodman on March 2, 2007, U.S. General Wesley Clark (Ret.), explains that the Bush Administration planned to take out 7 countries in 5 years: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Lybia, Somalia, Sudan, Iran.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXS3vW47mOE

So, at least he's sticking to the same story. Does it seem like nobody cares about this little story? Does everyone thinking he's just a liar?

That same day, March 2, 2007, Bush discussed the War on Terror with Associated General Contractors of America

http://tinyurl.com/26ksd5

And here are some of the things he said:

"The most important fact about our new strategy, it is fundamentally different from the previous strategy. The previous strategy wasn't working the way we wanted it to work. It's interesting, they run polls -- and I accept that -- and it said, you know, we don't approve of what's happening in Iraq. That was what the poll said last fall and winter, you know. And had they polled me, I'd have said the same thing. (Laughter.) I didn't approve of what was happening in Iraq. And so we put a new strategy in that was fundamentally different.

First of all, Petraeus, General Petraeus is an expert on counterinsurgency, and his top priority is to help the Iraqi leaders -- who, by the way, were elected by nearly 12 million of their citizens -- secure their population. And the reason why is, is that this young democracy needed some time to make important political decisions to help reconcile the country. After a thorough review, we concluded the best way to help Iraq's leaders to provide security was to send more troops into the nation's capital, into the country; was to send reinforcements to those troops which were already there. And their job was to go after the extremists and radicals who were inciting sectarian violence. Their job was to help get Baghdad under control. And their job was to continue to train Iraqi forces for the day they can secure the country on their own.

Last week, General Petraeus came to Washington, and he updated me and he updated the Congress on the early stages of this new strategy -- and I repeat, early stages. He reminded us that not all the reinforcements he'd requested have arrived, that it's going to be at least until the end of this summer that he will know whether or not the new strategy has achieved successes.

And that means the strategy is in early stages. My view is the Congress and the country ought to give General Petraeus time to see whether or not this works. And it's interesting, he goes up in front of the Senate and gets confirmed unanimously. And he said, I need more troops, during his testimony; send me more troops and I will go implement a new plan. They said, okay, fine, we confirm you. And yet there are some doubts in Washington whether or not they ought to send the troops.

The troops are going, the strategy is new, and the General said, let's give it some time to work to see whether or not it's successful, and I'll be able to report back to the country by the end of this summer.

The most significant element of the new strategy is being carried out in the capital. The whole purpose is to secure the capital. My theory is, and it's a good one, is that if the capital is in chaos, the country can't -- it's going to be difficult for the country to survive.

The strategy is also being carried out in what's called surrounding belts. This is the areas that kind of arc around the capital, and it's a place where there's been a lot of planning and plotting and attacking. Three American brigades, totaling about 12,000 reinforcements, have taken up their positions in the Baghdad area. The fourth brigade, fourth of five, is heading into Baghdad this week. And the fifth is on its way. In other words, you just don't take five brigades and move them in overnight. There's a sequencing that has to take place, and that sequencing is now being completed.

The Iraqis, by the way, have increased their own forces. In other words, this is a joint operation. This is the Americans and coalition forces helping the Iraqis provide security so that the average person can live a peaceful life. That's what they want. And so we've got about a total of 80,000 combat forces now in the Baghdad area -- U.S., combined with the Iraqi forces. The position of the forces is shifting. We used to have our forces live in bases outside the city. They would go in at night or during the day and then leave and go back home at night. They did a fine job, as we expect our U.S. forces to do, the Iraqi forces would do so. And then when they would leave, killers would move back in.

And so now we've got American troops are now living and working in small neighborhood posts called joint security stations. This is what's fundamentally different from the strategy. Our troops, with the Iraqis, go into a neighborhood, and they stay. They operate side by side with the Iraqi forces.

What's interesting is, is that the plan, General Petraeus's plan, is to help build trust. And when you build trust, you end up getting people buying into a centralized government, a unity government, a country that is united. And not only that, you end up getting cooperation from people. Remember, most people want to live peaceful lives. I hope this make sense to you, because I firmly believe that Iraqi moms want their child to grow up in a peaceful world, just like American moms do.

The level of cooperation from local residents is important. It's an indication as to whether or not we're making progress: our ability to take weapons off the street and break up extremist groups; the willingness of Iraqis to join their security forces is an interesting measurement. And, finally, it's important to measure the level of sectarian violence. If the objective is to bring security to the capital, one measurement is whether or not sectarian violence is declining. These measures are really not flashy. In other words, they're not headline-grabbing measures. They certainly can't compete with a car bomb or a suicide attack. But they are interesting indications. And as General Petraeus reported, these are heading in the right direction.

For example, General Petraeus reports that American and Iraqi forces received more tips from local residents in the past four months than during any other four-month period on record. People are beginning to have some confidence and they're beginning to step forth with information, information that will help them live normal lives.

Thanks to these tips the number of weapons caches that are being seized are growing each month. Better intelligence has led American and Iraqi forces in Baghdad and the surrounding belts to conduct operations against Sunni and Shia extremists. My attitude is, if murderers run free, it's going to be hard to convince the people of any society that the government is worth supporting. And, therefore, the Iraqis and U.S. forces and coalition forces are after murderers regardless of their religious affiliation."

So...

It looks like they may have found a way to get the Iraqis, for one, to welcome their new American overlords. I wonder if it will work with Syria, Lebanon, Lybia, Somalia, Sudan and Iran.

In see my predictions were too cheerful by a factor of two. Numbers of US soldiers both deployed and killed are double what I predicted. But I was expecting Kerry to win.