Kerry,

Anybody with a brain knows that if you put more boots on the ground you can prevent violence, but that doesn't mean you are solving the underlying problems that cause people to commit violence. The true test of whether the surge did anything to solve the violence is to draw down the troops and see if the violence returns. If it does...which I suspect it will, you have failed to do anything but delay the violence, not solve it.

So yah us Liberals will admit that you've temporarily capped the violence, but we are still going to point out to you very forcefully that the Iraqi government hasn't even come close to meeting the multiple mandates set by the US to clean up its act. And our friend Bush who doesn't seemed to know how to solve anything that doesn't involve the use of military force hasn't pushed them very hard if at all.

So I will tell you what the surge has done. It has postponed the violence, drained America's treasure, and made it quite clear that the only thing that is going to stop Iraq from disintegrating is if we sustain the surge forever, killing off our troops and bleeding ourselves dry because our administration doesn't know how to do anything else. That's a hell of a solution we have come up with. Oh yah! Lets have another dance on an aircraft carrier and proclaim year 5 of our 100 year occupation of Iraq.

Wow! Mamet says insightful and intelligent things. All Ahman can say is "blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Sad.

Lisa,

There is not one idoa of incorrectness in what I said. How many government reports stating that Iraqis are sitting on their hands do you need before you believe it?

The Iraqi president is perfectly happy to let us be his bodyguard and pay for that protection as long as we are stupid enough to do it. And like an ass, we keep doing it with no expectation that they have to do anything.

Don't worry.....when the politicians in Iraq start getting MORE stuff done on a regular basis, libs will point to the next talking point of "things that aren't getting done" to their "never gonna meet it" satisfaction. First it was "the Iraqis aren't doing enough to provide security" and then when that started to come to fruition due to long-term training and handing over security terrirtories it became "the politicians aren't doing enough for the country".....what's next when THAT continues to work out in favor of the Iraqi people? Maybe the complaining that we're taking away their AKs and giving them M-16s?

BTW, the politicians ARE getting things done in their fledgeling government, just not as fast as YOU and you and the rest of the "whiners from day-one until day 'X'", want them to......and no matter how much they DO get done, it will never be enough for the likes of you because you NEED to complain about it.

BTW, as of last June, there were 95 battalions of well-trained and mostly-trained Iraqis in the new Iraqi Army (not including the other 300,000 "security forces")....that's about 60,000 Iraqi Army troops....completely controlling 7 out of 18 Iraqi provinces and are "in the lead" with American support in another 7 provinces.....soon to be turned over as well.

In total...that's over half the country, including half of Baghdad. Not a bad job considering they had exactly ZERO NCO Corps.....and won't have a really effective NCO Corps for another 1-3 years.

oh and I bet they'd be getting things done alot faster if the alternative was we pull the plug and darkness falls on their little circle of protection in the green zone. Difficult situations have always spurred more action and inventiveness throughout history than easy ones. That's why you are more likely to see a guy learn how to run if you drop him in a hot bed of coals than if you dumped him on a feather bed.

Not a bad job considering they had exactly ZERO NCO Corps.....and won't have a really effective NCO Corps for another 1-3 years.

They don't have an NCO corps because like morons Bush disbanded it, and now that NCO corps is shooting back at us. Sunni insurgents anyone....duh.

Before you "d'uh" anyone with your NCO Corps ignorance.....learn about what an NCO Corps is and why it's necessary in an effective fighting force.....then learn the organizational structure of the former Iraqi army....and every other ineffective army in the world.

Despite your latest edition of "but but but Bush" whining, there wasn't an NCO Corps to begin with for Bush to disband, dumbass. They never had one. Just like every other country over there never had one. It's what makes their armies completely ineffective. It's just not how they organize their armies.

THEY have a 2-class organization....commanders and underlings. Commanders that don't know shit commanding entirely too large groups of underlings that don't know shit. The NCO Corps bridges the gap with experienced Sarges. Sarges that lead a small handful of guys....that are accountable for that small handful of guys.

D'uh......once again typing about that which you know nothing of.

Spewing absolutely stupidly incorrect talking points just shows how friggin' uninformed you are.

How dare those Iraqis not have an up and running non-dictatorial government getting everything done for the People....yet another something they've never had...with a speed that satisfies whiney libs.

Hmm, that's funny it seems Saddam was rather affective at keeping his country under control before we got there. Maybe he did it all "his own damn self" cause his army was just a bunch of incompetent dumb asses. Something I find rather unlikely.

effective...not affective...

Saddam didn't use the ineffective "NCO Corps free" Iraqi army to "keep his people in control".....he used the brutal Fedayeen (Fidayeen).......his version of the Fascstii....and the violence they'd unleash....the killing those getting out of line...the silencing of dissent. Maybe if you stopped blindly bashing Bush and educated yourself you wouldn't prove yourself to be so damned ignorant in matters concerning that which you know not. HERE's a great read about why "their" armies suck.....but educating yourself is much harder than throwing around lame Bush bashing tid-bits.

....and how is "keeping a civlian populace in line" proof of an army's "effectiveness"? It's not.....it's just another military ignorant punchline for you to throw out with a little jab at America for fucking up kite-flying peaceful Iraq.

Put the Iraqi army against an army 1/4 the size that has an NCO Corps and the NCOs will win every time because of the sheer increase in command and control over the privates makes them more effective.

Go on.....tell me again all about that Iraqi Army's NCO Corps that Bush disbanded.

Your military ignorance is shining brightly like always....you should stick to the talking points.

Sarge,

I could care less about the details. There are only two points to be made.

One, the Iraqis are not incompetent, if they want to make the regular army like the Fidayeen they could. Not necessarily in their brutality...but in their ability to be organized and effective.

Two we got rid of any structure no matter how inefficient that it was there, that could have been used to control the situation in Iraq before it got out of hand. And as a result we unleashed a bunch of guys trained to use weapons, most with only a cursory loyality to Saddam, without a paycheck. And we know what they became...a giant disgruntled adults that are now taking their frustration out on the US, instead of the more productive use we could have put them to. We could have always restructured their command structure, and done it a hell of alot easier than just disbanding the whole the damn thing, and then waiting years before trying to pick up the pieces.

"I could care less about the details. There are only two points to be made."

Details, shmetails. Two points, and he's outta here.

"One, the Iraqis are not incompetent, if they want to make the regular army like the Fidayeen they could. Not necessarily in their brutality...but in their ability to be organized and effective."

That's like saying you could have an investigatory body just like the KGB, except without being so evil..just in their ability to find things out.

Fedayeen is Fedayeen BECAUSE it is brutal and without conscience.

"Two we got rid of any structure no matter how inefficient that it was there, that could have been used to control the situation in Iraq before it got out of hand. And as a result we unleashed a bunch of guys trained to use weapons, most with only a cursory loyality to Saddam, without a paycheck. And we know what they became...a giant disgruntled adults that are now taking their frustration out on the US, instead of the more productive use we could have put them to. We could have always restructured their command structure, and done it a hell of alot easier than just disbanding the whole the damn thing, and then waiting years before trying to pick up the pieces."

What about the legions of criminals and mental defective Saddam unleashed on the street right before he split the scene? Not relevant to the chaos that ensued?

How wise you are to have boiled the entire Iraq war down to these two brilliant points. It's like watching Georges Seurat wielding a paintball gun against a postcard. Splat.

You know, ahmanrah, you are exactly the type of brain-dead liberal David Mamet would tell to shut the F up. (Of course, he would be a bit less delicate.)

Always Be Closing if you wanna win the knife set.

Kerry,

We aren't talking about the criminals, we are talking about the army stay on point...or you have no argument.

And I clearly said the Fedayeen's efficiency...not it brutality. Its clear the Fedayeen was far better trained than the Iraq army. And the fact that Saddam had a force that was well trained, means that Iraqis don't need America to tell them how to be efficient or run an army. Because they obvious were capable of training such a force themselves. Or they wouldn't have had the Fedayeen. Duh!

And despite all of this. What the Iraq army did have in the way of organization, was better than just disbanding a bunch of guys who knew how to shoot guns, but after getting disbanded didn't have a paycheck. What do guys trained to fight wars do, when they don't have money? I wonder. They put their talents to use for a guy promising to give them a better life....I wonder who that someone could have been...Al Qaeda? Sunni tribal chiefs and strong men. Hmm.

As far as the rest of your comments they aren't saying a whole lot of anything.

Oh and above I am not saying that every disbanded iraqi army guy was inclined to pick up a gun and become a mercenary to survive. But in the middle of a war, when the chances of finding another job plummet, it seems very likely to me that alot of these guys would have caved to the thought of hiring themselves out to anybody that would promise them money, a way to feed their families and a better life in the end.

So, the news in Mamet's piece?

I could care less about the details.

That sums up your entire ignorant attitude. You coud care less about details. You'd rather throw around lies like "Bush disbanded the NCO Corps". Nice 2 y.o. mentality. Tell me all about that Iraqi NCO Corps that you claim Bush disbanded, oh mighty ignorant one.

There are only two points to be made.

You have NO points to be made as you don't know what the fuck you're talking about concerning ANYTHING military.

One, the Iraqis are not incompetent, if they want to make the regular army like the Fidayeen they could. Not necessarily in their brutality...but in their ability to be organized and effective.

BULLSHIT.....period. The Iraqis as individuals are not incompetent, their military structure is incompetent as a fighting force, you dumbass. Once again, I'll provide for you that which you will not read so that maybe, one day, you will have something non-ignorant to say about the matter. A good read on why Arab armies SUCK. You don't even know ANYTHING about the Fedayeen and you're gonna talk about them like they were an effective well-organized military unit. They were mostly UNTRAINED PARAMILITARY ASSHOLES that used brutality to control the lives of the majority Shi'ite civilian population, nothing more. They were Saddam's Fascistii that conducted all the dirty work for the Ba'athist government....they were his thugs....his Death Squad. As a military force, the Fedayeen were completely incompetent and untrained in military tactics. The ability to behead a woman or pull a trigger isn't exactly a definer of great military effectiveness.

Point #1 must be that you have no fucking clue what you're talking about.....point taken.

Two we got rid of any structure no matter how inefficient that it was there, that could have been used to control the situation in Iraq before it got out of hand.

BULLSHIT...period. Once again, you're showing your complete ignorance of the historical chain of events without engaging the brain. First, the former Iraqi army had already disbanded itself or they would have been shot fucking dead by our guys or taken prisoner like the last time they came into contact with our guys over a decade earlier. It's not like they all got in uniform and held an Iraqi army formation and our commanders said "dismissed" and they all went home. They took off their uniforms and simply walked away from the fight before the fight started, dumbass. THERE WAS NO ARMY TO DISBAND. Secondly, you're too stupidly stuck with the talking points to not engage the brain one whit. When the fuck was the last time an army used the enemy army to do ANYTHING, let alone provide security for something? NEVER....it's not done, you stupid summabitch. "We" recruited the current Iraqi army just like "we" should have done and took them elsewhere for training.....OUR kind of training with OUR kind of NCO Corps structure. More efficient than anything they'd ever learned.

And as a result we unleashed a bunch of guys trained to use weapons, most with only a cursory loyality to Saddam, without a paycheck.

"WE" unleashed NOTHING. "They" disbanded themselves, dumbass. Is this all you really have? Nothing but anti-American sentiments about how "we" unleashed the former Iraqi millitary on the People of Iraq? Talk about intellectually void...

And we know what they became...a giant disgruntled adults that are now taking their frustration out on the US, instead of the more productive use we could have put them to.

You do not use the military of your enemy to do ANYTHING, dumbass....EVER.

We could have always restructured their command structure, and done it a hell of alot easier than just disbanding the whole the damn thing, and then waiting years before trying to pick up the pieces.

Military ignorance is bliss. You do not "restructure" an ineffective command structure, you get rid of it and start anew and MAKE a new command structure from the ground up in the method that IS effective.....ESPECIALLY when the old structure was the kind it was....a 2 caste system of wealthy commanders and poor followers. You start anew with OUR guys being the "commanders" and "NCO Corps" until "they" get enough experience to become Sarges themselves.....and then you promote the "good Sarges" to be Lieutenants and then promote the good Lieutenants to be Captains. It takes a loooooooong time to creat an effective force, not just a restructuring of untrained and inexperienced dumbasses.

But that's all beside the point because THERE WAS NO IRAQI ARMY FOR US "RESTRUCTURE", dumbass. They walked away from the fight.

Its clear the Fedayeen was far better trained than the Iraq army.

THAT is a bold-faced lie based on COMPLETE IGNORANCE. The Fedayeen were UNTRAINED BRUTAL ASSHOLES, nothing more.

And the fact that Saddam had a force that was well trained, means that Iraqis don't need America to tell them how to be efficient or run an army.

Ummmmmmm....you REALLY don't know anything about the military that Saddam had. The ONLY well trained guys at Saddam's disposal were the Republican Guard....and we wiped the floor with them at every fight because they DID stand up and fight...some.... We didn't beat their asses because of our technology...rather "our way" is more effective than "their way". Their Republican Guarg guys might be trained, but the individual guys were ineffective as a unit because they still had the 2-casts system without an NCO corps.

Duh!

You have no intellectual standing to be sayin' "d'uh" to ANYONE. The Fedayeen were a buncha untrained boobs with a brutal mentality that took out their aggressions on innocent civilians. Such an effective force indeed....

Tell me again about how Bush disbanded the Iraqi NCO Corps....

Wow....THAT sucked without the proper tags....try again.

I could care less about the details.

That sums up your entire ignorant attitude. You coud care less about details. You'd rather throw around lies like "Bush disbanded the NCO Corps". Nice 2 y.o. mentality. Tell me all about that Iraqi NCO Corps that you claim Bush disbanded, oh mighty ignorant one.

There are only two points to be made.

You have NO points to be made as you don't know what the fuck you're talking about concerning ANYTHING military.

One, the Iraqis are not incompetent, if they want to make the regular army like the Fidayeen they could. Not necessarily in their brutality...but in their ability to be organized and effective.

BULLSHIT.....period. The Iraqis as individuals are not incompetent, their military structure is incompetent as a fighting force, you dumbass. Once again, I provided for you that which you will not read so that maybe, one day, you will have something non-ignorant to say about the matter. A good read on why Arab armies SUCK. You don't even know ANYTHING about the Fedayeen and you're gonna talk about them like they were an effective well-organized military unit. They were mostly UNTRAINED PARAMILITARY ASSHOLES that used brutality to control the lives of the majority Shi'ite civilian population, nothing more. They were Saddam's Fascistii that conducted all the dirty work for the Ba'athist government....they were his thugs....his Death Squad. As a military force, the Fedayeen were completely incompetent and untrained in military tactics. The ability to behead a woman or pull a trigger isn't exactly a definer of great military effectiveness.

And as a result we unleashed a bunch of guys trained to use weapons, most with only a cursory loyality to Saddam, without a paycheck.

"WE" unleashed NOTHING. "They" disbanded themselves, dumbass. Is this all you really have? Nothing but anti-American sentiments about how "we" unleashed the former Iraqi millitary on the People of Iraq? Talk about intellectually void...

And we know what they became...a giant disgruntled adults that are now taking their frustration out on the US, instead of the more productive use we could have put them to.

You do not use the military of your enemy to do ANYTHING, dumbass....EVER.

We could have always restructured their command structure, and done it a hell of alot easier than just disbanding the whole the damn thing, and then waiting years before trying to pick up the pieces.

Military ignorance is bliss. You do not "restructure" an ineffective command structure, you get rid of it and start anew and MAKE a new command structure from the ground up in the method that IS effective.....ESPECIALLY when the old structure was the kind it was....a 2 caste system of wealthy commanders and poor followers. You start anew with OUR guys being the "commanders" and "NCO Corps" until "they" get enough experience to become Sarges themselves.....and then you promote the "good Sarges" to be Lieutenants and then promote the good Lieutenants to be Captains. It takes a loooooooong time to creat an effective force, not just a restructuring of untrained and inexperienced dumbasses.

But that's all beside the point because THERE WAS NO IRAQI ARMY FOR US "RESTRUCTURE", dumbass. They walked away from the fight.

Its clear the Fedayeen was far better trained than the Iraq army.

THAT is a bold-faced lie based on COMPLETE IGNORANCE. The Fedayeen were UNTRAINED BRUTAL ASSHOLES, nothing more.

And the fact that Saddam had a force that was well trained, means that Iraqis don't need America to tell them how to be efficient or run an army.

Ummmmmmm....you REALLY don't know anything about the military that Saddam had. The ONLY well trained guys at Saddam's disposal were the Republican Guard....and we wiped the floor with them at every fight because they DID stand up and fight...some.... We didn't beat their asses because of our technology...rather "our way" is more effective than "their way". Their Republican Guarg guys might be trained, but the individual guys were ineffective as a unit because they still had the 2-casts system without an NCO corps.

Duh!

You have no intellectual standing to be sayin' "d'uh" to ANYONE. The Fedayeen were a buncha untrained boobs with a brutal mentality that took out their aggressions on innocent civilians. Such an effective force indeed....

Tell me again about how Bush disbanded the Iraqi NCO Corps....

But in the middle of a war, when the chances of finding another job plummet, it seems very likely to me that alot of these guys would have caved to the thought of hiring themselves out to anybody that would promise them money, a way to feed their families and a better life in the end.

Uh.....yeah.....that's why recruiting for the NEW Iraqi army was so easy to do right from the start and why there are 360,000 members of the Iraqi security forces. Keep talking though....you're showing complete ignorance thus far...and a few blatant lies.

Now you're sounding a bit naive, Sarge. 360k members of the security force, huh? Some of those guys are just names and signatures that allow someone to pick up a check every month. Many of them are Iraqi security in name, all the while funneling arms and ammunitions to the black market, or their true factions. One day, they will receive the call, and rejoin the Mahdi army, or whatever flag they really rally to. They'll take all that nice American training and equipment back to shoot the bloody hell out of each other.

You can stop violence with a surge, but you can't create the culture of a modern state with one, or obliterate the tribal culture. The surge will end, and I do not believe it has pushed us past any tipping points. I could be wrong, but time will tell, either way.

As for dismissing the Feyadeen or "disbanding" the Iraqi army, I have no strong opinion. A similar decision which I do believe to have been a bone-headed mistake was the initial banning of Baathists from positions in the transitional government. I think that was an obvious mistake; one that is apparent to all in retrospect, and should have been apparent to those in charge at the time of their decision.

Actually, if you're gonna call me naive, you better check your internal data that you seem to be running on. Matter of fact, the 360K are from LAST SUMMER's numbers. Yes, it includes many police and other security forces that aren't elite military. BUT, as of THIS MONTH, there are now 531,000 members of the ISG......180,000 of them military, 340,000 "police" and the rest fall under "other"....facilities protection forces....like our "capital police".

So how do you like THAT 531,000 number? Yeah....I'm naive....

The breakdown is as follows:

Iraqi army....about 180,000 troops...60,000 fully ORA level 1 trained, the rest in various levels of training, but seeing combat duty with "us" in the lead.

VERY important is the number of army guys on the ground getting actual trigger time......it's up from about 60% to about 80%. AND, they have 73$ of officer slots filled and 69% of the NCO slots filled. THAT AIN'T BAD in such a short time.

Iraqi navy...yes they have a puny navy....about 800 troops right now.

Iraqi AF: 3000 troops in one recon squadron, one helicopter squadron and one airlift group.

Iraqi police: 340,000 in 4 groups....the Iraqi Police Service (local guys), the National Police (paramilitary...28K of 'em), the Department of Border Enforcement...and the faciliti8es protection service (protecting all the government buildings and shit like that.

Yes, there's corruption. Yes, there's shit going on that shouldn't. Yes, pick 531,000 AMERICAN troops and policemen and you'd find corruption and shit that ain't supposed to be goin on...and we've got a "civil" culture.

No, I don't think they've got 531,000 friggin' Seal Team qualified troopers with an impeccable work ethic built up. Yes, I understand that there's bad people in the world. Yes, some of them have loyalties elsewhere.......but to sit back in your armchair and belittle the great advances just smacks of sheer unwillingness to see the big picture positives that are going on.

Maybe YOU can tell me all about the NCO corps that Bush disbanded.....

Talking about what might maybe happen "one day" is purely speculational. I can make up what might happen one day too.

One day, Islam will see that, in order to live in the civil modern world, it will have to reform itself and let the people following Islam to be free to live their lives as they see fit. Might take centuries.....might take them seeing the light.......brilliant flash of blinding light over Mecca.

As to your last bit....I actually have no problem with them banning the Ba'athists from the ORIGINAL transitional government...should we have had the Nazis take part post-WWII??? I have no problem banning the remaining Taliban from the Afghani government. THEY were the ones fucking everything up for the People....getting uber-rich while those in the vast majority got dead by the Fedayeen that ahmanrah thinks were highly trained military troops.

BUT, once the governmnet gets more formed and the voting starts....then you've gotta at least let Ba'athists represent Ba'athist supporters in their regions if that's what the regional people want.

....and yeah...."some of the guys are just a name on a piece of paper".

Ever taken a look at the rolls of the local National Guard here in the States? They're FULL of guys names that aren't even there so they can both stay on the books as a unit AND get the funding for the unit. I'd bet my left nut that MY name is still on the books of the MA ANG after 11 years of separation.

Big deal....it doesn't discredit the notion that they're making great strides of achievement in building up their civlian, paramilitary,and military security forces.

Actually, if you're gonna call me naive, you better check your internal data that you seem to be running on.

Sarge, the charge of naivitee has nothing to do with your numbers per se (that's not what naivitee is). Whatever the numbers, they're not much more of an army than what came before. You want to blur the lines by saying there's the occasional corruption in our forces, the occasional corruption in theirs... guess it's all the same, right? It's all a wash? Yeah, right. My point is that it's not a functional army.

Maybe YOU can tell me all about the NCO corps that Bush disbanded.....

That's not a point I made. Do we all look the same to you? Don't answer that.

As to your last bit....I actually have no problem with them banning the Ba'athists from the ORIGINAL transitional government.

Locking out the Baathists is part of what led to the problems getting the Sunnis to the table. I've always said that they are our natural allies in Iraq, moreso than the Shiites. This is starting to dawn on them as they glean what a Shiite-run Iraq might look like (e.g. Iran).

Much comes down to whether or not there is going to be a huge civil war when we leave, and whether that would necessitate our re-entry. Would you agree? Yes, that seems pretty obvious. Is this army going to stabilize Iraq, or contribute to its chaos? 531k can be a great number or a horrible number, depending on what they are doing.

It IS encouraging to see that we have finally engaged the Sunnis. They have been stupid, and doubtless foreign Jihadists have been using them for purposes contrary to their self-interest. But I think everyone's just girding themselves for the next stage. I guess we'll see.

should we have had the Nazis take part post-WWII??? I have no problem banning the remaining Taliban from the Afghani government.

In the case of the Taliban, they are not the same thing. The Taliban was far more ideological and far less technically relevant to the operation of a modern state.

In the case of the Nazis, I'd look at it on more of a case by case basis. In some parts of Germany, party membership was so widespread as to be meaningless, and to include most of your bureaucrats and probably technicians. Are you sure they were barred in a likewise manner?

My sense is that this ban contributed to the early chaos in Iraq. During this period, I believe that we squandered great (perhaps irreplaceable) opportunities to remake Iraq positively.

Obviously, I've never been sanguine about this mission, but if there was ever a time I thought we had a chance to succeed, it was in the months immediately following the invasion. Why do I say this? Because I think in that time, it is natural to have a sense of open possibility. I think at this time we could have nudged Iraq in the right direction. But when chaos came calling, they ultimately fell back on their tribal roots, which have become stronger as a result. They lost faith in our interest or ability to improve their lives. The institutions of the new order there have already taken root.

Could the surge change this? I don't think so. A wise man once said "Fool me once..." They know the surge is going to end, and then what? Is the Iraqi army going to, in a nonpartisan manner, work against troublemakers? Does the Iraqi government have the political will to control Kurdish radicals?

Big deal....it doesn't discredit the notion that they're making great strides of achievement in building up their civlian, paramilitary,and military security forces.

What are these great strides, besides recruitment numbers?

I'd write more but I have a plane to catch...

Sarge, the charge of naivitee has nothing to do with your numbers per se (that's not what naivitee is). Whatever the numbers, they're not much more of an army than what came before. You want to blur the lines by saying there's the occasional corruption in our forces, the occasional corruption in theirs... guess it's all the same, right? It's all a wash? Yeah, right. My point is that it's not a functional army.

Fella......those that are well-trained are 1000 times the army than they were before.....about 60,000 of 'em....that's 2 complete divisions of a VERY effectively trained army.....more than Iraq has EVER had and it's growing by thosands every month out of the big pool of "not yet fully trained" recruits.

What are these great strides, besides recruitment numbers?

Great strides in filling the NCO corps and the Officer Corps with highly trained troops instead of the 2-caste ineffective system they had.......and in fully taking over the security operations in 7 of 18 provinces, including half of Baghdad.

Those are great strides when starting from scratch.

Still take them another 2-3 years to fully build the NCO Corps to 95% capacity, but 69% in 3+ years.....THAT's a great stride.

Hell...even the MoI seeing the corruption problem in the National Police is a great stride from the turn a blind eye that used to occur with the Fedayeen.....as was their decision last year to have a full retraining of the entire National Police...28,000 guys....to try to minimize such corruption..

The good things are always there for those looking for it amongst the reporting of only the bad. The newsies didn't like it much when things looked better over the past year. Now that more bombings are occurring, they're liking the reporting of the blood sausage again.