[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Editorial See other Editorial Articles Title: Echoes of Gen Westmoreland and Vietnam Echoes of Gen Westmoreland and Vietnam By Demetri Sevastopulo in Washington Published: September 9 2007 19:17 | Last updated: September 9 2007 19:17 There is a sense of déjà vu surrounding Monday’s Congressional testimony by General David Petraeus. In 1967, President Lyndon B. Johnson recalled his top general in Vietnam to defend the war against criticism from Congress. Back in Washington, General William Westmoreland said the military had reached a point where “the end begins to come into view”. There would be “light at the end of the tunnel”, but “mopping up the enemy” might take two more years. Forty years on, General Petraeus will deliver a similar message. Writing to troops ahead of his testimony, Gen Petraeus said the coalition had “achieved tactical momentum and wrested the initiative from our enemies in a number of areas of Iraq”. But he concluded the US was “a long way from the goal line, but we do have the ball and we are driving down the field”. The general is expected to say the US should not abandon the ball and walk off the pitch at this point. Most experts agree that the surge has helped improve security in Baghdad as US forces have spent more time integrated into neighbourhoods instead of patrolling in armoured vehicles. Anbar province has also seen less violence as tribal sheikhs switched from fighting US forces to siding with the Americans against al-Qaeda in Iraq. Some experts question, however, whether the improvement in Anbar was due more to serendipity than the surge. “The use of forward deployed US troops41;.41;.41;.41;has not stopped sectarian cleansing in Baghdad or elsewhere, but it has reduced the more brutal forms of violence,” Anthony Cordesman from the Centre for Strategic and International Studies, said recently. The war has already cost the lives of 3,760 US troops, and wounded 28,000 more. Iraq Body Count, a group that monitors Iraqi deaths, estimates that 70,000 Iraqis have been killed. It says there has been a “modest improvement” in security compared with the bloody second half of 2006, but that the first half of 2007 was the “most deadly first six months for civilians” of any year since the invasion. According to data from the independent Iraq Coalition Casualty Count there has been progress since the surge came into full effect in June with average daily fatalities falling from 4.23 in May to 2.84 by July. The same group calculated that 2,074 Iraqis were killed in August, down from 2,966 a year before. So far in September, 174 Iraqis have died, against 3,543 last September, the bloodiest month since the invasion. Gen Petraeus concedes “tangible political progress” expected from the surge has “not worked out as we had hoped”. But he is expected to argue that Iraqi leaders should be given more time. Unlike Gen Westmoreland, who was lambasted for calling Congressional critics “unpatriotic”, Gen Petraeus is more attuned to the need to appease Congress, if only to buy time. Media reports last week suggested he told President George W.41;Bush he could make a token withdrawal of one brigade – about 4,000 troops – to assuage concerns, although one senior military officer cautioned that no such decisions had been taken. There are about 170,000 US troops in Iraq. Gen Petraeus last week echoed the views of senior officers in Washington when he suggested the surge would start winding down from April, when the 15-month tours of the five “surge” brigades started to end. As the surge ends, however, the focus will shift to whether Mr Bush will keep forces at the pre-surge level of about 135,000, or whether he will consider further reductions, accomplished by not replacing some of the other 15 combat brigades. Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: tom007 (#0)
We killed the only Iraqi leader who had a handle on things.
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||