The main threat to victory is that enough Shias will go loopy under the influence of Iran to throw Iraq into Iran's camp. The Iraqi Shias prone to this thinking are a minority, but as we saw with the Sunni Arab minority under Saddam, a few with guns and the will to kill can dominate a majority. This Shia threat prevents the Sunni Arabs from surrendering and getting on with their lives in a new Iraq.
Sadr is the local Shia puppet of Iran who must be broken. Our "surge" will take this task on:
The new security plan, backed up by an additional 20,000 U.S. troops, aims to take down the Sunni and Shia militias. These organizations were left in place for the last three years, because they provided some security. But in the last year, the militias have become the source of most insecurity, as Shia death squads killed Sunnis in a bloody vendetta for decades of oppression. The Sunni Arab terrorists killed Shia to try and scare them into allowing Sunni Arabs to run the country again. Over the past two years, U.S. and Iraqi government intelligence agencies have compiled extensive data on the militias, and where they hang out. The crackdown would not expect to destroy armed Sunni and Shia partisans, but their organizations would be smashed, and their numbers greatly diminished.
This is a relief. I've worried about the purpose of a surge and the impact of a poorly conceived surge. This article has some details of briefings on the plan:
The latest increase calls for sending 17,500 U.S. combat troops to Baghdad. The first of five brigades will arrive by next Monday. The next would arrive by Feb. 15 and the reminder would come in 30-day increments.
Bush also committed 4,000 more Marines to Anbar Province, a base of the Sunni insurgency and foreign al-Qaida fighters.
The bulk of the U.S. buildup will come from extending the deployments of three Army brigades and two Marine battalions and moving one Army brigade into Iraq a bit sooner than scheduled.
This is interesting. This isn't a surge of 21,500. This is one new Army brigade of 3,500, moving one Army brigade in earlier, extending 3 Army brigades already in Iraq, and extending 2 Marine MEUs (battalion task forces). As I'd written before, I figured one new brigade plus special ops would suffice for taking down Sadr. The rest of our units are coming from inside Iraq. So unless I'm missing something, there is a surge of 3,500 new American troops that will temporatily add 7,000 troops above our base strength. Plus Iraqi units. [UPDATE A FEW MINUTES LATER: If three regularly scheduled brigades arrive as scheduled to replace those brigades leaving, then we get a surge of 17,500. If it is the same for the extended Marine units, we get up to 21,500. Since the "surge" is gradual over months, this must be the case. How long are the units being extended anyway?]
And it is not enough for us to have a good strategy. The sovereign government of Iraq must not shield Sadr as they have in the past.
The Iraqis seem to be on board with this plan, which is essential for its success:
True reconciliation in line with what happened in South Africa and Ireland is needed for resolution of the conflict in Iraq, but that reconciliation must be free from regional stipulations. Economics is also key, as gainful employment keeps Iraqi youths away from the insurgents. All of this must be preceded by a coordinated effort to secure Baghdad, which has become a haven for militia and terrorist activity.
We need a greater focus on the militias, which kill innocent civilians and defy the government with impunity. The Pentagon recently told Congress that the militias pose more of a danger to the security and stability of Iraq than do the terrorist groups operating there. Militias do not differ from other terrorist groups; therefore, the Iraqi government and the United States must classify militias as such and must treat and fight them in the same manner as other terrorists.
This is a necessary task and one that could justify the risk of a surge. But luckily we aren't really surging as much as we are doing things we've done before when we've increased troop strength temporarily. And taking down Sadr to stabilize Iraq is certainly easier than taking down Iran for the same purpose.
I always thought we could do the job against Sadr without a surge (or just a minor one), and considered having a good mission for our troops more important.
I'm feeling better. I still worry about too high expectations with all the "surge" talk. But we will do some good with this plan, I think. [UPDATE ALONG WITH ABOVE UPDATE: I'm a little more worried because of the extensions that will strain the Army and Marines, though not as much as I would be with a bad mission. Taking down Sadr is a good mission.]
UPDATE AFTER THE SPEECH: This article speaks, unofficially, of some troops involved:
According to the military official, who provided no dates,
_The 1st Brigade, 34th Infantry Division, National Guard Unit based in Minnesota, will stay longer than planned in Iraq;
_The 4th Brigade, 1st Infantry Division, based at Fort Riley, Kansas, will deploy to Iraq earlier than planned;
_The 4th Stryker Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division, based at Fort Lewis, Wash., will deploy early;
• The 2nd Brigade, 3rd Infantry Division, based at Fort Stewart, Ga., will deploy early;
• And the 3rd Brigade, 3rd Infantry Division, based at Fort Benning, Ga., will deploy early.
President Bush planned to visit Fort Benning Thursday morning as part of an effort to promote his revamped Iraq strategy. Brigades typically have about 3,500 troops.
The Pentagon made no official announcement about its troop-boost plan.
In addition, the 2nd Brigade of the 82nd Airborne, which had not been scheduled to go to Iraq this year, is expected to move into Iraq by mid-January. The brigade's home base is Fort Bragg, N.C.
So, to get five more Army brigades and two more Marine battalions, we know that four brigades will go to Iraq early and one new brigade will be sent. The Marines will extend two battalions to stay while two new battalions arrive. Since this slow surge is based on overlaps, units in Iraq must stay longer. And only one brigade and two battalions are mentioned as staying longer.
So four other brigades in Iraq right now will need to be extended to provide the full surge.
And the reserves will be called on to make up for the added active component deployments.
UPDATE: Here's the official word on the deployments. Nothing on extending more than the Army National Guard brigade and Marine battalions (and they are reinforced battalions and not MEUs as I assumed).
