Interesting foot note;

These small "fire bases" were all collapsed over the last few years and consolidated into much larger bases. The benefits of course were services and safety of the soldier not to mention the costs.... Hallibuton can't setup there with the Philipino outsourced chow halls, laundry facilities, cleaning and facility contracts... all these would be done by local Iraqi's at smaller bases.

The largest drawback for moving to the larger bases was the disconnection to the local population.

For me moving to the larger Base ment three hot meals a day, 24 x7 electric, running hot water, no night guard duty rosters or QRF drills and QRF responses, much more safety...

but I always thought that being out in the neighborhood gave you and the iraqis real common ground.

1SG White


BAGHDAD, Jan. 22 — Two blocks from the new American outpost in Ghazaliya, one of Baghdad’s most dangerous neighborhoods, a fight was raging. Shiites were battling Sunnis, the latest skirmish in a sectarian war that has left this area a wasteland.


Johan Spanner for The New York Times
On patrol in Ghazaliya, a neighborhood with Sunnis and Shiites, the soldiers passed graffiti asking them to destroy “the J.A.M.,” the Mahdi Army.
On Friday morning, it became an American fight, too, after a few rounds whizzed by Sgt. Sergej Michaud’s head, and he and three other soldiers returned fire.

The battle would rage for nearly an hour, with mortar shells and rocket-propelled grenades exploding near the soldiers, who in turn laid down heavy fire, eventually driving the attackers away.

Previously, that would have been the end of it, with the soldiers moving on to their next patrol area and eventually returning to their base. But this time, the Americans were staying, defending their new home in a neighborhood where the rule of law had been driven out by the reign of the gun.

Their outpost here, a cluster of fortified houses officially designated a joint security station and unofficially called the Alamo by some of the soldiers, is a test case for President Bush’s new Baghdad security plan. The strategy envisions at least 20 more facilities like it in other troubled neighborhoods, all jointly staffed by Iraqi and American forces.

Even after the stations are set up, American commanders say, it will be many months, at best, before they can even hope to prevent bombings like the one that killed at least 88 people in a central Baghdad market area on Monday.

In the week since the Americans arrived, however, the troops have seen the truth of what their commanders warned in announcing the plan: it leaves Americans more exposed than ever, stationary targets for warring militias.

The outpost sits on the fault line between Sunni and Shiite enclaves: Ghazaliya to the south, where fighters with Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia have moved in among the Sunni population, and Shula to the north, a base for Shiite militias that have been raiding this neighborhood for months.

Over the course of three days spent with the 105 soldiers here — Company C of the Second Battalion, 12th Cavalry — four American vehicles were hit by roadside bombs near the outpost. No soldiers from Company C were wounded, but they know the fighting will intensify.

“I’m a juicy target they are just trying to figure out,” said Capt. Erik Peterson, 29, the commander at the outpost.

During the week, the soldiers also received their first glimpse of the green Iraqi forces who will share the mission and eventually, they hoped, take it over. The soldiers talked about them with a mixture of bemusement, disdain and mistrust.

“You could talk about partnership, but you would be lying,” said one soldier who asked that his name not be used, for fear of punishment by his superiors.

It was also a week to start getting to know the desperate residents of Ghazaliya, where almost every remaining family has lost someone to kidnappings and executions, and where government services have long been cut off.

In their new role, the Americans find themselves acting as jailers and doctors, construction workers and garbage men, guardians and detectives — all in an effort to restore lasting order despite the threats on every side.

Wednesday: First Test

After three days of grueling work on muddy and filthy ground, including installing blast walls around the perimeter, filling 5,000 sandbags and hauling away trash, the soldiers had the beginnings of a functioning base on Wednesday.

That night, they had their first real test. It was nearing midnight, the generator had failed, there was no heat, the radio was malfunctioning — and an Iraqi girl no more than 4 was dying in the bitter cold on an Army cot.

At the same time, a loud firefight erupted outside, apparently an attack on an Iraqi Army checkpoint nearby.

Captain Peterson had brought the sick child to the base because her family was afraid to travel after curfew and no Iraqi government ambulance would dare visit the neighborhood after dark, if at all.

One of the company’s medics, Cpl. Peter Callahan, 23, worked by flashlight, trying to soothe the girl, whose body was rejecting the medication her parents had given her.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/23/world/mi...artner=homepage

As you may know I've been for redeployment for some time.
However, since Gen. Petreaus was made C.O. and some who
seem to have the interest of Iraq at heart, believe as they do...
you may also notice that I have stood down on my opinion.

Somewhere in my heart of hearts I still want a last
chance at success...a chance for Iraq War vets to have a
different restrospect that Vietnam vets do. And, if y'all
want this shot to play out for six months...well, I still pray.

And, while Democrats in Congress are moving way too slow
for most in the party, I believe it is for the same reason.
Because as much as we hate the reasons used for the war,
and the cost of the conflict, there is an abiding respect for the
men and women who put on that gear everyday.

However, it still pisses me off to believe that respect is being
used by those who promoted this adventure, in an attempt
to justify their sorry political asses.

Since the Iraqis are suppose to be taking on the load I'f sort a reason that's what they are doing. Disconecting from the local population is what everyone has been wanting......unless we got long term plans that is.

I'd say it happened a little to quickly in places like Baghdad..... or worse yet places like Sadr City .....it was never really in range and always off limits.....

can't just disengage... like say hanging up the phone.......

Without a clear cut strategy, working with local leaders and leaving the Police and Iraqi army on semistable ground.

And even with that... you still have to provide Overwatch.

Local Commanders are evaluated based on Metrics... like number of FOBs turned over to the Iraqi's...Number of Soldiers Police trained. For that the get their Bronze Stars... and turn it over to the next guy.

The real metrics of success and how commanders on the ground need to be evaluated should go a little deeper...... wouldn't you say?

Kind of reminds me of body counts in 'nam. (only from what I read of course)

Just me looking up through the weeds... and dodging the bird sh!t. (IMHO)

HELL YA I want to disengage.. but Lets do it where we come out on top.

Oh yeah and define "long term" for me... is that base on command rotations? political elections? Sitcom life span? American Idol competition? Average new car? Human Life span? season of the year?

Under the current environment I'd say Longterm is until the next congressional election cycle.

Did ya hear? The Iraqis with US assistance went into Sadr City yesterday intent on nabbing the leaders of the death squads active there. Not a shot was fired by either side aprehending the scum balls.

Yup... Since Sadr flew the coup... maybe the locals were getting tired of the tuff talk... and living in squaller.

US/Iraqi forces are setting up camp at a Police Compound on the edge of SC....

http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/st...815&k=79332

U.S. commander says no military solution to Iraq
Ibon Villelabeitia, Reuters
Published: Thursday, March 08, 2007
By Ibon Villelabeitia

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - U.S. and Iraqi security forces cannot solve the problem of violence in Iraq without political action and reconciliation with some militant groups, the U.S. commander in Iraq said on Thursday.

General David Petraeus, in his first news conference in Baghdad since he took command last month, also said he saw no immediate need to request more U.S. troops, but reinforcements already requested would likely stay "well beyond the summer."

"There is no military solution to a problem like that in Iraq, to the insurgency of Iraq," Petraeus said.

"Military action is necessary to help improve security ... but it is not sufficient."

He said political progress would require talking to and reconciling with "some of those who have felt the new Iraq did not have a place for them."

He said a key challenge for the Shi'ite-led government of Nuri al-Maliki was to identify those militant groups who were "reconcilable" and to bring them into the political process.

He said groups such as al Qaeda were intensifying their attacks to provoke more violence and stop that process.

Petraus said a U.S.-backed Iraqi security crackdown in Baghdad would take months and "sensational attacks" would continue, but there had already been encouraging signs of progress, notably a fall in sectarian killings.

U.S. TROOP PRESSURE

There are nearly 140,000 U.S. troops already fighting in Iraq, where sectarian violence has thwarted American efforts to bring the 4-year-old war to a close.

Democratic leaders in the U.S. Congress are pushing for a timetable for withdrawal of troops after widespread anger at the war handed them victory in last November's mid-term elections.

Petraeus said he had discussed with his second in command on Thursday whether he had enough troops for his current mission.

"Right now we do not see other requests (for troops) looming out there. That's not to say that some emerging mission or emerging task will not require that, and if it does then we will ask for that," Petraeus said.

Petraeus took command of U.S. troops in Iraq last month at a critical time, having been appointed to oversee President George W. Bush's new strategy (actually I'd call it Petraeus') in Iraq, focusing on halting the daily carnage of suicide bombs and death squad killings in Baghdad.

...

Asked about reports the additional 21,500 troops would need to stay in Iraq until early 2008, he said:

"I've certainly not reached a conclusion yet about that," Petraeus said. "I think you generally think that if you're going to achieve the kind of effects that we probably need, I would think it would need to be sustained certainly some time well beyond the summer, but again we'll have to see."


next page...

I like this f*ckin' guy...can't help it...