The U.S. is losing an enemy; the right is losing a talking point

As Drew Tilghman, an Iraq correspondent for Stars and Stripes, recently explained, al Qaeda in Iraq, as of a few months ago, included about 850 full-time fighters, comprising 2% to 5% of the Sunni insurgency. Tilghman quoted a 20-year intelligence veteran and Arabic speaker who has worked with military and intelligence units tracking al-Qaeda inside Iraq saying, “Al-Qaeda in Iraq is a microscopic terrorist organization.”

Two percent might even be on the high end. Gen. James Jones said as recently as September that probably “two percent or fewer of the adversaries that we’re facing in Iraq and that the Iraqis are facing in Iraq are foreign jihadis or AQI affiliates, [and] 98 percent or more are Iraqis fighting amongst Iraqis for the future of Iraq.”

Now, that number might be dropping from 2% to zero — AQI has practically been defeated.

The U.S. military believes it has dealt devastating and perhaps irreversible blows to al-Qaeda in Iraq in recent months, leading some generals to advocate a declaration of victory over the group, which the Bush administration has long described as the most lethal U.S. adversary in Iraq. […]

The deployment of more U.S. and Iraqi forces into AQI strongholds in Anbar province and the Baghdad area, as well as the recruitment of Sunni tribal fighters to combat AQI operatives in those locations, has helped to deprive the militants of a secure base of operations, U.S. military officials said. “They are less and less coordinated, more and more fragmented,” Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, the second-ranking U.S. commander in Iraq, said recently. Describing frayed support structures and supply lines, Odierno estimated that the group’s capabilities have been “degraded” by 60 to 70 percent since the beginning of the year.

Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, head of the Joint Special Operations Command’s operations in Iraq, is the chief promoter of a victory declaration and believes that AQI has been all but eliminated, the military intelligence official said.

“Microscopic” or not, AQI’s defeat is obviously an encouraging development. Of course, there are political consequences.

But as the White House and its military commanders plan the next phase of the war, other officials have cautioned against taking what they see as a premature step that could create strategic and political difficulties for the United States. Such a declaration could fuel criticism that the Iraq conflict has become a civil war in which U.S. combat forces should not be involved.

So, we won’t declare the defeat of a small terrorist group in part because the White House, National Review, and Joe Lieberman’s office might lose a talking point?

Indeed, about a month ago, Sens. John McCain and Joe Lieberman, arguably Bush’s most enthusiastic war cheerleaders, teamed up to write a wildly unpersuasive op-ed in (where else?) the Wall Street Journal. They said, “We must understand that today in Iraq we are fighting and defeating the same terrorist network that attacked on 9/11.”

Even at the time, their claim was simply wrong, a fact they were no doubt aware of. But recent developments clearly complicate matters. If AQI has effectively been routed, it’s that much more difficult for Bush and his allies to insist we stay the course to defeat our 9/11 attackers. Al Qaeda in Iraq is the rallying cry; it’s the raison d’etre of our occupation; it’s the basis for right-wing advertising; it’s the reason congressional Republicans can rationalize voting in lockstep with the White House on every Iraq measure for years.

And if the group is gone, then the reasons for sticking around are that much more elusive. After all, AQI can’t “follow us home” if it no longer exists.

Best of all worlds: terrorist killers are slain or dispersed, and the pants-pissers on the right have to find another kink for their self-defilement…

  • Doesn’t this mean that those Sunni Tribal fighters will focus on another foreign group? Like, the US Army for instance?

  • You know where I bet Al Queda went? Iran.

    To be more precise…do you know where I bet the Bush Administration will claim Al Queda went? Iran.

  • “And if the group is gone, then the reasons for sticking around are that much more elusive. After all, AQI can’t “follow us home” if it no longer exists.”

    why not? since when has reality had any bearing on right-wing talking points? don’t expect any change at all……

  • So…we invade a sovereign nation and spend five-and-a-half years there—and then ramp up to over 160,000 troops—to beat up on 850 guys that weren’t even there in the beginning? This has “wag the dog” written all over it.

    Actually, one might find AQI a lot closer to home. Look in that right-hand desk drawer—the one in the Oval Office. That’s where you’ll find them!

  • To be more precise…do you know where I bet the Bush Administration will claim Al Queda went? Iran. -slappy magoo

    I can’t help but think that this is anything short of 100% correct. I can almost hear the war drums beating in the distance.

    But don’t worry! With the Democrats in control, there is no way we’d do anything silly like give Bush the foot in the door he needs to attack. Right?

  • I may be missing some, but as I recall the Iraqi Big Bad Guy(tm) was first Saddam, then Saddam’s sons, then Zarqawi, then AQI. Whoever is the current Iraqi Big Bad Guy(tm) is supposed to be solely responsible for any attacks that get perpetrated. (This way the sheeple don’t need to trouble their little heads about confusing sectarian divisions, and the Chimp and his minions can continue to make reference to “the terrahrists,” as if lumping all the opposing forces in Iraq together was somehow a meaningful thing to do.)

    As they’d knock off each of these in turn, they’d have to come up with a new one to explain the ongoing violence.

    The next Big Bad Guy(tm) will be Iran. Iran has the advantage of being unlikely to be defeated, so they won’t have to invent another Big Bad Guy(tm) to replace it. Plus attacking Iran will make the whole mess even larger so Halliburton and Blackwater can get even more no-bid contracts and the war can continue until they dump it all into Hillary’s lap in 2009.

  • Only time will tell if this is good news or just another load of bull. But rest assured, there is no end to the justifications we will be given for staying in Iraq. When one rationalization wears out, another will take its place. Whether they’re accurate or even sensible will make no difference.

  • I think we give war supporters a little too much credit in assuming they will notice that the reason du jour for our presence in Iraq has evaporated and was made up of less than 1000 people to begin with.

    The war mongers know this and will apply the lessons learned from Iraq of how easy it is to manipulate an uneducated populace, to gain support for their continued lust for war. I agree that Al Qaeda might very well “move to Iran” next. At the very least, this will be used as an excuse to declare “Mission Accomplished” in Iraq in order to focus on the next war.

  • But… Al Qaeda is still in Iraq. The one who attacked us. Based in Afghanistan. Where they’re on the rise. Those guys are still in Iraq. Even though they weren’t there before the war.

    It’s the Al Qaeda that’s not really Al Qaeda (meaning, the ones who attacked us, gaining strength in Afghanistan) who’s been defeated in a place where they never were. Until after we invaded. But are still there.

    The important thing is that people see the headline “Al Qaeda Defeated”, rather than the more accurate “Al Qaeda not Defeated” or “Not-Al Qaeda Defeated” or “Does defeat of Al Qaeda in Iraq Create Opening for Al Qaeda in Iraq?”

  • Great. Now let’s go attack Al Queda in western Pakistan, where they’re based and where they’re operating openly with the consent of our “ally”, the government of Pakistan.

    What a bunch of fuckwits we have in the White House. Unbelievable.

  • Comments are closed.