WASHINGTON (AP) - A new classified intelligence assessment on Iraq says there has been significant progress in security since the last assessment was delivered in August, a senior military official said.

In most ways the new National Intelligence Estimate hews closely to the one delivered nine months ago. That document spoke of security gains since the increase in troop levels began in January 2007, the continued high rate of violence and uneven progress on the part of Iraqi security forces.

“It does not differ significantly from August’s NIE,” a congressional official said in describing the document.

The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because the report is classified. They noted that many of the conclusions of the report are already reflected in public statements and press reports.

Full Story Here:
Report: Security in Iraq Is Improving

This part of the story concerns me, and I have written about these stories in the past, stories that use anonymous sources as the basis for their article, “The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because the report is classified.”, IF the report is classified, why is this anonymous official speaking to the press about it? Doesn’t that sort of make the report being classified a bit of a redundancy?

I’m not doubting the accuracy of the report or it’s legitimacy, my question is this, WHY aren’t these leaks plugged? Permanently? A 9mm behind the left ear has a tendency to stop news leaks, but it does seem to cause a bit of brain leakage, that is if the so-called source is actually a real person and has any brains to begin with.

And according to the New York Times, More Than 1,000 in Iraq’s Forces Quit Basra Fight, and they did cite the report on improving Iraqi security, but they also took more than their fair share of digs as well.

If the NYT story is true and correct, would you consider that to be a fair cross section of the views and dedication of the Iraqi forces? Would that desertion be indicative of their desire to actually stand up and fight for a real democracy?

The general consensus among many Conservatives and the majority of Republicans seems to be that we are too far invested in Iraq to stop now, or, so they say, I still think we could cut OUR losses and should issue a hard edict to al-Maliki and Company, ‘you have until such and such a date and time to stand up an effective fighting force that is fully capable of defending the nation of Iraq and providing security for it’s citizens because at this specific point in time, we are out of here, and you people can sink or swim, it’s YOUR choice.’, and then we stick to that time table, right down to the letter, and if Iraq isn’t willing to make that stand on their own behalf, it’s time to place our troops in a more effective theater of operations, doing the job that the Global War on Terror was supposed to do, like maybe place those forces in the hunt for al-Qaida leaders Ayman al-Zawahiri and Osama Bin Laden, I mean, it’s a thought.

Remember, if you cut off the head, the snake dies.

Somehow, I believe that part of the war has escaped Bush and his Bots.

Trackback URL:
http://texasfred.net/archives/1054/trackback/