Go back to your hole. You got called out in the Colin Powell thread so now you start searching for easier quarry. Admiral you are sickening. You have the heart of a criminal.

My guess is that they have the reflective vests because they are running a checkpoint. Not a good sign.
Cheers,
Tom

...We will make you infidel dogs walk only when the light is green! None shall pass that do not submit to the will of the prophet! The school board has fully mandated our jihad! Do not expect us to work past 4pm! Union rules!

There appears to be a police vehicle in the background of that photo also.

That seems odd.

Walt

The SOI checkpoints in Iraq are usually jointly manned by members of the police or army or all three. Having a police vehicle in the background of the picture should not be a surprise then.

Any indication that this pic is of Sunni or Arabs? The vests are an IFF device to prevent friendly fire, a big deal in any armed force conducting a movement toward contact. These photo-op dayglo ninja uniformed guys are depicted within their own lines, associating with the side with the most firepower, and have quartermaster support.

Since BD doesn't date, locate, 'splain or attribute any of the pics, one assumes they have only the most casual and entertaining relationship to the content.

The two-fingered V gestures here are interesting. One is palm-reversed from the other. I remember reading that even in Churchill's day, there were various interpretations of that- Winnie avoiding the backhand version in polite society and photos.

I believe the picture is a recent one of SOI in Salahaddin

When was Biden right before? He was against the '91 war, for the '03 invasion, and then against the surge.
Best,
Tom

The partioning of Iraq is only happening in the minds of Westerners. Opinion polls of Iraqis have consistently shown that they believe in a strong central government, that they believe the central government should get the oil revenues, and in the latest poll conducting during the summer of 2010, most have a negative opinion of the Kurdish Regional Government, unless they are Kurds.

The Shia and Sunnis and Kurds getting along so well. On which planet is this?

There has never been any proof that Iraqis want a divided country. Here are a series of public opinion poll results done in Iraq, where are all the Iraqis calling for stronger provincial or regional governments, etc.?

Sep. 2010 Iraqi survey

Do you approve or disapprove of the central government? 61% Approve, 36% Disapprove
Do you approve or disapprove of the Iraqi Army? 73% Approve, 23% Disapprove
Do you agree that most oil revenues should go to the central government and not the provinces? 63% Agree, 29% Disagree
Would you prefer the provinces of central government be stronger? 63% Central Government, 33% Provinces

Nov. 2009 Iraqi survey
70% had confidence in the central government
65% had confidence in provincial government
60% had confidence in local government

Aug. 2009 Iraqi survey
67% Supported a strong central government
69% Said they were against ethnosectarian quotas in government

March 2009 Iraqi survey
How should Iraq be governed in the future? 70% Unified Iraq under a central government, 20% regional governments, 7% separate independent states

January 2009 Iraqi survey
72% rejected federalism
80% opposed partition of Iraq
80% against autonomy for Basra

October 2008 Iraqi survey
What form of federalism should Iraq have? 69.9% Strong central government, 17% more authority in the provinces
Do you support another regional government outside of Kurdistan? 70.0% No, 23.9% Yes
What is the most important way you identify yourself? 69.8% Iraqi citizen, 10.6% ethnosectarian identity, 7.6% Tribe, 5.2% Sect

March 2008 Iraqi survey
How should Iraq be governed in the future? 66% Unified Iraq under a central government, 23% regional governments, 9% separate independent states

August 2007 Iraqi survey
How should Iraq be governed in the future? 62% Unified Iraq under a central government, 28% regional governments, 9% separate independent states

February 2007 Iraqi survey
How should Iraq be governed in the future? 58% Unified Iraq under a central government, 28% regional governments, 14% separate independent states

2005 Iraqi survey
How should Iraq be governed in the future? 70% Unified Iraq under a central government, 18% regional governments, 9% separate independent states

2004 Iraqi survey
How should Iraq be governed in the future? 79% Unified Iraq under a central government, 14% regional governments, 4% separate independent states

...when the three groups are blowing the shit out of each other, striving to enclave the country into three ethnically pure zones. Civil wars are governed by guns, not polls, and those who respond to polls may well find themselves in the victim class.

My mother - God rest her soul - used to say that they were building a new wing on the hospital, for drivers who had the right-of-way. Perhaps they will build a new wing on the old folks home for those who cite polls saying a country is united ... as it visibly disintegrates in internecine warfare.

Let's take our own poll. The topic is what Iraq will be in 2015. Your choices are:

A. A brutal Sunni/Baathist dictatorship.

B. A brutal Shiite dictatorship aligned with Iran.

C. An ungoverned region divided by ongoing civil war among its three ethnic/religious groups.

D. A placid democracy with a competent central government supported by all its people.

E. With what's going on further east, who cares?

JWING, I've marked you down for D.

(I admit it. Old Rubber Ducky has developed a very dark view of our prospects for favorable outcomes in both Iraq and Afghanistan. I do so only because, well, modestly, I can predict the future. Those who see things turning out well for US interests - largely ignored for nine years now - please, in kindness, talk me out of my views. Tell me why, to use George W. Bush's favorite descriptor, we are winning.)

Rubber Ducky wrote:
"...when the three groups are blowing the shit out of each other, striving to enclave the country into three ethnically pure zones. Civil wars are governed by guns, not polls, and those who respond to polls may well find themselves in the victim class."

So since you discount any polling, how about you prove that "the three groups are blowing the shit out of each other."

When was the last time that Shiites retaliated against Sunni attacks? In fact, why don't you find the last time a Sunni insurgent group besides Al Qaeda in Iraq attacked Shiites. Where are the Shiites fighting the Kurds right now?

In fact, where is all the bloodshed in this civil war that you're talking about? According to Iraq Body Count 247 Iraqis were killed in Sep. 2010. That was the third lowest monthly death count since the U.S. invasion in 2003. In fact, if all the groups are "blowing the shit out of each other right now" why are attacks and deaths each month at the lowest they've ever been in Iraq? Here's a comparison of the first 8 months of the war in 2003, 8 months in 2007 during the sectarian civil war, and the last 8 months of 2010 using data from Iraq Body Count.

Monthly Death Counts

2003
May 544
June 594
July 649
Aug. 792
Sep. 555
Oct. 516
Nov. 483
Dec. 528
Avg. 582.6 deaths

2007
Jan 2813
Feb. 2549
Mar. 2623
Apr. 2448
May 2761
Jun. 2107
Jul. 2577
Aug. 2339
Avg. 2527.1 deaths

2010
Feb. 296
Mar. 311
Apr. 376
May 370
Jun. 353
Jul. 424
Aug. 503
Sep. 247
Avg. 360.0 deaths

Wow! real success:

"2010
Feb. 296
Mar. 311
Apr. 376
May 370
Jun. 353
Jul. 424
Aug. 503
Sep. 247
Avg. 360.0 deaths"

One reason the carnage is less is that the partitioning is more. You're still marked down for D. Alone.

Your response adds nothing to your argument. Please provide evidence that Iraq is being partitioned and that the "three groups are blowing the shit out of each other," or is that asking too much?

...as far as what is happening now. With respect to the future, though, there is great danger of losing what improvements in security have been made in the last three years.

This is less a product of intensifying sectarian feeling than of the Iraqi political factions' abject failure to form a responsible government, many months after the last parliamentary election. Though the NYT story may have exaggerated overall the phenomenon of SOI fighters joining the al Qaeda types, a government is needed to establish policy that will keep such a phenomenon from getting out of control in the future.

Obviously, having led this horse to water, the United States can't make it drink. And even if it made sense to compensate for Iraqi political factions' failures with a large American military commitment of indefinite duration, such a commitment isn't something we can afford any longer. We just need to be clear to ourselves about what our priorities need to be, and equally clear to the Iraqis as to what they need to do to avoid sliding back toward the abyss.

JWing has the best of the argument because he's using data that most accurately reflects the situation among the people of Iraq.

The communal violence that has plagued Iraq has mostly stemmed from competition among the country's political elites - especially involving former exiles - and has seemed to manifest itself at street level as sectarian in nature.

The 2007 Sadrist ceasefire that is credited with such a reduction in civilian casualties was a deal brokered between Sadr and Hakim. In other words, a cessation of intra-communal violence.

As an Iraqi said to me at the height of the civil war: "If you want to partition Iraq where do you start? My marriage bed?"

You guys think things are fine and getting better. Others think things are not good and the trend is downward. My best guess is that a strongman will emerge, probably Shia, and we'll be dealing with Iraq/Iraq as one problem and with a Sunni/Al Qaeda insurgency within (and spilling out) as another. Gee I want you optimists to be right in your shining prediction. I also want a pony for Christmas...

Sunni-led coup d'etat (with the ability to run the residually socialist state apparatus) by late December.

1) Why would the military want to take over Iraq right now in a coup? Are they going to get the electricity going? Are they going to develop the oil industry any faster? Yeah, they can make decisions, but the infrastructure and economy is so much of a mess right now that can only go so far. There are just too many problems going on right now that they would not want to be in charge of them.

2) Why would the majority of the military who are Shiite and Kurd follow a coup if it's led by Sunnis and I assume you mean would bring back Sunni rule?

RD,

In 5 years Iraq will likely still have a low level insurgency and Al Qaeda in Iraq who are incapable of overthrowing the government but will still be blowing stuff up.

5 years from now Iraq will still have a state-run economy that can not efficiently provide services and economic development for the country. Small businesses and local economies will be on the rebound however.

5 years from now Iraq's politicians will still be divided and very few of the major problems will have been addressed.

Recipe for a coup

Ingredients: Thousands of -
disenfranchised young men - CHECK!
organized young men - CHECK!
young men diametrically opposed to the standing regime - CHECK!
young men who are desperate for work and haven't seen a pay check in months - CHECK!
weak government with no control over internal security forces - CHECK!
elite class in exile waiting for a chance to step it - CHECK!

Directions: Let brew for a while, wait for a power vacuum, don't pay or integrate the disenfranchised, organized and angry young men into society. Secure foreign backing. Step in at opportune moment and seize control.

You could probably replace Iraq with America in every statement and not be far off. Sad but true.

Yes, this is a good point on Diyala. I was told once in Baghdad that Maliki keeps a special eye on Diyala because it is his guys' route into Iran (I think Sadrists come in mainly slightly to the south.) If so, he'd have reason to keep a special eye on Sunni fighters in the province.

Btw, overall I liked this RD/Jwing discussion, and learned from it. Perhaps Admiral and Kunino could study it a bit to see how adults handle an intellectual disagreement.

Thanks,
Tom

RD/JW are saying the same thing.

Violence and internal local killings are down because neighborhood cleansing was so effective in prior years.

Now, the remaining violence tends to be more focused on national political feuds.

As for military take-over, there is a big stretch between fixing the national grid, and taking political control. Has anyone missed the point that in the real Iraq, the military and foreign contractors always did most of the heavy lifting for big engineered projects.

Just like the Tennessee Valley Authority, military entities like the Corps of Engineers in the US, are probably the most effective and appropriate national, multi-regional instrument to retool Iraq's electrical system. What does that have to do with political fighting and regional hard or soft partitioning?

Probably all the more reason that a stable, security-robust, and technically capable national-level entity like the IA be deployed to the nation's task, which no one entity could otherwise do alone.

At the heart of the crisis is the fact that the Iraqi Constitution is a piece of rubbish. It was a hastely construed "copy paste" of the American framework - and it is failing miserably. American media won't report on this.