There goes the Green Zone

[Watser?]

At least 20 mortar rounds and Katyusha rockets struck the fortified Green Zone on Tuesday afternoon, killing an American service member and two other people in an attack on the heart of U.S. and Iraqi government facilities in the capital.

Those killed included an Iraqi and a person whose nationality was unknown, according to a statement released by the U.S. Embassy. About 18 people were injured, including two U.S. military personnel and three American contract employees, the statement said.

Brig. Gen. Abdul Kareem Khalaf, a spokesman for Iraq's Interior Ministry, said 20 mortar shells and rockets had struck; another source in the ministry put the number of blasts at more than 30.

link
The US Embassy picked a very curious way of playing down the incident:

A U.S. Embassy spokesman said he could not confirm whether the embassy was a target, and that the frequent attacks on the Green Zone are not a barometer of the security situation in the capital.

"There's fire into the Green Zone virtually every day, so I can't draw any conclusions about the security situation based on that," he said.

And yet, as Juan Cole points out, the Green Zone was supposed to be the one place in Iraq that was safe.

Let me draw the conclusion. If you've got fire into the friggin' Green Zone every day, then we can draw the conclusion that the security situation in Baghdad sucks big time. When you've got people killed and a large number of people wounded in the one place in Iraq that was supposed to have a "permissive" security environment, then security in general is the pits.

Now you might say that we can't draw many conclusions from the events of a single day. And, being able to lob mortar shells over a wall doesn't speak to that much organization. But then what about these two nuggets in the LAT story?

1) "There were about 39 attacks [on the Green Zone] in May, compared with 17 in March, according to a U.N. report."

2) "Tuesday's attack came the same day gunmen kidnapped Iraqi Police Col. Mahmoud Muhyi Hussein, who directs security inside the Green Zone . . .

In other words, the security situation in the Green Zone is spiralling down at an alarming pace, and the guerrillas have such good inside knowledge that they can kidnap the very person responsible for security in it, as he drives in Jadiriya. That, my friends, is an inside job. And such an inside job doesn't bode well for future security in the Green Zone. For one thing, presumably they are "debriefing" Col. Hussein as we speak, looking for weak points.

Oh goodie, much much more to come...

In the meantime, an Iraqi official said if US troops leave, there will be a civil war.

Will be...?

[Dingfod]

... and giant badgers.

[California Tanker]

Means absolutely nothing. The mortar teams may not even be launching in Baghdad. They're not exactly aiming at a point target, and mortars can have up to a 12km range. Katyushas are even longer-ranged.
The one injury to enemy action we sustained in our company was courtesy of a particularly competent crew who used 120mm rocket-assisted mortars from way outside our brigade boundary, it took a hell of a time to catch him, even thought we knew where he was launching from, and that was in pretty open terrain.

Claiming that people mortaring the Green Zone from a distance outside the Green zone is proof of the inherent failings of security of the Green Zone perimeter is stretching things, to put it mildly.

NTM

[Watser?]

Come on!

Of course it is.

This was supposed to be the only safe place. And for a while it was, but there has definitely been a increase in incidents this year, despite the vast increase in US military presence. At least in terms of morale and propaganda that is a victory (thought it is not clear for whom, al Zaman seems to think it is the Mahdi Army, but al Zaman is a Sunni paper I think).

But the kidnapping of Col. Hussein is probably more ominous in the end.

[Watser?]

BAGHDAD — The dress code at the Blue Star restaurant inside Baghdad's Green Zone now calls for vest and hat.

Flak vest and Kevlar helmet, to be precise. And it's a good thing.

At least four mortar rounds hit inside the Green Zone about 1:30 p.m. Saturday, killing two Iraqi civilians, according to a U.S. soldier who could not speak for attribution because he's not authorized to talk to reporters.

Meanwhile, a State Department official, after initially denying that State had ordered its 1,000 Baghdad personnel to wear protective gear, said that a copy of the order obtained by McClatchy Newspapers was an undiscussable security breach.

Saturday's attack followed a barrage of up to 35 mortars and rockets that slammed into the Green Zone - considered the safest place in Baghdad - on Wednesday.

The embassy issued its memo later that day.

link

[California Tanker]

Happens from time to time. I recall a four-week-plus "Must wear armour at all times" phase in Anaconda, it sucked. Not much to be done about it until areas outside the Green Zone are fully controlled.

NTM

[Watser?]

Yeah...

[ChuckF]

Michelle Bachmann says everything is juuuuust fine.

"This recorded message played four times while we were there, asking us to move away from any windows, to get on the ground and move to the center of the building," Bachmann said. "(Crocker) stayed in his seat and kept talking with us the whole time. He never moved."

Woohoo! The ambassador could stood by a window, ignoring the warnings to move away from them because we may be killed by a mortar attack. That's real victory.

Security conditions in Iraq prevented Bachmann from meeting any Iraqis, leaving the Green Zone or staying in Iraq overnight. She and other congressional members were required to wear full body armor, including Kevlar helmets, during the entire trip, she said.

ETA: This article also includes one of my favorite new war-republican talking points. "The surge is only just starting! Give it some time to work! Geez, of course the Iraqis missed over half of the benchmarks we set, they've only had a few months to do it." Back in February, John Boehner said we'd be able to tell in "60 to 90 days" if the surge was working. I think he was right.

[viscousmemories]

Don't worry, if they don't meet the benchmarks maybe Surge II (This Time It's Personal) in September will help.

[godfry n. glad]

And the answer is: More Troops.

Haven't we heard this somewhere before? Is there an echo in here?

What the fuck happened to The Surge™?

[D. Scarlatti]

They told us the surge was starting in January, then the other day Tony Snow said the surge was only just starting now.

They're so fucking dishonest, why should anybody believe a word of what they say.

[godfry n. glad]

It's Surgerific!!!™
(the latest in a long, long line of PermanentWarProducts®)

[D. Scarlatti]

What the hell is the surge anyway? This administration talks such euphemistic gibberish, who knows.

Concentrating more resources at more specific targets ... isn't that basic military strategy in the first place?

Where's Sun Tzu and Clausewitz when you need them.

[godfry n. glad]

I thought it was supposed to be more troops on the ground.

I read it as more readily available targets.

I pity the poor guardsmen and guardswomen.

[California Tanker]

Originally Posted by D. Scarlatti

They told us the surge was starting in January, then the other day Tony Snow said the surge was only just starting now.

The surge was announced in January. The last of the troops to arrive in theater as part of that surge only arrived a month or so ago. Once in theatre, they still need to settle into whatever their role is which will take from two weeks to some two months, depending on what they're supposed to do. As of the time of writing of the Benchmark Report of last week, only 2/3 of the planned surge outposts in Baghdad were even in place, let alone have time to take effect in the surrounding area. Thus

John Boehner said we'd be able to tell in "60 to 90 days" if the surge was working.

would about tie in with Patraeus' scheduled September briefing, though I'm reading that he'd rather it were delayed a little longer.

NTM

[ChuckF]

Originally Posted by California Tanker

would about tie in with Patraeus' scheduled September briefing, though I'm reading that he'd rather it were delayed a little longer.

NTM

I actually said:

Back in February, John Boehner said we'd be able to tell in "60 to 90 days" if the surge was working. I think he was right.

It turns out I was wrong about that. I apologize for the inaccuracy. It turns out, he said it back in January.

Sorry for the mixup.

[California Tanker]

Reading the CNN article, fair enough. From what you had quoted, I understood it to be '60-90 days of surge' (Said back in February, effective whenever the surge kicked off), not 'the next 60-90 days.' (i.e. said and effective both in February). Mr Boehner was talking about that which he had little knowledge (Not unusual for a politician of either side) , and was not representing the Administration position: The short article appears to indicate that he was of the personal opinion that they ought to be able to figure out what's going on within 60-90 days. Strikes me that he didn't think to ask anyone who might actually know what's going on.

NTM

[ChuckF]

That's pretty charitable. Given what I have seen of how the Republicans and too many of the Democrats talk about this war, I think he was probably just lying. The "surge" is temporary insofar as all things on earth are temporary. (By the way, it's sad commentary that the media has so uncritically accepted the White House's nomenclature for this escalation.) We'll keep hearing "We just need six more months! Then we'll see some real progress!" just like we have been hearing non-stop since "Mission Accomplished."

The goal now is to avoid losing Iraq on this administration's watch, and to pass it off to Bush's successor. I don't know why, it isn't as if Bush has any kind of legacy to protect beyond torture and the biggest foreign policy blunder since Vietnam.

[godfry n. glad]

In terms of long-terms costs, I'd say that Iraq Redux is going to be far worse than VietDamn.

VietDamn wasn't sitting astride one of the largest pools of petroleum in the world. VietDamn wasn't seething with actual and potential religious zealots who with simmer with resentment for years to come. While in VietDamn, we didn't piss all over the Chinese, like we're pissing all over the Iranians.

When Pakistan and Saudi Arabia fall, we're going to be in DEEEEEP doo-doo.

[ChuckF]

Oh come now godfry, don't you listen to the president at all? Pakistan and Saudi Arabia are our allies in the War on Terra. Propping up repressive autocratic regimes is foreign policy gold. The only thing better is training mujahedeen to fight the Soviets for us. The best part is that there are never any consequences!

[youtube]NDABe8AOuCQ[/youtube]

[godfry n. glad]

Love that U-Tube.

L'il Donny: "Hey, Saddam, have we got some WMDs for you!"

Saddam: "Well, we already got some...you got targeting hardware? We could use some of that."

L'il Donny: "Sure thing, Saddam, baby...I'll make it happen."

Saddam: "I hear you've got an admiral and a marine colonel playing the other side, Donny. That's not nice."

L'il Donny: "Pay no mind to those ugly rumors, Saddam. We're just unloading some second rate stuff to prop up some more militarist SOBs like you in spicland. Surely, you understand."

Saddam: "Oh...well...In that case, I'll have a case, too. And, don't call me 'Shirley'."

L'il Donny: "Sure thing, Saddam, baby...I'll make it happen. Just make sure you keep those Shites down an' outta the picture."

[Angakuk]

Is that a menu that Saddam is holding? "I'll take one from column A and two from column B. You do deliver, don't you?"