Head of U.S. command: Iraq civil war possible

[SivVulk]

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Under tough questioning from U.S. senators, the head of U.S. Central Command, Gen. John Abizaid, acknowledged Thursday that Iraq could descend into civil war.

"I believe that the sectarian violence is probably as bad as I've seen it, in Baghdad in particular, and that if not stopped it is possible that Iraq could move toward civil war," he testified at a hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Fueling this possibility, he said, was the combination of "sectarian violence, al Qaeda terrorists, insurgents and Shia militants."

"Failure to apply coordinated regional and international pressure ... will further extremism" and could lead to a widening and more perilous conflict, he said.

Abizaid was joined by Gen. Peter Pace, head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, whose exchanges with Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York were polite but testy.

"Under your leadership, there have been numerous errors in judgment that have led us to where we are in Iraq and Afghanistan," said Clinton, a possible 2008 Democratic candidate for the White House.

Her criticisms included not enough U.S. troops; the re-creation of the disbanded Iraqi army; and the lack of planning to maintain stability after Saddam Hussein was overthrown.

The United States is boosting troop levels, not decreasing them, she said, and civilian and military casualties were also rising.

Clinton also criticized Rumsfeld for underestimating the Taliban, when he said in late 2002 that the group no longer existed in Afghanistan. The Taliban, which harbored Osama bin Laden, has since resurfaced with a vengeance.

The defense secretary responded to Clinton. "Are there setbacks? Yes. Are there things that people can't anticipate? Yes. Does the enemy have a brain and continue to make adjustments on the ground requiring our forces to make adjustments? You bet," he said.

"Is that going to continue to be the case? I think so. Is this problem going to get solved in the near term about this long struggle against violent extremism? No, I don't believe it is."

Sectarian killings in Iraq have escalated since the February 22 bombing of the Shiite Askariya Mosque in Samarra. Nearly 6,000 people died in Iraq violence in May and June alone, according to a recent U.N. report.

McCain was also concerned that U.S. troops are moved from one trouble spot to another. "What I worry about is -- we're playing a game of whack-a-mole."

He cited Falluja and Ramadi as examples. "Everybody knows we've got big problems in Ramadi, and I said, 'Where are you going to get the troops?' 'Well we're going to have to move them from Falluja.'

"Now we're going to have to move troops into Baghdad from someplace else," he said referring to the deployment of U.S. troops to the capital to support Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's crackdown on insurgents. "It's very disturbing."

Nearly 2,600 U.S. service members have been killed in the 3-year-old war.


http://www.canadaka.net/link.php?id=10474


Just how possible do you think an Iraqi civil war is? Would going through a civil war force Iraqis to unite and look past their differences? Or would it only escalate the tensions between the various ethnicities?

[86Dude]

Ah, this is the point where the lefties on the board get to say "I told you so" over, and over, and over, and over again.

[soylentgreen]

Originally Posted by SivVulk

Her criticisms included not enough U.S. troops; the re-creation of the disbanded Iraqi army; and the lack of planning to maintain stability after Saddam Hussein was overthrown.

Which is it? Either you're against the war or you're not. But, to be against it and then say there were not enough troops seems stupid. If you think there should have been zero US troops in Iraq, how can you now criticize for not enough troops? Senseless second-guessing.

Originally Posted by SivVulk

Just how possible do you think an Iraqi civil war is? Would going through a civil war force Iraqis to unite and look past their differences? Or would it only escalate the tensions between the various ethnicities?

I think it is interesting that the general's comments about a civil war being "possible" are being widely reported. But, his comments about how he does not think it's likely are not being reported.

[veracity00]

Iraq is already in a state of civil war. It is a sectarian civil war. How else does one explain all of these murders and executions. A reported 100 deaths per day in the month of June. That's more than the US military death toll for the entire war.

[Islandtime]

civil war

n : a war between factions in the same country

From dictionary .com I suspect the conditions already exist to make the above a reality now. Why talk about if a civil war starts its already going on at a low intensity.

Yeah huge mistakes were made in Iraq, and they unfortunately have made the situation virtually untenable in the short term. If the US wants to make it work it will have to be there in greater numbers than they have today for at least 10 years. IMHO

So far MHO has been dead right as to the results of the Invaision too. ( theres the I told you so )