Al Qaeda in Iraq may well be more paper tiger than existential threat, but apparently not every cell got the memo:
A key Sunni ally of the US and Iraqi governments has been killed in a bomb attack in the city of Ramadi, Iraqi state television has reported.
Abdul Sattar Abu Risha was the leader of an alliance of Sunni Arab tribes that opposed al-Qaeda.
We need to deal with the fact that America’s power in Iraq has peaked more or less for good. The Petraeus drawdown plan has nothing to do with “meeting the Democrats halfway,” it simply reflects the basic fact that we can’t keep this many troops in Iraq much longer. Extrapolating through at least the next one or two presidential administrations there exists exactly zero chance that this level of American force will sit inside Iraq’s borders again. Any change that we hope to accomplish needs to happen right now.
And yet, nothing at all is happening. In today’s example the floor boards just rotted away under that much-ballyhooed oil law. Last month Maliki’s cabinet lost its Sunni representation, before that the Sadrists walked out. Here, at the apex of America’s ability to influence events in Iraq, every meaningful metric trends in the wrong direction. Anybody who seriously thinks that a three-plus deployed, fifteen month tour whack-a-mole force can accomplish what the “surge” forces failed to do, please email me about some blockbuster Tuvalu real estate.
We have brave soldiers giving their lives to the mission and doing honor to their world class training, but we might as well give them buckets and ask them to turn back the tide. In my opinion it dishonors their sacrifice to go on throwing men and resources at a problem that we have long understood cannot be solved with the tools at hand.
***Update***
Jim Henley, in comments:
it could have been a lot of people killed Rishawi – AQI, Sunni tribal rivals, holdout Baathist groups, Shiite militias anxious about the Salvation Council’s influence with the US, or, yes, Iranian intelligence. Until we know more it would be a big mistake to assume anything particular about the perpetrators. The real question is how many of the people in line to kill Rishawi got injured in the explosion.
Wilfred
Interesting, and fishy. Abu Risha was the sheik photographed with Bush when he was in Anbar. I linked to the photo and story at http://abuaardvark.typepad.com/ Really interesting, this.
Jim Henley
Tim, it could have been a lot of people killed Rishawi – AQI, Sunni tribal rivals, holdout Baathist groups, Shiite militias anxious about the Salvation Council’s influence with the US, or, yes, Iranian intelligence. Until we know more it would be a big mistake to assume anything particular about the perpetrators. The real question is how many of the people in line to kill Rishawi got injured in the explosion.
Ned Raggett
As I posted on my blog, one K. Lopez has some terrible timing today.
David
Yep. She came back with the news about 45 minutes after her initial post, albeit with a little angry snark at the messenger… if it’s bad news for the Home Team, then it must have been reported with an agenda, don’cha know.
r4d20
Until we know more it would be a big mistake to assume anything particular about the perpetrators.
Announcing the “prime suspect” is not the same as assuming the identity of the perp.
r4d20
Now we will know if this “awakening” is really a grass-roots thing or not.
If it is then his death wont change much. If not then the Anbar “Awakening” might just be a case of turning over to hit the snooze button.
Jim Henley
No, but it may be bad in its own right, r4d20. In this case I think it is.
Wilfred
let’s see. Bush goes to Iraq and instead of visiting Baghdad he pops up in Anbar,where poses for photos with Risha that get splashed on the front pages of newspapers all over the Arab world. And Risha gets blown up. We can’t even protect our newest ally who got his picture taken with Bush. Worse than bad, it’s humiliating. It hardly matters who did it.
Jay C
“Humiliating”, Wilfred?
Where you been these past six years? The word doesn’t exist in this Administration’s vocabulary! “Official Spokespersons” will get up and decry this latest atrocity, blame “Al Qaeda”, and pontificate away on how this only proves the need for us to “stay the course” in Iraq – probably for years.
Good news = reason to “stay the course”. Yay for us!
Bad news = more reason to “stay the course”. Yay for us!
Bushspeak 101.
Jake
Because it will be used as proof that the soldiers need to stay. Victory!
Oh no wait, people killed by bombs don’t count as casualties.
So he’s … not really dead. Victory!
capelza
You think Bush will mention this in his speech tonight? I wonder if his writers have had to do some serious revamping of the text?
That K. Lopez thing is just too funny.
Ned Raggett
Talk about looking for the bright side:
To quote SpongeBob, “GOOD LUCK WITH THAT!”
TenguPhule
If Al Queda gets any more extinct, they really will rule the world.
LITBMueller
My bet? It was the Iraqi Interior Ministry itself that bombed the Sheik:
Isn’t that convenient? Kill the head of the organization, declare a state of emergency in Anbar, and send in your own forces to make sure the survivors don’t cause any more trouble.
The Shiites and the Maliki government feel very threatened by the US support of the Anbar Sunnis. And, stuff like this probably didn’t ease their fears:
The Inerior Ministry is a Shiite-dominated militia in its own right. The recent Jones Report suggested its National Police should be disbanded all together.
But, just hold on a few minutes and I’m sure we’ll see the Administration and the media blame Iran. Count on it, because blaming Al-Qaeda doesn’t support the Bush/Petraeus Fiction that we’re “winning.”
r4d20
My bet? It was the Iraqi Interior Ministry itself that bombed the Sheik:….Isn’t that convenient? Kill the head of the organization, declare a state of emergency in Anbar, and send in your own forces to make sure the survivors don’t cause any more trouble.
Interesting…you might be on to something.
For all the talk of how “many” parties would have wanted to see him dead it seems implausible that equally many would have had the guts to try and kill him. Revenge would be a given so either the killers had HUGE balls or they were part of an organization as strong, or stronger, than the Sheiks.
Al Queda cannot be ruled out simply by reasoning that it would be stupid for them to do it. OTOH, the central government would also benefit from the death of a potential rogue sunni warlord.
the minister of interior has ordered a monument to be built in memory of the sheik, in addition to naming a police brigade after him
LOL. This is exactly the kind of thing I would expect them to do if they were the ones who had him killed.
In the old days, when the underworld still had something of a “code of honor”, when a mobster was murdered his killers would always come to his funeral and conspicuously show their respect for the deceased. The more ostentatious the display, the more likely the person was involved in the hit.
Tsulagi
Sweet Jesus, you leftards just don’t see the big picture. AQI blowing up this Sunni tribal leader is a good thing. Remember, not long ago these Sunni tribes were sniping and IEDing the shit out of us until they got tired of the holier-than-thou AQI values set. If AQ weren’t there, those Sunni tribes we’re now giving weapons, training, and cash bricks to could resume their old ways. We don’t want that.
Good to see at least one moonbat gets it.
BruceR
Wow, that’s the most insane thing I’ve read today, and that’s saying something.