Thousands Return to Safer Iraqi Capital

I agree that this article's missing a bit of context (3,000 families returned: how many have left or are still leaving?), but since when can only bad news from Iraq be corroborated and meaningful?

People bake bread in east Baghdad's Shiite enclave of Sadr City, Iraq, Saturday, Nov. 3, 2007.

Mmm...flatbread.

You can do better.

PH I know that you are more intelligent than this. Why don't you do further research to figure out what is going on.

So the AP needs to submit its copy to you for censoring?

Of course the "surge" is working: ethnically cleansed neighborhoods lead to less violence.

Yes NeoCon its progress, a destroyed Nation and dispersed population, troops without protection and the new rules for Democracy includes torture as a lawful element, hip hooray, America leads the way to oil revenues oops that's supposed to be freedom or is it one and the same to a NeoCon, corporate wealth and power are Americas greatest values. So nice your California Senator Feinstein didn't let the NeoCons down and approved an Attorney General who knows torture belongs as part of our values for human life.

Forget the Democrats, Schumer and Feinstein just gave a rubber stamnp to an AG who thinks torture is fine. Too many criminals on both sides of the aisle and people need to start looking at the MoC by name not party.

Wow, that's right, Krishna. Horrible news! I mean, I guess everyone will forget about the trillions of dollars wasted and the thousands of US troops killed and the millions of Iraqis all dead and all. Oh, and I forgot all about the lies and the torture and all that other insignificant crap.

Remember, any news is good news for republicans.

The stoopid is beyond painful.

This is one story. Ever heard the term "Pyrrhic victory?" You may need to add it to your vocabulary.

Forget the Democrats, Schumer and Feinstein just gave a rubber stamnp to an AG who thinks torture is fine. Too many criminals on both sides of the aisle and people need to start looking at the MoC by name not party.

Perhaps after Hillary is elected...things will change?

I guess everyone will forget about the trillions of dollars wasted and the thousands of US troops killed and the millions of Iraqis all dead and all.

Yea, I know right? I mean look at all the millions wasted and lives lost in the American Revolution and in the Civil wars, what I waste dude. Totally.

Yea, I know right? I mean look at all the millions wasted and lives lost in the American Revolution and in the Civil wars, what I waste dude. Totally.

All wars, actually. [except maybe those that were legal...?]

There is no such thing as a legal or illegal war. You've heard that concept so many times you believe it. But to take your idea and run with it, are you suggesting that the Revolutionary War and the Civil War were illegal? Interesting.

Recent conflicts such as the war in Kosovo – in which the U.S. acted without Security Council approval – provide evidence of disregard for U.N. authority. The war in Yugoslavia also proceeded without the consent of the global council.

"This record of violation is legally significant," Glennon wrote in his opinion piece, which also appeared in the International Herald Tribune. "The international legal system is voluntary, and states are bound only by rules to which they consent. A treaty can lose its binding effect if a sufficient number of parties engage in conduct that is at odds with the constraints of the treaty."

From a Tufts University law professor. Notice the part that says that the international legal system is voluntary and has been disregarded numerous times in the past already? Most notably by Clinton when he bombed Kosovo. But I don't or didn't hear anyone claiming that action as illegal.

And I might add that the only reason that the Korean War was UN-sanctioned was because the vote was held when Gromyko was still in transit back to NY. Had the Soviets been in attendance they would have vetoed it.

There is no such thing as a legal or illegal war. You've heard that concept so many times you believe it. But to take your idea and run with it, are you suggesting that the Revolutionary War and the Civil War were illegal? Interesting.

Actually I wasn't too clear in my post. That was the point I was trying to make--- the whole concept of an illegal or legal war is absurd. [Obviously, those that are opposed to any particular war-- or more accurately, a particular country's role in the war...will call it "illegal"-- the term 'illegal war' sounds like it means something-- it reality it doesn't].

That's good to know that some of us get it.

The underlying problem.? You mean there is just one? It is very messed up that anyone would have bad @!$%# to say about good news. Some people just can't be pleased. I mean seriously, would you rather hear @!$%# is getting better or worse? Is it that we are not allowed to have good news? Is it that you want Bush to be wrong so bad that you just can't accept any information that might be used to justify opposing views?

If that is the case then it's time to reevaluate. I'm sure tomorrow will have plenty of bad news for all the nuts out there but ultimately it's more progress and good news that we want. Try not to forget that. When you idiots get your way and President Hilboma bring our troops home there will be plenty of celebrations for the collapse of the Bush way of thinking but the next day you wake up the real enemy will remind you who they are and not long after your lovely children and mine will have an even nastier situation to deal with. Don't believe that? Well by all means feel free to tell me why because I would love an opportunity to live a life of ignorance along with you.

The underlying problem.? You mean there is just one? It is very messed up that anyone would have bad @!$%# to say about good news. Some people just can't be pleased. I mean seriously, would you rather hear @!$%# is getting better or worse? Is it that we are not allowed to have good news?

Here's a really funny satirical video by Hamnation: I Do Not Like to Hear Good News!

The delectable Mary Katherine Ham... she really hits the nail on her head...to coin a phrase 8-)

It is very messed up that anyone would have bad @!$%# to say about good news. Some people just can't be pleased.

(It's even worse that people are so willing to overlook the crimes and killing and fix on some shred of spin to call good news. That's disturbing, our Democracy is crumbling and we should jump for joy a few ethnically selected Iraqis can return to the bombed out area that has no water or electricity but details.

The State Department staff who were just assingned to the Embassy there revolted calling it a death sentence, career diplomats used to conflict assignments, yes it's much better in the lying US press.

Civilian deaths are down, U.S. troop casualties are down, Sunnis are turning away from al-Qaeda, and now, Iraqi refugees are coming home. Oh jeez, no matter what part of the spectrum you're from, can't ya' take some good news when it does come 'round?

I understand all of that. What I am saying is that these improvements do not change the actual situation, which is two well-armed rival groups vying for control of the country.

It's even worse that people are so willing to overlook the crimes and killing and fix on some shred of spin to call good news. That's disturbing,

It's not a matter of anyone becoming fixated on a little good news amidst a massive current of bad. From what I can see people, like yourself, are reluctant to even acknowledge good news. I do understand why from your point of view it is impossible to turn suddenly from the thought that everything is going wrong and nothing can be fixed but anything can be fixed. I'm not saying lose your head over the very mention that things might be taking a positive turn. I don't see evidence amounting to that, but at the same time I am unwilling to spit on an article that could be a prelude to peace for Iraqis. Good news is good news. This isn't a story about a man saving a puppy from a burning house with a happy shot of the dogs bright eyed 4 year old girl being handed her beloved pet. This is simply thousands of people returning to their homes. I am sure pictures would show faces that are weary and not completely at ease, it isn't Mr. Rogers neighborhood after all, but this is still better news than most that we see. Just accept it for what it is and hope for more.

The progress in Iraq right now is worth a cheer, so I take that as a compliment. Could change for the worse? Absolutely. Illegal? Just a vague dream that many people have.

Why the concern? The election of 2008 is being fought in Iraq and our friends on the left know it.

, we are dealing with a people who's loyalties are mercurial at best. those on our side today, maybe shooting at us tomorrow, again. we cannot trust these folks for too long. they have proven this any number of times.

And you guys on the left call us conservatives racist bigots? My god, do you listen to yourself?

Why assume that someone who wants to see Iraq become stable loves Bush?

Calvin I disagree, like the news of families returning to New Orleans the positive spin that goes out acts like a balm to gloss over the problems that are easier to ignore. What are these people returning to and what hope is there for any sort of life to pick up and go on? Are they even able to survive there?

For the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who have been made refugees and wounded and killed we haven't taken any into America we haven't covered the refugee camps and to applaud this as a real sign of progress even as we have the Congress approve torture as acceptable strikes me as a very unbalanced way to present the news. Sure we would all love to see peace and the people who were driven out reestablish their lives but this doesn't seem like a way to do anything more than sell the illusion that somehow things are safe.

The US State Department is facing an unprecedented rebellion by foreign service officers over a threat to force diplomats to accept postings in Iraq, the first large-scale "directed assignments" since the Vietnam War.

Tempers boiled over at an hour-long "town hall meeting" at the department last night, where several hundred diplomats vented their anger at the decision to approve the call-up and one veteran diplomat criticised it as a "potential death sentence".

?Incoming is coming in every day, rockets are hitting the Green Zone,? said Jack Croddy, a senior foreign service officer who once worked as a political adviser with Nato forces. He and others confronted Harry Thomas, the Foreign Service Director General, who approved the move to ?directed assignments".

?It?s one thing if someone believes in what?s going on over there and volunteers, but it?s another thing to send someone over there on a forced assignment,? Mr Croddy said, to loud and sustained applause from the audience. ?I?m sorry, but basically that's a potential death sentence and you know it. Who will raise our children if we are dead or seriously wounded??

These are the career foreign service diplomats who are intimately familiar with the conditions and a Pollyanna view sold to the American public is a disservice to everyone. It almost seems this story was an offset to the State Department revolt.

Pamela, if you've been following this story the ones griping at the State townhall meeting were NOT diplomats who had done tours in Iraq. A total of three State employees have been killed in Iraq since the war began. Pakistan is a far more dangerous place for an FSO to serve than Iraq and with today's events it's apt to get more dangerous.

Did the firefighters in SoCal give up or despair after putting out the first fire, simply because all the others were still going? No, they put one out, then another, then another.... One foot in front of the other! :)

Awesome way to put it Calvin, I think it would do us all much good to look at thing this way. Even if it is winning a small battle (which I am sure the 3000 who moved back don't think it is small). Build off these and eventually there is going to be more and more positives, Not all we are doing over here is negative. Thanks Calvin

Bill nowhere in my comments did it say they did tours in Iraq, it said they are experts on the region and are refusing to go. Nice to see when Calvin's here your pokes at me are civil and relate to the topic.

Calvin, I agree we need to take small steps as a positive but we can not pretend we are making progress so that the steps that are required to solve the bigger problems aren't taken as a result of an unrealistic view of the situation. The firefighters didn't stop battling in the face of overwhelming odds but we didn't report that things were looking good when there were fires raging all over the place. There was a call for additional help and support and an acknowledgment of the reality of the challenge.

Sorry, but to my ears this is the same thing that got New Orleans out of the headlines by highlighting the positives and ignoring the bigger problems and still New Orleans is a disaster. Has the happy success focus coverage benefited those residents?

I don't think so and much as I wish all the people fighting to make it work and appreciate the people who do the hard work of trying to accomplish that I am very wary of a media and Administration that have lied and misrepresented every problem from the beginning. It's not a matter of hoping for the positive it is a refusal to let that replace the truth. If we were so anxious to see these nice families begin living their lives again why can't we accept them into America? Maybe some don't want to come here but millions do. To give the focus to this as a return to normalcy seems disingenuous.

I read an article yesterday by some soldiers stationed outside Baghdad and they wrote about how they just hunker down for their shift and hope no one tries to bomb them, they don't search for the enemy, they don't do anything but lay low and pray to get back at night. That's not the kind of environment that happy families settle down to continue life.

You know this assertion gets bandied around so much that everyone just believes on its face, well all the lefties do, anyway. This war might have been ill advised, but it was NOT illegal. If it was illegal, why isn't the world court or the UN doing anything about it? Huh? Illegal my ass.

What exactly, makes a war...legal? Was WWII legal...or illegal? How about the Korean War? The War Between the States?

It seems to me that any folks call a war legal if the side they are rooting for is winning..it becomes illegal when the side they are rooting for is losing.

Which side are youse guys rooting for in Iraq anyway?

Thanks Calvin. Some of these people are just the most negative bunch of people. All news is bad news for them. They crave bad news. Fortunately for them most of the so called news outlets are all too willing to provide them with what they want. Not this time though.

Pamela, none of the articles I've read on the townhall meeting indicated that the assembled (or the ones voicing concern) were "experts" on the region. In fact one of the beefs they had was that they didn't believe they'd be trained adequately to serve in Iraq. FSOs come from a variety of backgrounds and generally serve all over the world in various postings not all of which would suit their primary language facility or academic background. We're talking here about the FS's foot soldiers, not the senior leadership of State's Near East Bureau.

I'd be curious to see where that is because nothing that I've read says that training isn't about surviving in a war zone but lack of regional diplomatic expertise.

On his way to the meeting in Turkey, Crocker offered an even blunter assessment, saying that diplomats have a responsibility to prioritize the nation's interest over their personal safety and that those who don't are "in the wrong line of business."

Joining the foreign service "does not mean you can choose the fight," he told reporters in Dubai. "It's not for us to decide if we like the policy or if the policy is rightly implemented. It's for us to go and serve, not to debate the policy, not to agree with it."

Crocker, a 36-year veteran diplomat who has worked throughout the Mideast and was personally skeptical of the Iraq war, has been the U.S. ambassador to Iraq since early this year.

Since his arrival, he has repeatedly asked for more and more experienced personnel to work at the Baghdad embassy and in Provincial Reconstruction Teams in outlying areas.

His requests have been given top priority by Rice and State Department management officials who have offered generous incentives, including extra danger pay, leave time and preference on next assignments to attract diplomats to volunteer for Iraq duty.

The move is the largest diplomatic call-up to an active war zone since Vietnam and on Wednesday several hundred diplomats angrily complained about the step in a town hall meeting, with many applauding when a colleague likened it to a "potential death sentence."

Others complained about the fact that they would be separated from their families, a lack of training and support, and the prospect of returning from Iraq with physical or mental disabilities with few options for treatment, something Rice addressed in the cable.

The problem is that too many in the state department are from a few ivy league schools and think that a hard foreign service tour means that the fois gras is is only served with white wine.

That used to be true of the old FS but not so much today. The entrance exam is quite rigorous and if one cannot become fluent in a foreign language that's a no-go. CIA's the same way. In the old days it was something of a sinecure for Ivy Leaguers but that changed over a generation ago. SOD Bob Gates, briefly DCIA under Bush 41, is an alumnus of my undergrad alma mater, the College of William & Mary.

Pamela, Ambassador Crocker was speaking of FSOs with experience in reconstruction, etc. not necessarily those with experience in the Middle East. Serving as a consular official in say Casablanca is hardly going to qualify one as an "expert" on Iraq.

Thank you for those details Bill, suggestion from the reports hardly explain it that way, live and learn. :~)

I second that emotion!!

For once (or twice, including epiphany sorbet's article this morning), there is good news to report. Why can't everyone just accept that?

And who the hell cares if this is bad news for Dems?

I think that's exactly the point-- people care more about petty political partisanship than they care about the fate of the Iraqis.

The fact is that this is bad news for the Dems-- so the political types feel the need to ignore or deny it. They could care less about the Iraqis....or for that matter, anyone else...unless they can spin it to their political advantage.

Their worst nightmare is peace in Iraq.

Their worst nightmare is peace in Iraq.

Their second worst nightmare would be-- a really good economy! :-)

Yes, coupled with the Iraq War, the world is coming to an end: GDP is growing at 3.8 percent and unemployment is at 4.7 percent.

Comrades: Let us all collectivize. Get out to organize and represent. Reframe the debate. Revisionize. Take it to the man. Raise class consciousness. Surely, somehow we can derail the economy before the 2008 elections!

Rob, this is indeed good news. As my friend BlaiseP is wont to say from his long experience with refugees around the world, refugees vote with their feet heading away from the bad guys and toward the good guys. Political reconciliation is the next step that is needed and as today's WaPo reports, the long-dormant amnesty program is beginning to stir again. And miracle of miracles, we're even seeing a lessening of EFPs being smuggled into the country. Let's hope and pray this tentative good news is long-lasting and that the sectarian violence that began in earnest with the al Qaeda bombing of the Golden Mosque in Samarra will gradually come to an end.

He seems quite serious about reform...also seems quite competent.

Do you want the U.S. military to go down there and take over?

Sure the Pentagon record of success and on budget performance is just so outstanding.

That is exactly the point Pam, the government is inefficient due to the way that the bureaucracy works. Couple that with incompetence and corruption and you have New Orleans.

New Orleans is still a mess because of people not returning, and who in their right minds would return? That area is not safe to live at until a very advanced levy system is put in place. Even then you are living next to large bodies of water and are under sea level so it's just retarded to think of rebuilding. I am glad people were smart enough to take what money they could get and settle into different towns.

Katrina was a natural disaster and the biggest problem that was made visible was the nasty nature of Americans who do nothing but point fingers. The FEMA director lost his job and later was found to have been operating at 100% of his job responsibilities. But the accusations cost the man a big position he probably worked his entire life to get.

Now years later here you are talking about some boobies. Well I like tits but the boobs you speak of are not deserving your finger. How come you can't just agree with Pamela's point? I do.

Has the happy success focus coverage benefited those residents?

I think it has helped more than hindered. After all New Orleans is a spot that needs tourist dollars. They want to have big turn outs for Mardi Gras. They need to keep restore and keep businesses flourishing. That will not happen if everyone thinks of New Orleans and how much damage has been left despaired and abandoned. People want to think of New Orleans as a happy and culture filled town that they can visit. So yes, I think the 'happy success' focus has benefited, perhaps just not as dramatically as they need it too.

media covaregde for this news would incurege many other Iraqi families ( especially those who left the capital ).

Which media? US? Al Jazera?

These people have 2-3hrs of electricity a day, the news mediameans very little to them, it's right outside their door. When they do watch TV, interestingly, a lot watch American soap operas. It's always easier to watch someone else's problems than your own.

I'm with ya Nawar, I'd much rather listen to you, an Iraqi, than to listen to all the naysayers who seem to want only defeat in Iraq. Congratulations on the turn of events and I, for one, am hoping for more good news. I have to admit that when the surge started I too was reticent in believing anything could change. And I thought that once the surge was over, then things would go back to the way there were, but this appears that there are some real lasting changes taking place over there and not all just because of the surge.

...I too was reticent in believing anything could change...

I too was anxious. But things looked bad for the U.S. before the Battle of Midway, too. We didn't give up...