In a previous post I pondered if Congress bothers reading the progress reports and benchmarks that the Defense Department already produces. Since I have long distrusted the mainstream media, and politicians in general, the internet has consistently been the conduit for information regarding the war and conditions in Iraq. Now, some say we should distrust any reports coming from the government, in which case, I say, great, then there’s absolutely nothing to worry about global warming, is there…
So, here I am surfing through my usual sources and I find this neat little graphic showing the progress of security in the provinces in Iraq. Follow the link and you can see the progress over time.
Now, this progress is only in transitioning to Iraqis being in the lead of security operations. But that is a giant step forward, as long as the Iraqis take this opportunity and show that they are capable of leading. Since violence in many of these areas is down to “acceptable” levels, I have to believe that the Iraqis are capable, given the time and resources to manage their own security.
And again I have to wonder, is Congress reading this stuff? Why the effort now to undercut our support for our soldiers, and the Iraqis, just when our training, and support for them is starting to take hold and gain momentum? I’ll leave it to others to ponder that question.
And via, Hugh Hewitt a message from General Petraeus to the soldiers now under his command:
The way ahead will not be easy. There will be difficult times in the months to come. But hard is not hopeless, and we must remain steadfast in our effort to help improve security for the Iraqi people. I am confident that each of you will fight with skill and courage, and that you will remain loyal to your comrades-in-arms and to the values our nations hold so dear.
In the end, Iraqis will decide the outcome of this struggle. Our task is to help them gain the time they need to save their country. To do that, many of us will live and fight alongside them. Together, we will face down the terrorists, insurgents, and criminals who slaughter the innocent. Success will require discipline, fortitude, and initiative – qualities that you have in abundance.
This brings to mind a question I’ve been mulling over for the past few weeks. With the surge of troops into Iraq, America is not escalating the fight. We are responding to the enemy on the ground over there.
To not respond, or to pull back, would, in effect, be signaling our surrender. And that would be disastrous for our National Security.
Dear Keith,
Thank you for posting the graphic representing control of Iraq.
During my deployment in Iraq (Oct 2005-Sept 2006) I witnessed the transformation of our sector (Log Base Sietz – North BIAP/Abu Ghraib City) from daily attacks to maybe bi-monthly attacks (on the base – minor in nature comparably) once the hand-off was made from coalition forces to Iraqi Army forces (mid-December 05).
It was night and day for several reasons. The IA was not constrained by U.S. rules of engagement. They could more easily ascertain and assess information collected on the scene in real time which allowed them to act immediately on intel.
No doubt they acted with U.S. assistance on many levels but they proved very effective in this capacity. I cannot speak as to how many casualties they suffered or what kind of collateral damage was done to the local populace and infrastructure but attacks on our base evaporated within two weeks of the handover.
Yes, there were isolated incidents of violence and from what I’m told (by unconfirmed sources) one major offensive that would have certainly breached our perimeter and engulfed the whole base in an extensive firefight while I was there on the level of the A.G. Prison assault prior to my unit’s arrival at L.B.S. (The attacking element was prematurely engaged by a roving IA patrol and the battle ensued in the adjacent market area instead of within our walls.
I unknowingly wrote about it on my myspace Blog from Iraq thinking it was just another firefight nearby. Again, I have heard other accounts of the same incident (perhaps the same) where the IA sent an entire battalion size element to quash the activities of just two men.
My point is this; the “fully trained and well led Iraqi forces” can handle security wherever they are deployed if given the means and opportunity. It is a time issue. When there will be enough such troops is a pressing issue as it should be.
How long did it take allied forces to quell all violence in Germany, Italy and the Pacific theatres? As I recollect there were a few well disciplined Japanese soldiers who held out well into the 1960′s in the Philippines and that is precisely the issue we are facing today except the holdouts are in fertile country to garner new recruits and extend their capabilities and peddle their influence. (It would be nice to see a list of the American intervention success stories – there has to be a few – and try to incorporate lessons learned from those instances).
We are dealing (in some cases) with people just as determined as the hold-out Japanese military personnel (divine wind) because they too believe not only in their leadership but that they are on a divine mission from Allah.
We simply cannot convince such people that there is a political solution for their grievances with the United States and others.
They will remain undeterred in their efforts to achieve their goals without sweeping changes in how we are perceived as treating others globally and in many ways how we actually do treat other nations while trying to protect our national interests.
It is sticky business meddling in other’s political and socio-economic affairs while trying to protect our national and international interests. I for one am not prepared to see more devastation within the borders of the United States. Until there is a better dialog, method or plan with those few who would like to see us wiped from the face of the earth, I feel that we are left with no alternative but to fight them abroad with our trained fighting men and women instead of waiting for them to come to us as they have so blatantly proven that they are willing and desiring to do.
Obviously there will be a point of diminishing returns in this endeavor. Where will the line define itself (if not already) when we are creating more enemies (perhaps generational) than we are defeating? The peoples of the Middle East (and elsewhere – Protestants vs. Catholics in Europe for centuries) are not known for resolving their differences via dialogue, tolerance and concessions at first.
Aside from removing an Iraqi dictator (who we helped rise to and maintain power) from power what can we hope to accomplish in Iraq in a few years – which they have not been able to do in five thousand years?
There needs to be a representative government in Iraq. There needs to be peace. The Iraqis I encountered want what we want. They want security to be able to feed their families, provide a roof over their heads, worship freely, send their children to school (some girls as well) and be able to travel freely without fear of kidnap or violence (been to Mexico City, Caracas or Bogotá lately – think of how many children disappear in this country every year?).
It is quite simple; the Iraqi people are very similar to the rest of the world. They are a great people with strong cultural values, vast talents and a yearning desire to be at peace amongst themselves. They have been oppressed for so long that they have become divided and disenfranchised to the point that the common person has forgotten what it’s like to have free will and self determination. This generational degradation will take time to reverse. Then think about Afghanistan! Lord knows those people have suffered.
Keep in mind that (often) power throughout the world is generally wielded by few and acts of violence and coercion as a means to an end virtually rules the majority of a populace (as perceived by outsiders). Therefore, we are forced to treat an entire “conflict of interest†on the terms of a relative few persons. Often this is seen as American aggression on an entire society rather than the few persons who have an ideology that is usually rejected by the majority of the people involved. The meek are ruled by the feared. How we wrench (and should we) power from the few extremists is the crux of our dilemma and has been since the formation of our country and the writing of our Constitution and the Bill of Rights (remember our War of Independence and our Civil War later?).
Support our troops on every level (they come home) and remember (as with every combat mission the U.S. has been in) that the wounds both physiological and emotional have more than a “shelf-lifeâ€, they have a “half-life†– which means the suffering extends (for some) well beyond physical healing and themselves. Families and communities suffer the affects of deployments and combat while loved ones are home, abroad and when they return.
It is a human tragedy and sadly – universal. Think of what it would be like if the combat was here on a daily basis. This thought was what finally brought me to a recruiter’s office three weeks before my thirty-fifth birthday – fully knowing that I was virtually guaranteeing myself a trip to the Middle East and a long absence from my family. It’s very hard, but I’ll do it again shortly.
All the best to you and keep up the healthy discussions.
Change begins with the individual.
Allah aakbar, Scott.
Good to hear from you brother. I am looking forward to you visiting this weekend (Mardi Gras.) Drive safely, here and in Baghdad.
By the way everybody, give my brother a warm welcome from A Second Hand Conjecture and its readers. He and his buddies will be on their way back in the next few months.
Pingback: Things that make me go “hmmm.” « Nuke ‘m Hill
Welcome home, sir. Enjoy the R&R. You and yours have more than earned it and thank you for your service.
God willing, you will not have to go back again.