Posted among other stuff at The Conjecturer.
Defense & The War
- Imagine that: actions speak louder than words.
- It’s worth pointing out that the Instapundit crowd defer lovingly to the troops only when they happen to agree—otherwise they’re not too big on considering stories outside their “preset narrative,” to borrow their common critique of a lot of mainstream reporting. It’s also worth noting that this dozen officers tried to report their concerns up the chain of command but were ignored—either willfully (in which case bigger questions need to be asked) or as a simply artifact of the stiff military bureaucracy (in which case it’s a symptom of the more general C2 problems they’ve experienced).
- How the Air Force massages budgets to maximize its funding.
Around the World
- Turkey is inching closer to invading Iraq, which is spiking oil prices. I’m not worried about an invasion, but I am worried about retaliatory strikes, as they would require a response by us. Not to be too chauvinistic, but it’s one thing when Turkey invades an island no one cared about before (and is still routinely condemned and denied some concessions over); it’s quite another when it’s the US and a Muslim NATO ally, battling over the border of another country we’ve invaded and occupied. That spells trouble. Whose side would we take?
- Finally, the cotton subsidies have been properly condemned. I hope the threat of retaliatory tariffs is enough to end them; then again, we tariff everything under the sun, so nothing will probably come of it until a group of countries retaliate.
- Remember that time we helped Ethiopia invade Somalia? Well, now the tiff between BFF Zenawi and Eritrea’s president/dictator Afewerki is about to spark a war. If we hadn’t blown our wad toppling the ICU, then maybe CJTF-HOA would have played a positive role in mediating the dispute; as it stands now, we can’t do much. Zenawi’s horrible campaign in Ogaden, which consists of raping and murder like in Darfur, does not help things. Which evil do you pick? Can you pick?
- Russia has never much liked the Heydars, not since they basically cut Lukoil out of the South Caspian oil fields in the mid-90s. Now they’re getting ridiculous. Unfortunately, our genius-President’s belicosity is helping them.
- [PIC FOR ASHC] Yulia Tymochenko forms a ruling coalition!
America Is a Silly Place
- Explaining mechanism theory, which won Leonid Hurwicz, Eric Maskin, and Roger Myerson the Nobel Prize in Economics this year.
- The RIAA hates your usenet. Because nothing says “encourage innovation” like suing a distributor of the precursor to the world wide web.
As opposed to some other bloggers I read? Not to mention the criticism has been focused on them being wrong, and of course not being there in the time in question, which certainly should be factored into assessing their complaints. Generally they have been treated with respect even by those who disagree. Something some commenters *cough* have not done when discussing the views of military men who have views different from theirs.
The difference being I don’t worship “the soldier” as almost a secular saint (note: I am not saying you do). Am I hard on the military? Absolutely, almost as hard as I am on Congress and the record companies, when they massage numbers of spin the truth. Frankly, they need it, too. You get no argument from me on that.
Does Glenn Reynolds? Does the “Instapundit crowd?” I see little evidence of that. In the post in question is anything disparaging said about them? Is Bob Owens attacking them? Does he show any evidence of seeing them as secular saints? Does Instapundit? I see no evidence in Glenn Reynolds’ case that he sees them as secular saints or that he is attacking them. The whole point is that it is the people there now we should be looking to for an assessment of the situation. That is quite a good point.
Of course the problem is almost everyone and all the data agree that important changes are occurring, so we have to reach out to frustrated soldiers who haven’t experienced what is happening now. Not just in terms of casualties, but in the entire atmosphere. I saw plenty of evidence of that long before the data became as clear as it is now. Just as I saw evidence as early as October 2006 that Anbar was turning around. Something that was not recognized broadly until this summer. It was still being denied vehemently as late as May, and dismissed as temporary as late as July. The real sign of progress was changes in relations between the various party’s and the type of daily atmosphere within which casualties were occurring (as opposed to the raw numbers.) Which is why, as tragic as it was, it was not the same when casualties spiked because of a few deadly mass casualty attacks such as struck the Yazidis. The context had changed dramatically.
Given the importance of those less easily measured aspects, how were these men to assess them better than the soldiers, embeds, and reporters there now?
In addition, as heartfelt and relevant as their experience was they show little appreciation or knowledge of present tactics, or counterinsurgency in general. They view the correlation of forces in a static manner rather than as a dynamic function of the interaction between the coalition and the populace. That is a serious flaw. It isn’t surprising, COIN wasn’t an important part of their training, it has been learned and applied on the ground in real time.
That doesn’t mean their eventual predicted outcome will not come true, but that will not change the serious flaws in how they view COIN or their lack of experience with conditions as they exist now. Violence didn’t just move, it radically declined. Moving it was important in and of itself, and that is a flaw in their analysis, but it would be at least arguable that it isn’t important, it is just whack a mole. A radical decline however shows their analysis has some serious holes, even if al Qaeda or others adapt their tactics to increase the body count and disrupt the changes we are seeing in the on the ground relationships.
Are you implying Glenn places soldiers as secular saints?
While Bob Owens and Reynolds were pretty respectful of those soldiers’ op-ed (at least IMHO), I haven’t seen them building a shrine “to the suffering of the war dead, and may George-W-Bauer-Bush crush our enemies!” like idiots like Sean Hannity?
Things have changed a good bit since 2006, mostly for the better which does alter how we can judge the op-ed.
However, wile AQI may be on the ropes, guys like Totten and Yon haven’t in my knowledge skimped out on the continuing dysfunction from the central Iraqi government, or how our new friends in the 1920 Revolutionary Brigades are temporary allies…
Which happens after Glenn has lead you to their site’s and as he usually states
“read the whole thing.”
What I’m more-or-less saying is that in this criticism of Reynolds, I think you’re overreaching…
If we are to go after people using one type of soldier (and their blog) for support of an argument, then Belgravia Dispatch could also be charged guilty, from this post here:
What I’m more-or-less saying is that in this criticism of Reynolds, I think you’re overreaching…
If we are to go after people using one type of soldier (and their blog) for support of an argument, then Belgravia Dispatch could also be charged guilty, as seen from this post here:
Damn!
Swallowed my link, the link tag did!
See link, here:
http://www.belgraviadispatch.com/2007/10/our_sunni_bffs_or_perhaps_not.html
Lance/Frank, I’m pointing more to a general tendency: Instapundit, and that guy Crittenden—neither of whom, to the best of my knowledge, ever served in the military, in any branch—have this knack for only praising pro-war journalists, the vast majority of whom (especially the many blogger-reporters who went over) have never served either. They get fed lines by the military, propaganda.
Honestly, that last part is fine, because I don’t begrudge the DOD trying to get its story out. That’s a part of any conflict. But seeing through the bull is an important skill. Knowing that, I have a hard time viewing Iraq—which is improved yes, though still not as improved as March of 2006 or March of 2005—with anything other than cautious optimism is a biiiiig stretch. Just comparing the “enemy killed” numbers with the constantly revised number of insurgents should offer a good picture of just how much we should trust their estimation of what and who they’re fighting. But looking at what actual Arabic speakers think about what they hear coming out of Iraq is even more instructive—especially when compared with what we tend to hear in English.
That’s why I shake my head at all the “al qaeda is defeated” mumbo-jumbo. Assuming it was ever a significant part of the fighting (which is its own debate we’ve had elsewhere), we had assumed it was defeated before—in a place called Afghanistan. They know how to do tactical retreats, something the non-mils tend not to understand.
Which makes me think, I should define what I meant by “the Instapundit crowd.” Obviously it includes that guy, whose grasp of foreign policy and other cultures in general has been beyond infuriating (like when he used the scandal over the movie The Kite Runner to imply we’re somehow at war with the Hazara, or when he claimed Turkey’s “Islamists” were why Russia was bullying the Causcasus. Or, when he very conspicuously avoided mentioning the fallout of the Pat Tillman investigation after there was shown to have been a cover-up, or his silence at the Marine Corps’ shameful bullying of Adam Kokesh after he chose to oppose the war. The point here? He routinely demonstrates a shocking and fundamental misunderstanding of the cultural forces at work in our conflict zones (at one point he was saying China was a “target” of Islamists because of their rocky relationship with the Uyghurs, which is not just incoherent but incredibly ignorant)—something he shares with a huge swath of bloggers he links to, like Jules Crittenden (who at one point complained We Were Soldiers was insufficiently deferential to the military).
Really, it gets silly after a point. Instapundit and Yon and Bob Owens have no more idea what is going on in Iraq than I do. You cannot understand what is happening there by reading English-language soldier blogs and the embeds. I don’t claim to know what is going on there either, beyond the very embarrassing feeling I’ve been badly misled by listening to their sources in the past—the same ones who have been wrong about most things in this war, including the real dynamics at play in Anbar (for example: what role did the surge play in Anbar Lance could see it shifting alignment in October and most people noted it in December? Did it do anything, or just make us all feel pretty?). I’ve been shamed into deep skepticism, a lesson that crowd seems not to have learned.
Straw man. A newspaper reports that some people believe it and so Reynolds believes it?
Yon has no better idea? His conclusions you are free to challenge, his actual knowledge and experience in Iraq cannot be questioned. It is more varied in geographical, tactical and strategic facets than the vast majority of the officers in Iraq, much less most journalists. As for Instapundit, I doubt he would disagree, but he listens to people who do.
What evidence do you have that Reynolds sees Iraq with anything more than cautious optimism? That is exactly how I would characterize his view. So I see no big stretch.
Now I don’t remember his links on those subjects amounting to what you claim, nor do I condemn people for not covering things I want them to cover (and he has written some scathing indictments of military conduct along those same lines, and was the person who broke a story on a murder in Iraq that sent several people to jail. Did you uncover that? What shocking behavior on your part not to have.) What you really mean is he links to people you disagree with. He also links to people you do agree with, including you. In neither case is he giving his seal of approval. He is exposing different views. Are they more likely to match concerns he has? Yes. Does he claim he is the arbiter of who understands Hazara culture the best? No. You are projecting. You hang your hat on your expertise in the region as why people should pay attention to you and those you like. Reynolds publishes a blog to expose people to some of the things he finds interesting. One of those people could be you, and has been.
As for his ignorance, well that is in large supply amongst us all, including at times in your own commentary. It is the human condition. The difference is you want someone who links to the wide variety of stories he does to be an expert in each subject. Actually it is more, an expert who agrees with your editorial judgment of who should be referred to. That is impossible, and frankly would be a boring blog.
I see no lack of it from Reynolds, he just trusts people who have proven trustworthy. Yon is a good example. Exactly where has he been wildly wrong? The man had trouble getting credentials because of the backlash against his writing very early on (he was the first I ever read to use the term) that we were in a civil war, not just a conflict with terrorists and dead enders. He is getting optimistic now, but if you are in any way painting Yon as some kind of Pollyanna or that he has over the course of this conflict engaged in selling sunshine I am frankly appalled. You owe an apology.
That is BS. Nobody who is as derisive as you have been towards the views of others can possibly claim you feel you don’t have an idea. How are we to get an idea anyway? Soldiers don’t count in your world, and most there now agree with Yon. The military is wrong. People there are wrong, who to trust? Funny, you link enough to stories that support your narrative, so I guess those sources on those days do give us an idea. If you are truly so ignorant, stop spouting off.
Reynolds has the grace to at least not claim to know what is going on. He just links to lots of sources that help others of us get the best view we can. We read the sources, the commentary on both sides and get to come to a reasonably informed view. I don’t pretend, nor would Glenn suggest, that he is the go to guy for the politics of Kazakhstan. He is a place where if you were not so pissy, you might be able to get alternative views on the Kite Runner mess published, if you let him know about it. No skin off his nose, so why not? While he will link to occasional venomous posts attacking him for someone he links to, I suggest not doing that. Debate in a civil manner. It works with Glenn.
Instead you sit back in obscurity and attack someone for not knowing things (in your opinion important things) he has never claimed to know with arch assuredness and a healthy dose of moral and intellectual superiority. Once again, try an e-mail to him. He gets about a thousand a day, but he does read many of them. Every once in a while he may notice when you disagree if he isn’t turned off by the vitriol first. He might even follow a link once in a while (though he gets so many you have to understand.) Then maybe the Kite Runner mess would have had an added link underneath explaining why you thought the first links were wrong, or that more needed to be said. That is the way it works.
It made a big difference. Most people did not note it in December. The real difference was the evolution in COIN in Anbar. The surge made it more likely to hold once the tide turned. Given that some people claimed the surge wouldn’t help because it was too little too late, it sure seems odd to claim the violence data and reconciliation with the coalition has nothing to do with the surge. Who knew we had already accomplished so much that it was unnecessary? I guess we need to go update all those columns excoriating the old strategy and claiming we needed even more men. The thing was going to turn anyway.
I noticed it by reading between the lines. I have studied warfare, especially guerilla warfare, since the age of 8 when I got my first copy of B H Liddle Hart’s “History of WWII,” his Strategy and Mao Tse Tung’s book on guerilla warfare. Even depressing reports lend clues to things that are important. That doesn’t mean that I knew it would happen, but Bill Roggio especially was reporting things which showed something was happening. What I did know is that claiming it was lost hadn’t been proven to me yet, and there were signs that it could turn around. Often these things happen stunningly fast, and can seemingly come out of the blue. This is a text book case, and why I am very skeptical of claims made by certain people about how some things in this war are impossible to achieve. They may not be achieved, but they are far from impossible.
Anyway, your attacks on Reynolds are unfair and ungracious. While his blog certainly features some types of views more than others, I know of no blog that is more ecumenical and generous with its links. To focus your criticism on Instapundit when no other place is better on those same grounds speaks to your irritation with his success and prominence rather than any actual substantive complaint.