The futility of Iraq

[TayTay]

Which may foreshadow the futility of Afghanistan.

The New York Times has an article about a http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/31/world/middleeast/31adviser.html?hp">memo written about the US situation in Iraq. The memo, written by Col Timonthy Reese, is a very pessimistic assessment of the Iraqi government and raises a great many questions about what the US goal is in Iraq and if we can do anything but watch this situation deteriorate. There are many people who said that the Iraq invasion and initial aftermath were so bad that we can't essentially right what we did or aid Iraq. We may be seeing that come to pass.

As an interesting side note, the Times notes:

Before deploying to Iraq, Colonel Reese served as the director of the http://usacac.army.mil/CAC2/CSI/">Combat Studies Institute at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., the Army’s premier intellectual center. He was an author of http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/29/washington/29army.html">an official Army history of the Iraq war — “On Point II” — that was sharply critical of the lapses in postwar planning.

Bio of Gen. Petraeus, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Petraeus#2000s">from Wikipedia

From late 2005 through February 2007,<29> Petraeus served as Commanding General of Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, and the U.S. Army Combined Arms Center (CAC) located there. As commander of CAC, Petraeus was responsible for oversight of the Command and General Staff College and seventeen other schools, centers, and training programs as well as for developing the Army’s doctrinal manuals, training the Army’s officers, and supervising the Army’s center for the collection and dissemination of lessons learned. During his time at CAC, Petraeus and Marine Lt. Gen. James N. Mattis jointly oversaw the publication of Field Manual 3-24, Counterinsurgency, the body of which was written by an extraordinarily diverse group of military officers, academics, human rights advocates, and journalists who had been assembled by Petraeus and Mattis.<30><31> Additionally, at both Fort Leavenworth and throughout the military's schools and training programs, Petraeus integrated the study of counterinsurgency into lesson plans and training exercises. In recognition of the fact that soldiers in Iraq often performed duties far different than those they trained for, Petraeus also stressed the importance of teaching soldiers how to think as well as how to fight and the need to foster flexibility and adaptability in leaders,<32><33> he has been called "the world's leading expert in counter-insurgency warfare".<34> Later, having refined his ideas on counterinsurgency based on the implementation of the new COIN doctrine in Iraq, he published both in Iraq as well as in the Sep/Oct 2008 edition of Military Review his "Commander's Counterinsurgency Guidance" to help guide leaders and units in the Multi-National Force-Iraq.<35>

These two guys come from similar backgrounds. The counterinsurgency movement was bolstered by folks from Ft. Leavenworth. This is also interesting.

[beachmom]

1. This is why I can't face the news anymore. Obama will be crucified for this.

He needs to ramrod health care through before that happens.

Ugh. So depressing. Oh, and there are no Iraqi bloggers anymore. No one reports on what is going on. I think they have all given up on their country. That was in 2007. No change since then. The surge didn't work. It just took Iraq off the front page of the newspaper.

[beachmom]

2. OTOH, the guy who wrote the memo is a bit of a wingnut:

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/07/author_of_hyped_iraq_memo_also_wrote_unhinged_atta.php?ref=fpb

A senior American military adviser in Baghdad, whose memo arguing that the U.S. should leave Iraq is currently the top story on the New York Times website, is also the author of an unhinged online screed against health-care reform.

The health-care post, by Colonel Timothy Reese, sketches far-fetched scenarios about forced abortions and accuses President Obama of being "deceitful" in telling Americans they can keep their doctor under his plan. Its harsh tone raises questions about an active duty officer inserting himself into the political arena. And it suggests that that his widely-publicized military advice -- which was posted on the same blog as the health-care post -- should perhaps be treated more skeptically than is currently being done.

The military memo being trumpeted by the Times, was written by Reese in early July and sent to a limited audience of commanders. It identifies problems with Iraqi forces, but nonetheless argues that they're strong enough to maintain basic stability, and that keeping U.S. troops in Iraq past 2010 will fuel growing resentment among Iraqis. It's time "for the U.S. to declare victory and go home," it argues.

The Times notes that Reese posted an earlier version of his memo -- since removed but preserved here -- on a blog called "The Enchanter's Corner," under the byline Tim the Enchanter. The blog is affiliated with the right-wing Townhall site, though the Times leaves that out. A bio describes Tim the Enchanter as "a member of the US Army on active duty for almost 30 years ... currently serving in Iraq as an advisor to the Iraq security forces" and someone who is "passionate about political issues."

TPM ends their article by saying this doesn't mean that what he said on Iraq (where he has far more expertise) is not relevant, but it is noteworthy that he is right wing and highly critical of the President. Remember, guys: the officer corps in the military is right wing. Sorry, they are. The majority. I have met many officers and this is just reality.

[TayTay]

3. True. And worth noting

And also worth noting that there is a big split in the military among people who want to use more force in our dealings there and in Afghanistan and the "COINistas" who are the careful nation-builders. (And who have not been all successful. We might have broken Iraq beyond our ability to affect repairs, after all.)

The observation here is that the NYTimes is putting this up at all. That is the interesting part. I wonder if they are going to cover the war within the military over the COINistas and the force folks. This is relevant. One side uses the prism of Vietman to say that we could have won there if we had removed the shackles from our troops and let them be harsher and kill more people. That debate, as we all know, had echoes throughout US history and is still a cultural divider. This might be another legacy of Iraq as well.

[TayTay]

4. Potential Republican spin on this

Granted this comes from Pat Buchanan on MSNBC, but he does spin the RW line relentlessly.

Buchanan said that Bush and Petraeus has fixed Iraq and had it working with the surge. Now, look at Iraq only six months after Obama took over. Obama has ruined what the surge accomplished.

This is rubbish on so many levels. First of all, it ignores the foundational idea that invading Iraq was the biggest foreign policy mistake in US history. Second, it pretends that the surge was permanent fix. The surge was always a gamble and one that had a lot of temporary fixes in it that were foretold, at the time of it's implementation, to be wobbly.

However, this line that Obama and the Democrats screwed up Iraq by removing the surge benefits is going to grow. Be aware of that. The standard Republican strategy is to claim that Dems are weak on defense. Therefore, how could Dems have done anything but screwed up a good thing in Iraq. (Repubs do not care about accuracy or ethics or truth. We should know that by now and plan counter-strategy going forward.)

I don't think this will completely play going forward. There has simply been too much discussion over all the things that went wrong in Iraq from 2003-2007. There was intense commentary when the surge was put in that it might be too late for it. Again, I refer people back to the two hearings on the surge in the SFRC in March of 08 and the very downbeat nature of those hearings. (This was at a time when everyone wanted to believe that the surge had really affected change in that country. It was pointed out at that hearing and elsewhere that it had not and was the equivalent of renting some peace for a while. Well, we stopped paying for peace and now we are slipping back into the foretold chaos.)

[YvonneCa]

5. Are we (Dems) ever going to stand up against...

...the spin? Your words: "Repubs do not care about accuracy or ethics or truth. We should know that by now and plan counter-strategy going forward."

I agree completely. But it seems like we (Dems) just keep letting them frame the debate. Case in point (on the economy)...on CNN this morning, they aired a John King interview with John McCain where he spent his whole time RE-MAKING his case on the economy and stimulus package. The media keeps airing this stuff. Over and over. ABC had MICHELLE MALKIN on to discuss Obama's economic failures and potential health care failure. Why is it okay to have a hate-monger like her be given such credibility?

WHEN are we (Dems) going to start calling Republicans on their crap? The media won't let go of McCain, or Palin or their argument that LOST, bigtime, in November 2008. Those arguments were soundly DEFEATED. I know some Dems have said this, but not in a cohesive way. If Democrats don't get together and GET LOUD soon...we may as well hang it up. JMHO.