Neocons - losing it AND the peace?

Remove all ads!

I think the point is that the ultimate purpose of the Iraqi invasion is to make Iraq a safer, less terrorist-friendly place through meeting such objectives as eliminating WMD, overthrowing a despot, liberating the Iraqi people, bringing democracy to a region much in need of it etc. All noble goals, regardless of whether anyone thinks America should have been the one to accomplish them or not.

But to accomplish the ultimate strategic goal of neutralising the threat Iraq poses - not just the immediate objectives of eliminating Hussein, WMDs etc - a two pronged approach is necessary:

1) Invade, kill the leaders and their probable heirs, destroy dangerous installations. The US has done a tremendously good job of this with a minimum of casualties. Well done. Pats on backs all round, and a loud "hurrah" for the troops who suffered to do it.

2) Replace the overthrown regime with a democratic one by rebuilding destroyed infrastructure and civil service, engaging the public in rebuilding their own country, reducing social unrest and restoring order. American troops are just not doing a good job of this either in Afghanistan or in Iraq. In fact they are fast making the region *more* dangerous than it was, by behaving so reprehensibly by local standards (including tremendous numbers of civilian and child deaths) that they are increasing fear and loathing for America all across the middle east.

America took a lot of trouble to keep a low number of civilian casualties during the invasion itself, and they were brilliantly successful at it. I'm sure they could come up with ways to do house-to-house searches in ways that do *not* make mortal enemies and future terrorists out of every man, woman and child they meet. On the dog issue, for example, if it's weaponry they are searching for, send in the engineers with detection equipment. Use more female soldiers in house-to-house search squads so that women can be searched by another woman if they request it. In a culture where admiring a man's wife is tantamount to raping her, it is not a good idea to have our soldiers and their dogs touching civilian women in their own homes. I'd agree this would be too much to hope for in the heat of the invasion, but we are supposed to have already won and in the rebuilding stage now. We all want the same thing here: to reduce future terrorism and weapon proliferation in the middle east. Let's try to come up with solutions that will work, not just rely on brute force where that is likely to make the problem worse.

As for cultural sensitivity training, of course we don't have time to teach the "intricacies" of a foreign culture to all soldiers. But peacekeeping troops absolutely DO get a rundown of the most important local taboos and key phrases in the local languages. If the American soldiers currently in Iraq are getting this training, it doesn't show from their general behaviour.

One of the biggest problems is really that the locals are now so angry with America that there is no way the soldiers can be seen to be doing anything right. I think that America needs to hand over more of the soldiering and rebuilding duties to UN peacekeepers now. It's NOT that UN peacekeepers are more competent - probably they aren't. It's that the best way to restore order is to gain the cooperation and trust of the locals, and America is now at an enormous disadvantage.

Ragusa: I hope you're kidding by suggesting pigs. Pigs are at least as offensive as dogs. Would you feed a Jewish prisoner a ham sandwich? Same story for Muslims.

 

@ Jack

This is a bit of an overblown generalization. Many armies throughout the world are trained on how to respond to different cultures or at the very least are briefed as to what lines they shouldn't cross before going in. This isn't anything new. If our soldiers are getting such training, it's certainly not showing.

EDIT - I'd go on, but it looks like Sprite beat me to most of my points.

I don't understand why people are so defensive to criticism of the way our country is handling a mess we insisted on getting ourselves into. This "liberation" is NOT going well at all, and there are many in this country - myself included - who aren't so quick to blame them crazy savage Iraqis. I'm not so sure I wouldn't act the same way in response to what's going on, and I sure as hell don't expect them to be grateful at this point.

Our military and current administration are doing a terrible job in Iraq, and it's high time they be held responsible for it. No amount of Rumsfeld's smugness, Jessica Lynch stories or reminders that Saddam was evil are going to convince me the Bush administration are wearing the white hats. Being patriotic also means insisting on believable leadership, and right now I don't believe a damn thing any of them says. That includes reports of our soldiers' conduct.

 

I wasn't aware that the responsibilities of the military had switched to "peace keeping force". This seems to imply that only policing duties are necessary. As fresh combat (related to the original conflict, not policing) crops up everyday, I don't think that we are there yet.

My comments are not limited to the use of dogs. My comments are related to the general needs of staying alive when hostile combatants are still present and active.
I agree that when combat is truly over, cultural sensitivity has a place. Until then, it's about staying alive. Could they get by without using dogs? I don't know. Apparently nobody else here does either.

Is there a way to get the job done and still respect all aspects of the native culture? I doubt it. And nobody here has given me any reason to think otherwise.

@Sprite

This I agree with. Especially when it comes to the policing and rebuilding. I would LOVE to see the international community more involved.

@Death Rabbit
My responses have nothing to do with patriotism, agreeing with Bush or the military, or to "blame the savage iraqis". My responses are to a thesis (respecting local customs is more important than staying alive) that I feel is ridiculous. Under any circumstances.
And as far as my response to Splunge, you can call it an "overblown generalization", but if you read my original post and Splunges response, he did, in fact, claim that his military was trained in this fashion. Whether he meant it literally or not is not my problem. He posted what he posted.

 

@ Jack Funk

My answer was there you just did not see her my friend.

First of all diplomacy is usefull before he becomes a sniper, now the soldiers all they can do is fear who is gonna be next. But as a saying in my country goes, the kids of the wise cook before they hunger.
And Ragusa gave one example i will give you another. US troops had gone in some houses while there was no man in the house only women. For most religions this means nothing but for Islam this is an attrocity women aren't allowed to speak with or been seen by strangers. You see where i am getting; Bad behaviour for their standards, normal behaviour by the USA standards. But in Iraq as well as in Afganistan as well as in everywhere in this world except USA US soldiers are the foreigners so they must first show respect not vice versa. Sorry but this is how it works as far as i know

 

Well, I’ve figured out one thing – the next time I’m asked to come up with a solution, I’m going to PM Sprite and ask her to do it for me. She said basically the same thing I did, but much, much more eloquently.

Jack, I think part of the reason that there is still fighting going on from the original conflict is because of the total lack of credibility that the U.S. now has in Iraq. IMO, the sooner the international community becomes involved, the sooner the rebuilding can begin.

That certainly is not my thesis; all I am saying is that cultural awareness is an important part of the whole solution.

Huh? What on earth did I say to make you think that? Or did you mean Mithrantir?

[ August 08, 2003, 19:21: Message edited by: Splunge ]

 

@Mith...

Do you really believe this? The true believers exist and no amount of diplomacy is going to change this.

@Splunge

Again, do you really believe this? The people carrying out the attacks are loyal to Hussein. No amount of cultural sensitivity is going to change this.

As I see it, I have nothing else to add here. As it often goes in the Alley, we will have to agree to disagree.

Perhaps when Ragusa returns (he seems to be absent) and responds to some of this I will reenter the thread (out of respect for Ragusa who has not yet responded).

Until then, have a nice weekend all and try to have some fun.

 

Here I go not expressing myself very well again. I said the lack of U.S. credibility was part of the reason, and cultural sensitivity is only part of the answer. My actual point was that there needs to be U.N. involvement ASAP to get the rebuilding process going.

I agree with you that we're probably beating a dead horse here, and we should wait for Ragusa (where the hell is he anyway? - drops this on us and then buggers off ). Anyways, I'm going out of town for a couple of days, so likewise on the wishes for a good weekend.

But I'd still like to know where you got the idea that I said our military was trained in cultural issues (assumung you didn't mean Mith).

 

I think the main point that most of you are missing here is more American soldiers have died in the aftermath than in the invaison.So regardles of how Bush and RumsField assure us the military opertation is over it certainly is not.You cannot operate in the field as a peace keeping force if your troops are still under fire.This is combat.
Many of you seem to have a military background so should be able to understand the rules of engagement change when you're still under fire.
Let's look at one of the big complaints that still seems to crop up,not searching houses till a male show's up to supervise.Do you have any idea how unrealistic that is.How easy would it be for people to hold up our men for hours while they move or hide what our guys are searching for.
I certainly understand your frustration with the way things are going over there but I beleive this is still a combat situation over there and until that changes some of the things you guys want will have to wait.
One thing is sure unless Bush and company come up with a way to win the real war,The one for the Iragi's hearts and minds things will never change.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3134763.stm

I've read today, but haven't found any link, that General Sanchez said, the US-forces have antagonized a big part of the local population. They plan to change behaviour, like taking locals with to house searches, which will first talk with the inhabitants.

 

Jack Funk,

Well, that is the very heart of the problem. When you conquer you need fighters. For occupying and transforming a country you need a different sort of troops, troops adept beeing a peackeeping force and troops adept at fighting guerrillas. The normal grunt the US sent there is neither of both.

The US gvt didn't understand that necessity. The US army iirc even closed a peacekeeping school only recently. Rummy & Crew obviously thought marching in is enough - you know - the plug and play invasion. This is not working in either afganistan and Iraq.

That is the crucial mistake I was pointing out and the one that will haunt the US for the next decade if they don't get things right quick. The lack of experience, and the lack of understanding about the difficulties in peacekeeping operations is the US achilles heel.

Look at the brits: They are in Iraq for the same silly reason, as illegal as the US, but they are handling this way more careful. Their sector is calmer, and they act less heavyhanded - because they have understood and learned their lessons from northern Ireland.

And even wheh US heavy-handedness doesn't make eternal enemies it could result in some GIs ending up eternally dead. Maybe that's worth a thought.

 

Things are still getting worse. Read here

Is this a way to cool things down? IMHO no and furthermore it seems to me that moves like that put fuel in the fire not only in the Iraq issue but in the whole War on terror issue. Opinions if you wish