-Caveat Lector-
Begin forwarded message:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: May 29, 2007 9:23:22 AM PDT
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: How Can One Country Win Another's Civil War?
An elite team of officers advising US commander Gen. David Petraeus
in Baghdad has concluded the US has only 6 months to win the war in
Iraq -- or face a Vietnam-style collapse.
"The Iraqi Army won't fight for us. Some pick up weapons and fight
against us. We’re 'helping' people that hate us. We help them
during the day, and at night they turn around try to kill us.”
Doubts Grow as G.I.’s in Iraq Find Allies in Enemy Ranks
By MICHAEL KAMBER
New York Times, May 27, 2007
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/27/world/middleeast/28cnd-delta.html?
_r=1&oref=slogin
BAGHDAD — Staff Sgt. David Safstrom does not regret his previous
tours in Iraq, not even a difficult second stint when two comrades
were killed while trying to capture insurgents.
“In Mosul, in 2003, it felt like we were making the city a better
place,” he said. “There was no sectarian violence, Saddam was gone,
we were tracking down the bad guys. It felt awesome.”
But now on his third deployment in Iraq, he is no longer a believer
in the mission. The pivotal moment came, he says, this past
February when soldiers killed a man setting a roadside bomb. When
they searched the bomber’s body, they found identification showing
him to be a sergeant in the Iraqi Army.
“I thought, ‘What are we doing here? Why are we still here?’ ” said
Sergeant Safstrom, a member of Delta Company of the First
Battalion, 325th Airborne Infantry, 82nd Airborne Division. “We’re
helping guys that are trying to kill us. We help them in the day.
They turn around at night and try to kill us.”
His views are echoed by most of his fellow soldiers in Delta
Company, renowned for its aggressiveness.
A small minority of Delta Company soldiers — the younger, more
recent enlistees in particular — seem to still wholeheartedly
support the war. Others are ambivalent, torn between fear of losing
more friends in battle, longing for their families and a desire to
complete their mission.
With few reliable surveys of soldiers’ attitudes, it is impossible
to simply extrapolate from the small number of soldiers in Delta
Company. But in interviews with more than a dozen soldiers over a
one-week period with this 83-man unit, most said they were
disillusioned by repeated deployments, by what they saw as the
abysmal performance of Iraqi security forces and by a conflict that
they considered a civil war, one they had no ability to stop.
They had seen shadowy militia commanders installed as Iraqi Army
officers, they said, had come under increasing attack from roadside
bombs — planted within sight of Iraqi Army checkpoints — and had
fought against Iraqi soldiers whom they thought were their allies.
“In 2003, 2004, 100 percent of the soldiers wanted to be here, to
fight this war,” said Sgt. First Class David Moore, a self-
described “conservative Texas Republican” and platoon sergeant who
strongly advocates an American withdrawal. “Now, 95 percent of my
platoon agrees with me.”
It is not a question of loyalty, the soldiers insist. Sergeant
Safstrom, for example, comes from a thoroughly military family. His
mother and father have served in the armed forces, as have his
three sisters, one brother and several uncles. One week after the
Sept. 11 attacks, he walked into a recruiter’s office and joined
the Army.
“You guys want to start a fight in my backyard, I got something for
you,” he recalls thinking at the time.
But in Sergeant Safstrom’s view, the American presence is futile.
“If we stayed here for 5, even 10 more years, the day we leave here
these guys will go crazy,” he said. “It would go straight into a
civil war. That’s how it feels, like we’re putting a Band-Aid on
this country until we leave here.”
Their many deployments have added to the strain. After spending six
months in Iraq, the soldiers of Delta Company had been home for
only 24 hours last December when the news came. “Change your
plans,” they recall being told. “We’re going back to Iraq.”
Nineteen days later, just after Christmas, Capt. Douglas Rogers and
the men of Delta Company were on their way to Kadhimiya, a Shiite
enclave of about 300,000. As part of the so-called surge of
American troops, their primary mission was to maintain stability in
the area and prepare the Iraqi Army and police to take control of
the neighborhood.
“I thought it would not be long before we could just stay on our
base and act as a quick-reaction force,” said the barrel-chested
Captain Rogers of San Antonio. “The Iraqi security forces would
step up.”
It has not worked out that way. Still, Captain Rogers says their
mission in Kadhimiya has been “an amazing success.”
“We’ve captured 4 of the top 10 most-wanted guys in this area,” he
said. And the streets of Kadhimiya are filled with shoppers and the
stores are open, he said, a rarity in Baghdad due partly to Delta
Company’s patrols.
Captain Rogers acknowledges the skepticism of many of his soldiers.
“Our unit has already sent two soldiers home in a box,” he said.
“My soldiers don’t see the same level of commitment from the Iraqi
Army units they’re partnered with.”
Yet there is, he insists, no crisis of morale: “My guys are all
professionals. I tell them to do something, they do it.” His dictum
is proved on patrol, where his soldiers walk the streets for hours
in the stifling heat, providing cover for one another with crisp
efficiency.
On April 29, a Delta Company patrol was responding to a tip at Al
Sadr mosque, a short distance from its base. The soldiers saw men
in the distance erecting burning barricades, and the streets
emptied out quickly. Then a militia, believed to be the Mahdi Army,
which is affiliated with the radical Shiite cleric Moktada al-Sadr,
began firing at them from rooftops and windows.
Sgt. Kevin O’Flarity, a squad leader, jumped into his Humvee to
join his fellow soldiers, racing through abandoned Iraqi Army and
police checkpoints to the battle site.
He and his squad maneuvered their Humvees through alleyways and
side streets, firing back at an estimated 60 insurgents during a
gun battle that raged for two and a half hours. A rocket-propelled
grenade glanced off Sergeant O’Flarity’s Humvee, failing to penetrate.
When the battle was over, Delta Company learned that among the
enemy dead were at least two Iraqi Army soldiers that American
forces had helped train and arm.
“The 29th was a watershed moment in a negative sense, because the
Iraqi Army would not fight with us,” Captain Rogers said, adding,
“Some actually picked up weapons and fought against us.”
The battle changed the attitude among his soldiers toward the war,
he said.
“Before that fight, there were a few true believers.” Captain
Rogers said. “After the 29th, I don’t think you’ll find a true
believer in this unit. They’re paratroopers. There’s no question
they’ll fulfill their mission. But they’re fighting now for pride
in their unit, professionalism, loyalty to their fellow soldier and
chain of command.”
To Sergeant O’Flarity, the Iraqi security forces are militias
beholden to local leaders, not the Iraqi government. “Half of the
Iraqi security forces are insurgents,” he said.
As for his views on the war, Sergeant O’Flarity said, “I don’t
believe we should be here in the middle of a civil war.”
“We’ve all lost friends over here,” he said. “Most of us don’t know
what we’re fighting for anymore. We’re serving our country and
friends, but the only reason we go out every day is for each other.”
“I don’t want any more of my guys to get hurt or die. If it was
something I felt righteous about, maybe. But for this country and
this conflict, no, it’s not worth it.”
Staff Sgt. James Griffin grew up in Troy, N.C., near the Special
Operations base at Fort Bragg. His dream was to be a soldier, and
growing up he would skip school and volunteer to play the role of
the enemy during Special Operations training exercises. When he was
17, he joined the Army.
Now 22, Sergeant Griffin is a Delta Company section leader. On the
night of May 5, as he neared an Iraqi police checkpoint with a
convoy of Humvees, Sergeant Griffin spotted what looked like a
camouflaged cinderblock and immediately halted the convoy. His
vigilance may have saved the lives of several soldiers. Under the
camouflage was a huge, six-array, explosively formed penetrator — a
deadly roadside bomb that cuts through the Humvees’ armor with ease.
The insurgents quickly set off the device, but the Americans were
at a safe distance. An explosive ordnance disposal team arrived to
check the area. As the ordnance team rolled back to base, they were
attacked with a second roadside bomb near another Iraqi checkpoint.
One soldier was killed and two were wounded.
No one has been able to explain why two bombs were found near Iraqi
checkpoints, bombs that Iraqi soldiers and the police had either
failed to notice or helped to plant.
Sergeant Griffin understands the criticism of the Iraqi forces, but
he believes they, and the war effort, must be given more time.
“If we throw this problem to the side, it’s not going to fix
itself,” he said. “We’ve created the Iraqi forces. We gave them
Humvees and equipment. For however long they say they need us here,
maybe we need to stay.”
------------------
Military chiefs give US six months to win Iraq war
Coalition is 'disintegrating'
Simon Tisdall
Guardian Unlimited (UK), February 28, 2007
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,2023541,00.html
An elite team of officers advising US commander General David
Petraeus in Baghdad has concluded the US has six months to win the
war in Iraq -- or face a Vietnam-style collapse in political and
public support that could force the military into a hasty retreat.
The officers -- combat veterans who are leading experts in counter-
insurgency -- are charged with implementing the "new way forward"
strategy announced by president George Bush on January 10. The plan
includes a controversial "surge" of 21,500 additional American
troops to establish security in the Iraqi capital and Anbar province.
But the team, known as the "Baghdad brains trust" and ensconced in
the heavily fortified Green Zone around the US embassy, is
struggling to overcome a range of entrenched problems in what has
become a race against time, said a former senior administration
official familiar with their deliberations. "They know they are
operating under a clock. They know they are going to hear a lot
more talk in Washington about 'Plan B' by the autumn - meaning
withdrawal. They know the next six-month period is their
opportunity. And they say it's getting harder every day," the
former official said.
By improving security, the plan's short-term aim is to create time
and space for the Iraqi government to bring rival Shia, Sunni and
Kurd factions together in a process of national reconciliation, us
officials say. If that works within the stipulated timeframe,
longer-term schemes for rebuilding Iraq under the so-called "go
long" strategy will be set in motion. But the next six months are
make-or-break for both the US military and the Iraqi government.
The main obstacles confronting Gen Petraeus's team are:
· Insufficent numbers of troops on the ground
· A "disintegrating" international coalition
· An anticipated upsurge in violence in the south as the British leave
· Morale problems as casualties rise
· A failure of political will in Washington and/or Baghdad
"The scene is very tense. They are working round the clock. Endless
cups of tea with the Iraqis," the former senior administration
official said. "But they're still trying to figure out what's the
plan. The president is expecting progress. But they're thinking,
what does he mean? The plan is changing every minute, as all plans
do."
The team comprises an unusual mix of combat experience and high
academic achievement. It includes Colonel Peter Mansoor, Gen
Petraeus's executive officer and a former armoured division
commander who holds a PhD in the history of infantry; Col H R
McMaster, author of a well-known critique of Vietnam and a seasoned
counter-insurgency operations chief; Lt-Col David Kilcullen, a
seconded Australian army officer and expert on Islamism; and Col
Michael Meese, son of the former US attorney-general, Edwin Meese,
who was a member of the ill-fated Iraq Study Group.
Their biggest headache was insufficient numbers of troops on the
ground despite the increase ordered by Mr Bush, the former official
said. "We don't have the numbers for the counter-insurgency job
even with the surge. The word 'surge' is a misnomer. Strategically,
tactically, it's not a surge," an American officer said.
According to the US military's revised counter-insurgency field
manual, FM 3-24, authored by Gen Petraeus, the optimum "troop-to-
task" ratio for Baghdad requires 120,000 US and allied troops in
the city alone. Current totals, even including often unreliable
Iraqi units, fall short of that number. The deficit is even greater
in conflict areas outside Baghdad.
"Additional troops are essential if we are to win," said Lt-Col
John Nagel, another Petraeus confidant and co-author of the manual,
in an address at the US Naval Institute in San Diego last month.
One soldier for every 50 civilians in the most intense conflict
areas was key to successful counter-insurgency work. Compounding
the manpower problems is an apparently insurmountable shortage of
civilian volunteers from the Pentagon, state department and
treasury. They are needed to staff the additional provincial
reconstruction teams and other aid projects promised by Mr Bush.
The recent British decision to reduced troop levels in southern
Iraq, coupled with the actual or anticipated departure of other
allies, has heightened the Petraeus team's worries that the
international coalition is "disintegrating" even as the US strives
to regain the initiative in Iraq, the former official said.
Increased violence in the south is now expected, caused in part by
the "displacement" of Shia militias forced out of Baghdad by the US
crackdown. American and Iraqi forces entered the militant Shia
stronghold of Sadr City today for the first time since the surge
began. No more major operation have yet been attempted there but
"we or the Iraqis are going to have to fight them", one American
officer said.
According to a British source, plans are in hand for the possible
southwards deployment of 6,000 US troops to compensate for
Britain's phased withdrawal and any concomitant upsurge in unrest.
Morale is another key concern in the Green Zone headquarters as US
forces prepare for a rise in casualties as the security crackdown
gathers pace. In a message to the troops after he assumed overall
command last month, Gen Petraeus heaped praise on their sacrifices
while warning of more "difficult times" in the months to come.
"We serve in Iraq at a critical time... A decisive moment
approaches. Shoulder to shoulder with our Iraqi comrades we will
conduct a pivotal campaign to improve security for the Iraqi
people. The stakes could not be higher," Gen Petraeus said.
"It's amazing how well morale has held up so far," the former
official said. "But the guys know what's being said back home.
There is no question morale is gradually being sapped by political
debates in Washington."
The advisers are also said to be struggling to prevent the
"politicisation" of the surge by the Shia-dominiated government of
Nuri al-Maliki. The fear is that any security advances may be
exploited to further weaken the position of Baghdad's Sunni minority.
Despite progress this week on a new law sharing Iraq's oil wealth,
continuing Shia and Kurdish opposition to measures to ease the post-
invasion de-Ba'athification policy that excludes Sunnis from many
senior posts is proving intractable. The Petraeus team believes the
government is failing to work hard enough to meet other national
reconciliation "benchmarks" set by Mr Bush.
Yet it is accepted that the US is asking the Iraqi prime minister
to do what most politicians in normal circumstances would refuse to
contemplate. "What we're doing is asking Maliki to confront his own
powerbase," one officer said.
Possibly the biggest longer-term concern of Gen Petraeus's team is
that political will in Washington may collapse just as the military
is on the point of making a decisive counter-insurgency
breakthrough. According to a senior administration official,
speaking this week, this is precisely what happened in the final
year of the Vietnam war.
Steven Simon, the national security council's senior director for
transnational threats during the Clinton administration, said a
final meltdown in political and public backing was likely if the
new strategy was not quickly seen to be working. "The implosion of
domestic support for the war will compel the disengagement of US
forces. It is now just a matter of time," Mr Simon said in a paper
written for the Council on Foreign Relations.
"Better to withdraw as a coherent and at least somewhat volitional
act than withdraw later in hectic response to public opposition...
or to a series of unexpectedly sharp reverses on the ground," he said.
"If it gets really tough in the next few months, it will throw fuel
on the fire in Washington," the former official said. "Congress
will be emboldened in direct proportion to the trouble in Iraq." If
the policy was not judged to be working by Labour Day (the first
Monday in September, which marks the start of the new political
year), Mr Bush could lose control of the policy to Congress and be
forced to begin a phased pull-out, he suggested.
Despite the problems identified by Gen Petraeus and his advisers, a
senior Pentagon official said this week that it was too early to
gauge the strategy's chances of success - but that preliminary
reports were encouraging.
"There are some promising signs. There is a new overall Iraqi
commander in Baghdad. A number of joint operations have just begun.
The number of political murders has fallen. Iraqi forces are
showing up as promised, admittedly a little bit under strength, and
are taking up some of the responsibilities that Maliki said he
would," the Pentagon official said.
"We have to be realistic. We're not going to stop the suicide
bombers and the roadside explosive devices for some time. And the
military alone are certainly not going to solve the problem. Maliki
has to meet the benchmarks. A civilian surge is needed, too. The
Iraqis have to do it themselves."
American officials say they also have rising hopes of a
breakthrough in Sunni-dominated Anbar province where tribal chiefs
are increasingly hostile to al-Qaida terrorists and foreign jihadis
- and are looking for ways to build bridges to moderate Shias. But
this week's US decision to join a dialogue on Iraq with Iran and
Syria, after previously refusing to do so, is neverhteless seen as
an indication of growing administration alarm over the possibility
of an historic strategic failure.
See what's free at AOL.com.
www.ctrl.org
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listserv.aol.com/
<A HREF="http://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listserv.aol.com/";>ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
