Rules of Engagement: Making Up The Rules As You Go

[Continental Op]

Rules of Engagement: Making Up The Rules As You Go War Analysis By J.J. Johnson Published 03. 26. 03 at 18:04 Sierra Time xxx All right, everyone. I did say I'd support the troops once the war started, and I do wish them well. Nevada even lost one of our own. Here's my problem: Understanding that 'truth' is always the first casualty of war, it is always better to take propaganda for what its worth. We understand this while watching Al Jazzerra or Iraqi TV. In most cases, we can all see right through it. But as much as I can't stand Jihad propaganda, American propaganda bothers me even more. Let's go over a few:

We'll start with this pesky little "resistance" problem. Perhaps this writer has a different perspective on this war because I've been a chess player most of my life. When developing strategy and analyzing the game, one must look at the whole position from both sides - not just one. For a country that has virtually no air force and crippled leadership, they sure are offering a hefty amount of resistance - even if it is futile. This resistance has been labeled with such terms as:

Iraqi Irregulars Saddam's Martyrs Saddam Loyalists Pockets of Resistance Iraqi military who changed into civilian clothes Al Queada sympathizers. The Fayhadeen

What you'll never hear them called are "armed civilians". This author recalls taking a lot of heat when we reported that Iraqi civilians were buying guns before the war started (how dare they?). We got loads of feedback saying we were either falling for or spreading Middle-East or leftist propaganda. You see, refusing to call them what most of them really are (armed civilians), points the suspicion of 'spreading propaganda' towards our side - much more than the enemy.

Of course, anyone having a problem with things like this are quickly dismissed, and thrown into the category with the Michael Moores of the world. No, I'm not one of those people - just analyzing some of the propaganda.

Violating the Rules of War.

Yes, that's what we're actually saying. Among the accusations: using women and children has human shields; wearing civilian clothes to ambush troops; antiaircraft missiles deployed around civilian areas; operating from hospitals, faking surrenders, etc. I've heard more than a few 'war experts' say, "They're not fighting fair."

This, after hearing one Pentagon spokesman come right out and say, "we don't believe in fighting fair - we want the advantage."

Reality Check: We have B2's F-117's, CIA operatives in civilian clothes, and we're in THEIR airspace, and on THEIR soil. Look at it from the other side of the chess board: If it were your country being invaded, what would you do? Would you 'fight fair'?

No matter how you feel about this war, you have to admit that before and after it started, we pretty much made up the rules as we went along. We're making the rules now. When it's over, we'll probably make up more rules as we go. Perhaps the 'resistance' is following suit - no matter how horrifying it looks on Al Jazzera. This is war - war gets ugly.

It goes back to the concept of "Operation Iraqi Freedom". Is it just me, or am I the only person getting the growing impression that some Iraqi's don't want 'our freedom' delivered to them?

Oh, it's just a 'desperate element of the regime', you say? Then what the heck have we been bombing? We've been duly slaughtering troops that don't surrender correctly (with few casualties that we are aware of) , leaving only these pesky civilians. Why won't they just surrender since they have NO CHANCE of winning? I believe there is a reason, but we'll address that later.

3000 Chemical Suits Found in Hospital

Brig. Gen. Vincent Brooks said Wednesday the discovery of 3,000 chemical suits in a central Iraqi hospital that had been used as an Iraqi base raised concern that Saddam Hussein's regime was prepared to use chemical weapons.

You've got to be kidding.

In addition to the chemical suits, the Central Command reported earlier that Marines found and confiscated gas masks and nerve gas antidote injectors in the hospital near An Nasiriyah.

Okay, before you start on my case with 'how dare you question the military authority while we're are war!", let me run this by you: Does the phrase 'first responders' ring a bell? It should, one died recently apparently from a smallpox vaccine. With all the first responders getting inoculated, does it mean the United States will be using smallpox as a weapon soon?

Of course, not. Just as chemical masks, suits and antidote injectors do not indicated that anyone plans on using chemical weapons. If it does, then we'd have some explaining to do - since every U.S. infantry person in the field in Iraq has been issued similar gear.

I strongly suggest the media quit peddling the 'chemical gear found at hospital'. No smoking gun here, sorry.

Seriously, glaring gaffs like this hurt our credibility. And you know how much credibility we have with the rest of the world now?

The fact is, the pressure is on our forces in the area - not just to take Baghdad, but to find Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). That's the reason we're doing this (so we are told)- to disarm Saddam Hussein from those WMD's no one has yet found. But it's only been a week.

Sidebar note: When some pundit was asked, "why haven't we found any weapons of mass destruction yet?", the Fox News talking head stated that a dictator like Saddam will probably keep such weapons close to him - like in Central Baghdad. "We'll find them once we get there". Sorry, but even the craziest nut wouldn't store stockpiles of such poisons in a major city - especially if bombs are falling all over the place.

Still, most of the propaganda is targeted on the resistance - those folks (civilians) we are told are loyal to Saddam Hussein, who just refuse to surrender in the face of sure defeat or welcome their American liberators. They are part of that regime, right?

Again - look from the other side of the chess board.

Fact is, opinions are floating in the Muslim world that the most of those (armed) citizens aren't necessarily loyal to that regime, but they are loyal to their homes and their families. And shame on them, they don't like some superpower coming in dictating terms how they should live, govern themselves, and demanding they get rid of WMD's when the only WMD's most of them have seen are the one's that were delivered by our military in the last week. Remember this when you hear of this armed resistance 'not playing fair' by wearing civilian clothes, and mingling in with civilians while fighting back. Despite what we hear, there's probably a good reason: They ARE civilians.

No, don't accuse me of 'not supporting the troops' as seems to be the knee-jerk reaction to anything but frantic flag waving. In my opinion, our troops are - once again - out there fighting with one hand tied behind their backs. This writer is merely explaining what we're up against. Unless we are ready to lay siege to the major cities in Iraq (and yes - that'll get ugly real fast), and wait a few months until they finally run out of everything, we'll have to go street by street - house by house - sewer by sewer. Fine, we say - we have the best military force in the world. But let it be known that this author predicts most of those 'pockets of resistance' are people fighting with whatever they have because, in their minds, it's not about liberation - but occupation.

And if it goes house to house (we could simply declare a whole area hostile and carpet bomb), the name "Operation Iraqi Freedom" is going start looking more and more like an oxymoron, and we're gonna have a lot more flag draped coffins coming home before this is over.

[Illbay]

For a country that has virtually no air force and crippled leadership, they sure are offering a hefty amount of resistance - even if it is futile.

Nazi Germany threw 53 divisions against Poland in 1939. After about a day and a half there wasn't a single Polish aircraft in the air. And there were no "rules of engagment," the Panzers simply rolled over whatever was in front of them. And it took the Soviets to help.

Even so, it took five weeks for Poland to fall.

I'm tired of this argument. This guy is a knucklehead

[Russ]

I am saving this article to throw back in your face in about two months.

[robertpaulsen]

"What you'll never hear them called are "armed civilians".

True. But that's like calling the Montana Militia "armed civilians". Or the Bloods and Crips "armed civilians". Not the best descriptor, is it?

When the 'war experts' say, "They're not fighting fair", they're referring to Geneva Convention "fair", not "matching force" fair. But you knew that.

"3,000 chemical suits in a central Iraqi hospital that had been used as an Iraqi base."

There's your answer. If the hospital had not been used as a military base, your interpretation of the (3000?) chemical suits for "first responders" might have merit.

Are you really series with this article, or am I missing the satire?

[sam_paine]

If you don't like the way the war is reported, do what Colonel Arthur Fremantle did during the War Betwixt the States: Go over to the war zone and take notes in a diary. I'll buy it.

Problem is, unlike the civilized warring parties in that war, you will not be rx'd by one side as an honorable observer. If the Iraqis are merely just citizen soldiers, you would expect them to take you in as a trumpet for their cause.

I don't think your "what would you do in America if another country invaded" is accurate or informative.

If Clinton had locked-down the USA as a police state a la Waco for 25 years, then I would expect the far left Clintonistas that benefit from the government apparatus would outnumber the conservative "rebels" by a vast amount, and they would violently oppose any "liberation." But I would welcome it. I think this is more like what we are seeing.

[Trust but Verify]

Or, maybe--here's a novel idea-- they're fighting because of they don't they'll be killed by Saddam's thugs, who won't stop there, they'll kill the families as well. We have underestimated the brutality of the regime, I don't doubt it. What hasn't changed is the fact that we will remove the regime. How many civilians die will be up to them, not us.

[prognostigaator]

Intimidation and fear -you overlook the emotional aspect of war , in Saddam's case , death.He is avoiding his.

So ,to the contrary for example;-he leaves orders for his followers to threaten the lives of wives and families of ordinary soldiers if they do not fight.

No one wants to die, however , when push comes to shove the civilians of Baghdad will turn on their oppressors as had a very different breed of French did during the French Revolution.

Eventually the Iraqi people in Baghdad will have had enough cake and will lose their fear of Saddam's henchmen and turn on them.

Especially since they have witnessed the precise targeting of Saddam's palaces while their own homes have been spared..

[muskogee]

"...Sorry, but even the craziest nut wouldn't store stockpiles of such poisons in a major city - especially if bombs are falling all over the place..." Bombs are not following all over the place. And sadam is way more evil than a crazy nut.

[Gee Wally]

Ooooh! Aaaah! This is such deep insight. Must be because you're a chess player.

[dighton]

Perhaps this writer has a different perspective on this war because I've been a chess player most of my life.

"Eleven-Star General of the Day" alert.

[Poohbah]

No, this is a "shameless supporter of Saddam Hussein because he opposes the Zionists" alert.

[BlueLancer]

[general_re]

Of course, anyone having a problem with things like this are quickly dismissed, and thrown into the category with the Michael Moores of the world. No, I'm not one of those people - just analyzing some of the propaganda.

Nawww, you don't belong with the Michael Moores of the world. You're much more of a Chomsky-type, with the "Manufactured Consent"-style of language analysis, busily explaining away everything they do as innocuous, while everything we do is cast as sinister and deadly.

[DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet]

I especially loved the subtle suggestion that firing on coalition forces while standing behind women and children and giving children guns was justifiable - 'cause after all, we're in their air space and on their land - and who would "fight fair" in those circumstances?

Ugly piece.

[Poohbah]

He's hoping and praying for the day of the uprising against ZOG here in the US.

[Continental Op]

The Sunni's in Iraq are a minority, they control the military and the government, Saddam Hussien is a Sunni. The Sunni's stand to lose their power. Of course they will fight to stay in power.

[CyberAnt]

The logic that's missing is that the Iraqi "armed civilian" is a paid military guy. He's placed within the community to keep order and to keep the level of fear intact. These people wield a lot of power in these communities and they commit brutal actions against the community on a daily basis.

[Theophilus]

I'm surprised this thread has survived. Good! There is a lot of stuff to ponder and possibly refute. I imagine that when J.J. Johnson sits down to play chess, after the first move, he analyzes his opponent's position and motive (most chess players just assume the opponent's motive) and even each piece's motive. Then he promptly cedes the game because his opponent is as likely to cheat. His opponent desperately wants to win and it's just folly to think that the white pawns want to be liberated.

That said, I wonder if the war should be billed as a "revolution" rather than as a "liberation" because a "liberation" implies that the people of Iraq will be free after the war. We haven't seen a free Islamic country since autocracy was imported to the bedouins. The truth is, we don't know if the Iraqi people will throw off slavery, corruption, fear, tribalism, Arab nationalism and a blind hatred of Israel. I hate the way liberals condescendingly say with affirmation: "I don't think the Iraqis are ready for democracy" but on the other hand, it's just as foolish to say with certainty that they will freedom and responsibility. They will be given a chance and if they fail, they must be conquered and ruled until they are ready. If we are not prepared to do that, then we must expect to be conquered and ruled ourselves.