AN EMAIL FROM THE FRONT

andrew sullivan ^ | Wednesday, April 14, 2004 | in iraq

[dennisw]

AN EMAIL FROM THE FRONT:
Here's an email from a soldier I first corresponded with when he was a cadet at West Point. He's legit - and his email is worth printing in full, I think. I'm not endorsing everything he says, but it's worth hearing what a very bright and committed young soldier is going through right now:

Troop strength - I think we have consistently underestimated the number of troops it would take to pacify Iraq. Gen Shinseki's original estimates were much closer to the mark. The fact that the 1st Armored Division (my unit) has now been extended for at least 4 months shows there aren't enough troops - in order to deal with a fairly minor uprising we had to break the one-year-boots-on-ground pledge. If we had had a strategic reserve, this would not be necessary. However, the dirty secret is that there aren't any more troops to be had - at least not the active-duty armor/infantry brigades and divisions requried to fight a tough enemy. Furthermore, the frenetic destruction that occured after the fall of Baghdad set us way back in terms of reconstruction - more troops could have limited if not prevented the extensive looting.

Sadir et al. - Although his uprising is seen as a ominious sign for the coalition, it does have an upside. His poorly trained and poorly equiped rag-bad militia is being chewed up by our army. His defeat and eventual marginalization will serve the coalition well. After one year of occupation, I think many Iraqis have come to see the army as rather toothless - we get blown up by roadside bombs or mortars and yet we continue to rebuild schools, enforce the laws, train police etc. Now because of Fallujah and what has been going on in Baghdad, our potency and resolve are on full display. My task force alone has killed many insurgents in the last two weeks - something that was not happening before. By confronting us in a conventional way, Sadir et al. are playing to our military strengths - and it isn't going well for them.

Long term prospects - I have to admit that after one year here I am largely pessimistic. Iraqi society is sick in many ways. Sometimes it's hard to tell if Saddam was the problem or the symptom. I just don't know how a society so divided along ethnic and tribal lines, with no democratic or liberal traditions and almost zero respect for the rule of law can build any kind of society accept and autocratic one. I'm not ashamed that the US came here with good intentions and noble sentiments about the universality of our values - democracy, liberty, the rule of law etc., but I think all our efforts might be eventually futile. In essence, we have given the Iraqis an enormous gift, but they don't seem to be seizing the opportunity. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink...

The Army - Most soldiers in my unit were pretty demoralized by the extension. We were promised a one year tour and now that promise has been broken. Retention will certainly suffer. However, we are facing a difficult time in Iraq and our continued presence is necessary. What I would like to hear and I think most soldiers feel the same way - is for someone high up to say "Look, we didn't plan for this. Things have gotten screwed up and we need your continued sacrifice. This is why it is so important you stay." Instead we have gotten vague comments about "managing the troop redeployment" - as if it were some little snafu or inconvenience. The truth is, our division is now getting ready for another bloody and hellishly hot summer that none of us expected to ever go through again.

Good and bad. But it's only one year.

- 1:42:52 AM

[Broadside Joe]

"Understood. Did the Bush administration even think in their wildest dreams that 120,000 troops would be there even one year later?"

Do you honestly think that one year is a long time for this kind of operation? How long did Germany or Japan take?

[LibLieSlayer]

You really should go back and READ exactly what all members of the Administration said concerning what was expected as far as difficulty (pre, during, and post invasion. WE ARE STILL AT WAR)!

It was media and ex-military "talking heads" making the cake-walk case, not the adults in charge of our government today!

I support our troops in every way that I can. I believe in the MISSION, the MAN, and OUR military. I think that a good number of Americans do not have the stomach to live in the world as it is today. The problem is.....we have no choice! It is either US, or THEM! No excuses...

LLS

[mrsmith]

"I am having trouble understanding why you are repeating DNC talking points on a conservative website. "

It gets attention.

But why people waste their time on someone who shows he has no knowledge of what he speaks and doesn't care to have any is beyond me.

[Broadside Joe]

"Yes, for the US to be in a war it has to be against an enemy of _ours_."

Selective reading?

--->Did you forget our Dept of State people that were killed in the west bank? Do you know who Hamas is?<---

Slick willy should have nuked them---> when Saddam tried to assassinate Bush 41.<---

[CSM]

"Yes, they did. The timing of this war was originally aimed at getting U.S. troops out of harm's way long before the 2004 election."

That's the first time I have ever heard of such ridicolous rankor! Please provide proof of this claim. As far as everything I have ever read and seen and heard, everyone expects us to have troops there for many generations to come. Think Germany, Japan, etc.

[Dog Anchor]

I will see your:

Camille Paglia
Fyodor Dostoyevsky
Evelyn Waugh

And raise you:

Jack London
Seutonious
Autobiography of Admiral Halsey

[af_vet_1981]

The writer of the email is sorry example of a potential leader in our real mans military, he should get out and repay the taxpayers for his free education.

We don't need another Wesley Clark.

[af_vet_1981]

Howver, I used to be very positive about Bush, even if I did vote for Buchanan in the last election. But this war founded on lies has hurt America in many ways and the liars behind it should be remembered on election day.

Please, please, please, do not come back to America. Please stay in Europe. We don't need you. We don't want you.

[Dog Anchor]

pointless war that only wound up entrenching muslim radicals and preparing the ground for a jihad against the few remaining Christians


Man...you are right about that!

Have you read Samuel P. Huntington?

[CSM]

"It would have had nothing to do with the weather. In fact, March was probably the absolute worst time of the year to start the military action -- due to the onset of the hot summer months in Iraq. If weather were an issue, they would have waited until October."

We were prepared to move much earlier, however the likes of you prevented it and demanded more "international cooperation". Another concession by the administration that is resulting in a "slapping" by those of you on the left!

[LibLieSlayer]

"The first day I saw "conservatives" using Bill Clinton, the U.N., Hans Blix, etc. as credible reinforcement of the Bush administration's rationale for the war, I knew the whole thing was a fraud".

The only fraud here is YOU, your politics, and "much" of your country (I know many fine Canadians that love the US, and are truly our friends. You are NOT among them).

You and your mates fiddle with terrorist's, while America is reshaping the world for eventual peace and freedom for all. You and your kind bitch, protest, and support actions and remedies that will lead to massive destruction of life.

LLS

[Dog Anchor]

O.K. I will call your T.S. Elliot.

Here is what I have:

"These newspapers, owned and edited by these men, although free from the repulsive vulgarity of the yellow press, were susceptible to influence by the priviledged interests, and were almost or quite as hostile to manliness as they were to unrefined vice...they favored the removal of tariff on works of art; they favored all the proper (and even more strongly all the improper) movements for international peace and arbitration; in short, they favored all good, and many goody-goody, measures so long as they did not cut deep into social wrong or make demands on National and individual virility. They opposed, or were lukewarm about, efforts to build up the army and the navy, for they were not sensitive concerning National honor; and, above all, they opposed every non-milk-and-water effort, however sane, to change our social and economic system in such a fashion as to substitute the ideal justice towards all for the ideal of kindly charity from the favored few to the possibly grateful many."
- Theodore Roosevelt

[q_an_a]

they tolerated Klinton.

[DTA]

>>>>>>>>The answer is clearly to split the country up into three new countries. Yugoslavia didn't work without a dictatorship, and neither will Iraq.<<<<<<

If this is the answer, what is the question? Meddling of Gernmany caused split up of Yugoslavia and the result was bloody civil war and bigger trouble than one in the 1990. But Yugoslavia's civil war would look like walk in the park in comparrison with the civil war that would errupt with the break up of Iraq.

In hindsight, decission to support break up Yugoslavia was a mistake. Only Bosnia sucked $100B with no end in sight. Poppy and Baker knew that and tried to avert disaster but Germany pushed Yugoslavia down the cliff (Holbrooke was ambasador to Germany).

If Iraq is split into 3 states, it would be 3 Bosnias.Eeach statelet would have a civil war within and probably statelets would fight each other because Shia, Sunni, Marsh Arabs, Kurds, Christians, Assyrians are more or less intermingled.

[af_vet_1981]

Ha! Now that is funny!

I'm serious. It was very important that the Tories ran away to Canada so we could establish our Republic. We aim to keep it. You stay where you are.