Replies

I guess we have a disagreement. My understanding of the Fedayeen is that they were created as an internal force meant to terrorize the citizenry into submission. In this regard, they would be roughly equivalent to the internal police forces which I believe the Allgemeine section of the SS was in charge of. The Republican Guard would not be the equivalent of the Wehrmacht because they were created with the idea of protecting Hussein, which was the idea behind the Waffen-SS, which originally started out as Hitler's personal bodyguard. Iraq's Army would be equivalent to Wehrmacht because the Republican Guard, like the Waffen-SS, was created with the idea of creating a counterweight to the Army. I am not sure what would be equivalent to the deaths head section of the SS because they were incorporated into the Waffen-SS in 1940/41. For my sources on this, you can check out The History of the SS by G.S. Graber.

In any event I am sure we can go back and forth about what was and was not similar regarding Adolf Hitler's use of police and military forces and Hussein's use of police and military forces. The key point I was trying to make is that the Republican Guard is composed of people who directly participated in atrocities that have occurred over the past several decades. As a result, when discussing the bona fides of high-ranking officers in the Republican Guard, I believe it would be prudent to take a guilty until proven innocent approach with respect to these fellows.

You know, I really can't fault your logic.

I guess that the problem comes in regards to what the sections of the Iraqi armed forces were meant to do when they were created and what they actually did when the balloon went up. They are two different things. :-)

As Stalin found out after his purge of military officers, ideological fanaticism does not translate into military competence.

It is my belief that the Republican Guard was militarily competent but ideologically soft. (Militarily competent enough to know that engaging the U.S. was suicidal and ideologically soft enough to know that Saddam was not worth dying for.)

It is my belief that the Fedayeen Saddam were ideologically fanatic but militarily incompetent. (Ideological enough to know that they were willing to die for Saddam but militarily incompetent enough to think that charging an Abrams with an RPG would actually accomplish something.)

From what I have read, it seems that this particular Iraqi General was in the "Militarily Competent - Ideologically Soft" category.

I am sure that, over the past year, this particular Iraqi General has been gone over with a fine toothed comb by U.S. authorities.

After World War II, many "Militarily Competent - Ideologically Soft" Germans made fine additions to West Germany's armed forces and to NATO.

For example:

Dietrich Hrabak, a 125-victory Ace with more than 1000 combat missions, was a key architect in rebuilding the modern German Air Force. ................In July 1955, Hrabak was one of the first three former-Luftwaffe officers to train in the Lockheed T-33. After this training in the United States, he returned to Germany and became the first German commander of the new German Air Force's Pilot School "B" at Furstenfeldbruck AB, a few miles west of Munich. Hrabak, one of the Luftwaffe’s most famous Aces and a highly respected fighting wing commander, put his stamp on a whole generation of pilots and influenced the doctrine and tactics of the reborn German Air Force.

Erwin Rommel, another "Militarily Competent - Ideologically Soft" World War II German would also have made a fine NATO commander if he had survived the war.

Disclaimer: I acknowledge that comparing World War II German military competence and Iraqi military competence is analogous to comparing apples and lemons. However, when we only have lemons to work with, we have to make lemonade and not apple pie.