Posted on 09/29/2005 1:41:21 PM PDT by jmc1969
This is just not an accurate statement - The fact is there are correct principles that need (and can) be applied to help either fight an insurgency or help to stop one from occurring.
Many of these same people we through out (and caused ill will with) who were part of the Iraqi Army we have since brought back in to the new Iraqi Army...only we did this 6,8, 12 months later and asked them to do what they could have been doing from the very beginning.
Another principle that was broke was the notion that higher-ups (way away from the actual battle field) know better then the operators working in Country (many of these operators mind you, who were working in Iraq prior to the actual war beginning). Those operators knew more about the actualities on the ground then those higher-ups could dream of.
Duffawitz didn't have a clue what he was talking about yet he was pushing policy down the military's throat! (bad move!).
Years later we started out fresh with new armed forces in both countries.
Correct - But WWII was a completely different war and an absolute different situation when looking at the actual conditions on the ground. And what our objectives were from the very beginning. (see my post #11 & #20).
Here we are in agreement (at least in terms of them being classified as "professional soldiers" as most were not very professionally trained. At the same time a very high number definitely were. Don't mistake our success with the notion that the Iraqi Army must have been horrible. That is not the case. Our military was just that effective!!
I would also suggest that many didn't mind being in the Iraqi Army...per say (they liked the pay $$) what they didn't like was the notion of fighting Saddam's wars (two separate things there and we could have used that much more to our advantage).
Yeah we agree about several things involved with Saddams Army, I have no doubt that there was a core of soldiers which was well trained and equipped. What I also know is they were mostly Sunni's.
The other point I was making is that command structures were often set up which would put together a member from each different tribe so they weren't likely to form a coup plot. Saddam also would frequently change peoples assignments and stations for the same reason to deny someone the ability to form bonds and plot against him. And if Saddam felt some officer was getting too well liked or powerful within the military they would be executed.
These paranoid practices had to have had a negative effect on the military, So while I think they had a core of well trained troops the command structures were kept weak because of Saddams paranoia........
The other point I was making is that command structures were often set up which would put together a member from each different tribe so they weren't likely to form a coup plot. Saddam also would frequently change peoples assignments and stations for the same reason to deny someone the ability to form bonds and plot against him. And if Saddam felt some officer was getting too well liked or powerful within the military they would be executed.
These paranoid practices had to have had a negative effect on the military, So while I think they had a core of well trained troops the command structures were kept weak because of Saddams paranoia........
You are correct here to an extent (though some of all that has been over hyped by the MSM )- Early Sadddam years and shortly after the First Gulf War are certainly a better reflection of your comments -
But irregardless of that - the bigger point is there were large numbers of troops (and Gov't officials as well) that were thrown out of jobs (which caused ill will and needless havoc) only for us to then come back 6, 8, and 12 months later and ask these exact same people to come back on board and help out -
The operators working the ground (prior to the invasion) had made it clear we shouldn't just throw everyone out - Yet Duffawitz and others went against these shooters judgment....and there has been a price to pay for that.
Yeah.....The old Iraqi army was incredibly corrupt. Bribes, mistreatment of the foot soldiers, incompetence, graft. It was disbanded because it was too corrupt to fix and the Iraqi people would have never trusted them.
Sure, it would have made it easier with the 20% of the Sunni, who would have been convinced they would continue to rule, but we would have lost the other 80% including the Kurds.
Sure, it would have made it easier with the 20% of the Sunni, who would have been convinced they would continue to rule, but we would have lost the other 80% including the Kurds.
The military itself (as a whole) was not so feared by the general public (this just isn't an accurate statement) - It was only select units within Saddam's military. The two units his sons ran especially. These of course would not have been allowed to exist. Nor would have much of the Republican Guard.
However large segments of the rest of the military could have easily existed and come on board (and since have! Or even asked to and surrendered before the actual invasion even began. Only to then be thrown out of their jobs).
Additionally many Gov't officials (at local levels) were foolishly thrown out of office as well (only to be asked to return several months later).
Again, those SOF units we asked to risk their lives and enter Iraq prior to the invasion were in the best position to determine what the actualities on the ground were.
However their advice was trumped by a bunch of desk-warriors or defense type bureaucrats who didn't have clue to what was actually happening on the ground.
The Kurds from the very beginning have set up their own institutions and local Gov't along with security personal. And they have reached out and worked very well with the others in the new Iraqi Gov't. There would have been no change in this situation whatsoever.
If you read Iraq the Model, their father was in Saddam's military and he thinks we did the exact right thing. The entire face of the military has been rebuilt and restored and the people can now have faith in it instead of fearing it. It was irretreivably corrupt, beyond anything we can even imagine. Graft traveled upwards to the point where everyone had to pay to keep their jobs.
It may have been painful, but it's far better that we rebuilt from scratch. This way, the people have faith in their new military and actually cheer them because they want to and not because Saddam would go after them if they didn't.
The good men can be brought back one at a time as "rehabilitated", but even then they have to have a whole new mindset because, since we have trained from scratch, the new army is being trained in our ways. They all seem to really like it, respect goes up and down the line and for the first time EVER, officers feel responsible for their men.
Look at what a total mess it was when we put that former Iraqi general in charge of Fallujah.
This wasn't even an option so it is irrelevant - In that not "all" of the baathists would have ever been allowed to stay "active" - Most of the Republican Guard would have definitely been disbanded (and arrested) as would have Saddam's sons two controlled units (whos names changed often).
But the fact is the Kurds are working with the New Iraqi Gov't (which has former Baathists throughout it at all levels).
Again, you are suggesting as Duffawitz was (as was the known liar Ahmed Chalabi) that they knew better from thousands of miles away and the actual SOF operators on the ground didn't really understand the situation (that is complete BS).
As it was, it was a total disaster when the military put the Sunni general (Latif?) in charge of Fallujah.
The Baathist are being brought back into the fold as they are proven to have the best interst of Iraq at heart. And the people are accepting them. That would not have been the case if the army had remained intact.
All you really had was a very small, incompetent, corrupt officer corps. The conscripts were paid $2 a month and from that they had to pay their own transportation.
The majority of the Iraqi Army in 2003 no longer wanted to be under Saddam - They would have in no way, shape or form tried to restore the old regime.
You just don't have an accurate understanding of what the ground situation was early on in this war.
Those several units that were very loyal to Saddam (and his sons) would of course been disbanded (and many arrested...and this did happen).
However, we also through out a vast number of semi to decent-trained people in both the Army as well as local Gov't officials (and caused ill will among these people). Only to then ask them back less then 3,6 or 8 months later.
I find it quite comical how many are so brave and not concerned with creating unnecessary ill-will....when your as$es aren't ever on the line to deal with the deadly ramifications of those actions.
When tough decisions have to be made and through those decisions some ill-will comes (along with the added danger) so be it - That is part of being a soldier. However, when it is clear (on the ground) that some of the added danger / ill will can be avoided....it most certainly should be...(especially so if those pushing the other direction are doing it from the safety of 10,000 miles away! - Or holed up in some "Green-Zone").
Read the rest of my posts on here (before I will go further).
If the old army had not disbanded, everyone would be talking about the lack of "legitimacy and credibility" with elements of the old regime around. Also, we would be constantly looking over our shoulders at the old sunni operators taking back control and the Shites undoubtably would be in the middle of their own insurgency against the government.
All this speculation is pointless. The old generals lost their jobs and are pissed, so what?
Thge old army was largely Sunni, and we might ask was it wise to keep power in their hands? They had their chance to get rid of Saddam and deal with us as the Italians did after they got rid of Mussolini in 1944. The army as an institution ceased to exist more or less by their choice.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.