Posted on 08/14/2010 9:07:01 PM PDT by Libloather
Iraq: US troops leave with a latte
Last American combat troops get ready to withdraw from Iraq.
By Jane Arraf - GlobalPost
Published: August 14, 2010 08:48 ET in Middle East
BAGHDAD — This is the way a war ends — not with a bang but a chai tea latte.
At Victory Base Camp in Baghdad, soldiers from the last American combat brigade in Iraq are packing up their coffee grinders, their pirated DVDs and their tangled memories for the long journey home.
They line up outside the Green Bean coffee shop ("Honor First, Coffee Second") in 90 degree evening heat for the smoothies and lattes that have replaced the packets of instant coffee dissolved in purified water that were popular in the early days of the war back in 2003.
Most of them haven’t fired a shot in combat during their entire deployment over the past year. Most, but not all, are happy about that.
Over the past seven years, the military invaded a country, denied there was an insurgency, fought an insurgency and largely subdued it, but some of these latest soldiers to serve here have never made it off the base.
(Excerpt) Read more at globalpost.com ...
Give it to Iran
Iraq has all the long term probability of success and strategic importance to us in both national security and economics. It is Iraq where success will be determined by our orientation on terrain and holding ground. Hold ground, it has value to us.
Afghanistan has a low probability of success and little strategic value to us in any respect. Mission success is accomplished by being oriented on the enemy, terrain/holding real estate is itself inconsequential. Kill or capture bad guys. If bad guys move, we move, the ground is irrelevant.
What we are doing is backwards. We are holding ground where the ground has no value. We are trying to nation build where the probability of success and cost in treasure, time and blood is excessive. On the other hand, we are surrendering the high ground with Iraq that has a high probability of success and value to us (as in the ground itself).
It is Iraq that has the more literate people, pre existing governmental bureaucracy, infrastructure, a more world open society prior to 1991, a more secular society as far as the Muslim and Arab world is concerned. It is Iraq that has something that can sustain an economy, is located near the Caucasus, on the Persian Gulf, is the self declared center stage in the war by AQ and is between our best buddies Iran and Syria. It is Iraq that has value to us because of missile defense, oil, and because it's a battle space where we can make the rules as they best suit our needs (i.e. only self imposed restrictions - we own that place). It is Afghanistan that has no value to us except for the fact that bad guys are there. In a place like that you do not hold ground, you do not try to own the real estate! It's expensive, gives the enemy targets (casualties), and achieves nothing long term. The idea of nation building in Afghanistan is a dream. The level of political commitment by the West, even the US is not there. The amount of money, the amount of casualties, the length of stay we would have to commit to make that work exceeds our resolve. It is Iraq that is within a close reach of success. But it is Iraq that became a political battlefield both in the US and abroad while Afghanistan is seen as the “just war.”
It will be the failure of Iraq that will send shock waves through the Middle East may it be Kuwait, Qatar, Jordan, UAE as their confidence in us will fade, and their willingness to join the winning team (i.e. Iran - if you can't beat them, join em.) will become more apparent. While these nations won't be invaded or toppled, their political willingness to "go along" with what they big boy Iran tells them will be more pronounced. It will be Iraq where our failure will lead to a substantial gain in power and influence of Iran as their influence in Iraq becomes omnipresent and omnipotent and our allies/moderates in this region become more aligned with this belligerent.
Our national security at a strategic level is being defined by a news media, opinion polls, and perceptions that are driving policy makers to chase what is popular, not that which makes sense. What is happening with Iraq is crazy. It's like a cancer patient that is 85% cured with a highly successful treatment regime, but you then stop the chemo and radiation therapy, just to probably long term see him get eaten up when this cancer returns.
Actually ... Afghanistan has many more natural resources than Iraq.
Iraq has oil - Afghanistan has copper, zinc, uranium,...
About a million times the value of Iraq’s oil.
If you can get to it, if it's economically viable to mine, if it's safe enough to operate out of that place, if you had the infrastructure to move it out of there......... and most of those reports are speculative and hype.
“About a million times the value of Iraq’s oil.” Really? Wow- are you sure it's actually not 100 trillion billion gazillion?/sarc It is Iraq that is the worlds 12th largest oil producer, not theoretically, but like real world, right now. Actually it is Iraq that has some of the worlds largest reserves (4th) still in the ground, not theoretically, but like, really, as in fields that have been discovered. Iraq also has some minerals and some industry.
Technically, there is stuff in the ground in TX where I live. Realistically, it is not worth developing. There is something in the ground may it be oil, minerals/metals, gas, coal, in many places, but it's not economically viable to develop in most unless certain conditions are met. There are a lot of places where you can find gold for example, but it's not worthwhile to try to get that gold out of the ground.
Let's put this in perspective.
Factors influencing the probability of a successful outcome:
Iraq (I): pre existing governmental bureaucracy. The nation has experience in self governance.
Afghanistan (A): non functional
I: literacy rate of adult population by our standards 60%
A: 10%
I: Pre existing infrastructure, i.e. power, water, roads, communications, hospitals, airfields etc.
A: Little, what they do have is in poor condition.
I: Prior to 1991 a world open society, many Iraqi's have been to the US, Europe, through Asia and the Middle East.
A: Few people have world concept or know much outside their small world (not the ones there).
I: A more secular nation, not very radical in actuality. Even the Ba'ath party was essentially secular.
A: More extreme, difficult to integrate Western ideas.
I: Can support it's own economy as it did for decades before we came.
A: A basket case with it's number one revenue coming from the growth of poppies for illicit drug production.
Next we'll look at what value each of these nations (the real estate) have to us.
It is Iraq where holding ground has a value to us (That does not mean staying there forever). Located on the Persian Gulf (Oil shipping lane threatened in the past), between our best of friends Iran and Syria, it's a great staging area for intel collection as well as further military action may it be required in the future. It has a role it could play in the realm of missile defense. Located close to the Caucasus it's a forward location closer to some of these nations whom we back. Because this nation has airfields, roads and ports we can actually do something there unlike Afghanistan where just moving around internally poses a challenge. It is Iraq more so than Afghanistan that is center stage for AQ as well as other extremist elements bent on killing Americans, Westerners, Christians, whatever. In Iraq we have picked up Musl;ims from Europe that actually traveled there to fight. Iraq has become somewhat of a magnet sucking these sort of people in, but that's good in two ways.
1. We're not fighting them on our ground.
2. We're fighting them in a place where we have less self imposed restrictions.
Iraq has actual purchasing power (4.5 times the GDP of Afghanistan with about the same population). They are not rich, but they can actually buy things from us, unlike Afghanistan, and their oil has a significant strategic value to us. A success in Iraq creates a de facto counter weight to Iran, an advocate of ours even if they bad mouth us. The Sunni and Kurd influences will repel the Iranian Shia influence and even some within the Shia community (Sistani for example) want to keep the Iranians out. This of course is only true for as long as Iraq remains a cohesive nation. If Iraq succeeds, this will automatically create a long term existential threat to Iran which is already struggling with internal pressures to liberalize in many aspects. As witnessed with the protests and demonstrations of students and other groups, there are many inside Iran that want this society to modernize, to liberalize, to open up. A successful Iraq will long term fuel this, not unlike a West Germany to which many in the DDR looked.
On the flip side, what does a loss of either mean?
Afghanistan failing would bring with it few repercussions for us and in fact we could manage the failure of this nation to where even though the nation per say fails we still can achieve our national security goal of denying the use of this space for bad actors to work out of and or killing/capturing those we really want to get. You don't need to own real estate to do these types of military operations. However, Iraq failing would have a “domino effect” politically on other Gulf states that would see the US as wavering, unreliable, and Iran as the rising regional power to deal with. Not only would Iran gain power through vast Shia populations in the South of Iraq, other Gulf states would be more compromising and forthcoming to Iran's positions. Iraq's failure would ripple through the Middle East possibly affecting nations like: UAE, Qatar, Kuwait, Jordan, Bahrain. Iran itself would become the puppet master of Iraq and that would be very bad.
The point I make is simple: To attain a positive outcome for us, we are required to have boot on the ground in Iraq, to own real estate. That is not the case with Afghanistan. Trying to nation build in Afghanistan is a task we are not willing to pay the price tag for, but Iraq is attainable and we're probably already most of the way there! We're quiting right before the goal line. We simply need to stay in Iraq long enough to where they can internally manage their own affairs, but this requires our physical presence on the ground.
Red herring- Non argument.
Iraq had a bureaucracy and operating government before and during Saddam's reign. Some nations like Afghanistan haven't had a functional government in ages and the institutional knowledge, the peoples acceptance of this governments authority, the pool of people able to lead and administer these programs are lacking. Just like Iraq had a functional military from which we can draw on as we recreate the new Iraqi Army, you have bureaucrats and people who understand how to run these systems like their version of a department of justice, ministry of oil, department of defense, education etc run.
“Infrastructure is supported by the central government. While it remains in a deadlock, nothing is maintained, improved, or built. Except for Kurdistan, the populace is up in arms over the lack of essential services in all area's of the country. “
You might want to look at a map of airports and airfields (104) for Iraq and compare that to Afghanistan (51 and how many of those were built/repaired so they have any use by us?). Or look at electrical power generated for Afghanistan 285 Million KWH compared to Iraq 46.39 Billion KWH............ Iraq has more paved roads in Baghdad than Afghanistan has in the entire country. Iraq 20 million cell phones, Afghanistan 8 million........ What is your argument? By what measure do you wish to argue? Iraq has a larger, more modern, and more robust infrastructure? Iraq has 28 TV stations, and 55 radio stations, Afghanistan? How many of their stations are in reality operated/funded by us or our allies? Outside of Kabul how many people have Internet? How many universities are up and running? How many large hospitals are there? Iraq has .66 MDs per 1000 people, Afghanistan .16 (roughly 1/4). What national airline do they have flying from Afghanistan to Europe and other Middle Eastern nations and which have placed orders for new 737s, 787s and Bombardier jets that will be maintained in that country? Iraq has over 2,300 Km of rail, Afghanistan? Tell me, what measure are you using?
” Iraq will not be able to support it's economy until the central government fixes it's political inter-party squabbles. “
Oil is flowing despite their squabbles, which we have as well, just like you can find corruption here too, or in Afghanistan. What did Gore do when he lost? Does our Congress always get along and never have gridlock? Do we have clean politicians that are trustworthy sticking $50K in a freezer, selling their office, taking money from foreign governments.......?
Sorry to disagree, but it is the argument for Iraqi's.
Tell me, what measure are you using?
The opinion of the Iraqi people. They don't quantify in such a manner. The numbers you cite have little meaning to the average person on the street. Placing a number such as rail lines may have value to somebody somewhere, but when is the last time a train has ran those lines? How any of those .66 per 1000 MD's are on a government payroll but are not present at the government run hospitals? How much of that robust infrastructure have we rebuilt and upgraded for the country?
I'm not comparing Iraq to A-stan. I've worked in both theatres, and there is no comparison. To do so is tantamount with comparing Croatia to Mongolia. Iraq has tasted modern comforts, and they want them again. Iraqi's look to their currently non-functional government to provide those services. A-stan, OTOH, rarely had such amenities and they have done fine. Their civilisation (if it can be referred to in such a manner) does not suffer from the lack of power, internet, phones, TV, etc. You cannot suffer from the lack of something you never had.
What national airline do they have flying from Afghanistan to Europe and other Middle Eastern nations and which have placed orders for new 737s, 787s and Bombardier jets that will be maintained in that country?
I don't know about in-country maintenance, but Safi Airways flies from Kabul.
Preexisting infrastructure is important if you intend to operate out of that place may that be conducting humanitarian or military operations or for us or their own government. How easy is it to move around troops in Afghanistan? The argument I posed and you digress from is that Iraq has the far more likely long term prospect of success. By digressing, you create a Red Herring. Preexisting infrastructure plays a role in the likely outcome of a nation. Let's assume Afghanistan has vast mineral resources, how will those be developed and moved? “Infrastructure matters.” As does the fact that they have had self governance in the recent past (people that can run/manage things, acceptance of authority for national government), a more world open society, a higher literacy rate, something that can sustain an economy, a more secular/liberal society as far as an Arab/Muslim nations is concerned and less adherence to the tribal thinking.
To answer the questions- No, Afghanistan is not buying our airplanes with their own money, operating their own national airlines and being able to maintain these aircraft in their nation (They don't have that level of complexity). No, we didn't build most the infrastructure in Iraq, we repaired a lot that was damaged from war and decay over 12 years since 1991, but most of those airports, roads and rail was there when we got there. Yes, the rail system is being operated again connecting to most its neighbors: Iran, Syria, Turkey and Jordan, as well as between 5 of it's major cities. These things matter, because they are the building blocks that we and Iraq itself will rely on not only for reconstruction and humanitarian relief, but also economically as they become more independent and for security in moving around forces and being able to sustain them. In Iraq, we could use HETTs to move our tanks from Baghdad to Karbala, Najef, Kufa, etc in 2004 when Sadr had his uprising because you had “roads.” In Iraq we can logistically support our forces from Kuwait and elsewhere because you have major roads that run North South straight into Baghdad, we actually hired diesel mechanics (Iraqi's) to work on our generators on our FOB because you had people out there with usable skills.
A society like Afghanistan is a lost cause. Like Somalia, you're dealing with an even more tribal place. You're dealing with people that are still in the stone age. A culture that is as backwards as Somalia or Afghanistan, a nation lacking infrastructure, where the people are ignorant and you have few skills within the populace, nothing that can realistically sustain an economy, where their is greater fear and rejection of any foreign influence even if it's to help (cultural rejection)....... in such a society you have little chance of success.
Iraq is the one that has a realistic probability of success and all the strategic value to us.
To achieve success in Iraq, you are required to nation build and hold ground, at least for a little while. It is a requirement if you want to bring about a positive outcome. To achieve success in Afghanistan this is not a precondition. Afghanistan was a pile or rocks, it is a pile of rocks, and it will be a pile of rocks in the foreseeable future. What brings us to Afghanistan is bad guys, and going after them does not require a nation building effort, the stationing of vast number of troops, massive construction of military infrastructure. A place like that you approach in a completely different manner, i.e. special forces in an advisory role (train, equip, lead), aiding allies in that nation (intel, money, credibility/access to political power brokers), occasional direct action with forces, missile launches, air strikes, drones, CIA operations, Information Operations, etc. The goal is to get bad guys and deny the use of that space. The ideal solution is to essentially resign to the fact that many nations will be ruled by a strong arm/war lord, but at least he's one that is not a threat to us.
THX for your service, I've been there too, albeit in a slightly different capacity as you, Rangers lead the way.
Not true.
Oh, and we wish the "evening heat" was 90 degrees. It's in three digits well past 11:00 p.m. these days.
OK, so when is the welcome home national parade?
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.