The Biggest Mistake in the War on Iraq? (Vanity)

Vanity | 9/4/03 | ArGee

[ArGee]

In listening to all the news about how "badly" the rebuilding of Iraq is going, I had an interesting thought.

If we had reduced Baghdad to rubble instead of the "smart" bombing that was carried out, would the Iraqi people be demonstrating because the power was not yet restored, or would they be busy rebuilding their homes and burying their dead?

Perhaps the biggest mistake of this war was targeting the Hussein regime. That made our occupation look more like a coup than a victory in war. The result is that the people are more concerned with whether their trains still run on time than whether they will live to see tomorrow.

One possible lesson for the historians: In running a "humanitarian war" we may have blown the "humanitarian peace."

[ArGee]

Comments?

[dirtboy]

Yeah - you really need to quit paying less attention to the mainstream media reports and start paying more attention to the underground reports seeping out of Baghdad - that there is strong support for the U.S., that things are actually doing quite well there, and that the malcontents are slowly being captured or killed. For all the hoopla in the media about the attacks on the UN and the Shia shrine, both of those targets had asked to not be protected by the U.S., and were easy soft targets as a result.

[dirtboy]

If we had reduced Baghdad to rubble instead of the "smart" bombing that was carried out, would the Iraqi people be demonstrating because the power was not yet restored, or would they be busy rebuilding their homes and burying their dead?

Oh, and we bombed Nazi Germany to rubble in WWII. We still faced a guerilla action after that war, the Werewolves. So much for your theory.

[MJY1288]

The problem is that you are listening to what the liberal press wants you to believe. The situation in Iraq is far better than it's reported. All you have to do is compare the occupation of Iraq to any other occupation in history and it's obvious that we are making great progress in Iraq. The press just doesn't like reporting it that way

[ArGee]

you really need to quit paying less attention to the mainstream media reports

I realize that things are not as bad as the media wants to claim. But I still think there is food for thought in that the people were not conquered, and so claim the right to protest about how we're rebuilding the country. If we had fought a more traditional war they would be thanking their god they were alive rather than protesting how fast we are rebuilding their country for them.

Shalom.

[ArGee]

So much for your theory.

That's a good point, and thanks for the input. But it still begs the question in whether it might have been better to completely conquer Iraq before attempting to rebuild it.

Shalom.

[mict42]

No amount aid and assistance that we provide the Iraqi people will cause them to think more of us. That's a fact. It has always amazed me that since WW1, our mindset has been to hate enough to destroy then instantly have such compassion that we spent our resouces to help them rebuild the infastructure.

[jocon307]

"If we had reduced Baghdad to rubble instead of the "smart" bombing that was carried out...."

Of course, ALL our problems stem from the fact that we did not kill enough Iraqis during "major combat". I don't agree that we were wrong to target the regime, rather than the populace, but it is most unfortunate that the regime's resistance broke down so early, enabling them to "run away and live to fight another day." (Unlike the French, who just run away. Let us give credit where it is due).

I also think we did not estimate sufficiently the level of, let me call it outside influence. Sure, maybe it's on balance a good thing if Jihadists are flocking to Iraq to fight us there, if this is indeed the case. But was this factored in?

I also think we are dealing with a press core and a left wing who cannot tolerate war. We are in this for real, and for better of worse we toppled that government, we are going to have to stick it out so let's support our troops and our President!

[APRPEH]

ok. its brutal. but war is hell. the iraqi people clearly dont feel defeated. this is a similar fault brought to us by the same state dept pressure which led the white house to engage the iraqi army in a very successful prewar intel op. which resulted in the iraqi army going home before the war instead of being destroyed like a defeated military should be. the amount of terror action and clean up going on now would have been greatly reduced had the us army and marine corp been allowed to do the job they were trained for..

[ArGee]

No amount aid and assistance that we provide the Iraqi people will cause them to think more of us.

Well said, and back to my original point, perhaps we should have truly conquered them before attempting to rebuild their country and society. Since they were going to hate us anyway, perhaps it would have been valuable to instill a little more "healthy" fear.

Shalom.

[roses of sharon]

Upon entering Baghdad, Saddam and his men ran in order to fight another day, from behind the trees.

This is simply the fight for Baghdad we never had.

[ArGee]

let's support our troops and our President!

Agreed. Trying to learn lessons from the decisions made is not the same as not supporting the team.

Ever listen to a Red Sox fan after a game?

Shalom.

[Publius6961]

You answered your own question.
Correctly I might add.
War is not a "social experiment".

If animals threaten our very existence, either accept the inevitable or destroy them. Halfway measures, in the hope that animals will suddenly begin to reason and express virtues totally foreign to their natures (such as gratitude and a long term view of their lives) can not work.

That will ultimately be judged to be the single and fatal mistake.
War is to win or to lose. Reality allows no half measures.

"Unconditional surrender" works every time.

[APRPEH]

Get Saddam. Then Get Out.
by Sha'i ben-Tekoa
July 16, 2003


As an Israeli who remembers our country’s doleful occupation of southern Lebanon (1982-2000), some words of advice to our American friends: Get Saddam, then get out of Iraq as fast you can. Drop the idea of trying to build a new society there.

On Sunday on NBC, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld drew an analogy between America’s occupation of Iraq and those of Japan and Germany, as many have, but L. Paul Bremer III is not Douglas MacArthur, and the Arabs in old Mesopotamia are neither Japanese nor Germans, two peoples with long histories of social cohesion. If you think you can create the first Western-style liberal democracy in the Arab world, think again.

There are 147,000 GIs embedded in 25,000,000 Iraqis, with the latter now not only playing on their home court but “fighting” as they like to, which is not as conventional soldiers but street fighters and bush-whackers. The Iraqis as conventional soldiers were routed by the US in 1991, and again three months ago they less melted away than never got into battle formations.

But now they are much more in their element. What Arabs prefer is not the combat of conventional warfare between armies in uniform on battlefields, engaged in e.g. artillery duels, flanking actions or bayonet charges. They like firefights with small arms in urban locales.

Their preferred weapons systems are not modern tanks or mobile artillery pieces, which require teamwork; they favor hand-held weapons like RPG-capable assault rifles.

Arabs throughout history have rarely fielded large armies led by far-seeing generals; where is their Caesar, Napoleon, Wellington, Rommel or Patton famous for directing large formations of troopers? They have always preferred operating in small groups, or alone, with weapons no heavier than one man can carry and use unassisted.

In medieval Tunis, the Arabs’ greatest historian ibn Khaldun (1332-1406), author of the classic Al-Muqaddimah, the philosophical prolegomena to his 19-volume history of the world, explained this phenomenon of Arabs not being very good at fighting in large, coordinated, rank and file military organizations. What they lacked was unit cohesion and the discipline found in the armies of more civilized peoples. The Arabs gravitate to small unit ambushes, and not necessarily against only enemy soldiers on a battlefield but unsuspecting enemy civilians in villages and towns, a/k/a terrorism.

remainder of article: http://www.deprogramprogram.com/wbswebpage.cfm?pagetextid=nofrontgetsaddam

[ArGee]

If human beings were animals this would all be very easy indeed. Animals are far easier to predict.

My question wasn't whether we had to destroy all of Iraq, send the survivors into exile, infuse the land with new blood, and all those measures for completely removing a nation from history. My question was directed at the reality that they don't seem to fear us as much as, perhaps, they ought. And in our effort to be more "compassionate" were we actually less so?

I'm not blaming Bush. This would be one of those unintended consequences that dog all decisions.

Shalom.

[templar]

Sure, maybe it's on balance a good thing if Jihadists are flocking to Iraq to fight us there, if this is indeed the case. But was this factored in?

Well, there were plenty of people warning about it. Of course, they were all discounted. Much the way warnings are being discounted now.

We are at war with Islam, and we'd better understand that soon. The location (Iraq, or wherever) is not of that mcuh importance.

[jocon307]

"We are at war with Islam, and we'd better understand that soon. The location (Iraq, or wherever) is not of that much importance."

You are correct, I'm afraid. Well at least since I corrected your typo. : )

No, no, very scary stuff. These folks tried to take over the world once before. And don't think there weren't warnings out there in recent years, there were.

I'm really appalled at how "soft" the American people have become, well not the people, the elites. Was is like this in WWII? I wonder.

[jocon307]

"Ever listen to a Red Sox fan after a game?"

Or after a season? Yes, I read the "mugger" column in NY Press.

Only kidding. My grandmother was a dedicated Red Sox fan. And now that I have abandoned the Yankees for the Mets, along with hubby, btw, we root for Boston now. My daddy-ama's happy about that!