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]

"People who worked with UNSCOM also came out against the war beforehand."

Name them.

Oh and by the way once again. Did Saddam or did he not support terrorism?

[Alberta's Child]

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.

[mikegi]

Sometimes it's hard to tell if Saddam was the problem or the symptom.

This is the key sentence in the whole email. I lean to the "symptom" thinking. Of course, we're asking a bunch of nomadic tribesmen to advance about 500 years in thinking in a year.

As for the bitching about staying longer than expected, that's normal. If I had been told I was getting out of that sewer of a country then got stopped at the last minute, I'd be pretty p*ssed.

[BenLurkin]

"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."

[neefer]

I think it’s rather naïve of you to assume that Hussein did not possess WMD. The last group of UN inspectors found long range missiles in Iraq, in violation of UN resolutions. Yet, it’s safe to assume that Hussein wasn’t hiding bio and chemical weapons that are easier to conceal than these missiles? Although Bush’s adversaries accuse him of “rushing off to war,” I believe Hussein had more than ample time to cover his tracks.

So Hussein was a murderous dictator turned nice guy with no ill intent and Bush is the true bad guy?

[Coop]

That's why John Kerry's best campaign ad this summer will be George W. Bush's silly performace on the deck of that aircraft carrier last year.

Oh, brother. Is this the part where you tell me Bush said "Mission accomplished?" (When those of us who read know he said the EXACT OPPOSITE!)

[Coop]

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.

1) WMD is only one part of the war - a portion brought to significance for Tony Blair and then jumped on by the Dems and naysayers.
2) I don't use it as credible reinforcement at all. I just wish the critics would apply the same standards to everyone as they do to the Bush Administration.

[Alberta's Child]

Here's where the rubber meets the road:

If the Bush administration knew in May 2003 that the events of the last three weeks would have unfolded as they did, do you think they would have even dreamed of staging that event?

I didn't think so.

[BillyCrockett]

"Bush was ill served by advisors who lied about WMD.
Who, specifically, lied? Clinton, Kerry, the U.N., and most of the anti-Bush brigade drew the same conclusions from the same intelligence. A lie is something that you know to be untrue. Where is the evidence that Bush advisors had that knowledge?"

And I believe those WMDs didn't just disappear. They'll turn up. 50 tons of mustard gas was found under a chicken farm in Libya... remember? Iraq is a very large area and they seem to bury everything they want out of sight. When Iraqi scientists can finally feel free to come forward, WMDs will be found. All of them... which the UN detailed many times.

[Broadside Joe]

"It would have had nothing to do with the weather"

Sure it did.

"In fact, March was probably the absolute worst time of the year to start the military action"

Not really. June, July or August would have been the worst time.

"If weather were an issue, they would have waited until October."

Nope. As was said a million times, you can't keep troops on a high level of alert on an unlimited basis. Their readiness degrades after a certain period of time.

[KC Burke]

I don't recall Bush ever making a "one year boots on the ground pledge". I do recall military staff talking about a one year rotation cycle.

Rotation, in the manner it was done, was a mistake in Vietnam in the sense that no soldier could feel the "mission accomplished feeling" and returning units entitled to honor didn't happen all that often, soldiers dribbled home.

The first Gulf War had a, "Ii'm here till the mission is won," attitude that we are missing here, even though there was some rotation of units there to a mocest degree.

No one wants to see the load of danger and sacrifice thrust too extensively on particular units, but I think this feeling being allowed to develop is a mistake of Secretary Rumsfeld, despite my feeling he is great Sec Def.

[BillyCrockett]

"Bush was ill served by advisors who lied about WMD.
Who, specifically, lied? Clinton, Kerry, the U.N., and most of the anti-Bush brigade drew the same conclusions from the same intelligence. A lie is something that you know to be untrue. Where is the evidence that Bush advisors had that knowledge?"

And I believe those WMDs didn't just disappear. They'll turn up. 50 tons of mustard gas was found under a chicken farm in Libya... remember? Iraq is a very large area and they seem to bury everything they want out of sight. When Iraqi scientists can finally feel free to come forward, WMDs will be found. All of them... which the UN detailed many times.

[r9etb]

An interesting note -- but we have to consider the source.

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.

Sounds an awful lot like Yugoslavia, doesn't it? It's astonishing to me that we're still reaping the "benefits" of the political rearrangements that followed the First World War.

[Dog Anchor]

What is the cost of the New York Times in London?

[Alberta's Child]

I just wish the critics would apply the same standards to everyone as they do to the Bush Administration.

I do. It is the Democratic critics who don't.

If Bill Clinton were the president today, and events in Iraq unfolded over the last year exactly as they have, I would venture to guess that 99% of the people on this site would be calling for his resignation -- and rightfully so.

In fact, this is my basic complaint about how this administration has performed on this specific issue -- they've done things the way I would have expected the Clinton administration to do them.