Front Line Views on Iraq/Afghanistan War Situation

After spending 8 months in Gulf War I (Aug. 1990 to April 1991) with an elite unit, and now in Afghanistan this soldier has definite opinions on the Iraq/Afghanistan war, politicians and supporting our troops. The threat of civil war in Iraq and the outbreak of suicide bombing in Afghanistan heighten concerns here at home. Here is a front line assessment of implications for the future.

Question: Recent reports indicate that Iraq Sunnis are turning on Al Qaeda. If they are driven out of Iraq, what are the implications for action in Afghanistan?

Answer: "Most likely suicide bombers have made it into Afg. already. Watch for reports of arrests or actual bombings. In many cases it is getting harder and harder to be a suicide bomber in Afg. The communities, even in the cities, are too closely knit. Everybody knows everybody. Someone will identify the new people who don't belong there. The only place Al Qaeda has any credibility is in the countryside where there are no US troops.

"The US Army is the goose that lays golden eggs. We have plenty of money and we spend it. Halliburton is nickel and dime compared to money we waste on local contracts. However, it does buy us friends. The people who have spent some time around us know that we are a good meal ticket and we are not here to turn them into Christians, make their women prostitutes, or eat their children. We are generally decent people. We go to great lengths to respect their culture and not impost our ways on them. However, we are not to be messed with. We are the sleeping giant with great resolve.

I don't see this war ending any time soon. AQ is still out there and they still have supporters. It really doesn't matter what any of these politicians say--we are stuck here. The minute we leave things will start to fall apart.

The worst thing we can do to AQ is to show any potential supporters that US is the one that is going to butter their bread. There is no money in Jihad. These people want JOBS, a HOME and a nice FAMILY. AQ will not bring them peace and prosperity."

Q: In a recent interview after the bombing of the golden mosque, Daniel Pipes expressed concerns about the reactions of Turkey and Iran in the event of the breakup of Iraq. Do you think his pessimism is justified?

A: "I really think Turkey is more concerned about being part of the European Union. [Would not want to make EU mad by invading an Iraq Kurdistan.] They will simply have to live with a border problem that is much like our problem with Mexico.

The Shiites in Iran and Iraq are of different tribes. They have long standing tribal animosities. Yes, they can put this aside in the interest of business (there is a lot of trade along the border) but I don't see an alliance. Besides, they will have their own oil [the Shiites in an independent southern Iraq] and will be fairly independent. Remember, everybody wants their own fiefdom. And don't forget the old Iran-Iraq war was fought in their back yard. There is more tension than teamwork there."

Q: What thoughts do you have on the US political situation regarding the Iraq/Afghanistan warfare?

A: I am very much against my views being used to advance a political agenda. Right now the Dems are reaching out to disgruntled vets--not because they care about vets, but because it advances their own political ambitions. Both sides are to blame for the sorry state of affairs in this war. Both sides also use the military as a mere political tool for their own purposes. Wa have a saying, "there is no justice--just us." If you don't have a dog in this fight then you are just on the outside looking in. No politician has a dog in this fight. Honestly, of this is such a noble cause why don't the children of these politicians join the Army? Only we here and our people back home are sacrificing in this war. For anyone else, this war is just a story on the evening news."

Q: A few weeks ago 4 US military were killed near Kandahar. What are your thoughts on that?

A: "In the minds of many the war is over. We have 12 conditions we must meet before we are allowed to do anything useful. All missions must be approved by the Afg. government. We are no longer allowed to operate at will. These 4 guys died because of this. These guys should never have been alone out there like that. They should have been accompanied by a light infantry company. However, we would need a full light infantry division here full time to provide that sort of security to units all over the country. I am not sure the politicians or the American people are willing to pay for a Cold War sized Army. Nor does anyone seem to have the stomach to do what must be done. It seems like everyone seems to know how to run the war better than the people who do this for a living. We are restricted by State Dept. nicities and political correctness. As a result our people get killed. A lot of the guys who go outside the wire are engaged in little more than combat tourism. Remember, we really aren't allowed to do anything useful here."

Q: What do you see for the future of the war and the outlook of the American people?

A: "In Afghanistan I don't see this war ending any time soon. AQ is still out there and they still have supporters. It really doesn't matter what any of these politicians say--we are stuck here. The minute we leave things will start to fall apart.

I just don't think we (as a people) have the will to do what must be done. Armies kill people and break things, and that is not a reality that the American people are comfortable with. I really can't see Alexander or Patton fighting this war the way we are. The ground rules are being set by the State Dept. and we have to follow them.

The problem is that the strategic vision and the tactical reality on the ground do not mesh. We cannot fix what is wrong in this part of the world. The fact of the matter is that these people have more real freedom than we do. [I think he means in Afg.] For the most part anarchy is the norm--not chaos--just the absence of government. What holds these people down is in their own heads. They are slaves to their culture and customs. We cannot liberate these people from their own mind."

A: The war has no clear goal and as such is, it cannot be won because we have yet to define the conditions for victory. The global war on terror is all things to all people. It is whatever people want it to be on any given day. We do not have a clearly defined goal. What are the conditions for victory? When is the war over? When can we go home? This is a forever war."

A: "How about everyone who "Supports the Troops" volunteer for a nice tax increase to pay for the war? How about a military pay raise? Aren't we worth it? How about some better equipment? How about giving every returning vet a good JOB?"

Most of the soldiers and marines I've worked with are proud of their work and support the mission. But many of them are realists of the situation there. I completely support the mission, and I think we have done great things.

I have no doubt the dems are using this to their advantage, which is disgusting. But whether we like it or not there is a growing concern over the situation over there. We don't doubt the mission or the works we've done, but we do question where it will go...especially when we aren't there to watch over them.

I promised to see if I could find information on how many Congresspeople had members of the immediate family in the service. I refined the criteria to those who have served in Iraq or Afghanistan since 2001.

The Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee (R) has a child who has served in Iraq. I have phone messages in to the Senate ASC. No one can give me exact figures so far, and I was told they may not exist. One suggested I research Congressional Quarterly. I have not had time to do that. I know that about 10 years ago when I was helping to organize a local Veterans' Day parade, a significant number, I think at least 1/3 of Congresspeople had served in the military.

The assertion that more troops could have made any significant difference is not established fact. That is an irrefutable statement.

What is certain is that domestic politics would have been much less antagonistic toward the war if the traitors in the mainstream press had been publicly identified and unable to put out biased and even fraudulent reports.

I see no evidence for any worthwhile “vision” in the comments of this post; they could have been uttered by anyone who has been listening to Cindy Sheehan or Howard Dean.

Bush waited forever to take out Saddam. The problem with giving Saddam a year and a half, after Bush's proclamation that we would come after all terrorists or state sponsors of terrorism--meaning Saddam, was that Saddam had time to hide the WMD and to seed Iraq with more terrorists.

Any unpreparedness on the part of our military in March 2003 was Clinton's fault for intentionally gutting the military as much as possible during those 8 tragic years.

I disagree, because they wont stem the flow of foreign fighters via the damascus network. Syria has training camps, we see them and know they are there. They are transporting thousands of algerians, saudis and other terrorist through Syria and WE are not doing shit about it.

I'm not going to get in a back and forth with you - But with all du respect your above comments are complete BS! - Those foreigners coming in from Syria have been reduced to hardly nill! - Furthermore there has never been that large (in numbers) of people from outside of Iraq that we are fighting.

The vast majority of people we've had a fight with have been Sunni Iraqi's and other dead-ender types (that are Iraqis). While yes, there has been a smaller sized and violent element that has come in from outside Iraq....but those numbers are vastly shrinking as well.

Iraq is not lost at all either - That is so far from reality I almost didn't bother replying. The reality is we are in a war (a world war in which the major fighting currently is taking place in Iraq)...but we are winning and doing so clearly.

The values of freedom and self-worth are spreading. This cannot be denied by anyone who is at least "willing" to be intellectually honest on the subject. These values are our biggest allies in this WOT.

Since Sept 11th, our enemies have suffered one strategic defeat after another...we have not suffered one.

As for the soldier in Stan right now who's comments this thread is regarding - He makes sense in a number of spots ....but he also has a serious martyr syndrome going on in which it is keeping him from intellectually understanding the world is bigger then himself and he needs to get off his cross. He does not speak for most in the military whatsoever. This I am certain of (of course there is always the hanging on the cross types...but they are not the majority).

I appreciate this info though I completely disagree with it. It is difficult for me to see the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq as anything short of monumental successes. I actually think the Taliban and Saddam were bad. I recognize that individuals still sympathize with such views but it seems that conditions favor the US in a massive way. We have pacified Afghanistan in a way the Soviets never could even after a decade of effort. Iraq has three elections and a US trained military force larger than our current 140,000 plus ground forces. All of this is done in less than 3 years. Is there a US war that has been more successful than these two? I question whether WWII was as successful. Death rates of civilians, combatants, etc. are all positive relative to previous wars and better in terms of pre-post war condition comparisons. I think it is the nay sayers who live in a bubble.

You have it exactly right - There is no question we are winning the WOT / Iraq - None, from anyone who is willing to be intellectually honest about the subject.

"It is diffidult for me to see the wars in Afgh. and Iraq as anything short of monumental successes."

While I am extremely happy that Uday and Qusay will never plague us, and that the Taliban were kicked out of Afg., this does not keep me from being worried that things are not going as well as one might like. To mention 3 specific things in Afgh. (and these threads are more about Afg. than Iraq) we have the major production and export of heroin, the threat to kill a muslim who converted to Christianity, and the questionable death of Tillman. The first two point to the major problem that long range change has to occur in the heads of the Afghanis. The Tillman death may relate to the problem pointed out in "Front Line View on Iraq/Afghanistan War Situation, No. 2" in which the lack of attention to actual military skills as opposed to good appearance is highlighted.

While I am extremely happy that Uday and Qusay will never plague us, and that the Taliban were kicked out of Afg., this does not keep me from being worried that things are not going as well as one might like. To mention 3 specific things in Afgh. (and these threads are more about Afg. than Iraq) we have the major production and export of heroin, the threat to kill a muslim who converted to Christianity, and the questionable death of Tillman. The first two point to the major problem that long range change has to occur in the heads of the Afghanis. The Tillman death may relate to the problem pointed out in "Front Line View on Iraq/Afghanistan War Situation, No. 2" in which the lack of attention to actual military skills as opposed to good appearance is highlighted.

First off we have a major problem with drugs right here in good ole USA - So to suggest that we have fixed the heroin situation out of Stan in and of itself isn't any criteria on which to judge if the WOT (within Stan) has been a success. It most certainly has.

Additionally the heroin trade is a huge / sole segment of money for large segments within Stan - Ending that is going to be a decade in the making process (and it will never be completely ended....that is the reality of the real world).

As for some within Stan wanting to kill a Muslim for converting to Christianity....again, that is not even in the realm of how to judge the progress in Stan. It is simply one negative instance in the grand picture of thousands of positives.

Regarding Rgr. Tillman. Again, that a terribly unfortunate friendly fire accident took place shows absolutely nothing in terms of the big picture. Not a thing. Those soldiers that acted terribly unprofessional with that unit have since been removed - Their reckless actions did cost the life of Rgr Tillman but that is nothing new to this war whatsoever.

As I said earlier, without question the WOT is a success. We are systematically and deliberately destroying our enemies. They have suffered one strategic defeat after another. We have not suffered one.

Do the rats at State and the JAGs screw things up for our guys in the field. Without question. But, so goes life.

As I mentioned above, the person to whom you speak with that is based in Stan makes several good observations....but he needs to take himself down off that cross and leave the martyr role alone. His comments on Stan do not reflect the majority of soldiers there.

Best regards,

This is the third time I have tried to post this comment. I hope it is not being zotted by someone who doesn't like the president.

"What about Congress voting for more funds for the military and less for pork back home?"

There was recently a proposal that the President be given a line item send-back authority. This would require our Congresspeople to actually be recorded on specific spending projects, rather than being able to sneak them in at the last minute at the end of very big bills where people don't have the time to see them and object.

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.