Iraq - what now?

[syscom3]

This was funny enough to be posted here and not in my cartoon thread.

[ndicki]

[102first_hussars]

Originally Posted by Erich

102, am not so positive it was politics that did not allow us the gains in Nam. It was not a declared war even though LBJ and tricky (Dickie) had other ideas in their heads. We did not have total population support and since this was during the uncertain love not make war 60's you can see the reason why soon enough. My feelings it was about power and greed, and too much cover up by certain elected officials, some of them still in power who are over-due for IMPALEMENT. And you guys think we ares screwed up now under our present administration ? ........... man if you could of been around in the 60's early 70's, but that was moons ago

Yes definately, my point is that it was politics that prevented you guys from flexing your muscles.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

That is funny up there syscom and it is quite true as well. The French just want us out, so they can start selling them weapons again.

[ndicki]

And knocking off the oil - don't forget who profited the most from the oil-for-food thing. And who accused the US the most vociferously of wanting to "steal" Iraq's oil!

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Ummmm the Congonese?

[102first_hussars]

At one point werent the Iraqis stealing Oil from Kuwait, ummmm slant drilling is what i heard

[ndicki]

Grief, you lot haven't a clue - THE FRENCH AGAIN!

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Um are you sure I thought it was Fiji...

[ndicki]

No, that was serious. It was.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

[Matt308]

[FLYBOYJ]

This is a brutal and honest assement of Iraq with some comparisons to Vietnam - the guy who wrote this is a retied bird colonel who served in Korea and in Vietnam, I think he make a lot of sense as based on his experience slams everyone...

"We had a pretty corrupt South Vietnamese 'government' to turn over things to, but the reality was that the Tet Offensive was an unmitigated disaster for the Viet Cong. I should know. I did the analysis of the outcome of every engagement in the II Corps AO - the southern half of Vietnam including Saigon - for, first the Corps Commander Fred Weyand, then for Westmoreland and Abrams.

For Tet, in spite of US Media's portrayal was not a military victory, but a Viet Cong defeat everywhere.

It was a US 'political' defeat largely because of media fueling the anti-war movement in the US. Superficially the press, by circulating pictures of Viet Cong at the gates of the US Embassy - 'communicated' that we somehow were overrun everywhere.

But of course it was not the NVA as much as the Viet Cong that were master manipulators of US Media - just as Al Quaeda and its allies are now. THEY understand US Media, and how American react to televised sound bytes better than any Americans do. That if you just blow up a Humvee spectacularly, after inviting the press and its cameraman to the scene, THAT will make the 5 o'clock news for 50 million Americans, while anything that went on anywhere else in Iraq the same day is not covered.
Do that every day through the 'protracted' years of a war, and into the eye and ears of Americans at homw, who expect all wars to be short and sweet, with overwhelming American force against uniformed enemies, and US Will falters, and eventually gives up.

Sure, the US 'lost' the Vietnam War in large part because it - McNamara, Rostow, McGeorge Bundy, Kissinger - totally a Democratic administration - AND the JCS and especially Westmoreland - did not know how to fight a 'National War of Liberation' ala Mao, with protracted rural political subversion, terrorist acts, guerilla war, leading eventually to main force battles - ala the NVA, just as they did with the French leading to Dienbienphu (sp).

But don't under credit Giap and the North Vietnamese. They won as much by the superiority of their bottom up politico-military strategy and tactics
as by our mistakes.

Iraq is de ja vu all over again. We (Rumsfeld, the Neo-Cons, and Bush accepting their 'military' advice - while rejecting Powells and Shinseki's) with a Republican Administration did the same thing all over again.

Now it would have taken far smarter - than Rumsfeld's 'political wisdom' about the Middle East and Iraq in particular, to have made the right political decisions in the first place (like setting out to partitioning Iraq into Sunni, Shiite, and Kurd sub-nations) to lay down what would be politically feasible, and then harness the military to that aim. So the big mistakes were political in the first place, not military.

But once again, the US Military also had forgotten (having rejected in the 80s and 90s) the operational lessons of Vietnam, saying we will NEVER get into another insurgent war again. So even where we had the 3d, 1st Armored, 101st Airborne, 4th Mech, and 1st Cav Divisions and the Marine Expeditionary force, there as soon as the Iraq Army was whipped, I give no slack to them either, ( with the exception of Gen Petreus and Col McMasters and probably a few other Marine and Army battalion commanders who 'got it' and knew what to do) The Army and Marines could have done it better had we had a working Counterinsurgency on the shelf doctrine, training to suit, and commanders ordered to use it. Only the SF and their counterpart Special Operations units were ready for that war.

So as far as I am concerned Iraq was lost by the Administration + US Military + Media influence. Operating against a US Population which wants a Free War Lunch - fought only by volunteers."

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I agree with him. I think he hit the nail on the head.

[Gnomey]

Originally Posted by DerAdlerIstGelandet

I agree with him. I think he hit the nail on the head.

Yep I think he did too. If only we could learn from past mistakes they wouldn't happen again (although there is still time in Iraq to 'fix' it).