Yet another liberal traitor criticizes the War in Iraq
The Washington Post has an article by Thomas Ricks today on the "Findings and Recommendations" of Army Lt. General Chiareli, no 2 commander in Iraq regarding the investigations into the civilian killings at Haditha. Essentailly he endorses the the army's own investigation report by Gen. Bargewell (which stands 4 ft when stacked up!), but what is most interesting to me is the following:
Chiarelli has long been concerned that the U.S. military was inadequately prepared to conduct an effective counterinsurgency campaign in Iraq. He also included thoughts about how better to prepare troops and commanders, the official added.
"You've got to prepare for the fight you're in today," said a second defense official, summarizing Chiarelli's findings on the military's inadequate training for counterinsurgency operations. "It's totally different" from fighting in Iraq two or three years ago, he said.
The Army, for example, tends in its training to emphasize using heavy firepower against the enemy, although classic counterinsurgency doctrine teaches that soldiers should use the minimal amount of force necessary to accomplish the mission.
Also, the Army early in Iraq tended to focus on killing or capturing insurgents, although counterinsurgency doctrine teaches that the best way to deal with an insurgent is to persuade him to change sides or to desert. Also, in contrast to a spate of cases of abuse of detainees, counterinsurgency theorists recommend treating captured fighters well, to encourage them to desert and to persuade others to give themselves up. Above all, people are seen as the prize in the war, not as its playing field.
So we have been fighting for three years, and even our top commanders know that we aren't learning anything from the experience. But I am sure that Chiareli is just another liberal crypto-pacifist soft-on-terrorism type. He will soon be set straight by more experienced military minds like Dick 'Don't fire until you see the white's of his eyes' Cheney, George 'Mission Accomplished' Bush and Don 'Stuff happens' Rumsfield.
2 Comments:
Interesting post...in short, the enemy is a fast-moving target. I feel like we're all pawns in a high-stakes game of chess...for all our blogging and opining, there's so much we don't know about the deals and backstabbing that are fueling this war.
Anyway, thanks for visiting my site and for your comments on the Pope entry. Keep in touch.
--GCL
It's not so much the deals and backstabbing. It's the fact that the enemy is NOT a fast moving target - we've known for some time the basics of counterinsurgency - in fact Lincoln knew some of it in 1865- it's that we have an administration that is still caught flat-footed by last years developments.
And I enjoyed your site. Hope you aren't put off by my more extended comments in the next post up.
Post a Comment
<< Home