Even with the ‘surge’, the present number of US troops in Iraq is quite insufficient to ensure the physical security of either the Iraqi people or the US soldiers and marines themselves.
This report from AP today makes this starkly clear. Building on information given by commanders in Baghdad, it once again spells out something I heard in the radio on, I believe, Saturday evening about the incident, Saturday, in which four US soldiers and one Iraqi interpreter lost their lives and three further US soldiers were, apparently captured by insurgents… Namely that there was a 56-minute gap between the time that neighboring units heard the explosions of the two Humvees holding the men and the time that help could be gotten to the spot where they’d been.
Other reports indicate that the eight soldiers were mounting some kind of a dawn patrol there when their vehicles were blown up.
I send my heartfelt sympathies to the families of all the soldiers (and the interpreter) concerned.
But in addition I’d like to note that for the higher-ups to order a small unit into a situation like this without ensuring that reserves are on hand to ensure adequate and timely reinforcement/rescue to them is to recklessly endanger the lives of US soldiers and their Iraqi support staff.
Might some people say that if the present troop deployment in Iraq is not big enough to ensure sufficient cover and back-up for all service members, then the deployment should be that much further increased in size?
It simply is not possible. The U.S. military is strained to break-point already.
This incident and the fallout from the Diyala incident of late April indicate that the US has no conceivable military “solution” to the challenges it faces in Iraq.
Under these circumstances, for the Bush administration to claim it needs until September before it can gauge the results of the “surge” policy and plan any alternative next steps at all is merely to sentence additional scores, perhaps several hundreds,- of US service members– and many times that number of Iraqis– to needless deaths between now and September.
The administration must act much faster than that to halt this ending of these people’s lives.
It could act today by declaring:
- 1. That it intends to bring all US troops out of Iraq by the end of October 2007; and
2. That it invites the UN to convene, at the earliest possible opportunity, an authoritative international gathering at which
- (a) All Iraqi parties ready to commit to nonviolent participation in national politics would negotiate the form that this participation should take, under UN auspices; and
(b) The present government of Iraq, all of Iraq’s neighbors, and all permanent members of the UN Security Council would meet in parallel, and also under UN auspices, to negotiate the modalities of the previously announced US withdrawal from Iraq.
How fortunate humanity is that we have a body like the UN that– regardless of all its flaws– still embodies the important concept of the international rule of law and is in a position to help both the US citizenry and the Iraqi citizenry to find a way out of the present terrible imbroglio in which we all find ourselves.
President Bush could, as I noted, take the above two steps today. As I have also written any number of times over the past two years, he could and should have taken these steps a lot earlier than today. (See my writings on ‘How to Withdraw the troops from Iraq’ as linked to near the top of the JWN sidebar. In some of them, including this one, I argued that if the US has already, upfront, announced it intention of withdrawing from Iraq completely, then a majority of Iraqis will have a strong incentive not to interfere with that withdrawal as it happens.)
Today, we can see more clearly than ever before that the President’s reluctance to take such steps is needlessly costing the lives of Americans as well as of Iraqis.
BRING THE TROOPS HOMES NOW!
Another Atrocity Waiting To Happen
What causes men and women to abuse and torture other humans? For many there is some degree of sadism and tendencies towards deviant behavior, but for many others it is the stress and frustration of constant fear and uncertainty.
We are about to increase the amount of time our service personnel spend in Iraq and we are decreasing the amount of time for leaves. By keeping our service people in these heighten states of fear for these extended periods, we are laying the groundwork for more atrocities on civilians in both Afghanistan and Iraq. Any military or civilian doctor will tell you that wars like these are extremely stressful on the soldiers, because there are no fronts to guard or hide behind. The soldier is constantly surrounded by both friend and foe and no real way to distinguish the two. As we put more and more soldiers in close proximity to civilians as the surge plan does, this increases the level of stress for the soldier. Our military personnel can only take so much stress before time has shown; they will become less inclined to abide by the rules and conduct of engagement with civilians.
The detailed mental health survey of troops in Iraq released by the Pentagon on Friday highlights a growing worry for the United States as it struggles to bring order to Baghdad: the high level of combat stress suffered during lengthy and repeated tours.
The fourth in a continuing series, the report suggested that extended tours and multiple deployments, among other policy decisions, could escalate anger and increase the likelihood that soldiers or marines lash out at civilians, or defy military ethics.
That is no small concern since the United States’ counterinsurgency doctrine emphasizes the importance of winning the trust and support of the local population.
In an effort to sway public opinion in America our political leaders are playing a very dangerous game with the lives of civilians in both countries. Because they have stretched our military to the point of breaking and new recruits are becoming more difficult to find, the current troops are being asked to do more than even the military knows they should. But rather than stand up to this Commander and Chief they are allowing the seeds to be planted and when the harvest comes in with more atrocities they will once again blame the ordinary soldier for behavior that they in fact put into motion by their cowardice.
Another component to all of this is the lowering of standards for the military. To try to keep pace with the growing need for bodies in uniforms, the military has been lowering the standards for recruits that are being accepted. As we lower our standards for military personnel, we increase the likelihood for abuse. The new recruits are more likely to have criminal histories or behavioral issues that could manifest themselves under stress related duty. Remember, we are putting these young men and women under some extreme conditions and expecting them to behave as robots, it isn’t going to happen. These conditions could bring out the savageness in anyone of us. Who is to say what any of us would do under those conditions?
By placing our troops in the middle of the sectarian violence, we are making them targets for both sides. Also, we are dealing with a civilian population that is growing more and more frustrated with the violence and the reconstruction efforts. This is a recipe for disaster, and it is unfortunate that no one is going to speak out until the next massacre or other atrocity. And again only to condemn the soldier, but not the policy that has placed them in this situation. As we place them in more and more stressful situations the casualty count will increase, as well as the mental health issues. We are already providing woefully poor care for our current veterans in the mental health area and now we are going to dump more people into an already congested pipeline. I hate to think it, but I have a feeling the number of veteran suicides may very well increase due to the current stress load being applied.
Those of us at home must not continue to stand pat while our military personnel are placed in these situations. Just because we may not have a direct stake or loved one involved; it does not allow us the right to be mute. In a democracy it is the people that decide inevitably when and where our soldiers fight. The President can declare a war, but without public support it cannot continue. The lives of our military and of innocent civilians are at stake. There are those who may say that innocents may die if we leave and that well may be true, but we won’t be the ones killing them.
The Disputed Truth
The British sailors captured by the Iranians last month were in a similar position. Their mother ship drew too much of a draught to keep close to them in shallow waters. The ship’s helicopter ran low on fuel and returned to the mother ship; it had a machine gun but no one on board to fire it. The sailors chose not to make a fight of it when the Iranians ambushed them as soon as the opportunity presented itself. We Brits are equally overstretched, but have taken the decision, privately at least, to get the hell out.
Helena,
“Other reports indicate that the eight soldiers were mounting some kind of a dawn patrol there when their vehicles were blown up.”
Helena I am keep asking WHY US troops all around cites of Iraq?
WHY US troops touring residential streets with their Hamvies?
WHY US troops all around the streets in all time?
What they doing?????
Are these troops PLOICE forces or they are Military forces?
These troops a “Military” forces are doing a “POLICE” force duty why on earth this?
Any one, include Iraqis civilians seeing this offensive daily seen of US troops in Hamvies carrying warning signs, with loud music coming out of their Hamvies!!!! Doing a lot of damage to the streets and street kerbs who on earth like these on his city streets?
Do any one tell us how much lives Iraqi lost of this act and action of searching, random suffering on Iraqi civilians, or some US troops how mach damage physical and emotional doing to Iraqi families?
Henea I like to tell us more inside from that confirance you participated in London about Iraqi OIL? Tell us the truth whats that confirance all about?
John O’D,
Those Britt’s solders were spying on Iranians so please don’t replay the propaganda here, please go and read more aftermath of that incident.
Helena,
With your call to withdraw US troops from Iraq with all your posts and idea of this action none of them come to one major thing here.
THE REPARATIONS or THE COMPENSATIONS” of Iraq and Iraqis for collective damages done to them and to their country US, UK and other countries who participated in this crime war should be hold accountable to pay for Iraqi and Iraq.
Those who planed for this war should be caught and bring them to the War Crime Court room.
So it’s not just calling for withdraw and UN rule in all this and get out of this miserable human crime war, this the Justices that you are one of the fans for it, isn’t Helena?
Another Atrocity Waiting To Happen
U.S. needs alternative for Iraq: Back Shiites and ‘win dirty’
Helena I am keep asking WHY US troops all around cites of Iraq?
WHY US troops touring residential streets with their Hamvies?
WHY US troops all around the streets in all time?
What they doing?????
This is all part of that surge they’ve been telling us about. Put more US troops on the street and the insurgency will soon be in its last throes…
Persistence of Memory, US troops touring the streets and cites for five years!
GWB said to you “Mission Accomplished” so why US troops on the streets killing Iraqis destroying the country?
regarding the comment about the stress of being in combat for so long.
In Vietnam, 80 percent of US forces didn’t even carry a weapon. Among the grunts going on patrols, they usually rotated back from firebases periodically for R&R in the rear.
In WWII, you may not remember, the US entered the European part of the war after the Russians had pretty much broken the Wehrmacht. Operation Overlord to VE-day was less than a year. With notable exceptions like Bastogne, most American GI’s saw less than 30 days of combat during their 1 year of war.
In Iraq, soldiers go on patrol for 60 consecutive days, sometimes more. A soldier might be in combat, actually getting attacked by IED or sniper or harassing mortar fire over 200 days out of a 15-month tour.
This is much tougher than American fighting men had to face in other wars. Because we have no infantry vets in the White House. None.
I never liked this “Fort Apache” stupidity of even further extending our pathetically inadequate forces into even more isolated and vulnerable locations throughout Iraq. Anyway, a little poem for the dreadful occasion.
“Mini-Green-Zone-Castle Diaspora”
Far from the Green Zone Castle
In mini-Green-Zone forts
Our scattered forces “mingle”
With RPG retorts
Then when the ambush happens
The cavalry replies
And rides off to the rescue
With any handy guys
It takes perhaps an hour
Once timely news arrives
Of dead and captured soldiers
And lost Iraqi lives
Somewhere we’ve got a mission
That no one can explain
It promises to triumph
With just a bit more pain
For sure, we hear, our “leaders”
In uniform and not
With yet more blood and billions
Could plan an “ink stain” spot
They work in bits and pieces
A little here and there
And see some hints of “progress”
Just never any where
They travel to the future
And tell us what they’ve seen:
That things, absent their fuck-ups,
Would soon get really mean
We need them to continue,
They say of what they’ve done,
Because if we stop losing
The “bad guys” will have “won”
The country’s off its rocker
When talk like this persists
While troop retention withers
And no one new enlists
Yet if they wreck the Army
Perhaps some good will come
For with no foreign legion
They might not act so dumb
It hurts to lose our soldiers
But many profit, too
So why give up the gravy
Slurped by the greedy few?
The country’s lost its marbles
That such a thing should be
As suits and brass commanding
Naught but their perfidy
We’ve learned of those “belief tanks”
Where no one suffers doubt
And “scholars” scream for “going in”
But not for getting out
We’ve got the dumbest “leaders”
Who ever walked the earth:
Those lowered expectations
Of less than zero worth
So tell us of the “new” plan
We cannot wait to hear
The brilliant scheme you’ve cooked up:
What next we have to fear
Michael Murry, “The Misfortune Teller,” Copyright 2007
Bush is a compulsive murderer. He must continue to commit murder, one way or another, to feed his habit. Which, as it grows, compels more murders.
Why is this hard to understand? If one wanted to be a compulsive murderer, or could develop into one over time, would not the Presidency of the United States, with the greatest military in the world at its disposal, be the ideal job? Does George W Bush not smirk with glee with every loss of life? When, given the ideal excuse late last year to try something else, did he not deliberately set upon precisely the opposite policy, one that would lead to even more deaths?
Why is this so hard? We have entered the gates of hell itself. It has its own horrifying logic. Bush wants to kill. Doesn’t make him any difference if they’re white or brown or black, speak Arabic or Farsi or English or Jive, or if they are shot or blown up or drowned like rats. Amazingly, he still has a completely free hand to continue his campaign of cold blooded murder. No entreaty will stop him. Going back to the days when he signed every death warrant put in front of him & gleefully mocked the condemned as he did so.
Cheney is a different case. Rumsfeld was a different case. Blair was a different case. But, combined with the president, they made for the perfect storm. Rather than beg the mercilesss for mercy, we should rapidly organize those groups that can still do something to help. They are: 1. Congress. 2. the UN.
So, what specific means are available to the General Assembly to stop US madness? In what specific ways does the UN Charter let the GA limit Security Council decisions? We can’t wait forever for Congress, and we shouldn’t expect them to do all the work by themselves and we surely cannot wait for the next election & merely hope things will sort themselves out. The last time we let an election settle a war, we got four more years of war as a result (1968). Since 1960 the United States of America has not had a track record of getting itself out of messes like this. One way or another, the UN must shake off its inertia & become what its founders intended it to be.
The lives of innocents, perhaps thousands of them, depend on us.
Whatever the military impasse, two things are unlikely to happen:
1) Sunni and Shiite agreement to any “fair” settlement drafted by any UN delegate intrepid enough to follow the failed 1948 footsteps of a Bunche or his slain predecessor. British withdrawal did not suffice to make local partisans any less partisan. Sunnis know they could quickly demoralize and obliterate the flimsy security forces, once bereft of their US benefactor, faster than the ARVN or Republcan Guards melted away, and Shiites know it could happen.
2) Any vote by US Congress to fund “reparations” or submit to any international “tribunal” that proposes to prosecute US authorities. US support for multilateral ventures would die, period. If the recent spat at the World Bank is any example, Cheney will be more than pleased if Europeans terminate support for the World Bank because of Wolfowitz’s continued command. All the better to send the World Bank and similar bodies into their “last throes.” The Neocons will also relish any US bashing or antics by Euro magistrates who issue warrants or fatwas against US officials.
Neither GOP nor the Democrats want to take the downside risk of a quick withdrawal. It is not only a reluctance to walk away from the oil or the megabases. Nor is it primarily a concern for Iraqi lives. Frankly, it is fear that whoever votes for quick withdrawal will lose the 2008 elections to a combination of right wing and disgruntled moderates who are more upset by admission of defeat than perpetuation of a quagmire. Contrition and shame do NOT lead to the top of any corporate, academic, ecclesiatical, military, or political totem pole. Between now and 2009, there will be a protracted game of “chicken” to see who is bold to proclaim high principle, seize the reins, and get the Great Sucker booby prize. As prospects for the “surge” dim, Bush’s fondest hope may be that Pelosi and the Democrats get what they say they want.
Just a little follow-up to all this “Fort Apache,” or “surge” (in casualties) “strategy” stuff we sometimes hear spoken of (in hushed and worried tones) these days. Call it:
“Custer’s Next Stand”
Fort Apache, Baghdad
Custer “going in”
Whack-a-Mole on steroids
Virtue cured by sin
Doin’ dumb to dawdle
Stupid acting smart
In the trap for good now
Military art
Mini-skirted booty
Cheerleaders in thrall
“Block that kick!” the girls yell
When we’ve got the ball
Burger King on bases
Pizza Hut in tow
Mercenary merchants’
Dog-and-pony show
One-trick gag a let-down
Victory not near
Running out the clock now
Marching to the rear
Let’s “fan out” and “get ’em”
Let’s “go long” on fourth
Strategy by jargon
Going South through North
Making sense to no one
Maybe that’s the point
Mystifying madmen
Let us now anoint
Custer’s got a plan, though
Always letter “A”
Alphabet so simple
Any one can play
Next time we’ll do better
What we’ve botched before
Southeast Asia, redux
Vietnam once more
Colonize the Muslims!
Crusade in Levant!
Rounding up “dead-enders”
Taking what we want
Israel and us now
Just the two in chains
One the other’s patron
One the patron’s pains
As in any marriage
Two have plighted troth
Master, slave, and inmates
Adding up to both
Others see a shack-up
Lust outside the law
Married man and mistress
Fighting to a draw
Custer says he “can do”
What he’s never done:
Occupy the Muslims
Armed with but a gun
Inconclusive carnage
Wages paid to greed
Custer’s followed order
Troops from life has freed
Custer doesn’t like it
Now that “it” means death
Still, he says he’ll “win” soon
With his dying breath
Michael Murry, “The Misfortune Teller,” Copyright 2007
How to Win in Iraq—and How to Lose
Why There Is No Insurgency in Iraq
Can some one tell this guy go to Dywaniyah, or Basra or Kute or Semawa walk on the street and see if there are “Insurgency” if he returned to us after his short walk in one of those cites Southern Iraq!!!
This is a paid lies like this guy who paid to go to Iraq, it is shame to that university who gave him his degree to use his academic degree to lie
Salah, it should indeed be fine. So long as the kind senator has a “FliegerAbwehrKanone (a german word from which was drived the original english WW2 abreviation “Flack”) Jacket for all of us to stroll through the carefully selected market with our huge combined-forces bodyguard.
But then why would a US civilain with an S.U.V and no personal army bother going there when the remaining oil is shipped to your local gas station?