Professional Soldiers ® - View Single Post

Solid · 06-19-2006, 06:22

To quickly jump in on this one,
This quote: "could not be independently authenticated. But senior Iraqi officials were ebullient about its message," bothers me. Indig Iraqi intel publications have often been inconsistent with reality. Either way, two things strike me as important:
1. AQ is a cellular organization; it is very possible or likely that "AQ in Iraq" is constructed the same way: in fact, "AQ in Iraq" may be a loose affiliation of different groups/cells instead of a single monolithic organization. If these guys have been practicing the kind of field craft which has so far been typical of AQ, there will be firewalls between groups, and we'll only be able to roll up one cell.

2. I may take a lot of heat for this POV, but IMO the situation in Iraq is now a LOT less about AQ in Iraq (ie: international terrorism) and a LOT more about a flat out civil war. AQ fanned the flames, but to be honest even if we were able to smash AQ in Iraq entirely, this situation is by no means 'coming to an end'; or even 'the beginning of the end'. Civil Wars are nasty, highly complex affairs, especially when they involve 1) A country which depends on high resource rent (ie: oil) and 2) a country with several ethnic groups with a history of war who are not already divided into very nice, regular civilization-shapes. They also occur regardless of the operations of terror groups within the AO.
Furthermore, civil wars are something which no government is very good at dealing with because they are all highly individualistic and lessons cannot easily be generalized between them.

Politically-fanned optimism shortly before Tet was one of the reasons public moral crumbled in VN (another civil war). If we're going to be in for the long haul, which it seems we have to be in order to succeed, realism needs to be at a premium.

AQ in Iraq will not be the deciding factor in the peaceful resolution of this conflict. Yes, they can wreak havoc, but No, their removal will not end hostilities.

JMO,

Solid

PS: A great read on this subject would be Biddle's "Seeing Baghdad, Thinking Saigon" article in March/April 06 Foreign Affairs.

06-19-2006, 06:22	#6
Solid Guerrilla Chief Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: NC Posts: 995	To quickly jump in on this one, This quote: "could not be independently authenticated. But senior Iraqi officials were ebullient about its message," bothers me. Indig Iraqi intel publications have often been inconsistent with reality. Either way, two things strike me as important: 1. AQ is a cellular organization; it is very possible or likely that "AQ in Iraq" is constructed the same way: in fact, "AQ in Iraq" may be a loose affiliation of different groups/cells instead of a single monolithic organization. If these guys have been practicing the kind of field craft which has so far been typical of AQ, there will be firewalls between groups, and we'll only be able to roll up one cell. 2. I may take a lot of heat for this POV, but IMO the situation in Iraq is now a LOT less about AQ in Iraq (ie: international terrorism) and a LOT more about a flat out civil war. AQ fanned the flames, but to be honest even if we were able to smash AQ in Iraq entirely, this situation is by no means 'coming to an end'; or even 'the beginning of the end'. Civil Wars are nasty, highly complex affairs, especially when they involve 1) A country which depends on high resource rent (ie: oil) and 2) a country with several ethnic groups with a history of war who are not already divided into very nice, regular civilization-shapes. They also occur regardless of the operations of terror groups within the AO. Furthermore, civil wars are something which no government is very good at dealing with because they are all highly individualistic and lessons cannot easily be generalized between them. Politically-fanned optimism shortly before Tet was one of the reasons public moral crumbled in VN (another civil war). If we're going to be in for the long haul, which it seems we have to be in order to succeed, realism needs to be at a premium. AQ in Iraq will not be the deciding factor in the peaceful resolution of this conflict. Yes, they can wreak havoc, but No, their removal will not end hostilities. JMO, Solid PS: A great read on this subject would be Biddle's "Seeing Baghdad, Thinking Saigon" article in March/April 06 Foreign Affairs.
Solid is offline