Guest Comment: Iraq Prognosis
A canny Vietnam veteran wrote me the below but requested that it be posted without attribution. I thought it well worth sharing.
As I see it, these are some of the things we can expect in the next seven months in Iraq: 1. The last of the "surge" forces (American), will arrive by mid June; 2. About 1400 British soldiers, well trained and adept at urban conflict, will leave the South of Iraq. As one can see by reviewing icasualties.org's latest listings, 13 (at least), British and/or Polish troops stationed in the South have been killed, almost all by hostile fire. Ths is a increase in British hostile fire losses, and comes when the prospect of Iraqi or American troops entering the fray in the south would pose a dilution of the surge forces. No Americans have really ever been stationed in the south of Iraq, among predominantly Shia populations. The methodology the UK forces have used has been learned in Northern Ireland, and is much more sophisticated than any approach Americans have used. As a result, units which may have been in Iraq previously, but are now peopled by a fair number of new grunts, will cut their teeth in the southern Iraq. Because of much more heavy handed approaches, lack of sophisticated skills in urban war, and an increase in various Shia militia more radical than Moqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi Army, the Americans will cause one incident of cause celébre in the South; 3. More EFP's (Explosive Formed Projectiles), manufactured and assembled by more radical Shia militia, will take a serious toll on Americans moving in behind British troops leaving; 4. The U.S. WILL have more difficulties as they step between rival Shia groups in the south, and elsewhere; 5. As was demonstrated by an entire school being wired as a complete booby trap, insurgents with good inside intelligence are anticipating American-Iraqi troops taking over abandoned schools, police stations, etc., as "outposts." Even if Americans inspect these facilities early, with sophisticated devices, there is no guarantee that stay behind explosives experts among the insurgents won't trigger these massive booby traps -- killing American and Iraqi inspection teams; 6. At least one more outpost will be attacked by al-Qaeda, or others, as we recently saw, where 9 Americans were killed and two dozen or more wounded. Al-Qaeda will try a Khobar tower attack, where they used an 18-wheeler fully loaded with tons of explosives. This will depend on whether an outpost is sufficiently distanced from the local population enough to destroy the outpost, but not killed any more Iraqis than necessary; 7. improved rocket and mortar fire will continue to hit the Green Zone with greater accuracy. As a result, we will see a "time on target" attack against the Green Zone, where multiple katyusha rockets or heavy mortars will fire, simultaneously, on a mark, on the Green Zone, with any number of rockets or mortar rounds hitting simultaneously. There is evidence that the mortar and rocket fire is becoming more accurate. That implies insiders gauging the accuracy and feeding that data back to the gunners. Multiple rockets/mortars fired from multiple azimuths on the compass will make counter battery fire more difficult; 8. Every attempt will be made in the next seven months to cause at least two dozen or more American fatalities in one event, plus many more wounded; 9. As the Army and Marine Corps troops are told that they will stay the entire 15 month tour, and the follow on forces get notified of deployments for same, it will become evident that President Bush WILL NOT reduce American numbers in Iraq in 2007. His arrogance and stubborness will cost him support by year's end among the GOP; 10. It will become increasingly clearer that Maliki, and his Shia dominated government, have no intent on handing back any substantive power to Sunnis or even Kurds; 11. As the Kurds become more disillusioned and embittered at not receiving substantive increases in their real power, they will make moves which will draw severe warnings from Turkey of intervention if Iraqi Kurds stir up Turkish Kurds; 12. If the Sunnis do not cooperate with the Kurds, they will be ejected from the Kurdish north, or at least threatened of that possibility. If so, more violence could erupt in those areas which thus far do not present a severe test for American occupiers; 13. More attempts will be made to capture Americans and hold them hostage. Additionally, in a symbol of resistance that will become a cause for rally, more Iraqis will booby trap their doors or front gates, so that the scene of Americans kicking in doors, or knocking them open with battering rams will be less prevalent as some Americans are blown up performing that task. A simple tactical response to the occupation such as that will lead to a slow down in American offensive operations as more Americans are killed or wounded, and they become more hesitant to perform such duties. This will become the counter part to Americans crawling down into tunnels in Vietnam -- a very nasty and undesirable task which had to be performed, but which was psychologically very anxiety producing; 14. At least one event will occur where Sunnis with ground-to-air missiles will take out more than two choppers in one fire fight; 15. If any additional Iranian officials are captured by Americans (like the four captured whom the Iranian Government say are Iranian diplomats), another ambush will occur where Americans are killed or captured; 16. The effects of the recent DOD study on the increasing number of mental health risks American soldiers and marines face in Iraq will be one more very serious reason for at least a few more congressmen or women to call for a real change in the level of forces maintained in Iraq; 17. Some Republicans will demand that if the "surge" is deemed to "be working," that that be used as a positive reason to lower American force presence in Iraq. Bush won't do it; 18. At least one high level intelligence failure will occur do to infiltration or manipulation by an Iraqi "agent in place" which will cause the loss of American lives; 19. Some Democrats, and certainly, many night time comedians will begin calling George Bush, Our Decider in Chief; or, "Our Commander Guy," or, His Majesty, King George II, or His Highness, when referring to our fearless leader; 20. If the "surge" does not show appreciable improvement on the ground in Iraq, Bush will ABSOLUTELY refuse to bring any troops home by Christmas. Very, very sadly, American soldiers or marines will show an increase in suicides, in Iraq, and among troops alerted for a second, third or fourth deployment. There will be at least one family killing by an American soldier or marine slated to return for a multiple tour in Iraq. |
Labels: Iraq

|
10 Comments:
Most of these predictions are rather obvious once you see them formulated so concisely in this way. Thank you for letting us all see it.
I'm not sure I understand the logic in #17 -- but as it is how Rupublican congress members will react, perhaps logic is not of the essence?
As for #19, let me suggest Mighty Codpiece and Supreme Hole.
Slightly OT, last week the Danish Defence Minister was on a photo-op to the Danish contingent NE of Basra when they took incoming mortar fire -- they showed on TV here him diving under a desk for cover. It would have been hilarious if it wasn't so serious.
So do you think the Kurds will eventually start a larger war in the North and draw in the Turks?
Leaving us fighting in the middle and the South.
The Brits are smart to be getting out.
Plausible scenarios, all.
I would add that, in the absence of strong objections from the White House to vacations by the Iraqi National Assembly, something may be in store for the al-Maliki government which it may not find appealing.
Given the President's temperament and current frustration level, he is probably ready for another roll of the dice. Mr. al-Maliki might be wise to join Assembly vacationers abroad.
Prognosis:
Firstly, the current 'George' is the 3rd, following GHW and George Washington. This is interesting from the standpoint that there was another 'George III' who figured prominently in American history. It might be also interesting to note whether Iraq becomes the current #3's version of the 'colonies,' whereby he is forced to retreat. Or, then again, this might be a sort of 'War of 1812,' the final thrust before being booted out of the Middle East. Even so, George III was still ambling about although addled and the English were in a caretaker status under George, Prince of Wales (later George IV) in the early 19th Century.
Next, the central issue that the Vietnam Vet focusses on is that of the Iraqis becoming more organised, practiced, and sophisticated in their approach toward the Americans and others, able to predict with higher accuracy the movements and responses of the foreign forces as time goes on. The element of surprise is rapidly fading, excepting for that on the side of the indigenous who have recovered from 'shock 'n awe' sufficiently to move freely about their own country with relative impunity or interference and to strike as the mood suits them. The advantages of decentralisation of command, control, and communication allow for greater flexibility in actions to be taken against the invaders.
The only way that there will be any 'success' at this point will be to do something similar to what the 'Israelists' did to Lebanon not long ago, destroying various cities (or portions thereof), removing large segments of the population from any sense of ease, creating conditions that would be unliveable unless there is an agreed upon subjugation. Problems with Iran can be quelled by increased threats about reprisals for interfering with the 'master plan,' reducing the influence of the troublesome neighbours significantly, isolating the Iraqis as much as possible.
To accomplish this, and effectively, the notion of limited casualties will evaporate. We've seen in other historical contexts where attacks on the occupiers resulted in severe penalties for the occupied. Halabja*, as it has been portrayed by the accusers, will be an example of what might come about should the will of the mighty be defied and denied but using other means than were employed by the Iranis. The intent will be to conquer by example, a very 'Christian' concept, using the warning of the crucifix, "Screw up and this is what will happen to you!"
As the clock moves forward, there is going to be increased consolidation and concentration of force by both sides, with tests of will deciding the outcome. If the Americans decide they are staying, that will turn the tide in their favour from the standpoint that the Iraqis have been, so far, the only ones staying and the regional powers will be relieved of any number of obligations to act on their own. As long as Americans are willing to do the killing and be killed, all others remain innocent of any wrong-doing.
Removing the Americans will undoubtedly ignite regional conflicts, emboldening the 'freedom fighters,' not only in Iraq but in other countries. Saudi Arabia recently broke up (reportedly) some of their own terrorist cells. Syria has been accused of harbouring insurgents and foreign fighters. Iran has the Shi'ite connexion. Then, there are the Kurds and various splinter groups bringing up the rear. There will be no 'worser' or 'better,' only the use of Iraq as the magnet for those who want to fight the 'West.' Just as there were the Pakis in Londonistan who blew up the busses and other things, newly inspired people of all sorts will become opportunists should they see any evidence that their efforts making points or improving their status as martyrs.
We only need go back to the late 1700s to see how the Americans looked at their situations and repulsed the colonisers and invaders later on. The Iraqis aren't stupid and they understand the risks and rewards of their actions. Unfortunately for Senator Hagel, the GIs are 'beans' that are expendable resources. The overall ideals that have been established (by the powers that are) have been deemed important enough to commit for the long term, even it means getting occasionally ugly or turning each city and town and village into a sort of Arab 'ghetto'** that can be secured and monitored indefinitely. The lessons of WW2 were not lost on the Americans, having used some of the techniques extensively thereafter.
'Freedom' and 'democracy' are just illusory words that make everyone feel good when they read or hear them. Sheep and goats are also free and equal, so long as they respond to the bell and the shepherd/goatherd when commanded. Everyone gets to move along at the same pace and can be fleeced or milked with no discrimination in mind. The occasional death is briefly recalled but memories fade when one is concerned for one's own life and mobility. Strays face their own perils.
* http://www.the7thfire.com/Politics%20and%20History/GaseousLies.htm
** Originally Italian
Thanks for publishing this.
As always, Dr. Cole, you have a very insightful and informative blog. Although I've never before posted a comment, this blog is one of the first I read every morning for its well-researched and in-depth knowledge of the Iraq War.
It's certainly past time to give you the props you deserve.
The guest writer predicts greater us of mortar fire and booby traps. Perhaps. The mystery is why this has not happened already. AK-47s abound on the black market. Why not mortar materiel? Weren't mortars aplenty in Saddam's abandoned arsenals?
The dire military prognosis translates to a "high five" from Bush's standpoint. No one will come up with a cogent alternative to the "surge" that avoids a calamitous breakdown and violence. Bush will leave office in 2009, self-sure and serene, and the next president will have to cope with alternative no-win options.
One under-evaluated topic: the share of military personnel who serve in the area without direct duty in the surge or any daily contact with Iraqis. These people might face family hardships and sense solidarity with comrades who are exposed to danger and death. But they may be at relatively little risk themselves, and life in the "bubble" of a secure base could nurture ideas with little real basis in the Iraqi "street." In particular, most of them could base most of their ideas or attitudes on official US sources and conservative satellite media. They are surely homesick, but their pay certainly beats what they had back in Wheeling or Peoria. It may be more fun to watch the ballgames with the buddies on a big HDTV at the non-com lounge than back in Macon (where the grass would have to be mowed and the faucet leak fixed). There is a certain excitement and glory in sharing a hardship with peers. Yes, isn't it great to protect the folks back home from terrorists and avenge the martyrs of 9/11 (etc). "These Iraqis," they will say, "they're all a bunch of ungrateful [fill in the blank]. Let's tune in O'Reilly and get the straight dope on what is going on."
People who serve in the outposts, on the other hand, face, in addition to danger, a huge amount of cognitive dissonance. They face daily uncertainties, cannot tell friend from foe, and have to cause all kinds of damage in blind searches for insurgents or weapons. It begins to dawn on them that it is futile. The connection to 9/11 gets fuzzy. They still think the insurgents are Al Qaeda. After all, this is what the officers tell them. But some begin to get the sense that something else is going on to, and just maybe (how could this be?) the Iraqis in general just plain do not want the Americans around.
These front-liners, however, soon rotate back to the "bubble" and get pepped up again with comradery, Fox News, and GWOT briefings. It may not be enough to make them hoora, but might work to avoid mass mutiny--at least until January, 2009.
The final break in military moral is often after the mission end is acknowledged and withdrawal begins. "Fragging," desertion, and friendly fire deaths surged after the start of vietnamization in the early 70s. It also happened in 1945 as troops massed for Operation Olympic (cancelled after the A bomb attacks) urged immediate return home and unleashed rage against officers, stole goods, and nearly rioted. All this lies documented in smoldering War Department archives of boards of inquiry and courts martial, but ignored in official histories or media romatics.
A forecast: the person who becomes commander in chief in 2009 will have to make the decision to redeploy, but face an immediate crisis in military morale. The reflex will be to blame the Democratic controlled Congress or liberals for the debacle. No one on the Right will admit that the war itself was false or futile. After all, wasn't the Alamo a defeat, and didn't Lincoln say that soldiers' deaths sanctified any mission? Right-wing culture, by nature, adhers to self-evident truths (God, nation, flag, family) and eschews doubts or self-criticism. Conservative historians and pundits will blame defeat on loss of will and leftist perfidy, not on any bad purpose or design. Even the disputes over bad execution will be clouded by tactical quibbles over whether there should have been more walls, tanks, or one type of armor or another. The US will absorb no real lessons, and the authors of the mishap will enjoy the last smirk, going on to great private careers or sunny retirement. Corporations will underwrite a magnificent bookless W Library with sanitized archives. The official W biographer, perhaps an AEI pundit, will elevate him to Cervantian glory as the noble dreamer whose cause was undermined by liberal treachery.
Maybe Henry Ford's verdict on history was right.
The methodology the UK forces have used has been learned in Northern Ireland, and is much more sophisticated than any approach Americans have used.
That the United States military found itself bogged down in a guerilla war suggests misfortune, but that it apparently has failed to learn how to deal with one suggests carelessness.
Interesting predictions and analysis, all based on the assumption that nothing real or manufactured will happen in the Middle East to cause America to actually go to war. An occupation restrained by American and world opinion is one thing. A war in which America engages in what it believes is a life and death struggle against Islam would, too late, remind the world who we Americans really are. There was no need for a brutal occupation of Japan and Germany. The war itself had seen to that. IMHO, disengaging from Iraq is going to be very tricky, the political equivalent of disarming a bomb. It's going to require a sharp mind and a steady hand. I'm not sure this administration and Congress is up to it under the best circumstances. Considering the pressure from all sides they're working under, I'd say the prospects are bleak.
Here we are on 8th May and the Bush Administration has announced that it will send 10 more combat brigades to Iraq.
Yes, this is good idea. I will think about it.
And you can think about this: hysterostomatome
Post a Comment
<< Home