Demoralized troops in Ramadi welcome “new plans”
posted at 8:43 pm on December 6, 2006 by Allahpundit
Six troops from one Army company, specifically. The article coincides with the release of the Baker Commission report but it’s careful not to say the troops are welcoming that. For the simple reason that the core of the Commission’s strategy, i.e., turning the country over to Iraqi troops in the near future with a vastly reduced force of U.S. troops advising them, is absurd:
“In Iraq, we try to win the hearts and minds of population,” said [1st Lt. Gerard] Dow, 32, of Chicago. “They want Americans out of here. They blame us for all their problems. They look at us as the terrorists and then they turn around and help the terrorists who are trying to kill us.”
Dow trained Iraqi soldiers in Ramadi and in the north during his first assignment in Iraq, and he doubts U.S. forces will be able to hand over the fighting by early next year as the commission recommends.
“The Iraqi army is getting there,” he said. “But they are still not where they need to be and I doubt they will be by then. Too many times, they are in a selfish state of mind. Too often they are along for the ride while we do the work for them.”
He said the largely Shiite soldiers sometimes loot homes, fail to follow orders and openly acknowledge that they don’t trust the Sunni population.
“They are only going to do the right thing if someone’s watching and they know they will be punished if they don’t,” he said. “That’s not every soldier. I have met some great guys, but it is a lot of them. They don’t care, and this is their country.”
Asked if he was frustrated with the situation in Ramadi, he replied: “That doesn’t cover it.”…
Dow said elders at a nearby mosque broadcast messages saying Americans are the cause of all the problems in Ramadi, the capital of restive Sunni-dominated Anbar province, 70 miles west of Baghdad.
Pace is reportedly considering abandoning Anbar altogether.
Meanwhile, some Iraqi soldiers say once the U.S. goes, they’re going too:
[I]n his years with the Iraqi Army he has learnt one simple lesson: once the US military pulls back in Iraq, he should leave the country if he wants to survive. “As soon as it happens, I will quit my job and live outside Iraq,” the sergeant told The Times.
“We need to give the Americans back all the authority over the Iraqi Army like before.”…
A decision by the US military to hand over full control of Iraq’s Army to a Government plagued by sectarian interests, could well spell its ruin…
The sergeant, dressed in a US Army shirt, bemoaned the intensifying government pressure. He feels that the Americans have taught his men to be a professional, non-sectarian force and political parties are undermining them.
“If we detain Sunni terrorists, many of the Sunnis working for the Government will keep pushing us and our battalion commanders and ask us why you do that. Sometimes they will make a complaint against us. If we do the same thing in Sadr City, they (Shia officials) will make an announcement on television that we are doing the wrong thing and killing innocent people.”
Like the man said, “We can train Iraqis to be better soldiers but it is not proven we can train them to be better Iraqis.” We probably can’t. Not at this point, anyway.
N.Z. Bear notes that among the keywords encoded into the PDF version of the Baker report, the word “victory” does not appear. Is that defeatism or realism?
Update: Pace has since denied that there are plans to pull out of Anbar.
Update: INDC Bill e-mails:
Start linking roggio and fumento, at least as a counterpoint to or component of your ongoing Commissar conversion …
Heh. I’m not undergoing a Commissar conversion, but fine. Here’s Roggio’s blog and here’s Fumento’s.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
James A. Baker III has no desire for an American victory in Iraq, or anywhere else in the ME. That might upset his Saudi
paymastersclients.Spiny Norman on December 6, 2006 at 8:52 PM
The US colonel, in Ramadi last night, said quite the opposite about being “Demoralized troops-” on FOX.
Anyone got film? I think it was Hannity and Colmes show.
shooter on December 6, 2006 at 9:18 PM
Looks like dividing the army, or at least the police, along sectarian lines might be a good idea. That way we won’t have to worry about training Shia to kill Sunni and vice versa.
Victory would seem to be fewer Iraqis killing each other. Or at least less of it on the news.
Bill C on December 6, 2006 at 9:26 PM
Could these guys be demoralized because most of the world is on the side of their enemies? Or because at least half of their fellow americans and the american media stab them in the back everyday?
Ran across this in the comments section of the yahoo news article. Another hollywood a**wipe giving us sheeple the “real” truth.
Scot on December 6, 2006 at 9:35 PM
Well, I’m not in Ramadi, and it’s been a good while since I’ve been a ‘troop’.
But I’d sure be demoralized anyway… Demoralized because a little more than half of the people back home are fools, because most of my government is in the process of making our sacrifices to be in vain, and because many signs lead to the belief that the CiC is probably going to go along with those who would throw away everything that we have been working and dying for, for the last three years.
LegendHasIt on December 6, 2006 at 9:47 PM
I have to say, Oliver North has been reporting from Iraq with troops telling a different story. I think it depends on where you are.
But the bottom line is the Iraqis aren’t taking responsibility like they should. Geraldo, who’s been there 7 times and to Afghanistan 5 times, was on O’R earlier talking about the difference. That oil greed has just made the Iraqis a bunch of fu** ups, but that he’d trust his life to an Afghani.
All I know is here’s what we know to be true:
The Democrats spent 13 years arguing that there were WMDs in Iraq, leading up to the war. Clinton, who made regime change our policy, attacked them in 1998 with stronger language than Bush. The world believed Saddam had the stuff, and he wasn’t giving unfettered access to the UN, all the while firing at our planes patrolling the no-fly zones.
After 9/11 Bush had a decision to make, and he went with the better safe than sorry one. He had every reason to believe WMDs were there, and Saddam had been known to use them, and in a post 9/11 world, we realized we couldn’t afford to sit around and hope he didn’t sell them to Al Qaeda, etc. (Tip to forgetful libs: We are still in a post 9/11 world… I know it was soooooo long ago, right? But nothing has changed… at least not for the better. There are still hundreds of millions of Muslims who want you dead)
Then, because we aren’t fighting a war like past wars, where there is a country that is an enemy, there is no such thing as a “cease-fire” or “surrender”, especially since the enemy often kills by blowing themselves up! People don’t seem to get this. There is no single event or any actual way to “win”… This is an ongoing struggle that, I’m sorry, won’t end until Islam does.
The question right now is, do you want it going on in Miami? Dallas? Portland? Or do you want it done in Baghdad?
Of course, I understand the argument that we stirred it up, but if you agree that all we’re doing at this point is trying to help Iraqis get on their feet, then you have to understand that these people don’t have any real reason to want to kill us, other than jihad. Remember, we’re fighting Iranian jihadists right now. My point is, do you think these people would just be going on about their lives had we not been in Iraq? If you really believe that, then I don’t know what to tell you. They aren’t doing any good for anyone but killing indiscriminately. It’s not like they’re defending the Iraqis from us or something.
Now why are we losing troops? Because we’re on the ground, again, not fighting a war the old fashioned way, by pounding the hell out of them with our superior firepower. Our people are on the ground walking around like police officers in towns where people blow themselves up trying to help go from war to civilized society.
Because of that, it frustrates me to hear “we can’t win” or “we’re losing” talk, because it conveys the wrong message. If this were a “war”, rather than this weird thing it is, we would just annihilate cities with bombs from the sky. “Winning” would not be a question. The problem is that since the beginning we’ve let terrorists shoot out of schools, mosques, and hospitals without returning fire, etc. And again, it’s not a fight against a country with a government. That was over in days, as it would be in any other country.
So what do we do? Pull out immediately? I don’t think anyone dares call for that anymore, because we know the Middle East would just explode if we did. But we obviously don’t want to be there for 100 years while this crap continues. So, say we draw down in the next year or two… Who’s to say the terrorists don’t just wait for our benchmark dates to arrive and then just multiply their efforts? As I said, Islam is at the root of this problem, whether anyone wants to admit it or not, and you aren’t suddenly going to talk sense in to these people.
The truly scary thing is that this, and this alone, is helping Dems get in to power. Well, the media probably play an equal role because they’ve continued to lie about so many things (if any libs want to challenge me, I’ll end you with the simple example of the economy and how people truly are happy with their own finances, yet for some reason rank the economy negatively).
Isn’t it sad that the Dems were swept in to power by this, and they’ve rooted for failure all along because it was all they had. Win by default. The terrorists know this, and that is why they’ve continued their efforts, and they’ve made statements to the effect. They know they can destroy our resolve and get cut-and-runners in to power, and sadly they’re doing it. We were this close to virtually ending the Democratic Party, and sadly we’ve likely swung it back the entire way.
Anyway, does anyone have a solution to Iraq here?
RightWinged on December 6, 2006 at 9:48 PM
Pace has emphatically denied the reports that he is considering abandoning Anbar.
armylawyer on December 6, 2006 at 9:50 PM
The reason for the lack of esprit de corps is that the so-called Iraqis are not “Iraqis”, but Sunnis or Shi’ites, primarily and ultimately. (And cultural primitive tribalists, as well, just to make things worse.) “Iraq” is a British/Western fiction.
The Muslim true believer has no loyalty to any “country“, but to their religious sect. And to the urgings of their local tribal leadership.
Sunni Saudis and Sunni Pakistanis are more alike than a Shi’ite and Sunni “Iraqi”.
We opened the Babylonian zoo’s cages and “forgot” to send in enough lion tamers.
Failing to understand the religious, cultural and psychological history and nature of the enemy is a prescription for what we now reap: the blind trying to orchestrate a band of homicidally brainwashed zealots to play “Give Peace A Chance”.
We’d have more success with “Gotterdammerung”.
In the form of overwhelming military force.
That they would understand.
Until we completely crush Islam’s Jihadists, and convince the “moderates” to reform the murderous verses out of the Koran, this War will blunder onward to our disadvantage.
Know thy enemy- or else.
profitsbeard on December 6, 2006 at 10:01 PM
Name one.
Allah, it isn’t surprising you can find so many articles portraying the inevitable defeat of our goals in Iraq. It’s also not surprising anymore that you’re so inclined to take them at face value. Your pessimistic attitude is legendary. It’s what makes your cynical humor so biting and funny. But it makes your analysis total crap and completely unreliable. You could at least make an attempt at finding contrary assessments to put in your postings. Specifically, rumors regarding Pace’s disposition vis. Anbar were completely refuted by the man himself in his Press Briefing the very day that ABC story first got published. The Iraqi sergeant would leave today if we left today, but when conditions are right for our leaving ask him again. Oh that’s right, we’ll never see that interview. Cause the Times won’t publish his more optimistic assessment at that point. Get a grip, man.
I hope that my criticism doesn’t come off as too pointed or malicious. I’m still a big fan.
The Apologist on December 6, 2006 at 10:11 PM
just a reminder to the part of RightWinged post about forgetful libs who say that 9/11 happened a loooong time ago – those who forget about the past (namely what happened on 9/11) are doomed to repeat it. also i want to add this RightWing, liberals want the terrorists to blow up a major city so that they can blame Bush, because to liberals – he’s the one who created the terrorists since the U.S. went into Iraq in 2003
Starblazer on December 6, 2006 at 10:25 PM
here’s one simple question for everyone, since this fight is between Sunni & Shi’ite, what about the Kurds? , i mean no one in the media including Fox News isn’t saying anything about them anymore & frankly, it would be nice to hear good things about the Kurds & how they are living peacefully.
Starblazer on December 6, 2006 at 10:31 PM
what i’m trying to say is, i think that Fox News should focus more on what the Kurds are doing instead of always reporting bad news on the Iraq war.
Starblazer on December 6, 2006 at 10:33 PM
Israeli Gilad Shalit may be released soon.
Have you seen anything else on this Allah?
The Apologist on December 6, 2006 at 10:35 PM
First part of your statement – a stretch to say the least. Second part – dead on.
CliffHanger on December 6, 2006 at 10:38 PM
That ain’t news, that’s a commercial… yaawwwnn!
I’ve often thought that if I operated a 24-hr news network, I’d have a one hour feel-good news program called something like “The Good News” where all the reporting revolves around the good things that are happening in the World today. Certainly there are enough positive stories and a potentially large enough demographic audience to make such a program successful over the long haul.
I can even think of a couple of slots at Fox where I might put it, with Greta’s program being at the top of that list.
CliffHanger on December 6, 2006 at 10:53 PM
This is obvious, but most people just don’t want to admit it because it makes them appear “fringe-right” or something. But it’s very clear. It’s also clear that 90%+ of the country doesn’t understand the world, the threat, etc.
RightWinged on December 6, 2006 at 10:57 PM
I can even think of a couple of slots at Fox where I might put it, with Greta’s program being at the top of that list.
–Sign me up, man. Don’t bother with slots at Fox: you can have MSNBC’s channel, as no one is actually watching.
( Olbermonkey will be the first actual living person to
have his head explode on live TV with no one watching )
Janos Hunyadi on December 6, 2006 at 10:57 PM
i remember when Bill O’Reilly had mention that if the entire world had banded together against the terrorists, then the terrorists would have been defeated by now & the world would be a little bit safer. but unfortunately, most of the world is against the U.S. fighting the War On Terror, because they believe that the U.S. are the terrorists.
Starblazer on December 6, 2006 at 11:04 PM
Boy, RightWinged, That says it all.
I agree 100%.
Hear! hear!
Chuck on December 6, 2006 at 11:08 PM
The Iraq Army will probably collapse the moment we begin pulling out. The sectarians will have their religious civil war and the Sunnis will lose. The war between Shiia and Sunni is 1400 years old, and the hardliners of each are itching to murder the other side. If the Shiites go genocidal, the middle east just might go up in flames in a regional Shiite/Sunni blood bath. As Muslims go, the Sunnis are in the majority and the ensuing war would make Rawanda look like a Boy Scout camping trip.
Our enemy is Al Qaeda and the remaining Ba’athists, not the Shiites or Sunnis of Iraq. We need to continue killing Al Qaeda (and the Ba’athists), no matter what happens to the civil government of Iraq.
From what I can gather, we have essentially destroyed Al Qaeda in Iraq and their remnants are desperately trying to forment a religious civil war as a last desperate bid for power. If we pull out of Iraq, then the sacrifices will have been for nothing. If we stay on the same course, trying to civilize ‘em, the Democrats will almost certainly pass a law similar to the one passed in 1974 that forbade the government from giving any aid to South Vietnam.
The questions are: Do we want to stick it out as we are doing now? Do we want to increase out forces by another 50,000 troops and give them new, aggressive ROEs? Do we want to withdraw and let them have their religious civil war?
I favor the middle way. I’m convinced that only the ruthless application force will suppress the sectarian militias as well complete the destruction of Al Qaeda in Iraq.
Further, I am against any attempt to “negotiate” with Iran and Syria, because they have no interest “peace” but only in how humiliated they can make us.
Finally, I know that the Democrats are waiting like vultures for Bush to do anything OTHER than pull out of Iraq — so they can impeach and remove him.
And if he does not pull them out fast enough, the Democrats will try to summarily cut off all funding of the war, the way they did in 1974 with South Vietnam. Just listening to Durbin prattle on about the report makes that clear to me.
georgej on December 6, 2006 at 11:14 PM
Here’s a soldier with a different perspective.
Scot on December 6, 2006 at 11:16 PM
Yes, and this is ANOTHER instance of how the Vietnam War was FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT FROM OIF ( Operation Iraqi Freedom )
Janos Hunyadi on December 6, 2006 at 11:26 PM
I think that we’re all missing the point.
The point *ISN’T* that we have a free, democratic Iraq. *THEY* don’t even want that.
What we want is that Iraq, however it is constituted — even if they go back to licking the boots of medieval sherifs and headmen and slaughtering *EACHOTHER* — knows enough *NOT* to harbor *ANYONE*, assist *ANYONE* who might even *THINK* of crossing us…that is U.S.
Sure, it’d be nice to leave a democratic nation in our wake…and it’s not bad there, in most of the country. The problem is that the problem isn’t entirely one taking place *IN* Iraq. It’s international, in nations which scream to be invaded, but nations we’ll never get around to because half of our electorate has been taken in by the Party of Treason. They don’t want a messy war. They can’t see beyond suppertime.
What we want is a Middle East which doesn’t respect, certainly doesn’t love, the US. We haven’t enough money for that. We should, however, bend every effort to ensure that we have a Middle East which *FEARS* the US…and Iraq is as good a place to start as any.
The morons of the Middle East sit about in coffee bars, sucking on hookahs or chainsmoking, listening to other morons tell tall tales of former heroes of their blood…tales of fighting Crusaders and all of that…some even tell tales of fighting Alexander the Great…having to go back that far to find tales of their having *NOT* knuckled under to foreigners invading.
They are all afire to throw out the “infidels”, and I, for one, am not averse to going. I’d just like to know that, when we pull our young men out of Iraq that they won’t have to go back in…as in the present case…where Bush41′s actions led to *ME* going to Turkey and Iraq…and two of my son’s in the military at risk of having to put up with Bush43′s apparent weaknesses today. Both seemed and seem to only want to fight wars *SO FAR*…and no further.
Once again…you don’t *END* wars, you either win them or lose them.
We appear prepared to lose this one by not wishing to bother with it anymore. That means that the aim of instilling sufficient fear in the region, discouraging them from inconveniencing us further, will be forgotten, and we’ll get back to endless presidential campaigning…politicians in this country seem to have little time for anything else….
Clinton’s scar on America is deep…and festering….
Puritan1648 on December 7, 2006 at 12:05 AM
More of this would put the fear in them Puritan.
Scot on December 7, 2006 at 1:18 AM
Until we grow some stones and bomb the mosques (from the AIR) where they hide— back to Allah— this war will never be a war.It will be an unwinnable public relations nightmare.
My Hunky Husband was in Ramadi this time last year and the stories I SOOOOooooo wish I could repeat here…oh, folks, you just cannot know……
Its the new Castrati in Washington that are losing this war for us. Not the Pentagon. SO NOT THE PENTAGON.
seejanemom on December 7, 2006 at 8:51 AM
Wow! Deja Vu!
Does “Vietnamization” ring a bell? Good idea. Let’s stick to a good old tried and true exit strategy (sarcasm most definitely intended).
irishsquid on December 7, 2006 at 10:05 AM
Who is going to be the first to apoligize to the troops and their families for denigrating their sacrifice?
Rule #1 – Once you call the military into action politicians need to hang up the phone and wait for the call back that the job is complete. I wish the Pentagon had taken their phone off of the hook after being given the go ahead to invade Iraq.
I will never look at the “average” American the same way anymore. Except for those who stepped forward and put on the uniform of this country, and endured the endless abuse and criticism of their character by all of the armchair quarterbacks you are nothing but a bunch of Kerry loving, Murtha boot licking, back stabbing pacifists.
When the war comes here don’t bother asking for help. Just hit the reset on your Playstation and start over since that is the way you think the world is.
LakeRuins on December 7, 2006 at 10:34 AM
…oooo…tasty….
We need more of that, and more of that broadcast into every home, in order to convince the American public that the Iraq isn’t a “disagreement” or a round of schoolyard bullying, but a shootin’ waaaaar…”Here, Mom and Pop America…here’s what Junior is doin’ over in Falluja…and he’s doin’ VERY well!”
…tasty….
Puritan1648 on December 7, 2006 at 11:40 AM
Looks like the AP is winning. AP, is that Al Qaeda Press, Al Aqsa Press, Al Fattah Press, Al Hezbo Press, Al Hamas Press, Al Jihad Press……of course it’s all of the above..
It is 1937 all over again. Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it. In our case, it’s those who have not been taught the past are doomed to repeat it. We still teach slavery, and of course Indian genocide, but notice it’s all American history(and we’re the bad guys). We are now reaping the flaws and intentional lies of our govt. education. I heard on a local radio station a 20 year old college student ask why we fought WW2….was it really necessary…why do we always fight wars. A total ignoramus. Sad part is he’s never been taught the history of WW2 and he’s certainly not going to make the effort on his own…not when the new X-box is coming out and there is a new season of American Idol to watch. The only thing he knows about WW2 is that we evil Americans dropped the nukes on Japan. He probably knows we rounded up Japanese Americans into internment camps. Things that taken in a vacuum sound so awful, so terrible. Where is the context, the perspective? The fastest, most effective way to destroy a civilization is not with a bomb or a war. It is to diminish their capacity to understand their cause, their way, their greatness, and their history. You sever the present from the past, where is your identity? There is a line(I rarely quote a Hollywierd movie)in Amistad that tells all, that reveals truthfully the secret of life. This secret is for the faithful and the non-believers. John Adams is questioning the main character(I don’t recall the slaves name)about his determination to fight injustice. His answer is his ancestors….he believes he will win because his ancestors will come to aid him…for at this moment, he is the reason they lived. That’s it, the secret of life. What our ancestors did was to lay the path for those who follow. It is up to us to honor that sacrifice….but we are not alone..our ancestors will help for WE are the reason they lived upon this Earth. Our grand-fathers and grand-mothers, our fathers and mothers fought Nazism, Fascism, and Imperialism…and defeated it so we may live without fear. It is upon us again…will our ancestors help lead us to victory? Not if we keep ignoring their advice and sacrifice….We must overcome ourselves before we can overcome Islamo-fascists….
ritethinker on December 7, 2006 at 11:58 AM
Quite right!
However, when the mass majority of our people are content to be mindless, sheeplike simpletons, what do you do effectively.
This sort of stupidity generally takes many years to overcome (think Dark Ages), and to be honest, I don’t think that we have that many years left to salvage our nation.
Our nation, collectively, is not grateful for the sacrifices of its’ warfighters and to some extent, it could be argued, does not deserve its’ liberty.
Hence, they will be the ones shouting the loudest when this house of cards collapses upon them.
Thank God that they will still have their PS II’s, III’s and more to anesthetize them against reality.
Emmett J. on December 7, 2006 at 12:43 PM
I read an opinion peice once that pointed out that almost 90% of Kurds are actually Sunni muslims. He pointed out the fact that the Sunni muslim Kurds can live peacefully and questioned why the other sunnis couldn’t get along. It was interesting.
I’m for sending in more troops, but only if they are given the go-ahead to win this war. As long as we are planning on pulling punches, we have no business sending soldiers over there.
JadeNYU on December 7, 2006 at 3:35 PM
Allah and Bill,
Look out guys, because pretty soon even Laura and Barney will be trampling over you.
commissar on December 7, 2006 at 5:09 PM