Quote of the day
posted at 8:50 am on January 25, 2007 by Allahpundit
“I say we just let them go and we do this ourselves.”
More (Bryan): The story Allah linked is an important one, so I hope you all take the time to read it. The upshot of it is that the Iraqi Army units involved in the fight described didn’t pull their weight and in fact goofed off and may have played both sides.
I imagine that the people least surprised by this behavior were the US troops there fighting alongside the IA. Our troops are training those guys how to fight, but even more basic than that, they’re training the IA how to be a professional fighting force. That’s going to take time, thanks to the way the IA operated under Saddam.
The troops at Camp Justice explained it to us this way. In the 1980s, the US military started reforming the way it teaches and trains management. It started bringing in business management models like TQM to instill a common management culture (I personally didn’t think much of TQM when the Air Force brought it on in the early 1990s, but never mind that). But even before that, we had the academies and ROTC programs to teach basic leadership and management. That was Washington’s basic idea for West Point: To maintain continuity in the military’s officer corps between conflicts, so we didn’t have to keep re-learning the same lessons of warfare over and over again.
The IA under Saddam has never had any of that culture at all. Officers tended to use their positions to enrich themselves and the enlisted were mostly conscripts who didn’t want to be there. Most officers weren’t managers in any real sense, they were just petty bosses and feudal lords. There was no real NCO echelon to work between the two and form the spine of their army, like our NCOs do. We’re having to change all of that, while the IA engages in warfare against many of its own people as well as external forces like the Iranians who are coming in and training the insurgents. It’s no easy task.
For the most part, the quality of a given IA unit depends very heavily on the quality and allegiance of its officers. Most IA officers still haven’t learned how to manage or lead and many aren’t sure if we’re going to be around very long so their allegiances are questionable (and they’re questionable for the usual sectarian and religious reasons too), so their units are not very useful. Throwing them into any fight can be counterproductive. There are some good IA officers, though, particularly in the Diwaniah area, who get it and are building a professional army where they can. They are also targets of the insurgents, and many good IA officers have been assassinated.
So the IA is a very mixed bag, and it’s going to take time to unmix it. If it’s possible to unmix it.
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
A very good article, despite the source. Thanks for the post.
It’s difficult to view the reports from Ms. M. and feel a strong desire for the US to risk more to help the Iraqi people, only to find that we are arming people who are little better than animals.
I am increasingly convinced that Iraqis want to rip themselves appart in a bloody civil war, and we can delay, but not stop it.
doufree on January 25, 2007 at 9:03 AM
Me too.
Allahpundit on January 25, 2007 at 9:05 AM
I guess you can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink. Or in the case, you can lead an Iraqi to freedom but you can’t make him behave in a civil fashion.
Don’t lose hope Allah, for when we lose hope we lose the war. Hopelessness is what they, the insurgents, want us to feel.
However, that being said, even I’m not in favor of keeping the troops there much longer if this push fails.
E L Frederick (Sniper One) on January 25, 2007 at 9:21 AM
Excellent article. Depressing, though:
If the behavior of the troops in that article is representative of the entire Iraqi army, then there is a real professionalism problem that a surge will make absolutely no difference in resolving.
Slublog on January 25, 2007 at 9:30 AM
They have had tribal warfare going on for centuries…let’s just let ‘em go at it and then either negotiate with or blow away the winner…depending on his attitude.
DoctorDentons on January 25, 2007 at 9:40 AM
Isn’t it the mission of the NYT to create a sense of hopelessness about the situation in Iraq. Why, all of a sudden, do I get the feeling that you guys actually believe the treasonous Times?
What general in his right mind would support a surge if this is true?
LonelyMassRepublican on January 25, 2007 at 9:44 AM
Lonely….my feelings exactly. I question the source. My son has been over twice. He says there are good units and bad ones in the IA….but he always kept his eyes open.
Limerick on January 25, 2007 at 9:48 AM
God bless our fallen warrior and his family. My undying gratitude and respect goes out to them.
The NYT is the propoganda arm for the enemies of this country. I am not going to assume that all units will have the same experiences. As has been stated ad nauseum, having the Iraqi’s in the lead is the only way for them to get the experience they need. The bad ones will be rooted out and the good ones will be promoted. This is the same process our troops went through during the Revolutionary War.
DO NOT LOSE FAITH PEOPLE! Say your prayers and support the war effort at all times.
csdeven on January 25, 2007 at 10:03 AM
Maybe they were having such a good time because they knew they wouldn’t be shot at…
WisCon on January 25, 2007 at 10:16 AM
Romans 8:28
And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.
Yes, even Iraq.
Valiant on January 25, 2007 at 10:17 AM
I think that we should surround the border of Iraq with ropes. Build a giant bell in the middle of Baghdad. Ring the bell, stand back and shout through a giant loud speaker… “ROUND ONE!” If there is any culture that could make sport out of slaughtering eachother I think I know which culture that is.
Zetterson on January 25, 2007 at 10:21 AM
I’d say this article is indicative of the complexity in Iraq Bryan and Michelle referred to in their reports. The IA’s lack of professionalism can be improved or it can’t. We’ll see. How sad for the decent Iraqis if it fails.
Buck Turgidson on January 25, 2007 at 10:23 AM
Everyday I hear things like this. I also see Islamist nutjob leaders, through actions and language, pushing our backs closer to the wall. I just wonder what is going to happen when our backs are finally firmly pressed against the wall?
Zetterson on January 25, 2007 at 10:29 AM
Wow, I can’t believe the joking attitude these troops took, especially the idiot that pulled his trigger on an empty chamber while pointing at a report. For our troops sake, I hope these Iraqi’s are not indicative of the majority of the Iraqi Army.
One question… the USA unit was looking for the IA unit… don’t the two units share communications?
dalewalt on January 25, 2007 at 10:31 AM
For once, the NYT portrayed the truth about our troops–that they’re consummate professionals who do their job well. But make no mistake: the NYT is still doing its hit-job on the president. Bush stated that the primary goal in Iraq now is to hand off operations to the Iraqis. Therefore the NYT will take every opportunity from now on to highlight every example they can find of idiocy and inadequacy in the Iraqi army. This will show how futile and stupid the president’s policy is, you see. It will also show how our wonderful troops are being “wasted” on people who don’t want or deserve freedom. This was a smart rhetorical approach by the NYT, at least in terms of continuing to tear down the war effort while seeming to support our troops. I think they’re trying to provide the lead for Democrats, who are struggling with how to portray these essentially contradictory ideas in the political arena.
aero on January 25, 2007 at 10:34 AM
I’ve heard from a couple sources who have served in Iraq that the Kurdish troops are highly motivated, professional, and serve very well along side the US forces.
The problem is that they can not bring them into areas in the south. In the south, they would do their job TOO WELL. US commanders are afraid of inflaming the potential for a 3-way civil war verses the current 2-way.
natesnake on January 25, 2007 at 11:09 AM
Let me also add that the Kurds are the only sectarian group that has 100% bought into the Unified Iraq strategy that the US is desperately trying to hold together. Even though the Kurds would like to break away and have their own territory, they appreciate more than anyone else in Iraq that the US sacraficed greatly in their liberation.
They are willing to put tribal differences aside for the benefit of the US.
natesnake on January 25, 2007 at 11:16 AM
In hindsight maybe we should have brought 3000 or so Iraqi’s to the US for officer training, back in 2003? But who knew? Maybe our own generals & officers, and the pentagon, should have known.
Possibly picking out some ‘qualified’ soldiers for management, taking these Iraqi’s out of the insane environment of Iraq, put them into an advanced / intense ROTC type training.
Management is the main problem in the IA, but is it too late to do this? From these reports it doesn’t appear most of the IA gives a damn. Might be because they really don’t have any idea what a real structured army is supposed to look like. Might be they don’t know how to even hope for tomorrow. None of these Iraq’s are old enough to know Iraq without Sadamm.
Thanks Bryan, again for your insight.
And AP, did that article really come from the NYTimes? /s
shooter on January 25, 2007 at 11:39 AM
It’s been going on since Ali became the Caliph.
PRCalDude on January 25, 2007 at 11:40 AM
This is why EVERY TIME I hear some Congress member rag on and on about the MISTAKE made in disbanning the former Iraqi Army, I shake my head in disbelief. EVEN I know that keeping that army would have been a huge mistake. As hard as it is, the IA has to be rebuilt from scratch. It’s going to take a lot of time to turn them into a professional fighting force. It too will be generational.
As for the NYT article, no surprise there! It’s the usual .. Iraq is hopeless, it’s all bad news and we’re all going to H3LL in a handbasket.
I wouldn’t expect any less from the from them.
Texas Gal on January 25, 2007 at 11:56 AM
That story sets off my BS detector. The author is clearly trying to leave a certain impression of the situation, one that just happens to support the “Iraq is a failure” point of view.
For instance, we’re never told why the Iraqis disappeared or what they were doing in that time. The article makes it sound like the answer must be either nefarious intent or irresponsibility. Maybe it was. Then again maybe the Iraqis were actually taking initiative and trying to accomplish something at that moment but the article’s author decided not to tell us about what that was so we’re left to wonder if they were off having coffee or reporting in with the local militias.
When it comes to Iraq, never trust the NY Times.
John on January 25, 2007 at 12:33 PM
That is not quite correct. Although that may not be their mission, our troops are training the Iraqi Army to act more civilized than their society in general. They are teaching them the American way, no matter how much the Iraqis and our pundits here try to say we don’t care if they end up looking like US forces. While I agree we don’t care if they look like us, or are as good as us, there is a standard for civilized conduct in this world. The Iraqis must begin to meet it. That includes not shooting at American forces training you, not killing members of your country who are of a different religious sect, and not killing Westerners because they ain’t Muslims.
The fact that the Iraqis aren’t there yet says volumes about what they believe is Right and Wrong. It says nothing about how noble and honest American citizens and soldiers are. Their willingness to volunteer for this duty, take the fight to our enemies, and show compassion when warranted, deal death when justified, and save Iraqi and American lives under great pressure means that they, not reporters, not US citizens, not priests, rabbis, imams, or any other religious or political figures, no one but the American soldiers have the ultimate moral authority on waging this war.
And not a one of us has the right to question their performance.
(Congress, are you listening.)
Press on, gents. You WILL be Victorious.
Subsunk
Subsunk on January 25, 2007 at 12:55 PM
One of the things that I think few of us Westerners get is just how backwards the Arab-Muslims are. It was over seven hundred years between the Magna Carta and the racial desegregation of the 1960′s. The Arabs aren’t even ready for the Magna Carta yet. That is a lot of sociopolitical development to drag a culture through in just a few years.
Maybe we should have established the new IA as an “auxiliary” of the US Army, with Iraqi soldiers commanded directly by US officers and NCOs. As time went on, we could have established an Officer Candidate School and NCO schools and gradually worked them to “command independence.” But that would have taken a lot of prior planning and support, as well as acknowledging the very un-PC reality that they were (maybe are) not ready for self-command.
Then again, I believe that letting the Iraqis write their own Constitution and establish their own governement was a mistake (see my first paragraph).
My prediction is that the Dems wil take the White House in 08, we will pull out of Iraq wholesale. and the country will descend into chaos. Eventually Turkey will invade the North to fight the Kurds. What we’ll do then is anyone’s guess.
Lancer on January 25, 2007 at 1:51 PM