Audio: Michael Yon says Iraq is still winnable
posted at 11:06 am on February 5, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Security operations in Baghdad are set to begin in earnest at any time, if they haven’t already. The joint command center is already in place, with 600 American troops for each of the city’s nine districts and two Iraqi generals for each side of the Tigris (Shia to the east, Sunni to the west). According to this brief yet tasty Insta-view with MY, it’ll be like nothing the city has seen before. Yon also tells Glenn and Helen that morale is, surprisingly, “good to high,” which cuts sharply against some of the news from this weekend. I’d pay to see him and Tom Lasseter on a panel comparing notes.
Speaking of blogger embeds, INDC Bill is back in DC and has the first of many posts up about his experiences in Fallujah. Andrew Sullivan’s heart will not ache while reading this one:
Once captured, the Jundi brought the man back to headquarters, where he was put in a corner, blindfolded, and quietly interrogated by two officers.
I slipped into the room, observed for a few minutes and eventually snapped pictures. I asked Fisher if this humane treatment was typical and/or if it was merely a symptom of having the Americans around.
“You’ve got a lot of work to do if you want to change a mindset that’s been forged in their collective memory over half a century. You don’t change that in two years with a couple nice hand outs and a Dale Carnegie course. But when they (the Iraqi Army interrogators) see (humane treatment) works, that’s what sells the product. You can give them brochures and hand outs and well meaning people coming in and talking to them about human rights, but until they see the tangible product that ‘boy this does work, they actually told us what we wanted to know,’ until they see it, they don’t believe it. And that is very much how this country works.”
Lots of photos at the link. Proceed.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
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
Comment pages:
Of course it is winnable. Our troops are the finest in the world.
We are in the position we are in now, not because our troops are falling short, but because our politicians and media are. They say they support the troops with one breath and undermine their mission with the next.
If this war is lost, it will not be a military defeat. It will be a political one.
jman on February 5, 2007 at 11:24 AM
Amen
Our troops can secure Baghdad as long as they are there in greater numbers. It will boost morale tremendously. Unfortunately, the Religion of Peace® is completely incompatible with peace, freedom, and self-government. Until the root cause of terrorism is addressed (the Koran and its proponents), we are setting ourselves up for long-term failure.
Valiant on February 5, 2007 at 11:43 AM
Who is Michael Yon and why should I care? I know the guy has a website, but so do I and that doesn’t make me an expert on anything.
John on February 5, 2007 at 11:49 AM
maybe I’m not reading this right, but shouldnt that say “Andrew Sullivan’s heart will not ache while reading this one:”
color me blond.
One Angry Christian on February 5, 2007 at 11:51 AM
This last quote on his website tell a lot.
right2bright on February 5, 2007 at 12:01 PM
Lemme see… you’re a small town kid, who according to your own bio, hasn’t apparently spent much (if any) time outside the midwest.
Yon, a former Green Beret, is currently on his second major tour of Iraq, and is so widely regarded by military brass, many consider him a must-read for his accuracy, insights, and of course, photos.
Gee, I wonder who is more worth reading on this subject?
Bob Owens on February 5, 2007 at 12:02 PM
John,
In addition to blogging, Yon is an author. Prior to that, he was a special operations soldier. He’s been to Iraq a number of times, including being embedded with the 1st Battalion, 24th Infantry Regiment, 25th I.D. He may not be an “expert,” but a lot of people, myself included, care about what he has to say because of his experience in the military and his proximity to the events he describes.
angler on February 5, 2007 at 12:05 PM
This interview with Hugh Hewitt may help some not familiar with Michael Yon get to know him.
RushBaby on February 5, 2007 at 1:02 PM
My apologies. Michael Yon seems like a real stand up guy based on your descriptions. But don’t you dare knock the Midwest or my small town background. That besides, I’ve lived in three states, been to more than a few of them and seen quite a bit. Granted, I have never been to Iraq, so I can only base my opinions of that situation on what I see on TV and read on the internet.
Honestly, I think that our guys have done an exceptional job considering the circumstances, but Iraq is a tough go for all the obvious reasons. It is essential that President Bush find a way to end the war now, or we’re going to be stuck a President Hillary or a President Obama and a rubber stamp Dem congress for four years plus. No Republican is going to win dog catcher running on a pro-Iraq war platform. And if the Dems get the White House, its over anyway. Think long term. Let Bush’s mistakes fade away with Bush, for the good of the country. Bush might have made a great American president. Sadly, we’ll never know since he’s spent the last six years trying to be President of Iraq and ambassador to Mexico.
John on February 5, 2007 at 1:39 PM
John,
Your analysis of the situation in Iraq is about as informed and cogent as your first comment questioning the bona fides of Mr. Yon.
That you come to your conclusions about the proper way forward regarding Iraq based on what you see on TV is not surprising.
That you conclude it is “essential that President Bush find a way to end the war now,” i.e. quit immediately and lose, is saddening. Not only on the merits, but because your conclusion represents pure political calculation over principle. Fuck whether the war is actually worth fighting and winning. No, John says we out to stake out our position on the war on how many political points we can earn or whether a Republican gets elected local dog catcher. You counsel taking a long-term approach, but adopt the short-term version – abandoning a worthy and important effort on an important front on the war on terror because, right now, that effort is unpopular and may cost votes.
I also fail to see the logic in your “plan.” You argue that Republicans must abandon the war so that they can salvage their chances at the next elections. But you also argue that if they don’t, the war will be abandoned by Democrats, who, having won office by opposing the war, will carry through on their promise. Well, if abandoning the war is so important, why would the electorate select a Republican, who presumably would end the war despite his principles but for political gain, when a Democrat would abandon the war because he really thinks that’s the right thing to do?
angler on February 5, 2007 at 2:28 PM
Look, Iraq is a big problem that will fade over time. What the Democrats would do to OUR COUNTRY with both houses of congress and the White House is a big problem getting bigger. Hillary has basically announced a domestic policy agenda on par with the thinking of Hugo Chavez. And we all remember what the Clinton years were like. If you think Obama is even the slightest bit more conservative than Hillary, you’re delusional. Obama is just the glossed over Chicago Machine version of Hillary without the checkered past. We have given the Iraqi people every opportunity to get along and play nice. But trying to jump start democracy in Iraq has been like trying to have a tea party with Beavis and Butthead. This is like the parable about not casting good seeds onto unfertile ground. I find it really surprising that the same people who understand that violent sexual predators cannot be rehabilitated can’t wrap their minds around the Iraqi people. The insurgents are not fighting against the Iraqi people, they are the Iraqi people. The only good thing about Saddam was that the old SOB was the one animal that could keep all the other animals in line. Maybe if we stay in Iraq for the next hundred years we could finally make some headway. But we don’t have that luxury. We have an election coming up in a little more than a year, and we have to decide what’s best for us.
Republicans used to kick ass on a regular basis back when they were about limited government, social conservatism and economic responsibility. Now everything is about the damned Iraq war. Every issue on every level is being voted on based on the war. We’ve got to slay this dragon before 2008 or this country is going to be had over a barrel by the likes of Dean, the Clintons and Pelosi. I feel bad for the slim handful of descent Iraqi people. I really do. But time is running out.
John on February 5, 2007 at 3:37 PM
Our policy in Iraq is like a new parable: If the ground is unfertile, sift out the big rocks, amend the soil with some nutrients, then then plant some seeds. And after they start to grow, don’t forget to fertilize and keep the area weed-free!
John, I use to share your pessimism. Heck, I said worse stuff than your “slim handful of decent Iraqi people.” Even compared them to piranhas at one point.
But I am ashamed of that mindset and it is thanks to Hot Air, a daily dose of Rush Limbaugh, and other sources that I rejected the pessimism and defeatism I felt at one point.
Please stick around – because I am hoping that this website will help to nurture your optimism about our future and that of the Iraqi people.
RushBaby on February 5, 2007 at 3:58 PM
John,
I guess I just can’t find common ground with someone who compares the Iraqi people to sexual predators and animals to be kept in line, and our troops to seeds needlessly expended in an infertile, hopeless endeavor.
I’m the last person who would like to see a President Clinton or Obama. But to say, “Hey, we’ve got an election to win, let’s hurry up and lose this unpopular war” is crass and short-sighted. Did you support the troops and the mission when this operation began? If you did, a soldier reading your comments would be forgiven if he’d conclude he’d rather not have had your support, if he knew you would so easily withdraw it if things in Iraq got difficult, unpopular at home, and an election was coming up.
I agree that Republicans used to kick ass. I think some still do. But I don’t agree that a way to kick ass at home means being a pussy abroad. Making national security decisions based on pure electoral politics has a home in another party. We don’t need it in this one.
angler on February 5, 2007 at 4:43 PM
John on February 5, 2007 at 3:37 PM
John, it’s apparent you have a great deal yet to learn about history, radical islam, iran, saudi arabia and what the situation and the stakes actually are should we fail in the ME.
These are non-trivial matters that we walk away from at our extreme peril.
techno_barbarian on February 5, 2007 at 8:29 PM
Comment pages: