Mi Vida Loca » Iraq - seven soldiers viewpoint

Published on August 23, 2007 By Locamama In International

Link

Seven soldiers who are coming off of a fifteen month deployment in Iraq wrote an op-ed piece for the NYT. I am going to quote from their article but if you would like to read the entirety the link is above. I think it is very interesting to get the viewpoint from the actual troops with their boots on the ground. I would love to hear from other soldiers in Iraq but I'm not sure what the military regulations are and how much they are allowed to share about their experiences. One of the soldiers that was contributing to this article was shot in the head but is being flown back to the U.S. and they think he will survive.

Viewed from Iraq at the tail end of a 15-month deployment, the political debate in Washington is indeed surreal. Counterinsurgency is, by definition, a competition between insurgents and counterinsurgents for the control and support of a population. To believe that Americans, with an occupying force that long ago outlived its reluctant welcome, can win over a recalcitrant local population and win this counterinsurgency is far-fetched. As responsible infantrymen and noncommissioned officers with the 82nd Airborne Division soon heading back home, we are skeptical of recent press coverage portraying the conflict as increasingly manageable and feel it has neglected the mounting civil, political and social unrest we see every day. (Obviously, these are our personal views and should not be seen as official within our chain of command.)

The soldiers are skeptical of recent press coverage - huh?

A few nights ago, for example, we witnessed the death of one American soldier and the critical wounding of two others when a lethal armor-piercing explosive was detonated between an Iraqi Army checkpoint and a police one. Local Iraqis readily testified to American investigators that Iraqi police and Army officers escorted the triggermen and helped plant the bomb. These civilians highlighted their own predicament: had they informed the Americans of the bomb before the incident, the Iraqi Army, the police or the local Shiite militia would have killed their families.

This the Iraqi police and army that we armed and trained. Is this a winnable war? Let's look at who the enemy is. Obviously it includes at least some members of the Iraqi police and army but also

It is crowded with actors who do not fit neatly into boxes: Sunni extremists, Al Qaeda terrorists, Shiite militiamen, criminals and armed tribes.

This is not as simple as a war on terror or al queda. This is not even as simple as being in the middle of a civil war.

Reports that a majority of Iraqi Army commanders are now reliable partners can be considered only misleading rhetoric. The truth is that battalion commanders, even if well meaning, have little to no influence over the thousands of obstinate men under them, in an incoherent chain of command, who are really loyal only to their militias.

I think the key phrase here has to be LOYAL TO THEIR MILITIAS.

Similarly, Sunnis, who have been underrepresented in the new Iraqi armed forces, now find themselves forming militias, sometimes with our tacit support. Sunnis recognize that the best guarantee they may have against Shiite militias and the Shiite-dominated government is to form their own armed bands. We arm them to aid in our fight against Al Qaeda.

We thought this was great news. Sunnis are standing up to Al Qaeda who are also Sunnis. The Iraqi Sunni citizens are taking a stand against terrorists. If only it could have been that easy. The Sunni's want to be able to fight the Shiites.

Armed Sunni tribes have indeed become effective surrogates, but the enduring question is where their loyalties would lie in our absence. The Iraqi government finds itself working at cross purposes with us on this issue because it is justifiably fearful that Sunni militias will turn on it should the Americans leave.

The Shiite/Sunni issue is a huge part of why the Iraqi government has not been able to meet many of our benchmarks. The Sunnis were in power under Sadam. They don't want to go away quietly and let the Shiites rule the country. The Shiites were oppressed under Sadam even though they are a majority and feel that they deserve to be in power now.

What matters is the experience of the local citizenry and the future of our counterinsurgency. When we take this view, we see that a vast majority of Iraqis feel increasingly insecure and view us as an occupation force that has failed to produce normalcy after four years and is increasingly unlikely to do so as we continue to arm each warring side.

We are arming opposing factions. Someone explain to me again exactly how this war is going to be won militarily.

At the same time, the most important front in the counterinsurgency, improving basic social and economic conditions, is the one on which we have failed most miserably. Two million Iraqis are in refugee camps in bordering countries. Close to two million more are internally displaced and now fill many urban slums. Cities lack regular electricity, telephone services and sanitation.

Four years into our occupation, we have failed on every promise, while we have substituted Baath Party tyranny with a tyranny of Islamist, militia and criminal violence.

I think there needs to be some massive re-evaluation of our goals in Iraq and how to achieve them. The path we are on is not going to lead to a stable, united, democratic Iraq.

Comments

Locamama

on Aug 24, 2007

Not even one comment on this? I thought this was a really interest perspective from some of the soldiers viewpoint.

CharlesCS

on Aug 26, 2007

Well, I too believe this is an interesting perspective from some of the soldiers point of views. It's obvious not everyone will have positive and/or negative views on this war.

I am curious though. Not insulting or being rude in any way here. But if you found 7 soldiers speaking the opposite of what these soldiers said here, not pointing out all the doom and gloom or Iraq, but instead pointing at some progress done, some good things happening, would you still have this same opinion?

The reason I ask is because of the reason I compare you to Col gene, which I know you hate. You see, this article only shows one side of the story. Typical for someone who only wants to reinforce their position on an issue. This is what is called slanted news. Sure, these 7 soldiers, out of thousands, feel that Iraq is not getting better as the Media or the US Gov't is leading us to believe. They could be right, but if I was to make an objective decision of what I think is going on in Iraq, shouldn't I get the other side of the story? Should I base my opinion on the words of 7 out of over 100 thousand soldiers who just happen to have similar points of view on Iraq? Were there any soldiers who had opposing views from these 7? If so, why did you not post them here as well?

Keep in mind I am, in no way, stating that anything said here is either a lie, made up, BS or twisted. I am only pointing out that I can't agree or disagree with this article because we are only getting the whole opinion, merely that of a very, very small portion of those soldiers. As I said with over 100 thousand soldiers in Iraq, we are bound to find some against it or in favor of it.

This is probably the reason you have not seen any other replies, at least not from those who would disagree with you on this issue. Not sure about those who would agree.

Locamama

on Aug 27, 2007

I would be interested to hear any soldiers perspective that has served or is serving in Iraq. This just happened to be the article that I found. I am not an anti-war activist like you seem to think. I don't think we can just pull up stakes and head out. I just think it's much more complicated than "let's go kill all the terrorists so we can be safe at home". I think we need to re-evaluate our current plan so we can accomplish our objective which is to have a stable, democratic, self-sufficient government in Iraq.

CharlesCS

on Aug 27, 2007

Hey, your idea is not that bad but I would suggest you don't keep, as I've been told before, generalizing all of us with 1 single persons words. You got hung on Paladine's words of "kill them all" and applied it to everyone who has an opposing view to yours.

You say you just happen to find this one, but did you make an effort to try to find soldiers with an opposing view? Don't tell me you did and couldn't find any cause there have been plenty of them and some posted here before, I believe in part by ShadowWar.

You can call yourself anti-war, anti-Bush, anti-Iraq or none of the above, but that doesn't really matter. You words describe what your feelings are; you don't like the Iraq conflict, period. It's your opinion and no one can take that from you. But don't expect others to follow suit on a one sided, slanted, biased article. You could have made a better case if you had both points of view, or are you afraid to admit that some good may be coming out of Iraq and don't want others to know about it?

Locamama

on Aug 27, 2007

Charles, I'm starting to think it is pointless trying to "discuss" things with you. The "kill 'em all" sentiment is shared by many. If I refer to that mindframe, I am not referring to one person's opinion.

I don't like the conflict in Iraq. Who could? I don't think we should have gone there in the first place but I'm not a anti-war activist. I think we have a responsibility to the Iraqi people to not pull out until they are more stable and self-sufficient. It's the if you break it, you bought it philosophy. I also think it is in our national interest to have another deomcracy in the middle east.

I want to hear good news coming from Iraq. There are good things happening there but it's much more complicated than people realize. I do think we need to rethink our goals and the best way to achieve them. I don't want to be rah, rah, go team while ignoring the true situation.

CharlesCS

on Aug 27, 2007

Charles, I'm starting to think it is pointless trying to "discuss" things with you.

I don't think it's pointles. There have been people who have made me see the light. I am simply stating that you could have done better had you provided both points of view on Iraq, not just the opinions of 7 soldiers who agree Iraq is not improving as the Media and the Gov't is showing.

The "kill 'em all" sentiment is shared by many. If I refer to that mindframe, I am not referring to one person's opinion.

It's shared by a few, sure. But you are broad brushing everyone with it. I don't think the idea of killing all terrorist or insurgents is even realistic. WE may never actually stop them from commiting terrorist acts. But we can slow them down, hold them back, lower their numbers. Terrorism only works if the end result is fear of another attack and therefor we will comply. But if they can be shown that they can not control the masses with terrorist attacks then we have taken away their one advantage. As I said before we need not to kill them all but their spirit. Make them think twice about attacking, make them believe it's not working, it's not worth it anymore.

I don't like the conflict in Iraq. Who could? I don't think we should have gone there in the first place but I'm not a anti-war activist. I think we have a responsibility to the Iraqi people to not pull out until they are more stable and self-sufficient. It's the if you break it, you bought it philosophy. I also think it is in our national interest to have another deomcracy in the middle east.

I don't think anyone likes it, except maybe those who think they are Rambo and feel the need to blow everything up. But again, I was simply pointing out that since you complained no one replied it could have been maybe because you only gave one side of the story.

I want to hear good news coming from Iraq. There are good things happening there but it's much more complicated than people realize. I do think we need to rethink our goals and the best way to achieve them. I don't want to be rah, rah, go team while ignoring the true situation.

How complicated can it be? What is so complicated about there being good things going on? people don't want details, they just want to know that 3000 plus soldiers have not died for nothing. They want to know that we are not doing this for a bunch of ingrates who don't really give a dam about the sacrifices being made for them. Stories like Iraqis pointing to weapons caches, saving a soldiers life, pointing out insurgent hideouts, simply saying thank you or celebrating with them; these stories can make a big difference in both those of us here in the US and the soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan. But God forbid these stories make it to the Media, first of all its bad publicity for the Democrats and second it doesn't sell as much as pain and suffering does.

MasonM

on Aug 27, 2007

I have family serving in both Iraq and Afghanistan who have a much different view of things there. But soldiers are human beings and as such their view of a situation is going to be colored by their own personal experiences and biases.

It doesn't surprise me that the NYT printed this one as it supports their own editorial agenda to a tee. One must wonder however, how many such pieces written by soldiers with an opposite view of the situation did they choose to not print?

As with all things one must apply critical thought and skepticism to any such piece regardless of it's source. After all, you know what they say about opinions.

I am simply stating that you could have done better had you provided both points of view on Iraq, not just the opinions of 7 soldiers who agree Iraq is not improving as the Media and the Gov't is showing.

What part of the fact that she's pointing out a piece appearing in the NYT do you not understand? She didn't write the damn thing.

CharlesCS

on Aug 27, 2007

What part of the fact that she's pointing out a piece appearing in the NYT do you not understand? She didn't write the damn thing.

Oh I know that, I just wanted to make sure she was aware of that as well.

Locamama

on Aug 27, 2007

Oh I know that, I just wanted to make sure she was aware of that as well.

No, I wasn't aware that I didn't write the article. Thanks for pointing that out to me. You're very helpful.

Texas Wahine

on Aug 27, 2007

No, I wasn't aware that I didn't write the article. Thanks for pointing that out to me. You're very helpful.

LMFAO.

CharlesCS

on Aug 27, 2007

No, I wasn't aware that I didn't write the article. Thanks for pointing that out to me. You're very helpful.

And then you wonder why I compare you to Col gene. I was refering to the fact that you quoted the NYT, not that you did not write the article on the NYT.

CharlesCS

on Aug 27, 2007

LMFAO.

I second that.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!