Category Archives: Iraq

Why lose when you can win?

"War is not poker; the stakes in Iraq are much higher than a little money or a few chips. But war’s psychology bears some resemblance to a well-played game of cards. The only way Americans lose this war is to fold. That seems likely to be the next move, but it is the last thing we should do. Far better to call and raise. Our cards are better than theirs, if only we have the nerve to play them."

Harvard law professor William J. Stuntz in the Weekly Standard. 

Via Instapundit 

Advisers

IraqAdvisor.jpg

The probable greatly-expanded future of the American military mission in Iraq, the advisery effort–photo explained in this in-house report from Central Command–is what was tried in South Vietnam, in a sort of half-assed way in the beginning, but with much more committment towards the end, and it was making a difference when Congress cut the last check. It ain’t easy, but it has the virtue of marrying light infantry to all that technology of ours, similar to what we did in the beginning in Afghanistan, but cheaper because no special operators are required.

Copperheads win

Get out your American history book to figure out the headline. Let’s just say, in 19th century Southern American vernacular, the war on terrorism could be about to go up the spout. Appeasement of dictators, group hugs and singing kumbaya with the French and the EU could soon be the order of the day.

"Okay, the House has flipped. How about the Senate? We seem to be moving into darker territory with every quarter-hour."

And impeachment–don’t let’s forget impeachment. The Democrats sure won’t. The American people seem either to want Bush’s head on a pike, or a standoff between him and Congress. It looks like they’ll be getting one or the other before next summer. Then, while the cat’s preoccupied with all those congressional hearings and subpoenas, the Jihadis can play.

Hysterical? Unwarranted gloom? Maybe. Bruce Bartlett at RealClearPolitics thinks so.

"Indeed, I think that Democratic control of Congress has the potential to rejuvenate Bush’s presidency, just as Republican control gave new life to Clinton’s."

We’ll know in a few months, when the investigations show trials begin.

UPDATE  On the other hand there’s Ralph Peters best-case prediction of what the party of Michael Moore will do. I think he’s way too optimistic. I also don’t see the point of sending more troops, which is not the way to fight an insurgency. But he’s right about the Iraqis having to get off their butts and eliminate Mookie and his thugs.  

Tour of Iraq

Kurt Wheeler, history teacher from New York and Marine Corps reserve lieutenant colonel, looks like a good one to follow from his blog posts for the next year.

"ON THE WAY… After nearly four weeks of preparations, I am finally on my way to Iraq. I am writing this entry from a wifi spot in the Chicago airport en route to California."

Via Op-For 

Mookie’s ticket needs punching

Uncle Jimbo at Black Five tears Muqtada al-Sadr a brand new one. But UJ admits that death, slow or quick, would be better.

"Mookie is the idiot son of a family that can trace its lineage directly to Mohammed but he has failed to distinguish himself at any religious scholarship. He excels at gathering groups of thugs together, getting them jacked up on old time religion, and collecting satchels of Mullah money."

Meanwhile Iraqi PM Maliki owes his parliamentary coalition–the votes that keep him prime minister–to Mookie’s voters. But Mookie’s thugs may have been involved in the recent kidnapping of an American soldier, certainly have killed others, and been instrumental in keeping up the level of violence in Baghdad. Something’s got to give.

Ralph Peters agrees.

"I lost faith in our engagement in Iraq last week. I can pinpoint the moment. It came when I heard that Maliki had demanded–successfully–that our military release a just-captured deputy of Muqtada al-Sadr who was running death squads."

Set-recs

Set-recs, for "set the record straight" is what the old time newspapermen called corrections, which were always plentiful although frowned upon.  After five years of pummeling from the not-always-accurate MSM’s preferred war narrative, it’s about time the defense department entered the set-rec business, here.

They’re also into argument for their side of the issue, even when rebuffed.

"Second, the issue is not Newsweek’s position versus the ‘government position.’ The issue is that your readers were given a one-sided, opinion-laced article on Afghanistan based on falsehoods—which is something that journalists and editors are usually concerned about. Your dismissive reply is disappointing, to say the least.”

More, please. 

Via Op-For 

Tet on the Tigris

Bush’s political and media opponents are having a grand time with his remark that there may be some similarities between Tet, 1968, in Vietnam and Baghdad, in 2006–at least in the way that the enemy is trying to influence American politics. Poor man, he has no way to win with some people. If he says nothing, he’s uncommunicative. If he says something, he’s either blundered or engaging in spin. British military historian John Kagan says he blundered. At least Kagan’s numbers are instructive.

"By January 1968, total American casualties in Vietnam — killed, wounded and missing — had reached 80,000 and climbing…In a bad week in Vietnam, the US could suffer 2,000 casualties. Since 2003, American forces in Iraq have never suffered as many as 500 casualties a month…In any year of the Vietnam war, the communist party of North Vietnam sent 200,000 young men to the battlefields in the south, most of whom did not return. Vietnam was one of the largest and costliest wars in history. The insurgency in Iraq resembles one of the colonial disturbances of imperial history."

Via Instapundit