Richard Warnick“Surging” for An Answer
President Bush may be determined to pass along his Iraq problem to the next president. Iraqis are equally determined to rid themselves of foreign occupation. As I suggested in a previous post, the decisive battle will be fought in Baghdad. Baghdad is the center of gravity for the larger American mission. If the capital is overwhelmed by sectarian strife, there will be no way to stabilize the entire country.
It has been clear for the last five or six weeks that Bush wants to “surge,” or make a last-gasp effort to secure Baghdad using an additional 20,000 combat troops (not enough, but it’s probably the maximum available). No one in the White House seems to understand that such a move would be counterproductive. Opinion polls show that Iraqis want us out. Increasing our troop presence would only add to the impression that U.S. forces intend to remain as permanent occupiers.
The outlines of this plan have emerged in a PowerPoint presentation by Frederick Kagan, military analyst of the American Enterprise Institute. The title is: “Choosing Victory: A Plan for Success in Iraq.” Slate’s Fred Kaplan describes the Kagan plan:
Kagan’s surge involves more troops than the United States can readily mobilize and fewer troops than it needs for the kind of victory he has in mind…
Besides demoralizing the troops, many of whom are on their third tours of duty, this would also create a logistical nightmare; supplies would be needed for twice as many soldiers; supply lines would have to be denser and more densely protected…
Kagan acknowledges that putting all these additional American soldiers on the street might trigger still-greater waves of violence, both sectarian and anti-occupation…
In Kagan’s plan, after Baghdad is secure, we have to go clear and hold the rest of Iraq. This means still more troops will be needed, beyond the initial surge, because the troops in Baghdad have to stay there…
This obviously would be a desperate gamble, the final chapter in a fiasco that’s already gone on too long. It could break the back of the U.S. ground forces. Lawrence J. Korb and Max Bergmann of The American Prospect write:
Currently there are no active or reserve Army combat units outside of Iraq and Afghanistan that are rated as “combat ready.” To ensure that troops fighting in Iraq have the equipment they need, units rotating out of Iraq have been leaving behind their equipment for units taking their place. The units that return home are so depleted that the Marines have been referring to this phase as the “post-deployment death spiral.” The additional units sent to Iraq would not have enough body armor, radios, and armored vehicles or training (since without equipment, non-deployed units cannot train properly).
In November 2005, Rep. John Murtha concluded: “Our military has done everything that has been asked of them, the U.S. can not accomplish anything further in Iraq militarily. IT IS TIME TO BRING THEM HOME.†How much longer will it take to muster the political will and withdraw our Army and Marine Corps from this strategic dead end?
UPDATE: On Talking Points Memo, Vali Nasr suggests that a more accurate name for the “surge” proposal would be “escalation,” because an attack on Shiite militias would provoke a new insurgency on top of the one we’re fighting now.
December 21st, 2006 at 9:25 pm
I think we will see some real movement after50 US soldiers lose their life in one day.
However long that takes may be how long it will take to muster the political will.
We could speed this up by prosecuting the pres, so dems its on you now.
December 22nd, 2006 at 6:10 am
Glenn nails it one more time. Sadly.
December 22nd, 2006 at 9:13 am
If you have time, download the Kagan PowerPoint presentation. It’s grim stuff. And he admits our enemies in Iraq can surge as well as we can. Slide 52 of 56:
More Casualties?
- Yes
- Short-term increase in casualties is not a sign of failure
- As troops actively secure the population the enemy will surge its attacks on coalition troops and Iraqi civilians
- Long term casualties over a nine month period will decrease as the population is secured
Of course, Frederick Kagan isn’t going to put his own ass on the line!
December 22nd, 2006 at 11:43 am
Caveat; Sadly yes, I know my people by now.
Richard the psychological momentum is not with us, we are going to get our asses kicked or we are going to commited atrocities to accomplish it. We lose either way.
It strikes me as funny that in the same way the Pope manipulated the spirit ad enthusiasm of the faithful(new church converts Germans and Englishmen, Norsemen) to attack Islam in 1100,….. so have we, America become the latest in a naive group of people to do the dirty work of elites in the name of religion. The parallels are striking.
We are the big dummy that has been conned up to do this thing. It is not unusual in history. The hope of the Human Prospect, and what can be changed and what cannot yet be changed, is little understood by the American people, as they do not study other people, their culture, habits, and history, and assume that these people will respond to our actions as we would.
Crusade on America. The activity is in fact the solution for the delusion.
December 22nd, 2006 at 2:23 pm
a consistent ten body bags a day = 3650 per year and might do the trick.
I keep stumbling onto items claiming that large numbers of foreign contractor mercs (mostly salvadoreans and columbians who have been promised u.s. citizenship upon survial) are bearing the brunt of the up close combat and are being buried in iraq. Any truth to this? add this to u.s citizen contractors and what is the actual U.S. body county.
December 22nd, 2006 at 8:10 pm
U.A. I read about the mercenaries a coupla years ago, but couldn’t tell you exactly where.
December 22nd, 2006 at 9:33 pm
A couple of weeks ago the Washington Post cited a figure of around 100,000 contractors in Iraq. How many of them are armed? Nobody seems to know. The U.S. has about 70,000 combat troops over there. About 650 contractors have died in Iraq since 2003, according to Labor Department statistics.
December 23rd, 2006 at 7:44 am
Just a reminder, It’s all about Democracy, Folks. The stat’s indicate that nearly 90% of the citizenry oppose the ‘escalation’ option in Iraq, but ‘Dorquamada-in-chief is going to do it anyway, so that the Iraqi people can experience freedom and Democracy, the will of the people, blah, blah. The man’s just a genious, nothing more. Will we EVER be able to get enough?
January 8th, 2007 at 4:49 pm
[...] At the White House, every day is “crazy hat day.” The Mad Hatter is going to explain his plan for Operation Choose Victory on Wednesday night, 7 pm Utah time. [...]
February 14th, 2007 at 12:33 pm
[...] According to Dreier, “support the troops†really means support the invasion, support the occupation, support the escalation. In reality, none of our forces would be in Iraq if President Bush had listened to the military experts. Boosting America’s troop presence by 48,000 was opposed by the Joint Chiefs. It’s “their mission†only in the sense that Bush has ordered them to do it. It was actually thought up by a neocon who never served a day in uniform. [...]
February 28th, 2007 at 3:46 pm
[...] Although it was announced last fall, the so-called Baghdad security plan is still in the very early stages of implementation. Some areas of the Iraqi capital have reportedly seen less violence due to diminished Shia death squad activity, while other neighborhoods and suburbs have been targeted by car bombs. The additional 48,000 American soldiers slated to go to Iraq probably won’t all be there until sometime in May. Equipment shortages are hampering that effort. [...]