Ralph Peters Throws In The Towel
Another war supporter has given up hope on Iraq:
Iraq is failing. No honest observer can conclude otherwise. Even six months ago, there was hope. Now the chances for a democratic, unified Iraq are dwindling fast. The country’s prime minister has thrown in his lot with al-Sadr, our mortal enemy. He has his eye on the future, and he’s betting that we won’t last. The police are less accountable than they were under Saddam. Our extensive investment in Iraqi law enforcement only produced death squads. Government ministers loot the country to strengthen their own factions. Even Iraq’s elections — a worthy experiment — further divided Iraq along confessional and ethnic lines. Iraq still exists on the maps, but in reality it’s gone. Only a military coup — which might come in the next few years — could hold the artificial country together.
This chaos wasn’t inevitable. While in Iraq late last winter, I remained soberly hopeful. Since then, the strength of will of our opponents — their readiness to pay any price and go to any length to win — has eclipsed our own. The valor of our enemies never surpassed that of our troops, but it far exceeded the fair-weather courage of the Bush administration.
Yet, for all our errors, we did give the Iraqis a unique chance to build a rule-of-law democracy. They preferred to indulge in old hatreds, confessional violence, ethnic bigotry and a culture of corruption. It appears that the cynics were right: Arab societies can’t support democracy as we know it. And people get the government they deserve.
For us, Iraq’s impending failure is an embarrassment. For the Iraqis — and other Arabs — it’s a disaster the dimensions of which they do not yet comprehend. They’re gleeful at the prospect of America’s humiliation. But it’s their tragedy, not ours.
Iraq was the Arab world’s last chance to board the train to modernity, to give the region a future, not just a bitter past. The violence staining Baghdad’s streets with gore isn’t only a symptom of the Iraqi government’s incompetence, but of the comprehensive inability of the Arab world to progress in any sphere of organized human endeavor. We are witnessing the collapse of a civilization. All those who rooted for Iraq to fail are going to be chastened by what follows.
Iraq still deserves one last chance — as long as we don’t confuse deadly stubbornness and perseverance. If, at this late hour, Iraqis in decisive numbers prove willing to fight for their own freedom and a constitutional government, we should be willing to remain for a generation. If they continue to revel in fratricidal slaughter, we must leave.
That last paragraph is the dying gasp of an idea that is hard to let go of: our vision of a democratic, peaceful Iraq that would be a beacon to its neighbors in the Middle East. Given what came before it, it can safely be ignored.
The question is, can we support keeping our troops in a country with a Prime Minister who protects a death-squad-supporting cleric by ordering U.S. troops off of a search for one of their own?
Manifestly, we cannot…
I’m not throwing in the towel…yet. But after all the storm and noise from the election, I’m going to be looking very closely at what the Iraq Survey Study Group returns with, and how the White House reacts. This war supporter’s continued support will hang in the balance. The present dynamic with Maliki and Sadr is unsustainable…
2800 soldiers dead, 50,000 civlians killed.
I did not realize the militias were responsible for so much death and destruction. How much of the dead are attirbutable to militas, and how much to sunni baathists and insurgents?
Peter is worried about the enemy of our enemy, at the expense of ignoring who our ‘real’ enemy is.
1) I think the best argument for remaining in Iraq is the lead editorial in this week’s Economist (“cut and run” on its cover). Basically they argue that the Iraqi people ought not to suffer for our mistakes, and we have an obligation to stay there until it is certain that our presence does more harm than good. They also argue that the likely result of our leaving now is much worse than the likely result if we stay a few more years.
However, I think that writing that “the cynics were right: Arab societies can’t support democracy as we know it” is the wrong conclusion. First, Lebanon is an exception, despite all of its problems. Moreover, there are plenty of non-Arab Muslim countries which are democracies (Turkey, Malaysia, Indonesia, etc.) I think the right conclusion is that you can’t inculcate democracy in a society which lacks security and the reliable delivery of basic services like electricity and water. Sectarian conflict doesn’t help. My guess is that people probably said the same thing when MacArthur occupied Japan – but once things stabilized there centuries of monarchy gave way to a robust democracy.
2) I assume mtl means Peters and not Peter?
Violence in Iraq dropped over 40% last week (end of the religion of murder holidays) and will drop even futher as soon as they are no longer out to help the democrats in this election cycle. A win for the democrats is a win for terrorism worldwide. Mark that on you calendar.
Here’s the deal, though: Maliki sided with Sadr against our own troops, in an operation designed to rescue a U.S. soldier.
That’s not going to cut it…the insurgents may be our enemies, but so is Sadr. And if Maliki keeps choosing him over us, I’m sorely tempted to let them have each other.
I may be mistaken, but don’t muslims get off for the month of ramadan?
one month of near 100% unemployment, including ing going home on break-not like a country that stops working and has its protection go on holiday for a month would suffer the consequences…
I missed these issues being discussed by the media, our ‘knowledgable’ media.
mark, is there a good article that discusses the actual events about the soldier?
the last ‘kidnapping’ of a translator, which provoked a ton of ire in the press, was actually a desertion.
I am extremely sympathetic to translators, they get to tell a people in their own language-no. (The system in the me, is that the aggrieved approach the person who holds power, and beseech them for help. Our current system is not to provide direct aid that cannot be ‘filtered’ thru local leadership. In our effrot to bolster local eaders, we sacrifice some of the greates pr we can provide.)
Don’t know, but I’ll look for one, and if I find it, I’ll post it here in the comments…
Well, it’s not as in depth as I would like, but a casual search found this:
…and this from Andy McCarthy, having absolutely nothing to do with the circumstances of the soldier, but reinforcing my opinion:
I concur completely with every word of the above…
And then there’s this:
It seems we are running out of friends (I assume we still are on good terms with the Kurds, though)…
I can’t see how exerting pressure on maliki, to exert pressure on the militias, which make up only a fraction of his actual supporters, after taking function as head of brand new govt, less than 5 months ago is going to help.
Militias are not for the us to address, it is completely in the hands of their govt.
Mission number one is to defeat the sunni baathists and foreign fighters who are waging war, as they have done since the fall of saddam, against our soldiers. This is the most destabilizing force, by far.
Discussing militias, is like deciding whether to tell the captain of the titanic whether he is about to hit an iceberg, or tell him the chef is out of their favorite dish. The militia issue, is an internal matter, but the gravest concern of the govt, is shiites being targeted by sunnis or insurgents.
I saw michael ware (no freind of the administration) on cnn, he said the most tangible emotion on the street was ‘fear’. He sees this as a destabilizing event, but in a stream of events, it makes people take action-good and bad. If the level of fear stagnanted, a society would adjust and accept fearing any further decline.
a society that knows fear, and feels it increasing is much more easily lead than one who is compensating.
The dice are still rolling, but then they will be for the next 3-5 years.
What exactly makes you people think this administration is capable of or wants a competently run war…they get their money from oil and weapon companies so they are paying back their investors at the expense of soldiers who were lied into enlisting.
Yes, madmatt, beautiful…now run along and let the adults talk…
can’t argue with ‘logic’.
our inability to drill off our own shores drove bush to go to war, to get oil from 6000 miles away.
it would be ‘funny’ if our soldiers were getting killed by US weapons.
The ones who are making a ‘killing’ are the chinese, the french, and the russians weapons dealers.
peter, I did mean ralph peters, earlier.
I feel bad about the missing soldier…I’ll wait for the video before I say kidnapped/hostage.
I remember Gulf one, more than 30 soldiers were injured in multiple incidents of playing catch with live grenades, while waiting to go on mission…
this guy knew the risks and the rules, and ignored both in a warzone. If we ‘liberate’ him, I’ll be pleased, if we ‘find’ him I feel the press loses their martyr. Altough by the fact that they haven’t ‘fully’ martyred him already suggests that ‘cotton candy’ thing of the story.
MTL,
A couple of responses to your posts:
5.
Yes, you are mistaken. Most Muslims (I won’t say all because just as there are Christian sects with some widely divergent beliefs, there are Muslim sects of different cloths.) do not take the entire month off for Ramadan. They still work, attend school and go about their required business. However, any extracurricular activities are curtailed as is their diet, fasting during the day and eating one or two small meals after sundown and before sunup. The point is to live their life as piously as possible for a month as a recommitment to their faith.
1,10.
As for the militias, they are a critical part of the current conflict and any suggestion to the contrary, shows a distinct lack of a reality-based understanding of the situation. The influence of foreign fighters is negligible in the violence, the majority of which is occurring between Shia and Sunni groups and directed at each other and the American soldiers. Unless your solution is to eradicate all Sunnis or allow the Shia militias to do it for you, any stabilization of Iraq must take into account the safety and security of all of its citizens.
As for your quote “a society that knows fear, and feels it increasing is much more easily lead”, you might want to take a good look in the mirror.
Mark, I can’t say I disagree with Peters. It is but a very valid option.
When I think ‘stay the course’, I only see point A and Point B. How one gets there is purely tactical and essentially moot, i.e. come hell or high water.
I support getting to point B as envisioned by Bush and executed by Rummy. And altho the MSM won’t admit it, we are constantly revising tactics based on experience & imagination, so when they cast Bush as wrong to ‘stay the course’, I emphatically disagree.
But, as noted by you, if getting to B is slim next to none vis a vis Malaki, then yeah pull out and let the misbegotten fools stew in their gore. It won’t be that we’re cutting and running, instead, we’re washing our hands of the mess and walking out with heads held high.
As for the comment about Lebanon, don’t forget it was only 35 years ago that Beruit was the “Paris” of the ME. A significant portion of the lebanese, including the dispora can remember the good old days. The rest of the ME never had it as good as that jewel.
I meant to add a smilie after “Rummy” just for you Mark
[...] Decision ‘08 [...]
“As for the militias, they are a critical part of the current conflict and any suggestion to the contrary, shows a distinct lack of a reality-based understanding of the situation.”
my initial impression is that they are supported by the populace at large, as they provide protection. I think you have made some stereotypical errors in believing this militia is like all other me militias.
Their cause is not religion, unless it is for the purpose of religiously killing sunni baathists.
Since the fall of saddam they have been getting whacked. The us stopped their checkpoints in sadr city, and hours later a motorcycle bomb blows up. Either sadr is targetting civilians indiscriminately in his home district, despite having these militias, or the sunnis are still try to stir them into destabilizing the govt. The militas, while not very effective, provide the community with a sense of protection FROM sunnis.
If they are a critical part of the us soldiers dying, that would be news to me. The militias actually weaken the insurgency. They are forced to defend their home turf, limiting their ability to leave their territory. The militias are a ‘critical’ response to the insurgency. They go nowhere until the insurgency is a) put down or b)trapped in anbar.
The militias are also providing for forced migration…something the us and iraqi govt, could never do.
unethical, dirty, call it what you will to let them do the work, but if the govt is going to succeed, it must continue.
I imagine the first report maliki reads each day is the number of govt officials or their family members killed by baathists/insurgents, fighting directly against his govt.
The militias? They have a lot of catching up to do, if they want to be the problem that the insurgency is. If I’m maliki or any other shiite, I want the militias around and scaring the crap out of the sunnis.
100 plus solders killed in october, how many by militias?
Militias provide the same type of protection as the Mafia. It always comes at a price and in the end they are just as likely to shoot you as to help you if it furthers the cause of their Capo/Cleric. Any false stability by these militias is always at a high cost in terms of capital, blood and most importantly the fact that a democratic society must be built on the rule of law, not vigilante justice.
I can’t give you an exact number of our soldiers killed by the Shia militias but I can give you at least 1 name, Army Cpl. Kenny Stanton killed by an Iraqi police infiltrated by the Mahdi army. That would be the same Mahdi army headed by Muqtada al-Sadr and based in Sadr City and the same army that US forces have been in an ongoing battle with since 2004. On top of the expected increase in violence for Ramadan, the additional increase in US casualties can be attributed to the US initiative in the past couple of months to disarm these militias in Baghdad. Of course, the militias have been fighting back and our soldiers are taking the hits.
In addition, US Army trainers are estimating that 70% of the Iraqi forces that we’re training are actually members of the Mahdi Army and other militias. Our guys have to watch their backs from the very people they are training. The point of the militias infiltrating the Iraqi Security Forces is for training, easy access to weapons (undocumented and untracked weapons) and to position themselves to control the government. They know that all out chaos is much more likely than peace and are doing their best to get the upper hand.
BTW, you keep using the word insurgency. When in your mind does the insurgency become a civil war? There will never be battles on the scale of Gettysburg in Iraq. So what would be your qualifying threshold?
And just so you don’t think I’m pulling an O’Reilly and talking out my ass, here are just a couple of news links that back up my points.
Article 1
Article 2
I see the militias as an independent form of putting pressure on the sunnis.
I find the mafia comparison apt, as the mafia assisted the us during WWII. We have a horrible hx of making deals with the devil, but for the time being, Iraq does get it together until the sunnis are beat. The militias more as propoganda, than effect, will be the primary source that drives the sunnis to coordinate with the govt.
The sunnis don’t deal until they are losing or beat.
one other conflict that is brewing-
the militias attacking sunnis has a dleterious effect on the syrian-iranian realtionship. Iran funds militas to kill/defend against sunnis. Syria funds baathists that kill shiites to impose fear upon them.
this alliance in regards to lebanon, doesn’t hold up much longer.
worst case? a shia sunni civil war splits the country, but also splits any future alliance between sryia and iran.
What an edifying, dispassionate analysis of the tactical intricacies facing U.S. troops, as they contemplate an orderly withdrawal from the deteriorating and strategically untenable situation in Iraq. How “adult;” no rash, impulsive attacks from undisciplined partisan hacks. Kind of like listening in to an intense debate among the White House advance team on the appropriate color tie for the President’s photo op during his first visit to New Orleans after Katrina, as dozens of rotting corpses wash up along Canal Street.
Make no mistake about it; this war – the single worst foreign policy debacle in U.S. history – isn’t an “American” failure, it’s a Republican failure, one that will, and damn well should, get shoved up their a** during every election cycle for decades. It’s a little phenomenon known as chickens coming home to roost; with the Simpering Imbecile and the Snarling Savage in the lead, the Republicans tried to divide this country with every resource at their disposal, with their disgusting refrain of “cut and run,” and their cynical attacks on the patriotism and bravery of veterans like John Murtha and Max Cleland. Now they can shoulder full and exclusive repsonsibility for the disaster.
Of course, we can expect to start hearing lots and lots about “bipartisanship” and the “politics of personal destruction” from the Republicans. And rest assured, we’ll support extending every ounce of bipartisan cooperation we’ve received from the Republicans over the years.
As to the impossibly execrable Ralph Peters throwing in the towel, here’s an alternative title for the post: “Giant rat scampers down the gangway of the sinking ship.”
Chickens coming home to roost? Is that you, Ward Churchill?…
As Iraq spirals downward, don’t forget to blame the MSM for not reporting on progress. Curse Muslims for their barbarity, and wail against treacherous Democrats for their hatred of America.
As Moqtoda rises to power (whether we stay or go) making the Iranian president look like a tame kitten by comparison, throw the UN and the French under the bus.
…but every morning, don’t forget to take an honest look in the mirror.
Elections Matter!
OK. You can think about it a little longer before you finally acknowledge this is the single biggest foreign policy fiasco in our nation’s history, bar none, I defy anyone to come up with something close.
The Iraq war is the Bush Administration’s fault. Period. Enabled by a Republican congress, it was fought incompetently from the day Baghdad fell, onwards, and will prove to be the biggest boost to terrorism since, well, nothing comes close. Maybe the Russian invasion of Afghanistan. Everything about it: the incredible corruption on the ground (and the one man prosecuting that corruption FIRED THIS WEEK by the Republican Congress), the willful disregard of our allies’ advice, the failure to talk to Iran and Syria, the strategic military failures, ALL OF IT, is Bush’s fault. The MSM ignored successes? Give me a break. Iraq was, from day one, mor dangerous than Vietnam ever was. An election happened, purple finger pointed skywards? Pointless. This was screwed up from the first moment, and the kicker then is that we posted nuclear bomb plans IN ARABIC on the internet. Does the incompetence ever, ever end?
Yeah, you can think about it a little longer. I thought about it for two years. But I came around over a year ago, and its been a steady slide since then. This is a disaster, and it is All Your President’s Fault.
I hope he gets creamed on Tuesday. He deserves so much worse.
Hey, at least you’re consistent, I have to give you that. Peters and his ilk (Noonan, etc.) are particularly reprehensible because only a short time ago (a year in Peters’ case) they were saying that any talk of failure in Iraq is not only erroneous, but TREASONOUS. That was of course when Dems were doing it. Now they are doing it, and they consider it “tough-minded”. Soon they’ll be claiming, a la Bush, that they NEVER supported the war at all.
Ignorance is freedom.