6 Further Alternatives for Pursuing the War in Iraq

Politics International Politics
1

A week or so ago I posted an article which offered some steps for changing the way the War in Iraq is being carried out. I had hoped for a few good comments and some relevant discussion. Well…that didn’t happen.
But, ever the optimist, I would like to table another article discussing some variance in the war method that make some good sense.
If nothing else it showed that their are people out there who are considering alternate and progressive methods to reflect the ever-changing face of modern warfare and terrorism.

[quote]Go Native
By Josh Manchester, 28 Nov 2006

A super-secret group of military officers studying Iraq found its conclusions leaked to the press last week. The Washington Post reported that the group has developed three options, “Go big,” “Go long,” or “Go home.” The group is said to be recommending “going long.”

"The group has devised a hybrid plan that combines part of the first option with the second one – ‘Go Long’ – and calls for cutting the U.S. combat presence in favor of a long-term expansion of the training and advisory efforts. Under this mixture of options, which is gaining favor inside the military, the U.S. presence in Iraq, currently about 140,000 troops, would be boosted by 20,000 to 30,000 for a short period, the officials said.

“The purpose of the temporary but notable increase, they said, would be twofold: To do as much as possible to curtail sectarian violence, and also to signal to the Iraqi government and public that the shift to a ‘Go Long’ option that aims to eventually cut the U.S. presence is not a disguised form of withdrawal.”

Here’s my own contribution to these discussions. Why not go native? The constituent parts to this plan are:

  1. Dramatically expand the training and advisory efforts.
  2. Create a crash program to develop a massive Arabic linguistic capability within the US military.
  3. Give Maliki 60 days to remove the Shi’ite militias from positions of influence in the government.
  4. If he can’t do it, then declare Iraq’s security forces to be in receivership.
  5. Create combined US-Iraqi forces.
  6. Redeploy as many FOBBITS as possible.

tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=112806G[/quote]
Each of these items are expanded upon in the article.
I think these are getting to some of the core issues involved in the scenario in Iraq. Nobody went into this looking at a short-time in theater. Now its time to change tactics to fit the changing environment. These are a few good ideas.
As was the previously mentioned 6 - Steps.
forumosa.com/taiwan/viewtopic.php?t=56421

edit:spelling corrected. 5 -> 6 Steps.

2

Privatization.

That’s the key.

Privatize all the military forces, security forces etc. No more government funding for the military. After all, privatization is apparently the best way to go when it comes to health, education and so forth, so let’s try it with the military. No more communist/socialist type handouts to the security forces. And the best bit - think of the tax-cuts. Hundreds of billions could be saved.

Don’t think it could work? Well, the various militias control large parts of Baghdad and they’re all privately funded. The Kurdish peshmerga is keeping the north of Iraq fairly quiet. Abu Walid’s Wolf Brigade has even seen action in Mosul fighting alongside the US.

3

There are only two real ways out of a quagmire. One is to not jump into it in the first place and the second is to have somebody pull you out of it.

It’s too late for the first ‘solution’ so the second is our only hope.

Expecting the Iraqis to be the ones to save our asses when we can’t do the same job ourselves and they’re part of the quagmire is delusional.

Our only real hope is to convince the rest of the world to actively join in the effort to stabilize Iraq and that includes Europe and most importantly the other countries in the Middle East with some leverage in Iraq.

Barring that be prepared for a long, slow penance for our sins of hubris and arrogance.

4

I think you are right, spook, but what to do? Looks to me the allies you have, well except Australia and its paltry committment, are eager to leave. The UK in particular. Perhaps the diplomatic initiatives have some merit. I certainly hope so.

HG

5

I think you are right, spook, but what to do? Looks to me the allies you have, well except Australia and its paltry committment, are eager to leave. The UK in particular. Perhaps the diplomatic initiatives have some merit. I certainly hope so.

HG[/quote]

The first thing we have to do is jettison our ‘my way or the highway’ attitude problem while we’re stuck up to our necks in the Iraqi quagmire. We can’t expect anyone to help us out of a problem of our making as long as we exhibit no willingness to changes the ways and attitudes which created the mess in the first place.

They’re undoubtedly privately thinking that the best thing for us is to stew in our own juices until we’re ready to see reason – rather than free us up to repeat the same mistakes all over again.

6

Count me out and pretty much everyone I personally know in Germany.

Not correct. Such thought is done rather openly.

How about you just do it like with Vietnam? Leave and then find out the world (the U.S. in particular) will not come to an end.

7

That being the case, can’t see the point in starting yet another thread. Couldn’t you continue to post in the old thread?