Post-war reconstruction: Iraq and Japan

Hindsight is always 20/20 or better, especially in war, or in any difficult endeavor.

In retrospect, it may indeed have proven a wiser and more effective course to retain as much as possible of the old Iraqi military, police, and civil bureacracy, as was done in Japan after WWII.

Unlike Japan, however, those institutions in Iraq did not so much “cement” the population, with the notable exception of course of the Sunni Baathist minority.

For the vast majority, of Shia and Kurds, the existing structures “held things together” mostly through oppressive force, brutality, and intimidation.

In the aftermath, the daunting task of “vetting” existing officials, in order to weed out the ones who retained loyalties to the old regime and the old ideologies, led to the decision to simply “fire everyone”, and start over by taking applications.

It would have been like keeping the Nazis in charge of the concentration camps after taking Berlin, on the basis that “they” at least knew how to run the camps, and would keep the prisoners from running amuck.

Islamo-fascism: No apologies – calling a spade a spade ….

Mike writes:
“What is an ‘Islamo-fascist’? Which Islamic fascist state are you referring to when you use this term?” –MikeCannon; WDH Forum

Mike asks an excellent question and, presuming for the time being that he is actually interested in a serious answer, and didn’t just write the words rhetorically in a petty effort to trivialize and demagogue a serious issue, I’ll address it.

In response first to the second part of his question, regarding the presumed necessary existence of a fascist “state”, this once again reflects a degree of “WWII thinking”, and it’s nature as a formal “conventional war” against an established, nationalistic state, with a more or less homogeous citizenry, a formal centralized government, and clearly defined geographical borders.

In contrast, the present conflict is characterized by it’s “asymmetric” nature, in which the formal military and political structures of one or more distinct nation-states are pitted against a more loosely-organized, militarily inferior, trans-national guerilla-style force, that is organized around and draws it’s identity from an ideology or cause, rather than on the basis of a geographical identity.

Iraq – on appeasement, surrender, and avoiding entanglements

Web Guy writes:
“Save our military for real threats. And if some nut blows up a skyscraper in a metropolis on one of the coasts, the lives lost will be much less than the numbers lost from annual traffic deaths. If Bush were really concerned about “democracy”, why does he let Israel attack neighboring democracies in Palestine and Lebanon?” — WebGuy; WDH Forum

An interesting perspective that is perhaps quite telling.

It would appear that Web Guy counts himself as among that group that does not view Islamist jihadism (aka Islamist terrorism) as a legitimate “threat”.

Presumably then, he is one in agreement with John Edward’s assertion that the “War on Terror is nothing more than a bumper sticker”.

If global Islamo-fascist jihad is “not a threat” worthy of the efforts of our military to combat, then just exactly WHAT does Web Guy legitimately consider to be a threat that calls for a military?

Appeasing the Islamist alligator …

Dino writes:
“The Agerians did not follow the French home, they were Muslims. The French left there, and they made it home okay.”  — Dino; WDH Forum

Mike writes:
“vilifying people is the oldest trick in the book. Now that the godless commies are gone, now we have the radical jihadists islomo fascists Muslims.” — Mike Cannon; WDH Forum

With due respect to Dino’s understanding of what’s going on in the world, France today is one of the most heavily Muslimized countries in Europe, followed closely by Britain – a legacy of their “open borders” and liberal immigration policies. Muslims came for the “opportunities” of a nominally free and democratic society, and many now seek to re-impose the type of oppressive society and culture that they originally fled.

Sort of like what is increasingly happening here.

The levels of violence perpetrated by radicalized Muslims living in France is a significant ongoing problem there, and the sheer numbers of Muslims who have refused to adopt and to become a part of the culture of their new country, is a significant political problem that in many ways has immobilized French politicians from taking necessary steps to protect the country from the Islamist’s who have indeed, “followed them home”.

Soldiers in Iraq serve the cause of freedom, deserve support …

In a recent WDH Forum post Pat writes:
“My husband was in Iraq, he was away from home for eighteen months. You civilians have all these idea’s why we should not be there. I think you should ask the Soldiers instead. You know only what you hear and see on the news, not the good things. And what kind of support are you showing with all the crap going on. Pulling out of Iraq now would be a serious mistake.  We need to finish the job now and get it overwith not argue about what you civilians think is right. Bush was for the Military , still is and has done a good job. At least he has the guts to face the real problem.” — Pat; WDH Forum

Standby responds:
“One of the big differences between the opposition to the Vietnam War during that era and the opposition to the Iraq War today has been the ability of people to correctly assign accountability for the policy where it belongs. In a representative democracy, leaders must always consider “what you civilians think is right” because that is the way the system is designed to work.”  — Standby4321; WDH Forum

In spite of considering their “successful” opposition and undermining of the military efforts in Vietnam to be the defining moment and political model for over two generations of post-modern liberal activism, the liberal left did learn at least one important PR lesson: it is counter-productive among large numbers of the more main-stream population to be perceived as spitting on and denigrating the troops, and calling them “baby killers”.

Iraq – Democrat’s paradigm of failure

According to congressional Democrats, a few re-election-sensitive and RINO Republicans, and the most radical leftist fringes of the political spectrum, “nothing good” is coming out of Iraq, we can’t win, we gotta get out, and in fact, we’ve “already lost”.

So why do Democrats in Congress continue to stubbornly insist that “we’re losing”, and yet are unwilling to consider or advance any positive alternative strategum for success – continuing instead to myopically insist that all difficulties are “all Bush’s fault”, and that “surrender and withdrawal” is the only acceptable path?

They don’t say “surrender and withdrawal”, of course. They use terms like “change of course”, “change of strategy”, or “redeployment”, strategic or otherwise.

Democrats of today like to emphatically say that they “support the troops”, and that they somehow “hope the surge works” – but their veracity is seriously in doubt.

Senator Levin of Michigan recently rejected the analogy that the Democrat’s view of the recent interim report on Iraq was a “glass half empty” interpretation, saying “As a matter of fact, this is a cup or a glass with a big hole in the bottom.”

Iraq – “Clear and Hold” strategy leads to progress …

The Fadhl neighborhood area in Baghdad is one of the oldest and poorest neighborhoods in Iraq’s capital, with 300-year-old buildings still in use today, and narrow, twisting roads that are ideal lookout points for insurgents to spot approaching vehicles, according to a recent article by Major Sean Ryan, presently serving Iraq with the 2nd Infantry Brigade Combat Team.

http://www.defendamerica.mil/articles/jul2007/a071007ej1.html

Only a few months ago, according to Ryan, the Fadhl area in Baghdad was a breeding ground for snipers and extremist militia activity.

Just this past spring however, in April, soldiers from the US 1st “Red Devil” Battalion, 504th Parachute Infantry Regiment out of Fort Bragg, SC, together with combat teams from the Iraqi Security forces, started clearing operations in the area, designed at disrupting insurgent networks and capturing insurgent leaders responsible for attacks on US and Iraqi troops.

According to Major Ryan, the operation turned into a bloody firefight that lasted five hours, and resulted in 14 wounded troops, and dozens of insurgent enemy dead and wounded.

Now, just a few months afterward, the situation has changed remarkably.

Iraq and the politics of defeat

On another forum, poster “frd” writes, regarding Iraq:
“Today during his press conference President Bush, defending his troop surge in Iraq, insisted that the insurgents attacking US troops in Iraq “are the same ones who attacked us on Sept. 11.”

Frd, like nearly all Dems and members of the political left (and yes, including some mis-quided or politically-panicked Republicans) for selfish electoral purposes are heavily invested in a strategy of failure, defeat, and retreat as the only option in Iraq, and are thus reduced to cheerleading and providing comfort to those declared enemies of their own country, and of the liberties that they themselves enjoy in being able to do so.

Frd also hears only what he want to hear. President Bush in his press conference was also very clear in pointing out in his response to the question, that the direct perpetrators of the attacks are dead, a large number of the planning leadership is dead or captured, and bin Laden himself and his lieutenants – none of whom are in any apparent hurry to commit martyrdom and themselves go meet Allah with the 72 black-eyed beauties – while still a threat, are less of a threat than they would have been had they not been pursued.

Iraq – libs sing “We gotta get out of this place … “

In another forum, poster “Bylinepjw” writes on July 10, regarding Iraq:
“John McCain is either in or just returning from Iraq. As has been reported, his presidential campaign is dead in the water, perhaps because he has supported the “surge.” … I sort of expect McCain to return from Iraq having seen the light. I think he might say his visit made it clear to him that the escalation is only yielding more American deaths and that Iraq’s leaders aren’t toting their fair share of the load.”

“We gotta get out. How we get out without harming our already shattered reputation around the globe, or turning the country into more of a black morass than it already is, or leading to even more death and suffering, is beyond me. We’re in a no-win here, so far as I can see. I don’t know how to fix it. I only know who is responsible for putting us here.”  — Bylinepjw, http://forums.wausaudailyherald.com/viewtopic.php?t=5605

=============

Like the old protest ballad:

“We gotta get out …” (of this place … if it’s the last thing we ever do ….)

Certainly a quite human reaction to any situation one feels personally in the middle of, doesn’t understand, and doesn’t know how to deal with.

Like the claustrophobe in a confined space, the human tendency is to scream and pound away ineffectually at the walls, working oneself into an even greater panic and frenzy.

Iraq’s “do-nothing” congress … progress from the people …

On another forum, a poster wrote (regarding the Iraqi parliament):
“Today, many of those parliamentarians simply don’t show up to work. There are rarely enough to reach a quorum to debate any of the key issues facing the country. They squabble over who the speaker should be, and debate how much they should get paid, while 74 members currently boycott the sessions entirely.”

This individual was,  I believe, attempting to make the point that we should immediately “beat feet” and effect a total, unequivocal pullout of troops from Iraq, on the basis that the central political establishment in Iraq still has it’s collective head up it’s fourth-point-of-contact, and is unable to accomplish anything other than to engage in petty internal partisan bickering.

Strangely, his quote from ABC News also quite accurately describes “business as usual” in the United States Congress – a Congress, I believe, who will be themselves joining the Iraqi parliament in taking off the month of August, in spite of a host of pending legislative matters of “imperative national significance” still facing it, and troops in harms way actively waging a shooting war against a clear and declared enemy of the United States.

And not that the early US Congresses were all that unified or productive either, from 1776 onward. It took us quite some time to get our collective “stuff” together, and we didn’t have a neighboring Islamist state deliberately stirring things up.

Just a few redcoats – and the French.