What is the "Surge?"

[MSG Proctor]

53433Another element is that the Shia militias have totally coopted the tribal system. Shia sheikhs don't like this and, consummate survivors that they had to become under Saddam, are experts in risk aversion. The historical interchange between tribes, honor besmirched requiring shame/honor response, sheikh involvement in finding a solution maintaining the honor of both parties - done to avoid the otherwise honor demanded necessary mutually assured destruction, has been turned on it's head. The Shia militia has become the biggest tribe, with unaccountable political power[/B], and is not afraid of besmirching the honor of anyone or tribe. It has turned the shame/honor system on it's head. Young, proud men see this dynamic, and are easily led from allegiance to their tribe to allegiance to the militia. Believe me, Shia sheiks would like some payback, but there is nothing empowering them to get it.

Interesting. Because this is the same flawed tack taken by AQ in Anbar that resulted in the Sunni Awakening. That awakening is popularly understood as a movement led by the tribal Sheikhs (and it was/is) but the clerics were the pivotal leaders in procuring tribal buy-in.

CF/GOI need to develop the same coalitions of co-optible religious leaders among the Shia as they did with the Sunnis in Anbar. I realize its a completely different animal with Shiites, but there's probably no other way to solve this problem.

[Bullmoose Bailey]

Interesting. Because this is the same flawed tack taken by AQ in Anbar that resulted in the Sunni Awakening. That awakening is popularly understood as a movement led by the tribal Sheikhs (and it was/is) but the clerics were the pivotal leaders in procuring tribal buy-in.

CF/GOI need to develop the same coalitions of co-optible religious leaders among the Shia as they did with the Sunnis in Anbar. I realize its a completely different animal with Shiites, but there's probably no other way to solve this problem.

Very good discussions here friends. I see several new advantages to the escalation as I call it.

I find the term "surge" a bit inappropriate, I respectfully protest that a surge in western parlance applies more to electrical power than military power.

I feel the main stream media loved the term because it served to dehumanize the Troops. So extension or escalation is a superior term.

Yesterday & other days our C-in-c used the term so it does pass into history. I wonder who will be identified most with it in history; McCain, Petraeus, Bush, Pelosi ???

[Schmedlap]

Yesterday & other days our C-in-c used the term so it does pass into history. I wonder who will be identified most with it in history; McCain, Petraeus, Bush, Pelosi ???

Perhaps I am overly optimistic, but I think the fighting men and women will be most identified with it, as they should be.

[MikeF]

Kim Kagan just released this documentary titled Understanding the Surge (H/T Andrew Exum). COL Gentile describes it as COIN porn. I admit that I was a fan of her earlier Iraq Reports, and I have not read her book. I thought she did a brilliant job of interpreting the available data at the time; however, this documentary seems very weak on analysis. I felt dirty after watching it.

Here's my reaction,

It took us four years to comprehend that the various insurgencies were conducting classic Mao protracted war- "clandestine organization, psychological preparation of the people, expansion of control, and consolidation of power." It's a failure of leadership on many levels that it took this long. Kim doesn't even acknowledge it in her documentary, and I would submit that many leaders still don't get it. She just shows the by-product of a Phase III civil war- lots of people were dying, and it was bad. Duh, but it didn't happen over night. During my one staff tour in 2005, it was increasingly apparent to many leaders on the ground that a civil war had sparked long before the mosque in Samarra was blown. Some acted- Remember McMasters and Tal Afar?

After we finally defined the situation for what it was NOT what we wished it to be, we employed a counter-strategy of population control measures, increased kinetics targeting leaders, facilitators, and bomb-makers, denial of safe-havens, destruction of training camps, and turning reconciliables. Additionally, GEN Patraeus and Ryan Crocker pressured the Iraqi Gov't to govern.

Am I off here? What are others' thoughts?

[davidbfpo]

MikeF asked:

Am I off here? What are others' thoughts?

I thought it was over-hyped although the incredibly short interview clips did have some interest.

davidbfpo

[jkm_101_fso]

It was kind of hokey and broad-brushed over many important details of the Surge beyond the tactical changes that were made.

I do like that history channel guy...maybe that's why it reminded me of a H.C. show, which I enjoy.

To a layman that knows nothing of what happened, it's probably appropriate.

[MikeF]

It was kind of hokey and broad-brushed over many important details of the Surge beyond the tactical changes that were made. I do like that history channel guy...maybe that's why it reminded me of a H.C. show, which I enjoy. To a layman that knows nothing of what happened, it's probably appropriate.

Y'all made some good points. David is right, the interviews are good. Guess I have to learn to step back and take a deep breathe on these type of things.