I'll be foreward and honest with you;
1. Horrbile analogy. There's a difference between listening and hearing. Most of the public has been hearing what they want to hear and not listening to the full story since the beginning of this war, typically hearing what suits their own preconceived notions.
2. The Surge isnt' the strategy. Clear, Hold, Build is. What 1/1 AD was doing in Anbar that set the stage for the Anbar Awakening is a macro level of Tal Afar. People are missing the big picture here. The strategy has changed sginificantly in the last year. The surge has only accelerated progress with a new strategy.
3. A narrow-minded and shortsighted approach to the Middle East. You're judging them with Western standards in mind. This clearly does not translate. The most basic cultural awareness class reminds us of this each time we deploy.
If that's the only metric you're looking at, then you aren't seeking the bigger picture. What improvements are being made in sewage disposal, water treatment, electricity per day, academic institutions, trash removal, medical services, and local security? If you're looking for body counts only, that's about the poorest metric I can think of.
Not in 4 years its not. TX Hammes makes an excellent point in a History Channel Documentary dated 2004, stating words to the effect that the Malaysian Counterinsurgency Campaign took around 15 years. Others have taken upwards of 40. So the gold standard in the last century is 15 years, with an average of about 25. The American people don't have the patience to prosecute a war they don't understand nor do they care about understanding. For the vast majority of them, it doesn't affect them.
BS. All many people care about is what Brittney Spears is doing this week or how OJ Simpson is going to get out the next jam. They could care less about what the strategic military objective in Iraq is, or, much less, how it's affecting the family of some poor Iraqi they'll never have to deal with anyway.
Last I checked, I pay taxes too, and I've spent 24 months in Iraq. Does that mean I have a greater vested interest? I'd suspect you'd say no.
Leaving Iraq is morally and ethically irresponsible (How dare I bring morals and ethics into a discussion like this). Regardless of the reasons we invaded, however valid or invalid any of them are, we created the situation over there. I'm sick and tired of the same old line; "We haven't found WMDs," "This is about Oil," "We went there to fight Al Qaeda." At this point, 4 years into this, we need to get over ourselves and face reality. We're there. We're going to be there for a while. Deal with it. How do we, as an American people, make things better?
I feel, as an American, like I'm on the New York Giants, with the entire country as the team. It's always someone else's fault and no one wants to accept responsibility for what's going on. The team sucks right now. No one is on the same page. Most people are so damned preoccupied with blaming someone else that they don't see the real issue right in front of their faces. We're in Iraq. We're tasked with building a government and providing security. We are. Not the Army, not the Marine Corps. We. What has John Q. Public done besides slap a yellow ribbon on his bumper or perhaps sent a package around Christmas? Not a damned thing.
You may say I'm a nepotist and you're probably right. After 6 years since 9/11 I've seen a country go from total support to "we support the troop and not the war" which is crap. I seldom listen to those who don't have a hand in this anymore, for reasons good, bad, or indifferent. If GEN George S. Patton was still alive, Old Blood and Guts would be pissed. I'd gather Chesty Puller is spinning in his grave. One day, I imagine, I will be too. Either way, I must be the last idiot that believes in this. And I'll continue to do so.
Bookmarks