RANGER AGAINST WAR <

Sunday, August 26, 2007

Trying to Please Everyone

Allow the president to invade a neighboring nation,
whenever he shall deem it necessary to repel an invasion,
and you allow him to do so whenever he may choose
to say he deems it necessary for such a purpose
-- and you allow him to make war at pleasure


America will never be destroyed from the outside.

If we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves


A friend is one who has the same enemies as you have


--Abraham Lincoln

______


Last Sunday, a group of seven E-4's through E-6's wrote a clear-headed assessment of the situation on the ground in Iraq, contrasting that with the "surreal" political debate in Washington. Their duty assignments weren't given, but I assume they are company-level soldiers.

I would like to revisit this piece, which, though eloquent, offers a troubling and dissonant conclusion. Before further comment, a summary of the piece.

They described the welter of actors who fill the stage, including the "Janus-faced"
Iraqi police and Iraqi Army, "which have been trained and armed at United States taxpayers’ expense," who often "escort the triggermen and help plant" bombs. "Reports that a majority of Iraqi Army commanders are now reliable partners can be considered only misleading rhetoric."

These soldiers "operate in a bewildering context of determined enemies and questionable allies, one where the balance of forces on the ground remains entirely unclear."


The "vast majority of Iraqis feel increasingly insecure and view us as an occupation force that has failed to produce normalcy after four years and is increasingly unlikely to do so as we continue to arm each warring side."

"The choice we have left is to decide which side we will take. Trying to please every party in the conflict — as we do now — will only ensure we are hated by all in the long run."


"Four years into our occupation, we have failed on every promise, while we have substituted Baath Party tyranny with a tyranny of Islamist, militia and criminal violence."


"In the end, we need to recognize that our presence may have released Iraqis from the grip of a tyrant, but that it has also robbed them of their self-respect. They will soon realize that the best way to regain dignity is to call us what we are — an army of occupation — and force our withdrawal."

They then suggest we retreat to the margins. "This suggestion is not meant to be defeatist, but rather to highlight our pursuit of incompatible policies to absurd ends without recognizing the incongruities."

So far so good, but their last sentence falters: "As committed soldiers, we will see this mission through." It is too reminiscent of the last messages received from elements of the German Sixth Army isolated in Stalingrad.

The message of the entire piece is "let's get the hell out" before we do turn into that cordoned Army. Yet they end on a chipper "Get 'er done" statement -- right out of the GWB play book.


It misses as protest, when they say morale is high, and they will keep on keepin' on. Why even bother writing, if you will not protest your continued participation in a futile and corrupt undertaking?

It earns a "D" for dissonant conclusion, as it does not correlate with the intent of the article.

Labels: ,