Iraq, from a Marine's perspective

[dmpaquet]

Oh, thanks a lot Hoya! Interesting read and VERY well written.

[Crazy_Ivan]

Originally Posted by dmpaquet

Iran won that war? Really? I think that's quite a stretch of reasoning. Both sides eventually accepted the terms of UN Resolution 598. A lot of scholars see it at least partially due to US involvement - following Operation Praying Mantis and the shoot down of Iran Air 655.

In all reality, neither side won.

I was not referring to the actual war, I was referring to the current state of Iraq and the fact that Iran's biggest local enemy is now gone and there is now a predominantly Shia run government.

All of which(If the U.S. and Britain pulls out) will leave Iran in a very happy place.

[darthrob13]

Joe,
The author is to be commended and thank you for posting this.

When does he get rotated home?

Tell him "Thank you" for writing it and for doing what most of us wouldn't do....go to a sand covered oven and protect people who don't want you there, for reasons that are beyond any of us.

D

[go]

1. Without Education. what is so good about democracy? Obviously education is key.
2. While this is an interesting perspective, it is not very nuanced. You could tell it was written by an American marine.
3. The title about Iraqi national character was not what I expected when I read the text. I thought it would be whether these people really consider themselves Iraqi or not. What kind of national characteristic do Kurds in the north, Sunnis in the middle, and Shia's in the south have in common? Instead it was a diatribe how lazy and selfish some villagers are and how everyone is it in for themselves.
4. The paragraph about police was inconsistent. By talking to a Marine about their grievances they are exerting themselves. They laughed at the Marine because they know that new unions were banned by the Bathists and are most new ones are still illegal under the American puppets. Remember, Republicans don't like unions. Did the Marine ever look into his own biases? Union leaders are also targeted by the insurgents because of their message.

[dmpaquet]

Originally Posted by Crazy_Ivan

I was not referring to the actual war, I was referring to the current state of Iraq and the fact that Iran's biggest local enemy is now gone and there is now a predominantly Shia run government.

All of which(If the U.S. and Britain pulls out) will leave Iran in a very happy place.

Ah... now I understand what you meant - I know you know your stuff. That's why I was surprised (but not anymore!).

Iran wouldn't let a vacuum form like before in Afghanistan (the Iranians weren't exactly too fond of the Taliban, remember). So, in many ways it would be in their interest to involve themselves more openly in the event the US and UK up and left.

[Leonidas]

An interesting first hand account, though I do agree with some of go's observations, especially 3 and 4.

For those who lament the fact that they haven't seen or heard of much of this before I say, the information is not new. It's been out there since soldiers and marines started writing about their experiences in Iraq. It's also been in the press, especially in the New York Review.

What's going on now in the presidential campaign is that both candidates and most policy makers know and have known this basic information for years. Some politicians have even said some of these things (Joe Biden for instance).

The purpose of the constant drumbeat that to withdraw will be a betrayal of "the troops" and the more recent mantra that "the surge has succeeded" and that to withdraw now will "snatch defeat from the jaws of victory" has been nothing else than to set up a narrative in which opponents of the war can be painted as disloyal and responsible for a defeat instead of acknowledging the more complex truth that this marine and thousands of others have testified to.

There are only a couple of possible results for Iraq: 1). US withdraws most troops and the Shi'ite dominated government that is a client of Iran keeps power and turns it power on a dissatisfied Sunni minority that has (ironically) aligned itself with the US (the so-called 'Sunni awakening'). 2). The US tries to ignore the Shi'ite government's call for US withdrawal and sets up permanent bases in the Sunni dominated regions of Iraq that are used to 'defend' Saddam's former Sunni and Baathist supporters and as bases from which to (potentially) strike neighboring nations to Iraq.

The war is unwinnable. It's either withdraw and leave Iran and Iraq in alliance--the sole (and unintended) accomplishment of the invasion and occupation at the costs of thousands of lives and hundreds of billions of $--or stay in a quagmire that is ready to suck us into more pointless death and expenditures for decades.

The only reasonable (and legal) course is withdrawal, but that withdrawal will only lead to another round of simplification and political falsification of history (as with Vietnam) and keeping Americans stupid about what happened and why through that Orwellian narrative will be used to distort our politics and policy for decades to come.

[FishMonger]

Very very good read. You should thank your boy who wrote it. Well written, informative, nonbiased... all very good. Thank you for posting it.

[SnoochieBoochie]

Somewhere back there someone posted about our government's lies about the war. I think that missed what I took away as the point of the email. What I took away was that the US after the "war" was "won" was left in a position of handling a mission that was entirely different than what the US Armed Forces had been trained for. The military was left to handle the police, contractors, etc. with no true plan on the mission. Now that might be a criticism of the Bush administration, and a very valid one.

I am still lost on people saying that the war was all about lies. That's like my kid getting pissed off when I told her she could have ice cream later, then when later came, didn't give it to her. I will try to do this without a triple negative. If you really thought that that the war was about WMD's and were upset that the government lied to you, that was your fault. Sentaor Obama is not going to do 1/10 of what he has been saying that he will do. Bush didn't. Clinton didn't. Bush Sr. didn't. Reagan didn't. Carter didn't. Nixon didn't. Kennedy didn't.

Saying that the war in Iraq was about WMD's is like saying the US Civil War was about slaves. The emancipation of the slaves was one of the most crucial acts of the American government, but it wasn't done for the reasons people beleive today. The Civil War was fought more over political and economic idealogy than human rights.

The Iraq war was fought because the US had to kick someone's ass in the Middle East. Now that the ass was kicked, it became blatantly evident that our brialliant government failed to plan for the what if. What if we actually kick their ass? What would have happened in Vietnam if we would have been sucessful? Look the Vietnamese today. They are trying to do well for themselves and they are re-entering the global community. Time will tell if Iraq can do the same. It doesn'y sound like that will be the case.

Great initial post and great analysis on the little problem that is really the elephant in the corner of the room. You can lead a horse to water and you can make it drink. You're probably going to get head butted and kicked, but you can do it.

[chu gar]

I hope to read this soon when I have time so I can see if it coincides with my friend, who was a marine in Iraq too...hopefully on Tuesday