As usual, VDH hits another out of the park. He states what a vast majority of Soldiers and officers have been stating for years. It also appears he is getting the same reaction from the left that us Soldiers and officers do.

I appreciate his pointing out the education level of the US Military. I am saddened every time I have to remind leftists that ALL officers O-3 or higher MUST have a BA/BS. I meet many leftists who fully believe we are high school dropouts (though these same people worship Hollywood celebrities who really ARE dropouts). Actually most officers have their degrees when commissioned at O-1, but some who go OCS get a few additional years to earn a degree. I am working on my Masters now, but with the war, I cannot take two years “off” to get it. Thus I am trying for the Naval Post Graduate School program. Though, as VDH points out, none of that matters much to Soldiers and officers. Degrees matter the most on OERs and when seeking a “subject matter expert” on some things. Wisdom does not come solely from degrees or books, but from experience. Usually, after a while of brainstorming, we turn to the NCOs and ask, “Ok, we’re spent, what’s the correct answer?” In this aspect, the US Military represents one of the few military forces where the enlisted are valued as more than cannon fodder.

VDH’s critique of our universities is also accurate. So much artificial status is derived from who has what degree and who wrote which paper. New, contrary thought is forcefully silenced. This leads to an “Old Guard” mentality and the inability to use debate in the shaping of positions by the ivory “elites”. Thus, most universities are ‘stuck’ in the 60s.

The military is not safe from this path, however, unlike intelligencia, hard reality often trumps “Party Truth”. A casual look at the interwar period (1920s-30s) shows the inability of militaries to transform in peacetime. The crushing of the unimaginative forces by German panzers and Imperial Japanese bombers put an end to much “Party Truth” and allowed the military to innovate quickly. Now we are able to use history, like the above, as a bulwark against the “old guard” trap. “Innovate or die” takes on new meaning when “die” really means its dictionary definition.

Back to the article, there is nothing I can add to it. VDH did a great job, as usual. As usual, the left will only attack and/or ignore his work.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Excellent post. VDH is always worth reading. The unvarnished truth from Iraq is a heartbreaking mixture of failure and success, and as such it doesn’t fit into the simplistic story templates of the MSM. God bless the men and women serving far from home.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

A very thorough analysis of the situation. This is what makes Victor Davis Hansen the preeminent military historian he is.

While some question the strategy prior to the current “surge” strategy, to an extent, the prior strategy set the stage for the surge operations. Though Anbar was “written off,” the Sunni population was already weary of AQI. They just didn’t know how to get out from under. Hansen makes this point. Further, one needs to remember the Iraqi population as a whole is new to freedom and self-determination that goes beyond the Saddam era, but also their entire history as “Iraq” and before then. So, the learning curve is steep.

Do the Iraqis need to step up? Yes, they do. Do they need help? Yes, they do. Who’s the best equipped to help? We are. Certainly not the UN, or some half-hearted coalition others have suggested. Are the Iraqis making the cut? Some are, some aren’t. But, it will take time.

The other supposed solutions, such as suggested by the Iraq Study Group or Biden’s “decentralized government” (read as partition), only plunges Iraq deeper into disarray. A rapid or too early drawdown of US military power will only invite the major bloodletting we fear, and invite military disaster for ourselves. A redefining of the military mission (only concentrating on counterterrorism ops and force protection) does the same.

From the very beginning, I’ve been very optimistic of our effort in Iraq. And, even more so with the strides we’ve made the last few months. If we can’t prevail in Iraq, the whole effort in the terror war will be undermined and be for naught. The war will come home. I think we can agree that is something we do not want or imagine.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

“The U.S. is spending billions of dollars to hunt groups made up of 5, 10, 20 guys at a time when the 300,000 already trained Iraqis could be dealing with them. It’s probably been a year since the U.S. went up against 100-500 of them at a time.”

One of the most ignorant things I’ve read in a long time. 5-guys in a hummv vs “5,10, 20 guys at a time” What’s that? They send out several vehicles at once? Yep, and terrorists don’t always stick in a 5 man group to a city. No. Please re-read the news reports from when the surge operations started a few months ago, and you’ll see that US forces gutted AQ wholesale where there was a lot more than 5, 10, 20 guys. If you’re not keeping up with the news-the dramatically good news from the past few months, then you’re opinion and comments are grossly ill-informed.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071013/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_toll_plunges;_ylt=AuH.DJ7VkXWfWbcmANzY264LewgF

Like or Dislike: 0  0

http://www.militarytimes.com/multimedia/video/iedhunter/

Yes wow 2 of my favorite people Mark and David.
Keep up the great work.
Lost in a time warp.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Bush admin already knows all of this
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/12/AR2007101202485.html

Like or Dislike: 0  0

“It is not possible to negotiate peace with an enemy that only wants war and sees that you only want peace”

cs

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Iraq has a 25% unemployment rate so it’s only natural that’s the best place to expand the forces. I really don’t think the U.S. needs to be the one to expand in Iraq. What the Iraqis lack in equipment and training, they gain in intellegence gathering, smaller supply lines and are politically more feasable for the U.S. and the Iraqis.

As far as no end in sight to the violence, the U.S. does have a long history of violence between groups that have lasted decades. The fight against the Indians/Native Americans lasted 100 years or so, the fight between the Irish and Italian mobs lasted about hundred years, the racism in the South against blacks is still going on with church bombings and who knows how long the Bloods and Crips will fight each other. At some point the violence will have to be labelled tolerable since it’s not going to go away completely.

My armchair quarterbacking is that the U.S. should move it’s European bases on both sides of the Turkish/Iraqi boarder to help Turkey vs the PKK which has claimed 30,000 lives since 1984. Then the U.S. could place boarder forts on the Iraqi side of the Iranian and Iraqi boarder and the Syrian/raqi boarder. The U.S. could use those forts as training bases for the Iraqi military and police. This would minimize the exposure of the U.S. supply lines (since most of the roads are way out of civilian population making it easier to tell the good guys from the bad guys) and since there would be only two roads it would be easier to defend, help cut off the insurgent supply lines. This would also help cut down on the need for heavy equipment since the patroling would be done by the Iraqis and not the U.S. I do believe the insurgence is now not capable of overthrowing the Iraqi government or even temporarly taking over even a police station at this point. Just look at the latest tally, a group of 20 or so insurgence were attacked which made the news. What really stands out was this group was smaller than a high school football team. The U.S. is spending billions of dollars to hunt groups made up of 5, 10, 20 guys at a time when the 300,000 already trained Iraqis could be dealing with them. It’s probably been a year since the U.S. went up against 100-500 of them at a time. Meanwhile it’s said that there are about are approximately 407 gangs and over 56,000 members in Los Angeles (www.vpcla.org/factGang.htm). You don’t see the police calling in airstrikes or running around in strykers. The insurgence in Iraq probably are 1/3 that number or less by now.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I liked the comparisons between the military culture and the university/academic culture.

Our military doesn’t go around wearing their degrees on their sleeves, are free to express themselves without being intimidated by rank or position and it’s an honest diversity of backgrounds and races, not some artifical scheme for the sake of diversity.

Excellent article. And an honest appraisal with the good, the bad and the ugly.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Amazing report. Outstanding research-being there, talking to the Phd officers, the BA and BS soldiers and Marines, and so forth.

I can confirm two things that I’ve heard directly from friends over there:
1) Hummv’s (in particular) and other vehicles are really REALLY worn out. One guy told me that he hadn’t seen a hummer with a door that worked in two entire tours. Yes, refitting’s gonna cost. My bet’s that the money’s already in the pipeline, but hasn’t been spent (as is the case with most of the supplementals)
2) Without getting into details, there’s a new generation of IEDs that’s causing trouble, but (again, from a very good friend of mine who is over there and emailed me) the ingenuity of US forces from the airman, sailors, soldiers, Marines etc who are over there is incredible. American ingenuity has a long history in war dating back to putting wax over their powder before crossing the Delaware, but read some of the tell all books from returning pvts, sgts, captains, etc, and you’ll see it.

These people are America’s finest. I have no doubt whatsoever of that. It’s why I support them, and I support what they do, and because I want to see the US succeed, I want to see Iraqis succeed, and I want to see Al Queda defeated, I support the efforts of those troops; ie I support the war.

At this point on the political calender, there is no other choice.

OT…this week I saw an article from a fervent opponent of the Bush Administration (and thus the war as a catalyst for that opposition). The article from this hard working leftist acknowledged that:

-the Democrats’ Congress is not going to force a political end to the war

-Democrats running for President (Clinton, Obama, Edwards) are not going to end the war

-Republicans aren’t going to order a cut and run

-Troops are scheduled to come home in the Spring, and probably many more in the summer

His response to all this was that it wasn’t good enough. He (like Michael Moore btw) want every American to pack their gear and get to the nearest plane/ship/border as fast as they can. Since it ain’t gonna happen, this far left guy ranted on and on about how we ought to impeach Cheney, then Bush, then if Hillary, or Obama, or Edwards, or a Republican were elected by the American people, we should all join this guy’s group and impeach any and all of those people until (irregardless of the will of the American people) a President or Speaker or Sec of State or whoever can take control at 1600 Penn Ave, and order a rout.

Brilliant plan. Don’t get your way, throw a fit and demand impeachment rather than face the reality that opposing the war via non-violent political means is useless at this point. Doing so in violent means is straight up joining forces or allying one’s self with Al Queda and Saddam’s regime remnants. That is the state of the opposition to the Iraq War. Clueless, frustrated, in denial, and living-actively LIVING in a dream world.

Like or Dislike: 0  0