Is the past a lesson for the future?

[SeaMonkey]

Okay, do we use history to help solve the problems of the future/present? As I remember reading about the fall of Berlin in WW2, it took a quarter of million Russian casualties to root out the diehard Nazi vermin. Well.....what if we cordon off Fallujah, give the good folks 72 hours to vacate the premises, checking them all as they come out. Then........what? House to house, or just raze the place of living organisms with MOABs? Are we too civil? Is this a war or not? How long are we going to pussy-foot around these animals?

[Les_the_Sarge_9_1]

The future proves this to me.

We don't want the country run by the army. But we don't necessarily want civilians who can't recall the past, being able to just send people to war, when those people in control know nothing of our past examples of sheer stupidity

I have no interest in politics, and I have a very solid grasp of a great deal of our race's (humantity eh, not some ethnic variation on that term) past conflicts.

What I can't understand, is how so many elected leaders, can so consistently prove they have no idea what they are doing yet again and again and again.

Maybe a requirement of political office, should be past service in the military (real service too eh).
Maybe a requirement of political office should be a real degree in human history (not some damnable honourary degree either).

Maybe there would be fewer wars to become expert on, if our politicians, that supposedly speak for the people, were less anxious to send those same people, into yet another conflict they should have seen coming and known to avoid.

Most of the wars I have studied, appear to have started as a result of blind faith, or complete ignorance.

There will always be humans that wish to create harm. And they will continue to create harm. Until we develope as a species, and learn to force those in elected power, to be masters of dealing with the occasional crazy warmonger among us.

And it can't just be one nation that does all the work. We as a planet need to finally accept, that humanity has to cut the bull, and finally grow up as a species.

Or sooner or later, we will be writing more sad sorry history about yet another sad sorry event, that looks remarkably like so many other events from the past, enigmatically repeated, because no one that was in charge remembered.

[SeaMonkey]

Understand the philosophy Les, but I was hoping for a more tactical perspective. We're there and we're obviously not leaving anytime soon. Tactical=practical, some ideas to save our countrymen's lifes, now!

[Les_the_Sarge_9_1]

Hmm, well on the tactical level.

And understand this is me entering a topic I might find only gets ugly, and thus I will merely abandon it (the topic).

I see the US in Iraq, fighting a war with maybe the wrong assets.

The cost to maintain a tank in Iraq, has got to be fairly hefty. I wonder how many MPs could be fielded for the same price?

Terrorists, and that is what I think is the current enemy in Iraq, to accomplishing some peace and order right now, would likely be best fought by well organised MPs units.

And keep in mind, I don't care if the US should or should not have gone. To late to cry over it, then went, they kicked out Saddam, its done.

Now they need to restore the country to some manner of stability.

I am not sure a bunch of tanks is the right way.

Yeah I know, would rather be in a tank when being shot at by goons with guns.

But I would also like to have the local support of a full contingent of MPs just as well.

I am assuming a lot of MPs would make it hard to get away with the things that are being done currently.

So on a tactical level, I think it is time to stop employing combat troops ie tanks armour personell vehicles and such. Time to insert men trained to keep the peace and ensure the peace. Time to make the Iraqis trying to do the same, feel better supported by men that are essentially the same sort of person, police.

[SeaMonkey]

It seems more boots on the ground with good intelligence support would be constructive. Thing is I would like to make sure there are more prosecutors of the law than the lawless, that maybe difficult but manageable on the tactical scale. Fallujah could provide a testing ground as there are many identifiable perpetrators from the visuals I've seen. There maybe no easy way, surgically thinking, to separate the innocent from the criminals if the population should erupt into frenzied behavior, much the same as some of our urban riots. Me thinks a few more prisons need to be built.

[blam0]

ORIGINAL: Les_the_Sarge_9_1

So on a tactical level, I think it is time to stop employing combat troops ie tanks armour personell vehicles and such. Time to insert men trained to keep the peace and ensure the peace. Time to make the Iraqis trying to do the same, feel better supported by men that are essentially the same sort of person, police.

I think the problem with the MP solution is there are simply not enough MPs. Without getting into who cut what budget, our Armed Forces simply don't have the proper levels of manpower to deal with policing a whole country.

That notwithstanding, I'd say that Saddam had plenty of prison space [;)] so there should be no need for us to build more. The (other) biggest issue that we face right now in Iraq is one of PR. If we start "cracking down" exuberantly, we will risk being seen as even more as oppressive infidels. The (misguided) goal in Iraq is supposed to be to build a democracy. If we are seen as "opressive" in the process, then we will not only have a difficult time building a consensus government, but we will also fan the fires of hate that the extremist groups feed on.

I think the best solution is for the Iraqi police force (such as it is) and the Iraq Criminal Justice system to handle the problem. I'm not confident in their abilities (and I am just speculating), but I think it's the best of a bad situation.

[Les_the_Sarge_9_1]

Hmm well lets see, bring the tanks home, then offer decent pay increases for MPs with the money not wasted using tanks, and I think you would have a good dose of interest in MP work.

Its not like they can't end up with a lot more MPs, someone in charge merely has to be bright enough to think of it.

Oh wait, that won't work now will it I would have to actually find someone in charge that was bright now wouldn't I?

[blam0]

What I meant was the the number of MPs required to police Iraq do not exist in our current force structure. Additionally, many MPs are Reservists (not the other way around). The fundamental problem therefore is that the US armed forces are not structured for this type of action.

Raising the number of MPs in the ranks takes time. Training does not happen overnight. Besides, an Abrams is going to cost "x" number of dollars regardless of where it is (Iraq or the US). I'm sure that there is additional cost for maintaining it in the field, but I really doubt that the incremental can justify a full division of MPs (my WAG at what it would take to police most of the country).

Don't forget that the administration has set a June 30 pull out date for our troops (who knows if that will actually happen). I really doubt that we can put a significant number of additional MPs on the ground before that date, even if we adopt your plan immediately.

Honestly, I don't see how the US can get out of this (Iraq) cleanly. Viet Nam springs to mind, not because of the "will to win" issue which is commonly cited as the reason we lost, but because we did not understand (or chose to ignore) the culture of the region we were getting into.

There's got to be a reason that there are no democratic Middle Eastern governments...

[SeaMonkey]

Well it seems we have all come to the same conclusion and hence no positive action and so people(Americans) will continue to be killed. I was hoping for a more expeditious tactical plan to stop or reduce this killing in the reality of the Iraqi environment. The time to worry about our "worldly" image has passed IMO. Looking at past military occupations and patterns consistent with the Middle Eastern violence, leniency or complacency may also further the exuberance for continued violence. Is fanaticism responsive to humanitarian therapy?

[Les_the_Sarge_9_1]

Western thought and beliefs combine with the Middle East no better than oil and water.

In the end, the only solution is to accept no amount of mixing is going to change that.

Maybe we would have less "immigrants" causing undue hassle INSIDE Canada and the US, if part of the requirement of coming to Canada and the US, was a decisive agreement, that participation in any activity supporting actions in their point of origin, was grounds for immediate dpeprtation back to the point of origin.

A lot of the reason we have governments forced to care about the Middle East etc etc etc is we have lots of people happy to come here, but not happy enough to accept when they came here, it was to "get away" from where they came from.

I sympathise with a lot of the world's "problems", but frankly, a lot of the reason any one has to care, is the loud "minorities" with the noise level of a "majority" insisting we have to "do something" about every other nation on the planet.

Wouldn't it be nice if Canada and the US were only responsible for Canada and the US.

We don't get squat for any of our troubles from anyone else eh. Why should we have to always fix everyone else's country.

If Baghdad had become a "real" problem. I would be happy to let George flatten every square inch of it in a single b52 raid using non nuclear methods.
It would not have mattered where Saddam was currently hiding.

The only REAL solution to external problems, if they are indeed a real problem as defined by those in charge, is to "remove" the problem.

I would like to see a suicide bomber make it across the Atlantic, if they had to come to us to kill us eh.

[blam0]

ORIGINAL: SeaMonkey

... I was hoping for a more expeditious tactical plan to stop or reduce this killing in the reality of the Iraqi environment. The time to worry about our "worldly" image has passed IMO. Looking at past military occupations and patterns consistent with the Middle Eastern violence, leniency or complacency may also further the exuberance for continued violence.

We would all like a better solution, but I think that's the nature of the problem, really. There is no "easy" solution, or tactical solution to make this type of problem go away.

The image that I worry about is our image within the Middle East. What I mean by that is, we need to be careful to not do anything to further alienate the people there. After all, they are the prime recruiting grounds for AQ, and other Islamic hate groups. If you can avoid doing something to give the hate groups recruiting material, then I think it should be avoided.

To your last point suggesting that leniency will exacerbate the cycle of violence where force will not, I would suggest you re-examine your history. While leniency will certainly exacerbate it, meeting force with force has simply not proven to work except when dealing with state sponsored terrorism (note, Libya, Iran, and Iraq post 1993 -- and yes that means that this war had nothing to do with the WOT).

..but of course the WOT is another subject and I don't want to hijack your thread...

[SeaMonkey]

I'm thinking summer is coming soon in Iraq, from what I hear it gets pretty hot and dry there. I wonder how the citizens of Fallujah are aclimatized to creature comforts? Probably wouldn't bother them a bit without power for a few hours? Delayed food shipments do happen and sometimes water gets scarce(pumps break). Might dissipate some of that excess belligerent energy they have.

[blam0]

ORIGINAL: SeaMonkey

I'm thinking summer is coming soon in Iraq, from what I hear it gets pretty hot and dry there. I wonder how the citizens of Fallujah are aclimatized to creature comforts? Probably wouldn't bother them a bit without power for a few hours? Delayed food shipments do happen and sometimes water gets scarce(pumps break). Might dissipate some of that excess belligerent energy they have.

Acutally, I think your point is interesting, but I would take it the other way. Call it what you will, but if the citizens of Iraq are so inundated in creature comforts like A/C, well there would not be much motivation to go out into the sweltering heat and fight.

I'd love to be able to think of a scenario where this worked in the past, but I can't. It's a given that this is the "long term" goal, but seriously...who really believes that Iraq will be a productive democracy 3 years from now?

[SeaMonkey]

Well blamO I'm thinking how long did it take for Germans and Japanese to become contributers and they weren't sitting on a billion barrels of crude oil not to mention the extent of destruction to their infrastructure. Unfortunately conditioning the Iraqis to the comforts of capitalism will take to long = human life lost, remember I'm looking for a quick tactical fix.

[blam0]

Good point.

I guess I just feel that there is no quick tactical fix aside from Americans travelling in large, heavily armed convoys.

[SeaMonkey]

That didn't work either. Don't you remember "Rat Patrol".[:D]

[Marines]

First of all, this talk about putting more MPs on the streets and pulling some of the armored vehicles out is a bunch of bull****. I served in Iraq with the 1st Battalion 10th Marines thats an artillery unit. Unlike the Army everyone in the Marine Corps is a rifleman first from the cooks to the air wingers. After we finished blowing the crap out of them from 15 miles to 400 feet from us we stopped and waited for 2 days. The Marines have whats called a PRC which is a Provisional Rifle Company made up of artillery, admin, supply etc. and use these units as a peacekeeping force in cities, towns and so on which I did as well. They are now sending units from the 1st and 2nd Marine Divisions to Iraq which are not even in a combat arms MOS. Maybe the Army who is 3 times larger than the Marines should adopt the same idea of a PRC and train thier cooks, motor t... what ever to help out and alleviate some of the burdon and streched ranks of the Army.

"Well I actually voted for it before I didn't vote for it."

John Kerry on his no vote for increased funding for troops in Iraq to include body armor.

[ravinhood]

And it can't just be one nation that does all the work. We as a planet need to finally accept, that humanity has to cut the bull, and finally grow up as a species

The problem with this though is that other species of ourselves haven't even gone through half the increase in knowledge and technology than the ones that would proclaim everyone needs to be the same.

Instead of making wars, we should be "teaching" our pasts, those that are more advanced than other races, not trying to use them to bend to our own wills and principles. You think those people in Iraq, Afganistan and other 3rd world countries even understand what democracy really is?

You can't change a species overnight, going to take 100's more years, before there's a united species, with one goal, one god and one government. Even if a country stormed across the whole globe, today, one fell swoop, it would still take hundreds of years to bring all the countries into conformity. There will always be insurgents, those that always disagree with single rule, single control.

To me that's what makes the world great, separated as it is, because with a separated world I have choices about where I want to go, where I might want to live. With a controlled world, there's no longer a place to escape to, a place for change, because it's controlled by the "one".

I look at it like this, at one time the societies and civilizations were like a giant vortex with mankind at the top and outer regions of it, as time and civilization swirled around and inside this vortex they have slowly been pulled to the bottom of it, the smallest narrow portion of it. I sort of like the vastness of the gaping portion of the vortex, than the narrowness of the bottom of it where everything is compact and controlled.

[SeaMonkey]

Come on ravenhood isn't your imagination stimulated enough to think outside the "vortex". Just because humans are subjected to conditional responses manipulated by their environment doesn't mean they have to succumb to narrowed thought processes. If that were true we would never have arisen from the constraints of the caves, our instincts. Abstract thought gives you the ability to change, to deny the conditioned reaction. Yes people have a hard time dealing with freedom, even these so called sophisticated western humans can't deal with taking responsibility for their own actions to a certain extent, its always someone elses fault. Conspiracy abounds, excuses everywhere, shortsighteness condemns those to a constricted future. Face it, it is not instinctive for people to be subjected, else they would be animals unable to contemplate their future, their death, their afterlife, their universe. We were created to choose.

[hero_33]

[:@]Jesus Christ les_the_sarge!!!

Iv'e read your posts for too long now...for some one who doesn't like politics you sure like politics!!![>:] In case you havent noticed, our country (or any other country that was or would be attacked in the manner that we were) Requires a balls out response! I for one am sick of hearing your anti Bush crap! He is the first politician to have the nuts to make a change in the middle east and establish democracy...not some falling appart colonialism that is now the middle east. a few scud missiles in response to a car bomb in the parking garage of the world trade center doesn't (and didn't) cut it...Result? 911!!! Now we have an administration that is willing to do something about it. The casualties of this war are sad but are going to happen as the middle east is dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century! It is us agaisn't them (them being the evil doers) and will be untill things are put right. What does pacifist you and the rest of the pacifist countries really expect? Almost 3,000 people died in that attack! Time to straighten things out in the middle east in the language they know best. Learn from history Les_the _Sarge, and give us all a break!

Steve.