The strategy for Iraq is still: "We'll stand down, when they stand up!"
For starters, we dismantled their army, their police, and their
government. Government here refers to more than Saddam and his cronies.
It means the entire administrative apparatus that runs a country. It
never occurred to anyone in this administration that countries need to
be run. But that's another matter.
Then, when the looting began, the American occupation force stood by
and let it happen. Indeed, many members of Bremer's Coalition
Provisional Authority thought it was a good thing. Sweep out the old,
then when the fresh rain of democracy came, a whole new country would
spring up, like mushrooms. That didn't happen.
Eventually, the administration thought we better create a new army and
a police force. Arm them, train them, give them uniforms. Then they'll
stand up, and we can stand down.
They put an American general in charge, David Petraeus.
Petraeus trained the new Iraqi army. And - for whatever reasons - he
failed. He utterly failed. They don't show up. They don't fight. They
work part time for the army and part time for the militias they're
supposedly fighting. Not to take anything away from General Petraeus.
Everyone says he's brilliant and dedicated and competitive. It's just
that, he failed. Completely.
When it became evident so evident that the Iraqis were not standing up
that even the administration and the media noticed, the Bush
administration came up with a plan. The surge. More soldiers, to stay
there longer, so that the Iraqis would have time to stand up.
Who did they call forth to take command?
General Petraeus. The man whose failure created the condition,
according to which we have to stay there.
It's even more bizarre than that. The Senate voted to confirm him
81-0. Not a single one of our learned statesman saw sufficient
contradiction in the facts to vote against him.
It's even more bizarre than that.
After Petraeus failed in training up the Iraqi military, he got sent
back to America. There he wrote the army's new counter-insurgency
manual.
The manual calls for a force ratio of 25 for every 1,000 in the population.
The population of Baghdad is just short of 6,000,000. The population
of Iraq is 26,780,000. Therefore, according to Petraeus, according to what is now official
army doctrine, it would take 150,000 troops to control Baghdad alone.
It would take 669,500 to control Iraq.
There are currently about 145,000 troops in Iraq. And it's a disaster.
Which, according to Army doctrine, is perfectly logical. It is exactly
what is to be expected.
In theory, the force in that force ratio is supposed to include Iraqi
army and police. But in fact, neither Iraqi army or police can be
relied on to be fighting the same war that America is (to the degree
that we know who we're fighting and what we're fighting for).
Indeed, there are enough of them, on paper, to have brought Baghdad,
at least, under control. So either we have to accept that in fact,
they can not, at this time, be put into the equation. Or say that the
theory is wrong and the number has to be far higher.
Let's accept the theory and accept, at the same time, that Iraqi
forces should not be counted.
The bizarreness continues.
The Bush administration, as we all know, came up with a plan. The plan
is the 'surge.'
The 'surge' will take the troop numbers up to 160,000 or 170,000 or
maybe even 180,000. Both experience, and the army's own official
doctrine say that is vastly insufficient. It is a guarantee of
disaster. The same disaster that's there now. Just going on longer.
To summarize, General Petraeus, the man in charge of the initial
failure, has been put in charge of a new plan that requires his
original failure to magically reverse itself and which is also
guaranteed, according to the mathematics of own theory, to fail.
It is clear that real war we must fight, is the war on stupidity.
Our 2024 Coverage Needs You
It's Another Trump-Biden Showdown — And We Need Your Help
The Future Of Democracy Is At Stake
Our 2024 Coverage Needs You
Your Loyalty Means The World To Us
As Americans head to the polls in 2024, the very future of our country is at stake. At HuffPost, we believe that a free press is critical to creating well-informed voters. That's why our journalism is free for everyone, even though other newsrooms retreat behind expensive paywalls.
Our journalists will continue to cover the twists and turns during this historic presidential election. With your help, we'll bring you hard-hitting investigations, well-researched analysis and timely takes you can't find elsewhere. Reporting in this current political climate is a responsibility we do not take lightly, and we thank you for your support.
Contribute as little as $2 to keep our news free for all.
Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.
The 2024 election is heating up, and women's rights, health care, voting rights, and the very future of democracy are all at stake. Donald Trump will face Joe Biden in the most consequential vote of our time. And HuffPost will be there, covering every twist and turn. America's future hangs in the balance. Would you consider contributing to support our journalism and keep it free for all during this critical season?
HuffPost believes news should be accessible to everyone, regardless of their ability to pay for it. We rely on readers like you to help fund our work. Any contribution you can make — even as little as $2 — goes directly toward supporting the impactful journalism that we will continue to produce this year. Thank you for being part of our story.
Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.
It's official: Donald Trump will face Joe Biden this fall in the presidential election. As we face the most consequential presidential election of our time, HuffPost is committed to bringing you up-to-date, accurate news about the 2024 race. While other outlets have retreated behind paywalls, you can trust our news will stay free.
But we can't do it without your help. Reader funding is one of the key ways we support our newsroom. Would you consider making a donation to help fund our news during this critical time? Your contributions are vital to supporting a free press.
Contribute as little as $2 to keep our journalism free and accessible to all.
Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.
As Americans head to the polls in 2024, the very future of our country is at stake. At HuffPost, we believe that a free press is critical to creating well-informed voters. That's why our journalism is free for everyone, even though other newsrooms retreat behind expensive paywalls.
Our journalists will continue to cover the twists and turns during this historic presidential election. With your help, we'll bring you hard-hitting investigations, well-researched analysis and timely takes you can't find elsewhere. Reporting in this current political climate is a responsibility we do not take lightly, and we thank you for your support.
Contribute as little as $2 to keep our news free for all.
Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.
Dear HuffPost Reader
Thank you for your past contribution to HuffPost. We are sincerely grateful for readers like you who help us ensure that we can keep our journalism free for everyone.
The stakes are high this year, and our 2024 coverage could use continued support. Would you consider becoming a regular HuffPost contributor?
Dear HuffPost Reader
Thank you for your past contribution to HuffPost. We are sincerely grateful for readers like you who help us ensure that we can keep our journalism free for everyone.
The stakes are high this year, and our 2024 coverage could use continued support. If circumstances have changed since you last contributed, we hope you'll consider contributing to HuffPost once more.
Support HuffPostAlready contributed? Log in to hide these messages.