The piece says we must be in Iraq for another five years. The piece says we have serious supply problems because so much of the American military is stuck deep in Iraq for too long. A five year Persian Gulf supply line that remains exposed because even the Brits will leave. (Brits are leaving because Iraq is now as good as we can make it). Well this nation does not have money for more C-17s because we have spent so much shipping so much to Iraq. The piece says we need to double the number of C-17s so we can continue massive military exploits all over the world (ie Iraq). (C-17 assembly line is planning to close soon).
The piece confuses strategic concepts with tactical. Lt Gen Odiero's surge is a temporary and tactical objective - similar to stabilizing Saigon - as the numerous insurgencies let the surge flail in Baghdad while they rebuild and train. Insurgencies don't confront organized militaries. Surges won every tactical victory in Vietnam. Lessons well taught on Hamburger Hill. Therefore, just like in Nam, as tactical victories pile up, the strategic objective is lost to an insurgency that only gets stronger. A simple concept that 'big dic' tactical thinkers never grasp.
McCaffrey's piece is wonderful news if taking a 'big dic' attitude - tactical victory means strategic victory. A cheerleader's report to officers who otherwise would be so despondent. It reads almost exactly like Westmoreland's reports from Nam and articles rewrote by Henry Luce in Washington and NY. Clearly we also won that war by simply staying five years and only reporting good news.
McCaffrey forgets to mention that Americans on Iraq's street only create more enemies. And yet only Americans can do the street work. Although Iraqi locals are happy to have Americans in their neighborhood now (and never leave), their contempt for Americans in Iraq makes insurgencies grow faster. Americans can never stay in any neighborhood long enough to keep the local happy. Obviously.
Just another example of a 'good news' tactical perspective while ignoring the 'bad news' strategic objective. If we keep major units only in that neighborhood, then no insurgents kill and kidnap - tactical solution. But Americans are in Iraq and rarely in that neighborhood. Civil war therefore exists; all blamed on Americans - a strategic defeat.
Iraqi army and police basically have pickup trucks for military vehicles - no different than technicals in Somalia. After 100 trained Battalions, Iraq still has near zero army. These 'forgotten lies' also continue. Police are part of the insurgency - what is sometimes officially called al Qaeda (a stolen name since bin Laden has zero relation to it). What created that massacre in Talafar? The Police went door to door killing Iraqis. Don't worry. We will graduate more police.
McCaffrey's summary reads like a cheerleader's report - too many good things. No mention of so many bad things we all know are ongoing. Therefore Iraq is even worse. If you desperately need some propaganda to raise emotional spirits, to ignore reality, to also believe in the Wizard of Oz, then this is your report. To uplift troop commander's sinking hearts, this is your report. It is quite good. And if you believe the US military can continue with these destruction rates for five more years, then this is your report.
How does xoxoxoBruce explain, for example, so much American military destruction that even a Division Ready Brigade has been lost:
Bush's Shrinking Safety Zone
Massive destruction of US military readiness - irrelevant? Don't worry, be happy.
Five more years in Iraq. Five more years ... and we will see light at the end of the tunnel. That is also in the piece. Finally. We've been waiting for 40 years now. Vietnam deja vue. Just give us another five years and we can win this thing ... is that what xoxoxoBruce believes?
Conditions have become that bad that commanders need McCaffrey's 'rally the troops' assessment. And blame it on Al Qaeda since we need a boogey man to blame. Good for troop moral.
Call me in five years when you see the light.