Subscribe to ePluribus Media



ePluribus Media Store


Want Headlines via Email?
Enter your email address:


Help Save 1.800.SUICIDE


"Go Long" in Iraq: Same Bull Feathers, Different Day

by rcs1

Cross posted at the front pages of My Left Wing and Pen and Sword. Also at Kos.

The "best and brightest" of the U.S. military's brain trust never fail to disappoint me.

The Pentagon's review of the Iraq situation is worming its way into the mainstream media.  The review proposes three alternative courses of action, named "Go Big," "Go Long" and "Go Home."  Here's how noted Pentagon correspondent Thomas E. Ricks describes the options:


commentary :: :: :: buzz-it!
"Go Big", the first option, originally contemplated a large increase in US troops in Iraq to try to break the cycle of sectarian and insurgent violence. A classic counter-insurgency campaign, though, would require several hundred thousand additional US and Iraqi soldiers as well as heavily armed Iraqi police. That option has been all but rejected by the study group, said sources who have been informally briefed on the review.

"Go Home", the third option, calls for a swift withdrawal of US troops. It was rejected by the Pentagon group as likely to push Iraq directly into a full-blown and bloody civil war.

The group has devised a hybrid plan that combines part of the first option with the second - "Go Long" - and calls for cutting the US combat presence in favor of a long-term expansion of the training and advisory efforts.


The war college I attended taught that when you propose courses of action, each option should be plausible and feasible.  The brainiacs who came up with the "Go" plans must have attended a different war college than I did.  

A recommended course of action rejected by the recommenders is neither plausible nor feasible, so the Pentagon "study group" has really only proposed one option, and that option is merely a reaffirmation of what the Pentagon has had in mind all along.

In "Go Long," according to Ricks, "...the U.S. presence in Iraq, currently about 140,000 troops, would be boosted by 20,000 to 30,000 for a short period."  There's no word from Ricks or the Pentagon on how "long" the "short" period might be, but whatever the length of time a troop increase might involve, the overall period of time American troops will be deployed in Iraq can best be defined as "indefinite."

In other words, "Go Long" is "stay the course."  Same strategy, different buzz phrase.  Same bull manure, different day.

Been There, Done That

Actually the "new" buzz phrase isn't exactly new.  The "Long War" phrase was officially sanctioned by General John Abizaid to describe the overall thingie on whatchamacallitism clear back in 2004.  Abizaid is in charge of U.S. Central Command, and his area of responsibility encompasses both Iraq and Afghanistan.  Abizaid is on the short list to join William Westmoreland and George McClellan in the Worst General Ever Hall of Fame.  But with Rumsfeld gone, Abizaid is the biggest gorilla in the Department of Defense zoo right now, and anything the worker bees in the Pentagon tell him will be carefully crafted to sound like something he wanted to hear.  

I was in the audience of my war college's auditorium when a four-star officer advised us that the secret to success in a military career was knowing how to size up your boss.  "Figure out what the bastard wants and give it to him," the four-star said.  That may well have been the very moment I decided that my days in uniform were numbered.  

In subsequent years, I came to realize just how prevalent the top-down group-think was in military circles, and how exhortations to practice "original thinking" were really admonitions to think in ways that supported ideas and theories that originally came from on high.  Nobody at the top of the chain of command really wants you to "think outside the box" unless the box you're thinking outside of is somebody else's and not theirs.

So go figure why "Go Long" is the Pentagon's Iraq option of choice.  It's in keeping with the core value of military careerism: "go along to get along."

And I reckon you can guess what I suggest the "Go Long" proponents can go do with themselves.

#

Commander Jeff Huber, U.S. Navy (Retired) writes from Virginia Beach, Virginia.  Read his commentaries at ePluribus Media and Pen and Sword.

Display:
Should probably add "Go Stupid" to the list:  the practice wherein a subordinate commander carries out poorly-designed missions exactly as ordered (assuming that's possible without jeopardizing their unit(s)).  In the civilian world that's "work to the rule", and in both cases can be an effective tool for change of bad policy.  

by rba on Mon Nov 20, 2006 at 12:48:57 PM EST
I'm just amazed at these 3 options.  Now, there is a good diary up on dKos....... I happened to watch the show the diary talks about "ABC's This Week".

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/11/20/12032/320

excerpt:
We have enough troops to go after Muqtada al-Sadr, the key Shiite religious leader whose militia is causing us this trouble. We can't do it because the Iraqi government won't let us. It is causing enormous political pressure. So right now we have an Iraqi government that does not allow us to search for our own soldier. We had to abandon a search, is in cahoots with a shiite militia that has captured americans. The point is not here that you need a military or political solution. Obviously you need both. The point is we have an iraqi government that cannot, will not make any of the decisions that will supplement this military.

by avahome on Mon Nov 20, 2006 at 01:48:27 PM EST

On Crooks and Liars, the link is probably still there.  It shook the ground under me in that it was the first time I had heard "The Iraqis said NO".  Surprised?  No - just that someone had the guts to say it outloud.  THIS IS A POLITICAL ISSUE trying to be solved by MILITARY FORCE.

Does NOT compute.

by kfred on Mon Nov 20, 2006 at 06:48:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

when Zacharia made the statement to George Stephanopoulas... George Will was speechless.....but you knew Zacharia was right on.  For the life of me, I don't know why no one listens and picks up on his statements.  Robert Reich of TAP was sitting next to Zacharia and you could just see the light bulb go off in his head!  

America seems to have been pretty much marginalized in Iraq.........wonder how long that is gonna fly.  
Surely Iraq know that if America leaves...so goes the money....unless Iraq government is going to demand war reparations.

by avahome on Tue Nov 21, 2006 at 08:22:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]

and also a "Final Push"...

And the ChickenBawks are all-a-chirping that "Benchmarks" are telegraphing to the insurgents when we will be pulling out with flexible benchmarks?

The insurgents certainly can understand when the deadline is when they read FINAL and LAST...

This "Go Long" BS is supposed to sound like a whole new plan, but the reality is it just another "Stay the Course!" plan with more American soldiers on the ground in Iraq for the insurgents to blow up.

Just enough soldiers to increase targets... Nowhere near enough to stabelize the civil war in Iraq. It still spells:
F-A-I-L-U-R-E

The bush endorsed plan this pentagon toilet paper is supposed to lay the groundwork for only pushes that failure off into the future in the hopes of pawning it off on the Democratic controlled Capitol Hill OR future administration.

And that is the definition of playing politics with soldiers lives.

Guaranteed to be plastered all over the Internet
Drinking Liberally in New Milford
by Connecticut Man1 on Mon Nov 20, 2006 at 09:21:40 PM EST

Support ePluribus Media -- Support Citizen Powered Journalism!

ePluribus Media

↑ Grab this Headline Animator

members


community front page

make a new account


Username:
Password:

create account | faq | search | community front page |