June 26, 2004

IRAQIFICATION?:

Army Used Speed and Might, Plus Cash, Against Shiite Rebel: The operation against the militia of Moktada al-Sadr is already being studied by an Army struggling to learn the lessons of a war that continues to evolve. (THOM SHANKER and ERIC SCHMITT, 6/26/04, NY Times)

When the First Armored Division got orders to mount its counterattack against the Sadr militia, one-fourth of its 30,000 soldiers and more than half of its 8,000 tanks, armored vehicles and artillery pieces had already left Iraq. The division, along with the Second Light Cavalry Regiment, also under its command, did an about-face, recalling troops, unpacking gear and receiving unwelcome orders to extend its stay by 90 days.

"I called together all my commanders, and I told them that we were going to demonstrate that a heavy force could be agile — to put heavy and agile in the same sentence, a place where they had never been before," said Maj. Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, commander of the First Armored Division, whose signature weapon is the 70-ton Abrams tank.

"And 15 hours later, from a standing start in Baghdad, we moved 170 kilometers down to Najaf, and were in contact with the enemy," General Dempsey said, referring to a distance of just over 100 miles.

As quickly as the military spent its ammunition, though, it spent its money in an effort to heal some of the wounds it was inflicting, and those dealt by the militia as well.

From the moment the Americans recaptured Kut, the first town where they reclaimed control, officers switched from military to civil operations. Having scattered the enemy, they pulled them back together and put them to work in an amusement park destroyed in the fight.

"These are young men who have been poisoned, unemployed, disenfranchised and very poorly led," General Dempsey said. "We found a local tribal sheik who said he could corral them. We hired him to repair the amusement park, and he in turn hired these young men."

The example was repeated in Diwaniya and all across south-central Iraq, where General Dempsey spent several hundred thousand dollars to pay locals to remove rubble, rebuild roads and finance claims for damaged homes and businesses.

The campaign against the Sadr militia in south-central Iraq also had to be fought elsewhere — inside military headquarters in Baghdad, in the command-and-control "Tank" at the Pentagon, inside the National Security Council at the White House and even at the United Nations, as senior commanders debated with civilian policy makers how best to counter this menacing militia presence that grew in the shadows of the American occupation.

On one side were those who believed that Mr. Sadr could be sidelined, and that to attack him would only stoke support among his followers in Iraq and beyond its borders. This view was convincing to the uppermost level of commanders in Iraq, and certainly was the stance of Bush administration officials, especially after they heard the opinions of Iraq's own nascent leadership. On the other side were those, mostly field commanders, who argued that Mr. Sadr was a growing threat in advance of the June 30 transfer of sovereignty, and that eventually he would have to be arrested or eliminated to guarantee the future of a stable and democratic Iraq.


Should have just asked al-Sistani.

Posted by Orrin Judd at June 26, 2004 10:10 AM
Comments

How about asking him to hand over the guys who mutilated the Americans?

How about asking him why he didn't do it some time ago?

You are living in a fantasy; we didn't win at Fallujah. We lost. Sistani lost big time.

Even if Muqtada is killed tomorrow, there are lots of ambitious thugs who now see how to game the system against us and, more to the point, against any kind of popular and democratic native regime.

Posted by: Harry Eagar at June 26, 2004 2:34 PM

I admire the way you cling to an obviously wrong opinion.

Posted by: oj at June 26, 2004 3:01 PM

I'm repeating myself here, but Wretchard (Belmont Club) has some posts that are absolutely must reading.

http://belmontclub.blogspot.com

Posted by: Barry Meislin at June 26, 2004 3:57 PM

Seconding Barry, Wretchard is Brilliant.

Beyond that, Harry, War requires some degree of patience. Falluja, is just in the first phases, now. wait until the the City fathers ask the interim goverernment to declare martial law.

Posted by: Robert Schwartz at June 27, 2004 4:06 PM

That Sistani was afraid to confront Muqtadr is hardly just an opinion.

Posted by: Harry Eagar at June 27, 2004 8:15 PM

Sistani won.

Posted by: oj at June 27, 2004 8:36 PM

He's a prisoner in, and of, his mosques. His writ apparently does not run even across the street.

Posted by: Harry Eagar at June 28, 2004 8:11 PM

al Sar gave up. Iraq is free and will be a Shi'a state. Sistani won. He's simply more long-sighted than someone ego driven like you.

Posted by: oj at June 28, 2004 8:21 PM
« MORE LIKE A SANDBOX THAN THE SENATE: | Main | WHAT OTHER CHOICE DID THEY HAVE?: »