June 24, 2008
LESSON ONE...:
General David Petraeus: My philosophy on war: David Petraeus, the top US general in Iraq, has moved to cement his reputation as a thinking soldier by issuing a 23-point list of lessons learned from salvaging America's 'lost war.' (Damien McElroy, 24/06/2008, Daily Telegraph)
Much of the memorandum could be an inversion of Mao Zedong's principles of guerrilla warfare. Mao declaimed that a successful resistance must arouse the population to swim alongside like fish in the sea. In the Petreaus version, troops are told to secure and serve the population: "The Iraqi people are the decisive terrain."But Gen Petraeus, a warrior of capitalism, places a high importance on cash as a battle winner. Money is a weapon, he writes.
The author of the latest revision of the US Army field manual, Gen Petraeus arrived in Iraq in February last year, with a mandate to implement his own ideas. FM 3-24, as the draft was known, sought mastery of counter-insurgency.
By surging combat troops and shifting the army out of massive bases into smaller outposts, the high command was able to disrupt and destroy its enemy. Control of the streets allowed the US to build confidence in Iraq's security forces, which are now confronting the country's strongest militias.
....when the Sunni find out that not only are they a minority but the Shi'a are more than happy to commit reprisals, they suddenly become pliable. Posted by Orrin Judd at June 24, 2008 5:03 PM
You keep hitting that theme. It's a factor, but not as important as you think.
From the Sunni point of view, what 2003-2005 were all about was holding on to a power advantage to prevent Shi'ia reprisals. For the Iranians and al Qaeda, it was all about playing Muqtada al-Sadr like a drum to keep the situation stirred up.
The political advance wasn't putting Shi'ia in power, it was convincing Maliki and other powerful Shi'ia not to support reprisals, so they could assure the Arab Sunni that they were safe even in the minority. Part of that was playing on their egotism, somewhat justified -- a regime that rewards ability and effort will eventually end up with Sunni on top again.
It's complicated. Don't oversimplify.
Regards,
Ric
It's not complicated, which is why you restate the theme. The Sunni tried holding the power they'd obtained via totalitarian violence but which they can never retain in a democratic Iraq. Their initial shock came when elections revealed just how outnumbered they are. Their second came when Mookie and others refused to yield to violence and perpetrated it right back at them. The combination of a large Shi'ite majority and one that isn't cowed concentrated the Sunni mind wonderfully. That's why tribes started suppressing al Qaeda and Ba'ath remnants, because they feared bearing the brunt of the reprisals.
Once the Sunni renounced violence against the Shi'a the need for Shi'a death squads was gone, at least for now. The Surge just accepted the Sunni surrender.
Posted by: oj at June 25, 2008 11:30 AM
And when both learn that the big outsider, the USA, isn't leaving soon, they all become willing to cling to the strong horse.
Such a surprise...
Posted by: Mikey at June 24, 2008 6:05 PM