Abu Muqawama: Post
Abu Muqawama retains its autonomy and the views and beliefs expressed within the blog do not reflect those of CNAS. Abu Muqawama retains the right to delete comments that include words that incite violence; are predatory, hateful, or intended to intimidate or harass; or degrade people on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, or disability. In summary, don't be a jerk.
The Men vs. The Mission
Population-centric counterinsurgency puts soldiers lives at risk. That's the truth.
Members of Congress have voiced concern about the increase in U.S. deaths, one of the factors behind growing public dissatisfaction with the war. President Obama and his national security advisers are considering McChrystal's assessment, which calls for intensifying the counterinsurgency strategy and dispatching additional forces, among other options.
"I am troubled if we are putting our troops at greater risk in order to go to such extremes to avoid Afghan casualties," said Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, who at a hearing last week urged Pentagon leaders to determine whether new rules of engagement -- the classified directives that guide the use of force -- are unnecessarily endangering U.S. troops.
The trolls who sometimes lurk in the comments section of this blog have gone so far as to accuse me of being part of some Hizballah/al-Qaeda/Taliban plot to make U.S. soldiers and Marines more vulnerable on the battlefield. (This is when I'm not being accused of being a bood-thirsty Zionist imperialist, of course.) But they are right that population-centric counterinsurgency strategies raise the short-term risk for soldiers and Marines by exposing them to greater dangers and limiting what kind of munitions with which they can respond to incoming fire. It's a gamble, right? On the one hand, any time you send a soldier to war, you are exposing them to risk in the hopes that military action will help lead to the realization of a political objective. In COIN, meanwhile, you are asking the soldier to expose himself to even more risk up front in the hopes that violence will decline in the longer term. We do ourselves no favors by not being honest about that...
"In COIN, meanwhile, you are
"In COIN, meanwhile, you are asking the soldier to expose himself to even more risk"
Should this be amended to, in population-centric as opposed to enemy-centric COIN, you are asking the soldier to expose himself to even more risk?
ADTS
Delete my last comment. I
Delete my last comment. I forgot to read the first line of the post.
ADTS
"I am troubled if we are
"I am troubled if we are putting our troops at greater risk in order to go to such extremes to avoid Afghan casualties"
This is a racist statement.
Diablotakahe: "I am troubled
Diablotakahe:
"I am troubled if we are putting our troops at greater risk in order to go to such extremes to avoid Afghan casualties"
This is a racist statement.
###
I cannot tell if you are being facetious. Even if you are, though, surely some harbor similar thoughts. My rejoinder: I imagine similar sentiment exists, would exist, or did exist for every war in which this country has fought. Do you think putting troops at higher risk to avoid German (civilian) casualties in WW II would have evoked outcry, or been considered (or actually been) racist - or is that simply the nature of war?
ADTS
Didn't know ROE were
Didn't know ROE were classified.
adts - i was not being
adts - i was not being facetious, but you make very good point.
however i think if your stated objective is to protect the civilian population of an occupied nation (which was not the case in WWII) then you need to put the lives of the civilian population above the lives of your troops.
your soldiers need to feel, to know, that their primary mission is the protection of the civilian population. at any cost.
otherwise its all bullshit.
You are a Zionist and a
You are a Zionist and a member of Hizballah/al-Qaeda/Taliban? How do you find time to work on your dissertation?
A man or a woman who has
A man or a woman who has placed their life at risk on behalf of the nation create a sense of personal value that sits within them not far below the surface. Trolls who rise from the REMF population generally find this sense lacking within themselves and therefore threatening. Their tactic of defense is to provoke an angry response as a method of belittling character, such as courage, that they do not have and have no desire of obtaining. Integrity is also such a target.
Deep south politicians and their supporters in beer swilling populations hold such anti-virtue behavior tactics in high esteem.
I am not worried because Joe
I am not worried because Joe Biden is taking care of everything.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/23/world/asia/23policy.html?_r=1&hp
There isn't anything
There isn't anything "short-term" about this. The allies broke the will of the Nazis to the point that their ideology was destroyed and then they were tried, killed, and hunted down still to this day.
Has humanity upgraded to version 2.0? Why all of a sudden do you figure you can ignore thousands of years of military history and factor out human nature and ignore the ideology of our enemy? This WILL NOT WORK!
The Nazis weren't commanded by a supernatural master to make war on all non-Nazis. These terrorists are. Do you just figure that if we conduct warfare in a more polite and silly manner that they will begin to overlook certain sections of the Quran? HELL NO! This enemy loves death more than life. And to make matters worse, they WILL NOT COMPROMISE, let alone concede defeat.
The point is that COIN does put our military at increased risk. To what gain though? It won't bring this war to a short or even long conclusion. And I bet although you aren't willing to admit it, you know this. This war is nothing more than you and your think tank benefitting from troops and Afghan civilians dying. You have blood on your hands.
These trolls are all the
These trolls are all the same guy, right?
Troll, like Satan, changes
Troll, like Satan, changes appearance with level of hell from which it speaks or with host change on Fox News to which it speaks. Same demon.
@Kilo, specifics of ROE are
@Kilo, specifics of ROE are indeed classified. Here's the publicly released version of McChrystal's tactical directive
http://www.nato.int/isaf/docu/official_texts/Tactical_Directive_090706.pdf
- a quick read should satisfy any questions about what is classified and why. (And with a bit more thought why that can lead to accusations of unnecessarily putting troops at risk - can't respond to the charge beyond generic terms without breaking that classification, advantage goes to the accuser.)
Interesting that this
Interesting that this particular troll is aware that Andrew is working his dissertation. Must be a long time reader.
I am a long time reader and
I am a long time reader and I don't consider myself a troll because I have never lived under a bridge.
Or as someone once cautioned
Or as someone once cautioned in this fine comment section, the idea that COIN (pop-centric or otherwise) is some sort of bloodless, fluffy bunny warfare is one that should be squashed. (This is different than never claiming it in the first place.)
But I'm not convinced pop-centric COIN adds risk to soldiers to any degree greater than any other boots-on-ground approach. It does present opportunities to its opponents to make claims that it's so - besides the ROE point there's the "not using enemy body count as metric" concept that leads to one-sided body counts in domestic reports, once again usable by opponents of the tactics, strategy, or the commander (at any level, up to CinC).
All this is true to varying degrees of any sort of war, by its very nature. Frankly, al Qaeda (and similar) is/are well aware of this - to them it represents a strategic advantage. This is nothing new.
Don't like boots on ground approaches? Consider that a decade of standoff warfare created al Qaeda (but failed utterly to effect regime change in Iraq - the stated goal.) Osama bin Laden's various fatwas and public statements from the 90s are well worth a read.
Don't like war? I don't either. Unfortunately both sides have to quit. Generally the defeated party does it first, but its a mistake to believe the other will follow suit. I know no one's talking "quit" here, but we are pondering changing our approach (wherein people get killed) to another (wherein people get killed) - and it is worth noting that we don't get to decide when people will stop being killed.
The anti-Exum forces are
The anti-Exum forces are just naive to political reality. CNAS was founded by center-left types to show the world that not all Democrats are pussies, cut-n-runners, and domestic welfare focused ACORN activists. No, these guys are not Dennis Kucinich, these Dems have hairy chests and also want to bring freedom, Democracy, purple fingers, reproductive choice, and gay liberation to the world thru American military intervention ... but with a smile while sipping chai and building schools in 3rd world shitholes.
Look at it this way, Democrat Richard Holbrooke advocates bombing Serbian civilians in order to "save" Bosniaks. Holbrooke only kills to "help" the downtrodden. However, neocon Richard Perle advocates invading Iraq and killing civilians to steal oil and enhance Israel's security.
Therefore, Holbrooke is decent and a humanitarian but Perle is bad and a warmonger.
What the trolls here do not recognize is that Perle and Holbrooke are essentially the same, they both play fast and loose with American soldiers lives and tax dollars. The trolls should wake the fuck up and realize that the policies of Exum and the policies of Elliot Abrams and the Kagan Mafia are the exact same shit except that Exum's policies have a prettier veneer. Exum at least acknowlegdes Bacevich's warnings while the Kagan mafia pretends that Bacevich does not exist.
But they both embrace and love the idea of a very "Long War."
ADTS A more considered
ADTS
A more considered response to your point.
In WWII civilians were between us and the objective (Normandy), or they were the target (Dresden).
In COIN, they are the objective.
Faithful reader, first time
Faithful reader, first time commentor, and I'm definitely not a military person, so forgive the obviousness of my comment. Throat clearing aside, the problem isn't so much that Americans/ISAF casualties are up. Anybody paying attention to the situation should have known that these casualties would rise in the run-up to the election, in order to ensure that it would come off with as little violence from insurgents as possible. The part that's hard to swallow is that we put troops in the crosshairs of the Taliban only to see Karzai steal the election & completely undermine its legitimacy. That's what's disgusting about the whole situation, and why, imho, we seriously need to reconsider the entire commitment. Without the possibility that we can, at some point, turn the reins over to an even modestly capable -- but more importantly, honest -- government, there seems to be little point to the exercise.
Visitor 4:46: Point
Visitor 4:46:
Point well-taken.
ADTS
sorry adts, that was me at
sorry adts, that was me at 4:46.
You protest against those of
You protest against those of us who you call "Trolls" out of ignorance. Although I cannot speak for the others I myself have sworn the oath and paid the price. If you can make this misstake with one of us it is likely you can make it with both. Before you go all holier than thow you might want to consider that your prejudice towards us is lead by a REMF.
Stop handcuffing our
Stop handcuffing our soldiers and limiting there ability to defend themselves.
Comment by Gulliver on
Comment by Gulliver on September 23, 2009 - 9:53am
"These trolls are all the same guy, right?"
Either that or the telepathy that lets them all post one after another in agreement is sure working a treat.
I think they are al qaeda
I think they are al qaeda operatives trying to trick us into killing civilians.
I call Copyright, I
I call Copyright, I glutenated together all the various sinister threads first!!
אנדרו Exum, הסוכן הציוני
What's hysterical is my first attempt at this came back as Andrew Exum, "Scores" agent.
So I guess you're also a talent scout for NYC Strip Clubs?
Now I understand the "Drunk Israeli Stripper" fetish.
Update CV.
"I think they are al qaeda
"I think they are al qaeda operatives trying to trick us into killing civilians."
I'm coming around.
I have only ever posted as
I have only ever posted as Maddog .45 try again. And how dare you call me a traiter when you and your precious Exum are the ones who want to make nice with the enemy.
Boy for a counter insurgencey group you sure are ignorant.
maddog .45 - why do you hate
maddog .45 - why do you hate america so?
tiffany & co jewelry
tiffany & co jewelry
A calling card or phone card
A calling card or phone card - a international calling card rates with a Personal Identification Code named also (Pin) employed for a pre-selected long distance carrier being absent from home or office.
Pre paid phonecards and monthly billed callingcards often bid really lower long distance rates (1.5 to 7 times) than the ”traditional” call services such as coin (landline), cellular (wireless) and collect calling. Needless to say prepaid cell phone card rates remain permanent no matter when the call has been placed.
I agree with your point,
I agree with your point, please share with us more good articles.1973 Cadillac Eldorado AC Compressor
Add your comment