tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post3646168208660025916..comments2024-01-01T19:49:13.788-08:00Comments on The Vigil: Assigning the Strongest Armed Forces of the World to Occupation DutyVigilantehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07640246609540057997noreply@blogger.comBlogger42125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post-90526482165502151392007-02-19T07:11:00.000-08:002007-02-19T07:11:00.000-08:00Following Petty Larseny's link to a Rumsfeld-W...Following <a href="http://petty-larseny.blogspot.com/2007/02/instant-sure-fire-politically-viable.html" rel="nofollow" rel="nofollow">Petty Larseny</a>'s link to a <a href="http://www.defenselink.mil/Transcripts/Transcript.aspx?TranscriptID=3744" rel="nofollow" rel="nofollow">Rumsfeld-Woodward interview</a>, I read Rummy speaking about occupation as a double-edged sword:<br><br>"<i>And I always felt that foreign troops are an anomaly in a country, that eventually they're unnatural and not welcomed really. I think I used the characterization of a broken bone. If you don't set it, everything grows around the brake and you end up with that abnormality.</i>"<br><br>That's the problem, isn't it? Bush's legacy will not tolerate leaving an 'abnormality' behind in Iraq. To him, leaving behind unresolved civil strife (worse case scenario) or separate sectarian militia strong men (best case scenario) would be an intolerable mutation of 'his mission'. That is why he thinks we must 'stay the course'.Vigilantehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07640246609540057997noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post-85193932877698710522007-02-16T16:57:00.000-08:002007-02-16T16:57:00.000-08:00Well, it looks like the forces of light won big in...Well, it looks like the forces of light won big in the House of Reps today. Non-binding, but a defining moment. The turning of the worm, the changing of the seas. Wizard is right: these kinds of thing cannot stay the same: the course cannot be stayed. We are leaving, one political stroke after political stroke, the onion will be pealed. Next comes trimming the Iraq budget: not another dime for Iraqi use of our troops <i>for the killing of each other</i>. Pull them back, leave by truck, car, Humvees, helicopters, whatever. <br><br>This useless vendetta bloodletting of Bush's was DOA four years ago. Nothing has changed, and nothing will be changed by the 'new stratergy' or the next new stratergy. This fucking shit pile of worms is so brain-dead, Terry Shaivo had a better chance to recuperate and regenerate. <br><br>But Bush will keep his crack-head project on life-support until he leaves office. <b>THAT</b>'s his fucking strategy, buck-o's. That's what this is all about. We can drown in the patriotic bull shit that the GOP-ers dished out this past week in the aisles of the People's House. But that's what it's all about.Recidivisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02824272869804979764noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post-15900857978636775052007-02-16T08:08:00.000-08:002007-02-16T08:08:00.000-08:00messenger, I agree with you 100% about the occupat...<b>messenger</b>, I agree with you 100% about the occupation. You make an excellent point that I hadn't thoroughly considered. <b>Congress NEVER AUTHORIZED OCCUPATION.</b>the WIZARD, fkaphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18171655256407149176noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post-36844062172309706372007-02-16T07:15:00.000-08:002007-02-16T07:15:00.000-08:00We have not lost; we have accomplished all of the ...We have not lost; we have accomplished all of the objectives - specious though they were - of the original Congressional Authorization of force against Iraq (Oct '02). We were not authorized to occupy Iraq. Our continued presence is not authorized by the 2002 vote. Occupation without the consent of the occupied is not the role for a democracy that aspires to be the leader of the free world. We should leave. Now.Messengerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07717447585401926179noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post-17097466863517811322007-02-15T22:43:00.000-08:002007-02-15T22:43:00.000-08:00I cross linked the Moran article on your site beca...I cross linked the Moran article on your site because I felt that it bolstered your argument, your position (and Luttwak's) for the immediate withdrawal from Iraq (even if that wasn't Moran's intent).<br><br>Moran wrote: <b><i>"the fact of the matter is we either fight to win – and win as quickly as circumstances allow – or we admit defeat and leave, accepting the consequences of our folly while holding harmless the young men and women who sacrificed much in service to the government and the people."</i></b><br><br>Is this not exactly what Luttwik has been saying in his professorial tone in your three posts?<br><br>Luttwik wrote: <b><i>"the ambivalence of a United States . . . that is willing to fight wars, that is willing to start wars because of future threats, that is willing to conquer territory or even entire countries, and yet is unwilling to govern what it conquers, even for a few years. Consequently, for all of the real talent manifested in the writing of FM 3-24 DRAFT, its prescriptions are in the end of little or no use and amount to a kind of malpractice. All its best methods, all its clever tactics, all the treasure and the blood that the United States has been willing to expend, cannot overcome the crippling ambivalence of occupiers who refuse to govern, and their principled and inevitable refusal to out-terrorize the insurgents, the necessary and sufficient condition of a tranquil occupation."</i></b><br><br>I clearly identified Moran as a "right wing firebrand." You can quibble with his obvious Republican prejudices, but he and Luttwak make essentially the same point.the WIZARD, fkaphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18171655256407149176noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post-1559704720074916772007-02-15T21:39:00.000-08:002007-02-15T21:39:00.000-08:00Vigilante..... The Republicans are playing a game ...Vigilante..... The Republicans are playing a game of "chicken" with the funding of the troops. <br><br>If the Democrats blink now they will not only betray the voters who elected them, they will end up as "road kill."the WIZARD, fkaphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18171655256407149176noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post-71188438044156262832007-02-15T19:48:00.000-08:002007-02-15T19:48:00.000-08:00After moving on from blaming Clinton for 9-11, Wiz...After moving on from blaming Clinton for 9-11, Wizard's parsed essayist says, <br><i>I say to you that whether you believe this war to be moral or immoral. . .</i><br>Skimming ahead, I found no case stated for finding the war to be moral. I only found Democrats castigated for not unanimously demanding immediate withdrawal, and nothing about Republicans for not demanding immediate withdrawal. <br><br>Wizard's still dodging back into narrow partisanship to avoid coming to terms with his party's President's manifest war crimes.<br><br><i>I see no one else has commented on this. Why does it take me to do it? Am I right, or am I right?</i>Vigilantehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07640246609540057997noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post-80305313341349380412007-02-15T09:10:00.000-08:002007-02-15T09:10:00.000-08:00I apologize for this shamless plug, but this morni...I apologize for this shamless plug, but this morning I stumbled across one of the best written and most on-target analysis of the tough decisions the U.S. <b>MUST MAKE IMMEDIATELY.</b><br><br>I invite you over to my house to take a look.... <a href="http://wizardfkap.blogspot.com" rel="nofollow" rel="nofollow">the WIZARD, fkap</a><br><br>I believe this really ties into vigilante's article here. And, of course, you can return here to The Vigil continue the conversation if you prefer.the WIZARD, fkaphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18171655256407149176noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post-39074438761420477852007-02-15T06:05:00.000-08:002007-02-15T06:05:00.000-08:00Get used to it. When and as we leave Bush's Me...Get used to it. When and as we leave Bush's Mess-o-Potamia, we'll have to take our puppets and their families out with us. Part of what we owe them. A small part to be sure. Look at it as part of paying reparations.Recidivisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02824272869804979764noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post-86324977401126650702007-02-14T22:28:00.000-08:002007-02-14T22:28:00.000-08:00We've been fighting them over there so we don&...We've been fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them over here? But now we're getting <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6362289.stm" rel="nofollow" rel="nofollow">7,000 boat people</a> from Iraq-nam?GetaLife-ReadUrNewshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12534117511488863577noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post-46897646467538909582007-02-14T22:10:00.000-08:002007-02-14T22:10:00.000-08:00Thanks, Wizard, for trying to herd us cats back on...Thanks, Wizard, for trying to herd us cats back on topic. I would rise and take up the cause, but Valentine's Day is meant to be devoted to pursuits other than politics.Vigilantehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07640246609540057997noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post-26359497125055195882007-02-14T12:34:00.000-08:002007-02-14T12:34:00.000-08:00I'm enjoying this conversation, although I'...I'm enjoying this conversation, although I'm not sure the most recent posts abut the nature of our adventure in Iraq are nearly as important as Vigilante's original post about the potential outcome of an immediate withdrawal.<br><br>Still, let me say I believe that the current chapter in Buffalo Bush's Big Adventure is an occupation, not a war.<br><br>But, <b>madmike's</b> (and others) points are well taken. We do not control the population and we do not hold much ground and our "puppet government" doesn't behave well.<br><br>So, at the very least, we need to admit that, while this may be an occupation, it's an extremely poorly run occupation.<br><br>the Wizard...........the WIZARD, fkaphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18171655256407149176noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post-35894416812193009182007-02-14T11:17:00.000-08:002007-02-14T11:17:00.000-08:00Asymetrical war??? :-) :-) That works for me. The...Asymetrical war??? :-) :-) That works for me. There are not always clearly definable front lines. There are places you can go without being shot, probably, and places you can go where you will probably be shot. That makes it no less a conflict. Thanks BB!MadMikehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03593724257782751406noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post-45438585358223219302007-02-14T10:15:00.000-08:002007-02-14T10:15:00.000-08:00I say right now, because it looks like Cheney want...I say <i>right now</i>, because it looks like Cheney wants to restore our over-taxed troops to war footing - this time against Iran - which is more marketable as a respectable military mission.Recidivisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02824272869804979764noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post-60003676680814219182007-02-14T10:11:00.000-08:002007-02-14T10:11:00.000-08:00The only war in Iraq, right now, is the civil war,...The only war in Iraq, <i>right now</i>, is the civil war, the ethnic cleansing war, or the sectarian war. Whatever you want to call it. There is an insurgency or insurgencies against foreign occupation forces (that's us, folks) which are insufficient to their assignment.Recidivisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02824272869804979764noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post-25160749132396047032007-02-14T03:41:00.000-08:002007-02-14T03:41:00.000-08:00Vigilante,Agree with some commentors here: World&#...Vigilante,<br><br>Agree with some commentors here: World's strongest armed forces - US - aren't and can't fulfill Occupation duty because they haven't come close to occupying Iraq. <br><br>The US will not be able to occupy Iraq no more than I could go to the moon today; I reckon, to occupy will require that US pour half a million troops on the ground in one go.<br><br>If the US could do that, there's just a chance, the US may end the mess.<br><br>The problem is to field half a million troops will mean 1.5 million troops rotating. <br><br>On balance, Bush is better off leaving the Iraqis to fend for themselves - set up quarantine all around and hope the mess doesn't extend to the surrounding countries.<br><br>Or, go back to the UN and see whether NATO member nations could help come to the rescue (Ugh! NATO are stretched thin too...)<br><br>General Sir Rupert Smith who's just published The Utility of Force, is asking "What are the US forces in Iraq doing?" <br><br>Looks like Iraq is gonna be another Vietnam for America.HILLBLOGGERhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15891336814331353189noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post-66039817071622472842007-02-13T21:44:00.000-08:002007-02-13T21:44:00.000-08:00Our guys coping with a sniper attack.<a href="http://www.worldpressphoto.com/index.php?option=com_photogallery&task=view&id=892&Itemid=146&type=&selectedIndex=0&bandwidth=high%5D?rss" rel="nofollow" rel="nofollow">Our guys coping with a sniper attack</a>.Vigilantehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07640246609540057997noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post-31899210601808325562007-02-13T21:43:00.000-08:002007-02-13T21:43:00.000-08:00Occupation images.Occupation <a href="http://www.worldpressphoto.com/index.php?option=com_photogallery&task=view&id=835&Itemid=146&type=&selectedIndex=2&bandwidth=high%5D?rss" rel="nofollow" rel="nofollow">images</a>.Vigilantehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07640246609540057997noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post-89880974838233863562007-02-13T21:06:00.000-08:002007-02-13T21:06:00.000-08:00Beach, even your thoughtful and articulate respons...Beach, even your thoughtful and articulate response doesn't convince me. You say, <br><br><i>The only terrain we control is the dirt under our troops boots.</i><br><br>I say coalition forces can put their boots on any dirt inside Iraq. It's just that they won't necessarily find it expeditious to <b>stay</b> every where they can go, which is - everywhere. (I'm saying that on any given day our troops can search & toss any given house, even in Anbar province.) The so-called 'no-go' areas or Red Zone pertains to where civilians aren't safe without a military escort, and that's everywhere outside the Green Zone. <br><br>If it's a war and not an occupation, as you and MadMike maintain, then I submit that either or both of you could come up with a <i>current</i> map depicting the front lines of this war.<br><br>Until you guys, whom I respect greatly, can thus <i>cartographically</i> convince me, I say we are in occupation mode, however ineffectually.<br><br>(And no fair using that old dodge, asymmetrical warfare, either.)Vigilantehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07640246609540057997noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post-43683783394034162572007-02-13T20:05:00.000-08:002007-02-13T20:05:00.000-08:00E.:You can't get your 'daily vigil' fr...<b>E.:</b><br><br>You can't get your 'daily vigil' from me. Your daily vigil is your responsibility. I post every time and everyday I have something to share from within. Right now, my front page is full with what I feel contains and brackets the central issue of our times: are we going to hold our traitorous fellow citizens - who have betrayed our once-great nation's birthright and traditions of non-aggression in foreign policy and constitutionalism in domestic governance - accountable? Or are we going to let them bleed our country dry pursuing their illegitimate militaristic foolishness in Iraq? That is my Vigil, and every day I am here as well as on other sites, maintaining it. Every damned day.Vigilantehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07640246609540057997noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post-57654752290466191012007-02-13T19:09:00.000-08:002007-02-13T19:09:00.000-08:00I have to agree with Mike in that what is going on...I have to agree with Mike in that what is going on is a war in the sense we are not in control. The only terrain we control is the dirt under our troops boots. Rummy's going to war on the cheap defeated us as soon as Baghdad fell because we had no where near the number of troops to secure the now fallen capital much less the countryside. As soon as the Sunni and Shia noticed the power vacuum both sides saw the chance to get revenge which began as a low simmer and has now reached a boil because no one in our leadership could see the hand writing on the wall and correct the shortcomings in American plans. That is if anyone would have listened!<br><br>As best as I can understand Luttwak he is correct in that no matter how many arm chair commandos sitting safely here in this country might talk about doing it, actually gunning down families and villagers to maintain control is something we generally can't do. Yes, there are horrible exceptions to that rule but the average American soldier or Marine just could not in cold blood kill civilians. I believe our answer to such insurgent terror we are seeing now in Iraq is generally an overwhelming troop presence that does not allow the freedom of movement the insurgents need to accomplish their mission. But, again, that leads back to the fact that we needed well over 300,000 troops to secure the country to allow the social programs and economic development projects to work. But if the stories I have been reading are any indication that part of "Operation Iraqi Freedom" was just as big a bust as the military plan. But that brings in the question of whether no matter how well our intentions might have been the Iraqi and American cultures are so far apart as to have been unbridgeable given the Muslim/Christian history of conflict among other things. <br><br>Like pekka this whole affair for me has entered the Twilight Zone with a republican congressman today still talking about a military victory along with talk that a THIRD carrier group will soon be heading for the Persian Gulf to join the other two facing off against Iran. Bush's unstable, to say the least, mental state along with what must be a demon possessed Cheney have shown they can not govern and their leadership has this country facing a huge strategic defeat that will emboldening every enemy of this country around the world. They very much need to be impeached and kicked out of office. Sorry vigil this far too long.Beach Bumhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03111975008573423515noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post-43762300635909608072007-02-13T16:36:00.000-08:002007-02-13T16:36:00.000-08:00All I can say is I agree.All I can say is I agree.Etzel Panglosshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07708327245763324624noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post-88334185272681762952007-02-13T13:52:00.000-08:002007-02-13T13:52:00.000-08:00I do not support the Bush-Cheney-McCain-Lieberman ...I do not support the Bush-Cheney-McCain-Lieberman doctrine of "win at all costs." Anyone who has followed my blog would know that I am anything but a fan of the fools. I am making one point and one point only: <br><br>If we are fighting for turf in Iraq that means we are not occupying it. That means we are trying to occupy it. The fact that we are fighting for it means we are not occupiers but soldiers impressed into a senseless war by irresponsible prevaricators and ne'er do wells.<br><br>The intent of your remark, Not your Mama, is not lost on me. I will admit that I may not know everything about human behavior, or, for that matter, gang behavior. I did write a thesis on it at the master's level, and a dissertation on it at the doctorate level, all following a lifelong career in law enforcement, but I am sure you would know best. <br><br>The civil insurgency in Iraq must be dealt with as long as we are there, primarily for our own protection, not necessarily that of the indigent population. They need to fight their own battles.<br><br>I do not now nor have I ever supported sending in more troops, except at the beginning. I was with Colin Powell and others who urged a stronger entry force.<br><br>Finally, and to Vigilante, I see quite well thank you. I actually think we both see the same thing, but in different ways. I don't think I will get my prescription checked anytime soon.<br><br>In closing:<br><br>Impeach Bush! Troops home NOW!!<br><br>Peace....(literally)MadMikehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03593724257782751406noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post-74042496616478790422007-02-13T11:27:00.000-08:002007-02-13T11:27:00.000-08:00Where are you Vigilante?!! I need my daily vigil!...Where are you Vigilante?!! I need my daily vigil!Ehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17587216740731401718noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post-15548953550940363982007-02-13T07:16:00.000-08:002007-02-13T07:16:00.000-08:00N.Y. Mama, It's a given that when we withdraw ...N.Y. Mama, It's a given that when we withdraw from Iraq - as we must sooner or later - there will be an up-tick in violence. That's what happened when we finally left Vietnam, right? What's at issue is how much cumulative slaughter will happen along the way, until we leave. That's what we can still control by our actions now. We must remember what's at the <i>root</i> of this civil war and insurgency, and that's our illegitimate presence in Iraq.Vigilantehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07640246609540057997noreply@blogger.com