Faster, Please!: Maybe We're Winning in Iraq

| | TrackBacks (0)

Faster, Please!: Maybe We're Winning in Iraq

Michael Ledeen looks to counterinsurgency theory to explain the dramatic successes in Anbar, Basra, and elsewhere: "In the early phases of the conflict, the people remain as neutral as they can, simply trying to stay alive. As the war escalates, they are eventually forced to make a choice, to place a bet, and that bet becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. The people have the winning piece on the board: intelligence. Once the Iraqis decided that we were going to win, they provided us with information about the terrorists: who they were, where they were, what they were planning, where their weapons were stashed, and so forth....

"There is a tendency to treat the surge as a mere increase in numbers, but its most important component was the change in doctrine. Instead of keeping too many of our soldiers off the battlefield in remote and heavily fortified mega-bases, we put them into the field. Instead of reacting to the terrorists' initiatives, we went after them. No longer were we going to maintain the polite fiction that we were in Iraq to train the locals so that they could fight the war. Instead, we aggressively engaged our enemies. It was at that point that the Iraqi people placed their decisive bet." (Via Ace.)

Categories

0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Faster, Please!: Maybe We're Winning in Iraq.

TrackBack URL for this entry: https://www.batesline.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/3174

Contact

BlogAds

Support BatesLine

Show your appreciation and help fund hosting and research expenses:

Official PayPal Seal

Enjoy affordable and reliable hosting with Bluehost and support BatesLine at the same time -- click here!