And I would like to reiterate my response to that particular post on March 31, 2003.
Re: "Iraq is no Vietnam"
<<Yes, Iraq is far worse than Vietnam. Here's the comparison:
(1) South Vietnam had 20 million people in it, Iraq now has 24 million. Therefore, Iraq is about 20% harder to police. >>
In this 24 million take out the Kurds and the Shiites and the Sunni family members of the families mercilessly persecuted by Saddam. General Giap or Ho Chi Minh the leadership of the north had not used chemical weapons against their own people. Policing North of topographically much more problematic due ot natural contours that encourage hit and run missions, in Iraq short of urban battle the opportunities for a guerrilla like campaign are negligible.
<(2) In South Vietnam, we had the assistance of their army, which took 5x as many combat deaths as we did. In Iraq, we have no assistance from anyone except the British. And the Brits are going to leave it up to us to run the troop levels up, so this will eventually become an almost entirely US operation. The Kuwaitis, for example, are providing us with zero combat assistance.>
I think you completely overlooked the Peshmergas. There are 70,000 peshmerga and nearly 10,000 member strong Shiite forces based in Iran, I am not sure that the later are of nay use but as I have very early in the campaign highlighted that 70,000 bilingual Peshmerga are very good fighters and are providing the filling of the gap created by absence of huge US Army in the north. Kurds are a persecuted community and have no sympathy with Saddam. In case of Afghanistan once Mazar-e- Sheriff had fallen National Alliance was the key factor that helped overcome lack of US infantry on the ground.
Afghanistan was and is a 100% US operation that has been successfully designed around local Afghan recruits and US friendly warlords who have been bought to serve the interests of US on the ground. Who could have imagined that what was suppose to be the graveyard of British Empire influence in Indian sub-continent during last century Afghan wars and turned out to be final nail in the coffin of USSR in the 80’s could have fallen so fast to US meagre ground resources. Afghanistan if we could recall the predictions of these Monday morning quarterbacks was suppose to be the quagmire that never materialised. The technological advantage of US that includes aerial superiority along with accurate pinpoint elimination of leadership command and control has entered a new dimension in wars of 21st century. Bogging down is a real possibility for any power but US supremacy based on tech advantage of the 90’s on land, sea and air in helpful regional theatre like Iraq makes it a very opposite case strategic studies ot that of North Vietnam. Saddam dreams of ‘Stalingrad’ type of urban warfare are unrealistic and logistically not possible for the entrenched diehard zealots. They may resist and die but without a popular support that Ho chi Minh enjoyed he sat on a far higher moral ground. The concept of carpet bombing that was relevant in case other 2nd world war entrenched urban warfare’s and even utilized in North is something that international community would not accept in the present day and age, the collateral damage would be far tot high for any state to engage in such foolish enterprise but the pin point elimination of key targets from the ground nod air has given a deadly blow to this whole idea of entrenched urban battles. The example of Basra in recent conflict is an eye opener, the Brits desert rate are wearing the enemy entrenched in the city of 1.2 million ot level where they have no where but ultimate surrender to consider. Similar siege can happen around Baghdad, Brits and the Centcom wants Basra imitative to take place days before Baghdad encirclement is complete so for me siege of Baghdad may be long but on scale of casualties it may have slightly intense pattern then Basra.
< (3) The enemy population in Vietnam was Buddhist, a population known for its aversion to violence (our side was Catholic), while the enemy population in Iraq is Moslem Arab, a population known for its love of violence. >
Sometime violent population is fond of the show of strength, a peaceful person turned into an enemy (in case of Buddhists) as he is pushed to the wall can be far dangerous than someone who is violent and can be subdued by equivalent show of strength. Someone who inflicts pain far more often understands the results far better. It is for this reason that from Osama to Omar even Saddam have ( and may) all choose to escape instead of the final ‘courageous stand’ to die with the comrades. The canon fodder is one thing self sacrifice another! I would not be surprised that in a twist of events Saddam body which may be lying in a basement for last 14 days with his sons may be brought once Baghdad battles inflames as martyrs of Baghdad. I have very bizarre feeling that a cabal is ruling Baghdad. Minister of info talks far more authoritatively than he could ever if Saddam was in control but this is an assumption only.
Is it not strange that most of the Islamic world was colonialised over centuries? Mongols rarely were, much as violence is loved by the Islamic society as perpetual Jihad is a firm injunction the corollary to your idea is that firmness is also equally respected, the concept of strongman and that is the reason that from Mubarak to Ghaddafi to Bishar to Saddam we have so many strong man in the region and in a rare display of undemocratic practices nearly all are grooming their sons to the future Presidents the Arab version of Camelot.
<(4) The civilian population in Vietnam was extraordinarily poor and had to rely on the Communists to supply it with the meagre weapons they had. But every Iraqi past the age of 12 owns a rifle. >
Yesterday one of my friends from Kuwait visited Um Qasar and Al-Zubayr, according to him he has rarely seen poverty on that scale, as a crow flies the distance from Safwan ot Kuwait is 80 Km but on test of poverty trap the inequality is from 12,000 $/capita to 280$/ capita. If the southerners or Iraqis who are hard marshland people (not urbanites Baghdadis who are far more refined ) owned guns than Brits would not have deserted helmets to Berets. The nicer and gentler face of ALLIES is already at work.
<(5) South Vietnam was connected to the rest of the Vietnam ethnic nation (their natural ally against a foreign invader) by a very small piece of land (the DMZ). By comparison, Iraq has incredibly long borders with the Arab nations of Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Syria, as well as an impossible to govern border with Iran. We're going to see every weapon produced on the planet smuggled across those borders. >
There is no love lost between Iran and Iraq, Iran is gleefully looking at elimination of the tyrant, although they would for sake of greater Islamic unity not openly profess it. This Arab nation and Islamic nation unity is a biggest myth. In case of recent stand off between India and Pakistan the Pakistanis realized very quickly that no support will be forth coming form any Muslim quarters, similarly Syrians and others are far more handicapped they may have popular demonstrations but united political action on government scale west is not possible. Iran yesterday arrested may trying to cross the borders to fight the war, the misery levels and poverty levels are at such a scale that every family considers their own daily living as an uphill task. If this scenario of your would be true I should have seen a lot more weapons from Iran and huge number of Iranian volunteers already in the south of Iraq. That is not the case and definitely if that was a case the war would have taken entirely different shape. A regional conflict where Iran gets involved will take the whole global economy into tailspin, you know why? Because of Persian Gulf, Iranians can be biggest pain the arse; however they have shown a lot of barking but no biting and that will remain so. Ayatollah Baqar Hakim is a member of the Iraqi Opposition and he has his command centre in Qum for him to see Shiites being freed from Sunni tyranny of hundred of decades is far better prospect, these fault lines and problems did not exist in North. The Chinese had ideological affinities along with USSR with North leadership; it is Marxist ideological unity that fuelled the unlimited war supplies through the Ho Chi Minh trial through Laos.
<(6) The total Arab population of the world is around 100 million people. As this fight drags on (and it will), the arab countries will begin supporting the Iraqis against us, just like the English speaking nations supported each other, and were eventually dragged into WW1 and WW2. Compare this to the situation in Vietnam, where the total world ethnic community of the Vietnamese was only around 40 million or so. >
The confusion can be multiplied if you define this war beyond Arab conflict, yesterday Saddam Cabal had raised the ante by making it a clash of civilisation, it is an ironical and clumsy effort. 100 million Arabs are actually around 250 m if you include sub Saharan variety too, but they all feel hard done by, they have no representative voice, they are upset with their own regimes which are mostly un-popular. Arab economies along with 1 billion strong Muslim economies which can be natural partners in this coalition of disgruntled for help of tyrant are totally dependent on oil incomes and in case of countries like Pakistan and Indonesia goodwill of their trading partners in the west. In the Arab land Saudis are the most important players, yesterday Taha Yasin Ramadan called Prince Feisal a despicable character unworthy of being an Arab and that was on Al-Jazeera so with that outburst goes out any unity that may threaten an oil embargo, now what Ramadan was demanding and appealing to the will of the Arab street yesterday to rise up and destroy the tyrannies under which they live. The will to dissent is some thing that his ruling cabal has most earnestly destroyed with keenest of efforts, if the Arab Street today is bunch of political eunuchs it is not because they have no power their power to demonstrate and dissent has been systematically destroyed by people like Saddam, he cannot rely on power of street if he has not come through one in power. That is the internal dilemma of the politics of Arab unity and unity of Islam.
I hope you will appreciate this effort to remove some popular misconceptions, I am not a well read person like you, I run my life with street wise conventional wisdom and my passion is to understand logic and Socrates sort of search of truth thorough enquiry. I assure you that on this thread we do bring points that are not current but have a lot of rationality and assessment, my buoyancy in life stems from the fact that we are dead anyway let’s make the best out of our life. Let me confess I do have an agenda when I write, I think of a parent who has son and daughter in Iraq fighting on the front and I think let me bring a smile on his face let me show some brightness and light at the end of the tunnel, in a reverse flow I think of someone who wants his freedom from slavery of Saddam, my thoughts also goes out for him that the end of tyranny is near. I also very much realize with this kind of open ended agenda and optimism I may not be the best of analyst, the problem is even when I am listening to TV pundits I always think why can’t he may more positive why so much apprehension on anything. It ids for this I never really moved up form this thread, 99% of my views are not accepted by my own paper they reject most of my analysis as too provocative and I am left with this little space of mine where no one can censor me and I know that it does become a small part of my own little bubbly life.
With best regards,,,, |
