Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: pheilman_ who wrote (219071)	9/8/2007 3:21:01 PM
From: unclewest	Respond to of 793914

Now I see your point is that the government of Iraq derives its legitimacy from the consent/respect of the populous Correct. Every government requires the support (willing or coerced) of the governed. For the most part Iraq has neither right now. The first step of a counter insurgency effort is similar to the surge we are witnessing. The last phase is national elections. In our first effort we skipped all the in-between steps. Therein lies the reason I so confidently predict a military victory (based on the original mission set) is no longer achievable. Presently we are now attempting to back into regional elections. That too is out of order. The next step (after the surge) should be local elections in the secure areas. Regional elections come after that and national follow regional. The reasons would fill a book. The most important reason imo is this ensures the leadership is built ground up from counter insurgents. The lower level leaders have much motivation to continue to provide local security because by accepting leader positions, they and their families have the most to lose - their lives. But that is what got them into the fight to begin with. Every local election establishes leadership that can, with help if necessary, maintain security. That does 2 things: 1. Wins even more support of the people and 2. Creates a denied area for the insurgents. That piece is then repeated over and over until the country is secure. We started a war of liberation and declared a win. During the victory party a war of insurgency was being created to fill the leadership void we (stupidly) created. Then we entered phase one of counterinsurgency. Next we jumped to phase 8. Then we went back to phase one. Now we are attempting to jump towards phase 4. Catch 22: The most fundamental responsibility of govt is to provide security. The people of Iraq are not going to support a national government that does not provide security so they don't. The Iraqi national government cannot provide that security from the Green Zone. Hell the Iraqi government cannot even secure the Green Zone. Security must be established locally first and the first round of national leaders must come preferably from those who fought the insurgents. The real Iraqi leadership cream will rise if the election process proceeds from local to regional to national. I don't know how to go back now and do it right. And apparently nobody else does. But that is what should have been done. Petreaus is already going against basics in the FM he claims he wrote. The most reasonable way out of this may be to get rid of Petreaus and Kilcullen and put real counterinsurgency experts in charge. But in my heart, I think it is too late even for that, besides, I know we won't do that. We can't. We are running out of clock. This war is FUBAR. The pols screwed it up initially. War is politics by other means. When the pols recognized their failure they sent the troops. When the generals recognized their failure they requested and the pols provided more troops. Unfortunately the military leadership selected by the pols is not equipped with the other means. This means at some point the pols are going to have to pull the plug. Meanwhile back at the ranch the same failed military leadership that brought us here are redesigning our armed forces for more counterinsurgencies in the future. I see pieces of the new design everyday. So far it looks remarkably like an Edsel. uw