With the sad report of another handful of US soldiers killed in Iraq, a look at what the US is actually doing there again comes to mind, causing us to ask why and how much longer this can continue. What can be said, with any integrity to the families opf the slain soldiers and the families of soldiers still deployed? The mantra of the Bush Administration, its supporters and apologists is that the current “mission” in Iraq must be continued and that totally unrestricted funds must be appropriated to “support the troops.” However, taking the time to examine the situation in any detail suggests that these arguments are little more than false and unreflective jingoism.
Let us first look at the funding issue. A rash of recent reports detail how profligate the Pentagon and the Bush Administration have been as stewards of past funding allocated to the Iraq mission. While troops were coping with and dying from lack of adequate body armor, personal protective equipment and lack of armor for their vehicles, the Pentagon was paying millions of dollars in fraudulent overcharges to Halliburton for supposed "supply services" to the troops. Seven of the eight reconstruction projects that the Bush administration has touted as “successes” that are to help build citizen support for US troop presence are in serious disrepair or totally dysfunctional.Vital equipment and machinery have no maintenance and break down for simple failure to put oil in them, and generators are sitting idle or have been stolen. Millions of dollars of money that was supposed to pay Iraqi recruits our troops are to train remain unaccounted for and unavailable to support the mission. The long list continues, but the picture clearly emerges. Let’s just stop lying and kidding ourselves that it makes any sense to grant the Bush Administration a blank check to further conduct his Iraq adventure. The request is either a blatant request to keep the trough full for his porcine cronies to slake their insatiable greed, or an open acknowledgement that the Administration needs a blank check because it is totally incompetent to properly direct and account for the funds that they are provided.
More to the point, however, is the duplicity that underlies the declaration that current efforts and policies of the bush administration are designed to support the troops themselves. Consider a very recent report that prolonged and repeated troop deployments of 6-9 months or more, without interim periods out of theater for at least a year, are causing serious mental deterioration of our military manpower and readiness. More than 30% of soldiers deployed in Iraq are returning with serious mental illness issues, including Post Traumatic Stress Disorder [“PTSD”]. Lacking the bodies to fill recruitment quotas, the military has lowered the bar and is accepting new troops by overlooking or ignoring criminal records, mental illness histories and inability to meet previously imposed academic standards. Officers are being appointed and promoted at unprecedented rates and without time in grade experience previously required. This advancement is necessary because of the number of experienced officers who are electing to leave military service in light of the current deployment strategies.
Is it unreasonable to expect that a train that is run excessively without rest, maintained with substandard parts and driven by inexperienced engineers will be more likely to experience a train wreck? That is the current state of the US military. This is what the experienced military brass are telling the Bush Administration and Congress.
Consider also that a recent survey by the military revealed that more than a third of soldiers believe that torture of enemy captives would be acceptable if it might save the life of a fellow soldier. At least a third of soldiers reported that they would not report abuses of captives or civilians by their peers that they witnessed, and approximately half of Marines reported the same response. Both responses are directly at odds with formal rules of engagement and international law. If we assume that the soldiers that are recruited and sent to Iraq are not deliberately chosen because of a weakness in ethical fiber, then we have to conclude that the circumstances and stress of the battle theater is taking a toll on their morale and judgment. This is the experience that was seen in Viet Nam and led to massacres like My Lai. Unfortunately, the “military way” is to punish the front line soldiers who break under such pressure rather than to hold accountable the officers and officials who placed them in those circumstances.
The message both GOP and Democratic Congressional representatives sent to President Bush with the Iraq funding bill was that Congress is willing to support the troops with funding, but that there must be accountability on the part of the administration as to how the funds are used. There must be a clear and coherent strategy to achieve predefined progress and end the occupation that is putting our troops in such terrible straits. If there is no clearly demonstrable plan that is likely to improve the situation, then the greatest support of the troops is to bring them home. The US cannot solve the internal problems of the Iraqis by itself, we can only assist them. And there is no military solution, as even top US military brass have acknowledged. If the Iraqis are not inclined to resolve their own problems and they do not want us there to assist, the only sane response is to withdraw our troops. Neanderthal chest pounding rhetoric about "win at all costs" and "never accept surrender" coming form safe offices in Washington, DC, is not only irresponsible, but also fails to acknowledge the real problems that our troops face on the ground daily.
Experts have opined that US presence in Iraq is an irritant and a catalyst for the sectarian violence. Others have opined that our military presence provides an excuse for the various competing political factions NOT to work out a compromise. Were the US to withdraw its presence, or even set a deadline for withdrawal, the politicians in the Green Zone would be forced to sit down and hammer out compromises or risk losing whatever leverage they believe they now have.
The US military is one of the best trained, disciplined and capable forces in the world when they are managed in accordance with best practices as established in military regulations and deployed on missions that have some reasonable purpose and coherent strategy. The Iraq mission meets none of those criteria and is more likely to destroy the reputation and integrity of the US military than to support the troops.
No comments:
Post a Comment