Subscribe via RSS

Archives by Date
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008

See all Archives
Archives by Category
'Canes
Afghan Update
Ammo and Munitions
Armor
Around the Globe
Av Week Extra
Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
Bizarro
Blimps
Blog Bidness
Body Armor Blues
Bomb Squad
Brownshoes in Action
Bubbleheads, etc.
Cammo Green
Catch the "Buzz"
Chem-Bio
Civilian Apps
Cloak and Dagger
Commandos
Comms
Contingency Ops
Cops and Robbers
Cyber-warfare
Data Diving
Defense Tech Poll
Dissent Tech
Drones
DT Administrivia
Eat DT's Dust
Extra! Extra!
Eye on China
Fast Movers
FCS Watch
Fire for Effect
FOS Files
Friday Funnies
Gadgets and Gear
Going Green
Grand 'Ol Osprey
Grand Ole Osprey
Ground Vehicles
Guns
Homeland Security
In the Weeds with Eric
Info War
Iraq Diary
Jarhead Jazz
JSF Watch
Just War Theories
Lasers and Ray Guns
Less-lethal
Logistics
Los Alamos and Labs
M4 Monopoly
Medic!
Mercs
Missiles
Money Money Money
Most Wanted
MRAP Edge
Net-Centric
Nukes
Old Skool
Our Shrinking Planet
Planes, Copters, Blimps
Politricks
Polmar's Perspective
Popular Mechanics
Rapid Fire
Raptor Watch
Red Team
Retro-Futuro
Robots
Roll Your Own
Sabra Tech
Ships and Subs
Snipertech
Space
Special Ops
Star Wars
Strategery
Stray Trons
Tactical Development
Terror Tech
The Deadlies
The Defense Biz
The Peoples' Site
The Sunday Paper
The Tanker Tango
The View from Av Week
Those Nutty Norks
Training and Sims
Trimble on the Case
Video Lounge
War Update
Ward'z Wonderz
You can run...

See all Archives
Newsletters

Edited by Christian Lowe | Contact

Captain America in the Forever War

American troops in Iraq are near-suicidal. Or maybe they couldn’t be happier. It all depends on the flavor of blog you read, I guess. But what I found in my time in Iraq didn’t cling to any neat political storyline.

sgt_looking.jpgOver three weeks in and around Baghdad this July, I spoke to dozens and dozens of soldiers about their views on the conflict. For the most part, morale among these infantrymen and engineers and bomb-disposers was high. Shockingly high, given the fact that they didn’t buy the Bush administration’s rationales for the war.

“Democracy? Here? Are you fucking kidding me?” one sergeant laughed, as we drove near the Abu Ghraib prison. This was from a guy from helped safeguard the January round of elections. He figures the place will collapse into civil war as soon as U.S. troops leave.

But he’s glad he’s in Iraq, regardless. Mostly, because of the insurgents.

The guerillas in Iraq have been brutal, killing way more innocent bystanders than American occupiers or Iraqi collaborators. While I was in Baghdad, a group of soldiers in a nearby neighborhood were handing out candy to bunch of kids. Until a suicide bomber stepped in, and killed 27.

“It boggles my mind, how someone can go into a crowd of kids, and kill them all. I’ll never understand it. But that’s why I’m here,” said Staff Sgt. Mark Palmer, with the 717th Ordnance Disposal Company, an Army bomb squad. “Yeah, it’s still fun to blow stuff up. But it’s not the core thing. Figuring out how this shit [the bomb] works. Stopping it from hurting people. That’s the main thing.”

U.S. troops are highly trained. So they’ll do what they’re ordered. But in order to feel good about their mission, they need a cause. They need a bad guy, a villain, so they can play Captain America. The insurgents have been only too happy to step collectively into the role of Dr. Doom.

The result is a cycle of attack and reprisal that has nothing to do with WMD or drafting constitutions – but can easily drag on for years. Most of the soldiers I spoke with didn’t expect the deadly feedback loop to stop any time this decade. “I’m staying [in the Army] until I retire, which is another ten years,” one non-commissioned officer told me. “So I figure I’ll be back here, what, another five or six times?”

Most of these GIs were ready to whoop ass, when they first get to Iraq. They’re part of America’s professional, increasingly-permanent military class. Which means they’ve been training for years to go to war – with precious few full-out battles to fight. “For a solider, this is like the Super Bowl,” Captain Greg Hirschey, the 717th’s commanding officer, said.

But the Super Bowl is only one day long. To keep going for years and years, they need a mission, a reason to stay and fight. Washington isn’t providing. The insurgents are.

And make no mistake, soldiers are staying. I’d say three in four of the GIs I spoke with were planning to reenlist. The new, fat bonuses are one reason, of course. But another is the sense that there are real-life psychopaths out there that need to be stopped. It may sound corny. It may sound dumb. But that’s what I saw.

THERE’S MORE: Now, I’d be remiss if I didn’t throw in a few caveats here. These soldiers we all stationed at Camp Victory, the poshest military base I’ve ever seen. It’s also one of the safer places would could be in a warzone. Which means better morale. Could soldiers and marines feel differently out in the sticks, where it’s MREs three times a day and mortars all night? You bet. Also, I was in Iraq in July. Since then, 233 American troops have died over there. That could have been a major morale-changer, too.

AND MORE: Chris is embedded with the 2-2 Batallion of the II Marine Expeditionary Force in the Anbar province. Which means you go read his blog, now.

AND MORE: Joe Katzman's response is really worth a read.

Comments

Nice Haldeman reference with the title. Great book, as relevant today as it was during Vietnam.

Posted by: L.B. Jeffries at June 21, 2007 01:37 PM


It is obvious (to those of us that pay attention) that the MSM is slanting coverage making Iraq look like a failure. I think the Bush admin. failed to counteract the critics.Humbleness is an attribute but in this case it is a henderance. Most people don't know that most of Iraq is safe and secure, that it is only the 2 or 3 provences that is under attack.

Posted by: Ken at December 9, 2005 07:31 AM


It's encouraging to see our nation's soldiers eager to do their duty and defend our country. However, this "forever war" with Iraq and the Islamic world in general has the potential to turn into the next Crusades, which itself lasted hundreds of years. I also wonder how much this war will end up costing? If all they say about the spending is true, this could end up becoming the biggest expense in the history of humanity. It's sad to see such a waste of good American lives. The Old Men in Washington are destroying entire generations of men and women over this war in the desert. And most of them never even had the stones to fight in wars when they were young.

SAD.

Posted by: Luis Hernandez at November 30, 2005 11:52 AM


Al-Qaradawi was let into the UK to speak to various audiences this summer. I hope the UK government knows that the implications of his ruling are to urge Iraqis to attack British civilians and troops, as well.

Posted by: Stephanie_B at November 5, 2005 05:31 AM


The paragraphs quote below is from a July 2005 BUSINESS WEEK article on Robert Pape's report on suicide bombers:

"PREVAILING MISCONCEPTIONS. The implications: There's a connection between September 11 and the war in Iraq, radical Islamic fundamentalists are behind all of the suicide bombings in Iraq, and they're spurring insurgencies throughout the Islamic Crescent. Yet government studies of intelligence failures and Pape's analysis indicate there's no evidence that any of this is true.

About the only point Pape agrees with is that the bombers want to drive the U.S. out of the region. But he argues that American policies to combat the terrorists are wrong-headed. "The presumed connection between suicide terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism is misleading and may be encouraging domestic and foreign policies likely to worsen America's situation and to harm many Muslims needlessly," he writes. Here's a summary of his analysis, which is based on the 315 suicide terrorist attacks from 1980 to 2003:

Sri Lanka's Tamil Tigers, a Marxist-Leninist Hindu group opposed to religion, committed the largest number of suicide attacks, 76. The Kurdish PKK, which used the tactic 14 times, is headed by a secular Marxist-Leninist, Abdulah Ocalan. The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, another Marxist-Leninist group, and the al-Aqsa Brigade, which has ties to the socialist Fatah movement, account for a third of the attacks against Israel. Communist and socialist groups account for 75% of the attacks in Lebanon. Islamic fundamentalists, he concludes, were associated with about only half of the attacks from 1980 to 2003. And such fundamentalist Islamic countries as Iran and Sudan aren't producing any suicide bombers."

Suicide bombers in Palestine/Israel and Iraq are trying to send a message: get out of my country. If we don't pay attention, our troops and the people of Iraq will keep paying the price.

Posted by: Linda Jansen at November 3, 2005 10:58 PM


Mary,
I couldn't agree more that the Saudis and their state-sponsored wahabbism are a major mover of Islamist terrorism, not to mention a big stultifier of reform in Islam in general.

But as for a full scale war across Saudi Arabia, Iran and Sudan, surely you're joking! We don't ever commit to large wars lightly. On the eve of American entry into the Second World War, when the extent of the genocide the Nazis were committing was already pretty clear, and the potential for Hitler taking of all of Europe was visible, it was still an open question about whether we should go to war, and certainly whether we should go in full-scale. Recall also that many of the tactics used in that gruesome war (firebombings of Dresden and Tokyo, the a-bombs, etc.) would - thankfully - simply not be acceptable under the present circumstances, not by soldiers or civilians. And that war was against well-defined armies run by state actors, not diffuse hate-mongering organizations with varying degrees of rootedness in communities across the Islamic world. Not to mention that we surely did not fight WW2 alone - had the Russians not fought Hitler to the death, or had they made "peace in the east" we might well have been fighting him for many more years.

We clearly need to force change on Saudi Arabia, and that will be hard as long as they have their fingers on the spigot. But we also have to accept that the next stage of development in Islam will probably not be a secular democracy, and it will happen over decades.

Posted by: Eric E at November 3, 2005 10:36 AM


Congrats to this web site for providing such a worthwhile sounding board from an Army veteran of the 1970's. I am now going to become an avid visitor, and contributor.

Posted by: Bill at November 3, 2005 09:36 AM


I am an Army Brat. I respect the men and women who serve this country and I also know that I couldn't hack being in the military. That aside, I find that there seems to be a collective amnesia going on with politics these days. Does anyone remember that in Desert Storm there was a lot of talk of going in to "finish the job" by Bush Sr. and was poo pooed as not being humane or civilized. I remember plenty of talk of this on CNN. But those that insist we should not have finished off Hussein then are often the same ones that are wondering why we didn't now. How discusting and manipulative.
So now we have this debate about whether the White House fudged the data to create a reason for war in Iraq. Even my wife pesters me on this. Doesn't anyone remember our current president talking about how Iraq was not behind 9/11 but was a necessary step? Does anyone remember as far back as 1998 how Clinton, Gore, Kennedy and Kerry are quoted in the NY Times, and Time magazine as saying that one of the biggest threats at that time were Iraq and bio-terror weapons, and that EVEN if there were no WMD we would still be justified for a first strike? Look it up. I may be wrong. I may be mislead as to the reasons why we are at war and that the administration is up to it's own agenda. I don't believe so. I can almost certainly say that the nay-sayers would have done very similar things in this war and you can bet if Kerry were elected (let alone Gore!) we would still be in this "quagmire". So it seems that the Democratic Party has been using the general uneasiness of our current world as a springboard to blame it on Bush. Guess what, there are plenty of sound, rational, peace loving folks who do understand why we are at war and must finish the job. Yikes!!
I also have distant relative in what was formerly East Germany. People used to say to me, "well they are relatively well off" as justification of their situation. I also heard a lot of "they don't know about democracy" BS
Let's hope that there will be some more obvious signs that things are going as planned for the nay sayers soon. In the meantime, we are establishing a possible pro-West(I don't think that's a bad thing) and pro-democracy regime in the midst of a very Islamist(not Islamic) region.

Posted by: Lance at November 2, 2005 04:16 PM


Get us out of Iraq---Now!!!

Posted by: Carol Devine at November 2, 2005 01:56 PM


'“It boggles my mind, how someone can go into a crowd of kids, and kill them all. I’ll never understand it. But that’s why I’m here,” said Staff Sgt. Mark Palmer, with the 717th Ordnance Disposal Company, an Army bomb squad.'

This guy obviously doesn't know what levels of "collateral damage" the pentagon finds acceptable. 30 civilians can be projected to be killed per bombing w/o approval from the secretary of defense.

Posted by: John Farnsworth at November 2, 2005 12:41 PM


"But do we really know if our presence in Iraq is decreasing Iraqi terrorism? Or is it inflaming it? This isn't a question of courage or good intentions. It's really just about effectiveness."

Did our presence in Europe inflame the Nazi SS? Did the passengers on flight 93 inflame the hijackers? Oh, my, we shouldn't inflame them. Let's just sit quietly and let them do what they please.

But it's true, we do have to question the effectiveness of this limited war. When we decided to fight fascism during WWII, we didn't ally ourselves with the primary source of fascism, Germany. During our 'war on terrorism', our government allies itself with the primary source of Islamic fascism, Saudi Arabia.

We were able to install Democracy in Europe after WWII because our enemies' infrastructure was entirely dismantled. We're trying to install Democracy in the Middle East while allowing fascism and terrorism to thrive in Iran, Saudi Arabia, the Sudan, etc.

Our government consistently avoids any opportunity to confront Islamist fascism, partly because of oil and partly because they find the Islamists a convienient weapon to use against the commies, especially the Chinese. We're still fighting the dregs of the cold war. As a result, our government, (Republicans/Democrats), has no plans to directly confront these fascists.

As a result, our soldiers are the only people in the world who are currently effectively fighting terrorism. Every terrorist hopes to take as many innocent lives as they possibly can. In a nuclear era, that's a lot of innocent lives. Dead terrorists are a good thing. Our soldiers need all the support they can get.

Posted by: mary at November 2, 2005 10:36 AM


Six billion borrowed dollars a week poured into the desert sands, so Captain America can pretend to change the political culture of a 4000-year-old land, one dead Arab at a time. Where do we invade next? Instead of thanking the troops so much for fighting Uncurious George's war, I should be thanking my (as yet unborn) grandchildren for paying for it, with compound interest--not that they'll have any choice.

Signed: ex 11-B, ex-82nd Airborne, all the way and then some.

Posted by: Anthony at November 2, 2005 02:38 AM


The courage of our fighting men is unquestionable. And there's no question that people who blow up civilians are monsters.

But do we really know if our presence in Iraq is decreasing Iraqi terrorism? Or is it inflaming it? This isn't a question of courage or good intentions. It's really just about effectiveness.

Posted by: kate at November 1, 2005 10:57 PM


As a deactivated Vet (65-67) I want our people in Iraq to know my thoughts, and prayers are with you every day. These terrorists are an evil bunch, and you are the people holding them in check May God bless you all.

Posted by: Richard at November 1, 2005 07:20 PM


JSAllison,

The bulk of the young black troops I've met in Iraq are with support units, but that's because there's a higher percentage of black soldiers in support units than in the infantry and armor, etc. This has been a trend in recent decades ... blacks seeking out military careers in support and technical branches versus combat units. There've been interesting sociological studies about the phenomenon. It seems a lot of young suburban white boys join combat units looking for adventure. Rural and urban blacks are looking for military jobs where they learn skills that are applicable to later civilian careers.

Posted by: David Axe at November 1, 2005 04:50 PM


Joe Katzman writes in to say...

I said almost a year ago that our greatest saving grace in this war was our enemies. This is being demonstrated on a smaller scale in Iraq, and on a larger scale by Iran.

The GIs are right in their instinctive grasp that the folks who do such things didn't exactly wake up one day and snap. The depth of the carefully cultivated, organized hate in the Arab/Islamic world is rarely covered, hence rarely appreciated. But it is the real driver of this war, and always will be until/unless it's replaced with something else. That "something else" may be systems of government that give them more constructive outlets, or some kind of sea-change within Islam (which Iraqi revulsion at terrorist tacticshelps to spread - that is al-Qaeda's quagmire fear), or it may be a Germany/Japan kind of experience where suddenly the murderous hate doesn't seem like such a great idea any more, either via direct example or via a disastrous proxy incident (since America isn't the only player in this game, don't assume the sobering megadeath incident must come at America's hands). If that replacement doesn't happen, the war continues whether we like it or not - and even whether we acknowledge it or not.

The hardest thing for folks here to grasp about this war is that in a fundamental way, it really isn't about us or what we think of it.

Posted by: Noah Shachtman at November 1, 2005 02:39 PM


Great post - thanks! Note that only 13 countries other than the US have 300 or more troops in Iraq, and several of them will probably insist on withdrawing by February 2005. The US will increasingly have to go it alone in Iraq next year, though the UK and Italy will probably continue to provide about half a division between them. (the US has the equivalent of about 7 divisions in Iraq).

Posted by: John Beale at November 1, 2005 12:17 PM


In any large organization you're going to have clueless wonders. My only beef with the first fracas in the Gulf was that it didn't last long enough to weed some of these yobs out.

Jerks in base camp are a tradition that goes way back in just about every military organization.

As far as the young black troops being skeptical and distrustful I'd have to ask are these line troops or support troops? My experience was that the dividing line had more to do with their first line leadership and in line units there's a bit less separation in the day to day life of the soldiers and their noncoms which tends to help establish trust.

Of course, the further away from my span of control things were, the more pessimistic I was about them and vice versa

Posted by: JSAllison at November 1, 2005 09:53 AM


Fixed.

Posted by: Noah Shachtman at November 1, 2005 07:30 AM


Interesting post-I was in Baghdad from October 2004 to about 8 weeks ago.

The clashing of military cultures was a morale killer-I remember being followed around Victory by a Sergent Major who was unhappy that my turret gunner "ground guided" our humvee from up top, instead of dismounting. He insisted that the gunner had to ride sitting, facing forward-at all times. This silliness is a small example of the stupidity that goes on over there - there is more outside the wire, especially rookies who show up and think that the stateside training is an accurate simulation of the conditions in Iraq.

It seems that common sense has disappeared from some of the military.

The California National Guard Commander in the first link tops any story I have however-He got to Iraq and was shocked that he had to arm his trucks!!! After two years in combat over there, that was a surprise to him.

How do people like that become commanders?

Posted by: max at November 1, 2005 12:44 AM


Last link is borked...

Posted by: Capt. Jean-Luc Pikachu at November 1, 2005 12:03 AM


Great post, Noah. I've spent half of 2005 in Iraq, and I agree with your assessment. GIs are highly trained and highly motivated, even if they don't buy the Administration's rationale for the war. One demographic has a notably different attitude, in my experience, and that's young black enlisted troops who are much more skeptical about their leaders and much more critical of the war. Why this is, I don't know.

Of course, I don't trust the troops on the ground to have the best perspectives on the war. They see only through the sights of their rifles, which is an important perspective but a limited one. Senior officers and NCOs tend to have a broader view of the war, but theirs is often highly politicized. The young enlisted guys, the ones with little to lose in speaking their minds, see only the same grubby kids, dirty streets and barren plains day after day.

Posted by: David Axe at October 31, 2005 08:17 PM


Post a comment




Remember Me?


Please enter the code as seen in the image below to post your comment.