My assumptions:
1. The Iraqi rebellion can not be defeated unconditionally by the US
forces in Iraq.
2. The number of rebels in Iraq will continue to grow in size,
knowledge and materials as the US forces remain at a more or less
constant level, potentially even diminishing.
3. The US can only keep this up for 3 more years, especially if
Afghanistan blows up.
4. There are in fact few real critical objectives for the US in Iraq
that can be saved, the situation is a failure overall. In Afghanistan,
where the situation is more stable and where the core of Al Qaeda
remains, there is much more to lose.
5. We have little knowledge of the enemy and are on an equal footing in
the intelligence counter intelligence war.
6. The asymmetrical nature of the conflict makes it easier for the
rebels to bring new combat methods to battle. In 2 years they have
move from mortars and road side bombs to highly coordinated suicide
(homicide) attacks with conventional small arms back up, they have open
a supply line from many channels, Syria is just one. They are
experimenting with more ruthless methods, the US procurement process
hold new methods up for months.
7. The supply chain for the Iraqi rebels is actually in many ways
better than the US system. The US forces are, for political reasons,
forced to buy US and allied technology when better cheaper weapons are
available. In many recent battles the rebels had better small arms and
even sometimes better body armour.
8. There is clearly no workable plan, nor one that can be concieved of
to turn things around.
These are all pretty bleak, but I can see little evidence for more than
raising questions about them. The US is in a ugly position in Iraq,
one I think will soon become worse.
My Theory:
Al Qaeda and other Islamic organizations are flooded with new recruits
being trained in Iraq to fight Americans. These troops will pass
through Iran and enter the much more difficult terrian of Afghanistan
where the population seems to be ever more tired of US occupation. In
Afghanistan they will link up with existing groups and raise the
pressure on allied forces in Afghanistan.
This will essentially reopen the second front in this war. But it will
be an important front. Essentially Iraq is a side show, and
Afghanistan is relatively silent. This could change very quickly.
With the difficulty of the terrian and the excellent quality of local
fighters Afghanistan could soon become a real mess for US forces.
IF this happens the US will have no option but to negotiate some
extraction from Iraq to insure that the real, and in my opinion
entirely just, efforts in Afghanistan, Gitmo abuses aside, does not
fail.
The future.
The elected Government of Iraq and thier forces are a humiliation to
the entire rebuilding effort. The US will soon see it in their best
interst, assuming I am correct, to look for an El Salvador like
solution with all parties joining new general elections, or the nation
broken up or have some Lebanon like situation.
This is my hope, to save American lives. It is probably too late to
save Iraqi lives, but we can atleast be sure it is not us killing them.
Once the US pulls out the Baathists, harden by 3 to 6 years of combat
with the world's greatest army will expel most of the Arabist, who will
go to Afghanistan and their home contries to expand the war. Then the
New Baathists will, under the banner of stability and Iraqi
nationalism, take the nation over in a coup.
The end: the US lost the war.
But the fate of the people of Iraq hangs in the balance. We simply
must face the fact that this will happen, no matter how long we stay.
Our presence is just training, the Iraqi National Guard is a joke.
Lightening has been a failure.
The key question is what happens when the Baathist take the nation over
again. The options are generally three in my opinion.
1. Kurdish and pro-Iran factions break off and Iraq is in civil war. I
don't see the Shia winning though the Kurds could hold out, but this
will possibly draw Turkey in in some form.
2. The Baathists carry out a mass revenge plunging Iraq in to a
Cambodia like situation, very bad.
3. Or, a more moderate side of the Baathists, freeded of Saddam's
family and personality, will rule much better than the old regime.
I have far too little information about what the Baathist party is
going thorugh to know. But on the Shia side I see Shistani, a weak old
man, and Sadr. I don't think these guys are going to win any wars.
.
|
