# So these are the heroes that will step up as we stand down? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 30, 2007, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-these-are-the-heroes-that-will-step-up-as-we-stand-down/390126 "2007-01-30T16:42:24Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 9\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2007, 12:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-these-are-the-heroes-that-will-step-up-as-we-stand-down/390126/41 "2007-02-22T00:16:11Z")
[QUOTE=Ryan\_Liam] Vietnamisation primarily failed because the ARVN were prone to avoid risks in pacification, not to mention large amounts of corruption and poor leadership, mix this in with conscription, leads to a force poorly trained and unqualified to fight in battle. However in Iraq, we have a situation quite different, whilst the ARVN was built for conventional warfare, we’ve seen a light Iraqi army (suitable for counter-insurgency) (also not conscripted but all volunteer) built up with US for back up support. [/QUOTE] Perhaps, but the Iraqi army still seems to be cursed with corruption, poor leadership, and a force poorly trained and unqualified to fight. ---
**Author:** ![Ryan\_Liam](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ryan_liam/32/3965_2.png) [@Ryan\_Liam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ryan_Liam)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2007, 11:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-these-are-the-heroes-that-will-step-up-as-we-stand-down/390126/42 "2007-02-22T23:53:17Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] Perhaps, but the Iraqi army still seems to be cursed with corruption, poor leadership, and a force poorly trained and unqualified to fight. [/QUOTE] Seems to me alot of officers and Generals in the Iraqi Army come from a well versed military background. As for corruption and poorly trained, what do you expect from decades of military training by the Soviets? When an army lacks NCO’s and emphasised an expanded officer corps in order to maintain loyalty, this is bound to have repercussions. At least Coalition efforts have been trying to remedy that. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2007, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-these-are-the-heroes-that-will-step-up-as-we-stand-down/390126/43 "2007-02-26T15:42:35Z")
[QUOTE=Ryan\_Liam] As for corruption and poorly trained, what do you expect from decades of military training by the Soviets? [/QUOTE] I don’t recall Iraq ever having been a Soviet ally. ---
**Author:** ![tagos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@tagos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tagos)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2007, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-these-are-the-heroes-that-will-step-up-as-we-stand-down/390126/44 "2007-02-26T16:06:28Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] I don’t recall Iraq ever having been a Soviet ally. [/QUOTE] But it did get a lot of arms from the USSR and other places. I beleive the air force was trained in soviet military doctrine. None of this is relevant to the beleif that somehow, magically, an Iraq army built around factions, sects and nationalities doesn’t have a primary loyalty to them and not the government in Greenzonia. [Loyalty in question](http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/special_packages/iraq/16716510.htm) > [@](#): > > KIRKUK, Iraq - Lt. Hiwa Raouf Abdul is not supposed to be in Kirkuk. The oil-rich city, which many fear is teetering on the brink of civil war, is off-limits to Kurdish Peshmerga militia members. > > And yet, on Tuesday, the slender, 26-year-old Peshmerga officer breezed through one checkpoint after the next on his way into Kirkuk, exchanging waves and salutes with Iraqi army soldiers and policemen as he rode with a truckload of Peshmerga gunmen. > > \ > > But the ease with which a pickup truck carrying seven Peshmerga members, most of them wielding AK-47s, passed into Kirkuk says volumes about the challenge of pacifying flashpoint towns like Kirkuk and, ultimately, Iraq. > > When he passed by the Iraqi army checkpoint on the edge of Kirkuk, Abdul looked at the soldiers saluting him and said, “They get their orders from the Iraqi army, but their loyalty is to the Kurds, to us.” > > As with Shiite militias in Baghdad, the line between militia members and Iraqi security troops in Kirkuk is so thin that it at times doesn’t exist. And U.S. plans to build Iraq’s security forces - a process that has cost more than $15 billion nationwide - seem to have strengthened militias instead of discouraging them. > > The issue of loyalty with Iraqi security forces is proving to be the Achilles’ heel of American plans to stabilize the war-torn nation. Without neutral Iraqi soldiers and police, an American withdrawal would almost certainly lead to greater sectarian bloodshed than Iraq is currently experiencing. The end result will at best be a miltary coup and another murderous strongman we support because he’ll be anti-iranian. To believe that we can wave a magic wand and create a neutral, professional army is just wishful thinking. Note how the iraqi troops for the baghdad surge are [imported Kurds](http://www.voanews.com/english/2007-02-16-voa27.cfm). > [@](#): > > Iraq’s army is moving more troops into Baghdad as part of the new effort to stop sectarian violence there. The controversial plan includes bringing Iraqi Army units to the capital from the Kurdistan region of northern Iraq. Some critics of the plan oppose adding Kurds to Baghdad’s volatile ethnic mix. And it’s [not going swimmingly](http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/16502266.htm) > [@](#): > > The Iraqi army brigades being sent to the capital are filled with former members of a Kurdish militia, the peshmerga, and most of the soldiers remain loyal to the militia. > > Much as Shiite militias have infiltrated the Iraqi security forces across Arab Iraq, the peshmerga fill the ranks of the Iraqi army in the Kurdish region in the north, poised to secure a semi-independent Kurdistan and seize oil-rich Kirkuk and parts of Mosul if Iraq falls apart. One thing they didn’t bank on, they said, was being sent into the “fire” of Baghdad. > > “The soldiers don’t know the Arabic language, the Arab tradition, and they don’t have any experience fighting terror,” said Anwar Dolani, a former peshmerga commander who leads the brigade that’s being transferred to Baghdad from the Kurdish city of Sulaimaniyah. > > Dolani called the desertions a “phenomenon” but refused to say how many soldiers have left the army. > > “I can’t deny that a number of soldiers have deserted the army, and it might increase due to the ferocious military operations in Baghdad,” he said. > > \ > > In interviews, however, soldiers in Sulaimaniyah expressed loyalty to their Kurdish brethren, not to Iraq. Many said they’d already deserted, and those who are going to Baghdad said they’d flee if the situation there became too difficult. > > “I joined the army to be a soldier in my homeland, among my people. Not to fight for others who I have nothing to do with,” said Ameen Kareem, 38, who took a week’s leave with other soldiers from his brigade in Irbil and never returned. “I used to fight in the mountains and valleys, not in the streets.” ---
**Author:** ![tagos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@tagos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tagos)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2007, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-these-are-the-heroes-that-will-step-up-as-we-stand-down/390126/45 "2007-02-26T16:20:05Z")
[Defence reluctant to share data on Iraq army readiness](http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=35882&ref=rellink) > [@](#): > > The Defense Department has resisted auditors’ efforts to obtain data on the military readiness of U.S.-trained Iraqi troops, according to a senior government official. > > Comptroller General David M. Walker told audience members at a Government Executive breakfast Wednesday that Defense has not complied with repeated Government Accountability Office requests for evaluations of Iraqi troop preparedness, known as transitional readiness assessments. The Pentagon develops those evaluations for Iraqi and U.S. forces, Walker said, and has a statutory obligation to release them to GAO. > > \ > > Walker said he expected to find some embarrassing information that would account for the battle over obtaining them. “You just can’t go by how many people you trained,” he said. “Of the people that you’ve trained, how many are left? To what extent do they have loyalty to the unified government of Iraq? To what extent are they properly equipped? To what extent do they have appropriate support?” Of course we can’t quite rule out the possibility that things are just going so darned well Bush and Defence would just be so gosh embarrassed at all praise good news entails. It would probably be greeted with flowers. ---
**Author:** ![Ryan\_Liam](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ryan_liam/32/3965_2.png) [@Ryan\_Liam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ryan_Liam)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2007, 9:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-these-are-the-heroes-that-will-step-up-as-we-stand-down/390126/46 "2007-02-26T21:11:41Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] I don’t recall Iraq ever having been a Soviet ally. [/QUOTE] It was in the 1970’s but not in the sense of being a satellite, hence why it had a large officer corps and Soviet trained officers to keep the Iraqi army loyal. > [@](#): > > But it did get a lot of arms from the USSR and other places. I beleive the air force was trained in soviet military doctrine. None of this is relevant to the beleif that somehow, magically, an Iraq army built around factions, sects and nationalities doesn’t have a primary loyalty to them and not the government in Greenzonia. Same thing happened in Vietnam, units were most loyal to the areas around them, which were called the ‘Ruff/Puffs’ not to the central government, but ironically were more dedicated than the national army, the ARVN. I’d say the Iraqi Army is primarily not effective enough because it’s not done enough to strengthen it’s logistics and ‘beef up’ it’s military capability, it’s still a work in progres, remember it’s only been 3 years or so since we removed the last government. > [@](#): > > The end result will at best be a miltary coup and another murderous strongman we support because he’ll be anti-iranian. And who would support this strongman, once removed the instant Iraqis realised he is supported by their ‘former occupier?’ Why would any strongman put him in the position to be used by the US again? > [@](#): > > To believe that we can wave a magic wand and create a neutral, professional army is just wishful thinking. Note how the iraqi troops for the baghdad surge are imported Kurds. That’s strange, considering those ‘Kurds’ are actually still considered to be part of Iraq, they’re still ‘Iraqi Kurds’ hence the ‘imported’ is a nice spin. Look, armies, especially ones which are being rebuilt, take time to become effective. Taking into consideration that we destroyed the last one, and we’re rebuilding one which is multi ethnic and confessional, is a long job. I’m happy in the least the Army isn’t conscripted, because it would be a hell of an even longer job of getting them into the field. ---
**Author:** ![FRDE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e68b1a/32.png) [@FRDE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FRDE)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2007, 9:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-these-are-the-heroes-that-will-step-up-as-we-stand-down/390126/47 "2007-02-27T09:09:54Z")
The ‘Iraqi Kurds’ have not really been part of Iraq since 1992 - after that the USA roped them off from Saddam. Getting them into Baghdad is a bit like importing French troops into London. I know one of those guys, he cut my hair yesterday, he has been in the UK for five years and is just about to get a British passport. He would quite like to go ‘home’ but says that it is still very dangerous out there - which I found interesting - I assume that he has good contact. Possibly the Kurds have internal problems, or maybe he comes from a border area. ---
**Author:** ![tagos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@tagos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tagos)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2007, 11:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-these-are-the-heroes-that-will-step-up-as-we-stand-down/390126/48 "2007-02-27T11:27:51Z")
[QUOTE=Ryan\_Liam] That’s strange, considering those ‘Kurds’ are actually still considered to be part of Iraq, they’re still ‘Iraqi Kurds’ hence the ‘imported’ is a nice spin. Look, armies, especially ones which are being rebuilt, take time to become effective. Taking into consideration that we destroyed the last one, and we’re rebuilding one which is multi ethnic and confessional, is a long job. I’m happy in the least the Army isn’t conscripted, because it would be a hell of an even longer job of getting them into the field. [/QUOTE] No - nice spin in pretending anyone has a primary loyalty to Iraq and not their factions. I’ve presented evidence but as usual all you respond with is vague hand-waving and specious logic. You may think it clever to play word games but it really isn’t. Why does any strongman get support? Because he controls rewards and punishments. It worked for the USA with Saddam and it would work even easier with a Shia strongman let loose on the Sunni’s while we turn a practised blind eye as usual, while shovelling dollars and guns in his direction. This isn’t rocket science to figure out you know, not if you have a passing acquaintance with recent history and/or the principles of power and international relations. And as this is GD and I’ve provided you with copious cites in this and related threads please support your contentions with cites or don’t reply. ---
**Author:** ![Ryan\_Liam](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ryan_liam/32/3965_2.png) [@Ryan\_Liam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ryan_Liam)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2007, 11:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-these-are-the-heroes-that-will-step-up-as-we-stand-down/390126/49 "2007-02-28T23:06:35Z")
> [@](#): > > No - nice spin in pretending anyone has a primary loyalty to Iraq and not their factions. But those ‘factions’ **are Iraq**. Just as much as the UK is ‘English Scottish Welsh and Northern Irish’ you can’t make them go away. The situation in Iraq is difficult because those ethnic/sectarian passions are enflamed at the moment, a lot of history, wars, massacres in the absense of actual political progress between any of them is bound to produce such a situation. The fact that there are groups willing to listen to other sides is a mark of improvement from ‘my way or the highway’ Politics from the last butcher of Baghdad. There will never be stability, never be peace until the rule of the gun is put back in the box. > [@](#): > > I’ve presented evidence but as usual all you respond with is vague hand-waving and specious logic. You may think it clever to play word games but it really isn’t. What specious logic? You immediately equate withdrawing of UK forces as a ‘defeat’ because Patrick Cockburn says so, yet you fail to realise is that if we never give up control of Basra to the Iraqis, then what the hell is the point of the venture in the first place? We can’t hold it for an unspecified amount of time, nor do we want too, and I said to you in the beginning, that the eventual strategy was to build an Iraqi government and security force able to take over security, no matter how badly they handle it. Even if they fail a few times, we’re still their to provide advice, equipment and logistical support to carry them through difficult times. So it’s a circular argument, the British Army withdraws to bases further away, whilst allowing indigenous forces to remain and build up security on it’s own, because in the end, it’s going to be them doing it. That’s what nation building and counter insurgency is. But somehow this is all equated with defeat. Tell me, how are we supposed too, in your mind, to withdraw from Iraq without actually leaving the place, because that’s what it sounds like you’re saying on here. > [@](#): > > Why does any strongman get support? Because he controls rewards and punishments. It worked for the USA with Saddam and it would work even easier with a Shia strongman let loose on the Sunni’s while we turn a practised blind eye as usual, while shovelling dollars and guns in his direction. Then what would be the point of trying to accommodate the Sunnis into the political process if we were just willing to allow the Shias to butcher the lot of them? And why would numerous Anbar Sunni Arab tribes pledge their alleigence to the Government to get rid of Al Queda in Iraq? And why would various Sunnis join the local police forces in that area if it were not in their best interest? And why if we’re so concerned about ‘shovelling dollars and guns in their direction’ concerned about stopping the flow of arms to Shia militias from Iran? And why have numerous Shia leaders tried to make policies on accomodating the Sunnis and countering the militias? > [@](#): > > This isn’t rocket science to figure out you know, not if you have a passing acquaintance with recent history and/or the principles of power and international relations. Let’s just say I know alot more about Middle Eastern politics, culture and Iraq in general than yourself. ‘Might makes right’ politics in the Middle East will always be the substitute for stability, never the guarantor. > [@](#): > > And as this is GD and I’ve provided you with copious cites in this and related threads please support your contentions with cites or don’t reply. Who says I have to reply with an equal amount of cites to justify my position? Again, this is the whole premise of your argument. > [@](#): > > The ‘Iraqi Kurds’ have not really been part of Iraq since 1992 - after that the USA roped them off from Saddam. That’s ridiculous arguement as to saying Scots are not part of the UK, because they happen to have their own parliament and football team. Kurds served in the Iraqi Army, served in the administerial part of the Government (yes of Saddam and previous leaders) lived in Baghdad and surrounding areas and even in some cases intermarried with Arabs. But since the Kurds aren’t part of Iraq, then they’re not part of Syria Iran Turkey Right? Can’t have one rule for one and another for the others. Until they eventually declare independence, they’re still officially part of Iraq. And it’s political leaders have been wise enough to fall short of actually wanting it, knowing it would completely isolate them. > [@](#): > > I know one of those guys, he cut my hair yesterday, he has been in the UK for five years and is just about to get a British passport. He would quite like to go ‘home’ but says that it is still very dangerous out there - which I found interesting - I assume that he has good contact. Possibly the Kurds have internal problems, or maybe he comes from a border area. Even though the Northern part is undergoing an economic boom, not to mention is the safest part of the country. He’s probably talking about the border areas, and even then it’s stretching it. Look at the pretty pictures. > **[Home - Michael J. Totten](https://michaeltotten.com/)** > > \[et\_pb\_section fb\_built=”1″ next\_background\_color=”#f7f7f7″ admin\_label=”Hero Section” \_builder\_version=”4.21.0″ use\_background\_color\_gradient=”on” background\_color\_gradient\_stops=”rgba(0,0,0,0.4) 0%|rgba(0,0,0,0.4) 100%”... [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-these-are-the-heroes-that-will-step-up-as-we-stand-down/390126.md?page=2)