The U.S. military conducted widespread raids in Iraq leading to the capture of 319 suspected Ba’ath Party opponents as part of a new crackdown on regime diehards yesterday. Military officials said U.S. forces carried out 27 raids and also seized more than $9 million in cash as well as hundreds of machine guns and grenade launchers over the past two days as part of Operation Sidewinder.
Will these raids be enough to end the continuing sabotage and the attacks on Coalition soldiers? Will they even help? Are raids like this the right approach to the problem? If not, what should we do instead?
Well, obviously they’ll help. I mean, any time you find and round up people who want to kill you, and take things that help them kill you, like weapons and money, that’s assets taken out of play.
What we need to do in the long term, though, (in addition to the raids, which we should keep up) is convince the Iraqis to accept our presence, and that they’re better off with the Coalition there. That will reduce any underlying support for the rebels, and might even cause some of them to give up.
Perhaps if done right and coupled with a massive increase in resources to address the economic chaos.
As they are now? No.
Hire more Arabic speakers, massively step up facilities available to CPA-I, compete for the weapons by buying them out and hiring soldiers for temporary make-work projects putting money into hands of desperate.
Also start putting together teams with better understanding of local conditions and mores.
The problem in Iraq isn’t just having “Ba’ath party” loyalists around. It’s that the country’s under the military occupation of a foreign power. The only surefire way to stop attacks against American and British troops is for the American and British troops to get the hell out.
December, if you really attended Berzerkeley in the 60’s (which frankly seems a bit of a stretch but I saw it in another post and am willing to give the benefit of the doubt), then you should know enough about armed resistance to realize that the US is rapidly getting into a quagmire. It’s a hydra and lopping off a few heads wont kill the beast. One has to win the hearts and minds as it were. The middle class don’t as a rule become guerilla’s…
Whether or not the raids will help depends on the nature of the resistance.
If the attacks are coming from a small group of ex-baathists or terrorist groups, and the population at large wants them to stop, then the raids will help as long as they get the attackers or their leaders.
If, on the other hand, the raids are coming from a wide spectrum of Iraqis (blood revenge, nationalism across the population, etc), then the raids will at best be ineffective, and at worst be counterproductive.
Since the U.S. has stepped up efforts to find ex-regime leaders once again, I believe the U.S. military feels that the attacks are coming from a smaller guerilla movement, unsupported by the population at large.
Do you have a cite for this? Guerillas are often recruited from the lower classes since as a rule, they are generally unhappy about something anyway. They are usually LED by well educated people with means (middle and upper class).
Raids will help root out organized resistance however it is nearly impossible to stop the lone guy with a grenade willing to sacrifice his life (especially in a country where everyone owns an RPG).
Should we simply pull up our tents and leave Iraq to its own devices because it is unacceptible for a single or even a hundred Americans to be killed in battle?
Only if the attacks are all being controlled from a single central source. Since they aren’t (despite White House spin about “Ba’ath Party Loyalists” and whatnot), they won’t.
Not treating the locals like third-rate serfs would help:
Well, considering that they’ve hit Saddam from the air 3 times now, only to discover (or admit?) later that he was nowhere near where they were bombing, how much confidence can we have that they captured actual combatants rather than bystanders?
Unless they captured people who were actually firing at them at the time, I would doubt it. And since they got 300 odd people, I sincirely doubt it. After all, reports indicate that they get shot at by a handful of men at a time, not 300.
Basing an opinion on a thundering amount of unalloyed ignorance…
My suspicion is that the Bushista’s want to spin this nastiness as being a continuation of the war: hold-outs, pockets of resistance, B’aathist zealots…
B’aathist zealots? Since when do secular, cynical political structures breed zealots? The B’aathists had no discernible ideology, certainly no religious claims to make on its adherents. Political structures like that last only so long as it remains capable of ordering soldiers to shoot. Witness the dissolution of the Communist Party in Russian. Hear about any Communists retreating to Siberia to organize for a Revolution?
The one tip off is apparently these people know what they are doing, they have some weapons training from sombody. On that basis, the disbanded Iraqi Army operating more as mercenaries than as genuine “guerillas” seems very likely. For this reason, I think Col suggestion of massive employement program for ex-soldiers is very sensible. Of course, it will cost millions. Not doing it will cost lives.
That was Sam and Co’s claim before the war when I warned of these kinds of problems, regretably Baathism does indeed have a highly discernable ideology and removed of Sadaam, and in opposition to a foreign invader just might stil have a motivating force.
Iraqi nationalism combined with narrow group or self-interest is, however, a likely explanation.
Perhaps you should review your timelines for 1989-1991.
As every other adult male Iraqi seems to have had some military service in the conscript army, basic tactical training and know how to use low end weapons such as RPGs and the like really tells us nothing at all.
However, it is reasonable to assume that disgruntled ex-soldiers are a significant component insofar as the upswing in organized attacks appears to coincide with the brilliant move to dissolve the army.
Indeed.
It is too early by the way to declare Iraq an American Chechnya.
There is a certain potential – perhaps growing – but turn around is possible. However that will mean the Admin will have to really start pumping in more resources and forget its little fantasy the foreign investors such as myself will jump right in w/o much helping hand.
You misunderstand China Guy’s comment: his comment was going to the issue of comfort: reduce dissatisfaction, give people a buy into a new system and the problems will be reduced.
No, however it’s time to get realistic about the costs of the process and the resources required.
Rumsfeld et al believe that. I’ve heard different things round here from guys with short haircuts, but perhaps Rumsfeld really does have his finger on the pulse of Iraq.
Make work projects: meaning not concieved to do the job in the most cost effective or efficient way, but concieved to employ as many Iraqis as possible.
Lots of them, jump start things. At present CPA-I in my opinion has a focus on efficient projects. Makes sense, except they need to be spreading the love as it were and getting Iraqis massively employed doing something vaguely useful but above all putting money in their pockets and giving them a sense of movement.
Movement not seen or felt doesn’t help the political situation.
