17 July 2006

Winning in Iraq - Introduction

(This is the first in a five part series addressing the perception that we're losing the war in Iraq.)

People have many different motivations for making the claim that we're losing the war in Iraq. Based on my research, I can only conclude that a large majority of the people who make this claim do so for reasons other than honoring our country or our new ally, Iraq, and that, more importantly, this claim is not based on the truth. Let me be more direct. People who say that America is losing the war in Iraq are lying.

As a Soldier, I don't care to comment on policy or politics. It is wrong for me to second guess an order or chip in my 2 cents worth whenever I think I know more than my leaders. Once I have assessed an order as legal, it's my duty to make sure that it happens whether or not I agree or understand why. It is my job to accomplish the mission.

As a Soldier, I do care to inform people who mistakenly think that we're not winning the war - people who say that we're not accomplishing the mission, people who say that we're doing a bad job. Unfortunately, many of these people have not read the National Strategy for Victory in Iraq, which was published by the National Security Council in November 2005. This strategy describes the conditions that must be met in order to declare victory, and provides a plan to achieve those conditions. This is the guide for conducting the war in Iraq. This is where my mission comes from.

The war in Iraq is being won by Iraqi Security Forces and the Coalition despite what one may hear on the daily news. As for the violence that said news is fond of telling us all about, this violence is to be expected. It is the nature of conflict for things to get violent before they get peaceful. Without the threat and action of good men with guns, kindly asking the bad men to stop will accomplish nothing when they are so committed to their cause that they would gladly welcome death rather than allow those under their influence the simple freedoms like, for example, letting women vote or letting someone of a different religion worship openly. If we are to win in Iraq, these bad men must be killed or captured. By its very nature, this means violence. When you send good men with guns into neighborhoods to find bad men with guns, there is a very good chance that there will be violence. As these bad men are taken down, others like them will attempt to use the same tactics of brutality and intimidation in order to impose their tyrannical will, but they will also be taken down. As this cycle continues, we are faced with two options: The first is to say, "Enough! There are more bad men with guns than we are willing to deal with though we are able to", and we retreat back into the borders of our own country hoping that the bad men we had just been fighting don't come knocking on our door. The second option is to continue to train and work with the ISF to kill or capture the bad men with guns until THEY say "Enough! There are more good men with guns than we are willing or able to deal with", and make sure that these bad men never knock on anyone’s door again.


Blogger andrea/pj's said...

i can't say how much
i appreciate your
insights to us:)

andrea/summer pj's

Blogger Rob said...

Would ya do us a favor and put a link to the article in its entirety once all the parts have been posted please?

Anonymous lee mcdaniel said...

Well said Bandit36. The logic is clear, simple and believeable.

Anonymous Anna said...

Wonderful post and insights. Much appreciated, too as I am tired of hearing how horrible it's going there and that it's all civil war now!

Keep up the great work and STAY SAFE!!


Post a Comment


Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home