You Want A Contractor-Counter-Insurgency (CCI) Guys... P.S. Don't Forget The Iraqi Economy

Usedcarsalesman saw the U.S. dead count in Iraq hit 1000 in late 2004.

It’d be great if he could look back today and say:  Yes, we lost 1000 soldiers, but the U.S ultimately mastered the social, economic, and military environment in Iraq and no additional U.S. soldier deaths were recorded between 2005 and 2008!!  Unfortunately he cannot.

As of March 24, 2008, the U.S. dead count in Iraq has ascended to 4,000. That's 4,000 Americans – people like you or me -- who are now but a memory. 

Who’s to blame for the quadrupling of U.S.combatant deaths in the space of 3.5 years? Certainly the enemy insurgents bear ultimate the responsibility.

However, Usedcarsalesman believes that the insurgency's success at killing our personnel is greatly enhanced due to the following  errors committed by U.S. Leaders:   

I. Employing a Strategy That Does Not Eliminate Insurgency

Chief of the British General Staff, General Sir Richard Dannat, speaking in September 2007, stated that “…With the exception of the Al Qaeda in Iraq element…(Insurgents) are Iraqi Nationalists and are most concerned with their own needs – jobs, money security…”

What does the U.S. use to combat these insurgents  -- these private Iraqi soldiers not a part of any nation’s standing army, and “who are most concerned with their own needs?”  Of course, the U.S. uses the military tool it has most readily available -- its own standing army.  Usedcarsalesman says this is the wrong "tool" for the job

What do we see as a result? A high-stakes, "police-vs.-criminals" scenario, where the U.S. Armed Forces play the “police” and "insurgents"  play the "criminals."  And Just as with crime in the U.S., we ultimately see that the Iraqi Insurgency is never entirely eliminated. it's managed or perhaps reduced, but never wiped out.

If the U.S. wishes to eliminate insurgency, Usedcarsalesman says that the U.S. must rapidly fund a different "tool."    It must fund a Superior Counter-insurgency force composed of private soldiers who are of U.S. origin and military background and -- like the Iraqi insurgents -- most concerned about their own needs including  jobs, money, and security.

Namely, the U.S.must work with Private Military Companies to create a Contractor Counter- Insurgency (CCI) force of 50,000 to 100,000 men.

This force could be achieved by drawing deeper from the current pool of ex-combat soldiers, ex-Marines, ex-Army Rangers, and ex-Officers with those forces, as well as by using an even larger number of ex-soldiers / sailors and officers from Special Operations Units – Army Special Forces, Recon Marines, and Navy SEALS.   

Yes, money and lots of it, would serve as the aforementioned "draw."  But as General Dannat said above,  "jobs, money and security" are what motivates the Iraqi Insurgents.   So, the ethical equation  balances out, so to speak.

Usedcarsalesman believes that in effect, such a Contractor-Counter-Insurgency (CCI) force – essentially "Mercenaries" who are mostly U.S. citizens with U.S. military training and loyalties– would put the Iraqi Insurgency Out-of-Business. The CCI would become the sole “Insurgency” in Iraq by forcing the competition – Iraqi Insurgents -- to do something else or die!

II. Failing To Adequately Rebuild (Remodel?) The Economy of Iraq

Iraq’s adult population -- namely the guys willing to carry the gritty AK-47s -- has faced  chronic low or under-employment for the last 5 years in no small part due to the U.S. invasion. Also, Iraq, itself, has had to struggle under more than a decade of foreign-trade embargos following its invasion of Kuwait in 1990.  Add the continued presence of an occupying army to the mix and Iraq finds itself with a nice case of domestic insurgency.

Usedcarsalesman, however, says that the failure of the U.S. to enable full and ample employment of the native population has left conditions in Iraq especially fertile for Insurgency 

Is it not reasonable to assume that all people who are unemployed and who want to work will potentially turn in to "outlaws" if they fail to find adequate employment (true for the United States as well as Iraq probably)? Is it not reasonable to assume that people who work and make a decent living typically want to avoid trouble, embrace security and obey the law (since failure to do so only puts what they have -- their recently-earned money, assets, well-being of family -- at risk)?  Exactly!

How Does The U.S. Fix The Aforementioned Two Problems?  Usedcarsalesman humbly submits the following solutions:

I. Voters Should Elect Either Sen. Barack Obama or Sen. Hillary Clinton as the Next President of The United States.

Here's why:  We know that Obama or Hillary will withdrawal U.S. combat soldiers -- Hillary in a probably more moderate fashion than Obama.  What most voters don’t seem to realize is that such  U.S.troop withdrawals won't necessarily mean that the United States is exiting Iraq.  

Instead, Obama or Hillary’s "troop withdrawal" action will enable former U.S. combat soldiers to freely rotate back to Iraq as well-paid military contractors. And trust Usedcarsalesman, most of those guys will want to do just that.

Sen. John McCain -- he a great leader and patriot and also an old, third-generation Naval Academy War Horse -- will not withdrawal troops.  In fact he will add troops -- the poorly paid Army/Navy/Marine guys enjoying mediocre public support and experiencing little in the way of perks other than ready-access to base fast-food -- and the U.S. will see another 5,000 U.S. soldiers come home in body bags in the next 8 years.

Yes, you could argue that 5,000 well-paid military contractors will come home in body bags in 8 years instead.  However, Usedcarsalesman would contend that those dead military contractors went to Iraq by choice, knew the risks, and could leave at any time. They were not there for some vague or questionable national objective, either 

(All is not peril for a CCI force of military contractors.   Keep in mind these well-paid privateers could afford – and have the leeway -- to arm and armor themselves with state-of-the-art equipment, thus cutting some of the risk of death and injury that they would face using “Standard-Issue” (Lowest-Bidder) gear .

II. The U.S. and The Rest of The U.N. Needs to Get the Iraqi Economy Moving Full-Throttle

Usedcarsalesman wants to see Iraqi Movie Studios bigger than Warner Bros., Iraqi Investment Banks that dwarf Morgan Stanley, Iraqi Entrepreneurs that make Steve Jobs seem flat-footed, Iraqi shopping malls better than anything in Tyson's Corner, Va., Iraqi hotels better than the best in Dubai, world-renowned Iraqi Universities, an Iraqi Six Flags,  a dozen Iraqi Harley Dealerships and Walmarts.   

He doesn't want a single Iraqi to have time to contemplate picking up a weapon unless it’s at the newly built gun club down the road from the new Coach store in Baghdad. And he wants each Iraqi citizen pining for pictures of Ray Kroc and Donald Trump to hang in their home-offices (not pictures of explosive-vested martyrs).

Yes, you could say that the aforementioned economy would be a better state of affairs for many people in the United States, let alone Iraq. And Usedcarsalesman is forced to agree.   

The good news is that the U.S. may gain experience "fixing" Iraq that will enable it to correct its own problems at home