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