‘We haven’t been defeated militarily but we have been defeated politically’

September 11, 2006

The Anbar province — one-third of Iraq — has been a nightmare for quite a while, but it’s reached the point in which one key Marine official quietly told his superiors the region is all but lost.

The chief of intelligence for the Marine Corps in Iraq recently filed an unusual secret report concluding that the prospects for securing that country’s western Anbar province are dim and that there is almost nothing the U.S. military can do to improve the political and social situation there, said several military officers and intelligence officials familiar with its contents.

The officials described Col. Pete Devlin’s classified assessment of the dire state of Anbar as the first time that a senior U.S. military officer has filed so negative a report from Iraq.

One Army officer summarized it as arguing that in Anbar province, “We haven’t been defeated militarily but we have been defeated politically — and that’s where wars are won and lost.”

Col. Devlin added that al Qaeda has become a powerful political force in the region, thanks in large part to the lack of functioning Iraqi government institutions. One person who read Devlin’s report concluded that Anbar is beyond repair; another concluded that the United States has lost in Anbar.

Aside from the obviously dejecting news, it’s only natural to wonder what the political reaction will be to Devlin’s memo being leaked.

I’m afraid Michael Crowley has it about right.

Republicans have come up with the term “Defeatocrats.” So what does this make Pete Devlin? A “defeatosoldier?” “A cut-and-run colonel?” I look forward to the RNC’s attack ad against him.

Indeed, given what we’ve seen and heard of late, Donald Rumsfeld believes that Pete Devlin is the moral equivalent of Nazi appeasers in World War II; Dick Cheney believes any public debate about Devlin’s conclusions necessarily encourages terrorism, and Condoleezza Rice believes Devlin’s attitude is akin to those who tolerated slavery in 19th century America.

No? Top administration officials wouldn’t really smear the chief of intelligence for the Marine Corps this way? Perhaps not, but why, then, smear those of us who think he’s right?

“Top administration officials wouldn’t really smear the chief of intelligence for the Marine Corps this way?”

CB, this guy is just the G2 for the Marine forces in Iraq, not the Chief of Intelligence of the Marine Corps (which relies on the ONI for that anyway, the Marine Corps Intelligence Center is subordinate to him).

That said, Col. Pete Devlin’s opinion is quite interesting. Since we have been so dead set against the breakup of the country of Iraq, we’ve done nothing to promote Sunni secularists and tribalists in Anbar province. Thus, the only real power is our enemies, and according to Col. Devlin, they are essentially run by al Qaeda. Now, I’m not sure how much the local Sunni Arabs would want to have their country run by foreigners, but then, the Taliban seemed perfectly happy to have Osama bin Laden as their Minister of Defense.

What this all goes to demonstrate is that a clouded imagine of what you can and want to achieve will distract you both from the possible and the desireable. If we had gone into Iraq with the avowed intention of smashing it to (political) bits so that it could never trouble its neighbors again, the damn Iraqis would have done everything possible to stick together. But the contrarian cusses are now willing to blow it apart rather then see us achieve our goal of a “united democratic Iraq”.

I say give Anbar to Saudi Arabia. More Sunni Arabs for them but no more oil. They have a defense budget larger than Iran’s. Let them spend it there 😉

  • I say give Anbar to Saudi Arabia. More Sunni Arabs for them but no more oil. They have a defense budget larger than Iran’s. Let them spend it there

    Not a bad idea in the short run. In the long run, though, I’d be wary of giving more fodder to the wahhabi cannon that is Saudi Arabia.

  • The “disgruntled employee” excuse can only work so long. Officer by officer, the the frustration and disgust of the military is beginning to steam out of the bottle. There HAS to be a big morale problem right now, from top to bottom, and for good reason.

    Once again, I recommend reading “Fiasco.” The incompetence was there from the beginning and followed up by breathtaking failure of leadership. About 2/3rds into the book, you learn how the US Army itself methodically poured gasoline on the fire of the insurgency. In fact, you find that “insurgency” was the last thing expected in Iraq, and that the lessons of Vietnam were all forgotten.

    This is not neccessarily news, but the failures are carefully detailed and explained. Apparently operational tactics have changed for the better, but the hole was dug too deep.

  • Well I guess Cheney, Bush, and their media drones will soon start accusing this guy of abetting the terrorists. Of course the administration could just ignore it and hope the general media follow suit. Sadly this is not an unlikely scenario.

  • Everybody knows dumbya is an idoit with idoit yes-men and yes-women in this administration surrounding him. Why don’t some of you smart people do something about this situation before he screws up the entire world. This matter is getting very serious.

  • “I’d be wary of giving more fodder to the wahhabi cannon that is Saudi Arabia.” – Edo

    Edo, fodder is what you put in front of the other guy’s cannon to absorb all the shot while you manuever around his flank. It’s not something you load into your own cannon. And frankly, I’d expect the Saudis to have their hands full of just as much Iraqi insurgency as we face now. The faces would change, but the methods would remain the same.

    And frankly, it’s about time we started to think that way (using allies as cannon fodder, especially our Arab allies) if we expect to get out of this “War on Terror” alive. Damnit, in the end it’s the Arab regimes in the Middle East that Osama wants to overthrow and replace, not the United States governement.

  • I think that the right will try to cover the implications by doing the loud WATB dance and screaming for the head of who ever leaked the memo.

    -jjf

  • I expect an eruption of these realistic intelligence reports — after the November election. Funny how a democracy can keep a lid on what the voters need to know.

  • If the Washington Post burns to the ground tonight, check Rove’s closet for kerosene and matches.

    Seriously, I have a sneaking suspicion that in the near future (before 2007) Bush will suddenly announce that the Iraqi Government [snerk] is more than ready to take the reins and it would be rude for the troops to stay there another moment. This will distinguish him from the “Cut and Runners” because as “The Decider,” he can decide when Iraq has achieved sufficient democraticness.

    The fact that it would amount to screwing an entire nation from the front and then flipping it over to take it from the back would not matter to him, so long as it staves off his transformation from a lame to a very dead duck. And if it means Iraq becomes a giant terrorist training camp? With any luck a Democrat will be in office when, or a little while before terrorists strike the US again.

  • ***…be wary of giving more fodder to the wahhabi cannon that is Saudi Arabia.***
    ———————————————Edo

    The Wahhabi cannon can be permanently spiked by establishing a crash program to develop an economical alternative to petroleum—and then giving the technology to the world for free. Such a move would, within months, deprive the entire OPEC region of its most sacred asset: Foreign currencies.

    If this nation so desired, it could, in all likelihood, develop a bio-mass substitute for petroem-based aviation fuel for all forms of aircraft, diesel fuel-oil for heavy trucks and locomotives, marine-grade fuel for all classifications of boats and ships, and a manageable substitute for automotive gasoline—all within two to three years’ time. Take away their money, and the House of Saud will implode….

  • “Unleash the swiftboats … and cuts veterans benefits again, too” – K. Rove

    There was a report yesterday, I believe it was in the Guardian, that mentioned that the no. 2 Brit soldier in Afghanistan called it quits because the warplan was so lousy and poorly implemented. He didn’t want to be part of such an inept operation. The part that struck me was that he said the Brits wanted to be different from the U.S. forces by not battling the insurgency with WWII-style blast the city with armaments and then tell the battered citizens you just saved them. The Brits ended up going the American route.

    Ths soldier also made (yet again) what should be such a common sense observation: that winning a counter-insurgency relies on winning over the population with good actions and diplomacy. Unfortunately our leaders have those cast iron “stomachs” that prefer the taste of violence and blood.

  • Lance,

    And frankly, I’d expect the Saudis to have their hands full of just as much Iraqi insurgency as we face now. [ about giving Anbar to the Saudi ]

    Mmm, no. Actually I would expect to do a bit better.

    For one thing, they speak pretty much the same language.

  • Did this suprise anyone, once they pulled troops out of that province to shore up security in Baghdad? And didn’t have any forces for replacement?

    And where the hell is the new Iraqi Army? Sitting in their barracks, or patroling the quiet areas (if any) of the country?

    On the other hand, I can see the right using this as a microcosm of what would happen if the US completely left Iraq.

    They rabbit hole just keeps getting deeper and darker.

  • “Seriously, I have a sneaking suspicion that in the near future (before 2007) Bush will suddenly announce that the Iraqi Government [snerk] is more than ready to take the reins and it would be rude for the troops to stay there another moment. This will distinguish him from the “Cut and Runners” because as “The Decider,” he can decide when Iraq has achieved sufficient democraticness. ” – TAIO

    I expect that about a month after they execute Saddam Hussein. Which, in my opinion, is why the Iraqis are not making an effort to finish Saddam’s trials and shot the bastard.

  • If Al Qaida if becoming the “protector” of the Sunnis, doesn’t that make them the adversary of the Shiites? Can we expect armed conflict between Iraqi based Al Qaida and Moqtada al Sadr militias? Let them have at each other. These two viruses may neutralize each other.

    • Comments are closed.