In the Arena

Sounds About Right

Lawrence Korb’s fascinating and depressing diary of a recent visit to Iraq, via Kevin Drum.

ps–I’ve been told by several Congressional sources that troops intended for Baghdad are being diverted to Diyala and other trouble spots…which makes the counterinsurgency plan even more difficult to implement in the capital.

From Reader Anonymous:

To clear up a few facts about the surge: The “surge” has not yet taken place, there are currently between 142,000 to 150,000 US troops in Iraq as compared to the 152,000 troops that were in Iraq in November of 2006. As of january 2007 troop levels had dropped to 132,000 in Iraq, the lowest since July, 2006 (127,000.) The surge of troops “will boost” back the total deployment to 162,000 by June 2007.

You’re absolutely right. But two points–(add:three, actually):
1. The nature of deployments changed when the counterinsurgency tactics were instituted in Baghdad. Instead of being based in large forward operating bases (FOBs), outside of Baghdad, troops were moved into Baghdad neighborhoods, which was a major augmentation of troop presence in the city–and part of the reason for the increased US casualties.

2. The so-called “surge” never came close to the classic 1 to 20 troop to civilian ratio recommended for counterinsurgency. The disparity was made worse by (a) the corruption and divided loyalties of the Iraqi police, (b) the ineptitude of the Iraqi military, (c) the fact that 2 of the 3 Iraqi brigades summoned to Baghdad to augment the force were Kurdish–non-Arabic speakers and now (d) the fact that at least one of the promised brigades have been diverted to Diyala. All of which makes a tough mission next-to-impossible.

3. The ultimate Iraq “surge” end strength is projected at 167,000, which won’t be enough–especially given the lack of readiness (especially when it comes to equipment), the newly extended tours and the fact that Guard and Reserve troops will be called back. This is an exhausted force. Morale will be a bitch. And for what? The damage to our military will be considerable. A disaster, any way you cut it.

Related Topics: Uncategorized
  • Latest on Swampland

    Why Romney Is Dodging the Press

    Joe, the Romney campaign’s control-freakery makes for bad democracy, but I suspect it’s a smart strategy. Consider the way Mitt’s personal approval rating has bounced back over the past several weeks. As the GOP primaries wrapped up, Romney was roughly as unpopular as late-era George W. Bush. Now he’s about even with Barack Obama.

    Since becoming the presumptive Republican nominee, Romney’s favorable-unfavorable rating has jumped to 50%-41%, his best ever and in the same neighborhood as Obama’s 52%-46% standing.

    What changed? Well, for one thing, other Republican rivals are no longer attacking Romney. That helps. But it’s not like he’s had a free ride: the Obama camp has picked up where Rick and Newt left off. An alternate explanation would be that Americans are simply seeing less of Romney, and that makes them like him better.

    For Obama, gay marriage stance born of a long evolutionHuffPost Politics

    Crossroads, Super PACs and the Incumbent Advertising Gap

    In a recent piece about the Obama-Romney ad wars, Michael Scherer made the smart point that this election is different from past ones in that the incumbent no longer gets a free hit on his rival during the period immediately following the primary. The reason: super PACs have the cash to cover that gap while the challenger collects enough general election funds to keep pace.

blog comments powered by Disqus