by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright April 27, 2007
All Rights Reserved.

tripping away the façade about Iraq, Lt. Col. Paul Yingling blasted the generals for misleading Congress and failing to adjust to a stubborn guerrilla war that costs American lives. While Yingling points the finger at the Pentagon, he must appreciate the White House's heavy-handed role. When Centcom commander John P. Abizaind and Iraq commander Gen. George W. Casey opposed President George W. Bush's troop surge, they took their early retirements. Both opposed escalating the Iraq conflict with more U.S. forces, believing they would add to U.S. casualties. Replacing Casey with Adm. William Fallon and Abizaid with Lt. Gen. David Petraeus doesn't undo the inescapable fact that gross miscalculations and mismanagement have turned Iraq into a hopeless suicide mission. Changing generals doesn't change Iraq's insurgency or precarious battlefield.

      Blaming U.S. generals fails to appreciate the intense pressure applied by the White House to meet its political agenda. When Bush announced his troop surge Jan. 10, skeptics worried about increased U.S. casualties. Three months later, civilian deaths modestly declined while U.S. deaths increased. While it's tempting to blame the generals, the White House continues its last ditch attempt to reverse Iraq's bloody insurgency. Petraeus has been handed a suicide mission, asked to undo a deeply entrenched insurgency supported by Russia, Iran, Syria and a host of other Islamic countries committed to ending Iraq's U.S. occupation. Calling his mission “the most complex and challenging I have ever seen,” Petraeus signaled—short of insubordination—that the military faced an uphill battle. No one wants to admit or accept defeat but the facts speak for themselves.

      Petraeus can't waive a magic wand, suddenly stopping a guerrilla war that transformed Iraq into Bush's “central front in the war on terror.” While Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds battle for supremacy, al-Qaida stirs the pot, pitting all groups against Nouri al-Maliki's American-sponsored government. “This effort may get harder before it gets easier,” said Petraeus, warning the public about bloody days, weeks, months and maybe years ahead. U.S. forces haven't adapted to fighting an asymmetric war, where camouflaged guerrilla fighters sabotage, snipe and plant bombs to upend the American mission. “I wouldn't try to truly anticipate what level might be some years down the road,” Petraeus said, warning of a deadly long-term conflict. Petraeus walks a dangerous line telling the truth at the risk of alienating the White House, buying more time before Bush leaves office.

      Iraq's lack of progress stems directly from disloyalty within its new army and security services. Infiltration by insurgents causes divided loyalty, sabotaging al-Maliki's attempt to meet key U.S. benchmarks for self-governance and self-sufficiency. “Iraq is in fact the central front of al-Qaida's global campaign,” said Petraeus, admitting to a comparable situation in the early '80s when Bin Laden's mujahedeen fighters fought with U.S. help to expel the Soviet occupation in Afghanistan. Now the tables are turned and Russia supports al-Qaida's efforts to expel the U.S. from Iraq. “This group's activity must be significantly disrupted at let least for the new Iraq to succeed,” said Petraeus, placing a heavy burden on the U.S. military. No conventional army has faired well against seasoned guerrilla fighters supported by foreign governments and rogue regimes to end U.S. occupation.

      Talking blasphemy in Armed Forces Journal, Yingling delivered the bad news about Iraq. “For reasons that are not yet clear, Amreica's general officer corps underestimated the strength of the enemy, overestimated the capabilities of Iraq's government and security forces, and failed to provide Congress with an accurate assessment of security conditions in Iraq,” said Yingling, countering White House claims that more time, more money and more troops will solve Iraq. Writing from inside the military, Yingling can't see the heavy-handed White House influence in the Pentagon. Generals, like Casey and Abizaid, can't tell the truth without jeopardizing careers. Blaming U.S. generals doesn't acknowledge the Pentagon's civilian control, leaving Pentagon policy makers at the mercy of White House spin doctors and political operatives.

      Replacing former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld with former CIA Director Robert Gates doesn't change White House policy committed to its current Iraq suicide mission. “The intellectual and moral failures common to America's general officer corps in Vietnam and Iraq constitute a crisis in American generalship,” said Yingling, pointing the finger at the wrong culprit. White House strategists set the policy for Pentagon generals, including civilian Cabinet secretaries like Rumsfeld and now Gates. U.S. forces in Iraq find themselves in the same quicksand as their counterparts in Vietnam. Battling an unending guerrilla war causes the ongoing hemorrhage, leading to Iraq's bloody insurgency. “Given the lack of troop strength, not even the most brilliant general could have devised the ways necessary to stabilize post-Saddam Iraq," wrote Yingling, offering a bleak prognosis.

About the Author

John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin national and global news. He's editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.

©1999-2005 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc.
(310) 204-8300
All Rights Reserved.