[IP] more on CNN special on Iraq war intelligence failures
Begin forwarded message:
From: chodge5@xxxxxxx
Date: August 25, 2005 12:57:47 PM EDT
To: "Robert C. Atkinson" <rca53@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Rich Kulawiec <rsk@xxxxxxx>, David Farber <dave@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [IP] more on CNN special on Iraq war intelligence failures
I think that public opposition to the war, and it cuts across
ideological
boundaries BTW, will play a much less significant role in Iraq than
it did
in Vietnam. I think the situation on the ground is deteriorating faster
than public opinion can react to it. I think it was a few weeks ago that
members of the Sadr Brigade walked into the office of the mayor of
Baghdad
and informed him that he was no longer mayor. Last week insurgents
managed
to disrupt power to the city for 24 hours (not that it's reliable
anyway).
I think CNN reported that Baghdad is averaging 880 killings a month by
death squads -- this is in addition to the casualties being reported as
inflicted by insurgents. I haven't seen any reports lately, but I'd be
very interested in hearing how many reporters actually leave the Green
Zone to prepare their reports. I'd also like to hear something more
up-to-date about the status of the road from Baghdad to the airport. My
guess is that it has been for all intents and purposes shut down.
I don't doubt that if insurgents lay siege to the city that allied
forces
could take it back by overwhelming force, but that would mean pretty
much
destroying Baghdad in the process. I'm not sure that's really a viable
option. And the Green Zone being inside the city.....I think that really
is a complication. I have trouble imagining how anything like an Iraqi
government could emerge from such a battle.
I think you're right about our attitude to the soliders being different
this time, but I don't think that's necessarily a good thing for those
supporting the war. In Vietnam, the anti-war movement often took out
their
frustration on soldiers for actions taken by the policymakers. I don't
think that's the case any longer. Here in East Tennessee we have a
lot of
troops in Iraq -- two local men were buried last week, and the son of
our
History Dept's secretary was killed last year, right before Christmas.
This time I think we understand that those being killed are our friends
and neighbors. When the local media interviewed the families and friends
of those killed last week, they were given ample opportunity to speak
about the President, the War, Cindy Sheehan, etc. They spoke about their
children, the love they had for their country, and their belief that
they
were trying to make the world a better place. They expressed great
sympathy for Sheehan and her loss. And with regard to Bush and the War,
they were silent. (Our local Congressman, a fiscal and social
conservative, was one of a handful of Republicans who voted against the
war; he saw it as a ill-planned money pit. His approval rating this area
was not affected at all, remaining somewhere in the mid to high 80s.)
One final comment with regard to how we are viewing our troops this time
around. I think this time we are more sensitive to the fact, esp.
here in
the South, that many of those enlisting, particularly in the National
Guard and private militias like Blackwater, are doing so because they
see
it as the only avenue open to them to emerge from poverty and to
participate in the American Dream they see every night on TV. We deride
suicide bombers in the Middle East whose families are awarded a payment
for their sacrifice, but the decisions poor Americans are making in
enlisting for the war should make all of us very uncomfortable.
PS While I am very supportive of the anti-war movement -- and can't
believe there isn't an active group on the Columbia campus -- I hope
Hamilton Hall isn't trashed this time around. Some of my fondest
memories
are of classes I had there.
-c
On Thu, 25 Aug 2005, Robert C. Atkinson wrote:
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 12:25:38 -0400
From: Robert C. Atkinson <rca53@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Rich Kulawiec <rsk@xxxxxxx>
Cc: David Farber <dave@xxxxxxxxxx>, chodge5@xxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [IP] more on CNN special on Iraq war intelligence
failures
Agreed...unfortunately, that's why a "Tet-like" attack--large enemy
formations taking and holding territory--is unlikely. Would the home
front support or opposition to the war be significantly changed by
"more
of the same, just larger"?
Rich Kulawiec wrote:
On Wed, Aug 24, 2005 at 06:34:43PM -0400, Robert c. Atkinson wrote:
If there is a "Tet like attack on Baghdad" will history
repeat itself? The insurgents will be undoubtedley be
annihilated if
they stand and fight so the question is whether they would win the
propaganda war?
Ah, but there's the rub. I can't see the insurgents et.al.
deciding to
"stand and fight", because, as you point out, they'd be annihilated.
I think they'll well aware of that. So if a major, coordinated
attack
comes, I think it'll use hit-and-run tactics designed to disrupt
infrastructure and inflict maximum casualties...not to actually
take and hold any targets. I think it's also a pretty good bet that
at least some of the attacks will be carried out in ways that make
defense/counter-attack carry a high risk of causing civilian
casualties.
---Rsk
--
***************************************
Robert C. Atkinson
Director of Policy Research
Columbia Institute for Tele-Information (CITI)
1A Uris Hall, Columbia Business School
3022 Broadway
New York, NY 10027-6902
212-854-7576
cell: 908-447-4201
***************************************
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/