Fresh Faces Revisit Postelection Iraq- Smaller Units to Cover Larger Area

[bigtree]

New Mission for U.S. Division: To Put Iraqi Forces to the Test

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/18/international/middleeast/18strategy.html?ex=1292562000&en=b1da64bcb7050d1a&ei=5089&partner=rssyahoo&emc=rss

Dec. 17 - The Fourth Infantry Division returns to Iraq next month for a complex, yearlong tour that illustrates the risks and goals of the American military's postelection mission across Iraq.

The more than 20,000 troops in the division, about 15 percent of the 138,000-strong American commitment scheduled to remain in Iraq at least through the early part of the year, will be responsible for security across a swath of central and south-central Iraq that is much larger than previous commands have tried to cover there.

The expanded mission includes more than a hope, but a requirement, that Iraqi security forces take over the security mission in larger areas of their own country. The planning is also driven by a cold reality that many of the allied troops - including Ukraine, Bulgaria, Italy and possibly even Poland - seem likely to leave Iraq over coming months.

So, like American troops all across Iraq, the Fourth Infantry Division, from its headquarters in Baghdad, will have no choice but to rely on increasing numbers of Iraqi troops, testing as never before the American and Iraqi forces - and the new government to be assembled from the parliamentary election that was held Thursday.

Across Iraq, American forces say they will be ready to rely on the Iraqis, though many acknowledge that previous assessments of how quickly domestic security forces would step up to the fight have been far too optimistic, with well-publicized instances of Iraqi troops fleeing the fight or not returning to duty after a particularly intense battle.

So, these soldiers are at the point of Washington's politics. They are likely optimistic and hopeful that the elections signal a turning point in the occupation. They probably expect, and may see for a time, that optimism and hope in the faces and attitudes of the Iraqis.

But, there will be more political and military meddling, and more opportunistic or compelled violence directed at the symbols of the sponsors of the ruling authority, our soldiers.

A military force, our military force is designed primarily to fight and win wars. Not that they don't do peacekeeping well. American compassion and generosity are reflected in many of the actions of our soldiers, most noticeably in their dedication to humanitarian pursuits like medical care, rebuilding schools, providing food and housing, and other instigations of the representatives of a prosperous nation.

But, there is great resentment among many in the Iraqi population that won't be assuaged by chocolates, bandages, or raising roofs. Our soldiers shouldn't be put at the point of such a murky policy of intentions in Iraq.

The article above spells out a limited, supporting role for the soldiers who are just arriving, but it just sounds like a pie-in-the-sky assessment of the intentions of the insurgency. In a statement on a frequently used Islamic website, the group associated with Zarqawi threatened to continue its attacks in Iraq. (http://www.rte.ie/news/2005/1217/iraq.html)

What is the wisdom of leaving these troops, vulnerable to a counter reaction by the resistance, with a lesser force? I understand the logic of a lesser target, but I also question the policy of this wishful-thinking deployment.

God help the soldiers who are at the point of Washington's politics. Damn the meddlers sitting safe here at home who can't bring themselves to say enough of their war games. Blessings to those who use their positions for peace, here and in Iraq.

[bigtree]

1. :-(

[bigtree]

2. Concern for the soldiers is where I started my opposition to the Iraq war

the second Iraq war, the one that junior waged to stick it to his daddy. Or, was it to stick up for him? "They tried to kill my daddy?"

Either way, they are the stick that these men and women we elect wave around to show their friends and neighbors how tough they are. They are the instruments of Bush's mindless destruction, his jingoistic justifications notwithstanding. They are our sons and daughters. Their lives and humanity are in our hands, Bush's hands. Let's not forget as we listen to Bush that our nation allowed him to put these soldiers in the position to do so much damage to others and subject to so much harm.

Bring the soldiers home now. When, and if they ever do, nothing more will have occurred in the interim more significant than the almost certain increase in the number of people killed.