From AP News comes an interesting article that reveals what most of us in Iraq know: many troops disagree with the surge (AKA escalation) idea.
In dozens of interviews with soldiers of the Army's 5th Battalion, 20th Infantry Regiment as they patrolled the streets of eastern Baghdad, many said the Iraqi capital is embroiled in civil warfare between majority Shiite Muslims and Sunni Arabs that no number of American troops can stop
There were a fair number of comments regarding the breakfast the new SECDEF Gates had with several lower enlisted troops at Camp Victory in Baghdad last week. The short version of that 15 person meeting was that the troops agreed with the idea of bringing more troops to Iraq.
Now we hear the other side of the story.
This becomes even more timely as we have news of the 82nd Airborne Division's 2nd Brigade being deployed out of schedule to Kuwait (and likely soon thereafter to Iraq).
At the time, I felt that it was likely that these troops were likely not coached to say what they did but that they may have been picked for previously expressed opinions. Having been in similar situations, I feel that it can be very difficult to be totally candid with the second highest person in your chain of command. To expect an 18-22 year old soldier to really speak his or her mind to the Secretary of Defense is asking a lot. I know it does happen (see the National Guardsman a couple years ago quizzing Rumsfeld on the armor for their trucks) but not often. More than likely, those soldiers felt some obligation to say something that Robert Gates wanted to hear.
Now we get several other soldiers, ones who are actually out on the streets every day (we don't know what all the jobs of the soldiers who had breakfast with Gates are. I like to assume that many of them were ones who are out there but who knows?) who disagree with the idea of sending more troops.
Spc. Don Roberts, who was stationed in Baghdad in 2004, said the situation had gotten worse because of increasing violence between Shiites and Sunnis.
"I don't know what could help at this point," said Roberts, 22, of Paonia, Colo. "What would more guys do? We can't pick sides. It's almost like we have to watch them kill each other, then ask questions."
Others were more diplomatic:
Capt. Matt James, commander of the battalion's Company B, was careful in how he described the unit's impact since arriving in Baghdad.
"The idea in calling us in was to make things better here, but it's very complicated and complex," he said.
Some do agree with the idea:
Staff Sgt. Lee Knapp, 28, of Mobile, Ala., also supported a temporary troop surge, saying it could keep morale up by reducing the need to extend units past the Army's standard tour of one year in Iraq.
"It could help alleviate some stress on the smaller units," he said. "It could help Baghdad, but things are already getting better."
Notably, although SSG Knapp thinks things are getting better in Baghdad, his real motivation for more troops is to take the pressure off the ones there and to boost morale.
I really do think most soldiers realize this occupation is not going well and despite there being many good things happening that aren't being reported in the newspapers back home, overall this is a mess.
My biggest worry about more troops is that with more soldiers there will be more casualties. Apparently I am not the only one:
But their more troubling worry was that dispatching a new wave of soldiers would result in more U.S. casualties, and some questioned whether an increasingly muddled American mission in Baghdad is worth putting more lives on the line.
December is very close to being the most deadly month this year for our troops (100ish so far) and with a few days left, could surpass October (106 - or "some 105" if you're reading the Fox News Ticker). The scary thing is that October was Ramadan, traditionally a busy month for insurgents since they apparently get a better deal in heaven if they die during Ramadan. December isn't a religious time for the Muslims. I know we are getting into the Hajj season and am not sure what that might mean for insurgent attacks. Also, with the impending execution of Saddam, officials are certainly preparing for the worst. Which only implies that we might have the deadliest month of the year with things only looking to get worse, not better. Throw in a few thousand more soldiers into the mix and things get even more fun (not really).
Unfortunately, it seems once again the JCS is buying off on this plan (even though the administration has supposedly not actually decided on a new strategy for Iraq yet) and it will likely happen. Time will tell and I certainly hope things get better in Iraq, but if they don't, I hope folks remember that it was John McCain's idea when 2008 rolls around (assuming he gets the nomination).