My Favorite Gilliard Posts

My favorite posts comprise the short series he did called How Iraq Ends.  Before I read it, I was one of the goofballs figuring that gee, we got in pretty easy (except for Turkey - don't forget Turkey!), we'll get out the same way - just start loadin' up them helicopters.  Steve put up satellite images and maps and then highlighted them so everyone could understand that getting out of Iraq wasn't going to happen well without a meticulously negotiated regional political plan and even then it's going to be dicey.  That's when I finally understood what the word "quagmire" means when it's used to describe a war and that BushCo has put together one hell of a quagmire. 

The posts are here:

How Iraq Ends, part 1

The End in Iraq, part 2

The End in Iraq, part 3

Also, An Honest Conversation, which explains why the war was lost before any Iraqi even picked up a gun.  In case the various News Blogs go away forever, I'm posting that one in the extended entry for safe keeping.

An Honest Conversation

This will be brief.

We need to be honest here: Iraq is not worth one more dead American.

People on the right and left want some deus ex machina to save Iraq, but we have., collectively, come to a simple conclusion:

Iraq is not worth dying for. Not for the warmongers on the right or the liberal hawks on the left.

It's bad the soldiers are trapped there, but we have made it their problem, No one is willingly going to join them, and 5,000 have deserted so far.

When you ask liberal hawks to enlist, they are offended by the question.

When you ask conservatives to enlist, they are offended by the question.

And America's parents are NOT sending their kids to die in Iraq if they can, at all, help it. No one blows up IED's at Wal Mart.

We have a volunteer army with fewer and fewer volunteers, and people reenlisting only to save their friends. There is a time limit to their ability to be in combat. They cannot serve forever. They will have to be replaced. And fewer and fewer are willing to replace them,

What I want people to do is be honest.

If you will not serve in Iraq, and no one you know will serve, stop expecting someone else to do what you will not.

Therefore, it is time to stop calling for more troops, or the US to make Iraq safe. We cannot do this and even Americans are refusing to join the fight. It is time to look at your actions and realize, that despite your ideals, you oppose continuing this war. In practical terms, you have decided that this war is not worth your life or anyone you know. And million of Americans have joined you in this decision.

So, with this fact evident, it is time to call for US troops to withdraw from Iraq. Not save it, not add more boots on the ground. You have already voted by your actions. It is time that you match it with your words.

           

     posted by Steve @ 6:43:00 PM       

Comments

[Thomas Nephew]

Yes, I read those back at the time. Those bridges at Nasiriyah (and other bottlenecks like them) are a big, big problem. (I remember wondering why Hussein didn't blow them up in the invasion, and not liking one answer I came up with.)

I don't think Gilliard was necessarily right if he was implying this is the only conceivable endgame. I think it's more likely there'd be a +/- quiet "redeployment", hopscotching retreat to the big 'permanent bases', an airlift out, and a lot of spiked/disabled equipment left behind. But (a) the fighting retreat scenario Gilliard describes is certainly an endgame to avoid. And (b) I'm not quite as well versed in these things as Gilliard was; my scenario may be harder to pull off than I think, or unacceptable for other reasons -- eg, the massive equipment losses.

[Kevin Hayden]

There's updates at Gilly's site. The blogs will only last another month.

[eRobin]

Thomas: Gilliard tended to write in extremes but he's been right about so much with Iraq that I figure that he was right to be concerned that this would be an option. I'm no MacArthur, but I think that the fighting retreat option ties directly to an attack on Iran. As in, if Iran is attacked, we'll be in immediate and serious trouble in Iraq that would require the sort of scenario that he describes in these posts.

Kevin: I saw that. I hope they think of a way to preserve his stuff though. There's so much that we'll want to have access to to help understand the war as it progresses.

[Thomas Nephew]

I'm no MacArthur.

That's no problem, that's a recommendation. MacArthur was an overrated, vainglorious nut. Exhibit 152: He allowed the US air forces in the Phillippines to be destroyed on the ground -- the day after Pearl Harbor.

I think you're right about Iran -- and it's one reason I'm guardedly optimistic about avoiding a war with Iran. I think the way this "surge" escalation is being conducted spreads out troops -- making them much more vulnerable to an uprising/fighting retreat than if they were pulled back to the FOBs around the country.

They're going to shut down News Blog?! Nooo! Is the problem with blogger.com? Given the outpouring about Gilliard, maybe the powers-that-be can release the administration to his co-blogger Jen?

[eRobin]

She said she never wanted to run the blog and won't start now. I think something will happen so that his work isn't lost. They just don't know what form it will take yet. I the meantime, we have thirty days to find all the stuff we want to have for future reference and save it on our own I guess. The colonialism series and all the stuff on Iraq, which has mostly all turned out to be so prescient, would be my choices.