Friday, August 27, 2010

Iraq war not over, after all

Saw an interview with NBC's senior foreign affairs correspondent, Richard Hertz [Richard ENGEL, surely! ed.] in which he disabused me of the notion that the American withdrawal from Iraq means the war is over. Mr. Engel was the man who covered the premature evacuation, so he should know.

Apparently what we witnessed earlier this week was the end of "Operation Iraqi Freedom" -- I'm not making that up -- which was the "combat operation" in which 1000s of Americans (and Iraqis) died. So the troops who left, shouting "We won! We won!" were combat troops. With me so far?

Well, it seems there are still 1000s of American troops in Iraq. On September 1st they begin a new mission, "Operation New Dawn". That is a training mission. The troops are there to give "advice and assistance", dontcha see.

Does that mean they won't engage in combat? Errr...no. They are armed and may use their weapons if fired on...or threatened...or whatever. Does that seem not right to you? Remember Vietnam. Our "military advisors" did a lot of fighting, and not a whole lot of advising because after awhile there wasn't anyone to advise. Just us.

What strikes me as odd is that Iraq is beginning to look like Vietnam in reverse. We send in combat troops, fight for seven years or so -- longer than WWII -- then declare victory and send the combat troops home...or maybe to Afghanistan. Then we send in the advisors.

Can you tell the difference between a soldier who fights and a soldier who advises? I wouldn't think so. They wear the same uniforms, carry the same weapons, salute the same flag. I wouldn't think the Taliban or the Shiites or other Iraqis will be able to tell the difference either -- worse luck for our side.

No comments:

Post a Comment