Building a Wall
A good post over at The Newshoggers about the astonishing news that the US military is building a wall in northern Baghdad in an effort to make it impossible for Shi’ite terrorists to commit terrorist attacks against Sunnis.
The modern version of the ‘Iron Curtain’?
Cernig writes:
The new counter-insurgency manual emphasizes the importance of information, of “hearts and minds” in counter-insurgency work. It was co-authored by Petraeus himself. Is he so desperate or so pressured by civilian masters to give them an exit that he’s walking away from his own ideas of how to do the job right?
“We’re not completely sure how the population feels either way.” said Army Sgt. Michael Pryor, a public affairs specialist for the unit building the wall, in an email to reporters. They bloody should have been sure – before they began!
You’re “not completely sure how the population feels” about you building a wall through their neighborhood? Isn’t this something that has to be supported by the local population? One would say so, wouldn’t one?
19 Responses to “Building a Wall”
To be won over, hearts and minds need to be in close proximity to each other — and not scattered across a blast zone. I suspect that General Petraeus would be open to alternative suggestions that will “curb some of the self-sustaining violence by controlling who has access to the neighborhoods.� Does anyone have a recommendation?
According to Robert Fisk, who wrote about this over a week ago, this plan was tried in Vietnam and failed spectacularly.
http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/50439/?page=1
Actually, nothing makes me laugh more than, “Army Manual”. “Hearts and Minds”, with regard to unconventional warfare, is an old Vietnam War term. Army Manuals are generally nothing more than comic books.
Nicely done, Chris. You shoehorned the eponymous Robert Fisk and a Vietnam comparison into the same sentence. Why not go for the trifecta and recommend levitating the Pentagon?
GW, you missed the point of my post entirely. It may well be that the wall is a good idea – if the locals agree it is one. When McMaster did this in Tal Afar he did it with the prior canvassing, knowledge and support of the people who had to live in the shadow of the walls.
This time, the US didn’t ask. That will both fuel the feelings of seperateness which have been created by the sectarian violence and fuel resentment against US forces. McMasters own theories, as explained by him during the Tal Afar operation and subsequently while back in the US, say so.
So the obvious conclusion is that Petraeus, who is advised by McMaster, is under political pressure to do stuff faster even if it conflicts with their own doctrine. Most would see that civilian interference in military operations as counterproductive even if they think the surge is workable.
Regards, C
Chris would eliminate the Pentagon and move all the money to welfare programs. *grin*
The wall makes sense. If you are being attacked, a defense is to put a wall between you and your attackers. It certainly worked in the Middle Ages, and it works today in the form of gated communities in the USA. (I bet Chris just loves those!)
In fact, some would advocate building a good, stout wall along the US border with Mexico.
The moat, the drawbridges and gates and portcullises guarding the portals in the wall .. .even a radiation barrier, cross at your own choice and risk … these are optional.
If two groups hate each other, separate them by a wall.
Not only that, but partitioning Iraq and even forced population exchanges and transfers, which would horrify the Left, may be necessary in the future.
> This time, the US didn’t ask.
That could be because the locals desire to kill each other and wouldn’t accept a wall interfering with their fun and games.
DLS,
Or it could be because the Bush administration’s civilians are meddling, pressing Petraeus for an excuse to declare victory and exit PDQ.
Or didn’t you read the bit where I wrote about what McMaster did in Tal Afar, where the locals were likewise trying to kill each other?
Regards, C
Cernig:
You believe that General Petraeus is being pressured into doing something rather than doing the right thing. Might it be the case that desperate circumstances demand desperate measures, and that Petraeus is not letting the perfect become the enemy of the good?
If I remember Maslow, the need for physical security should trump the commercial interests of the neighborhood merchants. Or is the situation not as desperate as the media portray it? If there’s a better solution to stemming the violence, I’m all ears.
Walls reflect a siege mentality.
Forts, in days gone by, had moats…Cities are not extended forts.
By this logic, the American campus may soon have 12 ft high walls…with security guards checking each and every student who enters the campus.
Walls are no cure for a deeper malaise…but an illusion that a place/city is being secured.
Let’s see how long this illusion lasts…
Welcome Komrad Cernig,
The “Axis of Weevils” welcomes you to the debate. What became of “purple fingers” and Sistani and al-Sadr singing Kumbaya.
Regards,
Rudi
This story jumped out at me too, Michael (as did one about a smoking ban in Amsterdam–off topic, I know). I guess I’m not as battle tough or hard-bitten and don’t have the most pertinent historical paradigms at my fingertips as some of the commenters around here (It worked in the middle ages?), but the wall’s just bad pr. Aren’t we past the point of imposing solutions? It’s a sovereign country now. If the defenseless build a wall to protect themselves from aggression, that’s one thing. Are our children fighting there just like that wall now, trying to keep the child-like Iraqi’s from their fun and games. From a selfish American standpoint, how does this protect our troops?
As for the Mexican wall, I’m all for it. I don’t want anybody destroying my shining city on the hill. Of course, that’s easy for me to say, I did grow up in a walled community.
GW, you want a solution? It’s not my job – I was against getting into this mess in the first place. I suggested, back in 2005, some solutions. Twin Wars:Part One, Part Two, Iraq and Part Three,Aghanistan and Onward It turned out the ISG agreed with most of them. What’s happening now isn’t a solution, it’s just further twisting the Gordian Knot.
It was said:
> By this logic, the American campus
> may soon have 12 ft high walls…with
> security guards checking each and
> every student who enters the campus.
You obviously haven’t visited the USC campus and its surrounding territory in the LA metro area at any time since the late 1980s.
Cernig said:
> Or it could be because the Bush
> administration’s civilians are
> meddling, pressing Petraeus
> for an excuse to declare victory
> and exit PDQ.
Declare victory, then flee? Could be.
I don’t claim there’s any deeper meaning behind the wall, by the Bush people, but I think of the wall and I also think about the segregation and related to that, partition of Iraq and possible (additional) population exchanges or transfers.
I read Cernig’s 2005 articles on the “Twin Wars� and found more to disagree than to agree with. But his refracting of the War on Terror through a Progressive lens was admirable exercise, if only for its rarity. Here’s a few of the contentions that I found particularly interesting:
I’d recommend that conservatives read Cernig‘s articles for a preview of the Progressives’ influence on a Democratic president’s prosecution of the War on Terror.
G. Weightman and DLS don’t like Robert Fisk because he wants to “challenge authority — all authority — especially so when governments and politicians take us to war.”
Chris:
I don’t have any personal animus against Mr. Fisk. It’s just that we have diametrically opposed views on Islamic fundamentalism. Here’s a typical Fisk column for folks who are still unacquainted with his work. Enjoy.
I agree with Fisk- we have been manipulated by our fears, and ignored climate change which will be even more ominous than the threat of terrorism as it pits richer nations against the poorer ones- who will be disproportionately affected by it. Which of course will lead to —-more terrorism- as poverty, isolation and hopelessness are all root causes of it. So, in a way they interrelate.