According to this Newsweek article, Sec. of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and “the Pentagon [have] developed a detailed plan in recent months to scale down the U.S. troop presence in Iraq to about 80,000 by mid-2006 and down to 40,000 to 60,000 troops by the end of that year”.
Guess what’s wrong with this picture.
The Iraqi Army and police force have been widely criticized as unprepared to take over security duties. Given the grim picture of a well-entrenched and dedicated insurgency and the threat from extremist-controlled militias, how is it possible to withdraw troops and maintain some security? It isn’t. The problem is the U.S. has no other option.
A few months ago, the Pentagon announced they would draw down most of the reservist and guard units by the end of this year due to a mandated two year limit on deployment. These units comprise about 40,000 soldiers. The Army said they would reshuffle their regular active-duty units to make up the shortfall. That’s a good way to grind the troops into the ground by forcing one tour-of-duty after another after another. As it is, some Army soldiers are on their third tour of duty with some Marines on their fourth.
Attentive readers may have noticed that recruitment is in the toilet. At the current rate, the Army will be 7,000 recruits short of their goal by September. That isn’t even taking into account the likelihood that many of those recruits will not make it through basic training. The military has dramatically reduced their standards which means more recruits will have questionable arrest records, drug and alcohol problems, lack of education, mental health issues, etc.
What will happen when the U.S. soldiers start to leave?
If the U.S. tries to occupy the whole of Iraq with fewer soldiers, there will be a dramatic increase in military and civilian casualties. If the soldiers withdraw to the military bases and only protect the oil fields, the rest of Iraq will fragment and explode in genocide, disease, starvation and civil war.
I’m sure that the Bush Admin will try to spin the withdrawal in the most positive way but will the public believe it?
A fellow named Laird Barron found one of my older and snarkier posts (Wonkaphilic Fan Fic, David Gerrold Kills Pound Puppies, &c., from May 20) and left this comment. The first bit is a quote from my blog, the second is his response.
“You might even say F&SF is the Rabbit Test of the spec fiction world, but of course you wouldn’t say it if you still harbored any hope of ever being published by F&SF, would you?”
Probably not. However, I think Gordon has enough class to separate the work from the author. Pity.
Sincerely,
Laird
I said this was one of my snarkier posts. Snarky may be too kind. My tone was petulant and whiny, and not particularly funny, so I can’t even use the excuse, “It’s only humor!” In ragging on the Rabbit Tests of the world, I contributed to the problem. In my defense, I really do find Fantasy & Science Fiction to be a frustrating magazine, and it’s not just because they won’t give me the time of day as a writer. I could have been a lot less pissy in expressing my opinion, however.
But let’s get back to Mr. Barron. It’s hard not to like this guy, or at least respect him. He zinged me with one word: Pity. And zinged me good. I thought about that all night.
I googled him, and have even more respect for the man. He has been published in Fantasy & Science Fiction, Sci Fiction, and other places. His story for Sci Fiction, Bulldozer, looks great, at least from the first few hundred words I’ve read thus far.
So, Mr. Barron, if you’re out there: yeah, I can take a hint. Consider me bitch-slapped. And good luck with your novel.
D.