-
The View From the Other Side
May 17, 2013 | 23 comments
-
Cyprus Uber Alles
May 10, 2013 | 9 comments
-
After Hugo
May 3, 2013 | 16 comments
-
Theory and Practice of Terrorism
April 26, 2013 | 24 comments
-
Border Security Games
April 19, 2013 | 26 comments
At Large
Afghan Requiem
The American fighting man and woman deserve better than the leadership they’ve had this past decade.
It is a tragic coda to the American presence in Afghanistan that a veteran staff sergeant is on trial for killing sleeping civilian villagers and their children without apparent provocation or purpose. Some have said this incident is reflective of the brutality of the war itself. The soldier involved seems to have become completely unbalanced in attacking without immediate provocation or in reference to a specific incident. That may be a reasonable psychological assessment, but it is not something peculiar to this particular conflict.
What is specific to Afghanistan is the incidence of combat deaths and mutilation that have occurred from passive destruction through the improvised explosive device (IED). The proliferation of these mines is as if snipers were lying in wait just below the surface of every road, village street, and hill trail. But, of course, the snipers sometimes do exist in addition to the IEDs. It’s not the typical warfare understood and experienced in the Western world where large and small armies clash in determined battle. These are Taliban tactics passed on from the Iraq war. They were also Viet Cong tactics, North Korean tactics, Malayan Communist tactics and, much earlier, Moro tactics in the Philippines. The list goes on.
The Russians experienced this same form of warfare in the 1980s during which their casualties were much higher than those of the U.S. and NATO since 2001 (14,450 to 3,230 killed). The reporting on Russian psychological casualties was negligible, but the impact of these losses on Russian military confidence was obvious. According to Pakistan’s intelligence, the functional capability of the traditional Soviet rifle regiments was substantially reduced.
This methodology of irregular small unit combat can be defeated tactically by imaginative counter-insurgency methods, but it cannot be fought against effectively over an extended period by American troops committed to traditional Geneva Convention-type rules. Decisive victories cannot be expected when the enemy is simply satisfied with inflicting pain, accepting pain, and rarely making the mistake of exposing themselves in traditional efforts to “win the field.” Eventually the American, or Russian, or British or any other trooper of the West, will resort to similar tactics. He then is in danger of being charged with losing his internal military discipline and simply becoming a “uniformed killer.” The term is unfair, but the danger is real.
In World War II and Korea the GI’s would refer to psychological breakdown as “battle-rattle.” Sometimes it rendered the serviceman unable to perform his military duties and made him fearful in the face of the enemy. Other times the result of such psychic attacks produced uncontrollable aggression. In the invasion of Normandy a junior officer of the 101st Airborne “went off his rocker” and “tommy-gunned” a group of surrendered and weaponless Germans for no clear reason. A furious captain in the 82nd Airborne, himself badly wounded, cut the throat of an injured German officer for loudly demanding attention and treatment in a crowded aid station.
Every war has stories like these, but Iraq and Afghanistan produced a special brand of breakdown. The enemy asked no quarter and gave none. The American soldier or marine at first responded with similar ferocity. However, as time wore on and America’s civilian population became less absorbed by the military aspects of the conflict, their politicians pressed the Pentagon to be “more understanding” of the Afghan people in general and. oddly enough, the enemy combatants themselves. At one point, supposedly to protect innocent civilians, new rules of engagement were posted that required American fighters to withhold fire unless or until an enemy shooter was clearly identified. These rules, introduced by Gen. Stanley McChrystal and further restricted by Gen. David Petraeus, satisfied the politicians even though they left the troops effectively disarmed. Air support and artillery fire were severely limited unless identification of hostile positions was guaranteed.
The war in Afghanistan was transformed into a nation building and rebuilding exercise. As part of this unspoken theme, deals were made with local insurgent leaders, some actually Taliban members. In exchange for providing protection for reconstruction efforts, the tribal leaders of such cooperative combatant groups benefited handsomely. Meanwhile local Afghan officials would have dribbled down to them the end product of the vast corruption that occurred at provincial and federal levels. This was an environment confusingly inconsistent with the ethical standards being preached at the same time by well-meaning civil affairs units.
Back and forth the all-volunteer combat force rotated three-four times or more into and out of the war theater — and the casualties mounted. Lip service is paid to the deleterious effects of multiple tours in combat. However, the reality is that ten plus years of multiple rotations of units and the personnel therein may reinforce the professionalism of the cadre, but at the same time attrition and combat fatigue reduces the mental stability and effectiveness of core non-commissioned ranks. Staff Sergeant Robert Bales may be an example of this group.
The question must be asked as to whether collateral responsibility should be adjudged by a political and military command that has kept our military forces in the field considerably beyond their effective psychological capability. The American fighting man and woman deserve better than the self-absorbed political and military leadership they have had during the past decade.
About the Author
George H. Wittman writes a weekly column on international affairs for The American Spectator online. He was the founding chairman of the National Institute for Public Policy.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (22) | Leave a comment
More Articles by George H. Wittman
More Articles From At Large
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/11/26/afghan-requiem
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
TheGr8Goat| 11.26.12 @ 6:19AM
Here, here. The "leadershit" of the military has forsaken their utmost responsibilities: They have abandoned the men they command and the Constitution. In place of these two they have taken up pursuit of a government retirement paycheck. The military is indeed under civilian leadership; you can't even tell the difference between a political appointee and an officer anymore.
AllAmericanAmerican| 11.26.12 @ 9:08AM
Pursuit of a retirement paycheck? Naaaah, they already have that.
In case you haven't been paying attention the "leaders" have been pursuing ass: groupie biographers, horse-faced "socialites," etc. I mean who has time for leading when you're banging your biographer under the desk or sending 30,000 emails to a chick in Tampa?
TheGr8Goat| 11.26.12 @ 1:01PM
Nice. Pathetic that it is true, but nice set of points. Well, when they find it impossible to recruit perhaps they will see the light.....nah, they'll just reinstitute the draft.
I served as an Infantryman but none of my four children will. I tell them the stories of the bankrupt leadership and tell them to make up their own minds about going. All they have to do is talk to some other veterans to validate what I said and the idea of serving goes away like a bad urge. Worked so far and I think it will work for the other two. Not my kids. Not for their neocon nation building nor their progressive peacekeeping.
AllAmericanAmerican| 11.26.12 @ 4:45PM
Funny you say that. I was a comm troop in the air farce and my wife, although still on active duty, dropped her retirement paperwork on Nov 7th. All of our three children are being highly discouraged from serving as well, for the exact reasons you indicate.
Don't get me wrong, I am teaching them to love their country and I am supplementing their school lessons with real, honest history lessons at home, but wear the uniform of the USSA? Nope. Not my kids.
Alan Brooks | 11.26.12 @ 4:34PM
I want to reiterate over 'n over: you put down a Jack in Wi for disliking Israel, yet you positively HATE Islam.
A bit of a discrepancy.
AllAmericanAmerican| 11.26.12 @ 4:47PM
Well tell us, what is there to like about islam? I mean if you are a thinking, rational, adult schooled in the West and you believe in the Judeo-Christian morals and ethics our country was founded on?
Alan Brooks | 11.26.12 @ 5:01PM
Do you mean to write there is nothing positive about Islam whatsoever? It is all black and white?:
we are all good and Islamcs are all wicked??
One would not have guessed things could be so simple.
AllAmericanAmerican| 11.26.12 @ 7:42PM
Well you just changed the argument. You said the original poster "positively HATE(s) islam." Then I asked you what is there to like about islam. Now you are turning it from the ideology of islam to the (sic) "Islamcs," who I am assuming you mean to be the practitioners of islam.
That's apples/oranges. Now, if you care to answer the question: tell me, what is there to like about islam?
Alan Brooks | 11.26.12 @ 8:20PM
The Koran is v. good-- I read it in 'Intro to Islam' (prof. Fredrick Denny).
The food is good.
Would I live in an Islamic nation? No.
Would I join a mosque in America? Yes.
Alan Brooks | 11.26.12 @ 8:31PM
here's the prof's book:
http://www.amazon.com/Islam-Mu.....1577660072
c. j. acworth| 11.26.12 @ 7:59AM
Why are we even in Afganistan anymore? Anyone who thinks that we're going to bring a tribal society into the 21st century is delusional. They (mostly) like it in the 7th century. We made our point a long time ago. Give aid and shelter to those who want to fly airplanes into our skyscrapers and we will flatten you. So we kicked out the Taliban and (finally) got bin Laden. We gave them a chance to join the League of Grown-Up Nations and apparantly they don't want to. Bring the troops home, with the understanding that if the savages leave their yard, we'll flatten them again.
OP4| 11.26.12 @ 11:10AM
We achieved a fast, brilliant, punitive raid a decade ago. It rivialed the British 1868 Expedition to Abyssinia - punishing crazy hostile leaders with help from friendly locals.
In 1868, the British were smart enough to march back to the sea and sail away (maybe they learned from their own debacle in Afghanistan).
We didn't pack up and leave in 2003. I have absolutely no idea why. Nothing but wasted lives and treasure since then.
Alan Brooks | 11.26.12 @ 4:37PM
"We didn't pack up and leave in 2003. I have absolutely no idea why"
No one knows.
AllAmericanAmerican| 11.26.12 @ 7:46PM
Why are we still in Afghanistan? Apparently so McChrystal could traipse all over Europe partying with his entourage while trying to sell "COIN" to our allies. Then Petraeus needed a place to bang his mistress far enough away from that bulldog-looking wife of his to where she couldn't rip his nuts off. Now it's so Gen Allen can send 30,000 sex emails to that horse-faced kook socialite in Tampa.
THAT'S why we're still in Afghanistan.
OP4| 11.26.12 @ 8:42PM
General officers get plenty of foreign travel and postings without a pointless war. And, they report to civilians who are supposed to set policy.
Bush decided to stay and Obama decided to double down. They would be the people to ask, although I doubt you would get a coherent answer.
nathan| 11.26.12 @ 8:03AM
There's nothing new here. Read a recent edition of "Military History Quarterly" which goes into considerble detail about Mai Lai and quotes Calley's men at length. As they saw their friends being killed by IED's and dying by the enemy's use of irregular warfare (how else were they going to beat the Americans?) they came to see all the people as enemies and acted accordingly. Rape became widespread. Which played into the VC's hands, helping to turn the locals against the Americans. A major goal of such tactics is to get the "good guys" to over react and we see this in Afghanistan and Iraq by our use of torture especially given that in Iraq according to Alfred McCoy in "Torture and Impunity" 70-90 % of the detainees were innocent people which turned them against us.
At Mai Lai the massacre was deliberate and they all knew what they were doing from Cpt. Medina downwards. There was only one hero that day, Hugh Thompson, who along with his two crewmen, literally leveled their guns at those murderers for which he was later threatened with courtmartial. Amazing.
The problem is as this story tells us, we didn't learn from Vietnam. We haven't learned how to deal with this type of warfare and maintain order among our troops. Maybe we can't win these wars. But we're going to have to try and find a way to do so. The law, international agreements, and the Constitution is clear on how our soldiers are supposed to behave. Their officers have to ensure they do.
Ken (Old Texican)| 11.26.12 @ 8:59AM
Yes, Mr. Wittman
A PRESIDENCY RUINED AT BIRTH
Any President could make an error in judgment that gets soldiers killed. It comes with the desk.
NO President can be forgiven for going AWOL instead of manning his battle station during the course of the battle for Benghazi. In this case ,his station was the “reinforcement command”, and he deserted it in the face of the enemy until the battle was over. That fellow citizens can be judged as a GROSS dereliction of duty at least, and “cowardice” in the face of the enemy as well.
Ladies and gentlemen, these charges alone demand impeachment articles be drawn up immediately.
He could have had ground reinforcements on the way in five minutes, had he the courage to face up to the voters.
Then, perhaps the most egregious error of all leaned over into “traitor” territory and he knew it when he put his people through 7 hours of hell rather than “fess up” to his earlier errors with those reinforcements.
Finally, he was very conscious of his guilt.
Witness the rigamarole cover-up doused with bald-faced lies for weeks as he squirmed.
littletime| 11.26.12 @ 6:09PM
This presidency is an example of 'token failure.'
AllAmericanAmerican| 11.26.12 @ 9:05AM
Gotta wonder how many Afghani military are on trial for murdering American military members in staff meetings and on patrol and such?
Marc Jeric| 11.26.12 @ 6:13PM
Our Rules of Engagement remind me of our different ROE in Germany 1944-5. In Ammerschwier, Alsace - a well preserved medieval town - a detachment of US soldiers led by a lieutenant marching in front of a tank was entering the town. They were met by the town mayor carrying a white flag, assuring the Americans that there would be no resistance. And so the soldiers entered the town main street when a hidden sniper killed the lieutenant. Their seargent took the command, ordered the retreat, and called for air support. American bombs then leveled the center of the town. After that incident no German towns repeated that error, knowing well what would happen. PS: after the war the American government paid for the restoration of Ammerschwier using original medieval construction materials. The US soldier now being court-martialled saw his friends murdered by an EID at the entrance to that Afghan village. The villagers then spent the night dancing and celebrating. The proper response would have been the carpet bombing of that Taliban village - and no more EID's with wild celebrations afterward.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 11.26.12 @ 9:34PM
What country is Ammerschwihr in today (Hint: not Germany at this time)?
Dimitry_Aleksandrovich| 11.27.12 @ 7:44PM
Our fighting men and women do deserve better. They deserve to be home in the U.S. of A.