Thursday, January 18, 2007

Rules of Engagement

Much of the talk in the news lately has been the new "surge" strategy for Iraq. I had the opportunity yesterday to have lunch with a U.S. Army sergeant who has served two tours of duty in Iraq, and participated in the initial invasion and made the push from Kuwait into Baghdad. I picked his brain on his thoughts on the current situation, the viability of the surge plan, and the options of where do we go from here.

I have my personal views on the situation, having supported the war all along, but I will try to keep them from coloring the rest of this post and convey this soldier's impressions from actually having his boots on the ground. Here on out, I will refer to this soldier as "Sgt. R"

As I said Sgt. R. participated in the initial drive from Kuwait into Baghdad. On their arrival to Baghdad, the rules of engagement were what we typically think of in times of war - any potential threats were neutralized. He stated that Baghdad was relatively secure due to the fact that the citizens knew that the American troops could take whatever actions necessary to maintain the security.

Over time, however, the rules of engagement changed. The military softened it's stance, in an effort to "win over" the hearts and minds of the Iraqi citizens. Sgt. R states that the citizens began to realize that they could get away with violence, and the military troops couldn't do anything about it. Their hands were tied. To top it off, when soldiers do take action, they face murder charges. These more restrictive rules of engagement have lead to the current situation in the Sunni Triangle.

The new surge plan proposed by President Bush involves a return to the original rules of engagement, which Sgt. R believe will bring Baghdad back under our control and restore peace in the city. However, he says that the peace will only exist because of the fear of the American troops. He wonders how will we maintain that peace for good. Eventually, once troops are withdrawn, the violence will return. Do we plan on an extended peace-keeping mission? Is it even possible?

Sgt. R said he doesn't know the answer, but hearing him relate his experiences has given me a lot to think about. I don't know the answer any more than he does, but as a nation, we must come up with a long range solution.

Labels: