More on the Hearts and Minds Front

Links courtesy of The Angry Arab News Service:

This L.A. Times article summarizes the problems the US forces have in obtaining decent ground intelligence. Note how the Marines on the ground are calling the area around Fallujah, with its dense foliage, the "Vietnam" area. This article pants a far more complicated picture of just how the Iraqi "security forces" are performing in the conflict. And this BBC story outlines definitely a "worst-case" scenario for the occupation: a united Sh'ia and Sunni resistance.

If the population doesn't support you, it will be difficult if not impossible to win. It doesn't matter if the population's lack of support is active (i.e., they're resisting) or passive (they simply don't care one way or the other). Sure, the resistance is certainly making sure that "collaborators" are dealt with harshly, which brings up a third reason for the lack of support for the occupation. But the fact is that until the occupying troops can PROVIDE REAL SECURITY for the general population, there's not a chance in hell they'd provide us with anything. I mean, who's crazy enough to ask to be shot?

All this goes back to Rumsfeld's war on the cheap, which is an oxymoron. War is NEVER cheap--unless you think human lives are. That said, the method by which this conflict has been fought will sit squarely on his shoulders, and, by extension, the man he works for: Richard Cheney. Of course, there's the matter of the Idiot in Chief, but history will give Dubya such a pranging that I won't be surprised if he's excised from the ranks one day. Perhaps the 22nd Century will recall Woodward's other startling revelation about Bush--he asked Dubya how he thought history would judge the war, the idiot replied, "Who cares? We'll all be dead."

And for the 43rd pResident, hopefully forgotten.