This NPR story details the movement of the U.S. into the Diyala province in Iraq, one that is well-known for being an insurgent stronghold.
It is a compelling story of heroic American soldiers risking their lives to help free Iraqi villagers from oppression. And "risking" is too light of a word--four American soldiers were killed by an IED in this area today.
An Army Lt. describes some of the atrocities committed by insurgents:
Stallings says insurgent groups terrorized the local people, and that they beheaded a retired police officer. "They pulled everybody out of their houses to watch it," he says.
However, it is also a story that captures well the desperate tightrope walked by our military in its role as an occupying force:
They've taken over homes along the main road, and offered compensation to the owners. One of their main outposts is the biggest and nicest house in the street, but the owner has yet to be compensated.
The house was recently built by its owner and they had barely moved in when American forces commandeered.
Stallings tells a member of the owner's family that the forces aren't prepared to make payments yet.
"We've been here less than a week," Stallings says. "There are a lot of claims that we have to handle and we don't come into town with a trunk of money to hand people cash for the things that have happened."
Those family members are not the only ones with questions about U.S. occupation in the area:
Stallings is assailed by questions from the locals. He's not helped by a short Iraqi soldier at his elbow asking how much longer they have to stay in Shakarat. The soldier complains he's working 12-hour shifts, hasn't had time off, and hasn't been paid.
Stallings becomes frustrated.
"Yes, we're going to be here as long as we need to be to secure the people of Iraq," he tells the Iraqi soldier. "You need to talk to your chain of command, your commander, your platoon leader... to ask them these questions, not me. I only run the American part of things; your commander runs the Iraqi part of things."
This is the problem. I completely believe that Stallings is not responsible and is understandably frustrated, but who is responsible? We cannot win the hearts and mind of those we preport to be defending if nothing we put in place is dependable.
Think about it: you spend your own time and money building your dreamhouse and then those protecting you take the house and refuse to compensate you? You are risking your life in one of the most dangerous occupations on Earth as a member of the new Iraqi military and you are not even being paid for it?
We have heard before about the billions of dollars that our lack of corruption control in Iraq is costing us, but the greatest cost is that the money is not making it to those who have given their own sweat and blood to earn it. Why should they continue to have faith in us?
Should we stay or should we go? I'm not convinced of either, but what I do know is that we better be damn competent at whichever option we choose...
Funding things like this been why I thought implementing some sort of oil trust was one of the first things we should have done. I think the Iraqis need to be invested in and see the results of their oil production coming back online, as it would provide an incentive to most citizens to help prevent the kind of sabotage that has damaged their productivity so badly.
"We cannot win the hearts and mind of those we preport to be defending if nothing we put in pace is dependable."
I completely agree, Xian. So, if you were an Iraqi citizen, would you be ready to pass along info to the soldiers? Would it make a difference to you if you heard the Congress has voted to pull the troops out on X date?
Oops,I just got a whole post eaten. Probably some problem with my ancient computer.
Anyway, in about 300 words less:
Once again, it's not about "Should we stay or should we go?" That's too simplistic. It's what we will do if we stay and that dictates whether we should or shouldn't stay. If I thought we could trust the judgment of those calling the shots in the war, I would definitely want us to stay.
I think that ideas like IP's are great, but it begs the question, if we have better ideas and predictions for what will happen when the troops hit the ground than the current adminstration, that's a terrible sign.
To answer your question, if I was an Iraqi citizen (which despite any amount of empathy is hard to honestly imagine), I imagine I would fear the insurgents and hope for help from the U.S., but also be angry if they were taking my newly built house and not paying me for it or I was a member of the Iraqi troops, but not getting paid, and it would be hard for me to hear the excuses.
Literally as I am typing this,,,my ex-supervisor is in the room visiting with us,,,,he heads back to Baghdad on Thursday,,,,he is an E-7 in the National Guard. He was allowed a 3 week leave to come home and visit his wife and children. He cannot tell us all that he has been involved in over there,,but one of put the question too him about are we going to pull the troops out,,,he thought a moment,,,,,and replied, at this point he really doe's not see how it can be done,,,the killing would really go off the scale at the point,,,,he did say in some ways it it like the wild west over there,,I hope he makes it home safely. I am proud to know him.