No Will to fight.

(The police fort at Latrun where the tiny Arab Legion stopped the Palmach in 1948)

"Defense Secretary Ashton Carter said Iraqi forces "showed no will to fight" as the Islamic State militant group captured the city of Ramadi, and he rejected calls by Republican lawmakers to commit ground troops to the conflict.

"What apparently happened was that the Iraqi forces just showed no will to fight," Carter said in a CNN interview that aired Sunday. "They were not outnumbered. In fact, they vastly outnumbered the opposing force, and yet they failed to fight. They withdrew from the site, and that says to me, and I think to most of us, that we have an issue with the will of the Iraqis to fight ISIL and defend themselves.""  Washpost

---------------------

It is unfortunate that one must mention the ongoing debacle in Syria and Iraq on this day in which we remember the brave.

Secretary Carter correctly rebuked the Iraqis for their lack of determination at Ramadi.  As he says the Iraqi military and police forces outnumbered the attacking IS forces by 10 to 1 and were much more heavily armed and yet they still ran away as fast as their US provided ground vehicles and aircraft would carry them.  How many Iraqi citizens have since been killed at Ramadi by IS as a consequence of this cowardice?

The excuse provided by apologists for this Iraqi behavior is that the US did not bring down a ring of fire from the air so that the IS nasties would not have to be fought on the ground.

This is the Great Arabian Dream Machine at its best.  The GADM has been around a long time.  I remember that in the Israeli War of Independence it was widely said that John Glubb had betrayed the Arab cause and that this is why Israel came into being.  In fact, if it had not been for the small Jordanian Army of that time, the Arabs would have lost ALL of Palestine.  I have been repeatedly told by Arabs that America supplies the Israelis with equipment that is invulnerable to hostile fire and that this is why Arab armies have repeatedly been defeated by the Izzies.  I have been told that in 1967 it was American tank crews who defeated the Egyptian Army.  The number and baleful effect of such self deceptions seems endless.

In this case, the Iraq forces did not have as much air support as they would have wanted.  I think it is fair to point to the total lack of air support available to the much smaller IS force.

Carter is not "free lancing" in making critical statements about the Iraq forces.  He is not, in Ollie North's memorable phrase, "a loose cannon on the gun deck of the ship of state."  The Obama Administration is considering its options about Iraq.

Those who pay attention to such things in the US know that the plaintive appeals of the neocons (McCain, Graham, Pletka, Keane, AEI, the ISofW, etc.) for just a few thousand more advisers, etc., are really a ploy to seek full re-engagement in the anti-jihadi war, a re-engagement of hundreds of thousands of our soldiers and trillions more of our money.

This will not happen.  pl 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/05/24/defense-secretary-carter-iraqs-forces-showed-no-will-to-fight-islamic-state/?hpid=z1

Comments

[Aka]

sir,
while reading your post (specially the part about US air power), my mind made a (maybe somewhat unfair) comparison between the current Iraqi forces and the VC forces that you mentioned in yesterdays post.

I think Sadam's army fought much more bravely than the current Iraqi forces.

BTW how long do you think the Iraqi forces will be able to do their "running" gig before they run out of places to run?

[turcopolier]

Aka

Yes, the NVA nnd VC in South Vietnam had to cope with a situation in which we had absolute command of the air. That was not the case over North Vietnam. In the South our opponents coped very well with this handicap. They had a lot of anti-aircraft weapons including MANPADS in 1972 and they shot up our air quite effectively. Saddam's Army was a far more effective force than these clowns and they do not have a lot of "running room" left. IMO it is not possible to compare soldiers like the NVA to these clowns now "fighting" in Iraq. pl

[LeaNder]

I stumbled across Oliver North recently:

"a loose cannon on the gun deck of the ship of state."

continued from above: concerning Watergate and its diverse Waters and Gates later. As some type of reason why: no conviction footnote, although no footnote, more the problem that new rules may create new problems.

[JJackson]

Re the running gig.
I had assumed the problem was a lack of will to fight for a population they did not view as their own people. If and when IS try and take a significant Shia town from them would the commenters here expect them to cut'n'run in the same way or are they now so depleted that even Shia heartland will be ceded gratis?

[Aka]

sir,
seems like ISIS is destroying the Baiji refinery. They seems to have reached the conclusion that "if we can't have it, then no one can".

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/05/isil-fighters-set-iraq-baiji-oil-refinery-ablaze-150525122055089.html

[Aka]

sir,
since ISIS seems to have destroyed the Baiji refinery rather than let it fall back in to the hands of the opposition, would they try to do it all other strategic facilities?

One example for such facility would be the Haditha dam.
According to the Map, there are ISIS activities near Haditha (ISIS in black, Iraqi government in Red, Kurds Yellow).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Iraqi_insurgency_detailed_map

Would ISIS follow a "Scorched Earth" policy?

[The Beaver]

Col.,

Speaking of the neocons , did you see John Bolton yesterday?

Quote: "I think our objective should be a new Sunni state out of the western part of Iraq, the eastern part of Syria run by moderates or at least authoritarians who are not radical Islamists. What's left of the state of Iraq, as of right now, is simply a satellite of the Ayatollahs in Tehran. It's not anything we should try to aid."

http://www.foxnews.com/transcript/2015/05/24/mike-huckabee-lays-out-path-to-2016-republican-nomination-amb-john-bolton-talks/

[jr786]

Well obviously some Arabs fight - they just happen to be the ones we don't like. Isis and Hezbollah, for example, seem willing enough.

Maybe what the 'Iraqi' forces lack is a compelling reason to risk getting killed. It's all well and good to depict Isis as the greatest threat to world civilization since Hitler and, if they don't fight in, say, Ramadi, then they'll be risking their lives anyway. But maybe they don't quite see it that way. And maybe there is a certain historical resonance to Isis that trumps whatever ideology we are throwing out there.

[turcopolier]

jr786

"whatever ideology we are throwing out there." What ideology would that be, fighting for one's country? I gave you an example of Arabs who fought. My little Zeidi friends would be another. As a new example of the GADM, the speaker of the Iraqi parliament is quoted as saying "the Americans are denigrating the Iraqi Army as an excuse for re-occupying Iraq." He should cling to that thought and make sure his foreign villa is in good shape. pl

[different clue]

If Obama is indeed building and holding a line against American soldier re-involvement back into Iraq, that is a good thing among all the bad things for which Obama, in all fairness, should be well remembered.

[Patrick Bahzad]

There is no Iraqi army as such. There's something like a pipe dream that's been sold to the American public as the new Iraqi army, with billions of US taxpayers money thrown down the drain.
That army is a non entity. In Anbar and other Sunni areas, thy called it the "check points army" because all they were good for was manning check points and hassling the locals. The ones who were keeping law and order and keeping ISIS out were the local militias that have been disbanded by Maliki out of fear they might turn into a challenge to his and the Shias grip on the Iraqi state.

[Fred82]

Col Lang,

How would you compare and contrast the capabilities and competence of ISIS with the VC/NVA?

[turcopolier]

fred82

Different terrain, etc., but in general the NVA would have eaten IS's lunch. pl

[HankP]

Col. Lang -

I asked you about this when you reported on Saudi troops deserting their posts, but I again have to ask, how can this happen? Specifically, two questions:

- Is there no responsibility and/or punishment for the defense ministry and military command when troops desert like this?

- ISIS appears to be a clear and very deadly danger to every Muslim that doesn't follow their particular interpretation of Islam. How is that not enough motivation to fight?

[João Carlos]

After I read "ISIS – A Black Hole in the Heart of the Middle-East: The Armies of the Caliphate"
by Patrick Bahzad at this site, I have the impression that IS forces are better trained and have better tactics than everything Iraqi army have. And I see IS forces are made for survive to air strikes (I think Sun Tzu named that kind of forces a "fluid army"), so they can be a serious problem for US forces. IS will fight the war they have an advantage and not the war that US forces have an advantage. History tell us that roman legions lose at the German forests and the Iraqi deserts, so I think it is really not a good idea engage them where they want engage US forces.

So, I don't think it is a good idea US send more hundreds of thousands of soldiers and trillions more money for a war that will be long and bloody and painful. But I fear when IS will finally take SA...

[VietnamVet]

Colonel,

This is the basic human problem of not being able to place yourself in another person’s shoes. An appropriate thought on Memorial Day the one day of the year we try.

The movie “Red Dawn” comes closest from an American viewpoint of showing what it is like being invaded. The French movie “Army of Shadows” is the best. Once the communists convinced the Vietnamese that the Americans were foreign invaders that were going make it a colony again; the war was lost without a million plus man army to conquer it. Also, Russia threatened the use of nuclear weapons forcing LBJ and Nixon, both not being crazy, to reject the invasion of the North. The problem with not learning history is the failure to acknowledge that the puppet government and the army established, funded and supplied by foreign invaders will never be legitimate. The Shiite militias with Iranian help may be able to defend the Shiite south but not if they are bled dry trying to retake Anbar Province. The Islamic State is a fact. There are only three alternatives; containment, a nuclear war or a million plus man army is built and funded to re-invade Iraq. The future will decide if the Islamic State has its victory parade in Mecca or has WWIII already started.

[turcopolier]

HankP

This is a political process, not a matter of military discipline or justice. pl

[ThePaper]

Certainly most of the army created by the US occupation and Lebanon-inspired sectarian quotas didn't perform that well. Not surprisingly.

But in Ramadi the army and the special police force, not locals, and some of the Sunni tribal fighters resisted against local opposition for more than a year. This time they had to retreat after a few weeks of increasing attacks by ISIS and increased local opposition. And one key reason was lack of reinforces and support due to US sponsored political bickering about who should fight or who shouldn't fight ISIS.

But don't worry so much. The new Iraq army, the volunteer based Popular Mobilization, is already on the task of keeping ISIS on check in Anbar and on it's way to recover Ramadi. And if the US can't risk her precious bombs and planes to help' the fight others will and the army will fight with extra effort.

Frankly. In a less trollish tone. I don't understand how people that is acquainted with the difficulties of combat against local opposing forces doesn't understand the problems of the Iraq Army, and the difference between a pay-based highly corrupted force and the new volunteer force that raised to the task of defending Iraq when the official Army failed. I don't understand the disrespect against these men that are fighting now every day on multiple fronts and the glorification of terrorists as an invincible force of great cunning.

Of course US officials need to put the blame on the Iraqi forces, government or whoever else. Their lack of credible policy for containing the Takfiri terrorists due to their misguided policies in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and now Yemen are one of the main reasons the Takfiri danger is spreading around the world.

[turcopolier]

ThePaper

Nah. The army of the present Iraqi government are a gutless pile of crap. They were besieged in Ramadi? So what? The poor things! You don't understand how the actual soldiers here can be so critical? Maybe you would if you had been a soldier and had fought in protracted combat as many of us have. An army is not the Kiwannis Club. There are standards of conduct and leadership that are to be expected in any group of people who aspire to be called soldiers. You think the Shia militias are great stuff? OK Let's see if they can retake Ramadi. Actually, we should withhold air support from them to see how they do without the "evil Americans' holding their hands. pl

[Patrick Bahzad]

All I'm hearing is white noise ...
We perfectly understand the problems of the Iraqi army by the way, the main one being it is not an actual army ... Takes more to being a soldier than collecting a paycheck at the end of the month.
Good luck to your new model army, without US air support, those Shia militias better brace themselves for a bit of a reality check ... It's gonna be no picnic I can tell you that much.

[Babak Makkinejad]

When Iraq attacked, in the Iranian township of Howeyzeh, the commissioner, and 5 young men with G3 refiles went out to fight Iraqis; almost certainly knowing that they would be killed in that fight.

The city of Abadan resisted for over 2one year; mostly with irregular forces, until the siege was broken in 1981.

[Amir]

Why not just have a COMPLETE blockage of the entire "Black Hole"?

[ThePaper]

US is already basically not giving any real air support to protect or retake Ramadi. Yesterday I was reading reports that most of the air attacks that are being reported in the area come from the limited Iraq AF capability.

So we will see for sure in the next couple of months if they can take Ramadi. I will be glad to read your opinion at that time. They are already engaged and pushing ISIS out of Al Karma, Baiji and the areas north and west of Tikrit.

Others also thought in other times and places the Shiite population were worthless. And then over the years Hezbollah drove Israel out of South Lebanon and it's now recognized as one of the best fighting forces in the area. That same expertise is available to the Iraqi Popular Mobilization.

There was already a case of a Shiite city resisting against all odds for weeks and months and which was finally liberated. Of course it didn't have the fame of Kobane in wester media and there was no large US involvement:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Amirli
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/08/31/us-iraq-security-idUSKBN0GV0BW20140831

[confusedponderer]

Re: Great Arabian Dream Machine

I always found it striking to see the importance of kin and the importance of the spoken word in my contact with Middle Easterners who lived in Germany.

Word of mouth had a tendency to take up a life of its own, blooming, and eventually transcending the events originally described, creating alternate realities which at some level needed to be addressed, necessitated by the very fact they were held in belief, or were at least being insisted on as if.

The special validity attributed by information transmitted by kin also had a peculiar effect. The IMO most intriguing excample: A Turkish girl once insisted to me that there is virgin birth - a contention I would have easily easily agreed with as a Catholic - had she not added that her cousin said so, and that she was unfairly divorced by her former husband.

There you go.

[confusedponderer]

ThePaper
"US is already basically not giving any real air support to protect or retake Ramadi."

The point is that wars for centuries have been without air support.

ISIS and the Iraqi Shia rump state are matched in terms of arms, and the rump state even has superior numbers. IS uses their arms and smaller numbers better, and leads their men more skillfully when the Shia rump state doesn't.

An army which is facing an enemy who also fights without air support, and finds itself unable to overcome that enemy, either fights poorly or is finding in that lack of air support an excuse for piss poor performance.

What is keeping them Iraqi Shia army to do mobile combined arms operations of the sort that IS executes routinely? Lack of US air support? Lack of Iranian support? What about a marked inferiority in leadership, lack of competence in logistics, maintenance, supply and tactics, not to mention the nepotism and chronic corruption?

US air support would make a difference, in the sense that a crutch makes a difference for a sick man wih an ailing leg. The man is delusional when he thinks because of the crutch the leg is good again. He can only hobble faster. Take the crutch away and the leg is still bad. What Iraq needs to do is to cure the leg, not call for more crutches.

"There was already a case of a Shiite city resisting against all odds for weeks and months and which was finally liberated."

Good or them. Probably that was because they had something to fight for - defending their town against enemies fervently desirious of cuting their apostate heads off.

One problem the Iraqi army and militias faced when fighting in Sunni areas has been reported over and over again as a pronounced unwillingness to fight and die for the Sunni and Sunni terrain. It is one thing keeping IS out of Shia-land, and another to re-take Sunni-land. That is, what worked for that town just may not work at all out there in Sunni-land.