I hope everyone reading this understands this is my opinion, and I don't always have all the information to form the most educated opinion about complicated military decisions, but today I am really upset about the safety of my husband and the rest of the "security" forces in Iraq right now.
Tuesday night, President Obama addressed the nation regarding the war in Iraq. I wasn't able to watch it because I had to greet parents at our open house. But I caught a news wrap up version and summary, immediately followed by a General talking about the increased violence in Iraq. Can we say I was less than enthused to hear that report right now. Chad is still transitioning INTO Iraq. His regiment is primarily still in Kuwait, training and unloading equipment for a few more weeks. His biggest fear right now are the Kuwaiti drivers who apparently make the drivers in Jamaica look calm. Let me tell you THAT was a cab ride! I will worry about him in the heat, in the traffic and miss him, but it is less stressful for the days or weeks that it takes for them to transition into country and back out for leave and redeployment than it will be when he is at his post in Iraq.
I am very happy that the President is making a sincere effort to follow through on the promises be has made to the American people; however, I am concerned that maintaining a set timetable in order to fulfill those promises may take precedence over protecting American lives. When the troop numbers have decreased so dramatically, followed by an increase in violence, shouldn't that tell us something? Are we hanging these security forces out to dry? Do they have the numbers and resources to protect themselves? Are the decreased numbers just an invitation to terrorists?
I felt pretty secure during previous deployments that our soldiers had enough of a presence to discourage most of the opposition. What about now? Are the Iraqi police and military forces really allies? A friend of mine at school told me he was concerned that this conflict is showing many similarities to Vietnam. The soldiers can't always tell who the combatants are. They are outnumbered in a harsh environment and the battlefield is sometimes unclear.
I don't know if I was just delusional before and the danger level isn't much different or if getting older has made me understand the real risks. I just don't want the government trying to use our soldiers to accomplish diplomatic goals that perhaps are a tad optimistic. I will worry either way, but want him to have the best protection he can have around him to keep him and his soldiers protected. Just my humble opinion, but don't reduce the troop levels so much they can't continue to stand for what they are defending - us!
Nothing is really going on in Iraq. Check out icasualties . org and you will see how many US servicemembers are dying. The death toll is about as low as its ever been. So relax. Consider this a chance for your DH to get a deployment under his belt without incurring the same dangers, as say, Afghanistan.
ReplyDeleteI appreciate the advice. Sometimes, they don't report all the casualties. One of last deployments, my DH was responsible for tracking injuries and deaths and said they reported less than half for whatever reason. And I totally agree that I am very happy he isn't in Afghanistan. It sounds much worse there. And this is deployment #4 - his belt is full enough! We're hoping for a non-deployable duty for a bit. I want to know what it is like to be married not just long distance ; ) Thanks again for reading and posting!
ReplyDeleteThough I in no way wish to diminish your frustrations or concerns for you husband, I can tell you from first hand experience that the danger and level of violence has dropped exponentially, regardless of whatever some talking head or statistics adjuster is saying. Also, as soon as anyone starts making Vietnam comparisons, a red flag should go up in your head. These comparisons are often either (1)designed to elicit an emotional response without using any empirical data or (2) made by someone whose understanding of military history is severely lacking. There are several, better examples, such as Napoleon in Spain or the American Revolution as it took place in the Southern Colonies.
ReplyDeleteI appreciate your comments. I am not exactly sure what level of violence the commander was referencing as having increased compared to. It just makes sense though that pulling out might inspire the insurgents/terrorists to make a concerted effort to attack the smaller numbers. Especially since he will be stationed on a tiny little post, not even a FOB.
ReplyDelete