The present-day U.S. military qualifies by any measure as highly professional, much more so than its Cold War predecessor. Yet the purpose of today’s professionals is not to preserve peace but to fight unending wars in distant places. Intoxicated by a post-Cold War belief in its own omnipotence, the United States allowed itself to be drawn into a long series of armed conflicts, almost all of them yielding unintended consequences and imposing greater than anticipated costs. Since the end of the Cold War, U.S. forces have destroyed many targets and killed many people. Only rarely, however, have they succeeded in accomplishing their assigned political purposes. . . . [F]rom our present vantage point, it becomes apparent that the “Revolution of ‘89” did not initiate a new era of history. At most, the events of that year fostered various unhelpful illusions that impeded our capacity to recognize and respond to the forces of change that actually matter.

Andrew Bacevich


Monday, January 25, 2016

Update for Monday, January 25, 2016


Just a couple of items I want to draw attention to today.

First, in Iraq, Gen. Dunford discusses the posture of U.S. troops in the planned assault on Mosul. It appears the U.S. is considering embedding troops with the operational brigades, which seems to be a euphemism for engaging in ground combat, whether proactively or defensively. We've heard vague noises about this before. The assault will not being for some months as Iraqi and Kurdish forces,with U.S. air support, work to isolate Mosul from the Islamic State in Syria.

The Czech Republic will donate rifles and ammuntion to the Peshmerga. However, their real need is for heavy weapons.

Charles Glass, in Harper's, has an in-depth look at the war from the perspective of the Peshmerga, and also visits the southern front's Shiite militias, Iraqi national army, and Sunni tribal units. The fragmentation and hostility within the opponents of IS is a real obstacle to defeating it.

Jason Lyle, in Vox, discusses the situation in Afghanistan. He sees the Taliban making major gains against the corrupt and ineffectual Afghan government, and does not believe they can be driven to really participate in peace talks without much more vigorous U.S. involvement in the fighting, and real cooperation from Pakistan. (The latter seems unlikely, the former would seem to depend on the U.S. political scene.)


Posted by Cervantes at 10:03 AM

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)