Let’s get our Military History analogies strait
April 11, 2008
The usually bright Leon Hadar has this long and winding comparison of the ineffectual response of the “Iraqi government” to the return of the Sadrists to – get this – the Tet Offensive!
How many turning points in Iraq have silly people in Washington compared to Tet? I have news for them: al-Sadr’s first show of force in April 2004 was the Tet Offensive, and we’ve been in nothing but the bloody drawing out ever since.
While we’re on the subject, I’d like to propose the best analogy to the surge and most of all the countersurge, one which gives me great pride as a New Yorker – the Battle of Brooklyn. When Washington (the insurgents) entered New York (Baghdad), the British sought to take the city with overwhelming force. Washington’s (the insurgents’) strategy? Relocate to the Brooklyn Heights (outskirts of Baghdad), send a few units out on a series of suicide missions as the British (Americans) advance up from the south, buying just enough time for a long, drawn out fighting retreat from Manhattan (Baghdad), allowing the British (Americans) to take the city, giving them just the pyrrhic victory necessary so that they could be bled to death in their false confidence.
It may very well be the greatest irony in the history of the world – the earliest prophet of irregular warfare would be the father of the country whose empire would be most spectacularly destroyed by it.