What the troops think

By Michael J.W. Stickings

You won't hear this from the White House, which doesn't seem to care what if anything the cannon fodder think, but:

Many of the American soldiers trying to quell sectarian killings in Baghdad don't appear to be looking for reinforcements. They say the temporary surge in troop levels some people are calling for is a bad idea.

A bad idea? Well, sure, but that hasn't stopped Bush and the warmongers before. So why now? Perhaps they ought to listen to those they claim to respect so highly:

In dozens of interviews with soldiers of the Army's 5th Battalion, 20th Infantry Regiment as they patrolled the streets of eastern Baghdad, many said the Iraqi capital is embroiled in civil warfare between majority Shiite Muslims and Sunni Arabs that no number of American troops can stop.

Others insisted current troop levels are sufficient and said any increase in U.S. presence should focus on training Iraqi forces, not combat.

But their more troubling worry was that dispatching a new wave of soldiers would result in more U.S. casualties, and some questioned whether an increasingly muddled American mission in Baghdad is worth putting more lives on the line.

Casualties. Lives on the line. Bush and the warmongers seem to have no clue about just what the troops face on the ground in Iraq. But, then, why would they? How could they? They're well out of range, protected not just by distance but by ideological fervour and delusional idealism. Their war may not quite be a game to them, but it sure isn't as real as the guts and blood of real Americans and real Iraqis and real "willing" coalitionists that will continue to be spilled as a result of their disastrous dreams of military glory on the battlefields of the Middle East.

Maybe, for once, the warmongers ought to shut the fuck up and listen to those who are actually risking their lives for this mistake.