How's That Iran War Workin' Out For Ya? - Genghis Khan, Hiroshima, And The Perils Of Limited Engagement

Donald Trump, his Secretary of War Pete Hesgeth, and his aides were meeting in the War Room of the White House to discuss progress in the war with Iran. Memories of George W. Bush on the deck of an aircraft carrier smiling at the camera and saying, 'Mission accomplished' were vivid.  The mission in Iraq after the fall of Saddam Hussein was by no means accomplished, for not long after Iraqis danced around the toppled statue of the dictator, militias quickly armed themselves and set out to gain control of the country. 

 

Instead of imposing military rule and a draconian 'shoot-to-kill' order for any civil disobedience and putting in place an indefinite military occupation, the US packed up and went home.  The result was predictable - the rise of Islamic militias and the descent of the country into chaos. 

It was 'hearts and minds' all over again.  The persistent Vietnam era policy of avoiding civilian casualties and winning the populace to the idea of democracy and civil rule - a policy which not only did not work but in its military reticence led to Viet Cong and North Vietnamese victories. 

The Viet Cong had their own means of winning hearts and minds - terror and intimidation. In the movie Apocalypse Now the Kurtz character describes it.  The American army had vaccinated the children of an entire village, and when the Viet Cong learned of it, the chopped off the vaccinated arms of every single one of them.  'The will', says Kurtz. 'The absolute, powerful, bright, brilliant will'; and with that knew that the war would be lost. 

Kurtz ruled his mountain region of Cambodia with such will.  As Willard and his crew sent by Saigon to assassinate Kurtz motor up the river to Kurtz's headquarters they see bodies hanged from trees, corpses lying decapitated, and smell the stench of death everywhere. 

As Willard read in Kurtz's dossier, Viet Cong activity under his command had dropped to zero. His summary executions of suspected Viet Cong and heartless pogroms did the trick. 

The accounts are fictional, but based on fact.  The movie was based in part on Michael Herr's firsthand account of the war - atrocity as an instrument of war was used without hesitation by the Viet Cong. 

'Hearts and minds' persisted in Afghanistan where the United States, in its exceptionalist view of foreign policy, set up a puppet 'democratic' government and made overtures to the Taliban to join the 'new' Afghanistan.  Of course the Taliban, like the Viet Cong were fiercely nationalistic, and having beaten the far more powerful Russian invader were in no mood for compromise.  The war ended, the Taliban regained power and Joe Biden brought the troops home.  Another war lost because of reluctance, hesitation, and overconcern. 

General of the Union Army, William Sherman had no such doubts.  His scorched earth campaign through Georgia and especially South Carolina, the state which began the Civil War, was brutal and effective.  'The South shall never rise again', he said, and the lesson was clear - raise a finger against Washington and all hell will rain down upon you. 

The emperor of all emperors, Genghis Khan marched down from the central Asian steppes with his Mongol-Turkic armies and conquered the world from far eastern China to the Danube, the biggest empire the world had ever seen. 

There have been many successful armies in the world.  Julius Caesar, Scipio Africanus, Pompey the Great, and Marcus Agrippa were as brilliant generals as Genghis Khan, and brought Roman organization, discipline, and management to the battle.  They won because of superior ability, armaments, and military thinking; yet it was Genghis Khan who, with an almost untamed savagery, conquered the world. 

Genghis Khan was a brilliant strategist, canny politician who through tact, intimidation, and offers of great spoils, enticed the warlike Turkic tribes to join his armies, nearly doubling their strength.  However, it was not only the might of his imposing armies, nor his ability to manage, discipline, and control such a large and diverse military force; nor even his tactical acumen and understanding of calculated risk which assured victory.  It was his indomitable, absolute, unalloyed will. 

Khan had no qualms, moral reservations, or ethical hesitancy.  Wars were for winning, civilians were complicit enemies, and total annihilation of any opposition was his modus belli. Not only would defeated populations be without the wherewithal to mount a resistance or counterattack, they would never dare to incite the bloody, murderous, savage wrath of the conqueror.

Curtis Lemay, US Army general and independent candidate for Vice President in the electoral campaign of 1964, was known for his hawkish views on military action. Impatient with Lyndon Johnson's measured approach to the Vietnam war, he proposed to 'Bomb 'em back to the Stone Age'.  Although he was ridiculed, he had history on his side.  The United States did exactly that reducing Hiroshima and Nagasaki to rubble with atomic bombs and firebombed Dresden and Tokyo, incinerating both.  

Populations were considered complicit in warfare, so Harry Truman had no compunction whatsoever in using the A-bomb against the civilians of Japan.  That would show Hirohito that we meant business. 

Donald Trump's war in Iran is different because the Iranian population is in full support of regime change, having suffered for almost fifty years under the oppressive theocratic regime of the ayatollahs.  A Hiroshima/Nagasaki attack is not possible; and because the current Iranian regime knows this well, it holds many cards. The limited response by the US and Israel is unlikely to annihilate the Republican Guard, the Secret Police, and loyal factions of the army. Winning a war of total destruction while destroying the population along with it is an impossible option. 

There can only be 'acceptable collateral damage' - i.e. blowing all headquarters, government buildings, military and oil depots, missile silos and above-ground installations to smithereens with minimum but significant civilian casualties. 

'This is the compromise the Iranian people will have to accept', said one military adviser in the War Room with the President. 

The aide's hawkish options were 'off the table', for the Administration was confident that with total control of Iranian airspace, precision bombing and the neutralization of missile defenses was possible. 'This is not total war', said the President. 

Yet of course it should be. If Iran is as dangerous an enemy as Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany, then it should be destroyed and like the American South, never allowed to rise again. 

Under President Richard Nixon, the Rolling Thunder bombing campaign was unleased.  Giant B-52 bombers released full loads of high-powered explosives up and down the Ho Chi Minh trail to completely eliminate the enemy's north-south supply lines and destroy him in the process. 

This massive bombing campaign such as the world had never seen, did no good.  The little black pajama, bowl of cold rice Vietcong, simply went deep underground during the bombings, came up when the planes had returned to base, and rebuilt the damaged trail.  Because air power was ineffective and land troops were hamstrung by 'hearts and minds', the war was eventually lost. 

'Boots on the ground' - that last ditch effort to search and destroy the Iranian enemy - will undoubtedly be necessary.  The war in Europe was won thanks to D-Day, the Normandy invasion and the march of Allied troops across the continent to Berlin. 

The lesson of Iraq is unavoidable. Even if the regime leaders are eliminated, armed militias fighting on their home territory will be a resistant, difficult, implacable enemy.  Urban combat as American troops learned in Hue, is bloody and discouraging. 

So, 'Bombs away and praise the Lord' is the modus operandi for now; but the Iranians are not stupid, and more than likely will pause their missile attacks hoping to give the impression that they are destroyed. Absent American ground troops, the Iranian army and Republican Guard will be able to regroup, and just when the Israeli-American axis feels confident enough to send in occupying troops, the Iranians will exhume their deep underground missiles and begin combat again. 

Iran is no patsy.  It has spent nearly fifty years in offensive and defensive armament, creating an extensive political machine, and used its oil wealth to pay for absolute fealty.  It will not roll over and die, and is likely to fight to the last man. Particularly now with much of its infrastructure destroyed and images of its destruction gone viral, the will to resist is even stronger. 

Most of those in the War Room wished that it wasn't so bloody complicated, and many channeled old Curtis Lemay.  Bombing the suckers back to the Stone Age would be too good for them; but reality bites, and after much consideration, debate, and lack of consensus, there was only one option - move more firepower into the region and all hands on deck.