Paying the Iraqi (“insurgents”) people not to shoot at us.

[Darius11 12]

As I am sure most of you know we are paying the people who shoot and have killed our troops to stop shooting at us.

I don’t know if I am the only one who feels this is a preposterous policy, but curios as to see what your point of view is.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[GQ_jumper 4]

Source please

History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid.
--Dwight D. Eisenhower

[Zarkon 0]

Quote

Source please

Take your pick
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=US+bribes+insurgents&btnG=Google+Search

[skydyvr 0]

Quote

I don’t know if I am the only one who feels this is a preposterous policy, but curios as to see what your point of view is.

Finest use of the word "preposterous" I've seen lately.

. . =(_8^(1)

[GQ_jumper 4]

Now I know what you guys are talking about, this was going on last time I was there, and it was quite effective in some areas. Ever heard the saying "the enemy of my enemy is my friend"? We have a mutual enemy with the sunni militias and made a deal with them so they would chase down certain AQ targets for us so we don't have to lose more American soldiers. We aren't just handing them free cash and sayin "sick 'em boys", in order to keep their support they have to sign agreements stating their left and right limits when they are operating against AQ and what will cause them to lose their support and find their way back on our target list.

Tell me, would you rather see more Americans killed, or see the Iraqis pushed to step up and take charge of their own fate?

History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid.
--Dwight D. Eisenhower

[Darius11 12]

Quote

Tell me, would you rather see more Americans killed, or see the Iraqis pushed to step up and take charge of their own fate?

I think that is like paying your kid money so he knows he should tell the truth instead of teaching why he should. It is a temporarily fix until the money runs out.
If their only motivation not to kill our solders is our money what will happen when we stop paying? If we have to pay for people to want democracy it kind of loses its meaning doesn’t it?


Edit to add: I would like to see no one killed. Bringing them home seems to be the best policy for that.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

Tell me, would you rather see more Americans killed, or see the Iraqis pushed to step up and take charge of their own fate?

What happens when the payments/support do inevitably stop? Does this promote peace or simply delay anti-American violence (or a little bit of each)?

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[Zarkon 0]

My concern is the enemy of our enemy often returns to our enemy and turns those guns we give them against us once it's no longer their best interest.

[SpeedRacer 1]

Quote

My concern is the enemy of our enemy often returns to our enemy and turns those guns we give them against us once it's no longer their best interest.

oh come on now. THAT would never happen.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[packerboy 3]

Didn't you guys hang the last person to do that?

--------------------------------------------------
In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock. ~ Thomas Jefferson

[Zarkon 0]

I think the greatest irony of it all is we are paying our 'enemy of our enemy' to kill our previous 'enemy of our enemy'.

[nerdgirl 0]

These are the “Sons of Iraq” (nee Concerned Local Citizens (CLCs) groups) that GEN Petraeus mentioned multiple times during his Congressional testimony.

It's part of the counter-insurgency strategy.

I voted “It is temporary fix and we need permanent ones” as the closest choice to my opinion.

It's a temporary measure to enable security and stability.

Implementable and effective strategy and operationalization to transition those guys to 'normal' activities and to reconstruction is needed, or yes, the worse some of the worse speculations may come true when payment stops. The goal is to enable an Iraqi defense force to deal with that when/if it occurs and to enable reconstruction to progress so that the "Sons of Iraq" will have other, more productive things to do that build IEDs, EFPs, shoot at US or Iraqi service members, or shoot Iraqi police.

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[SkyPiggie 0]

Quote

Source please

Darius usually posts Iraq war items which he has read in the indisputably reliable, unbiased and credible "Rolling Stone" magazine. (Yeah, that was sarcasm.) Like maybe this story:

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/18722376/the_myth_of_the_surge/print

As if a magazine targeting young music-fanatic dope-smokers is THE source for reliable info on the Iraq war.

It's interesting how some people are so unwilling to post their sources for others to critique. When they hide things like that, it kind of sends up a big red warning flag right away...

[christelsabine 1]

Quote

...
It's interesting how some people are so unwilling to post their sources for others to critique. When they hide things like that, it kind of sends up a big red warning flag right away...

Yup, funny that. Same refers to ppl who completely hide themselves behind empty or false profile data.

dudeist skydiver # 3105

[nerdgirl 0]

I concur w/r/t “Rolling Stone” being a less than ideal source for defense policy information. Interesting and occasionally intellectually provocative but not authoritative.

You might find more credible citations from DefenseLINK, i.e., the “official web site for the Department of Defense.”

ADM Mullen (CJCS) on “Local Partnerships Provide Key to Success in Iraq, Afghanistan, Mullen Says

GEN David Petraeus on the Sons of Iraq & counter-insurgency strategy:

“91,000 Sons of Iraq local security volunteers [volunteer as opposed to conscript – nerdgirl] are under contract to help coalition and Iraqi forces protect neighborhoods and secure infrastructure and roads, Petraeus said. These volunteers have helped to reduce violence and contributed to the discovery of improvised explosive devices and weapons caches, he said. The Sons of Iraq have been directly responsible for many lives and vehicles saved, and their value far outweighs the cost of the contracts to pay them, he said.”

MG Rick Lynch, USA, who commands the MNF Division in the Basra area, on “Sons of Iraq security groups.”

Army Col. Daniel S. Roper, director of the U.S. Army and Marine Corps Counterinsurgency Center at Fort Leavenworth, Explaining Counterinsurgency Efforts in Iraq.

One more, from The Economist:

"Another 90,000 paid volunteers, called the “Sons of Iraq”, have signed contracts to help Iraqi and coalition forces protect their neighbourhoods. These volunteers are armed and local, which makes them well-placed to spot any insurgents in their midst. They in effect pay for themselves, said the general [Petraeus during Tuesday's Congressional hearing - nerdgirl], since their wages are outweighed by the value of the army vehicles preserved since the violence has eased, not to mention the lives saved."

If you want authoritative critiques of 'Sons of Iraq'/CLCs/counterinsurgency (COIN) efforts from a uniformed service member perspective (which I'm not), I would start with looking for comments by LTG Odierno (from ~6months ago) or LTC Gian Gentile, as a couple suggestions off the top of my head.

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[Andy9o8 2]

When we do it in the US, we call it "protection". Same difference.

[crozby 0]

I voted good idea because right now getting people on side is more important than how its achieved.

If Bush, Bremer and the other useless turds hadn't disbanded the Iraqi military in the first place then this would not be necessary (and this illegal invasion would have been over long ago IMO).

[thirdworld19 0]

Quote

As I am sure most of you know we are paying the people who shoot and have killed our troops to stop shooting at us.

I don’t know if I am the only one who feels this is a preposterous policy, but curios as to see what your point of view is.

This has been the US foreign policy for a long time. We buy our friends - especially if our goals are not necessarily the same. Why do we give so much money to all the countries out there - I am too cynical to believe that we really give a rat's ass about most countries/people - especially when we have our own issues to deal with at home.

Is it a good thing? I don't know if anyone could really say what would have happened if we didn't give Egypt $28 billion over the last 25-30 years - or any other country for that matter.

For a long time, we were (don't know if 'are' would be correct anymore) the big man on campus - and people are always looking to take him down.

I am also not naive enough to say that we can just let the world do their own thing and we will all be just fine. There are too many wanna be controllers of the universe out there that actually have power.

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

Quote

As I am sure most of you know we are paying the people who shoot and have killed our troops to stop shooting at us.

I don’t know if I am the only one who feels this is a preposterous policy, but curios as to see what your point of view is.

This has been the US foreign policy for a long time. We buy our friends - especially if our goals are not necessarily the same. Why do we give so much money to all the countries out there - I am too cynical to believe that we really give a rat's ass about most countries/people - especially when we have our own issues to deal with at home.

.

Well, it costs a whole lot lot less to help a nation than to invade and occupy it.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.