Jump to content

Army Study Determines Iran won the Iraq War


Recommended Posts

Army’s long-awaited Iraq war study finds Iran was the only winner in a conflict that holds many lessons for future wars

Quote

 

The 1,300-page, two volume history, complete with more than 1,000 declassified documents, spans the 2003 invasion through the U.S. withdrawal, the rise of ISIS, and the influence of Syria and Iran.

“At the time of this project’s completion in 2018, an emboldened and expansionist Iran appears to be the only victor,” authors wrote in the concluding chapter.

 

 

From the description in that article, it seems the study is an honest take on the war, acknowledging the failures made at every level, from the strategic to the political. They argue that the Iraq war has lessons that need to be heeded even in conflicts with "peer or near-peer competitors".

 

Unsurprisingly, the Army thinks the Army needs more money and more troops, even with technological advances.

Quote

 

Additional highlights include the following, as highlighted in previous reporting:

The  need for more troops: At no point during the Iraq war did commanders have  enough troops to simultaneously defeat the Sunni insurgency and  Iranian-backed Shiite militias.
The  failure to deter Iran and Syria: Iran and Syria gave sanctuary and support to Shiite and Sunni militants, respectively, and the U.S. never developed  an effective strategy to stop this.
Coalition warfare wasn’t successful: The deployment of allied troops had political value but was “largely unsuccessful” because the allies didn’t send enough  troops and limited the scope of their operations.
The  National Guard needs more training: While many National Guard units  performed well, some brigades had so much difficulty dealing with insurgents that U.S. commanders stopped assigning them their own battlespace to control. The study found that Guard units need more funding and training.
The failure to develop self-reliant Iraqi forces: The U.S.-led effort to train and equip Iraqi forces was under-resourced for most of the war. A premature decision to transfer sovereignty to the Iraqis made it harder to blunt political pressure by Iraqi officials on Iraqi commanders.
An ineffective detainee policy: The U.S. decided at the outset not to treat captured insurgents or militia fighters as prisoners of war and then never developed an effective way to handle detainees. Many Sunni insurgents were returned to the battlefield.
Democracy doesn’t necessarily bring stability: U.S. commanders believed the 2005 Iraqi elections would have a “calming effect,” but those elections instead exacerbated ethnic and sectarian tensions.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Mr.Vic20 said:

Let me get this straight, you can’t solve millennium years old culture differences and usher in happy happy times by wielding an arsenal of weapons as a crusading outsider?! Hundreds of years of doctrine turned on its ear I tell ya!! 

You can. We were >||<- this close to doing it. And we’ve have gotten away with it, if it wasn’t for those meddling millennial kids. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...