The Right Troops in the Right Places

That's the title of an op-ed piece by Seth Moulton, an ex-Army officer who has served two rotations in Iraq, in today's NY Times. One of his rotations was with the American commander in charge of training the Iraqi security forces. So, he has direct experience of what was happening on the ground over there.

Yes, he has the basic criticism of not enough troops, but he goes beyond that to argue that we need the right troops in the right places, i.e. embedded with and advising the Iraqis. He claims that 12-man teams of Green Berets have replaced entire battalions of conventional forces in some cities.

"Yet despite the success of the advisers, the Army and Marine Corps still have a habit of sending their least capable troops to fill these positions. Many teams have trouble getting essential supplies like weapons and ammunition, even as the Army finds the resources to man speed traps on its ever-growing bases. We can't win this war from the Burger Kings and rec centers of our largest bases, nor we can afford the thousands of non-combatant troops needed to support them."

You can gather from the above that Moulton does not think too highly of our strategy, which is driven by the pressure to meet dates rather than get the job done. "Standing up Iraqi troops is not enough; they must be well-trained." Further, he points out that consolidating our troops in giant bases is exactly the opposite of what couterinsurgency experts proscribe.

Basically, Moulton is asking a basic question in most endeavors - be it war or business - where resources are scarce. Are we using our resources wisely? His answer is, "No".