Bill Ardolino, writing for The Long War Journal:
Officially appointed during the Saddam Hussein era, mukhtars are akin to “city sheiks†or “block captains.†They arbitrate interests within and advocate for their neighborhoods to the city government. Mukhtars know the people of their areas and understand their needs. And the reestablishment of this traditional position and new engagement with American civil affairs efforts have empowered both parties, as well as evened out distribution of employment and mitigated the systemic corruption and mafia-style intimidation that has historically plagued contracting in Fallujah.
Hmm. And here I thought a mukhtar was an instrument rather pretentiously overused in George Harrison-flavored Beatles tunes.
At any rate, Ardolino finds himself one of these creatures, corners it, and proceeds to observe it in its natural brown habitat.
Read the whole thing.
Sounds like we’re learning a thing or two. Unlike, say, Jack Murtha. Or Harry Reid. Or John Kerry, or etc…
I know I’ve seen the actor who plays “mukhtar” in something else. Was it a Holiday Inn Express commercial?
Pablo:
Don’t forget to include our own resident unlearner: semantics-clueless.
Aldermen
More sottocapo than alderman. Definitely a GoodFella.
Even so, if it turns out that the local officials are more responsive than the distant national gov’t, you can expect the Left will hate it twice as much.
When the mukhtar retires, does he write a self-serving book about how everything is going to shit but it sure as hell isn’t his fault? Cause I don’t see how this system is sustainable otherwise.
Aw, c’mon, happyfeet. He’s an alderman. He could move to Chicago and function perfectly without changing his makeup.
Regards,
Ric
The folks in the Windy City could probably teaching him a thing or two.
I dunno, JD. Apparently he was appointed (or elected) under Saddam, and has held on this long. The BoA might not have as much to teach him as you think.
Regards,
Ric
[…] Know your Colonial Charges, 16: “mukhtars†– Protein Wisdom […]
Yeah, but could he make dead Fallujans (sp?) vote?
Wow. Just woke up from my daylong nap and realized I hadn’t fixed the errors in the post. How embarrassing.
Sorry for the dearth of posts — I’m a bit on the sick side, though I don’t know what’s wrong with me. No energy whatsoever.
My son has been a bit sick, so I’m guessing I picked up something from him that in turn he picked up from one of the neighbor kids.
At any rate, I may post lightly tonight and tomorrow, but my first goal is to be able to make it an hour or two without completely crashing.
And I’m in the last phase of an intense workout program, so I can’t afford to be sick just now.
Learned also that I’m part of a douchebag duo — though I think being called a douchebag by an establishment feminist is akin to being called a peach fish by Tom Robbins, or a huge cock by Glenn Greenwalds.
I’d be flattered were I not so ennervated.
Ephedra. Works for me anyway. Also, EAT.
Unless you’re doing some crazy aerobic workout program. No ephedra then. But the eating thing, that’ll still help a lot.
My cardio workouts are in the morning. My resistance workouts are in the evening. I eat 6 meals each day.
May be time to up the calories, though. I am definitely feeling beat.
Also, Britney has a new song out.
I would rather say “precinct captain” than “Alderman”… can they get you garbage can lids and your alley paved?
Jeff,
No need to raise the calories, just spread them out into 12 meals a day instead of 6. This makes your caloric intake more readily available as each segment of the day needs it. The next step is further division into 24 meals a day. The bites get smaller and smaller until you’re eating nothing all day long. That’s when the benefits really start to multiply.
Cheers!
T&T
Articles like these tend to piss me off. General Petreus was fighting an effective counter-insurgency in his AO from the moment he landed in Iraq ‘lo these many years ago. Bush, counter to what he promised to us over and over again, let political considerations govern the management of the war rather than military considerations. He admitted as much in his speech announcing the Surge and Petreus’ taking over.
So now we read these articles and take pleasure in how well our troops are doing and how things are looking up but do we realize it could have been this way 3 years ago if Bush hadn’t been such a f’ing dolt?
I’m really upset too. This war could have been perfect. Christ I need waffles.
Thanks Happyfeet for the lame attempt at setting up a strawman.
After the waffles all I wanted was a big glass of milk but I spilled it. It’s still a beautiful fall day here in LA though.
It’s a beautiful day in New England too. Been out on the bike most of the morning, and it really is a gorgeous day. Gorgeous, but not quite perfect. Man, that pisses me off.
Eben, we could have done a lot of things differently. If you know of a war where this wasn’t the case, let alone a complete societal reconstruction, I’d love to hear about it.
What could have been is nice to think about, but we really need to deal with what is and what will be.
Pablo, that’s completely understandable but that’s not what I’m talking about. Bush stated over and over again that he had learned the lessons of Viet Nam and was going to let the commanders on the ground fight the war they wanted to, not the way politicians wanted them to, and I believed him. Then he said this when he announced the surge:
“In earlier operations, political and sectarian interference prevented Iraqi and American forces from going into neighborhoods that are home to those fueling the sectarian violence. This time, Iraqi and American forces will have a green light to enter these neighborhoodsâ€Â
Hmm, sounds a lot like politcial considerations taking priority. Sounds a lot like politicians dictating to the military how to fight the war. Sounds a lot like what he promised he wouldn’t do.
He also said
“Our past efforts to secure Baghdad failed for two principal reasons: There were not enough Iraqi and American troops to secure neighborhoods that had been cleared of terrorists and insurgents. And there were too many restrictions on the troops we did have.â€Â
Restrictions put on our troops by politicians. Restrictions removed when it became politically feasible to do so. Bush doing what he said he wouldn’t.
I’m not talking about hindsight or a wish that things could be perfect. I’m talking about a CIC well aware of the pitfalls of letting politics rule the battlefield, promising he wouldn’t let them, then admitting that he had done so all along. And what a surprise, when the politicians got out of the way and a competent general took over we started winning. Like I said, Bush is a f’ing dolt.
Actually, you had used the past tense: “if Bush hadn’t been such a f’ing dolt.” Meaning he was a dolt but he’s not anymore. All better now.
Personally I think the whole Fallujah thing – a military success but a propaganda nightmare vis-a-vis the Arab sat channels – and the big picture idea of impressing upon the greater Middle East the essential goodness of our purposes in Iraq is what you are calling “letting politics rule the battlefield.” It wasn’t just our tactics that changed. The bad guys started blowing up kids just for scuz. That generated some latitude for us to change our footing. You forget, Eben, Bush is a dolt no matter what he does.
I had/have significant problems with the ROE myself. But this whole process has been such a maze of competing interests that it’s tough to pretend to have had the answer up front. As an example, there are a lot of people who will tell you that disbanding the Iraqi Army was an enormous mistake. And yet, it was a pretty heavy handed tactic.
Had we not done that, we might be a lot further along than we are. Might…
We really don’t know what would have been if…
happyfeet sounds like a DC insider on some talk show trying to score points with all his friends watching the tele, with the smarmy quips, talking points and lame attempts at mimicking Jeff. You’ve won happyfeet, you’ve made me look like a Bush hating fool in front of all of your friends. I dunno, now maybe you can finish your waffles?
Pablo, believing that we could be further along now if Bush hadn’t played politics with the war isn’t too much of a leap. As I stated before, Petreus was put in charge because he had already proven that his tactics work in his AO. I mean really, are you trying to say that you’re just fine with Bush letting politics run the show for 3 years?
No, that’s not what I said. In fact I didn’t say anything close to that.
But thanks for asking.
Really though it’s my attempts at mimicking Jeff that are smarmy and my talking points that are lame, but I don’t think you’re a Bush hating fool. I just don’t see how you can expect anybody to feel very good about the war, the way you tell it. It’s all just so dark where you are.
My, what a lovely tea party we’re having!
I can’t imagine a more disengenuous comment. How did it come to this?
Eben Flood – Personally, when President Bush said that, I think he was referring to American politics not getting in the way. However, considering how some of the actions may play out inside Iraq, a political calculus, seems to be a fairly reasonable position to take. Maybe I am wrong, but I doubt it.
sure, it’s entirely Bush’s fault that the military did it’s darndest to try to placate those that were screaming about “acting unilaterally!” and “imperialism!” How dare they try to be so PC. damned if you do, damned if you don’t. I also don’t think that Petraeus’ tactics just sprang up fully formed either. it was trial and error, just like any other war. and the military is notorious for being slow to change, so I’m not surprised it took a few years to learn and adapt and “rewrite” the whole frickin’ COIN manual. but if it makes you feel better, blame Bush!
So, what Jeff is saying is, he eats three times a day, and his metabolism eats five times a day?
Jackie Earle Haley quote, for the cinematically disadvantaged.
I’m sorry, you’re all right, Bush is completely above blame ’cause gosh darnnit, he’s trying really hard!
Eben Flood – Did you even try to understand what we are saying? I doubt that you could find one person here, not one, that thinks that Bush is blameless.
kinda like you. or not. But seriously, He makes policy not specific military strategies.
Eben Flood:
It seems to me that you are stuck in a rhetorical loop that demands complete fidelity to the “Bush was/is a F**in dolt!” meme. Several people above have engaged in reasoned manner, some with a little satire. You’ve raised the strawman by insisting on the transcendency of your original opinion and accusing others of positioning you as a “Bush hater.”
Nope, you’ve done a pretty good job of doing that all by yourself.
Bush made mistakes, as did the military, state department, Halliburton, Iraqis, Congress and a legion of others. While we all recognise that the buck stops at the President’s desk we prefer a more nuanced reading of his management than “f***in’ dolt.”
If that makes us snarky, talkshow satire apologists, well, there you go. (Bush hater!) :-)
[…] Protein Wisdom analogizes it to Colonial India, or some part of Her brittanic Majesty’s abandoned Empire I suppose. […]