Anbar: the high cost of living

Posted By Thomas E. Ricks Wednesday, October 28, 2009 - 4:51 PM Share

I often find RAND Corp. reports mediocre, usually just telling the military establishment what it wants to hear. But a new one that surveys the population of Iraq's al Anbar province caught my eye. It notes, among other things, that 40 percent of 20 year olds have lost their fathers. "The coming of age of large numbers of fatherless young men in a society that puts a premium on revenge is a highly worrisome development for a region emerging from civil war," it warns. Even worse, nearly half of all households reporting losing at least one member to violence.

The U.S. Army/flickr

EXPLORE:MIDDLE EAST, IRAQ, SECURITY

(6)

HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE

WATSON

8:46 PM ET

October 28, 2009

Hearts and minds

The US re-took Fallujah in al Anbar province by using pretty much the same approach that Russia used to re-take Grozny in Chechnya, i.e. by unleashing enough ordnance to "make the rubble bounce”.

I’m not suggesting that the military acted irrationally in either case, rather that there are definite limits to the use of military force as an instrument for achieving foreign policy objectives.

The Russians could arguably maintain that they were reclaiming their turf; the Americans are hard-pressed to avoid the foreigner/invader/occupier/Crusader label.

DEVELOPMENT GIRL

1:15 AM ET

October 29, 2009

Though it is not the first

Though it is not the first generation of children growing up without a father:
France and Germany after the WWI for example, and entire Canadian villages after WWII.

As an aside to your comment about Rand: Didn't Kubrick call it the "Bland Corp."?

JWING

1:22 AM ET

October 29, 2009

Lancet Study Has Been Discredited

That Lancet Study has been widely discredited. The researchers refuse to answer basic questions about their research and won't share their work with others. Most of the major groups that follow Iraqi deaths estimate just over 100,000 Iraqis have died since the U.S. invasion. In comparison, Saddam killed about 200,000-300,000 in his Anfal campaign against the Kurds and his suppressing of the Shiite uprising after the Gulf War.

TYRTAIOS

12:50 PM ET

October 29, 2009

You would hold Saddam Hussein

You would hold Saddam Hussein up as the measuring stick as to what is acceptable for civilian death?

Whether the numbers are accurate or not, the law of land warfare states that when you invade and topple a country's government you are responsible for its security and administration.

We failed at that, albeit, for a number of reasons - but failed never-the-less. Shame on us.

CONCERNED

10:21 PM ET

October 29, 2009

Iraq

I believe that there is plenty disagreement as to whether or not we have failed in Iraq. I feel that if there was failure it was failure to understand the sort of society that we were getting involved in. We expected those of that part of the world to welcome the opportunity to be free of a person like Saddam which is only partly true. It appears that there is still a presence there with the same mentality as Saddam, a quest for power over the lives of the people of the country. A desire to force everyone in the country to accept their version of Islam. Power to keep the country in an uproar and try to enforce their beliefs on everyone. Power do keep them under control and not allow them the opportunity to live in a "freer" society than they had lived in previously. Will the people of Iraq ever obtain the freedom that they desire? If the current conditions are any indication probably not, but in the final chapter it is their decision to grasp the freedom to chose not ours.

BPB1979

6:26 PM ET

October 29, 2009

RAND

I've not read much of their COIN research, but RAND has done excellent work with counterterrorism analysis. There's a reason CIA swiped Bruce Hoffman to be their scholar in residence a couple years back.