Combatting ignorance

Years and years ago, MeTheSheeple filed his first federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the U.S. military, getting in return a floppy disk with FM90-8, the U.S. Army's classified counterinsurgency manual (since updated). A typical excerpt:

The Army faces an enemy that may strike from any direction. It must contend not only with military considerations in this environment but with the political, economic, and social considerations which may oftentimes outweigh military considerations.

Sounds a bit familiar, right? One of the core messages was that non-military matters (political, economic social) would in essence trump the military and determine the outcome of a "military" conflict. A natural thought from this, then, is that the military must understand the full spectrum of the conflict to be most effective in terms of the eventual outcome, rather than a specific battle or incident.

That ain't happening. I got cued in by a craptacular cartoon in Rolling Stone magazine, of all things, to this Zogby poll, which focuses on how many American troops want the United States to get out of Iraq soon. But take a closer look at this paragraph here, in which I will add emphasis:

The wide-ranging poll also shows that 58% of those serving in country say the U.S. mission in Iraq is clear in their minds, while 42% said it is either somewhat or very unclear to them, that they have no understanding of it at all, or are unsure. While 85% said the U.S. mission is mainly “to retaliate for Saddam’s role in the 9-11 attacks,” 77% said they also believe the main or a major reason for the war was “to stop Saddam from protecting al Qaeda in Iraq.”

Umm. What? Just what the hell fight do our soldiers think they're in? How was such a warped message passed through the chain of command, or how did military leaders not recognize such a deficiency of thought and respond appropriately? MeTheSheeple, who has no military record, still feels free to opine that there's a leadership shortfall here. American soldiers can't win against an insurgency they so drastically misunderstand.

There are leadership and reality gaps everywhere. Via Fark.com and the Think Progress blog is this little gem about neocon commentator Daniel Pipes, as noted on PittsburghLive.com:

Q: What is the biggest lesson you have learned from the Iraq war?

A: The ingratitude of the Iraqis for the extraordinary favor we gave them -- to release them from the bondage of Saddam Hussein's tyranny. They have rapidly interpreted it as something they did and that we were incidental to it. They've more or less written us out of the picture.

Q: How will we know when the occupation or the invasion of Iraq was a success or a failure?

A: Oh, it was a success. We got rid of Saddam Hussein. Beyond that is icing.

That nasty little comparison between Iraq and VietNam keeps coming back in. I'm wondering, though, if this war is fundamentally different. It seems like maybe the warmongers, rather than the hippies, are taking the purple acid. How else do you explain this?