The Benefits of the War in Iraq

Because of what I do for a living and because I lived and worked in the Middle East from late 2000 to 2004, I often am asked about the war in Iraq. Many people us this to segue into a self-righteous diatribe on why their opinion on the war is the correct one, whatever that opinion might be. I listen and often hear the standard arguments. On the pro-war side, I hear Sadam was a threat, he had weapons of mass destruction (WMD), he harbored/trained terrorists, etc. On the opposite side, I hear Bush wanted to finish what his father started, Bush was itching for a fight, there were no WMD, etc. We have all heard the standard arguments. What I would like to offer here is some often unexplained benefits of this war in the overall global war on terror (GWOT). I will try and be as succinct as possible.

My first point...

If one looks at the modern history of middle east conflict fought under the guise of "jihad" (Russia's invasion of Afghanistan, Chechnya, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict just to name an important few) there is one undeniable fact: when an Islamic nation or a Muslim people are "under attack” the call for jihad is made by radical Islamist leaders like our pal Usama bin Laden (UBL). What does this do? It causes the sleeping cells of radical Islamic fundamentalists to awake and move. They come from Indonesia, Malaysia, Germany, Britain, Turkey, North Africa, central Asia, from within the Middle East, wherever they are. Money begins to flow from Swiss, Cayman, Cypriot or Dubai bank accounts to fund the fight. Global arms dealers hawk their wares aggressively. To make all of this infrastructure flow, the Islamic fundamentalist networks must talk, on sat phones, via e-mail, face to face.

How does this help us? Our intelligence network, in concert with intelligence networks of other countries, is unparalled. We have extraordinary abilities to monitor every thing I just mentioned. Now, our intelligence, military, and diplomatic agencies break the world up into regions. Subject matter experts are assigned to each region. They live and breathe what happens in their particular area of responsibility. They are intimately familiar, due to our intelligence collection capabilities and the daily reports that are generated from them, with what is going on in their particular area. They know the financial networks, the names of arms dealers, the radical Islamic cells, operating in their area (Do we know it all? Of course not, but we know a lot.). And of course, we have these targets (a bank account, a sleeper cell, an arms dealer, etc) under some kind of surveillance. Some type of intelligence collection asset has been placed against what we have deemed high value targets in a particular area. When the call for jihad is made by UBL, there is movement in all of these areas. Our sensors pick up that movement and we begin to track it. All of this paints a picture of the Islamic fundamentalist terror network. It is like a big jigsaw puzzle. The intelligence is just the pieces. Those pieces must be fused together based on other global intelligence pictures to paint as accurate a picture as possible. Is it always a correct picture? No, but trust me...it is pretty damn good.

We are able to do all of this because we invaded a country, Iraq, in the heart of the Middle East that many Arabs look at as a proud pillar of Arab civilization and the birthplace of modern civilization. And they do not like it...so individuals like UBL call for jihad and everything I just explained above begins to happen.

When all of this happens, the enemy (that is the terrorists, not us, for some of you crazy conspiracy theorists out there who might be reading this) must expose himself. He must leave his country to go fight jihad. To do this he must fly, or get on a boat, or whatever. He must leave the relative safety of a big, messy city like Karachi, for example. He will need money, so money is withdrawn from accounts (ones that we are monitoring hopefully) to buy weapons from dealers (again, ones that we are monitoring or who are working for us). Through this exposure, all facets of the infrastructure make itself vulnerable to our attack and/or montioring. We may chose to monitor and track in hopes that this might lead us to something or someone bigger. Or we may chose to attack and interrupt the movement for whatever reason.

Jose Padilla, the alledged "dirty bomber", is a good example. He was monitored here and overseas. He was arrested upon arrival of an international flight from Zurich into Chicago. The FBI chose to arrest him then vice letting him continue on (in the hope of uncovering his co-conspirators) due to the significance and validity of the dirty bomb threat. Imagine if the FBI had let Padilla continue on under surveillance and then lost him. A short time later a dirty bomb is detonated in downtown Chicago. No need to say anymore. The FBI made the right choice.

The above is an attempt to show how the war in Iraq has aided us in uncovering the transnational terrorist network. Believe me, we have had successes. To publish them would be dangerous. When you have figured out the enemy, the last thing you want to do is let them know how you have figured them out.

My second point...

Some jihadis are going to make it to their destination. In this example, we will say the destination is Iraq. Now, they have arrived to fight jihad in defense of Islam. They are willing to die, purposely, for this fight (think homicide bomber). They are not bound by any rules: no Geneva Convention, no Law of Land Warfare. They are free to do whatever they want in this fight because Allah supposedly allows this in their (and I emphasis "their") version of Islam. The warfare they wage is unrestricted, violent, and horrific. They kill any and all in their way without discriminating between innnocent civilians and professional soldiers.

The force America and its coalition have to fight this kind of enemy is obviously the military. We are allowed to use the military because the fight is outside of our borders (the Posse Comitatus act of 1878 does not allow, except under a declaration of martial law, the US military to act offensively within the borders of the US unless approved by law), the UN gave America permission (though this was not necessarily needed) and because our lawmakers gave the President their approval (though it was not required).

It is important to note here that the US military is superbly equipped to fight wars. Law enforcement is not. So if we had to fight the jihadis inside our own border (i.e. they came here en masse to fight us) we could not use our military due to posse comitatus unless martial law was declared. We would have to use law enforcement. Law enforcement units are bound by stricter rules of engagement and lack some of the requisite skills and equipment needed to fight the jihadis effectively.

So to bring this point full circle, we fight them in Iraq for numerous advantages that we do not have if we must fight them here. I understand how this effects the Iraqi people. To be Machiavellian for a minute, this war must be waged and it must be won. To state the obvious, fighting them in the streets of Baghdad is much safer for millions of Americans than fighting them in the streets of NYC, Dallas, LA, San Francisco, etc. (as 9/11 proved). We can use our military, which is trained and equipped to fight wars, rather than trying to use a law enforcement capability hamstrung by an American legal system not built to deal with warfare. Additionally, due to legal restrictions that would need to be changed by Congress, we could not bring the massive capability of our intelligences services to the fight here in America.

I hope these points are clear. I believe this is a realistic, fair and legal justification for the war in Iraq. Anyone who does not believe that we are at war with an Islamic fundamentalist enemy dedicated to the destruction of this country, and have been since the Iran hostage crisis in 1979, must have their head in the sand (think the bomding of the American embassy in Beirut...twice, the bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut, the first World Trade Center attacks, the bombing of our embassies in Dar es Salaam and Nairobi, the bombing of the military barracks, Khobar Towers, in Dharhan, Saudi Arabia, the USS Cole in Aden, and finally 9/11). It is my fear that individuals who deny this fact will not be woken up to its veracity until a jihadi executed nuclear detonation happens on the soil of this country...and unfortunately, I believe that to be just a matter of time.