« Sixty-One Years from Omaha and Utah | Main | We Certainly Handle the Koran Better than we Handle the Constitution »
June 6, 2005
Welcome to the Real World
Sometimes I get really bugged by little things, like when someone, referring to the Marines' discovery of a large underground bunker complex near Fallujah, asks:
[I]s it a good thing that such a well-developed bunker system was being actively used over the past two years without being found by the coalition forces
Of course not; the answer is obvious, self-evident: no one wants enemy bunkers to exist undetected for any length of time. But is it a useful question?
If you decide to go to the store to get something, there are a number of things that could happen. You could get there, get what you went for, get home, and all could be well. You could get there, get what you went for, get home, and find your house burnt to the ground. You could get there, get what you want, and be killed in a freak accident on the way home. You could get there, and the store could be closed, or they could be out of stock. You could fail to get there in the first place.
In these cases, there are things that can be done to ensure the right outcome, and things that could not. Certainly, if you came home and your house had burnt down because you left the oven running, it's your fault and you are just out of luck. But what if an arsonist burned down your house while you were gone? Were you then responsible for not being there to prevent the arson?
Because that's the supposition behind the question: the Marines are to be faulted for not finding the bunker sooner. (To be frank, I'm half convinced that that chain continues with, "and therefore their commanders are to be faulted, and therefore George Bush is to be faulted". And I'm certain that, if that is the case, the chain of supposition started with "George Bush is to be faulted".) But is it a fair supposition? Going to the store, there aren't people trying to kill you (hopefully), and it is not uncommon for things to go wrong. Murphy rules, nowhere so completely as on the battlefield.
This kind of nitpicking is unhelpful in the extreme. The better question is, how can we find these complexes faster? Do we have the resources we need in Iraq to accomplish the mission? Can we accomplish it better with more, fewer or different resources? Does our doctrine or our equipment need improvement to make it easier to find these bunkers? How can we gather better intelligence in enemy-held areas (and especially in areas we hold) to ensure that such complexes are quickly discovered? Are there other bunkers out there holding WMDs or other things nastier than explosives?
When one begins with the expectation that perfection is possible, one fails more often than not. The [unobtainable] perfect is the enemy of the [obtainable] good.
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.caerdroia.org/MT/mt-tb.cgi/112