Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

The Proud, The Few, The New Iraq Army

Nick Gillespie | 12.11.2003 1:38 AM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Three hundred of 700 American-trained troops have quit the new Iraqi army, reports CNN.

The reasons include "unhappiness with terms, conditions and pay and with instructions of commanding officers."

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Be In

Nick Gillespie is an editor at large at Reason and host of The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie.

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (20)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. anon   22 years ago

    "unhappiness with terms, conditions and pay and with instructions of commanding officers."

    i.e. no raping, stealing, beating, gassing, murdering, looting or kicking their own people.

  2. R. C. Dean   22 years ago

    Technically, I suspect that the correct term is "desertion", not "quit", as in "300 of 700 Iraqis deserted the new Iraqi army."

    I understand desertion is an old and respected tradition in the Iraqi military, so this is more of a "dog bites man" story.

  3. junyo   22 years ago

    And of course all the people saying "See, I told you this was a bad idea, we need to get out..." harasses the administration into a patently bad decision:

    "...the Pentagon and the Coalition Provisional Authority were discussing recalling some units of the former Iraqi army."

    Yeah, the population's gonna be real happy to see their "liberators" put guns back into the hands of their former oppressors/assailants. We're gonna pull out too quick so Bush can look good and try to win the election and 20 years from now we'll be going back to nuke some nutjob that was drawing a check from the US in '04.

  4. Ice Cold   22 years ago

    How many US recruits quit before, during, or after bootcamp? 1/3 does not sound unrealistic. This article is painting Iraqi recruits as wimps, but Amercians can be wimps, too. 🙂

  5. Carl Sagan   22 years ago

    Why are we pulling out so quick? Is this Iraqi Interruptus?

  6. burghboy   22 years ago

    Now class, altogether, can you say, "ARVN"? Good... now, our next history lesson...

  7. Ruthless   22 years ago

    We're gonna pull out too quick so Bush can look good and try to win the election and 20 years from now we'll be going back to nuke some nutjob that was drawing a check from the US in '04.
    Posted by junyo at December 11, 2003 02:19 PM

    Adjust your timing: maximum "sierra" will hit the fan right about election time '04 which is why Gore will be Dean's VP.

  8. Jean Bart   22 years ago

    Hmm, it sounds like the American army during the Revolution. 🙂

  9. Kevin Carson   22 years ago

    One of those guys could be president of Iraq thirty years from now. Are any of them working on somebody's congressional campaign? 😉

  10. Steve in CO   22 years ago

    Ruthless,

    Hearing rumors that Hillary could be Dean's VP pick...

    Wouldn't THAT be interesting?

    Regards,

    Steve

  11. Ruthless   22 years ago

    Hillery as Dean's VP just doesn't make sense to me. For one thing, Slick moving in to the VP's digs? Nah.
    Who does that "futures market" predict as VP?

  12. Warren   22 years ago

    a) DUH

    b) Pulling out now is the best option left because; we already fucked ourselves. The longer we stay the more fucked we get.

    c) "How many US recruits quit before, during, or after bootcamp? 1/3 does not sound unrealistic." Yes. It's apples and oranges but US military DOR rates are nowhere near that high. (They couldn't afford to be)

    d) The current struggle for power over the Democratic Party is between the Clintons and the Gores. Therefore, Al's endorsement ensures no veep offer to Hellery, and likely a Dean/Gore ticket.

  13. joe   22 years ago

    A few months ago, Dean described his ideal running mate. Somebody who knows Washington and Capitol Hill; somebody to provide geographic balance; and someone who is a minority and/or a woman.

    So let's see. Minority woman. From the South. Spent time in Congress.

    Oh my God - CYNTHIA MCKINNEY! RUN AWAYYYYYY!!!!!

  14. burghboy   22 years ago

    A few months ago, Dean described his ideal running mate. Somebody who knows Washington and Capitol Hill; somebody to provide geographic balance; and someone who is a minority and/or a woman.

    Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr.: knows Washington, geographic balance, is a minority

    Gen. Wesley Clark: knows Washington, geographic balance, has no balls = is a woman

    Hillary Clinton: knows Washington too well, no geographic balance (native New Yorker, right?), may be a woman (we need to check with Janet Reno on this one)

  15. Howard Owens   22 years ago

    I think Dean is going to want to get a Hawkish Dem to counter his pandering-to-angry-left image.

    Hillary won't take the job because she wants to be president herself, and she won't risk getting on a losing ticket.

    Gore won't do it because he's already been VP and it wouldn't play well when he runs in 2008.

    That leaves Joe Biden.

    H.

  16. mike   22 years ago

    Just curious, Joe, but how ugly do you think Hillary is going to be in four years?

    I'm guessing that Hillary circa 2008 will be about as homely as Chelsea circa 1992. But without the braces.

    And having balls on the battlefield and balls in Washington are two unrelated characteristics. They may even be mutually exclusive. (See: Eisenhower, Grant)

  17. joe   22 years ago

    What kind of prick says a war hero career soldier who spent months recovering from wounds received on the battlefield has "no balls" because of his politics?

    Wesley Clark would stomp your fat ass into hamburger-boy. Then again, so would Hillary Clinton.

  18. Douglas Fletcher   22 years ago

    I don't know what's going on in the Iraqi 'army,' but I do remember from my days with the US Navy that what kept me in mostly was the fact that I'd signed a binding contract with them that said I couldn't quit under any circumstances. And as I fulfilled that contract, there were many circumstances under which I would have quit.

    Sounds like the Iraqi army needs a new contracts lawyer, maybe.

  19. Douglas Fletcher   22 years ago

    If Hillary Clinton is going to be stomping anybody it'll going to be with her own huge ass.

    Just curious, Joe, but how ugly do you think Hillary is going to be in four years? Do you think it will be a campaign liability?

  20. Kane Ian   21 years ago

    EMAIL: nospam@nospampreteen-sex.info
    IP: 212.253.2.205
    URL: http://preteen-sex.info
    DATE: 05/21/2004 06:12:34
    Study as though you will not reach, as if you may lose it.

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

In Defense of the Tourist Trap: Why Following the Crowd Might Be the Smartest Way To Travel

Christian Britschgi | From the August/September 2025 issue

69 Percent of Americans Say American Dream Is Not Dead

Autumn Billings | 7.4.2025 8:30 AM

With Environmental Regulatory Reform, California Gov. Gavin Newsom Finally Does Something Substantial

Steven Greenhut | 7.4.2025 7:30 AM

Celebrate Independence Day by Insulting a Politician

J.D. Tuccille | 7.4.2025 7:00 AM

Independence Day Reminds Us You Can Be American by Choice

Billy Binion | 7.4.2025 6:30 AM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!