Why can't Saddam's disbanded army be re-constituted?

Question

There must be some practical reason it's taking so long to train an Iraqi army. Iraq had a large army that was disbanded. It consisted of hundreds of thousands of trained soldiers. Why can't these ex-soldiers be enticed to join a new Iraqi army and be readied for duty in a short period? This is not a rhetorical question, so please don't take this as an opportunity to sound off about what a fool Bush is or what traitors the Dems are. If you truly understand military matters could you explain this, please?

Answer 1

Because you are not getting the truth about whats going on over there . They say these people cant govern themselves , however the truth is that Bush wants an occupation . Has it ever occured to you that Iraqi politicians or the interview with the man on the street never takes place ? The information coming out of there is closely controlled . I honestly believe that if we left there , they may have a better chance to succeed than you are led to believe . And showing that radical cleric all the time , instead of more mainstream politicians , only serves to influence American public opinion against leaving there.Think about it .

Answer 2

To begin with, the Iraqi army was a conscript army. Drafted. It didn't have the best training.
Secondly, the majority of the officer corps were Baathists, and the reason they were officers was as much their loyalty to Saddam Hussein as to their military ability.
Next, the military men from the Iraqi army have now moved on to other things. Can you say, insurgents? Reconstituting the Iraqi military by bringing these people back together would make the Iraqi army worse than useless. It would be infiltrated with insurgents from all sides.
Why can't it be done now? Loyalty. The Iraqi people now see themselves as Sunnis/Shiites/Kurds first, or members of their clan. They don't place their loyalty with the Iraqi government, or the country. (That's a generalization;there are loyal Iraqis, btu they are the minority, especially when faced with the violence the insurgents inflict on anybody who collaborates with the US.)

Answer 3

Many of the answers are valid and very good... Another look at the reasons might be to remember how quickly Saddam's military was overcome and "beaten"... Saddam's conscripted, hand picked Baatist army loved to prance around in fancy uniforms, goose stepping their way down the street with cute little hats, while gloves and rifles on their shoulders. They were really good at murdering unarmed civilian men, women and children. However, when it comes down to the nitty-gritty, they are not suited to battle against a real army. They drop their weapons and run like hell, hiding behind their mosques, children in schools, patients in hospitals.

With the strict religious sects and the difference in beliefs, you will not be able to have a standing army there. You will not get the best trained Sunni soldier to turn his gun on a Sunni, nor a Shi'ia soldier against another Shi'ia....which leaves only the Kurds to pick on.

Anyone who believes otherwise is a fool. Those in Washington obviously never considered the history of the middle east, nor bothered to find out. They still don't want to know. They will just keep throwing our young people against an unidentifiable guerilla "army" and getting them killed.

Answer 4

Your question is thoughtful and legitimate; to start with, Iraq is majority Shiite fundamentalist; but the Iraqi Army was totally Sunni in it's composition; it was a personally-managed arm of Saddam's regime, used to massacre Kurd and Shiites alike; and in the invasion of Kuwait, it's soldiers were allowed, no, encouraged, to rape, torture, and kill the Kuwaiti population.

All countries indoctrinate their soldiers; ours with love of country and a sense of moral justice, in supporting and defending our Constitution; in Iraq, the soldiers swore an oath to protect Saddam and his murderous regime... these soldiers had privilege and personal power over the average Iraqi citizen. In our system, our soldiers are citizens equal but not above others. The decision not to use these "tainted" ex-soldiers was dictated by historic concerns about using fascistic troops with blood on their hands. The present slow-down in training of a new Iraqi army is due to the necessity to weedout infiltrating insurgent or sectarian terror elements. The old Iraqi army used threats as motivation in training; our Army is trying to use morality and a sense of justice to train new recruits; this is a new concept for most.

Answer 5

We determined the army could not be trusted. So those who gave up were taken to pow campsOr sent home.If some one invaded this country would you join the invaders after capture?

Answer 6

Someone had the bright idea of "de-Baathification" and ended the ability to reconstitute the Army. I, personally, think it was bad idea. We should have used them to secure the country. Many have found jobs elsewhere. .

Oh well, live and learn I guess.

Answer 7

DUH! Cuz it was Saddams army and its been Disbanded.. sheesh... dosent take a rocket scientist to figure this one out..