Fallujah rundown part the first

It's been a few days since the atrocity in Fallujah, where four American civilians were killed and their bodies burned, mutilated, and hung from a bridge. A lot of thoughts have been going through my head about this, which I've been working to straighten out, and I've also been reading what others have to say to help me do that, which is why I've waited until now. I'd probably wait longer except thinking about it is keeping me awake so I want to get this stuff off my chest and go back to sleep.

I'll start with what some others have been saying. As usual, Steven Den Beste has a thoughtful post on the subject. Here are a couple of excerpts:

Terrorism is one form of violent war. It emerged as a way to wage war on the cheap; it was a way that very small groups could contend militarily with opponents who were vastly more powerful.

"Terrorism" in a broad generic sense is as old as humanity. But in the 20th century, a coherent doctrine for terrorist war emerged, which I described here. The key point to remember is this: the strategic goal of terrorism is to provoke reprisals.

...

Now, in Falluja, we have seen another operation consistent with the doctrine of terrorism, only this time the US was the target. Four American civilians driving through that city were killed, and their bodies were desecrated by an exultant crowd. Foreign cameramen captured it all.

The Baathist insurgency thought that ongoing attacks would cause American demoralization and retreat. That didn't work, because they monumentally misjudged the American character. But the goal of this attack is to inspire American fury. What they hope is that the Americans will be blinded by hatred and will do something extremely stupid: to punish the Sunnis collectively for the actions of the terrorist group.

...

We have to respond, and we have to respond massively. But that response must be targeted only at those truly involved in this attack. Sunnis collectively must not feel themselves victimized by it. And that's why this is exactly the right response:

U.S. troops on Thursday vowed to use overwhelming force to enter the volatile Iraqi town of Falluja and hunt down those who killed and mutilated four American contractors.

Marines took up positions on the outskirts of the restive town west of Baghdad where insurgents ambushed the contractors on Wednesday, but the U.S. army's deputy director of operations Brigadier General Mark Kimmitt said they would return.

"Coalition forces will respond," Kimmitt told a news conference. "They are coming back and they are going to hunt down the people responsible for this bestial act.

"It will be at a time and a place of our choosing. It will be methodical, it will be precise and it will be overwhelming."

In his own inimitable style, Misha rants here and here. He also makes a very good point:

Much as I'd have loved for the Jarheads to go charging in immediately, guns blazing following the unloading of a dozen Buffs on the top of the pigs' heads, this actually makes a lot of sense.

There's nothing the Marines could've done for the four civilians, they'd already been murdered, and by rushing in they'd only have given the chance for the murderers to fight back at a time and battlefield of their choosing, and that's the last thing we want.

And for more, just go through the links on my blogroll and scroll down. You'll find plenty of commentary that I mostly, if not entirely, agree with.

As for my thoughts, I realize this is a tough situation. We're essentially caught between a rock and a hard place. On the one hand, there's the desire to pound the town flat with a rain of MOAB's. On the other, we really are the good guys here, we're really trying to help. As Den Beste says, this attack was intended to provoke us into doing something stupid that would alienate the very people we want to help and turn them against us. Well, it's not going to work because, quite frankly, our people in charge over there just aren't that stupid. They were also doubtless hoping that we would finally be haunted strongly enough by the ghosts of Mogadishu that we'd lose resolve and go home. They were wrong.

One of the miscalculations on the part of those who carried out these atrocities is allowing it to be filmed by foreign journalists. We have them on tape, we see their faces, we can identify them. In fact, it's already happening as noted in this article:

U.S. officials have identified several people involved in Wednesday's fatal attack on four U.S. contractors in Fallujah, ABC News reported Friday, quoting intelligence sources as saying they included former members of Iraq's paramilitary forces and "non-Iraqi Arabs."

ABC said U.S. forces were expected to take decisive action against the attackers within the next several days, and intelligence sources knew who they were going after.

And, in support of the theory that this was part of a larger operation that had been planned in advance:

Eyewitnesses have told intelligence sources there were seven to 18 assailants involved in the attack, ABC said. It said Iraqi insurgents had set up several ambush points around Fallujah, and had stocked them with gasoline on the morning of the attack.

Some townspeople had been warned to stay inside, the intelligence officials told the network.

The fact is that we are an occupying power. I've never denied that. The point to remember is that the goal of this occupation is not conquest. Our goals have always been to remove a dangerous regime from power, and to work to set up a functioning democracy (besides Israel) in the Middle East in order to spark a wave of reform of that entire region. Whereas a conquering power would crush the town flat, we're not going to do that. But we must make sure that these people understand that this kind of behavior will not go without a response. Our response must be measured and targeted, but it must also be unambiguous.