Ralph Peters

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is about the military officer, novelist and essayist. For the president of the Long Island Rail Road, see Ralph Peters (LIRR).

Ralph Peters (b. 1952) is a retired United States Army Lieutenant Colonel, novelist and essayist. He has sometimes written under the nom-de-plume Owen Parry.

Contents

[edit] Early life and military career

Peters was born in Pottsville, Pennsylvania, but grew up in Schuylkill Haven. His father was a coal miner and unsuccessful businessman. Peters has written "I am a miner's son, and my father was a self-made man who unmade himself in my youth."

Peters enlisted in the Army as a private, and spent ten years in Germany working in military intelligence. Years later, during the 2004 Killian documents controversy, Peters pointed out that in his front-line division in 1977, five years after the memos in question were allegedly written, only the general's secretary had an electric typewriter. It was, he says, too primitive to produce the documents in question, and moreover, National Guard units "…got the junk we didn't want."

After returning from Germany, Peters attended Officer Candidate School and received his commission, eventually attending the Command and General Staff College, and still later graduated from the U.S. Army War College, in Carlisle, PA. His last assignment was to the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence. He retired in 1998 with the rank of Lieutenant Colonel.

Peters has appeared on PBS, FOX News, CNN and other networks with commentary on military issues and current affairs.

Peters's first novel was Bravo Romeo, a spy thriller set in West Germany. His novels progressed from futuristic scenarios involving the Red Army to contemporary terrorism and failed state issues. His characters are often presented as military mavericks who have the knowledge and courage to tackle problems others can't or won't.

His latest book is titled Wars of Blood and Faith: The Conflicts That Will Shape the 21st Century, and was released on July 15, 2007.

Peters is a regular contributor to the military history magazine, Armchair General, and also serves on its' Advisory Board.

[edit] Opinions on the Middle East

Peters was a strong supporter of the 2003 invasion and ongoing war in Iraq. Defending the war from critics who claimed that Iraq was descending into civil war, he authored a March 5, 2006 piece in the New York Post entitled Dude, Where's My Civil War?, in which he wrote:

I'm looking for the civil war that The New York Times declared. And I just can't find it...The Iraqi Army has confounded its Western critics, performing extremely well last week. And the people trust their new army to an encouraging degree. [1]

Claims that Iraq was descending into civil war, he wrote, were the politically motivated claims of "irresponsible journalists" who have "staked their reputations on Iraq's failure", though six months later, in an interview with FrontPageMag.com magazine, He stated that:

civil war is closer than it was...The leaders squabble, the death squads rule the neighborhoods. [2]

While it would be "too early to walk away from Iraq", the fate of the country was threatened by the US's failure after the invasion to provide adequate troop levels to maintain order, as well as "the Arab genius for screwing things up."

On November 2, 2006, he wrote in USA Today:

Iraq is failing. No honest observer can conclude otherwise. Even six months ago, there was hope. Now the chances for a democratic, unified Iraq are dwindling fast ... Iraq could have turned out differently. It didn't. And we must be honest about it. We owe that much to our troops. They don't face the mere forfeiture of a few congressional seats but the loss of their lives. Our military is now being employed for political purposes. It's unworthy of our nation.[3]

In this piece he also speculates that "only a military coup — which might come in the next few years — could hold the artificial country together" and that

[i]t appears that the cynics were right: Arab societies can't support democracy as we know it.

Following the 2006 US Congressional election, Peters wrote:

It's going to be hard. The political aim of the Democrats will be to continue talking a good game while avoiding responsibility through '08. They'll send up bills they know Bush will veto. And they'll struggle to hide the infighting in their own ranks - Dem unity on this war is about as solid as the unity of Iraq. Now that they've won on the issue, the Dems would like Iraq to just go away. But it won't. And they've got to avoid looking weak on defense, so the military will get more money for personnel, at least. But we won't get a comprehensive plan to deal with Iraq or, for that matter, our global struggle with Islamist terrorists. No matter how many troops we send, we're bound to fail if the troops aren't allowed to fight - under the leadership of combat commanders, not politically attuned bureaucrats in uniform. At present, neither party's leaders want to face the truth about warfare - that it can't be done on the cheap and that war can't be waged without shedding blood. [4]

Before and after maps from Blood borders: How a better Middle East would look, 'Armed Forces Journal,' June 2006
Before and after maps from Blood borders: How a better Middle East would look, 'Armed Forces Journal,' June 2006

In an article titled Blood borders: How a better Middle East would look, Peters conducted a thought experiment by changing the borders in the Middle East: "In each case, this hypothetical redrawing of boundaries reflects ethnic affinities and religious communalism—in some cases, both." [5]

Ralph Peters recently wrote in the New York Post the quadruple truck bomb attack in Iraq that killed reportedly 500 individuals was "a sign of al Qaeda's frustration, desperation and fear." [6]

In a recent column for Armchair General Magazine he wrote in support for regime change in Syria, Iran and Pakistan:

Syria's determination to develop nuclear weapons apes Iran's and North Korea's nuke programs, as well as Pakistan's successful bid to join the club of nuclear powers. ... Given a choice between taking out Osama Bin Laden and his entire leadership network and eliminating renegade nuclear engineers, the latter option might do far more for our long-term security.[7]

Peters is a strong supporter of the "surge" strategy and considers it successful, In January 2008 he wrote:

Determined to elect a Democrat president, the "mainstream" media simply won't accept our success. "Impartial" journalists find a dark cloud in every silver lining in Iraq. And the would-be candidates themselves continue to insist that we should abandon Iraq immediately - as if time had stood still for the past year - while hoping desperately for a catastrophe in Baghdad before November. These are the pols who insisted that the surge didn't have a chance. And nobody calls 'em on it.[8]

[edit] References

  1. ^ Dude, Where's My Civil War? (March 22, 2006).
  2. ^ KILLING FOR CONGRESS. Frontpage (August 16, 2007).
  3. ^ Last Gasps in Iraq. USA Today (November 2, 2006).
  4. ^ New Iraq Risks: What the Election Means (November 9, 2006).
  5. ^ Blood borders: How a better Middle East would look (June 2006).
  6. ^ KILLING FOR CONGRESS (August 16, 2007).
  7. ^ Armchair General Magazine Vol V No.2
  8. ^ NY Post January 11, 2008

[edit] Novels

[edit] Nonfiction

Peters has authored numerous essays on strategy for military journals such as Parameters, Military Review, and Armed Forces Journal, reports for the US Marine Corps Center for Emerging Threats and Opportunities, writes a regular opinion column for the New York Post, and has written essays and columns for USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, Newsweek, The Weekly Standard, The Washington Monthly and Army magazine. He has reported from Iraq, Israel, West Africa and other trouble spots, usually for the New York Post.

He has published six collections of his essays and columns entitled:

He authored the article "Constant Conflict"[1] which contains the controversial quote

There will be no peace. At any given moment for the rest of our lifetimes, there will be multiple conflicts in mutating forms around the globe. Violent conflict will dominate the headlines, but cultural and economic struggles will be steadier and ultimately more decisive. The de facto role of the US armed forces will be to keep the world safe for our economy and open to our cultural assault. To those ends, we will do a fair amount of killing.

[edit] External links

Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to: