Iraq: Two news stories; opposite views

A Marine general claims the insurgency is broken.

Another story says the insurgents will fight on.

Which of the two stories is correct, or is likely to prove to be correct? I believe the insurgents will continue to fight, no matter what happens.

What are the insurgents real goals? What is their vision for the future of Iraq? I personally believe that most of the insurgents are ex-Iraqi military who are terrified at the prospect of losing their positions of power to the Shia and Kurd majorities. It’s less about the American prescence and more about self-preservation.

I think only time will tell which story is closer to the facts. Insurgency isn’t the only snag toward making Iraq what GW et al see as a democratic society on the lines of the US, or Britain or France.

The story from the Lost Angeles Times highlights the fact that in a lot of places in Iraq there is a tribal society that is suspicious of outsiders and doesn’t want them around. And just for the record, the area that is the subject of the story is a Shiite region and definitely not composed of former Saddam supporters.

Old “Bring it On,” who by all accounts isn’t at all curious about the world outside his exerience, seems not to realize that Iraq is largely a tribal entity consisting of many disparate elements that was cobbled together by Britain and France to serve their interests.

And so GW, willy nilly, set a goal of making an exemplary democracy out of Iraq with no apparent consideration of what that entailed.

And that decision has just been ratified by 51% of those who voted.

Go figure.

I thought I put this in IMHO. Wouldn’t it be better suited there, mods?


The Marine general’s assessment is that the “back is broken” – they have no central logistical center, and will find it increasingly hard to communicate, resupply, plan, organize, recruit, etc. If he is correct, they are finished as a coherent military force.

That does not mean, however that they all vanish. As some of the other quotes indicate, they still fully expect scattered small-scale events. A suicide bomb here, a sniper there, a dozen holdouts storm a police station in another place. All sad and frustrating and, depending on how they are perceived, politically meaningful. But not a military threat.

Hell, that describes most of Alabama.

Riiiigh, because we did such a good job with this in Afghanistan… :rolleyes:

Please stop spamming US military propaganda

To a greater or lesser extent it describes a lot of places. However, in the US for example, in addition to tribalism there is an over 200 year history of at least a semblence of central, unified government that isn’t despotic or imposed from outside.

Although some unreconstructed rebels in South Carolina might disagree with that last statement.

Afghanistan seems to be doing just fine. No, it’s not Kansas yet, but hell, it’s clawing back from total destruction. People lined up for hours to vote. There were no attacks on voters. There hasn’t been an attempt on Karzai’s life for a long, long time. The economy is improving. There are no constant terrorist attacks. What more did you expect?

Right. We’re only supposed to spam message boards with left-wing propaganda, right? Like your comment a few minutes ago in another thread that 150,000 civilians have been killed - which appears to me to be a made-up number, and off by an order of magnitude to boot.

Oh? So the correct figure is more like 15,000? This is a great comfort, I thank you for bringing this happy fact to my attention.

I think Furt pretty much hit it. In another thread when we were talking about the run up to Fallujah and then talking about the aftermath I pretty much said the same thing. The back of the currently insurgency, if not completly broken, is severly hurt. Their major base for logistics and staging is gone. They lost a HELL of a lot of supplies in Fallujah, based on the stores of weapons, ammo, explosives, and the other things that keep such an insurgency going. I really don’t think a lot of people understand logistics, which is where the confusion comes from. There can be all kinds of folks hyped up to fight the US…but if they don’t have weapons, ammo, explosives, etc they are going to be severly limited in how effective they will be. A good portion of said supplies has just been lost to them. Undoubtely there are other caches out there…but they aren’t secure and the grip continues to tighten.

I really think the back of the insurgency WAS broken in Fallujah…and they know it. They are desparately trying to re-establish a new base in another city, but that means they have to come out in the open…where we can get them. In the long run this is going to be the decisive battle IMO.

All that said, its not over by any stretch. Saddam had LOTS of toys laying about, and as has been pointed out lots of insurgents are still out there. And IMO most of the leadership managed to bolt before we closed off Fallujah. The fighting will continue on for a while to come…but long term its not looking good, from my perspective anyway, for the insurgents.

Afghanistan though…thats another kettle of fish. Its a much more dispersed population, and a lot more rugged type terrain. Its also got a rougher boarder thats more porous long term for resupplying covertly from an external source. THAT situation might go on for quite a while longer. In addition, lets face it…Afghanistan really doesn’t have a lot of prospects for a viable strong economy, unlike Iraq. I’m encouraged though by the elections…maybe it will work out.


Re: Afghanistan: Sam Stone said:

Thanks to the opium trade.

Um, most of the country is in control of various warlords. The reason things are going “smoothly” is that no one cares to disturb the status quo. What %age of the agrarian portion (AKA, most of) Afghanistan voted? Were even registered?

Propaganda requires an organized effort by an organization.

Blue skys will clear up, tomorrow, tomorrow, it’s only a day aaaawwaaaaaaaay

Oh, right, that’s left-wing propaganda because it didn’t come out of a Republican’s ass.

A lot of ignorant things, for one. Things sure do look rosey when your viewpoint of the world is so tilted.

Except for all that pesky left-wing propaganda, of course.

Pretty soon, Sam is going to be sounding a lot like our good friend Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf

ahem “There is no insurgency! The terrorists have been dealt with. You are now Free. Return to your homes and don’t come out or watch TV or read the Internet. There is no war in Iraq.”

:rolleyes: Why you spew stuff like this I have no idea Zag.

BTW, here is another side of things:

Or maybe this is just US military propaganda too, ehe? Keep telling yourself that US bad, insurgents good, or US lies, insurgents truth Zag.


If the insurgency is broken, then we can expect a good number of our boys to be home for Christmas.

Whoops. That was Vietnam.

:rolleyes: Why you spew stuff like this I have no idea Zag.
I do it because it is funny, at least to me, to see the same rhetoric being spewed like that.

When did I say insurgents are good? I said that they existed.

Lies, x. Lies are for bad people. Stop doing it.

By your constant knee jerk defense of the indefensable Zag. And your equally knee jerk attack against anything the US does, reguardless of the facts.

‘Lies’ would imply that I don’t actually believe what I’ve said Zag. I assure you that I do in fact believe it…therefore it isn’t a ‘lie’. I could certainly be WRONG…but I’m not lieing.


The whole, “the insurgency is broken” thing is why our current leadership is far too moronic and simple-minded to fight a true war on terror. They’re playing a “we captured your city now you have to surrender and we win” game, as if Falujah had been the center of insurgent attacks and supplies. Like, f*ing hello? They were smuggling crap INTO Fallujah, and most of the terrorists inside just left when the Marines came.

And these asses are stupid enough to say, “the insurgency is broken”? Because you captured one city? Whoop-dee-freaking-doo. Pin a medal on your chest and put a flag on a map, but they’ll still be there in the morning.

Then all this crap about ignoring body counts and claiming that Afghanistan is the newest vacation resort and retirement town tourist trap. Jesus f*ing christ, are you people serious? Thinking like that is even stupider than the terrorists.

Then you come along and play the whole “Ooooh Zag, you support the terrorists you’re evil” card. You know what? F* you for that. Build a fing time machine and go leg hump McCarthy. Close-minded, us-versus-them thinking. Fing brilliant. Guess you’re just parroting Dear Leader’s words though.