Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 12/02/2003 6:20:25 AM PST by Perseverando
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Perseverando
It also may show that the currency update may have made the goofs desperate to get their hands on money!
2 posted on 12/02/2003 6:27:33 AM PST by observer5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Perseverando
Interesting to say the least.

I wondered yesterday what the change in SOP, including reportedly having the bad guys in uniform of the Fedayeen Saddam might signify. Could be correct here.
3 posted on 12/02/2003 6:29:35 AM PST by RJCogburn ("Is that what they call grit in Fort Smith? We call it something else in Yell County." Mattie Ross)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Perseverando
In the 20-20 hindsight of studying the results, the fedayeen Saddam made the mistake of fighting the other side's war. They proved to be totally ineffective in direct confrontation (if ambush may be called confrontation) and got drubbed. They will revert to the low-level, sniping resistance, never winning any battle on the broad front, but never retreating very far either. Their allies in this battle will be the "peace at any price" crowd and the appeal to the walking worried, augmented by the steady daily drumbeat of "give up, you are only making the other side even more angry with us" message to be found in much of the major media in this country.

Peace is the dividend of conclusive victory over your opponent, not the opposite of war. Unconditional surrender is the only real basis for establishing a workable relationship with the vanquished.
4 posted on 12/02/2003 6:35:03 AM PST by alloysteel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Perseverando
T.E. Lawrence, aka Lawrence of Arabia, had this to say,

"[A] 2% active insurgency is successful because 98% of the population is sympathetic to the point of not betraying rebel movements."

I know Bill Lind personally. He has some weird theories and beliefs in areas outside of military theory, but in general, his military stuff, especially when talking about 4th Generation warfare, is generally very good. Having said that he has had some spectacular misses also, like when he predicted the possibility of the 3rd ID being cut off, surrounded and forced to surrender on the drive to Baghdad.

Bottom line, he and Keegan are always worth listening to.
5 posted on 12/02/2003 6:38:14 AM PST by A Simple Soldier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Perseverando
bump
6 posted on 12/02/2003 6:46:24 AM PST by txhurl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Perseverando
Interesting that the two examples the author gives of "mistakes" both resulted in ultimate losses for the "occupier." How about some examples from the 7 out of 10 successful anti-guerrilla wars where the "occupier" won, such as Malaysia?
8 posted on 12/02/2003 7:54:51 AM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Perseverando
I think the Belmont Club, found at the link below, has a much better analysis of recent engagements in Iraq, and dissect's Saddam's faltering "strategy" point by point.

http://belmontclub.blogspot.com/2003_12_01_belmontclub_archive.html#107024609450321565

Here's their summary (though I do advise everyone to read the whole post):

"Serious historians may recall the fate of combatants who gadfly over the battlefield without achieving serious or decisive results while being pummelled in their vitals by their enemy. It will be the fate of Saddam."
12 posted on 12/02/2003 8:44:31 AM PST by diamondjoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson