Posted on 09/16/2004 11:50:30 PM PDT by churchillbuff
Madrid, Spain, Sep. 15 (UPI) --
Off the record conversations with intelligence chiefs in five major European countries -- each with multiple assets in Iraq -- showed remarkable agreement on these points:
-- The neo-con objectives for restructuring Iraq into a functioning model democracy were a bridge too far. They were never realistic.
[snip] -- The insurgency has mushroomed from 5,000 in the months following the collapse of the Saddam Hussein regime to an estimated 20,000 today, which is still growing. Insurgents are targeting green Iraqi units and volunteers for training and some have already defected to the rebels.
[snip] -- To cope with the insurgency, the United States requires 10 times the rebel strength -- or some 200,000 as a bare minimum. Short of that number, the insurgency will continue to gain momentum. The multiple is based on the British experience in Northern Ireland for a quarter of a century as well as France's civil war in Algeria (1954-62), when nationalist guerrillas were defeated militarily, but won the war diplomatically. France deployed half a million men to defeat the fellaghas in Algeria.
-- The U.S. occupation has lost control of large swathes of Iraq where the insurgency operates with virtual impunity. ...
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
However he is right on about the Saudi princes and the Wahabbi and his intelligence on the Middle East is excellent. He would like to be American but cannot abide the sans culotte
Dopes like you have no idea how disastrous it will be if we cut and run from Iraq. Nor do you care because you are as emotional as a woman with PMS. Why don't get the heck out of here and post your garbage at DU? You will get a great reception over there.
It's times like this that a little history can be helpful. If you look at the casualty rates from WW2 we suffered fewer losses in the years 41 through 43 when we were losing the war, but suffered considerably heavier casualties in 44 - 45 when we were clearly winning. The same can be said for previous conflicts.
We've made mistakes, like not killing Sadr and reducing Falluja, which would have made the present situation a little brighter. I also think the elections coming up here, in Afghanistan and Iraq are the main driving force behind these attacks.
Since no major offensive is likely before the November elections we will have to wait. But it's high time we start getting a lot more aggressive - take out Falluja once and for all. And if the new Iraq leadership is against that then we need to tell them we can begin the withdrawl of all coalition forces from Iraq in 48 hours and wish them good luck.
We also need to begin supporting groups inside Iran and Syria so the governments there are too busy trying to hold power than cause troubles in Iraq. Go on the offensive.
"The 'war on terror' is a misnomer that is tantamount to rhetorical disinformation. One can no more fight terrorism than one could declare war on Hitler's Panzers in World War II or Dreadnoughts in World War I. Terrorism is a weapons system that has been used time and again for the last 5,000 years. The root causes are the problem, not the weapon."
Tell THAT to the Israelis. They cannot solve the root causes of Islamic terror, and where would they be today if they had not developed tactics for fighting a war against terrorists. This is a poor article, filled with the usual European hypocrisy and geopolitical folly. And nobody really knows how many hard-core terrorists are in Iraq. They slip in and out of that country with the shifts in the wind. If we take away their incentive for being there and their support system, they'll go home and terorrize their local police.
We have begun to focus on kill ratios, a sure sign of impending disaster.
Victory is achieved only after the enemy's will to resist is broken.
Well, kick ass, of course-but a good old-fashioned ass kicking will not, I fear, be sufficient.
Well, God bless you, Mr. Robinson for everything you have done for this blessed land-but if you mean that Iraq policy will not need revision after the soon-to-be-forgotten john kerry is consigned to history, I fear that you are wrong.
That's right. No nation wins a war merely by holding territory or inflicting casualities on their enemey. You don't win until your enemy stops fighting. We have to focus on breaking their will and eliminating the incentives to continue fighting. I'm expecting some hard fighting in November after Dubya is re-elected with a pause at the Thanksgiving holdiday, then another offensive ending in mid-December. We're in crunch time now and we must improve the security situation in Iraq. I wouldn't be surpised if we launch some raids just over the borders into Iran and Syria--the kind of Special Forces raids than never officially happen (and may in fact not be officially occurring now).
Made up of Americans who treasured liberty and our beloved homeland.
I do not believe, and I never have believed, that a population sufficiently virtuous to win and then defend freedom exists in the former Ottoman provinces of Mosul, Mesopotamia, and Basrah which are now together commonly called "Iraq".
The reason we cannot build up a decent Iraqi security force is because there are no such people as "Iraqis".
Nonetheless, every single time I see the term "neo-conservative" used by the press, there is always a definite liberal, anti-Republican, or anti-Bush bias in the article. This article is no exception, because it quotes the anti-Bush European hypocrites.
Of course there is, and believe me, I am not carrying water for any euroscum.
But even a broken clock is right twice a day, and if we cannot learn from our enemies when they accidently speak the truth, we are not fit to govern ourselves.
(((( Ping ))))
I hope you're not really in Alaska?
I think we're going to crush a lot of these insurgents just after the election. No doubt the Pentagon is preparing plans for this operation right now. We're just training our guys, building up our supplies, and keeping the casualties down until the election. This offensive will be fast, efficient, and it won't be pretty.
Yes, it's 2:55 AM here. I'm up very late tonight. It's about time to call it a day.
I am literally amazed at the attitudes and responses of many Freepers on this subject. They remind me of the koolaid drinkers over at DU, blindly swallowing anything that "our side" has for foreign policy, and inviting all dissemblers to head for the exits.
Look, I was doing the conservative thing when most of the folks here were in diapers or not yet a gleam in their father's eye.
We need to face up to the fact that this is a bad war, not because we removed Sadaam, but because we have NO damn idea what we are supposed to do now that our kick ass military has WON the war. We are engaged in trying to impose a political structure based on independence, personal integrity, freedom, and other virtues on a culture of moon god worshiping, lying, cheating, fatalistic goat rapers. The west has to get it through our skulls that as much as muslims love the idea of freedom and prosperity, they hate the west even more, because we are infidels.
President Bush is a GOOD man. He believes that the Arab/Muslim world will respond to the values above because (though he won't say this in public) they are made in the image of God. He believes that freedom is branded into the souls of men by their creator. On that I agree with him. He is also privy to MUCH more knowledge of the world than I, but he is also naive in one huge aspect. Our western democracies and democratic republics were forged in the furnace of a religious conviction that emphasized individual freedoms, courage, personal responsibility, integrity, and a fear of centralization of power. THE MUSLIM WORLD SHARES NO SUCH WORLDVIEW. It is folly to attempt to appeal to the "better angels of our nature," to a whole nation, while they vehemently reject the platform that gives those better angels a venue to operate.
The sad alternative seems to be to declare victory, pull out, and watch as Iraq descends to chaos. Unfortunately, that is going to happen anyway (so I believe), whether we stay or not. The only difference is the number of body bags we bring out before that happens, and how disillusioned our soldiers are when they come back.
They fought like MEN. They are heroes all and there are none better. Get them OUT of that rat's nest while they can still be (rightly) proud of what they have done, removed a brutal tyrant and potential nuke thrower and given Iraq a CHANCE to determine its own destiny. What they do with that chance should be their concern, not ours.
BINGO!!!! We have a winner.
The best alternative to the civil war which is surely coming in Iraq would be to divide the country up FOR them. However, then we get to the 20 thousand dollar question of "who gets the oil fields?" Also, the turks would go apoplectic if we put an independent Kurdish nation on their border. They just finished a 20 year civil war to suppress Kurdish separtists inside their own borders.
It is a mess.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.