Worst for who?
Will probably be the Tet Offensive of Iraq. You can bet a lot of insurgents will get ambushed by snipers and whatnot on the way to targets; I'm sure they'll suffer massive casualties, potentially backbreaking.
All depends on how the media spins it though.
Is this from personal knowledge, or simply wishful thinking?
The terrorists have had a long time to plan for this. I doubt that they're going to just walk into ambushes.
Now if we - and the Iraqi's, expecially the Iraqi's - were to take the initiative and go after them, maybe your massive casualties prediction might be right.
What do you mean depends? Depends indicates there is a chance the media would spin it in a way other than negative.
"All depends on how the media spins it though"
I know how the media will spin it...just like they did Tet.
This is the first time I've heard you being optimistic. Usually, you are a factual realist.
And, intuitively I agree.
I'm not sure just why we don't hear reports of the Iraqis having a strong network of vigilantes who, via Kalashnikov, would persuade insurgents to cease their obstruction of the fledgling democracy.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1320937/posts
Not Tet yet, but a good start. They may not have the manpower to kill enough for a Tet. Good analysis in your post, might surprise some that the US military adapts during operations and adopts for planning purposes.