AL QAEDA'S WORST NIGHTMARE - (Zarkawi trying an Iraqi "Tet offensive")

WASHINGTON TIMES ONLINE.COM ^ | APRIL 15, 2005 | AUSTIN BAY

[CHARLITE]

Al Qaeda remains trapped in a Vietnam fantasy. It is desperately trying to produce an "Iraqi Tet" -- a Middle Eastern repetition of the North Vietnamese and Viet Cong 1968 offensive in South Vietnam.

On April 2 and again on April 4, the terrorist gang led by al Qaeda's Iraq commander, Abu Musab Zarqawi, launched "military-style attacks" on the Abu Ghraib prison complex in Baghdad. In the April 4 assault, U.S. forces took 44 casualties (most of them minor wounds). The terrorist gang, however, took 50 casualties, out of a force estimated at 60 gunmen.

On April 11, the gang attacked a Marine compound at Husaybah near the Syrian border. As I write, terrorist casualties are unconfirmed, but the assault flopped.

While bomb attacks on unarmed Iraqi civilians continue (particularly against Shi'ites), public opinion now matters in Iraq, and the thugs' public slaughters have killed too many Iraqi innocents. January's election dramatically lifted public morale and changed the media focus: Suddenly, democracy looks possible, and an Arab Muslim democracy is al Qaeda's worst nightmare.

Hence the "Tet gamble." Bombs have not cowed the Iraqi people, but perhaps the American people will lose heart and buckle if al Qaeda concocts a military surprise.

"They're trying to create a spectacular event, overrun a patrol or border outpost somewhere, an event with huge media value that would promote their cause and make them seem more powerful than they are."

At Abu Ghraib and Husaybah, Zarqawi failed militarily. He did not get his scare headlines, either. Short of detonating a nuclear weapon in Baghdad, a ground attack on the Green Zone that succeeds in cracking the U.S. Embassy and taking hostages is the only "Tet" card Zarqawi has. The Green Zone, however, is Iraq's hardest target.

[theDentist]

Loooks like his Tet offensive was similar to that in '68. Back then, while it was a PR coup (with the willing help of the MSM), it was really a disaster. There were so many NVA wounded and killed that they lost control of their own war, and the Khmer Rouge (sp?) took over the leadership. Same here, where of 60 attackers, it seems 1 in 6 escaped whole!

Try it again, goat-boy. Allah's on your side, so you can't lose!

[Dr. Frank fan]

A big part of the problem is that the Tet Offensive was a military failure. It only "succeeded" because of the symbolism, spread by a compliant US media willing to amplify the doom & gloom assessment. Of course, that US media still exists today, but its power is greatly lessened - and there is competition in the form of blogs and alternative news sources, people (including Austin Bay) who will get the story right.

So, if Zarqawi really is going for a Tet Offensive that is good news for us. It's always good news when your enemy is pursuing a hopeless strategy premised on inapplicable assumptions that are mired in the past.

[Luke Skyfreeper]

The terrorist gang, however, took 50 casualties, out of a force estimated at 60 gunmen.

Too bad it wasn't 60.

[gridlock]

The "success" of the Tet Offensive was a creation of the American media. Don't think for a second they would love to do so again today, if given the chance...

[Former Dodger]

The MSM is already practicing for a new Tet, so to speak, even a simple straightforward statement becomes a message of DOOM, ask Secretary Rumsfeld:

Press Caught Distorting Rumsfeld on Iraq Exit Strategy (media bias)(another thread)

[alloysteel]

So, on an objective basis, al-Zarqawi HAS managed to replicate the Tet Offensive. The Viet Nam experience was aided and abetted by the MSM at the time, with no countervailing information available from alternate sources.

They had it almost right this time. Only the information flow from the combat zone did not conform to the original plan. And there is no contingent that could come to a peace table this time, to make demands for what could not be gained militarily.

Lt(JG) John F. Kerry, where are you?

[jolie560]

The MSM stands ready to oblige even the slightest of 'good news' IEDS or suicide car bombings.

Maybe it's time to overwhelm the enemy with daily reports of progress, so that positive news gets so boring, it's no longer news. Or does broadcasting of 'good news' just target us for another dose of MSM toro-teasing?

[wingman1]

"Al Qaeda remains trapped in a Vietnam fantasy. It is desperately trying to produce an "Iraqi Tet" -- a Middle Eastern repetition of the North Vietnamese and Viet Cong 1968 offensive in South Vietnam."

This is all I had to read.

While the VC hope that a popular uprising did not occur in the major cities of South Vietnam, at least they enjoyed some popular support in the rural parts of Vietnam.

What the terrorists in Iraq have failed to understand is that car bombing innocent Iraqi civilians, as they attend Friday prayers in mosques, can NEVER produce popular support for their cause.

That is why the Iraqi and US troops are certain to win.

As one who fought elusive elements of VC and NVA, I can say with certainty that if the tide of battle changes to one of open confrontation; it'll all be over in a few months.

[El Gato]

There were so many NVA wounded and killed that they lost control of their own war, and the Khmer Rouge (sp?) took over the leadership.

Close but no Kewpie doll.

It was the Viet Cong (VC) that "lost control" (actually they never had more than the illusion of control, the North Vietnamese were running the show from the get go) and of Course it was the North Vietnamese Army (NVA) that ran things openly from then on. The VC were pretty much destroyed as a fighting force by Tet '68.

[CHARLITE]

"As one who fought elusive elements of VC and NVA, I can say with certainty that if the tide of battle changes to one of open confrontation; it'll all be over in a few months."

First of all, thank you for your service to America. You and your comrades deserve our undying praise and gratitude.

About the tide turning in Iraq: - I'm sure that it will turn, and this time around, there isn't an Uncle Walter Cronkite to provide appalling disinformation to the American public about how "we're losing the war in Iraq." Had Dan Blatherer remained in his musty old anchor chair, perhaps he would have given it his "all" in an attempt to spoil Bush's smart program of establishing democracy in the middle east, by beginning with Iraq.........but now, even with a lot of liberal MSM opposition, the leftist media isn't going to succeed in destroying actual American policy success there. That is my opinion, anyway.

Char

[El Gato]

Meant to add: The Khmer Rouge were the Maoist communists of Camdodia (Kampuchea) then supported by both the ChiComs and North Vietnamese. Later the NVA had to put down the murderous bastards, which caused a falling out with China (they were never close) and led to a short border war where the NVA kicked the ChiCom's rears, having had lots of practice fighting the US and South Vietnamese armies, who were much better than the Chinese Peoples Army.

[FlingWingFlyer]

The "success" of the Tet Offensive was a creation of the American media.

You got that right. General Giap wrote in his own book that the VC had been totally annihilated and that they NVA were on their knees ready to surrender. Then SeeBS and Walter Cronkite declare TET 68 a "great victory" for the Communists and started pumping out their videos of protests and riots in the streets of America by the Marxist "students." Giap wrote that if they could just hold on a little longer, Cronkite and the Leftist MSM "media" would get them their "victory."

We won't let that happen this time. Cronkite is senile and Rather is in disgrace. SeeBS is nothing but a "paid programming" channel. The "alternative" news media will get the truth out.

[wingman1]

"...this time around..."

Ah yes.

It's very different this time.

Let me count the ways.

First and foremost we have a real mission that can be put in to words. (The leftists know in their hearts they are wrong "this time around")

Second, we have real leadership.

Third, the MSM ain't sh!t.

Then again, maybe they are.

[CHARLITE]

Note this very fine new column on NRO by Victor Davis Hanson. No doubt it has already been posted on FR, but here's an excerpt, and the link to the original.

Excerpt:

"But too often we discuss the present risky policy without thought of what preceded it or what might have substituted for it. Have we forgotten that the messy business of democracy was the successor, not the precursor, to a litany of other failed prescriptions? Or that there were never perfect solutions for a place like the Middle East — awash as it is in oil, autocracy, fundamentalism, poverty, and tribalism — only choices between awful and even more awful? Or that September 11 was not a sudden impulse on the part of Mohammed Atta, but the logical culmination of a long simmering pathology? Or that the present loudest critics had plenty of chances to leave something better than the mess that confronted the United States on September 12? Or that at a time of war, it is not very ethical to be sorta for, sorta against, kinda supportive, kinda critical of the mission — all depending on the latest sound bite from Iraq?"

http://www.nationalreview.com/hanson/hanson200504150749.asp

[wingman1]

"...this war started on September 11."

What many of our leftist friends refused to realize or admit on, or shortly after, Sept 11 is that we were at war. War had been declared on western civilization long before that time.

This is not Vietnam - as much as those who hate America would have us believe.

Thanks for posting Hanson's article. I had not previously read it. He is rapidly emerging as a powerful voice.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

The fundamental difference between Tet and now is the fact that we are not remotely in the same political condition as we were at the time of Tet:

• we have been thru Tet once before, and we're skeptical of the press
• the conservative movement in America is no longer fractured by the traditional antipathy of southerners for the Republican Party. Consequently,
• The congressional majority wouldn't give a sympathetic hearing to a new Lt. Kerry if he did make an appearance.
• we have talk radio because Reagan killed the "Fairness" Doctrine
• we have FR

[CHARLITE]

"This is not Vietnam - as much as those who hate America would have us believe."

Thanks to both of you for your replies. Your remarks are absolutely on the button. Very true. No new Lt. John False Kerry would get the kind of attention that he got back then.......and I suppose that the Dixie Chicks would be the closest one could get to Jane Fonda of yore....and they fizzled in their melodramatic act, IMHO.

Char

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

the Dixie Chicks would be the closest one could get to Jane Fonda of yore....and they fizzled in their melodramatic act

Well, actually - the biggest difference of all is in the correlation of forces and the terrain . Nobody is allied with Iraq's insurgents who is a credible military/geopolitical rival to the US. Nobody is therefore in a positon to give industrial-strength physical aid and comfort to the antidemocratic forces. Much as the mullahs of Iran might enjoy it, they themselves have a legitimacy problem internally.

Seeing people dancing in the streets for having had the experience of officially registering their political judgement at the polls is a sobering experience for muslim tyrants, who must consider how that looks to their own people. Likewise the Dixie Chicks and suchlike are actually pretty thick on the ground - but they have a severe political problem in that it's becoming too clear that Iraq is becoming the most democratic polity in the middle east (Israel always excepted). In the wake of Saddam, Uday, and Cousay (sp), there really is no alternative to the present Iraqi government which an advocate of democracy can call legitimate.

It is of course true that "liberalism" - being nothing more than the manifestation of journalism as the Establishment - is antithetical to democracy. But of course, that is on the QT. Can't give the peons an overdose of truth . . .

[CHARLITE]

THE SAHARA SNOWSTORM
TTP Intelligence Bulletin
Dr. Jack Wheeler
Friday, April 15, 2005

It is obvious to anyone with open eyes that the Grey Lady of the New York Times is a liberal propaganda sheet rather than a real newspaper. The examples are legion of its pushing stories twisted to the left. But equally important are stories it refuses to report, that it doesn’t want its readers to know.

On January 26-27, 2005 there was a tremendous snowstorm in the Sahara Desert. Much of the Sahara in Morocco, Algeria, and Tunisia were blanketed by an enormous snowfall, the worst in over half a century. Here are the NASA satellite photos.http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/NaturalHazards/natural_hazards_v2.php3?img_id=12699

You would think a snowstorm in the Sahara would be news – but you never heard about it because such a story conflicts with the liberal secular religion of Global Warming.

Here’s another example: The Kirkuk-Ceyhan pipeline has been pumping oil from northern Iraq to Turkey’s oil terminal at such a rate now that Iraq is back to just about 100% of pre-war oil production. It’s one reason for oil prices dropping off the spike of nearly $60, and heading below $50. But such a story, folded into the larger story that security is improving in Iraq so that the country will be exporting well over 2 million bpd by fall, conflicts with the liberal media con that the world economy is failing and oil is rising because of President Bush (oh, yes – and now, according to Nancy Pelosi, also Tom DeLay!)

Just two small examples why you can understand the world far better by subscribing to To The Point instead of the New York Times…

Questions? Comments? Contact Us.info@tothepointnews.com

From To The Point - http://www.tothepointnews.com