[Grzegorz 246]

What is a “conventional war?”


Conventional warfare means a form of warfare conducted by using conventional military weapons and battlefield tactics between two or more nation-states in open confrontation.

The forces on each side are well-defined, and fight each other using weapons that primarily target the opposing army. It is normally fought through means other than with chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons. In other words without the use of weapons of mass destruction.

The general purpose of conventional warfare is to destroy the opponent's military force, thereby negating his ability to engage in conventional warfare.
Without a conventional force, the defender is then unable to prevent devastating attacks upon his nation-state, and can thus be forced to capitulate. However the defender may be willing to accept the consequences of such attacks, and resort to unconventional warfare in order to ultimately achieve his goals.

[dervish]

"The forces on each side are well-defined, and fight each other using weapons that primarily target the opposing army."

There you go. By your own definition Iraq is NOT conventional.

I suppose you call the terrorists there "insurgents?"

Further you ignored my point about how the war was conducted. On some level it is very simple -- us or them.