Can the U.S. defeat the Iraqi insurgency?
Related Article:
Can the U.S. defeat the Iraqi insurgency?
Quote:
Stoker may be right. The United States is wealthy enough to foot the bill and large enough to bear the casualties in Iraq, even if the strain on the military is causing serious problems with recruitment, retention, and maintenance. And Bush acknowledged last week that he's learned a few things from his many prior mistakes in Iraq. It's certainly encouraging that Gen. David Petraeus, who had great success in Mosul early on and then went on to literally write the book on counterinsurgency, will soon be running the war effort in Iraq.
1 Attachment(s)
There is a reason "Insurgencies Rarely Win"
There is a fundamental misunderstanding regarding Insurgencies. If a word could describe insurgents, it is self-serving—power, money, lawlessness, food, freedom from oppression, survival, etc., and once spawned, their aim is protractedness; their aim is not about winning. Simply stated, insurgencies are protracted because that provides the most utility to the insurgents; they are not protracted because it is an insurgency. Insurgents don’t have a goal of winning although they would not mind seeing their enemy fail. They win if the struggle continues to gain momentum and they draw others into the fray—that breeds chaos. The insurgency in Iraq is composed of men 18 to 40. This population can be likened to the criminal gang and organized crime elements more then conventional war fighters or terrorists. They tend to be decentralized in operations, are local within a small territorial range and recruit their fighters from local talent. When the group gets too large, there may be internal violence, mass killings and rival rifts as members compete for upward mobility. Their “Cause to Die For” is the failure of the government to meet the most basic levels of life and to provide hope. They almost always spawn from decapitated states especially if the levels of basic services do not improve with time. Their cause is never an ideology or idealistic dogma, and therefore they will have the propensity to ebb and flow based on the need of the day and the targets of opportunity. The insurgent is really apolitical and much more primal in their motives as compared to terrorism or conventional war fighters. Insurgency warfare is not politically or religiously motivated. Notice how these statements fly in the face of the conventional war fighter’s paradigm proposed by Clausewitz, “War is the extension of politics by other means.” Attached is a paper that speaks to the Insurgency Paradigm
Insurgency Vs. Insurrection, Rebellion, Civil Disobedience, Revolution
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jcustis
Sir, if an insurgency is self-serving, then would you use the term insurgency to classify the Rhodesian/Zimbabwe situation after UDI in 1965?
The fact that "All" human behavior is motivated by one thing and one thing only "Self-interest" does not make all struggles the same. The major difference as I see it between the insurgency in Iraq, and the UDI is that the insurgents are primal in their motives, needs, wants, and desires. The UDI was much more of an ideological struggle. Consider this difference--Using the Maslow Hierarchy --the UDI was at the Self-actualizing level (freedom of oppression, selfgovernance) whereas the Insurgency, at least in Iraq, is at the Physiological level--food, water, money, lawlessness. Their fight
is not an ideological manifesto like the media leads us to believe. As a result, the insurgency in Iraq wins if the struggle is protracted. The UDI wins if their independence is granted quickly--they did not want protractedness. As a result, I would not be inclinded to call the UDI an insurgency.
Some Just Last Longer Than Others -
like the Native American insurgency that went for roughly 300+ years, from the Powhatan campaigns through the Ghost Dance and Wounded Knee of 1890
Riled and Grave-rolling Ancestors
Yup, Marct - I'd have to or bear the wrath of 3 ancestors who fought the Brits and who would most likely curse me from their graves if I defined them as disgruntled pioneers or unhappy settlers or Presbyterian insurgents, yet now I'm wondering how many of their neighbors crops their burned and cattle they killed and how many they actually bushwhacked and killed for being pro-Brit..... thanks alot, pal, for making me rub some mud on the ol' family honor as I have no doubt they brought violence against anyone they could that was connected to the Brits in any way.
Can the U.S. defeat an insurgency ?
Hey Chris !
This one gets under my skin !
Quote:
Stoker may be right. The United States is wealthy enough to foot the bill and large enough to bear the casualties in Iraq, even if the strain on the military is causing serious problems with recruitment, retention, and maintenance.
Jeez, I sure hope Stoker doesn't end up correct. We may be wealthy enough (although I doubt that looking at our national debt), but I have serious reservations regarding Stoker's or whomever's exaggerated opinion of (somebody else's abilities whilst they (Stoker and company) sit on their dead Alphas in front of the fire place at the the loss of more close friends, subordinates, fellow NCOs and Officers. Stoker's utter and contemptible failure to use normal rationality or perception appears all to easy, because his butt is not out there at risk. It should be, perhaps then he would shut his trap.
Hello Marc !
Quote:
On a more serious note, I have noted a tendency for many people in the council to make a simplistic symbolic equation: insurgency = "bad", state government = "good". I think that this is a dangerous assumption for all of us to make. Sometimes, the state just has to go...
You have become my sounding board ! Yes, that's actually a good thing :cool: (I never know which smilie to use)!
Having watched countries fall repeatedly with loss of life considered nothing more than a means to an end, and the U.S. fish bowl "abroad" (that Tom enjoys hearing about all to often) performing "cozy" status quo for reports and as you put it so well, "simplistic symbolic equation" sends me from mere impatience to rage.
I vote to send Stoker there with an M16 :D
Regards, Stan
How Estonia's press is spinning their reasons
Hello Marc,
I like 120mm's thought process, but then I am also in a sense anglo and tend to think that way. Tom would kick me and wake up the other side of my thought process when he thought I was drifting. :D
The press here were trashing US for the longest time. Especially when Estonia lost bomb techs and infantrymen. Again, size is everything (afterall, 5 from 7,000 is a big deal, especially when you consider the birth rate is in the red).
We tend to live with the fact that 3,000 US military have sacraficed their lives And I have a very hard time with that number. But Estonia's people take the loss of 3 to 5 people in support of another country to the extreme, and as you already guessed, the press have a field day.
When POTUS - GWB visited in late November, all that changed. For some or many reasons, his visit pumped the country up and the new Estonian President (who spent more than 25 years studying in the States) stood firm with Estonian comitments. The poles later told the story. Over 90 percent in approval for what they were doing and the stories stopped.
We do not lack volunteers. A Platoon is what was promised and we have sufficient volunteers to take us into 2010, 35 at a time for 6 months.
Regards, Stan
I think it is the duty of every citizen
Hey 120mm !
After 23 years in the US Army defending for others I completely agree with you. If the general population is not behind this movement, all the help in the world won't mean Julliet Sierra and there's not enough ammo for us to do it for them.
Time for folks to get involved, and then help from the rest may come somewhat faster and even work.
Hi Marc !
Quote:
How often do we hear about the concept of "duty" in the popular press
You always seem to have all the hard questions :eek:
I like your questions, but wished I had the answers. BTW, I hate journalists !
They do their job, but rarely do their homework. Now we're down to opnions...I am not going there today, too many brews !
Regards, Stan