Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 21

Thread: Retired Insurgents

  1. #1
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    15

    Default Retired Insurgents

    It wasn't so long ago that there were quite a few former insurgents hanging around who could give an inside look in lectures for military and intelligence personal. The generation that gave us "Casablanca" and "Exodus" is dying but still has members left and the Cold Warriors are still hanging around. It shouldn't be to hard to find people who would be willing to tell what it is like to be an insurgent.

  2. #2
    Council Member pcmfr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    62

    Default

    Think of all the late 20th century small wars/insurgencies and I'm sure you will find many are doing just that. I attended a course on insurgent warfare last year and one of the instructors was a former Algerian militant for years then later turned and helped the French.
    Last edited by pcmfr; 04-17-2007 at 12:21 AM.

  3. #3
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,188

    Default

    good insurgents die young - only old hippies burn out and mend their evil ways.

  4. #4
    Council Member 120mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Wonderland
    Posts
    1,284

    Default

    I think the trick is to get as many "current" insurgents to come work for our side. I have reason to believe that in both Afghanistan and Iraq, we are attempting and sometimes succeeding at doing just that.

  5. #5
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Rocky Mtn Empire
    Posts
    473
    Last edited by Jedburgh; 04-18-2007 at 12:56 AM. Reason: Added link.

  6. #6
    Council Member Abu Buckwheat's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Insurgency University
    Posts
    143

    Default Chieu Hoi ... Oh How I Wish

    Quote Originally Posted by 120mm View Post
    I think the trick is to get as many "current" insurgents to come work for our side. I have reason to believe that in both Afghanistan and Iraq, we are attempting and sometimes succeeding at doing just that.

    This is not a bad strategy, except that its being handled in sort of a clumsy way.

    Its a common misperception that every insurgent is a Jihadi and will never surrender or stop his actions ... religious extremist insurgents comprise only 15-17% of the insurgency (AQI is just 2-5%) ... the Mujhideen Central Command (which is better translated as the Unified Mujahideen Command) are actually the Baathists FRLs ... they couldn't care less about Islam, even though they are Moslems who use the Rhetoric of the Islamists, they aren't fanatics - yet they account for 83-85% of the daily attacks.

    In fact with the right amount of money the FRLs could be bought, but it will take huge concessions on the oil pipeline through to Syria and a ruthless crackdown on the Shiite Militias before that could even be brought to the table. Most Sunni AIFs just want a life and air conditioning for their kids ... with the right incentives they could be a force to rid us of AQI.
    Just a thought.

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9

    Default A request was made for me to elaborate.

    We would like to hear your perspective on the subject. For example, if you could provide your reasoning as to why or why not amnesty programs or subsidizing Sunni families would or would not have an impact upon the insurgency.
    Heh, it's very amusing to observing how you americans think and tackle problems, i don't like to generalise all of you, but i think it's fair to say many of you have a capitalistic mentality, or atleast the ones in power. You think everything can be bought, everything has a price, people's lives, peoples dignity. You kill someones brother, mother, child, and you think that throwing money at the issue is going to fix it all. You assume that everyone is just an opportunist, who only acts only to further their own interests, because you assume everyone is like you.

    Well i'll tell you why your strategy won't work, since your asking. The people whome you fight don't think the same way as you do, they belive in things that you probably can't even comprehend, like honour. They do not accept bribery, with money or power, because neither of those things is what they are fighting for. Try to understand, even if you where NOT knocking down peoples doors, raping their sons and daughters and stealing their resources, even if your occupation was the most benovelent in history, there would still be resistance against you. People don't like to be meddled with, it's not your place not your right, to meddle in the country's affairs.

    Don't worry about it, Every Iraqi who was willing to sell their souls, their nation, and their people for money and power is already collaborating with you. Wether he/she was a sunni or a shia, or a ba'athist, or simply a back stabbing thief. Every opportunistic dirt bag who was already corrupt on the inside before the war, is already on your side. Furthermore, contrary to what you implied with your question, there is a shia resistance just aswell as a sunni resistance, and sunni traitors as well as shia traitors. It doesn't matter what you are but who you are and there is good and dirt everywhere.

    This was all quite elequently put by US consul Warren Parker during the fall of Saigon. "All these years I've been down there, doing a job of work for my country and for this country, and today all I can see is that we've succeeded in separating all the good people from the scum, and we got the scum." - As reported by John Pilger.

    Your battle with the resistance is a battle to the end, they will remain steadfast. Money won't save you. They fight for their nations dignity and freedom in the real sense. To suggest you can put a price on that or on peoples lives, is an insult.

    -Victory or Martyrdom.
    Last edited by Thepartisan; 06-03-2007 at 05:41 PM.

  8. #8
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    65

    Default

    At the risk of helping a troller.

    Victory or Martyrdom is their motto, and they will be steadfast till the end.
    I disagree, for example the Jews have done good work with bombers who they captured in studying how bombers think and act.

    don't like to generalise all of you
    And yet you think all Americans are ignorant people who want to throw money at any problem, have no honour and can not see others viewpoints!

    I think you like making blanket statements about all Americans. I think you like it alot, it makes you feel better than them.

    People don't like to be meddled with, it's not your place not your right, to meddle in the country's affairs.
    So you think no country should interfere with things going on inside anothers borders? Thats your thesis? That is something happens in one country no other countries should do anything?

    Don't worry about it, Every Iraqi who was willing to sell their souls, their nation, and their people for money and power is already collaborating with you. Wether he/she was a sunni or a shia, or a ba'athist, or simply a back stabbing thief. Every opportunistic dirt bag who was already corrupt on the inside before the war, is already on your side. Furthermore, contrary to what you implied with your question, there is a shia resistance just aswell as a sunni resistance, and sunni traitors as well as shia traitors. It doesn't matter what you are but who you are and there is good and dirt everywhere.
    This is very disrespectful to the Iraqi police and army people who have given their lives to try and help their country.

    You post seems little more than poorly thoughtout knee jerk anti-Americanism.

  9. #9
    Groundskeeping Dept. SWCAdmin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    DC area pogue.
    Posts
    1,841

    Default

    First, let me say that, like it or not, Thepartisan's post voices a viewpoint in a coherent way without a deliberate attack. There is a difference between an inflammatory post and a reasonable post recapping a position that inflames you.

    Try to keep that in mind in any responses.

    Quote Originally Posted by Thepartisan View Post
    ...many of you have a capitalistic mentality, or atleast the ones in power. You think everything can be bought, everything has a price, people's lives, peoples dignity. You kill someones brother, mother, child, and you think that throwing money at the issue is going to fix it all.
    Second, on some substance, I'll say that I think that widely misses the mark on capitalism as I see it.

    In the immortal words of Gordon Gecko, greed is good. And a capitalistic system puts some controls on our exploitation of power and wealth, while still allowing the spoils of success to accrue to the victors in the war of business. Without capitalism, we get a bunch of lazy communists with no reason to do things any better.

    Granted, with our US capitalism, we have got a lot of those controls less than right, and we sure as hell don't have the distribution of wealth down. It is vastly imperfect. But still way ahead of whatever is in second place.

    With regard to throwing money at death, let me say that is highly unpalatable for Americans. It is also a lot harder to find an American cop to bribe than it is in a lot of the world (but still not nearly hard enough). Your take on underlying American culture is wrong, confused by attempting to comprehend some superficial American acts (which are themselves being done in a cultural jujitsu sense, infinite loop inbound here) through your own cultual lens, which is about as cloudy as mine.

  10. #10
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Melbourne Australia
    Posts
    66

    Default

    With the greatest respect:

    he people whome you fight don't think the same way as you do, they belive in things that you probably can't even comprehend, like honour.
    This is true, its called cultural relativism and as a theory it was first expounded by Giambattista Vico in around 1636AD, and later picked up by the German romantic anti rationalist movement led initially by Herder, that finally flowered into Fascism. (read Isiah Berlin on the subject) To paraphrase Berlin: "We cannot understand ancient Rome or Athens because we cannot hear the songs or smell the incence".

    In other words, what you are trying to say, I believe is that another culture cannot be understood by anyone outside that culture because they don't have the same concepts, myths, legends, stories, histories and values. The obvious implication appears to me to be "don't even try".

    This is false. It is quite possible to immerse yourself in another culture and obtain an understanding of it, by reading their same myths and legends and absorbing their culture and values. People have been doing it for years.

    The alternative would mean that there can be no understanding of cultures at all. For example, some hold that the Spartans were noble, proud and honourable warriors to be emulated if possible. The reality is that any study will show you they were also infanticides, slave owners, mean, brutal, racist, and corrupt. Clearly, if you want to study ancient Sparta, you must understand Thermopylae in the context of the society.

    It is quite possible to learn about Iraq and its tribes and use that information.


    They do not accept bribery, with money or power, because neither of those things is what they are fighting for.
    With the greatest respect, about $40 billion in pallets of $100 bills is unaccounted for in Iraq. Go figure.


    People don't like to be meddled with, it's not your place not your right, to meddle in the country's affairs.
    True, the question then is why do we try?

  11. #11
    Council Member Abu Buckwheat's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Insurgency University
    Posts
    143

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thepartisan View Post
    Your battle with the resistance is a battle to the end, they will remain steadfast. Money won't save you. They fight for their nations dignity and freedom in the real sense. To suggest you can put a price on that or on peoples lives, is an insult.

    -Victory or Martyrdom.
    Well I have met the resistance. I have fought them, talked to them in captivity and inadvertently knew a few on the street ... I have been immersed in Islamic culture for 26 years and Iraq's for the last four. I will tell you something that will surprise many people ... these are men. There is no difference between the insurgent and us ... I am leaving AQI out of this equation because they are not the resistance. The Iraqis we are fighting are men with families, dreams aspirations, hopes and dispairs. We completely forget and ignore that. They love their country and the dreams for the future ... but nothing, and I mean nothing, motivates them as much as their love for their children. This war can come down to giving them a chance to have that future, not a cheap flat in Damascus or Amman, in Iraq doing whatever makes them prosperous. Given hope they will eventually stop. For the Salafist Jihadis, thats another kettle of fish, they can be accommodated as well but the surpise will come when they are stopped by the other Iraqi resistance groups.

    They do not accept bribery, with money or power, because neither of those things is what they are fighting for.
    Well obviously you haven't been to Iraq or the rest of the world! Dir Balek (look out), Baksheesh (tip), lillShai (for tea), un petit bois (a little drink) is a way of life ... before, during and after the Baathists. Nothing gets done without ensuring their day will be a little brighter ... I have no problem with that so long as its minor. Now the Ministry of Defense stealing a Billion dollars intended for armor vehicles... that was just graft.
    Last edited by Abu Buckwheat; 06-04-2007 at 01:54 AM. Reason: adding data

  12. #12
    Council Member 120mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Wonderland
    Posts
    1,284

    Default

    Interestingly enough, the couple instances I know of, when our guys caused the defection of an insurgent, US forces simply exposed that his "cell leader" was criminal scum. The insurgent's "sense of honor" led him to make a change.

    In another case, it was a pair of sunglasses and a uniform.

    I lack the cultural background to fully interpret the results, but I'm just calling them like I see 'em.

  13. #13
    Council Member 120mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Wonderland
    Posts
    1,284

    Default

    Back to the subject at hand: Do you not think that two honorable people can serve on opposing sides in a conflict? ESPECIALLY an Insurgency/Counterinsurgency?

  14. #14
    Moderator Steve Blair's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    3,195

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 120mm View Post
    Back to the subject at hand: Do you not think that two honorable people can serve on opposing sides in a conflict? ESPECIALLY an Insurgency/Counterinsurgency?
    Personally I think this has happened many times, and will continue to do so. Both sides are typically based on ideas, and will thus attract warriors. The true warrior is an honorable sort. All too often they are missed in the bloodbaths created by the losers and nutjobs that cling to the fringes of many insurgent movements (and lurk within the ranks of some government forces, although I would argue that their numbers there are far less in most cases).
    "On the plains and mountains of the American West, the United States Army had once learned everything there was to learn about hit-and-run tactics and guerrilla warfare."
    T.R. Fehrenbach This Kind of War

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9

    Default

    Sorry, life to live you know.

    what will they do when the Americans leave? Put down their arms?
    Once the americans leave, AND the puppet government and puppet securit aparatus they left behind is annihilated. Then Iraq can decide it's future free from the foreign influence of an occupier. The fighters having nothing to fight, will go back to their lives. I know my grandfather did. People don't ussually enjoy killing, unless their demonic mercinaries. They might go into government (or lurk as you put it), go into a new military, or go back to teaching or famrming.

    the resistance who LIKE killing and don't want to stop. We've seen it with the IRA, the PLO
    Hardly a suitable example steve, the occupation of Ireland and Palestine never ended for them to be given a chance to stop fighting.

    I'm not sure what it is your trying to say, that there will be some 'rogue' elements that just won't be content living out their lives not killing you?
    Well i can safely tell you, you have made life long enemies of the majority of the Iraqi population, you won't get a pro-US government out of there in your wildest dreams. And the people, their children, will hate you for what you've done to them, and at this point there is nothing you can do to change that.

    As for "rogue' elements who you say would be 'addicted to killing', (or maybe they just don't belive you deserve to be allowed to cut and run to fight another day perhaps in 30 years with another poor country). Are you affraid they'll come seek out your military in america? Thats just not likely. Take Vietnamn, a more suitable example since the occupation actually ENDED there. Did the resistance continue the war, where there any 'rogue elements' read to kill americans? no.
    But if it makes you feel better, perhaps you should consider signing a surrender and paying repartations. Then there would be no legitimacy in continuing a war once occupation is over.

    How does the insurgency intend to deal with the rogues within its ranks?
    How do you expect them to act or plan to act on a hypothetical and unrealistic situation? Relax, that bridges will be crossed when they are reached.

    And in future, try not to make so many enemies all over the world and maybe you won't have to live in fear. If i was you though, id be more concerned about 'rogue' americans soldiers who continue killing civilians once they return home. I've heard of several such cases.
    Last edited by Thepartisan; 06-04-2007 at 04:03 PM.

  16. #16
    Moderator Steve Blair's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    3,195

    Default

    Vietnam actually went through a period of "reeducation camps" designed to deprogram certain members of the Viet Cong cadre. Some were also killed. I'd really suggest you do a bit more research into the internal workings of most insurgent groups before you make broad statements regarding the group psychology of some elements within those groups.

    You WILL see elements that do not stop fighting. They aren't all "demonic mercinaries"[sic]. They will transfer their hate from one group to another, or continue to see enemies everywhere. There will always be blood debts that need paying for those people. All you need to do is look at the history of European terrorist groups, or many of the groups that have been active in Africa. In the end they all transfer their hate from outside groups to those closer to home.

    But you also seem comfortable with your generalities. Enjoy them.
    "On the plains and mountains of the American West, the United States Army had once learned everything there was to learn about hit-and-run tactics and guerrilla warfare."
    T.R. Fehrenbach This Kind of War

  17. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9

    Default

    I thought those re-education camps where from the south Vietnamese army traitors. And some of those where killed for sure.

    There will not be a civil war in Iraq. If that's what your suggesting.
    Sadr's already expelled 600 men that where accused of secterian killings. And if it does happen, that's iraq's business. No matter what will happen, the occupation must end.

    Murders will be dealt with, the same way you, would deal with your murderers. The crazed soldiers returning home.

  18. #18
    Council Member Sargent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    178

    Default It's not about what you want, it's about how to achieve what you need.

    Once the americans leave, AND the puppet government and puppet securit aparatus they left behind is annihilated.
    Unfortunately, you, like everyone else in history, must fight the war you have, not the one you want. As much as I hate to say it, there are very few Americans who are going to countenance -- for the best of intentions, no matter what you'd like to believe -- leaving Iraq before something stable is established to take its place. It's going to take a lot more loss in the way of casualties and treasure for people to just throw up their hands and quit -- we're a stubborn lot, which is going to mean time, which is going to mean a continuation of the dismal situation for the Iraqis.

    In war, you must be effective. It may be satisfying to kill Americans and their supporters, and it may seem that it is only just to demand that the new Iraq get set up on your own terms in the way that you want. But pursuing that as a goal is not effective to your policy objective, which is an Iraq free from foreign interference. In the short term, you may have to alter your desired sequence, get something stable and amenable to the largest number of people established. And then ask -- or tell, I don't really care -- the Americans to leave. The public/political sentiment in this country will be overwhelmingly in support of such a thing, and there won't be a damn thing any administration will be able to do to argue that we must maintain a presence there. If you want to go back and tinker with the system established, go for it -- these United States were originally established under one set of governing principles (Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union), which were discarded and replaced with the Constitution we now have.

    So, the question is, is it more important to kill Americans, to dictate a timetable that's just not likely to work, or to be effective to your policy goals, to have a good strategy that achieves most of your aims in the shortest amount of time with the least damage to the Iraqis?

    At this point, I'm one of the few people who believes that America can "lose" in Iraq and still walk away just fine, who's suggested a plan for admitting defeat, offering a reparations package, moving out, and getting on with being a better and more productive force for something positive in this world. However, it's not likely I'm going to be elected president any time soon. Thinking like mine isn't common, so you need to come up with a plan that takes better account of your enemy.

  19. #19
    Moderator Steve Blair's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    3,195

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thepartisan View Post
    I thought those re-education camps where from the south Vietnamese army traitors. And some of those where killed for sure.
    You're quite mistaken here. Reeducation camps were used for a variety of purposes, including the consolidation of power for the northern leadership. That included a "weeding" of VC cadre who might have ideas that were different than the direction given by Hanoi (and there were many of them). And before you tar the SVN as traitors, I suggest you take a look at the history of Vietnam. The north did not have a deadlock on nationalism.

    Now maybe we should get back on topic for the thread....
    Last edited by Steve Blair; 06-04-2007 at 06:14 PM.
    "On the plains and mountains of the American West, the United States Army had once learned everything there was to learn about hit-and-run tactics and guerrilla warfare."
    T.R. Fehrenbach This Kind of War

  20. #20
    Council Member Sargent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    178

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Blair View Post
    You're quite mistaken here. Reeducation camps were used for a variety of purposes, including the consolidation of power for the northern leadership. That included a "weeding" of VC cadre who might have ideas that were different than the direction given by Hanoi (and there were many of them). And before you tar the SVN as traitors, I suggest you take a look at the history of Vietnam. The north did not have a deadlock on nationalism.
    I think Truong Nhu Tang's memoir captures this point really well. Here was a committed nationalist, big in the NLF, fought long and hard against the Americans and the Southern regime, and then (along with a lot of his fellow nationalists) was absolutely crushed when the North marched in, ended up in a reeducation camp, and eventually fled. Turns out the Americans were not the biggest problem facing the Southern nationalists. As well, a good lesson in "be careful what you wish for."

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •