FM3-24 and FM90-8

[BRUZ_LEE]

In my opinion the difference between GUERRILLA and INSURGENCY is very easy, when you just look at the words and their meaning:
GUERRILLA (in Spanish) means literally SMALL WAR, so it is purely military business and describes the hit-and-run tactics of small groups of fighters in comparison to the traditional warfare, where you have big armies confronting each other on an open battlefield.
INSURGENCY simply means that somebody tries to topple a ruling authority/government by any means possible. There is no limitation to the military fight (which is just a part of the whole insurgency). Special forms of insurgency would be a revolution or a coup.

The military today (a few at least) accept counter-insurgency being more than just military business, however the military gets all the money and still runs the show (Iraq: MNF-I; Afghanistan: ISAF) while continuing to neglect the more important parts (economic, social and political parts of counterinsurgency) of counter-insurgency. That's simply because military generals usually don't want to share authority and/or command.

BTW I found the Title of the older interim Field Manual "Counterinsurgency Operations" more appropriate than the new FM3-24 "Counterinsurgency" because the title suggests that the military part is the whole business.

BRUZ

[SteveMetz]

In my opinion the difference between GUERRILLA and INSURGENCY is very easy, when you just look at the words and their meaning:
GUERRILLA (in Spanish) means literally SMALL WAR, so it is purely military business and describes the hit-and-run tactics of small groups of fighters in comparison to the traditional warfare, where you have big armies confronting each other on an open battlefield.
INSURGENCY simply means that somebody tries to topple a ruling authority/government by any means possible. There is no limitation to the military fight (which is just a part of the whole insurgency). Special forms of insurgency would be a revolution or a coup.

The military today (a few at least) accept counter-insurgency being more than just military business, however the military gets all the money and still runs the show (Iraq: MNF-I; Afghanistan: ISAF) while continuing to neglect the more important parts (economic, social and political parts of counterinsurgency) of counter-insurgency. That's simply because military generals usually don't want to share authority and/or command.

BTW I found the Title of the older interim Field Manual "Counterinsurgency Operations" more appropriate than the new FM3-24 "Counterinsurgency" because the title suggests that the military part is the whole business.

BRUZ

I disagree somewhat with your definition of insurgency. First, some insurgent movements try and topple the government. Others do not and are content to simply carve out "space" which they can dominate. In fact, I believe this latter type is becoming the most common one.

Second, I disagree with your point that revolutions and coups are types of insurgency. I argue in my 2004 monograph that insurgency, as a strategy, is always defined by its protractedness. No group that has the power to gain its objectives through quick means like a coup will undertake insurgency.

I also believe that revolution is a different thing all together. Something is revolutionary because of the extent of its goals. Something is an insurgent movement because of the strategy it has adopted. Some insurgencies are revolutionary; some are not. Some revolutionary movements use a strategy of insurgency; some do not.

[BRUZ_LEE]

I disagree somewhat with your definition of insurgency.

O.K. In just one sentence it is not possible to grasp everything. If somebody just wants to get control of a single province of a country, and not the whole country, than we have the "toppling of the government/ruling authority" also partially and of course it's an insurgency.

Attention: many on this forum think that what is going on in IRAQ today is purely an insurgency. WRONG WRONG WRONG

That is why we see a lot of fuss going on about "counter-insurgency" and the doctrine/definition etc. and that's why the "Counter-Insurgency" doctrine of Gen. Petraeus (of course he didn't come up with it, it's 45 years old. ... Trinquier, Galula, Kitson ....) will NOT work smoothely in IRAQ.

BRUZ