Quote Originally Posted by Van View Post
Hypothetically, had the insurgents read about Tet, but not read the fine print that it was a tactical disaster for the insurgents, they might try to emulate it. Do you think that was the insurgent 'surge' in attacks on the Green Zone about 2-3 weeks ago? On the one hand, it was a surge, and it looked liked it was more drama than effect (not to denigrate the people hurt and killed). Like they were trying to generate media effects (like Tet).

On the other hand, that implies a higher degree of cooperation that the insurgents seem willing to go along with. The insurgency seems more viral, with only general directions to the various groups, than coordinated. It seems to me that each Arab man sees himself as an emir or maneuvering to become one, and cooperation is low in their priorities unless directly threatened or there is a clear path to advancement involved.

The most important piece is that Tet wasn't a turning point until some know-nothing talking-head on the news said 'quagmire'. It drives home the importance of getting our message out accurately, and early.
It seems to me that each Arab man sees himself as an emir or maneuvering to become one
Another of the problems may be that this also a more common trait to many of us than we might like to admit, and that has come back to haunt us on many an occasion

In regards to TET if we look at the current stage of the wars we are in it might be reasonable to look at the possibility that we are in a current TET offensive by some of our enemies which has been focused in arenas not normally considered "Battle". As Ken and others have stated on several occasion's those in other parts of the world have been playing the manipulation and behind the scenes positioning game a lot longer than us.

That's why I generally tend to guess what I think is going on; study to identify whats really going on; then once it's all together pretty much count on the fact that I'm still missing something.