Why democracies don't lose insurgencies

[reed11b]

Your prerogative. Couldn't you say so without being confrontational?

Yes, I'll blame low blood sugar and apologize.

There are several places where that isn't entirely true; the mob rule aspect, I mean. As for the other, did you mean where the minority is in violent opposition to the majority?

It may not be always true, but without protections for the minority built into the body of law, it is a very real possibility. Iraq in 2005 could be considered an example of this, as for the other, either way it still is true, right?

Can you validate that with examples? I can't think of any right off hand but since you mention it, I'm sure you can provide a couple of examples.

I'll get back to you on this one, but would not most insurgencies be led, at least initially by a minority population?

Is that fact or your opinion?

Opinion, but it is based on the opinion that underestimating your opponent is dumb, likely a shared opinion with many would be my guess.

I did not see or assume that. Why do you think so?

Did not say you did, it is a response to the many "global community" theorists I have read and seem mentioned in this council, I disagree with them, but I can't put my thumb on a good enough example to communicate it very effectively yet.

Why do you say that? I do not see such a linkage in the postulation.

More on this later, while I figure out how to communicate it well.

That's all very well for a COIN Master Plan -- but the man said he was doing it for his Graduate School Thesis -- a very different thing. Thus, I'm not at all sure why you're objecting to it...

Can I go with low blood sugar again?
Reed
P.S. Please do not respond to my posts line by line anymore. It is a pet peeve of mine and it is almost impossible to respond without sounding defensive. I always appreciate your feedback, but please do it the conventional manner