Guerilla Actions in Irak

Rove: Military Must Be Flexible in Iraq

Presidential advisor Karl Rove blasted Democrats on Friday for even suggesting the U.S. withdraw from Iraq, saying the U.S. can't leave one of the world's largest oil reserves in terrorist hands.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...6102800112.html

But they couldnt leave it in Saddam's hands either. Because he didnt dance on Washington's music broadcast.

man, they are really getting desperate. if rove, who is a cool/headed guy, is making that much foam at the mouth, they must be desperate.

Hi Suparatu,

Yes, desperate on the internal political front with mid-term elections in the USA only a week or so away.

However, provided their political base holds up, the US military could go on accepting the current low level of attrition indefinitely.

Cheers,

Sid.

sure. but to what purpose?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9A_vxIOB-I&eurl=

It was (is) just politics, folks. Everybody's blasting each other, especially around election times.

If you want to see people foaming at the mouth, just watch one of Hillary's or Kerry's speeches, or some of Streisand's comments - actually, just about anyone from Hollywood will do.

Anyway, old news...

'Smart' rebels outstrip US

In Vietnam, the US was eventually defeated by a well-armed, closely directed and highly militarised society that had tanks, armoured vehicles and sources of both military production and outside procurement. What is more devastating now is that the world's only superpower is in danger of being driven back by a few tens of thousands of lightly armed irregulars, who have developed tactics capable of destroying multimillion-dollar vehicles and aircraft.

By contrast, the US military is said to have been slow to respond to the challenges of fighting an insurgency. The senior officers described the insurgents as being able to adapt rapidly to exploit American rules of engagement and turn them against US forces, and quickly disseminate ways of destroying or disabling armoured vehicles.

The military is also hampered in its attempts to break up insurgent groups because of their 'flat' command structure within collaborative networks of small groups, making it difficult to target any hierarchy within the insurgency.

The remarks were made by senior US generals speaking at the Association of the US Army meeting at Fort Lauderdale in Florida and in conversations with The Observer. The generals view the 'war on terror' as the most important test of America's soldiers in 50 years.

'Iraq and Afghanistan are sucking up resources at a faster rate than we planned for,' one three-star general said. 'America's warriors need the latest technology to defeat an enemy who is smart, agile and cunning - things we did not expect of the Soviets.'

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story...2031172,00.html

No S--t?

They only omitted one thing; an enemy willing, no, eager to commit suicide and depraved enough to blow any number of their countrymen, women and children to "paradise" with them and maim the rest.

America's warriors need technology? Why didn't this surprise me, from the mouth of a three-star General (allegedly). I would say the America's warriors need leadership, but this guy focuses on technology. Technology (or overdependence on it) is part of the problem, imo.

IMO, we need to win the hearts and minds. (A little too late for that, but better late then never.)
We need more soldiers to operate on the streets instead of sitting their fat asses around big bases. Also less incidents like Abu Graib (sp). And as said above, solid leadership.

But overall, its a little too late for any good tactic. The insurgency is too stuck inside Iraq. They infiltrated pretty much everything, its too late to eradicate them now.
What the US will try to do is put its tails behind its back and leave, then when the Iraqi government falls (a few months later), blame it on the Iraqi government for not doing enough. Or the democracts
I feel sorry for the soldiers dying for nothing........

Leave? You're not a friend who cares.

Nov. 22, 2006 22:32
Olmert: Israel safer post-Saddam
By ETGAR LEFKOVITS

"Iraq without Saddam Hussein is so much better for the security and safety of the State of Israel," Olmert said in an address to the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America, which is holding its biennial national convention in Jerusalem.
"Thank God for the courage, determination and leadership manifested by President George W. Bush in facing this challenge,"


Prime Minister Olmert urges US to stand firm on Iraq

"When American succeeds in Iraq, Israel is safer. The friends of Israel know it. The friends who care about Israel know it."

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid...icle%2FShowFull

Interesting article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/16/world/mi...=rssnyt&emc=rss

300$? One-two bombs per month and the bomber had enough money to live... nice job!

Iama

Your idea is in the surge plan:

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8...00.html?cnn=yes

Article from The Telegraph talks about a drastically increasing level of stability in Anbar province, after much of the population in the province turned against Al Qaeda and started supporting the American troop presence in the region.

Note: This information was available and made public last month in General Petraeus's report to Congress, with detailed statistics. It took at least one month for a major article from the "media"....but as one says, better late then never.

Article: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml...8/wanbar308.xml

Excerpt from article:

Iraq insurgency: People rise against al-Qa'eda

"In a town tucked tight against the Syrian border, US Marines pass softly along a darkened street as the crack of contact rings out. Instead of a panicked rush for cover, the leader of the patrol turns to cheer.

The familiar sound was not from the barrel of gun but the baize of an upstairs pool hall.

A transformation has swept western Iraq that allows Marines to walk through areas that a year ago were judged lost to radical Islam control and hear nothing more aggressive than a late-night game of pool.

The popular uprising against al-Qa'eda by residents of Anbar Province turned former enemies into American allies earlier this year. The result was a dramatic restoration of stability across Iraq's Sunni heartland. Husaybah bears the scars of the "terrorist" years - 2004 and 2005 - when al-Qa'eda and its local allies controlled the town."

This post has been edited by mabadesc on October 09, 2007 05:51 pm