Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 43

Thread: Victory in Western Iraq? Insurgency on verge of collapse

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Protector Domesticus
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    4,045

    Default Victory in Western Iraq? Insurgency on verge of collapse



    An Iraq success story
    Once-violent Ramadi, which now enjoys relative calm, shows that Iraqis can achieve peace -- with our help.
    April 24, 2007

    'A FEW WEEKS ago you couldn't drive down this street without being attacked. When I went down this street in February, I was hit three times with small-arms fire and IEDs." Col. John Charlton was describing Ramadi as we drove down its heavily damaged main street, dubbed Route Michigan by U.S. forces. Even though this was an unlucky day — Friday the 13th (of April) — we did not experience a single attack on our convoy of Humvees.

    The previous week, a suicide bomber drove a truck filled with explosives and chlorine gas into a police checkpoint, killing 12 people (not the 27 or more cited in most news accounts). But such violence, once the norm, has become the exception. Ramadi, which used to see 20 to 25 attacks a day, now sees an average of two to four a day. By the time I visited, no U.S. soldier had been killed in the town for weeks.

    ADVERTISEMENTThat remarkable success is worth pondering at a time when most Americans are willing to write off Iraq as a lost cause. There is no doubt that U.S. forces face an agonizingly difficult task in Iraq. The bombings that killed nearly 200 people in Baghdad last week make clear how hard the challenge is. But as Gen. David Petraeus said on taking command in February, "Hard is not hopeless." The experience of Ramadi — which has gone from being one of the most dangerous cities in Iraq to one of the safest — provides a glimmer of hope.

    The situation began to change for the better last year when the 1st Brigade Combat Team of the 1st Armored Division expanded the U.S. troop presence near Al Qaeda strongholds on the west side of town, losing almost 90 soldiers in the process. Then the 1st Brigade Combat Team of the 3rd Infantry Division, which took over the city earlier this year, extended the offensive. From mid-February to the end of March, about 2,000 soldiers and Marines, along with their Iraqi allies, fought to control the city.

    Each offensive began with troops staging raids into the targeted area to eliminate "high-value individuals" — local Al Qaeda leaders. Then the troops placed 3-foot-high concrete barriers around the neighborhood to prevent insurgents from "squirting out." This was followed by a clearing operation to root out the enemy. Combat was intense, with insurgents fighting back with homemade bombs, AK-47s, rocket-propelled grenades and heavy machine guns. Ten American soldiers were killed and 40 were wounded.

    "The price was heavy but worth it," said Charlton, the burly commander of the 1st Brigade who directed the operations. "The enemy lost massively." To illustrate the point, he showed me a page of closely printed type listing all the arms caches seized by his men: 10,250 pounds of homemade explosives, 2,347 pounds of high explosives, 2,265 feet of detonation cord, 6,000 gallons of chlorine.

    The scars of the battle — and those that preceded it over the last four years — are clearly visible on Route Michigan, which resembles pictures of Berlin in 1945. Buildings are destroyed or badly damaged. Piles of rubble are everywhere. Water sits in the streets; the water mains were broken by countless subsurface explosions from buried improvised explosive devices.

    In the past, U.S. troops would follow up a successful offensive by retreating to their "remote forwarding operating bases," and insurgents would slink back into the areas just liberated at a heavy price. To keep that from happening, U.S. troops have established four bases in Ramadi, along with more than 40 joint security stations and observation posts, where they work alongside Iraqi soldiers and police. There also are 23 police stations in the city and surrounding area. The mini-forts are within eyeball range of one another and are supported by surveillance cameras on 100-foot poles. U.S. and Iraqi forces have spun such a tight web in town that insurgents are having a hard time crawling back in.

    Having completed clearing operations, the American forces are now in the "build" phase of their campaign, trying to repair the damage and win over the populace. This is, in many ways, the hardest part because it requires money that is not readily forthcoming. Charlton can tap already allocated U.S. funding to pay for $4.4 million worth of projects, but he estimates the entire cost of cleanup will be at least $10 million. He is hoping that someone — perhaps the U.S. Agency for International Development — will foot the rest of the bill. Ideally, the cost should be borne by the government of Iraq, but, through lack of capacity or lack of willingness, the Shiite-dominated government is not at the moment sending much money to Sunni-dominated Al Anbar province.

    Yet for all the shortcomings of their government, Iraqi forces have begun to participate effectively in coalition operations, and nowhere more so than in Ramadi. Key to the success of this undertaking has been the recent decision by most of the major Al Anbar tribes to turn against Al Qaeda and its indiscriminate reign of terror. The Sunni tribal forces are still too weak to defeat Al Qaeda on their own and probably always will be, but they have been of critical help in generating tips that aid coalition forces. They are also now encouraging their sons to join the Iraqi police and army.

    Among police and army, there are encouraging signs of integration across sectarian boundaries. For example, an Iraqi army sergeant-major, a Shiite from Baghdad, was in charge of supervising the rebuilding of a Sunni neighborhood. This kind of inter-communal cooperation was once the norm in Iraq and could be again, if Shiite and Sunni extremists are defeated at gunpoint.

    Ramadi is not an isolated example. There is progress across Al Anbar province. According to coalition briefings, attacks in the province are at a two-year low. Tips to coalition forces are soaring. U.S. troops used to find only 50% of IEDs. Now they are defusing 80% before they detonate. (Al Qaeda in Iraq has responded with chlorine gas bombs. In other words, using chemical weapons against Sunni civilians — not a tactic likely to win over the populace.)

    The question is whether this success can be replicated in Iraq's nerve center. The challenges in Baghdad are considerably more daunting because of its size (6 million residents versus 1.5 million in all of Al Anbar province) and its sectarian fault lines. And, even when the surge is completed in June, Baghdad will not have as many troops on a per capita basis as Ramadi.

    But given enough time and resources, the "clear, hold and build" strategy that worked in Ramadi — and that has worked in Tall Afar, Qaim and other cities — could succeed in Baghdad too.
    Source

  2. #2
    nobel's Avatar Libertus
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    97

    Default Re: Victory in Western Iraq? Insurgency on verge of collapse

    Looks good. Al Anbar is the largest province in Iraq, however its also one of the most unpopulated and is mostly desert and arid region.
    However thats one of the firsts good signs iv seen come out of Iraq for a few years so good on them. Some Iraqis do want democracy
    Dont count your chickens till they hatch, its only one Sunni dominated province that is working.the other 11 now have to follow the lead



    Now, now, my good man, this is no time for making enemies.

    Voltaire, when asked by a priest to renounce Satan on his deathbed.

  3. #3
    Indefinitely Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    lala
    Posts
    4,273

    Default Re: Victory in Western Iraq? Insurgency on verge of collapse

    pro
    pa
    gan
    da

  4. #4

    Default Re: Victory in Western Iraq? Insurgency on verge of collapse

    Quote Originally Posted by enoch View Post
    pro
    pa
    gan
    da
    No, no, no, no - it's "a turning point in the blah blah blah". Another one. Again. Like all the others.

  5. #5

    Default Re: Victory in Western Iraq? Insurgency on verge of collapse

    Weren't there only like 500 Al-Qaeda fighters in the whole country? All this talk about beating Al-Q, when the President himself said the biggest problem is sectarian conflict. And you know when the prez says, he's giving it to you straight .

    Anyways, I'll be happyer when they stop blowing the piss out of our convoys all the time. They can grip n' grin with the camera men all they want, but I'm not sated by this "their IEDs are getting easyer for us to find." That's completely beside the point ain't it?

  6. #6

    Default Re: Victory in Western Iraq? Insurgency on verge of collapse

    Based on alot of TWCers Webster should change definition of propaganda and truth

    Main Entry: pro·pa·gan·da
    Pronunciation: "prä-p&-'gan-d&, "prO-
    Function: noun
    Etymology: New Latin, from Congregatio de propaganda fide Congregation for propagating the faith, organization established by Pope Gregory XV died 1623
    1 capitalized : Anytime anything positive is written about Iraq

    Main Entry: truth
    Pronunciation: 'trüth
    Function: noun
    Inflected Form(s): plural truths /'trü[th]z, 'trüths/
    Etymology: Middle English trewthe, from Old English trEowth fidelity; akin to Old English trEowe faithful -- more at TRUE
    1 a archaic : FIDELITY, CONSTANCY b : Anytime anything negative is written about Iraq

    Seriously mudpit is getting so odd with this nonsense, anytime someone posts a negative article people rush in and go no no everything is ok..though far fewer posters do that. Anytime something positive is posted people rush in and go no no its lies...far too many posters do that.

    Dont some of you people get tired of repeating yourself? Hell posting any thread about Iraq should be flat out banned because it evolves into the same nonsense over and over again

  7. #7
    Siblesz's Avatar I say it's coming......
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Beijing, China
    Posts
    11,169

    Default Re: Victory in Western Iraq? Insurgency on verge of collapse

    Dont some of you people get tired of repeating yourself? Hell posting any thread about Iraq should be flat out banned because it evolves into the same nonsense over and over again
    That is true... That is why I was about to post and then thought, "What's the point?" But history is in the side of the non-believers and skeptics, so I still side with the "propaganda" side."
    Hypocrisy is the foundation of sin.

    Proud patron of: The Magnanimous Household of Siblesz
    "My grandfather rode a camel. My father rode in a car. I fly a jet airplane. My grandson will ride a camel." -Saudi Saying
    Timendi causa est nescire.
    Member of S.I.N.

  8. #8
    Protector Domesticus
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    4,045

    Default Re: Victory in Western Iraq? Insurgency on verge of collapse

    pro
    pa
    gan
    da
    No, no, no, no - it's "a turning point in the blah blah blah". Another one. Again. Like all the others.
    Weren't there only like 500 Al-Qaeda fighters in the whole country? All this talk about beating Al-Q, when the President himself said the biggest problem is sectarian conflict. And you know when the prez says, he's giving it to you straight .

    Anyways, I'll be happyer when they stop blowing the piss out of our convoys all the time. They can grip n' grin with the camera men all they want, but I'm not sated by this "their IEDs are getting easyer for us to find." That's completely beside the point ain't it?
    I'd be happy to have a discussion once any one of you three can present evidence that would go against the facts and evidence shown in both the video and the article.

  9. #9
    Darth Wong's Avatar Pit Bull
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario
    Posts
    4,020

    Default Re: Victory in Western Iraq? Insurgency on verge of collapse

    Quote Originally Posted by Caelius View Post
    I'd be happy to have a discussion once any one of you three can present evidence that would go against the facts and evidence shown in both the video and the article.
    The article itself admits that this change took place over a period of only a few weeks. Don't you think that fact right there is a rather damning piece of evidence against any assumption that this change is a long-term one?

    Yes, I have a life outside the Internet and Rome Total War
    "Oedipus ruined a great sex life by asking too many questions" - Stephen Colbert
    Under the kind patronage of Seleukos

  10. #10

    Default Re: Victory in Western Iraq? Insurgency on verge of collapse

    Quote Originally Posted by Caelius View Post
    I'd be happy to have a discussion once any one of you three can present evidence that would go against the facts and evidence shown in both the video and the article.
    How many times have we read this story in the past? I remember reading about how Ramadi had been "secured" and how the US was about to hand Anbar Province over to the Iraqis back in 2003. And I can think of at least two other reports of how things were going marvellously in Ramadi since then. In between those reports there have been all the others about how the various insurgencies (note the plural) and sectarian factions have shifted tactics and things have gone to crap again.

    Welcome to asymmetical warfare.

    ""The price was heavy but worth it," said Charlton, the burly commander of the 1st Brigade who directed the operations. "The enemy lost massively." To illustrate the point, he showed me a page of closely printed type listing all the arms caches seized by his men: 10,250 pounds of homemade explosives, 2,347 pounds of high explosives, 2,265 feet of detonation cord, 6,000 gallons of chlorine.
    "
    And "the enemy" (as if the Al Qaeda guys are the only ones) then just did what insurgents in asymmetrical warfare always do - they went elsewhere and changed tactics:

    Many US and Iraqi officers say that many Al Qaeda members have regrouped farther north in the province around the Lake Thar-thar area and east in places like Al Karma, which borders Baghdad.

    Al Qaeda did make its presence felt in Ramadi and surrounding areas last week with four car bombs targeting mainly the newly reconstituted police force. The deadliest attack was a suicide truck bomb against a police chief from the Bu-Nimr tribe that missed him but killed 25 of his kinsmen and wounded 40, according to a police officer. Al Qaeda claimed responsibility for the attack in an Internet statement.

    Now the group, which also benefited from and controlled fuel deliveries to the province, issued last week death threats to tanker drivers not to take part in convoys put together by local authorities, according to a US military source.

    ("Can US Sustain Anbar Success?" Christian Science Monitor, May 4, 2007)

    "In the past, U.S. troops would follow up a successful offensive by retreating to their "remote forwarding operating bases," and insurgents would slink back into the areas just liberated at a heavy price. To keep that from happening, U.S. troops have established four bases in Ramadi, along with more than 40 joint security stations and observation posts, where they work alongside Iraqi soldiers and police. There also are 23 police stations in the city and surrounding area. The mini-forts are within eyeball range of one another and are supported by surveillance cameras on 100-foot poles. U.S. and Iraqi forces have spun such a tight web in town that insurgents are having a hard time crawling back in."
    That's great, but they don't actually want to "crawl back in" - they aren't dumb. They can simply go elsewhere and hit some other way. And the US forces simply can't set up that kind of network of defences everywhere, just Ramadi. Look at a map - Anbar Province is huge, large parts of it are empty and it borders Syria. Networking the whole place with fortresses in sight of each other might work - if you have several hundred years and a few million troops to spare.

    Then there's the problem that propping up some Sunni sheiks in Ramadi helps against Al Qaeda, but doesn't help relations with the Shi'ites. This is why this particular example of asymmetrical warfare is an even worse game of whack-a-mole than they usually are. It's not just that if you hit the enemy in one place they pop up again elsewhere. It's also that if you help one faction you alienate another.

    Getting Al Qaeda to scamper from Ramadi is great, but anyone who thinks this means "the insurgency is on the verge of collapse" needs to look at the situation in Iraq more carefully. To begin with, there isn't one "insurgency" and even if you manage to thump one, that often just inflames another.

    The Shi'ites in Iraq are less than happy that their militias in Baghdad are the major target of "The Surge" (since they are easier to target than Sunni insurgents or Al Qaeda terrorists). So whereas once the strategy was to turn a blind(ish) eye to the Shi'ites and hit the Sunni militants and the foreign fighters, now the guys who had the most incentive to at least try to co-operate (and who form the majority in the country and the Government) are being alienated by the change of tactics.

    Does that sound like a recipe for long-term "success"?

    So, sorry, but we've heard this song before and you'll have to excuse my extreme scepticism.

  11. #11
    Indefinitely Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    lala
    Posts
    4,273

    Default Re: Victory in Western Iraq? Insurgency on verge of collapse

    you don't actually know, and by know, I mean speak to as a peer, and by peer, I mean as a friend since birth, any soldiers fighting over there, do you?

    I do

  12. #12
    Blau&Gruen's Avatar Civitate
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Wagadougou, Bourkina Faso
    Posts
    5,545

    Default Re: Victory in Western Iraq? Insurgency on verge of collapse

    Quote Originally Posted by enoch View Post
    you don't actually know, and by know, I mean speak to as a peer, and by peer, I mean as a friend since birth, any soldiers fighting over there, do you?

    I do
    There is a point, when I have turned off CNN a while ago. "It could be ... ".
    Patronized by Ozymandias
    Je bâtis ma demeure
    Le livre des questions
    Un étranger avec sous le bras un livre de petit format

    golemzombiroboticvacuumcleanerstrawberrycream

  13. #13

    Default Re: Victory in Western Iraq? Insurgency on verge of collapse

    What makes me wonder the most here is the thread title.

    Neither the LA article nor its content say anything about the insurgency as a whole but only say that Ramadi, a comparatively small town which admittely was an important source of insurgent violence after Falludja got bombed to pieces (is it actually resettled, yet?), has become comparatively calm. From where comes the assessment that the insurgency is close to collapse?

    The article is rather sketchy to draw an overall picture of the situation. The remark that Ramadi has a two-year alltime low of violence kind of display that it was rather quiet sometime during 2005 as well.

    Also a thing is that Sunnis are busy fighting Kurds and Shias as well(this was a not so dominant aspect some years ago). As Ramadi is probably near 100% Sunni the militants might also have simply gone east, north or south to confront secterian enemies leaving Ramadi for the time being rather peaceful.
    "Sebaceans once had a god called Djancaz-Bru. Six worlds prayed to her. They built her temples, conquered planets. And yet one day she rose up and destroyed all six worlds. And when the last warrior was dying, he said, 'We gave you everything, why did you destroy us?' And she looked down upon him and she whispered, 'Because I can.' "
    Mangalore Design

  14. #14

    Default Re: Victory in Western Iraq? Insurgency on verge of collapse

    Quote Originally Posted by Caelius View Post
    Well I hope things will calm down in iraq very soon, but I doubt it will happen, despite this news.

    First, as the article shows, they fought heavy to clear an area of insurgents/terrorist, logicly they move away to area's less supervised by US troops.

    If I look at US fatalities for april 2007, its the worst since januari 2005, 117 killed , the attacks arent gone, they moved. And the US doesnt have enough troops to control the entire country this way AND take the offensive to them.

    And with the presure on the US gouv to get out of iraq, I think we will be seeing a lot of these news of "succes" .

  15. #15
    Protector Domesticus
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    4,045

    Default Re: Victory in Western Iraq? Insurgency on verge of collapse

    you don't actually know, and by know, I mean speak to as a peer, and by peer, I mean as a friend since birth, any soldiers fighting over there, do you?

    I do
    Several. My cousin is a USMC Scout Sniper, my own mother is a recently retired batallion CO for a reserve medical unit, and I have several friends in units in both the Army and Reserve. Does that satisfy you?

    The article itself admits that this change took place over a period of only a few weeks. Don't you think that fact right there is a rather damning piece of evidence against any assumption that this change is a long-term one?
    Actually it's been over the course of a year of up and down combat throughout the province as a whole. Ramadi itself has been reported as but the latest example of decreasing insurgent activity, as shown in the article. Don't get me wrong, i'm not sounding the victory bell in the slightest, but if the insurgency in Al Anbar is on the verge of collapse then I think it can be added as a plus regarding this conflict so far.

    How many times have we read this story in the past? I remember reading about how Ramadi had been "secured" and how the US was about to hand Anbar Province over to the Iraqis back in 2003. And I can think of at least two other reports of how things were going marvellously in Ramadi since then. In between those reports there have been all the others about how the various insurgencies (note the plural) and sectarian factions have shifted tactics and things have gone to crap again.
    Thanks for the rant. Aside from asking you on links to the articles and reports you just cited i'd also like to inquire for any current sources you could cite that would go against or disprove the findings in the OP. If you can't, well then I rest my case.

    Welcome to asymmetical warfare.
    A more accurate term would be 4th Generation Warfare.

    And "the enemy" (as if the Al Qaeda guys are the only ones) then just did what insurgents in asymmetrical warfare always do - they went elsewhere and changed tactics:
    Hardly, it's what any guerilla group would do, retreat and reconsolidate in order to cut operational losses. It does not in any way mean that they have any chance of re-attaining the same position they once had. The mere fact that they have been forced to withdraw so hastily is clearly indicative of the fact that they realized they had lost the initiative and could not regain it. I need only re-cite the OP as validation of that.

    That's great, but they don't actually want to "crawl back in" - they aren't dumb. They can simply go elsewhere and hit some other way. And the US forces simply can't set up that kind of network of defences everywhere, just Ramadi. Look at a map - Anbar Province is huge, large parts of it are empty and it borders Syria. Networking the whole place with fortresses in sight of each other might work - if you have several hundred years and a few million troops to spare.
    You're vastly overestimating the capability of the insurgents and underestimating the US in this situation, though given your dispensation towards the insurgents in terms of assumed advantageous they would have that shouldn't be surprising. If you've actually read the US Counterinsurgency Manual (which i'm assuming you haven't), then you'd know where i'm coming from. The fact of the matter is that it won't matter if they go somewhere else, as long as their operational capability in Al Anbar is increasingly marginalized.

    By altering it's TTP (Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures) and using networked defenses in coordination with local resources the US takes the battlespace advantages away from the insurgents while playing up it's own. It doesn't take a million years to do, as shown by the most recent reports, and as long as they remain confined to fighting in other areas then Al Anbar would effectively be won. Which in itself goes in accordance to Petraeus' basic strategy behind the Surge (which he actually drew inspiration from based on lessons learned by the French in Algeria) at a tactical level, that is to "take, hold, and build".

    There's nothing you really have to say that can go against that based on empirical data that has already proven this doctrine to be the correct one.

    Then there's the problem that propping up some Sunni sheiks in Ramadi helps against Al Qaeda, but doesn't help relations with the Shi'ites.
    There's virtually no Shi'ite population in Al Anbar though, so such comments are basically moot. It's practically in the heart of the Sunni Triangle.

    Getting Al Qaeda to scamper from Ramadi is great, but anyone who thinks this means "the insurgency is on the verge of collapse" needs to look at the situation in Iraq more carefully. To begin with, there isn't one "insurgency" and even if you manage to thump one, that often just inflames another.
    The data coming in from Al Anbar would support you claim (months ago), now is not the case. Military intel and data coming in have all shown that attacks and levels of violence are down throughout the province accross the board, not only by Al Qaeda but in terms of every militant group affiliated with the insurgency as a whole. To the say the least of the fact that cooperation with the population has (diametically) reached an all-time-high, with thousands of men that have signed up for the Iraqi police force. So until you have better evidence that would show the inflamation of another insurgent group your argument has very little to stand on.

    The Shi'ites in Iraq are less than happy that their militias in Baghdad are the major target of "The Surge" (since they are easier to target than Sunni insurgents or Al Qaeda terrorists). So whereas once the strategy was to turn a blind(ish) eye to the Shi'ites and hit the Sunni militants and the foreign fighters, now the guys who had the most incentive to at least try to co-operate (and who form the majority in the country and the Government) are being alienated by the change of tactics.

    Does that sound like a recipe for long-term "success"?
    Let's try to stick to the topic at hand please, we're talking about recent developments made in one province here, not what's going on in the whole of Iraq.

    So, sorry, but we've heard this song before and you'll have to excuse my extreme scepticism.
    You're free to your opinion, just as i'm free to mine. The only difference between us however is that i've presented substantial evidence that asserts mine over yours. At least until you can offer up something that would viablly contest that.

    If I look at US fatalities for april 2007, its the worst since januari 2005, 117 killed , the attacks arent gone, they moved. And the US doesnt have enough troops to control the entire country this way AND take the offensive to them.
    We don't have to, just enough to be able to marginalize the insurgency as a whole to a degree where a political breakthrough can be made outside of the military arena, as a by product of progress shown within it. Something that General Petraeus has advocated essentially from day one, and which I would add also pretty much predicted (in terms of increased troop losses) in his reports at the Pentagon and before the Senate Armed Services Committee. An increase in casualties in order to bring about increased security has long since been deemed an acceptable loss. So far this strategy has yielded positive results, despite the higher cost.

  16. #16
    Eat Meat Whale Meat
    Technical Staff Citizen Moderator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    15,812

    Default Re: Victory in Western Iraq? Insurgency on verge of collapse

    Isn't the Iraq problem that it's not an insurgency, which would be easier to deal with, but a power vacuum, which is less so? Or more accurately, insurgency, criminality, protective and pro-actve militias all merge together, shifting in emphasis from one to another from time to time, but with no lasting singular purpose except for becoming top dog. If it's an insurgency, things would be easier for the troops, as there would be a more definitive "us" and "them" demarcation. Instead, "us" are finding common ground with various elements of "them", while what also used to be part of "us" are now moving towards "them", with the whole process shifting again a few weeks later.

    Ironically, the best option might well be to get a full-blown united insurgency against us, then concede a humiliating defeat and withdraw. It would at least give us a single authority to deal with.

  17. #17

    Default Re: Victory in Western Iraq? Insurgency on verge of collapse

    Quote Originally Posted by Caelius View Post
    Actually it's been over the course of a year of up and down combat throughout the province as a whole. Ramadi itself has been reported as but the latest example of decreasing insurgent activity, as shown in the article. Don't get me wrong, i'm not sounding the victory bell in the slightest, but if the insurgency in Al Anbar is on the verge of collapse then I think it can be added as a plus regarding this conflict so far.
    Hardly, it's what any guerilla group would do, retreat and reconsolidate in order to cut operational losses. It does not in any way mean that they have any chance of re-attaining the same position they once had. The mere fact that they have been forced to withdraw so hastily is clearly indicative of the fact that they realized they had lost the initiative and could not regain it. I need only re-cite the OP as validation of that.

    Your forgetting (or ignoring) that this isnt a regular war, it isnt even a civil war . Its several groups to individuals who fight against the US/UK and themselves . When one group disappears other are created, they move they merge they disband to form others,... So there is no talk that resistance is colapsing simply because there is almost nothing to colapse, the same for initiative and withdrawal. They hit the US/UK where its easy and when its easy they dont want teritory, they dont want it now, they can take there time.
    You're vastly overestimating the capability of the insurgents and underestimating the US in this situation, though given your dispensation towards the insurgents in terms of assumed advantageous they would have that shouldn't be surprising. If you've actually read the US Counterinsurgency Manual (which i'm assuming you haven't), then you'd know where i'm coming from. The fact of the matter is that it won't matter if they go somewhere else, as long as their operational capability in Al Anbar is increasingly marginalized.
    It does matter because they will go to area's where the US presence is smaller, where they can better prepare ambushes and kill more US/UK soldiers. It doesnt matter if they kill them here or somewhere else, as long as they kill they are happy.

    As for there capability, as I posted, 117 dead last month, the highest in 2 years, doesnt seem like anything is about to colapse.
    By altering it's TTP (Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures) and using networked defenses in coordination with local resources the US takes the battlespace advantages away from the insurgents while playing up it's own. It doesn't take a million years to do, as shown by the most recent reports, and as long as they remain confined to fighting in other areas then Al Anbar would effectively be won. Which in itself goes in accordance to Petraeus' basic strategy behind the Surge (which he actually drew inspiration from based on lessons learned by the French in Algeria) at a tactical level, that is to "take, hold, and build".

    Wich doesnt matter, the US cant stay and protect it forever, it has too little troops to do that and while they are in Al Anbar other places are under attack.
    Some day they have to leave it and then the insurgents/terrorists just come back. Perhaps they can put the iraqi army in charge, but I doubt that, they tried that several times the last years and every time it failed.

    Let's try to stick to the topic at hand please, we're talking about recent developments made in one province here, not what's going on in the whole of Iraq.
    We don't have to, just enough to be able to marginalize the insurgency as a whole to a degree where a political breakthrough can be made outside of the military arena, as a by product of progress shown within it. Something that General Petraeus has advocated essentially from day one, and which I would add also pretty much predicted (in terms of increased troop losses) in his reports at the Pentagon and before the Senate Armed Services Committee. An increase in casualties in order to bring about increased security has long since been deemed an acceptable loss. So far this strategy has yielded positive results, despite the higher cost.
    What positive results? That one region of iraq is less violent but the other remain just as high?
    You say this is to marginalize the resistance to force them into a political breaktrough ? What do you think those insurgents want? Its no something the US can give them, so it doesnt matter to negotiate its pointless, they want the US out of iraq. So to them its fine that the US takes the fight to them and makes more casulties, thats what they are there for. And when its gets to tough, they move , prepare and attack in another part less protected or they go underground or ...


    IF the US had enough of soldiers or IF the iraqi army could take up its position it might work, region by region until they subdeud the entire country. But now they can clear out parts who get flood by insurgents the minute they leave.

  18. #18

    Default Re: Victory in Western Iraq? Insurgency on verge of collapse

    Quote Originally Posted by Caelius View Post
    If you've actually read the US Counterinsurgency Manual (which i'm assuming you haven't),
    Always be careful what you "assume". I started writing a long post, detailing these short-term developments in Anbar in the wider context of "the Surge" and counter-insurgency military doctrine. Then I found this article, which pretty much did the same thing in some detail, drawing on quotes from the US Counterinsurgency Manual.

    It's long and detailed, but worth reading. And not good news for the Iraq War Cheerleader Squad.

  19. #19
    Carach's Avatar Dux Limitis
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    England
    Posts
    18,054

    Default Re: Victory in Western Iraq? Insurgency on verge of collapse

    'A FEW WEEKS ago you couldn't drive down this street without being attacked
    thats quite a turn around... little early to be claiming victory just because theres been less attacks the last 2 weeks.

    but yea, iraq isnt an entirely lost cause, all the people back here have is the media to go on and power-hungry politicians, and they're all (with few exceptions) very narrow minded in what they report.

  20. #20
    Lord Condormanius's Avatar Artifex
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Derby, CT U.S.A.
    Posts
    6,439

    Default Re: Victory in Western Iraq? Insurgency on verge of collapse

    May 31, 2005

    Vice President Dick Cheney to Larry King: "I think they're in the last throes, if you will, of the insurgency."

    ...I wouldn't get my hopes up, as this is not the first time something like this has been said.

    LC
    "There is a difference between what is wrong and what is evil. Evil is committed when clarity is taken away from what is clearly wrong, allowing wrong to be seen as less wrong, excusable, right, or an obligatory commandment of the Lord God Almighty.

    Evil is bad sold as good, wrong sold as right, injustice sold as justice. Like the coat of a virus, a thin veil of right can disguise enormous wrong and confer an ability to infect others."
    -John G. Hartung

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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