Falluja: Dire Results.....

[Nikk]

LINK

Between the US election,...and the Iraqi elections, there is a window in which these terrorists will be severely attrited. It has been estimated that the insurgents can keep up the current level of attacks in other cities for another 3 weeks....but not beyond. Their level of losses of both men and equipment is not sustainable. By the time of the Iraqi elections these insurgents will be but blind leaderless remnants thrashing about to little effect.

-z

Errm Rik, if this form of Arab resistance was so predictable why wasn't it predicted by the U.S. and more troops sent in to begin with? Why was the Iraqi army disbanded? etc, etc, . OK people like me predicted this sort of resistance action, although I underestimated the war party's failures of imagination and planning; but before the war the gung ho chorus, people like you, were predicting an outbreak of democracy, love, peace and harmony I seem to recall. Now of course you post pompous articles which purport to explain why it turned into a disaster. It would have been so much more useful if you and your kind had been able to pass these insights on to the president in about autumn 2002 don't you think?

I'll keep a note of your little prediction and see how it works out. In fact I do hope that the resistance decides to shut up shop, but somehow I doubt if it will happen as you expect.

 

[CapelDodger]

Problem One would be alleviated if not for Problem Two, and that is the inability (to date) of the newly-constituted Iraqi police and Army to be able to confront a major insurgent attack BY THEMSELVES without substantial Coalition aid--note the attacks on the Police stations and while we have committed 10,000 troops to Fallujah, the Iraqis committed 2,000--and I am waiting to hear (after action) how they performed. Until there is reliable and trained Iraqi security forces that can directly combat the insurgents, we will be called in every time a city erupts.

And that will not do. It will not do at all. We need to see the Iraqis in control of their nation's security. Hopefully it is coming. But is ain't there yet. So we'll keep putting out the fires and continue to bleed.

There are constant reports of collusion between the various Iraqi forces and insurgents, the latest coming from Mosul - which is a real can of worms. What we are seeing is power groups manoeuvring for their place in the post-occupation. And at the same time trying to influence what the final settlement is. The Kurds want Mosul - and so do the Sunnis. The Iraqi reinforcements being called to the city are mostly Kurdish, and the peshmerga are moving in as well. How is the US going to resolve this issue without pissing off the Kurds or the Sunnis?

WTF, they've already pissed off the Sunnis, so the Kurds get it. Play of the Day goes to the Kurds.

 

[demon]

Nikk:
"but before the war the gung ho chorus, people like you, were predicting an outbreak of democracy, love, peace and harmony I seem to recall."

Yes, and they still want to be taken seriously, that`s what I find astonishing.

Here`s another couple of numpties for you:

Richard Perle:
"And a year from now, I'll be very surprised if there is not some grand square in Baghdad that is named after President Bush. There is no doubt that, with the exception of a very small number of people close to a vicious regime, the people of Iraq have been liberated and they understand that they've been liberated. And it is getting easier every day for Iraqis to express that sense of liberation."

Ken Adleman:
"liberating Iraq would be a cakewalk"

I`m still waiting for his followup article "Cakewalk Revisited"

Oh hell, might as well add Zilla`s latest fantasy as well, he`ll like the company:

"It has been estimated that the insurgents can keep up the current level of attacks in other cities for another 3 weeks....By the time of the Iraqi elections these insurgents will be but blind leaderless remnants thrashing about to little effect."

We`ll see.

 

[CapelDodger]

What demon said.

Time will tell particularly quickly for Zila, but "it has been estimated ..." isn't really putting your cock on the block, as they say in these parts.

 

[hammegk]

I address You with more courtesy then You deserve. I'm an army brat, dad a full bird , brother head of the Honor guard in Ft.Hood during Nam , relatives involved if WW1,WW2 , Korea, too numerous to mention. The old man had malaria which he had bouts of thru his life, my uncle had no stomach , being skewered by a German bayonet, other uncle had "phantom limb" syndrome after having his leg amputated.

A worthy family background. Many families have similar relatives and friends.

Don't you dare presume lecture me about sacrifice , liberty and freedom, you jackass.

Sorry, I'm not that closely related to you.

And I presume nothing; I state that your posts show no respect for heroes that gave, and give, you the opportunity to spew pap like the next quote.

The war in Iraq is an illusion of a stupidly formed fundamental outlook by the Bush administration which is costing us worthy men and women and incalculable amounts of money.

Pah! I agree you are entitled to an opinion, and also the right to publicize it. Others have the right to call you an ungrateful tool/fool.

 

[TillEulenspiegel]

"And I presume nothing; I state that your posts show no respect for heroes that gave, and give, you the opportunity to spew pap like the next quote."


Fine you made an assertion, now show me the evidence.

 

[hammegk]

Fine you made an assertion, now show me the evidence.

Read you own words. Think about them, and their tone.

You want to effect policy, run for office. Once you are POTUS, you can take your best shot at how things are actually done. Failing that, try supporting rather than denegrating our troops in harm's way.

 

[Nikk]

Nikk:



Yes, and they still want to be taken seriously, that`s what I find astonishing.

Here`s another couple of numpties for you:

Richard Perle:
"And a year from now, I'll be very surprised if there is not some grand square in Baghdad that is named after President Bush. There is no doubt that, with the exception of a very small number of people close to a vicious regime, the people of Iraq have been liberated and they understand that they've been liberated. And it is getting easier every day for Iraqis to express that sense of liberation."

Ken Adleman:
"liberating Iraq would be a cakewalk"

I`m still waiting for his followup article "Cakewalk Revisited"

Remember when the U.S. forces in Falluja shot down some stone throwing demonstrators? In this thread Rik had this to say........


"Why can't you give Bush a tiny bit of credit? The thousands of American casualties you lefties predicted never materialized. The military "quagmire" you guys predicted was all BS.

Fact is, the Iraqis make crappy infantrymen. Their generals were a bunch of know-nothing blowhards. They had no generals like Giap, or Uncle Ho. Even if they did, our military has improved vastly since 'Nam.

Once the Iraqi police force has been reconstituted and properly trained, they will be the ones doing crowd control. Also, once the Iraqi's have a provisional government that they can go to to redress grievances, the troops will be less of a target....the mob will have someone else to be angry at. Hopefully the Iraqis will eventually learn that they can safely protest all they want as long as they don't become violent.

-zilla



Nothing there about a 50 year old Arab concept of defence in depth it would seem. Crowd control seems not to be going too well either.

 

[evildave]

"It has been estimated that the insurgents can keep up the current level of attacks in other cities for another 3 weeks....By the time of the Iraqi elections these insurgents will be but blind leaderless remnants thrashing about to little effect."

Three weeks 'till the insurgency peters out?

Sounds a bit like rikzilla is making a "This war will be over by Christmas!" prediction.

 

[Jim Bowen]

Perhaps we should start a sweepstake on this?

Jim Bowen

 

[crocodile deathroll]

It is no surprise to me how little support the US is getting from the Iraqi military, as they have only suffered 6 deaths against 38 Americans. This indicates to me there is a substantial percentage of Iraq's military personal who are defecting into the insurgency. So in effect the US, through military training of the Iraqi National Guard is actually contributing to then insurgency in the long run. They will be firing the bullets America provided them straight back at them and as a consequence America will just have to shoulder the cost of this war entirely on her own.

CDR

 

[Ziggurat]

It is no surprise to me how little support the US is getting from the Iraqi military, as they have only suffered 6 deaths against 38 Americans. This indicates to me there is a substantial percentage of Iraq's military personal who are defecting into the insurgency.

That's quite a leap, and makes absolutely no sense. First off, the absolute number of Iraqis involved is several times lower than the number of US troops involved. If the implications of that aren't obvious, well... Furthermore, they are relatively inexperienced, so they aren't being used quite the same way. Their main purpose is to clear sensitive buildings and complexes like mosques. The danger and frequency of their asignments need not match what US troops are doing. So why would you even expect the casualty ratios to match? Your explanation for a non-existent discrepency is also probably non-existent.

 

[rikzilla]

Three weeks 'till the insurgency peters out?

Sounds a bit like rikzilla is making a "This war will be over by Christmas!" prediction.

Strawman.

Why don't you go back and read what I actually posted? My opinion was based on the information quoted from the link I gave. It is from a military blog that has participation by expert strategists, as well as soldiers who are actually involved in the Fallujah campaign.

The information I quoted is not a prediction...it's an educated guess based on the destruction of enemy logistics, interdiction of his supply lines from Syria and Iran, and level of battlefield losses. And yes, it could be wrong but as an Army veteran myself it sounds like these guys are very well informed.

What is at question is the enemies ability to sustain the current high level of attacks throughout Iraq. It's not a wild prediction to say that the enemy will be unable to keep up this tempo in the face of their massive losses of men and material. In fact, it would be just such a wild prediction to infer that they can. These insurgents are not supermen. They bleed and die. With the re-election of GWB time is no longer on their side. "Help" is no longer on the way from the American left.

 

[rikzilla]

Remember when the U.S. forces in Falluja shot down some stone throwing demonstrators? In this thread Rik had this to say........


"Why can't you give Bush a tiny bit of credit? The thousands of American casualties you lefties predicted never materialized. The military "quagmire" you guys predicted was all BS.

Fact is, the Iraqis make crappy infantrymen. Their generals were a bunch of know-nothing blowhards. They had no generals like Giap, or Uncle Ho. Even if they did, our military has improved vastly since 'Nam.

Once the Iraqi police force has been reconstituted and properly trained, they will be the ones doing crowd control. Also, once the Iraqi's have a provisional government that they can go to to redress grievances, the troops will be less of a target....the mob will have someone else to be angry at. Hopefully the Iraqis will eventually learn that they can safely protest all they want as long as they don't become violent.

-zilla



Nothing there about a 50 year old Arab concept of defence in depth it would seem. Crowd control seems not to be going too well either.

Sure I posted that. But let's give it a little context shall we? I posted it exactly 42 days into OIF. During a time when all the lefties were crying "quagmire", and still listening to the disinformation from Peter Arnett and Baghdad Bob.

Reposting my words now is taking them out of the historical context they were written in. Back then there were alot of folks comparing Iraq to Vietnam...my derogatory comments about Iraqi troops were referring to the fact that they were shedding uniforms and running away in stunning numbers. This was very much unlike NVA troops who were very proficient infantrymen.

So, a nice bit of cherry picking Nikk,...but in light of the current situation in Falluja it's hardly enlightening. The major engagements of US Army vs Saddam's Iraqi Army were no quagmire. The US invasion of Iraq and defeat of conventional uniformed Iraqi units was one of the most efficient military engagements in history. The insurgency is not the same thing.

-z

 

[Ed]

OOT

/rant

I just know that when I saw the bloodied grizzled face of a 20 Yr. old American kid, butt hanging out of his mouth like some weird modern take on John Wayne, /rant off

It is not a "take" it is real. That said, your point is........

 

[TillEulenspiegel]

Read you own words. Think about them, and their tone.

You want to effect policy, run for office. Once you are POTUS, you can take your best shot at how things are actually done. Failing that, try supporting rather than denigrating our troops in harm's way.

You make an assertion for the 2nd time.Prove it. Show me my words that denigrate our troops. You can't because I never have. I have vociferiously denegrated Bush and his stumbling in to a disterious, long, costly war. Maybe that's what you mean.

My post here was a reflection on the human cost of war, nothing else.

So you may want to take your own advice and don't write falsehoods.

 

[AtheistArchon]

Failing that, try supporting rather than denegrating our troops in harm's way.

- Ye gods, not this again. The only one worse, and still in use, is "Why do you hate America?!?!"

- Nobody here is "denigrating the troops", idiot.

 

[hammegk]

- Nobody here is "denigrating the troops", idiot.

Please do not use your nickname to refer to others. Remember what your mama told you about that.

For those of you not actually denigrating our troops -- in a war disliked, pursued by a hated administration -- cheer up. More of the survivors will have to return to the US before you can spit on them and call them baby-killers, torturers, lowest scum, etc.


All wars are long, unpopular with a few (or many) and costly. Sorry ya'all didn't get the CIC you hoped for who "governs" by holding his finger in the wind. Even then, I suspect you would not be getting your wishes any time soon, whatever those wishes might actually be.

 

[crimresearch]

Sure I posted that. But let's give it a little context shall we? I posted it exactly 42 days into OIF. During a time when all the lefties were crying "quagmire", and still listening to the disinformation from Peter Arnett and Baghdad Bob.

Reposting my words now is taking them out of the historical context they were written in. Back then there were alot of folks comparing Iraq to Vietnam...my derogatory comments about Iraqi troops were referring to the fact that they were shedding uniforms and running away in stunning numbers. This was very much unlike NVA troops who were very proficient infantrymen.

So, a nice bit of cherry picking Nikk,...but in light of the current situation in Falluja it's hardly enlightening. The major engagements of US Army vs Saddam's Iraqi Army were no quagmire. The US invasion of Iraq and defeat of conventional uniformed Iraqi units was one of the most efficient military engagements in history. The insurgency is not the same thing.

-z

Part of Nikk's standard pattern of disinformation...when I pointed out the same things, he demanded evidence that anyone had ever predicted massive American causalities in the *early* engagements with Iraqi troops..and when I repeatedly provided links showing that those predictions had indeed been bruited about in the media, he ran away in the face of my requests that he provide rebuttal citations.