News Is the US Military Losing the Battle for Hearts and Minds in Iraq?

[Art]

Sure it did. The general insurrection lasted six years and went very badly for the IRA.

Well who am I to argue after all I only lived in ireland throughout the troubles.

It means that the Americans physically outnumber the enemy by 7:1. That, and they're kill ratio is roughly 10:1. It's a nice numerical way of saying that most of the bad guys don't have a chance in hell of surviving this.

What can I say, you're playing a blinder, 17,700 insurgents killed? Got a source for that ? As for the outcome, time will tell.

Where did I dispute my own source?

You claimed as above that the kill rate was great and yet your report showed the number of insurgents had quadrupled. So looks like more people becoming alienated to me.

You could provide a source that actually says what you say it says.

Sure sounded to me as if junior was blaming all his woes on 'foreign fighters' yet your report shows they make up a small % of the insurgency

Why would it? We agree that foreign fighters are far less numerous than former regime elements.

Good we agree on something

I'm still waiting for you to attempt to substantiate yours.

My what?

Why the community? Why not just a handful of households?
So you've made an argument for having your immediate neighbors in check, although you haven't explained why your neighbors would have to know that you're going out to shoot policemen. Why would the whole community need to know? Especially if you move around a lot?

See response from Alexander re Globalsecurity

 

[Rev Prez]

Well who am I to argue after all I only lived in ireland throughout the troubles.

Are you seriously going to just chalk it up to authority on this one?

What can I say, you're playing a blinder, 17,700 insurgents killed? Got a source for that ? As for the outcome, time will tell.

Yes, I do [1], [2.

You claimed as above that the kill rate was great and yet your report showed the number of insurgents had quadrupled. So looks like more people becoming alienated to me.

The report shows the estimated strength of the insurgency at a given time changing; and the figures derive from DoD estimates correlating the lethality of the insurgency with the killed and captured numbers.

Sure sounded to me as if junior was blaming all his woes on 'foreign fighters' yet your report shows they make up a small % of the insurgency

Then be more specific. Where did the President say that foreign fighters made up the bulk of the insurgency?

My what?

Your arguments. Follow along.

See response from Alexander re Globalsecurity

Already answered.

Rev Prez`

 

[Art]

Are you seriously going to just chalk it up to authority on this one?

Maybe we are at cross purposes here because I haven't a clue what you mean.

Yes, I do [1], [2.

Well your first source is hardly an unbiased source as it is the US military, the second doesn't mention insurgent casualties. The military source would presumably be derived by totting up estimates like the claim of 40 dead insurgents in the article at the start of this thread despite the attack being only from the air and eyewitnesses claiming the number of insurgents killed was 0? Or are the eyewitnesses lying because they are insurgents too? In which case the militaries' report is still wrong because they claimed to have killed them all. Bit of a paradox really.

The report shows the estimated strength of the insurgency at a given time changing; and the figures derive from DoD estimates correlating the lethality of the insurgency with the killed and captured numbers.

Yes it does show the number of insurgents changing - it's upwards. (despite your claim of 17,000 killed or captured) Still looks to me like the insurgency is gaining more support the longer this goes on.

Then be more specific. Where did the President say that foreign fighters made up the bulk of the insurgency?

Read what he said. I am not going to get involved in semantics.

Already answered.

You really have no idea of how urban guerilla warfare is conducted.

 

[Rev Prez]

Maybe we are at cross purposes here because I haven't a clue what you mean.

You appealed to your own authority and leave it at that.

Well your first source is hardly an unbiased source as it is the US military...

What a wonderful world you live in where Zmag is authoritative.

...the second doesn't mention insurgent casualties.

"On 20 October 2003 the Project on Defense Alternatives estimated that between 10,800 and 15,100 Iraqis were killed in the war. Of these, between 3,200 and 4,300 were noncombatants -- that is: civilians who did not take up arms."

You really have no idea of how urban guerilla warfare is conducted.

Enlighten us.

Rev Prez

 

[alexandra]

Hmmm...it looks like Globalsecurity has nothing to say on the matter.

Yes, it does. Couldn't you read it? I repeat, and highlight the relevant words to make it easy for you to find them:

Chapter V. Conclusion

Since Che Guevara's death in 1967, the nature of guerrilla
warfare has changed little. Whether one is a student of Sun-Tuz,
Clausewitz, Nepoleon, Mao-Tse-Tung or Che Guevara, it is obvious
that the activity of war is conducted in accordance with a set
of fundamental precepts which have remained constant throughout
history. The only thing that has changed and which continues to
evolve is how these principles are applied to meet the challenges
posed by the different physical environments and situations in
which wars are fought.

Marines deployed to conduct counter-guerrilla operations can
expect to face a crafty well trained opponent equipped with many
of the same lethal and sophisticated weapons available in the
Corps' own inventory. Operating from secure bases in remote
rural areas and hidden urban enclaves, the guerrilla fighter will
have the distinct advantages of knowing the terrain upon which he
operates, a total commitment to the cause for which he is fight-
ing and the moral support from his fellow citizens. In such a
situation, Marine Corps forces must be willing to fight a war of
repeated limited engagements where manuever, mass and security
will be paramount. They must also be prepared to suffer the
manpower attrition associated with this kind of warfare.
Reference: http://www.globalsecurity.org/milit...rt/1988/CJK.htm

You spell "massive infrastructure" as "moral support of the community?" Not a very impressive one. Try again.

Huh? What on Earth do you mean? If you want to discuss something I've written, please follow at least the basic rules of logical discussion and explain what the problem is. Unless we are logical, we cannot discuss things sensibly.

 

[Art]

Seems the US soldiers believe they have lost the battle for hearts and minds.
http://www.detnews.com/2005/nation/0507/04/A04-236191.htm

And so much for the much vaunted elimination of the cruelty and excesses of SH's regime with the introduction of the new westernised democratic institutions
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200507/s1405971.htm

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1520186,00.html

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1520136,00.html

 

[Rev Prez]

Seems the US soldiers believe they have lost the battle for hearts and minds.

Why do you misrepresent your sources? There isn't a single poll in any of these links.

Rev Prez

 

[Art]

Why do you misrepresent your sources? There isn't a single poll in any of these links.

Rev Prez

Gosh! You're right there isn't . But then again I didn't say there was? Why don't you try responding to posts as they are actually written rather than to how you would have wished them to be written, it would make a nice change and be a lot more relevent.