The insurgency in Iraq (1 Viewer)

[Generator]

Another thread on Iraq, but I think that it's justified.

Mixed messages from White House on Iraq war

The World Today - Tuesday, 28 June , 2005 12:34:00
Reporter: Michael Vincent


ELEANOR HALL: To the Middle East now where there are mixed signals from inside the United States and Iraqi administrations about how long it will take to defeat the insurgency in Iraq.

Overnight Iraqi Prime Minister – Ibrahim al-Jaafari – told reporters in London that he thought security could be restored in his country within two years.

Just 24 hours earlier though, the US Defence Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, was suggesting it could take more than a decade for the civil conflict to be brought under control.

Then there were the comments by the United States' Vice-President, Dick Cheney, who last week predicted that the insurgency was in its "last throes" and would be over during President Bush's current term in office.

Michael Vincent reports.

MICHAEL VINCENT: For the past week the Iraqi Prime Minister, Ibrahim Al-Jaafari, has been travelling Europe and the US, drumming up political and financial support for his country. Back in his homeland dozens have died in attacks by the insurgents.

Desperate for the violence to end, Prime Minister Al-Jaafari has declared that Iraq's fight against terrorism "and the poverty and ignorance that supply them has become the world's fight for the security of humanity".

But at no stage has he put a timeline on ending the insurgency, until now.

IBRAHIM AL-JAAFARI (translated): I think two years will be enough, more than enough, to establish security in our country.

MICHAEL VINCENT: Prime Minister Al-Jaafari made that prediction at a press conference with British Prime Minister Tony Blair. In response Mr Blair simply reaffirmed his commitment to be there for the long haul.

TONY BLAIR: I made it clear to the Prime Minister that we would stand by our commitment to Iraq and the Iraqi people and that we will make sure that the job that we have undertaken is completed and finished, and we were both talking about the need for us all to understand that the defeat of terrorism in Iraq is a defeat for terrorism everywhere.

MICHAEL VINCENT: The Iraqi Prime Minister followed his two-year prediction with a further explanation, saying the insurgency could be ended in less than two years if certain factors are addressed.

IBRAHIM AL-JAAFARI (translated): First the development of the security forces. We are working on this. As far as quantity and performance and equipment the more we are quick with this the quicker we do it. There are also the borders with other countries in the region. If the countries cooperate with us in controlling these borders, then the time will be shorter.

MICHAEL VINCENT: Just over a week ago US Vice-President, Dick Cheney, said the Iraqi insurgency was in its "last throes", and that he expected the war would end during President Bush's second term, which ends in 2009.

In this he's closer to the views of the Iraqi Prime Minister, but far more optimistic than US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld who made this comment on Sunday:

DONALD RUMSFELD: That insurgency could go on for any number of years. Insurgencies tend to go on five, six, eight, 10, 12 years.

MICHAEL VINCENT: But within 24 hours Donald Rumsfeld was not prepared to make the same comment.

DONALD RUMSFELD: There are so many variables that I would be reluctant to pretend that I could look into that crystal ball and say X number of months or X number of years, I can't.

One thing I do believe very deeply, and I think I'll end up being right, you never know in life, but um, I honestly believe that this insurgency is going to be defeated by the Iraqi people and not by coalition countries and not by the United States.

ELEANOR HALL: And that's the US Defence Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, ending that report from Michael Vincent.

Source: http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2005/s1402339.htm

Imminent, 2 years or up to (and over) a decade? What are your thoughts on the insurgency and the role of the Iraqi forces/Government and those of the coalition in achieving a peaceful outcome?

Even though I'm not a mod and cannot really chart the course of the debate, I would like to say that those replying should consider the need for maturity if they would like others to consider their views rather than the manner in which they are conveyed.

 

[McLake]

Even though I'm not a mod and cannot really chart the course of the debate, I would like to say that those replying should consider the need for maturity if they would like others to consider their views rather than the manner in which they are conveyed.

I agree. As with all threads in any forum (and especially in this forum) please PM a mod or report a post if you disaprove of a users comments.

 

[Enlightened_One]

I think that only two options exist to stop insurgents. The first is to kill them all, and thus make them matyrs (but when you get all of them there'll be nobody to look up to them), or take away their means for justifying their actions.
Each time allied forces strike back it makes them look like heroes to some foolish young boy easily persuaded by a 'loose' interpretation of the Koran.

 

[Comrade nathan]

SBS news last night reported that the US army has been holding secret meetings to negotiate with the insurgents.

This and giving lengthy estimations to how long it will take to bring down the insurgents (SBS said 10 years a General estimated) is an indirect way of admiting there is a legitimate insurgent movment in Iraq.

Also the US can't sustain a 10 year war, that is unpopular as this.

Ho Chi Minh said "If the Tiger does not stop fighting the Elephant, the Elephant will die of exhaustion"

 

[hfis]

I support the Iraq war, but it suprises me that the insurgents are being given such a bad rap. They are defending their country from invasion; what would we do if we were invaded? I'm guessing get labelled as 'freedom fighters', or something.

Just food for thought.

 

[Meldrum]

Throwing all the political throes and agendas out the window, I think it's said for those Iraqi's hamstrung between communal Nationalism and innate fear of speaking out.

Reminds me of John Foulcher's eulogy to John Bjielky-Peterson "I feel not that you have died, but that others lived during your life"

 

[loquasagacious]

^ suspicious of anyone using joh in a positive manner.

Analysis of insurgency:

If the insurgents can not be comprehensively beaten and the country pacified within two years then the war is lost for the US and her allies.

It would be extremely difficult to supress the insurgency within such a time frame as the insurgents can draw on several powerful emtions in iraq: Religion, Nationalism, and a dissatisfaction with the current state of affairs. The american forces provide a clear target for the discharge of these emotions as they are occupying the territory of the nation, they are suppressing radical islam and they disturbed the staus quo.

The americans will continue to be opposed by fracticious groups from all corners of life, primarily conservatives (sadamm supporters) and radical (supporters of a muslim state). The only hope for peace being to placate the conservatives by installing a sadamm like strong-man, which somewhat defeats the (possibly only overt - depending on your politics) reason for the invasion.

There are some pertinent exmaples to draw upon: Palestine has never been pacified, France never forgave (and still hasn't) Germany for seiving Alsace and Lorraine, The french followed by the US lost in Vietnam, the Russians lost in Afghanistan, the French lost in Algeria. It took Spain more than five hundred years and the creation of the inquisition to suppress the moors sufficiently to be stable.

In summation:

Every US soldier killed is a victory for the insurgents as it is a reduction of both the fighting capability and will of the enemy.
Every insurgent killed is a voctory for the insurgency as it will stregthen the resolve of their compatriots and aid recruiting.
The insugents will steal from the occupiers, in this way the occupier is weakended and the insurgent strengthened.
It is too late for any ammount of violence or appeasement to return the situation to an acceptable state of stability.

 

[LadyBec]

One thing I do believe very deeply, and I think I'll end up being right, you never know in life, but um, I honestly believe that this insurgency is going to be defeated by the Iraqi people and not by coalition countries and not by the United States

I don't see the US sticking it out, and winning in the end. It has to be the Iraqi people that want the figting to end, and who are willing to do what's necessary to end it. They have to convince their fellow citizens that it's not worth it.
The US mindlessly slaughtering all the insergants will solve nothing, all its going to do is make them into matyrs. And then more people will just be drawn in...

 

[leetom]

Is anybody else annoyed by Tony Blair's "a defeat for terrorism in Iraq is a defeat for terrorism everywhere"? As though there is a global force of terrorists who convene regularly to discuss new ways to wage their terror, and that Iraq is some sort of front in a wider war against terrorism. For that sort of comment to be acceptable, there has to exist some bizarre state which actually proclaims itself as a 'terrorist state'. The idea, of a self proclaimed terrorist state though is absurd, as nobody willingly calls themselves terrorists. Bin Laden actually has some rather though-provoking ideas on this, that challenging the West in any way results in being labelled a terrorist and that he beleives that it is in fact the Western nations who are the terrorists.

The insurgency in Iraq is not a singular force fighting in nation-wide unison. It is a collection of splintered groups fighting for different reasons. It has even been reported recently that different insurgency groups have attacked each other, despite the common foe of the US military. There are three groups which comprise the insurgency, they are:

1) Discontented Sunnis. The Sunnis of course being the community and religious group that largely occupies the geographic centre of Iraq. They enjoyed the most privileges under the Saddam regime, and now that those privileges have been curbed with US invasion, many Sunnis have been inspired to armed resistance.

2) General anti-government Iraqis. The Iraqis that detest the idea of having a new system of government imposed on them by the Americans. Are concerned primarily about the new government's independance. They view the American-established government as being weak and under the influence of Americans rather than Iraqis and submission to the authority of this government means allowing America and American business interests access to Iraq. Are compelled to fight by basic patriotism.

3) Islamic extremists- those who fight out of extreme religious motivation. The Americans are seen as a Christian occupier and must be resisted.