WP: Is This Hussein's Counterattack?

[kskiska]

Commander Says Insurgence Has Earmarks of Planning

Thursday, November 13, 2003; Page A01

BAGHDAD, Nov. 12 -- The recent string of high-profile attacks on U.S. and allied forces in Iraq has appeared to be so methodical and well-crafted that some top U.S. commanders now fear this may be the war Saddam Hussein and his generals planned all along.

Knowing from the 1991 Persian Gulf War that they could not take on the U.S. military with conventional forces, these officers believe, the Baathist Party government cached weapons before the Americans invaded last spring and planned to employ guerrilla tactics.

"I believe Saddam Hussein always intended to fight an insurgency should Iraq fall," said Maj. Gen. Charles H. Swannack Jr., commanding general of the 82nd Airborne Division and the man responsible for combat operations in the lower Sunni Triangle, the most unstable part of Iraq. "That's why you see so many of these arms caches out there in significant numbers all over the country. They were planning to go ahead and fight an insurgency, should Iraq fall."

In an interview Wednesday at his headquarters northwest of the capital, Swannack said the speed of the fall of Baghdad in April probably caught Hussein and his followers by surprise and prevented them from launching the insurgence for a few months. That would explain why anti-U.S. violence dropped off noticeably in July and early August, but then began to trend upward.

more…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A34071-2003Nov12?language=printer

[pfitz59]

1. Not 'insurgence'!

Partisan resistance! US are occupiers! Media perpetuates the big lie!

[MUAD_DIB]

29. *Sigh* You don't understand.

Anybody that attacks, resists or disagrees with coalition forces is a Terrist treat: subject to summary judgement, imprisonment and when it pleases his Chimpness-biological retirement.

There can be no insurgents fighting against a democracy...no matter how colonial it appears.

Anybody that approves of, works with and consumes goods as ordered is a peace-loving democracy-bound citizen of Haliburton-Iraq®: worthy of his Chimpnesses love as well as full media adoration.


Some Murkins just don't get it.

[MercutioATC]

2. I don't think it's that organized...

If this was set up as the plan from the beginning, how difficult would it have been to hide some really BIG stuff (conventional or bio/chem) and use it NOW, when there's no real regime to blame things on? This looks a lot more like opportunistic resistance attacks than any preplanned campaign.

[kalashnikov]

15. thats the brilliance of it,

ther are no big things. Its pure guerilla warfare, lots of people blending into the populace with small and improvised weapons conducting hit and run raids. This is what saddam originally planned on, but the US won overran Baghdad so quickly they had to take some time to regroup.

[MercutioATC]

18. But why not occasionally open up a can of anthrax or set off a REALLY

big bomb? If this was truly preplanned, those things could have been hidden last year, waiting to be used. Of course, ANY government would expect its citizens (and disbanded military) to fight an occupying force, but I don't think it was preplanned the way the article suggests.

[kalashnikov]

20. First off they have no WMD's, I think thats apparent.

Secondly the bigger the operation the more centrally planned it would have to be, and the US army is very good at taking apart traditional centralized command structures. And the Iraqi army officers know this first hand.

[MercutioATC]

23. But if they were PLANNING this, wouldn't they have SAVED some WMD?

As I said, resisting an invading an invading force after losing in military terms and using guerilla tactics to do so is nothing new. I believe that's always been the plan, but that's just common sense. I don't think the "plan" goes any further than that.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

30. So, explain how Iraq "lost" the war. Is it because we said they lost?....

Was there an agreement entered into prior to the start of the war that set out standard rules for winning and losing? No, there was not.

Neither you nor the Chimp-in-Charge has any idea what the Iraqis are thinking. For that matter, none of us have a clue.

As far as the WMDs are concerned, the UN inspectors in 1995 certified that Iraq had no WMDs remaining in their inventory. Any military planning by the Iraqis for conventional and/or unconventional warfare from 1995 to the present would have reflected the absence of such weapons.

[kalashnikov]

37. we kicked the regime out of power, thus we won.

Of course it remains to be seen if it is a lasting victory.

[kalashnikov]

36. They havent had WMD's for years

probably not since 1998.

[loudnclear]

27. I repeat again. Saddam did not lie to us, Bush did.

Saddam said that Iraq had no WMDs. Saddam said that if the US invaded Iraq, they would watch their soldiers die in the streets of Baghdad. (He didn't say when).

Bush said that Iraq had WMDs.

[newyorican]

3. didn't "wargame" this scenario...

and my nephew just went back after his 2-week R&R. :(

I wanted to break his leg, but my sister didn't let me.

[kalashnikov]

17. they did anticipate a guerilla style urban warfare type of scenario

however they thought it would be sooner in the campaign and not later.

[sleipnir]

33. Actually, funny (and sad) but true story

They did wargame Iraq ahead of time, the general who was tasked to play Op-For (Iraq) utilized many guerilla style techniques, including sinking several US ships in port. The Navy and Army decided that the tactics weren't fair and the "raised" the ships and "resurrected" the soliders. Stupid, stupid, of course Iraq wasn't going to play "fair" but they didn't listen, and now look what's happened. Sorry, but it's Iraq is not the plains of Europe and our cold war brass failed early on...

[kalashnikov]

38. They did not fail.

The military objective of destroying the regime was accomplished. Its the peace that is not going so well, however youll have to wait till the fat lady sings to see if we are able to install a democracy and win the political objective.

[sleipnir]

40. Was it????

I wonder, if there are coordinated attacks, did we achive our goal or did we fall into the same trap as the wargames?? Me thinks we did, they have ignored guerilla warfare in this conflict and ever since Vietnam. The Soviets would have played by the "rules" and the brass is the same from the Cold War. I'm saying that we need a new infusion of current tactics and responding to the 2000 NSA report on world security and the future of conflict.

[neuvocat]

4. I know it says that this could have been

due to long-term planning but with Hussein gone I think that other U.S. enemies (eg Al Queda) were able to easily enter in and take over some operations to lead against an occupying force.

[kalashnikov]

19. I actually disagree, I think bush took great pains to `

watch the borders of Iraq and seal them off for precisley the that reason. Of course some slipped through, but the US army made it a very high priority to keep foreigners out. I think it is more likely that it's Iraqis commiting most of these acts.

[neuvocat]

35. Oh.

I wasn't aware of that.

[kalashnikov]

39. If youre not being sarcstic

then you should read the news.

[DeaconBlues]

5. Looks like Saddam put one over on that idiot W

just like he did Bush Sr. And now we are all paying for it.

[WeirdSceneGoldmine]

6. How hard can it be to blow yourself and others up

In the larger scheme of things most people don't want to die while blowing up others - especially if there are innocents involved. The people doing this have been educated by very bad people. The good news is that there is a limited number of these type of sick people.

That said, it's time to pull out of Iraq and let them sort it out.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

8. Your post is a good example of why most Westerners...

...will never understand the mindset of anyone living in the Middle East and/or Asia. Unless we make some real efforts toward understanding their cultures, religions and languages, we will always have conflict at some level.

Whatever Westerners don't understand has to be "sick". Native Americans were believed to have been "sick", too.

[WeirdSceneGoldmine]

9. I'm open to education - unlike some 'westerners'

My grief and confusion is how a person with any conscious or respect of innocent human life can take the life of those that are not guilty of the crime they are punishing them for. If the mindset of people in the ME is one of 'kill them all and let god/allah sort them out' then we either need to educate them or stay the hell away and let them kill each other. There was a time it was ok to club a woman over the head and drag her into you cave to mate. Not too long ago a person of different race was not allowed to vote and had to drink from different water coolers. The saddest fact is that half of the people in the world are below average intelligence.

[paulk]

10. how do you rationalize the thousands of innocent civilians

our army has killed in both Afghanistan and Iraq?

[WeirdSceneGoldmine]

12. I don't

Do you?

[paulk]

26. so you are just as confused by our actions

as the actions of suicide bombers, since the results are the same? Is your grief over the mindset of Coalition fighters who would kill indiscriminately, then let God/Allah sort it out, just as deep as your grief over the ME killers?

[markses]

24. That is also the doctrine of airstrikes, though

if airstrikes "build in" "collateral damage," then the great white US policy makers also consciously "take the life of those that are not guilty of the crime they are punishing them for."

The counter-argument is always: But it is not intentional.

Well of course it is! If you *always* factor in "collateral damage," then you intentionally factor in punishment to innocent people. ALWAYS. That makes that punishment intentional in general, where the insipid excuse is that it is not intentional in particular. To the extent that Western publics accept such behavior, they are little better than the crowds that cheer for suicide bombers, though all manner of rationalizations take hold to smooth these rank acts of murder. In fact, I expect to see several such rationalizations in response to this very post!

[Paschall]

11. How hard can it be to blow yourself and others up?

Depends on: Desperation. National pride. Revenge. And a belief in personal sacrifice.

It seems that at least three of those elements--national pride, revenge, and personal sacrifice--are also part of the mindset among some, if not most, of our troops. The same might be said of our policymakers, except they have eschewed--almost to a man--any personal sacrifice through military service.

But as some Israelis are asking about Palestinian terrorist bombers, "Have we contributed to their despair?" We've certainly killed tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians, offended their national pride and greatly increased their hardships by destroying vital infrastructure, haven't we?

Civilians who resisted the Nazis in WWII also committed attacks they knew would be fatal to themselves. Suggesting it's a question of culture is looking at the situation with "occidentalo-centric" eyeglasses.

[WeirdSceneGoldmine]

13. All this makes me ask...

Why can't people get to know eachother and ignore the leaders that start these wars? Peace is only a friend away.

[markses]

7. Yeee-ikes. Why bury this in the last line

"The enemy is waging a campaign against the occupation," said retired Army Col. Andrew J. Bacevich, who teaches strategy and security issues at Boston University. "In some respects, their campaign manifests greater coherence and logic than does our own."

---snip---

Seems so...

[Media_Lies_Daily]

31. The Iraqis have a clear set of objectives, foremost among them...

...being the removal of "coalition" troops from within Iraq's borders.

What are the objectives of the "coalition" forces? Can anyone tell me?

[The_Casual_Observer]

14. These generals are simple minded nitwits

They don't have any idea who the enemy is, where they are, and what they are going to do next.

This is Bugs Bunny vs Elmer Fudd come to life. The tragic part is that they have ruined the lives of so many innocent people in the process.

[kalashnikov]

16. On the contrary every on was planning for some type of guerilla style

warfare, its just that they didnt anticipate it starting this late in the game.

[Paschall]

21. "Everyone was planning for guerilla warfare?"

Got a link on that?

I had the impression the only "guerilla warfare" we expected was the struggle with the deluge of carnations and roses the Iraqis were gonna toss at us.

[kalashnikov]

22. Every magazine I happened to read (time, us news, etc.)

was constantly talking about the dangers of urban guerilla warfare.
sorry I dont have a link but im sure u can google up some stuff.

that was also the reason for the fast dahs towards baghdad, they wanted to quickly overwhelm the enemy before it could engage in pitched urban battles where the army would be forced to fight house to house.

I also belive the US army sent a team to Israel to find out how they fought in the streets of West Bank towns. Before the War of course.

[Nihil]

25. The land of peace and harmony?

> I also believe the US army sent a team to Israel to find out how
> they fought in the streets of West Bank towns. Before the War of
> course.

Ah, that explains the calm, understanding way in which the US army
has won the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people then.

Strange how learning the Israeli army tactics has produced exactly
the same result in Iraq as it did in Israel (i.e., suicide bombers).
Those who do not learn from history ...

Nihil

[leesa]

28. Fantasyland! No it's the Iraqis fighting to protect their

country. Many of them were soldiers and ALL of them are highly motivated, why wouldn't they fight?

[Junkdrawer]

32. Saddam Hussein is the boogieman used to prevent our exit....

In other words, as long as Hussein is on the loose, he can be used as both the reason why we can't leave and as the reason we should believe that the majority of Iraqis still want us there. Thus there is no native insurgency, but rather "a small group of Saddam loyalists, aided by foreign terrorists" that we fight.

Wouldn't surprise me in the least if we knew EXACTLY where Hussein is, dead or alive.

[msmcghee]

34. The idea of sacrificing one's life . .

. . is what happens when most people in the world get involved in a military conflict.

Being a citizen of a superpower is different. Joining up means using unlimited firepower to kill swarthy people who have no comparable armaments like GPS, computer communications and smart bombs. Most US GI's consider themselves invincible - at least until they get there - and find out what people with a lot of determination who are not afraid to die, are capable of.

It's not cultural. In WWII there were many American GI's who knowingly sacrificed their lives realizing we were up against a powerful enemy and the stakes were enormous. It's just what humans do when we run out of other options.

A huge mistake that Americans make - even some in this thread - is assuming that no one in their right mind is willing to die for a cause - because we aren't, and everyone is just like us, right?