Iraq's Bridge Too Far

[sofa king]

http://www.washtimes.com/upi-breaking/20040915-054405-9487r.htm

Off the record conversations with intelligence chiefs in five major European countries -- each with multiple assets in Iraq -- showed remarkable agreement on these points:

-- The neo-con objectives for restructuring Iraq into a functioning model democracy were a bridge too far. They were never realistic.

...

-- The insurgency has mushroomed from 5,000 in the months following the collapse of the Saddam Hussein regime to an estimated 20,000 today, which is still growing. Insurgents are targeting green Iraqi units and volunteers for training and some have already defected to the rebels.

...

-- To cope with the insurgency, the United States requires 10 times the rebel strength -- or some 200,000 as a bare minimum. Short of that number, the insurgency will continue to gain momentum. The multiple is based on the British experience in Northern Ireland for a quarter of a century as well as France's civil war in Algeria (1954-62), when nationalist guerrillas were defeated militarily, but won the war diplomatically. France deployed half a million men to defeat the fellaghas in Algeria.

...

-- Iraq does not facilitate a solution to the Mideast crisis. And without such a solution, the global terrorist movement will continue to spread.

...

-- The "war on terror" is a misnomer that is tantamount to rhetorical disinformation. One can no more fight terrorism than one could declare war on Hitler's Panzers in World War II or Dreadnoughts in World War I. Terrorism is a weapons system that has been used time and again for the last 5,000 years. The root causes are the problem, not the weapon.

__________________________________

Perhaps what is more important than the Reverend Moon's interesting digression from the party line is the fact that this story has been chain-mailed throughout a certain company once CEOed by a certain Vice President.

It would appear as if dissent is being fostered within the ranks.

[ixion]

1. the last, very poignant point...

-- The "war on terror" is a misnomer that is tantamount to rhetorical disinformation. One can no more fight terrorism than one could declare war on Hitler's Panzers in World War II or Dreadnoughts in World War I. Terrorism is a weapons system that has been used time and again for the last 5,000 years. The root causes are the problem, not the weapon.


I really wish the mainstream populace would get this through their heads.

[sofa king]

3. I thought that was interesting, too.

But I have a few disagreements with it.

There are and have been successful "wars" against weapons systems. The crossbow was successfully kept out of Europe for hundreds of years. Guns were outlawed from warfare in Japan.

The power of the dreadnought was curbed by arms limitations treaties, and ultimately totally defeated by naval air power and submarines.

Panzers were effectively, if temporarily, de-clawed thanks to the combined arms power of anti-tank weapons and air power. By 1973, tanks were unable to roam the battlefield with impunity when opposed by a combined-arms system.

I still subscribe to the belief that terrorism is simply a logical continuance of combat raiding strategy. I don't think it's as much of a weapons system as it is a style of warfare--a strategy.

It becomes one of the few options available to an adversary who is committed to fighting against an otherwise overwhelmingly powerful opponent. The strategy of terrorism is defeated by offering better opportunities on political fronts, or by destroying the ideology behind it.

[ixion]

6. sure... I guess my point was that

wars on abstraction are not wars by definition. :-)

[markus]

2. From the pen of the Moonie Prince of Media Darkness himself

This is astounding. Google up the author if you're not familiar with him.

It is sounding more-and-more like the GOP is about ready to cut the NeoCon's loose. The only question is, how do they do that and keep The White House/Bush?

[sofa king]

4. Maybe they don't keep the White House.

Instead, they let us clean up the mess for four years, then attack Kerry for not doing a good enough job of it.

[markus]

5. Nominated for home page--This is Important!

This is the neo-cons starting to come apart from the Bush Administration.

This could be real panic setting in.

This is the best news I've ready in a long while.