insurgency problem in iraq

[Dennis G]

what would you do? How would you deal with the problem? What should the U.S. and its allies be doing. I would like to see some of your thoughts on how you would deal with the guerillas. Please be detailed.

Thanks Dennis

[budanski]

Its called a Moment of Contingency and theres nothing you can really do about it. Its happened throughout every known war in history. No matter how much you plan, this will always happen.

[California Joe]

I don't trust Dennis. He wants details.

[budanski]

Beggars shouldnt be choosey.

[Pojo]

If it was up to me I would just toss out the "war rule book" and do the same exact crap. No more "civilians" everyone in the area of operations is now a combatant. Anyone even seen with a freaking gun will be shot on sight, no more collateral damage bull****. If you think there is a bad guy in a room insides some building freaking level the entire building or tell the residents to give him up. Turn them agains each other so no one wants to be a terrorist or even know one.

Sure resistance may initially increase but they will get the message sooner or later.

:bash:

[Salty Dog]

look at the west bank.

[Pojo]

Thats different we would not need to keep territory just remove the % of the population thats brave enough to pick up arms. Suni (spelling?) triangle needs to be leveled and most of the problem is gone. Then send in the Russians too with no restrictions, they know how to deal with scum like that.

[Ichhabe]

Pojo: I dare you to go in first. Are you willing to do that??????????

[Pojo]

I am not some crazed blood hound but yes i would. I dont care if others will call me a butcher or something like that but this **** has to stop. Extreme times demand extreme measures. You will never get a true resolution unless one side is completely eliminated. Then there is no one left to pick up the same fight again.

The alternative is just as bad anyways it just happens at a slower pace with no real outcome.

:-*$

[Dennis G]

Well I guess I got some good results not as detailed as I wanted :lol: .

[16 OBr SpN]

I already posted some of my thoughts.
I would divide the anti-insurency procedures into two elements: information, and tactics. Each operation starts with information.

Information.
1) Work to get the best intel possible. Use local sources but don't rely on them too much. Work on recruiting own information sources.

2) Linguists. Each platoon should have good linguists who can quickly translate the information right on the spot.

3) Learn the terrain. Knowledge of theater of operation is extremely vital. Soldiers should be able to navigate, and recognize their position with no GPS.

I personally noticed that the US forces are reliant upon centralized sources of info, and decision-making. Insurgents are always on the move, therefore more autonomy should be given to smaller units, in order to quickly engage the insurgents.

Tactics.

1) Around-the-clock patrol of the main roads, and highways.

2) Recon flights of helicopters during night time. Always change the path, and area of operation. Use evasive tactics of hanging above one spot, then above another, and so on; in case of the insurgents having their recon groups working in the area. This is effective in order to conceal the real position of troops deployment.

3) Small, 8-16 men units with APC's should be working in problematic areas. Units should have a massive firepower capability (automatic grenade launchers; machineguns), and air support on a short notice (15-20 minutes away). Leave the APC 4-5 km. away, and move on foot. Always change your approach path. Never show up in the same area repetitively.

4) Sappers with specialized dogs should carry out missions before the column is sent through the respected area.

5) NEVER send a column without a proper recon of the area, and a backup.

6) Keep the low profile of all the operations. Only the command should know the details.

Some practical advices:
If weapons caches is found, away from populated area, do not take it. ****y trap it. There are very many ways. For example, tap with the hand grenades - make them so they blow up right when the ring is pulled out. ;)

If a small enemy group was destroyed in a deserted area, ****y trap their bodies.

It's a very long subject. Not enough time :) I've already posted some of my thoughts in other threads.

Regards,
16 OBr SpN

[James]

Combined Action Platoons/Companies, whatever. See here.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/1997/Go.htm

[duck]

I think Pojo's approach should be tested first in cities like Detroit. Let's slaughter a few thousand poor in downtown areas and the crack and drive-by-shootings will be gone. Everyone with a gun is a legal target, in fact the cops could reverse the drive-by-thing and fire from their patrol car.

[James]

I think Pojo's approach should be tested first in cities like Detroit. Let's slaughter a few thousand poor in downtown areas and the crack and drive-by-shootings will be gone. Everyone with a gun is a legal target, in fact the cops could reverse the drive-by-thing and fire from their patrol car.

Hmm... That is an intruiging idea, but I own a few firearms, and I am a law abiding citizen (I try, anyway ;) ). It would be interesting to get into a running car chase / firefight with cops.

Perhaps I should try a game called Grand Theft Auto. :P

[Pojo]

Testing what testing, we already know it works we just have to do it now. Use that tank shotgun in 360 as you plow over city blocks.

[James]

Extreme times demand extreme measures. You will never get a true resolution unless one side is completely eliminated. Then there is no one left to pick up the same fight again. :-*$

Let's take it to an extreme. By your rationale, the United States should enact a program of genocide against all Arabs. Hell, let's make it all Muslims. Maybe we should conquer the EU and everyone else who doesn't support our national aims. Think about it... :roll:

I am curious - how old are you, and what is your level of education?

[Pojo]

Ahh the feeble speak, I guess you one of the people that thinks things get solved by temporary treaties and empty promises. Such trivial things never stopped anyone from starting wars, invading other countries, executing prisoners, torturing pows, etc.

I see no reason to take it to the extremes you suggesting. Why would you want to kill people that pose no threat to you? For that matter what does it have to do with Arabs or Muslims? I really don't know where you going with your post.

I was merely suggesting that we go all out on our enemies, don't hold back until they all gone. This happens to a degree anyway's there are plenty of cases where the rules "do no apply" I am just saying toss them out from the start. If the enemy chooses not to respect the rules I see no reason why we should have to either. All it does is expose our troops to more casualties while we have to feed and house the asswipes.

[James]

Why would you want to kill people that pose no threat to you? For that matter what does it have to do with Arabs or Muslims?

My apologies for the assumption that you were talking about Iraqis, but this is a quote from a post you made earlier.


Suni (spelling?) triangle needs to be leveled and most of the problem is gone.

I also find it interesting that you made a comment about killing people who pose no threat to me. That kind of contratdicts your position that we should obliterate the Sunni Triangle, no?

Something to think about.


Ahh the feeble speak, I guess you one of the people that thinks things get solved by temporary treaties and empty promises. Such trivial things never stopped anyone from starting wars, invading other countries, executing prisoners, torturing pows, etc.

I might be feeble. If I was, I wouldn't know any better ;) . I am not one of the people who you guess about. I am quite fond of TR's comment about American foreign policy a century ago - "Walk softly, but carry a big stick."
What temporary treaties and empty promises were you thinking of? I would appreciate details. I know that a piece of paper with a signature on it can't stop a damn thing, but I'm curious about what you're referring to,

Please advise.

[Pojo]

To clarify my Sunni triangle comments was because as i understand thats where the "us haters" are concentrated (likely the future source of combatants). Also when I say a threat to us that includes the troops on the ground in the theater. I could easily be one of them someday so its very much a concern to me.

Now let go over there and :bash:

[James]

If you go on active duty, I wish you all the best. PM me if you have any questions for an old 20th century USMC infantryman.

Take it easy.

[martinexsquaddie]

take off and nuke them from orbit
only way to be sure rofl

[duck]

Dr.Doom a familiar figure to you, Pojo?

[ßå$tĮТHÏ¿ð]

I'm not in the army but if I was in charge here's how I would run it.

1, Get good intelligence from reliable sources, money talks. Find reliable sources and use them.

2, Weapons cache's: 1 of 3 things would happen
A)they would be destroyed
B)****y trapped if in the middle of no-were or used as bait in an ambush
C)handed over to the Iraqi police for use as there weapons

3, A quick reaction force to react quickly to events happening in hot spots. These would consist of apc's/troops/helicopters, if available special forces.

4, Helicopter patrols around the clock with differing patrol routes

5, Ground patrols around the clock. Always change there routes, apc's troops and helicopters for daytime. Tanks helicopters troops apc's you name it its there at night time.

6, Local support, to effectively fight the insurgents you have to have support from the locals. This would be done by things like electricty, food, running clean water, ect. They will be more likely to help if they also feel safe.

7, Ambushes, setup ambushes at weapons cache's. Snipers on roof tops.

But thats how I'd run it. I'm not a general and all but theres my 2 canadian cents worth.

[Roger Rabbit]

I reckon theres two ways to defeat insurgents.

1)Kill every last one of them, any who support them, family, children, you know the whole genocide thing.

2)Hearts and minds.

Personally, not being too keen on the whole mass murdering stuff, i think the hearts and minds might work a bt better.

[Javehn]

The situation is different between west bank and Iraq , but some things can be learned .
First of all , soldiers as soldiers making targets . But if U.S. politics thinks that soldiers presence is still necessary there , then soldier should do this :
-sence hearts and minds are still one of goals , there should be done much work in defence .
1)defending the vehicles , and upgrading them at list to boolet proof level (that they can learn from IDF , and learning it ) . Many soldiers using open vehicles , making the shooting on them without any problems. Defending also the main bases , and making them stand on terror attack , and direct / indirect weapon shooting inside the base . Less soldier presence "on the open" . If soldiers wants to show presence , instead of foot patrol can be done by armored vehicles .
2)Like been said in here , use of local population .Nead to have a good contacts with local population from one said , but to explain them that every action against soldiers will be retaliated.
3)Large consentration of fire power - on every patrol , large ammount of vehicle , to make terrorists think twice. Even if they launched an attack allready , to depress the fire quickly .

4) Most important , "silent" ambushes and overwatch on vital places . Just like the roads used by soldiers to patrol , or drive . Or ambushes on suspected places , or like someone in here said on weapon slikes . Electronical optical overwatch .Also to use soldiers without the uniforms - uniforms mostly cause fear more then respect , and a good way to make some recon .

I myself don't bellieve in usage of soldiers there now . It's better to have police force there of any kind , then soldiers .

[Royal]

1)defending the vehicles , and upgrading them at list to boolet proof level (that they can learn from IDF , and learning it ) . Many soldiers using open vehicles , making the shooting on them without any problems. Defending also the main bases , and making them stand on terror attack , and direct / indirect weapon shooting inside the base . Less soldier presence "on the open" . If soldiers wants to show presence , instead of foot patrol can be done by armored vehicles.

Conducting patrols in armoured vehicles goes completely against the principle of 'hearts and minds' you claim to support. If the CivPop cannot see and talk/interact with the locals there will be no hearts or minds won. This is one of the many reasons that SF and other unconventional units very rarely used armoured vehicles whatever the circumstances.


2)Like been said in here , use of local population .Nead to have a good contacts with local population from one said , but to explain them that every action against soldiers will be retaliated.

As many Isreali's still fail to grasp (maybe due to their interactions with the Nazi's?), retaliation against civilians for the actions of guerrillas/terrorists/freedom fighters/SF or any one else for that matter is a war crime.

[Javehn]

As many Isreali's still fail to grasp (maybe due to their interactions with the Nazi's?), retaliation against civilians for the actions of guerrillas/terrorists/freedom fighters/SF or any one else for that matter is a war crime.


I beg your pardon ??? First of all , that's a big occusation made by you , being false (not mention selfrightios) . And you tottaly then missunderstood me . Where the hell did i wrote above even one little line about retaliation ?? I ment that the millitary force in region should be in good contacts with local population , and to encourage them to disclose any millitant factor amongst them . Also they should be talled that the army will not be tolerant to any attacks . I didn't ment that the army will start to turn every house to ruins , man !! (And where anyway you tooked that idea , that we do it as punishment ?? )



Conducting patrols in armoured vehicles goes completely against the principle of 'hearts and minds' you claim to support. If the CivPop cannot see and talk/interact with the locals there will be no hearts or minds won. This is one of the many reasons that SF and other unconventional units very rarely used armoured vehicles whatever the circumstances.


Again . I explain it better . I just suggest to understand the realitty , and not to drive in open vehicles , and walk on the streets like they own the world . It have nothing against interracting with civil population . I am not suggesting that the soldiers will be locked up 24 hours inside APC's , i suggest that they should be much more carefull then they are know. You can keep a very good local interaction with that fact , bellieve me , it have nothing to do with one another .

But again , as i said . Soldier will be always targets . No matter how good they will be to local population , or how good they will armor themselfes , and even if everyday they will change they routine , there will be always attacks on them (take again the west bank as example ) . No need at my opinion to have soldiers in there , because for now they just making situation worse ( soldiers are good in war times , in peace times they looked bad from local population , specially in Arab/Muslim culture ) . Hell , bring police , or have security , but the army needs to be out now .

[Pojo]

Here is some of my thought (i know many of you dont wanna hear them p-) ). Pulling back into firebases would have some upleasant side effect I would imagine. Giving the terrorists a chance to regroup and to concetrate their efforts on just a few big targets. Pulling back on the amount of patrols will also send a clear signal that we iether dont care or afraid to be in the citys. This lack of power projection would also allow the war lords to gain support and territory making it even harder to deal with them later.

I really dont see how any half measure will ever solve this, we have to toss the "war book" and deal with them in a very cruel but effective way. Assasinations, on the spot executions and bribing for intelligence all have to become standard ops if we ever to secure Iraq.

I guess we could put sirens and stuff on the humvs and abrams to make them look like the policia.

rofl

[California Joe]

Iraq is a mecca for terrorists now. Sales pitch......"Kill an American in your own backyard, using a gun and looking macho too therefore keeping your annoying wife in line all at the same time. Why bother using up all your vacation time at the exotic animal zoo/wood chipper execution site to fly to America to kill them and possibly yourself if your shoes explode. Join now, our virgins are waiting for you in heaven, Mmmmmmm hot, hot virgins anxious to satisfy all your needs. Sheep costumes optional....Grrrrrrrr call now....

[Argyll]

Pojo? is that some kind of slang for "complete and utter asshole"?
Buddy you ain't got a fuc*ing clue,I suggest you keep you stupid BS comments for the counterstrike forums as it's pretty obvious you are not fit to lace a serving soldiers boots with idiotic comments like that
Toss the warbook rofl
Toss your half brained ideas more like
I'd love to see you in a firefight you retard,you'd have piss running down your leg,as you have no grasp of modern warfare whatsoever!

[California Joe]

Nice, I'm being funny and you're yelling at the crippled retards. Some pal you are.

[Pojo]

Sheesh Argyll of course I know it will never happen in the current PC world we live in. Thats why we going to be in Iraq for another 5 years and nothing will really improve. Yeah we gonna loose another few thousand soldiers but hey at least we stuck to the rules. Yay for us we so great... killed lots of people, lost lots of people all for nothing... yay...

:roll:

[Argyll]

I ain't got the time of day with nutters who THINK they can do a better job than the Military currently in place especially with ideas as stupid as "toss the rule book" attitude,Real war is different from Conterstrike and AAO.
The remarks go against What the Western Coaltion Forces are about,I'd love to get the rule book and shove it right up Pojo's arse,as it 's the only way he would be able to digest it!
While hes at it perhaps he could read the Geneva convention,while at the proctologist havin the aforementioned book removed from his rectum!!!

[Pojo]

Ohh yeah the japs used that book for exactly that wipe their ass with, the chechens and the afgans loved to start fires with it too. Even the germans tossed it to a point, all it does is restrict effective military tactics. I think our miliatry is doing an incredible job under the pressure of having to pay lip services to stupid obsolete rules of war. If they could operate with no such crap looking over them they could be even more effective.

Its time to update the rules so that if your enemy refueses to obay them you should not have to either.

[Argyll]

Its these very rule books that make our Armies what they are
Proffesional Soldiers,bound by an oath of allegiance,to uphold honor and tradition .........not lower the standards and morality of the way our Armies have been for Hundreds of Years.
Yeah lets all roll into a town and just shoot every man over the age of 10,as they have the potential to become terrorists and insurgents!
You forget one thing here ...............we are invaders of THEIR country.
Would you do as they do if the Soviets or Cubans invaded the USA .....bloody right you would,and do you think they would label you a terrorist /insurgent too,bloody right they would!
The Germans who carried out the atrocities in WW2 and also the japs were tried and executed in accordance to Military Law.......you Never heard of the Nuremberg trials where many of the top Nazis were held accountable for their actions and were formally executed?
Is that what you want to see happen to Bush,Gen Sanchez,TonyBlair,as they would all be in violation of the same articles of war these Nazi's were!!

[James]

Ohh yeah the japs used that book for exactly that wipe their ass with, the chechens and the afgans loved to start fires with it too. Even the germans tossed it to a point, all it does is restrict effective military tactics.

If you are referring to the Japanese and Germans in World War 2, I would like to point out that they lost the war, very badly, to Allied forces who by and large did play by the rules. I don't think that Chechen sepratists have accomplished much by discarding "The Rules", but then again the Russians seem to have a slightly different set of "Rules" than the U.S. or UK. I am not an expert there, but I hope one of our Russian friends on this site will add some insight. And Afghanistan... a country that didn't play by the rules you refer to was taken apart by less than 1000 Allied soldiers in less than two months. Those Allied soldiers did play by the rules.

I hope some of you have looked at the link I posted for the CAP effort in Vietnam and Somalia. I found it interesting, and I think that some of that experience has taken hold - joint U.S./Iraqi security patrols, for instance. Civil Affairs units can help a lot. NGOs can get in there. I think having good combat units on hand to deal with the insurgency is only a part of the solution.

[California Joe]

I'm just figuring that if you pissed off Argyll you're probably a major ****head. In the army of ****head's, not smart enough to make change at Wendy's so you'll end up selling your ass for crack in some tenement that was vacated by rats because it was sub standard. Good luck with that. Say hello to Adam.

[duck]

Pojo, try Blood & Honour or the KKK, you will find many fellow ret...comrades there.

[Roger Rabbit]

Pojo=young person, strange ideas, quite probably harbouring racist feelings, no military experience, little to none useful or modern military knowledge, complete prick.

Argyll=not so young person ;) , military experience, lots of common sense shown on this board, plently of military knowledge, knows more than you on how a situation like Iraq should be handled.

Rupert=sticky brown nose

Anyway my point if Pojo, your ideas are a load of crap. Besides being unrealistic unless you start a genocide, they are unworkable politically, they are inhumane and they are wrong.

[Fox2]

4, Helicopter patrols around the clock with differing patrol routes

Do ya'll think our commanders are using the attack birds to their full extent?

I don't know if they have already done this, but if AH-64s and AH-1s were assigned in support of convoys and such, could it turn the tide of some ambushes? Or even prevent them altogether?

[Pojo]

Ahh yes the "old guard" just because they older they know better, and I am racist and stupid for wanting to give our troops a fighting chance. Well if thats how you feel then we done talking about this topic. Its always fun to read people side with someone they knew for a long time and assume they right by default. Perhpas you should stop turning what I say into some extreme examples to justify your own biases.

I am all for having rules in combat but when your enemy uses that against you something has to be done.

Rupert: thanks for you contribution :roll:

California Joe: thanks for that description of your life

Argyll: i could debate with you the points you brought up but it appears this thread has degraded into name calling and baseless accusations.

[duck]

Pojo, how would you fight crime in your hometown? Just curious.

[Roger Rabbit]

No problem Pojo. If you want to draw up a detailed plan of how you would actually go about dealing with the insurgents then i'm sure a lot of people would be willing to look at it. But while your just going around saying "kill em all" then nobody is going to take you seriously. Oh and "on the spot executions." Reminds me of that Vietmenese Chief of Police executing the suspect in front of the camera crews. (not drawing parellels between Vietnam and Iraq, just saying thats what it reminds me of.)


On topic. Anybody see the Channel 4 news today? Had about 10-15 minutes focusing on "Charlie Company" in Iraq and how they were conducting operations. Also how the troops felt and a brief interview with a British General.

[California Joe]

Wow, I got a mention by name even *sigh* Did you overdose on Megadeath albums or some ****? The fact you even use the term "our troops" annoys me. There is nothing "our" about us. Slide back into the doublewide and get you another beer before you bang your sister and appear on Cops. Retarded freak.

[Pojo]

How would I fight crime? Its just fine the way it is the only problem is that they need do something about the huge prison population. I never though about that but sounds like they just need many more crimes to get the death penalty. There is no point in keeping lifers and I dont think anyone get really rabilitated the entire concept is silly. Trying to convert a crimial into a decent person by treating him like a criminal? Sticking them into a pen with others just like them is supposed to promote change? Most people fold under peer pressure so I would think most of them will just go with the norm. The norm being criminals all we doing is educating them more on how to be criminals. Sounds like someone didnt think that through. Anyways thats an entirely different topic anyways.

California Joe exactly how would you like me to reffer to you? I was brough up to address people by their name I guess that makes me a "retarded freak". Well i guess ill call you "that guy" or something. Hope that makes you happy. Megadeath? what the hell is that supposed to be...

=============================================

First off i would pull out the regular army they not trained for this and their equipment is not suited for the job. Next only special forces and other small highly trained units needs to be deployed in large numbers. Create the same cell structure the terrorists have where they operate with little communication or contacts.

Kiss war rules bye bye and start operating with same tactics as the terrorists. With that I mean shoot first ask questions later, set up traps where they supsect the enemy travels. Take known terrorist supporters and execute them, then set up traps on their bodies. If the enemy uses civilians for cover shoot right through them. Adopt their tactics and use civilians as shield when needed. After capturing or killing enemy high ranking officers hang them in public places for everyone to see.

All our high tech weapons is all crap when it comes to such low level conflict. Just gives them more targets to shoot at and cost the US way too much money.

You want the population and the enemy to be scared of the super crazy troops they are fighting. You want the civilians to be cought in the middle so they dont join either side because there will be severe punishment either way.

[Fox2]

First off i would pull out the regular army they not trained for this and their equipment is not suited for the job. Next only special forces and other small highly trained units needs to be deployed in large numbers. Create the same cell structure the terrorists have where they operate with little communication or contacts.

Kiss war rules bye bye and start operating with same tactics as the terrorists. With that I mean shoot first ask questions later, set up traps where they supsect the enemy travels. Take known terrorist supporters and execute them, then set up traps on their bodies. If the enemy uses civilians for cover shoot right through them. Adopt their tactics and use civilians as shield when needed. After capturing or killing enemy high ranking officers hang them in public places for everyone to see.

All our high tech weapons is all crap when it comes to such low level conflict. Just gives them more targets to shoot at and cost the US way too much money.

You want the population and the enemy to be scared of the super crazy troops they are fighting. You want the civilians to be cought in the middle so they dont join either side because there will be severe punishment either way.

I have a little time on my hands tonight, so I think I'll respond to this.

It saddens me to hear a fellow American propose such things as a means to win a war.

I believe the problem with the thoughts you presented here are that in the end you make more enemies than friends. That tactic may have worked temporarily in the Middle Ages, but in today's world, where you aren't engaging the enemy from 2 feet away with a broadsword, that sort of plan will dissolve quickly into chaos.

What you would end up with, I believe, is roving groups of trained killers looking for something to destroy. Furthermore, they have no knowledge of the location of the other friendlies due to lack of communication. If two of these friendly groups meet, the result might be a massive friendly fire incident.

Also, I don't think the civilians would react the way you predict. Especially in that region of the world, when they see the Coalition troops' indifference to their lives and blood, they would be more inclined to join the resistance. Even add in the idea that the insurgents might have similar indifference to their lives, and when given the decision of which side to join, the general population will most likely want to fight against who they view as the most alien or different from them.

In the end, it would be a lose-lose situation for the US. You would get a long, hard war between two guerilla forces. The insurgents would have an entire nation as an army, and we would have a comparatively tiny group of soldiers. Special Operations is a great tool as a combined asset, but soldiers (even elite ones) are not Supermen. They are human. Perhaps the top percentile of humanity, but human, nonetheless. Any survivors (if there could be) on the U.S. side would have a hard time living with themselves after such a war. Remember that we are in Iraq to help them.

Overall, Pojo, I believe your proposal would be a foolish way to make war and I shudder to think that this could have been brewed inside the mind of a fellow American.

[Argyll]

Pojo
Debate then,I'm calling you out for what you are!
Me I'm BTDT
You= Still in school and play too much Counterstrike.
You have no idea whatsoever about combat other than you think its all so simple!Go and sign up for your country put yourself in the frontline daily,and start ignoring the UCMJ,the Geneva convention,and see what happens when you're in Leavenworth breaking rocks with your hard ass for the rest of your life !
I stand by my original assessment you are naive and clueless,and a slur on the proffessional American Soldiers who have abided by these rules for Hundreds of years.
You are a slur on the guys who are doing a pretty good out there as it is.

Basicaly you're an idiot,and you need to grow up!

[WARPIG]

Hate to show up mid-thread and all but, Pojo.. you're way off on this. I'll tell you why.
I just got back from a military school. Many soldiers I trained with just came from and are going back to the desert.
Saddam captured.. yay! No change in the danger.
Speaking with them.. your proposed "special troops" are already there. They are part of the counter-terror missions. The rest of the troops are security. (Generally speaking) The different missions and needs of that area warrant troops of all kinds to be there. Spec Ops operators are working hard at tracking those guerilla movements. Remember, just 'cause it didn't show up on CNN doesn't mean it didn't happen. Besides that.. what does the news media like to report... explosions, shoot outs, killings, and bombings?? or do they report foiled attacks, bombings and activities because the guerrillas quit before they started?
Security in that region has many parts.. the physical presence of trained, armed forces, active measures to stop attacks before they start, intel, arrests, searches, and the most important one... giving Iraqi's no more reason to attack.
The security in Iraq depends on the "Hearts and minds" mission more than anything. That includes SF guys and the regular joes as well.
I have spoken to both types of soldiers this week. The converstation we had together came to one general conclusion.
Let the Iraqi people know that we are there to stay. Take away the pool of recruits who attack becuase the have nothing else to do. And last, make the Iraqi people decide that they have had enough.. when they start taking the guerilla matter in their own hands and begin to police themselves.. it will be a whole new country.
Ruling that place.. or any other country to include our own... with an iron fist would just create more hatred. If people are simply riding the fence until they decide who they hate less.. do you think your strong arm tactics are going to make more friends?
Our rules of war.. ROE.. UCMJ. and the basic respect for human rights that our soldiers are trying to excercise are what keep us above the rest. If we resort to powermongering then instead of just having to listen to the French and other people simply US-bash.. we would have real enemies on our hands.
Talk about a stupid idea.

[WARPIG]

Just a little testament to our troops. Every one knows that if we wanted to .. we could shut down that country and lock it up tighter than a frogs ass. We have the power and ability to enforce complete Marshall Law on that place if we wanted to. It doesn't accomplish anything. That is not what we are there for. People think we are still there because of WMD, Saddam, or oil. What the hell are we putting our troops in danger for then? We got Saddadm.. we don't care about the WMD because there is no one there to use them now... do you think we need to kiss up to the Iraqi's for oil? We own that piece of dirt now.
Iraqi people. Human beings in need of basic human rights... government.. freedom.. the right to live without oppression. Yeah.. strong arm tactics sounds like a pretty clever idea.