Is This Hussein's Counterattack?

Discussion in 'Middle East - General' started by jimnyc, Nov 13, 2003.

  1. jimnyc
    Offline

    jimnyc ...

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2003
    Messages:
    10,113
    Thanks Received:
    244
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    New York
    Ratings:
    +246
    ** What do you guys all think, is Saddam behind the attacks or is it just unruly insurgents & terrorists fighting the occupation?**

    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 (news - web sites) that they could not take on the U.S. military with conventional forces, these officers believe, the Baath Party government cached weapons before the Americans invaded this 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."

    http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...ashpost/20031113/ts_washpost/a34071_2003nov12
     
  2. SLClemens
    Online

    SLClemens Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    Given the chance he had seven months ago to engage us in urban combat with a force of tens of thousands I really doubt this. He didn't even take such simple precautions as blowing up bridges and mining roads. From all indications there was no organization whatsoever to Iraq's defense and I strongly suspect that many of the top generals were bribed (it would be interesting to know what's happening to them now, if that was the case).

    I find it interesting why we need to keep searching for answers to who, exactly, these insurgents are. It seems too obvious to me that they likely come from a wide variety of sources. Are they anti-American terrorists, anti-Western terrorists, Saddamites, Baathists, no-hopers, just plain dickheads, people who lost family and friends to American soldiers, people who've felt humiliated by our soldiers, people who think we're stealing their oil, common thugs who now have an excuse to kill, Islamist or secular, foreign or local? I'm quite sure it's all of the above. The ony thing they have in common is their enemy.
     
  3. jimnyc
    Offline

    jimnyc ...

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2003
    Messages:
    10,113
    Thanks Received:
    244
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    New York
    Ratings:
    +246
    That and the desire to see state run terrorism reign. Not to mention the violence that is apparently imbedded in them.
     
  4. SLClemens
    Online

    SLClemens Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    I don't think they do all wish to see state terrorism reign, and some attacks have clearly been planned so as not to involve civilians (shooting down a helicopter in a rural area, for instance, or hitting US military bases with mortors when there are no civilians in the blast area). Some of them, I'm sure, dream of a peaceful and prosperous Iraq free of American interference, with Iraq fully in control of its incredible resources and free from the humiliation of an occupying power. Some of them most certainly wish to see state terrorism reign. But we're not dealing with state terrorism here; we're dealing with anti-state terrorism, and this is almost impossible to control.

    I see a few patches of black and white, but mostly just shades of gray, albeit a fairly dark gray.
     
  5. rtm
    Online

    rtm Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    haha jimmy, you sound frightened? Is it not normal for them to fight off occupiers?
     
  6. jimnyc
    Offline

    jimnyc ...

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2003
    Messages:
    10,113
    Thanks Received:
    244
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    New York
    Ratings:
    +246
    What in the hell do I have to be scared about?

    RTM, please stop coming to the board and trying to stir up shit and start contributing instead. If you desire to continue in this fashion, please go elsewhere. We can assist you in doing so if necessary.
     
  7. dijetlo
    Online

    dijetlo Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    Yeah, I think you have a point. I doubt Hussein came up with the plan, he's an idiot, but some bright boy in the Iraqi military aparently had a brainstorm. At this point we have to worry that the resistance groups are sharing support and intel so you might expect to run into itinerant mujahdeen with brand new Iraqi weapons. That would confirm the existance of a hidden arsenal as well as the overall cooperation between the groups.
     
  8. NightTrain
    Offline

    NightTrain VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2003
    Messages:
    1,425
    Thanks Received:
    87
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Wasilla, Alaska
    Ratings:
    +87
    Yeah, I'm with ya, Jim... he has contributed no meaningful conversation whatsoever & actually is quite annoying.

    He ranks up with the 'Can you hear me now?' geek on the irritation scale.
     
  9. NightTrain
    Offline

    NightTrain VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2003
    Messages:
    1,425
    Thanks Received:
    87
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Wasilla, Alaska
    Ratings:
    +87
    There was some organization, but I agree that quite a few key players were sidelined by threats / bribes. I remember reading a news article about how prior to hositilites the Pentagon spammed all the officers with a message telling them it was futile to fight and they would be personally held responsible if they obeyed an order to use WMDs. Pretty slick.

    Another possibility is the Iraqi armed forces vividly remembered how outclassed they were in Desert Storm and they knew it was hopeless to fight & die for a lost cause. There was a large campaign aimed at the Iraqi troops telling them to surrender or to lay down their arms and go home.

    Since this time the declared goal was to roll all the way to Baghdad, a great many may have decided that they didn't want any part of it again.



    I think Saddam is behind the attacks & the continued resistance. Once he's captured or killed, things will quiet down.

    Communication has to be a major problem for Saddam, I would guess that he's relying on couriers to hand carry dispatches since using any sort of radio, online computer or phone would be suicide. This would account for the apparent lack of coordination of the resistance.

    I have yet to see any indication of any concern on the part of the Iraqis to avoid civilian casualties. I still remember the scene where a gunman was standing in a doorway pointing a gun and holding a small child in front of himself as a shield.... there were many cases of this sort of behavior. In another apalling case there were several fighters sniping from the basement of a building & when the building was rushed by Marines there were about 20 children & young women standing in doorways and windows.

    It's possible, Clemens... but I think the helicopter & the other attacks were just targets of opportunity.
     
  10. SLClemens
    Online

    SLClemens Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    They may just be targets of opportunity, hit by the same people organizing the car-bombing of civilian targets. But striking a military vehicle of an occupying army away from civilians is not a terrorist act.

    As for Saddam, if he's highly involved in insurgency he's taking a very different path from what his sons were doing. I think it would be in his best interest to try to hole up and just send the occasional dispatch. It will be interested to see what happens if they find him (in which case they'll likely kill him on the spot). I'll be interested to see your explanation for guerrilla and terrorist attacks if they continue at a high rate after such time. If anything I think that Saddam is inspiring insurgents by demonstrating that the US military cannot achieve such a primary objective as finding him. If they can't find him what are the odds of finding you if you're one of the mere 50,000 involved in insurgent opperations, according to the recently leaked CIA memo.
     

Share This Page