Quote:
Originally posted by sgtclub
I personally think the "insurgency," which is really a misnomer, is being blown out of proportion. We are talking not only about a very small portion of the population, but also a very small portion of the geography. No shadow government, no popular support. In other words, it's a dead end.
|
I think you misunderestimate the severity of the problem.
Club,
The Iraqi Interior Minister may be full of crap, but he said earlier this week that the Iraqi government now estimates the insurgency as involving up to 200,000 participants, with 40,000 "active" participants.
I hope those numbers are high, but if correct they represent about .8% of the Iraqi population as participants, with about .2% "active" in the resistance. Seems small?
Well, this is not an inconsequential number or proportion of a population engaged in armed resistance. That's the rough equivalent of an armed insurgency in America with 2.3 million participants and about 560,000 "active" participants. Even more to the point, its a huge number compared to the summer of 2003.
When you consider that we have, what -- 170K coalition troops plus about 100K local forces in various stages of training, quality, and equipment (generally not high) -- you'll see the counter-insurgency problem. Current doctrine calls for a ratio of troops considerably higher than our current 7:1 ratio to actually suppress a rebellion. [That ratio is generous to both sides, as it accepts the Iraqi number for nsurgents, but counts the Iraqi police and Defense forces (and all coaliton forces) as equally effective on the other side.]
It is true that the vast bulk of its support comes from Sunni Arabs, who are about 25% of the population of Iraq. That is not a "very small" portion of the population. Hopefully enough will decide to support an elected government that we can avoid a full-fledged civil war.
You've apparently missed some reporting on intel discussing large-scale coordination meetings, and "shadow governments" in some some towns and cities (particularly in isolated rural areas) -- levying taxes, etc. The insurgents are apparently engaging in their own "law enforcement" in Mosul.
As for geography -- the insurgency, IIRC is most active in 4 of Iraq's provinces which cover great stretches of the country's territory -- particularly the West, Northwest, and Center.
S_A_M
eta: Why do you think the word "insurgency" is a misnomer? All indications are that a very large proportion of those involved are Iraqis engaged in a battle against an occupying power. The forces of religion, tribalism, etc. all play roles -- but that doesn't mean its not an insurgency.
Also -- it is sometimes helpful to understanding if one considers matters from an opposing point of view. From that point of view:
The fact that we are good people who invaded their country with only the best intentions to help them out (cross our hearts and hope to die) to bring them democracy, and we don't mean to kill civilians (mostly) and have only killed probably about 12,000 or so civilians in the war and since (for perspective -- again, proportional to the deaths of about 135,000 American civilians) and we only blow up what we have to blow up, and are imposing a good system of government that will be the best thing for them in the long run (trust us) doesn't mean that many of those on the other side don't qualify as Iraqi patriots or are insane to oppose oru presence in their country.
