Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

US Military Arming Insurgents....er...."Freedom Fighters"

Discussion in 'Legal' started by Thin Black Line, Jun 12, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Thin Black Line

    Thin Black Line Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2005
    Messages:
    3,213
    Location:
    Amerikan Twilight Zone
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/06/12/niraq612.xml
    I did a deployment in Iraq with part of that time in Baghdad. I fail to see how
    a retinal scan would determine if someone had pushed the button on an IED
    or launched a mortar in the past....
     
  2. El Tejon

    El Tejon Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    18,085
    Location:
    Lafayette, Indiana-the Ned Flanders neighbor to Il
    When I read stories like this, I always remember the scene from the Lord of War when Nick Cage in the interview room is explaining the facts of life to Ethan Hawke.:D

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXLEhVAyspU

    I always get a warm fuzzy feeling watching that part.:)
     
  3. Thin Black Line

    Thin Black Line Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2005
    Messages:
    3,213
    Location:
    Amerikan Twilight Zone
    I never saw LoW and I think I was in Iraq when it came out.

    In any case, there's a certain amount of irony here when the US gov't will
    trust "former" Iraqi insurgents with automatic weapons, but not a new
    generation of Americans
    .....
     
  4. El Tejon

    El Tejon Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    18,085
    Location:
    Lafayette, Indiana-the Ned Flanders neighbor to Il
    The American government needs to control us so they can tax us to pay for the Welfare State that keeps the government in control.
     
  5. Titan6

    Titan6 member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,745
    Location:
    Gillikin Country
    TBL- I said the same thing in another thread. This is not actually new though and has been going on for some years. Depending upon where you were the militia has played a role since very early on in the war sometimes fighting side by side with us sometimes against us. Sometimes just ignoring us.

    I am sure you are aware that this has little to do with the people on the ground. It took a long time but we seem to have come to the stunning realization that the people do what the local chieftan or mullah tells them to do most parts of the country and that is about it. I don't know why we knew this Afganistan and could not in Iraq, but when you consider how poor some of the intel was it is not that surprising.

    I never saw LoW either.
     
  6. MrRezister

    MrRezister Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2004
    Messages:
    144
    Location:
    Little Rock, AR
    Am I just naieve and/or ignorant in believing that this is exactly the sort of strategy that has come back to bite us in the past?

    "Let's help out the marginally-less bad guys until they can kill off or control the really bad guys."? That's it? That's our plan for ensuring stability in Iraq?

    I'm just a stupid, cake-eating civilian, but that plan doesn't even pass the common-sense test. The enemy of my enemy isn't necessarily my friend.
     
  7. Marshall

    Marshall Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    5,569
    Location:
    Oklahoma, Green Country
    You sure we're not just talking them into killing each other?
     
  8. jselvy

    jselvy member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2007
    Messages:
    518
    Who do I have to kill for the Federal Forces to give me a weapon?

    Jefferson
     
  9. MD_Willington

    MD_Willington Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2005
    Messages:
    3,692
    Location:
    Canuck in SE WA State.
  10. Lone_Gunman

    Lone_Gunman Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    8,056
    Location:
    United Socialist States of Obama
    Our leaders havent done anything right in Iraq since Saddam was captured.
     
  11. Zoogster

    Zoogster Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2006
    Messages:
    5,096
    This is because they are likely to be pulled out after the next election. They no longer have visions of peace there or accomplishing that goal before they leave. The best they can hope for now is the elimination of who they see as the worst people to leave around to grab power when they pull out. Who better to hunt down al-Qa’eda forces than the very Sunni that share the same branch of Islam and therefore deal directly with them?

    Will some of the help end up in al-Qa’eda's hands? You bet. Will some of these people used to kill off al-Qa’eda look around for thier new enemy later which could be Americans or most definately Shiite backed government's like the one in Iraq? Yes.

    Remember that al-Qa’eda itself has its roots in just this type of power play. People armed and trained through American and Pakistani (as the middlemen for America) intelligence to be the best terrorists possible in order to fight the Soviets invading Afghanistan. Bin Laden was but a wealthy son at that time who traveled to help other Muslims fight Jihad against the soviets.

    It was during that time that he became sophisticated. It was at that time that formal and organized training for terrorism began. When entire camps dedicated to teaching people how to operate in cells, or on thier own, to build weapons on location from common supplies etc began. Where these actions and Islam were entertwined and reinforced through teaching creating a fighting force that never loses morale (something already being done by Arab writers since the creation of Israel, so sources for such propoganda was widely available to modify and distribute for the purpose at hand).

    Had we not created this Islamic weapon then we might not be facing them now. However the Soviet Union may not have gone broke fighting it either, and we may have actualy had World War 3 like both sides had been preparing for and come close to for decades. So a greater threat fell. Of course after the soviets fell they would look for a new enemy. Bin Laden offered his forces to Saudi Arabia to fight Saddam instead of having Americans come in at the time of the first Gulf War. They not only refused, but they permanently exiled him from the country as a threat. His path towards targeting America began then.

    No doubt similar people and organizations will form from current policy. However they are also able to document who is being used to fight al-Qa’eda. They will know who the people inclined to be fighters are from this tactic. Currently unknown insurgents will become documented fighters who can be hunted down more easily later if the need arises. They are working with very limited time and the best they can hope for is the elimination of the biggest organized threats before leaving the country ripe for civil war and power grabs without those threats present when they pull out.

    This will give a better chance for what emerges to succeed. This is not what people want to hear so they are not going to be told it. But the military brass no doubt knows that after the next election the operations in Iraq will be forced to cease. Only small clandestine operations and intelligence personal will be able to dictate things on the ground after the American forces are withdrawn. So they are creating a better environment for that now. They cannot work with al-Qa’eda, so they must be killed off before support is withdrawn along with other organized threats. However simply killing them off would not stop them from coming right back after we left. Making them enemies of the people that will still be there and they depend on for support however will be more decisive.

    However one of the interesting things about the term al-Qa’eda is that you can say anyone has links to al-Qa’eda because what is a link? Technicaly America has links to al-Qa’eda, and anyone in the business of world politics or warfare has links to al-Qa’eda just like they have links to eachother.

    However that term allows groups at will to be lumped in with those who attacked Americans and therefore basicly allows unopposed unrestricted actions to be taken against them and thier assets if they are deemed a problem.

    Of course telling the American troops or public what they are fighting for now is not a wonderful Iraq, but the lesser of many evils before withdrawing would be a serious blow to the morale of the fighting force so they could never do that. Instead they keep up the pretense of a great Iraq while doing all they can to identify the key leaders in the future power play and mapping out thier organizations so the Intelligence people have something to work with later on. This means they must pit them against eachother and work side by side with some of them to gain more knowledge. It also means they must get rid of the elements not fighting for Iraqi reasons such as al-Qa’eda types so that only people with clear logical motives centered in Iraq are present in force during the upcoming civil war. That way whoever wins, they will control Iraq for the benefit of some in Iraq, not as a tool in some global ongoing war that will then need to branch out.

    You cannot get rid of deeply embeded insurgents as an outsider. You must embrace people that have fought you and killed your own troops who are actualy capable of doing it at a much faster pace because they are closer to them than you are. Al-Qa’eda is Sunni. If we can divide al-Qa’eda from the Sunni population in Iraq prior to withdrawing from Iraq then we are more likely to be able to work with the forces that come to control Iraq after we withdraw. Unfortunately they are working on a very limited timeline and this is the best strategy available. The perfect Utopia and "free Iraq" is not going to emerge before we withdraw. So it is time to start stacking the deck in the favor of US interests prior to withdrawing. That means dividing true Iraqi patriots (both our friends and enemies) from foriegn fighters, and mapping out the organizations and personel in control so agencies like the CIA know what they are dealing with when we no longer have forces on the ground.
     
  12. Art Eatman

    Art Eatman Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2002
    Messages:
    43,775
    Location:
    Terlingua, TX; Thomasville,GA
    The way I read it, even the Sunnis are fed up with outsiders from Syria and Iran coming in and both fomenting locals to go to shooting, plus being shooters, themselves.

    It has long been the case in the Arab world that "The enemy of my enemy is my friend." That holds as long as the enemy is mutual. The friendship ends with the end of the enmity with a mutual enemy. That's what we did not learn from the USSR/Afghan issue.

    Stipulate for the moment that this Sunni effort does indeed help end the Al Qaida problem in Iraq. We pull back from any perceived sort of "occupation" duty, and the Sunnis then revert to enmity with the Shiites--and the Shiites are more numerous. If the end of active shootings then permits an inflow of serious oil money, any reasonable amount of prosperity can make for a quieter Iraq.

    IOW, it's a "wait and see" deal, coupled with, "Let us pray."

    Art
     
  13. Titan6

    Titan6 member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,745
    Location:
    Gillikin Country
    You have the right idea Art. But everyone knows the next president will be elected on the basis of ending the war, therefore the clock is ticking. My upcoming tour will likely be my last and hopefully now that we are getting pointed in the right direction most effective.

    The president is right. If we pull out now the country will fall into anarchy from the power vacuum. This will create all kinds of chaos in the region. So hope and prayer are certainly in the plan.
     
  14. slewfoot

    slewfoot Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2007
    Messages:
    52
    We should have been arming the Sunni tribes from the beginning.
     
  15. cbsbyte

    cbsbyte Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2005
    Messages:
    1,978
    Location:
    Cradle of Liberty
    I say arm all sides, then pull our forces out and let them kill each other off.
     
  16. wjustinen

    wjustinen Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2006
    Messages:
    235
    Location:
    Beaumont, AB Canada
    The problem is that

    it is always the .gov forces, the insurrgent forces, the warlords, the rebels, the militias that are armed. Never the average joe. In any situation of this type the factions causing the problems are always a small part of the population and their support from the "civilian" population is at best tenuous.

    That support is often passive, fueled by fear of the "rebels" or hatred of the .gov forces. Solution: arm the "civilian" population, remind them that it is their country - not the .gov or rebel - and let them work it out.

    Unfortunately, that flies in the face of the desire to "support" a government that will be on "our side." Government should only represent their citizens, not someone elses interests.

    2A is simply a statement of a right that belongs to everyone, everywhere; the reason given for not allowing infringement applies to every nation struggling with vicious .gov vs rebel violence in which the civilian population suffers untold harm.
     
  17. Caimlas

    Caimlas Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2006
    Messages:
    1,690
    Location:
    SD
    Some would say that the point of being there is either to establish and hold a beachhead for an eventual attack into Iran and Syria, and/or to destabilize the region to drive up the price of oil of those who have oil in other parts of the world - Venezuela, the US, Northern Europe, and Russia, as far as I know. Considering that certain US officials has been kinda buddy-buddy with VZ lately, and that the others are "the usual suspects" in terms of establishment control, well... it at least sounds plausible from this layman's perspective.
     
  18. jselvy

    jselvy member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2007
    Messages:
    518
    Why don't we just airdrop Liberators all over the place and let 'em get on with it?


    Jefferson
     
  19. Prince Yamato

    Prince Yamato Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2006
    Messages:
    4,411
    Location:
    Texas
    You know, all along, I've wondered, "why don't we just let the SOBs kill each other"...
     
  20. Thin Black Line

    Thin Black Line Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2005
    Messages:
    3,213
    Location:
    Amerikan Twilight Zone
    I believe this is called "blowback" and yes it has.

    This was fairly typical given the couple of times I saw training done by both
    Army and PCs of IA in different locations. Not surprising given that they
    collectively threw down their arms under Saddam when we invaded. However,
    it seems every Iraqi household was allowed to have firearms, even full auto
    AKs, under Saddam.

    When will a freedom-loving American president undo 1986?
     
  21. nemoaz

    nemoaz member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2006
    Messages:
    575
    Sunnis and Shias are going to kill. Sometimes themselves, sometimes each other. Our policy should be to get out of the way... and assist them in killing each other as much as possible.

    And the down side is........
     
    Last edited: Jun 13, 2007
  22. LAK

    LAK Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2004
    Messages:
    2,487
  23. ilcylic

    ilcylic Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    1,002
    Location:
    Desert Southwest, USA
    Oh, hey, I've got a great idea! I heard there's this guy that wants to fight our enemies too! Let's give him guns. He had a really wierd name though. Usa... osaa... Osama. That was it. Osama Bin Laden. He helped before, maybe he can help again!

    What could possibly go wrong!
     
  24. davec

    davec Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Messages:
    302
    Location:
    Bayonne, NJ
    Who blew up that mosq today?
     
  25. ServiceSoon

    ServiceSoon Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2006
    Messages:
    1,404
    Location:
    Michiana
    We would save billions and billions and billions of dollars that could be given back to the people who this money was taken from, cure cancer, build a giant wall on the US/Mexican border, finally build flying cars, solve world hunger..... :p
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page