CHESTER HAS MOVED!: After the Fallujah fight, then what? | csmonitor.com

Wednesday, November 10, 2004

After the Fallujah fight, then what? | csmonitor.com

After the Fallujah fight, then what? | csmonitor.com Highlight with notes: On psychological nature of strategy: "If US-led forces take Fallujah with relative quickness and efficiency, Samarra, Ramadi, and other restive regions may decide that harboring insurgents isn't worth it. But if the attack stalls, or causes large numbers of civilian casualties, moderate or politically uncommitted Iraqis might decide that the guerrilla fighters could end up winners, after all." Note: You bet. Taking the worst place down first, and quickly, will make the following battles easier. On the "what if they run away? THEN WHAT, HUH?" attitude: "Furthermore, it's possible that the insurgents will not fight to the last man in Fallujah, but will withdraw and regroup elsewhere, waiting for a time and place to strike again. Samarra has already seen something of this dynamic of retreat and resurgence. Elsewhere, Mosul, Ramadi, and other cities might see an upsurge in violence prior to scheduled elections." Note: Readers, have no doubt that despite our cordoning operations, many insurgents have escaped. Also have no doubt that there will be an uptick in violence in other cities over the next weeks. Also have no doubt that large numbers of insurgents can flee and we can still claim a victory in Fallujah. By fleeing and blowing themselves up elsewhere, they gradually become irrelevant. More on this later tonight. On what this site has termed Phase III: Exploitation, Reconstruction, and Installation of Government "But it may be the battle after the battle that determines which direction Fallujah and other areas of Iraq not now entirely under government control will slide. And that battle - consisting of the stability and nation-building activities that have proven so difficult to this point - will be increasingly out of US hands. "It will be Iraqi politics, governance, economic and aid activity, and military and security forces that ultimately win or lose," says Mr. Cordesman." Note: The US military's velvet-gloved fist will be the deciding factor keeping the Iraqi forces from losing.

4 Comments:

Blogger USMC_Vet said...

"Also have no doubt that large numbers of insurgents can flee and we can still claim a victory in Fallujah. By fleeing and blowing themselves up elsewhere, they gradually become irrelevant. More on this later tonight."

Agreed, LT.

I guess I feel like you were almost addressing me.

My concern is merely that this was what we should have done in April. Unannounced. Without Amnesty.

But...that's why cooler heads make the calls. Seeing charred bodies hanging from bridges celebrated like some sort of Cinco de Mayo has never left my mind.

November 10, 2004 at 6:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It seems that even if some of the insurgents escaped, that they'll be at a much larger disadvantage, if for no other reason than we've captured much of their large weapons caches. How big a difference will it make? How difficult is it to acquire further arms?

November 10, 2004 at 7:52 PM  
Blogger Brian H said...

There's a trade-off; hermetically sealing a city traps civilians inside, too. Chopping up the bases seriously harms the terrorists both logistically and politically, regardless of their death and capture numbers.

November 10, 2004 at 10:37 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

When did they do all this? Last I checked was a week ago. Payday Loans Cash Advance

November 21, 2005 at 10:17 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Listed on Blogwise