First, they are not "insurgents". Stop listening to rhetoric and instead read your dictionary: an insurgent is "an opponent to a constitutional government". The US is NOT the constitutional government of Iraq; they are an occupying army, hence those fighting the US are a _resistance_.
Second, if you wonder why they are losing, read on:
1) The US military is poorly equipped for urban warfare (you can thank Chicken George and Dumb Donald Rumsfelch for that).
2) You can't win a fight on the other guy's territory, nobody ever has except by genocide (ie. the British in Tasmania)
3) The US desperately tries to avoid even a single death, meanwhile the opposition are _willing_ to die in a 20:1 ratio. Even with that numeric advantage, the US doesn't have the heart, spine or stomach to fight a war of attrition. The resistance does.
In any fight, winning requires being able or willing to do what the other guy won't. The US clearly doesn't have the balls to do what it needs to do to win. And anyone who whines about the resistance's tactics (as some "answerers" have) is an idiot. These whiners seem to expect the resistance to walk in a line like the British redcoats, walking along and making it easy to shoot them.
As Donald Rumsfelch said, "You go to war with the army you have, not the army you'd like to have". The resistance have AK-47s, IEDs, suicide bombs and Molotov cocktails; guerilla war is the only way the resistance can win, so someone has to be stupid and infantile not to expect it.
Let's not also forget: the tactics of guerilla warfare (hit and run, shrapnel bombs, dressing in civilian clothes) were tactics the _US_ used to fight the British. And now these crybabies soil their diapers when an resistance uses the same tactics against them? If they don't like it, shouldn't do it, or better yet, go home and stop whining about it.
.
2007-03-03 18:37:41
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
We are, but you have people dressed up as civillians that jump out of a croud just spraying bullets from an AK. Or people dressed as civillians strapping a bomb to them, or there children, and detonating it at US forces.
America has a larger military force than the insurgents, I dont see how much longer the insurgents can go w/o having no men left; the death toll is one American to 78 militants in Iraq (the last I heard, might have gone up or down a little since then).
So everytime the media tells you 2-3 Americans died in a roadside bomb; remember that 156-234 Iraqi Insurgents died for those 2-3
2007-03-03 16:02:29
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
4⤋
An AK 47 is just as good as any other rifle don't you know. So whats this basic weapons stuff. You have to shoot and get shot at. That is the idea of urban warfare.
2007-03-03 16:16:36
·
answer #3
·
answered by K. Marx iii 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
It's easier to snipe and attack at random than go door to door on a fixed routine and route. And these "rag tags" are getting expert advice and training, plus they get to use civilians as human shields and run around dressed like women. If the marines aren't properly equipped, it's not teh fault of reps that dems have voted against every appropriation bill unless the military agreed to buy useless or unwanted goods from certain politician's districts.
2007-03-03 16:02:13
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
3⤋
Erudite, whats this "WE" you claim? Unless you've a rodent in your pockets theres no we. You've never served, and frankly I dont think you'd like it(other than the showering in groups part)
And remember day by day those Marines put insurgents into the hurt locker, one 5.56mm at a time.
Now enjoy that timberlake poster...
2007-03-03 21:29:11
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
The "actuality" you talk of seems to be that which you decide directly to be so, and not supported with the help of any guidance different than your say so on the debate board. If the yank militia struggling with guy (woman) replaced into allowed to unharness their potential to the completed volume and abilities of their weapons and practise, it could be over in minutes. we are hobbled with the help of Western notions of habit, morality and collateral harm. individuals have and could die or substitute into casualties quite than react with the comparable techniques as their enemy. each and every civilian existence is extra substantial to a US serviceman, than that's to those of their own lifestyle. I had no illusions as to the stumbling blocks, the two tactically and politically, dealing with our forces until now the incursion into Iraq. you do no longer look to have a extensive scope and attitude on worldwide matters, particularily militia affairs. all of it seems so cookie cutter sparkling to those who've never had to take super threat or make puzzling judgements on any point. in case you decide directly to attempt your thought on the "pee poor" militia, come out style in the back of the protection and anonimity of the main board, and p.c.. a combat with one.
2016-10-02 08:36:25
·
answer #6
·
answered by koltay 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
The people killing them are cowards, they hide in the dark, sneak around behind children, and hide under their mother's skirts...
They set up bombs to kill many innocents.. they don't care who they kill because they consider anyone in the controlled areas as a traitor and enemy...
They don't believe that the USA is trying to help EVERYONE in Iraq with a better government than than the one they had while living under a Tyrant.. but they have lived and fought under those conditions for many centuries in the area and they think that it is normal...
It does not take a trained soldier to create terror.. any person with the right materials and information can make a bomb to kill people.. and our soldiers cannot watch every piece of ground to prevent bombs from being planted...
If we had gone in and blanket bombed Baghdad during the Iraq/Kuwait war then many of these problems would not exist...
But, we have the most powerful military in the world and the US citizens prevent our government from abusing that power (at least to some extent we do).
2007-03-03 16:16:50
·
answer #7
·
answered by ♥Tom♥ 6
·
1⤊
3⤋
Probably because you can't anticipate every ambush that's going to hit you. The VC in Vietnam were great at hit and run tactics that were highly effective- but neither they, nor the Iraqi insurgents, can stand up to us in a face to face firefight. We tear them up.
2007-03-03 15:58:52
·
answer #8
·
answered by MacLeod_73 4
·
7⤊
1⤋
Because the insurgents are defending their country what would you do if somebody invaded your country for your own good you would fight for it until it is liberated.
2007-03-03 18:53:44
·
answer #9
·
answered by molly 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
Unfortunately they are not so rag tag anymore. They are being trained by Iran, and have been given Iranian weapons. So the enemy is more sophisticated now.
2007-03-03 15:59:36
·
answer #10
·
answered by J S 4
·
4⤊
2⤋