How can untrained and lightly armed Iraqi Insurgents with no Air Support can defeat US military?

Answer 1

as we can see it is no great feat to defeat the us military

Answer 2

The Answer is they can't. As for untrained and lightly armed? They are neither. They may not have the formal military training that most soldiers around the world have but they do have training. And arms flow in from across every border.

The biggest threat to the war effort is the media and the local economy here in Iraq. The media can sway the public and the political arena by focusing mainly on the tragic events and not on the good things happening everyday.

As for the economy, Iraq has a very high unemployment rate. If you're unemployed and can barely feed your family and someone offers you 2-3 months worth of wages to go an dig a hole on the side of the road - the only questions you ask are when and where do you want it and how big does it have to be? You could really careless that they're going to plant an IED (Improvised Explosive Device a.k.a. RoadSideBomb).

Two of their biggest assests are that they can blend into the local populace and they can doup the media into believing they are winning. But believing that they are winning is not the same as winning.

Answer 3

This is harder a question to answer as simply as stated, but I will try. Iraqi insurgents are a different type of people then what you are use to seeing. Iraqi culture is completely different. Where you might have no idea why someone would blow themselves up, they have a deeper meaning and belief structure. From personal experience, life can really suck over there and when the only means of salvation and relief from strife is dieing for what you believe in, then they run to it. Don't get it wrong and say that they are lightly armed either. They have access to many harmful chemicals and explosives are relatively easy to make now a days. Now that we explained that we go to the US military. The US military fought and trained for the Cold War for years. Talk about 50 years of hunting for Ivans and preparing for World War. Now we have an unconventional military force with complicated infrastructure that works in small cells that acts with or without leadership or central guidance. That has been fighting for several decades using corruption, violence, and religion as a motivating tool. The US military has not been defeated though. We have lost several of our sons and daughters, but still not defeated. If the US military was defeated we would be invaded and calling ourselves another country by nightfall. My suggestion to the US military is a simple one. Adjust tactics.

Answer 4

I am a non american military officer.My observations are based on reports and accounts of the operations from open sources ( history channel, CNN, us infantry journal etc...):-
1. You are operating too heavy.
2. Its a light infantry battle,little place for tanks, attack helos and artillery.
3. There was an episode a few days back on CNN which showed how casualties took place in an operation conducted by a marine engineer platoon as part of a company size task force.Perhaps the reporter did not cover the specific tactical issues, but several points came to fore: 1.What were scarce valuable specialist engineer troops doing on their own even if they were to set up polling stations? Engineer troops should be able to fire back :that should be the expected extent of their tactical competence. Why were only 70 tps even with AFVs used for the operation where 20-30 insurgents were expected?Why did the convoy drive right up to the village?Reconnaissance teams from the infantry battalion/special forces should have inserted 24-12 hours in advance to keep the village under surveillance.Where were the UAVs?the Task force shold have stopped 4-5kms short of the village and the force should move on foot till 6-700m short of the village.Prelim recce ought to have been done and an outer cordon established.Thereafter the inner cordon and the fire support group moves in.The Iraqi guide should approach the houses closest to the target and observe.then the close cordon would be established and house entry done.If 20-30 insurgents are expected,it is only sensible to assume at least 3-4 sentries would be present :2 close and 2 distant along vantage points/likely routes of approach.(i'm not too clear about night visibility conditions in Iraq). Instead as per the report the entire column of trucks yahooed into the village up to the target house, saw nothing (an immediate ground for suspicion)and moved out through the remaining part fo the town!!And then you are surprised if you buy casualties?The reason apart from many others for the insurgent's success is some lack of professionalism at the tac level(a very painful aspect to acknowledge) and doctrinal resistance to large-scale light infantry operations.

Answer 5

Well just like Vietnam the insurgents have yet to win a battle. However, that is not to say they will not win the war. They are fighting to cause disruption and terror in the civilian population within Iraq. They are also making very effective use of propaganda. Better I think than the VC and NVA ever did.
We were hampered in this fight by the ignorance of our leadership in starting a war without a clear mission statement. Had we went to Iraq to kill or capture Saddam all would have been well. But we went to bring democracy to Iraq. That is a concept that is impossible to measure. So where is the end point?. Hell, I am not always sure we have brought democracy to the US yet. Much less a country with a theocracy. Until someone comes up with a viable exit strategy for Iraq I fear we will continue to flail about.

Answer 6

When you are dealing with a fast moving, hit and run guerilla outfit, although not as well trained as most enemy units are, they have the biggest advantage in their favor. The element of surprise. They also are using IED's that are very deadly against our armored vehicles mainly because the IED's are shaped charges. And, something you might be forgetting about the insurgents is this: Most of their command officers are former fighters against the soviet troops that invaded Afghanistan, they know how to deploy small teams of fighters against a larger more powerful enemy and using guerilla tactics, can inflict great damage upon our troops.
If it came down to an open battlefield with their forces facing off against ours, they would be swiftly eliminated, but when they can blend in with the locals, coordinate their surprise attacks and use their home made IED's against us, they will be a tough foe to defeat.
And, you say they are untrained, this I doubt, because before any of these enemy fighters are sent into Iraq to fight the US led coalition forces, they are trained at camps that teach them the necessary tactics gained from fighting the soviets in Afghanistan.
I was always taught to never underestimate my enemy, and because of this, I am still alive and kicking today. If anything, I will overestimate his capabilities.

Another thing, the insurgents that are Iraqi born fighters may have gained their military training from the Republican Guard Units under Saddam's regime, so they have the knowledge and the skills to conduct this type of warfare against us.

If we can't see them, how the hell can we bomb them? Besides this, after they attack one of our units, they scatter into the populated villages and towns and blend right in with everyone else, since they are not wearing uniforms to tell the fighters apart from the civilian population. This would make me as nervous as a dog shi*tting razor blades. Such tactics does work against our troops, and I have not figured out a way in which we can gain the upper hand, yet, but I will.

Answer 7

The US/Brits have to fight with a set of rules. you've seen the news if a civilian is killed and injured by Allied forces then its big trouble,, the insurgents are killing and maiming willingly.
the Allies could easily burst into peoples homes and drag out all the suspects , shoot the ones they are convinced are insurgents and detain the rest in concentration camps.
but wouldn't go down to well with the rest of the world would it. just look at Guantanamo bay.
remember the Allies are uniformed targets. the insurgents shoot hide their guns and blend back into the city. The Allies cant simply open fire on a crowded street without the risk of killing Innocent civilians .
The Rules are like having a golfing handicap to even up the competition. The Allies play off scratch , need I say more

Answer 8

They have the support of the US Democrates.

If we lose this war, republicans look realllly bad, and Democrates will win next decade of elections.

thats how an untrained lightly armed militia can defeat the US Military.

Answer 9

Well, they haven't "defeated" the MILITARY... they cause trouble, and frighten the politicians at home. But if the US Military was unleashed and allowed to conduct WAR rather than police-work it would be over.

And they're certainly not "untrained" or "lightly-armed"... they are using 1000lb bombs, 82mm and 102mm mortars as well as the special IED's coming from IRAN.

The only way they'll "WIN" is if we QUIT... the casualties are actually light compared to any previous conflict.

Answer 10

It's called the Democratic Party. We've won the military engagements, that's not the problem in Iraq. Politics has been the problem. Some of it were "rules of engagement" where they interpretted kicking sand in their eyes during battle as being torture. Some of those things were corrected with the revised strategy the President implemented this year. Our Military needs the country behind it's efforts. That includes the media.

Answer 11

Because our politicians like to play general,make up silly little rules and expect the insurgents to play along with them.If they allow the real generals to conduct the war we would have won this mess two years ago.