Posted on 09/16/2004 11:50:30 PM PDT by churchillbuff
Madrid, Spain, Sep. 15 (UPI) --
Off the record conversations with intelligence chiefs in five major European countries -- each with multiple assets in Iraq -- showed remarkable agreement on these points:
-- The neo-con objectives for restructuring Iraq into a functioning model democracy were a bridge too far. They were never realistic.
[snip] -- The insurgency has mushroomed from 5,000 in the months following the collapse of the Saddam Hussein regime to an estimated 20,000 today, which is still growing. Insurgents are targeting green Iraqi units and volunteers for training and some have already defected to the rebels.
[snip] -- To cope with the insurgency, the United States requires 10 times the rebel strength -- or some 200,000 as a bare minimum. Short of that number, the insurgency will continue to gain momentum. The multiple is based on the British experience in Northern Ireland for a quarter of a century as well as France's civil war in Algeria (1954-62), when nationalist guerrillas were defeated militarily, but won the war diplomatically. France deployed half a million men to defeat the fellaghas in Algeria.
-- The U.S. occupation has lost control of large swathes of Iraq where the insurgency operates with virtual impunity. ...
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
Go away.
I'm positive this is an objective analysis.
The rest of the world wants to give up !
de Borchgrave has always been a Iraq and Afghanistan policy critic. Now he's trying to justify himself. You got any better ideas, Arnaud?
Arnaud de Borchgrave is the former editor-in-chief of the Washington Times. There isn't a journalist with stronger conservative bona fides.
High and dry. How about you?
Given the fact that our Iraq policy is in trouble, (if you don't believe me, read the newspapers or listen to the Republican senators on the foreign relations committee), I'm not sure how it's a devastating criticism to say that de Borchgrave has been a critic of it.
I think the situations will change once GWB is reelected. Much of the insurgency in both Afghanistan and Iraq is geared toward affecting our election here at home.
Quite a few of the insurgents are being paid, with the real terrorists organizing and recruiting cannon fodder. As usual, the terrorist leadership aren't in it for the ideologies they espouse, but for political power and gain.
After Oslo, one can logically conclude that no Palestinian entity is being seriously considered by the Arabs to coexist with the Jewish Israeli state. Only the conversion of the what is now Israel into an Arab dominated Muslim state will be acceptable.
Being that this is not acceptable to Israel, one can conclude that the only peaceful solution to the Middle East problem is the elimination of the Jewish state from the region.
I've spent 21 years to date in the USAF - never have been impressed by 'intelligence' chiefs. They are weenies who offer 20 opinions at once, and always counsel against doing anything until the data is more certain.
Any reader of military history knows nothing worth trying is ever free from the possibility of failure - and there is never enough data to be certain of any decision.
They are probably right that the insurgency is growing, and will continue to grow while we maintain a strong military presence.
Here's the real question: can we keep Iraq stable enough long enough for their own government to take over, with minimal help from us?
If yes, then the insurgency will fade away.
If no, then Iraq will be better off than under Saddam, but we will have failed in our strategic objectives.
It is certainly possible that we will fail - inserting a democracy into a country whose religion is opposed to freedom (Islam is about submission, not obedience by choice) is a difficult thing. But frankly, the middle east is such a s%&#hole that you can shake it up, and almost anything that falls out will be better than what is there right now.
No one ever won anything by waiting for a certain bet. This is a gamble, but it is worth taking. Listening to intel weenies is a certain recipe for failure.
I totally agree. Also, the funding for the insurgency is coming from Iran. Iran is the biggest problem in that area and it's going to be the next big challenge for the administration.
The Euros in these inner intel circles on the continent don't want American victory, they want American defeat.
As with Vietnam they want to make money off the other side while pretnding to be for freedom and want to keep up their tax systems based on our not winning.
They like the Terror because it keeps them in a position to block us. Only when their own people stop being duped and catch on to their game will they change.
If we win their neo-colonial empire of Eurosocialism through the U.N. and other such bodies will be gone and will be replaced by nations in New Europe and outside Europe emulating the American experience of a constitutional republicanism rooted in indigineous culture and context but with the opportunity to graft on it that which can be learned from emulating America and other similar successful entrepreneurial market-states. This old Europe fears, and they should.
You wrote:
"Being that this is not acceptable to Israel, one can conclude that the only peaceful solution to the Middle East problem is the elimination of the Jewish state from the region."
[Geopolitical Sarcasm Torpedo ARMED. FIRE!]
'Tisnt it _obvious_?
There are also intractable problems in Northern Ireland.
Just put Jewish State in Ireland, Separatist Irish in
Middle East. No problem. ;-)
It's their defeat they should worry about. France's appeasement of the Arabs is just not working (a cautionary tale for us). At the rate France is going they will also be a Muslim country.
When it came to the former Soviet Union De Bourchgrave was excellent, but when it comes to the Middle East he preaches defeat and resignation as the only course to follow. Also, I suspect he has the typical European feelings toward the Jews.
We are definitely in a race. We would have bought a lot of time if we would have crushed the Falluja uprising several months ago.
At some point we are going to have to revisit that blown opportunity and eliminate the bad guys there in a very public and definitive way.
What I don't understand is why its taking so long to build up a decent Iraqi security force. We trained, equipped and fielded a military of fifteen plus million in about 4-5 years in World War 2. But we barely have 100k Iraqis after a year.
LOL! Fortunately for us President Bush isn't Montgomery...and you're not Churchill.
Good point!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.