[woofie]

But I thought it was innocent people we are trying to kill

[dr_who_2]

Well, it's nice to know that the NYT has become less enomoured with the insurgency. Would be nice if could give the U.S. armed forces a kind word now and then, but in the end, maybe the French will come round, too.

[goldstategop]

The terrorists simply want to kill every one who they perceive as standing in their way to absolute power. They reject democracy, freedom, pluralism and limited constitutional government elected by the people. That much is clear. Why its a mystery to the New York Times is beyond stunning.

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)

[Cicero]

Translation: "Hey, if you guys can't manage to run a decent insurgency in Iraq, how on earth are we going to work up another Vietnam quagmire? Come on, let's have a little useful help, guys! We can't keep bashing Bush on Iraq all by ourselves. Now, these are the insurgency manuals you should be reading. . . ."

[Dallas59]

Not one word in the article......"ISLAMIC"

[fso301]

The NYT reporter, either an ageing hippie or child of a hippie is frustrated that the terrorists aren't helping out the MSM and other members of the domestic 5th column.

[Hostage]

Hey James Bennett of the NY Times! Get a clue.

There is no comparison between Iraq and Vietnam.

The North Vietnamese were backed by the Soviet Union who effectively ran all diplommacy and propaganda to make Viet Cong look like freedom fighters trying to liberate their country from the evil American imperialists.

And your employer was complicit to pass on the Soviet version of events. And now? They don't dare because they know Americans are still mad as hell and will no longer buy their particular brand of bovine excrement.

[vbmoneyspender]

The swells at the NY Times are apparently shocked to discover that death cultists like nothing better than to go around killing lots of people whom they consider to be infidels.

[Nam Vet]

Have you ever noticed that articles never mention the fact that Saddam released 100,000+ murders, rapists, thugs and bandits at the opening of the war? I wonder how many of this so-called 'insurgency' is just thugs and murderers who do not want to return to prison or a death sentence.

Nam Vet

[denydenydeny]

The simple answer is, all that they can do anymore is kill civilians. Direct attacks on military targets lead only to annihilation.

[WilliamofCarmichael]

If the insurgency is trying to overthrow this regime, it is contending with a formidable obstacle that successful rebels of the 20th century generally did not face: A democratically elected government. One of the last century's most celebrated theorists and practitioners of revolution, Che Guevara, called that obstacle insurmountable.

I bet that there is not a MSM "reporter" today who does not have a picture of Che somewhere among his/her prized possessions.

Had Che lived longer he too would have received the same overwhelming MSM support against anyone that the MSM gave to their Ho in Hanoi over the democratically elected government of South Viet Nam.

Bottom line: how the hell can this generation of MSM pukes know who to get behind against the Americans if one of the groups doesn't stand up and say, here's what we are for. . . . What's a "reporter" to do?

[mrsmith]

"history itself fails to illuminate the conflict under way in Iraq."
Uh, yeah, it's very mysterious... to the NYTimes. They think the Baath Party was a political party. Iraqi gangsters act like gangsters, not "rebels".

Al Capone: "Once in the racket you're always in it. "

[JasonC]

Oh god, how mindless are these people? Study Algeria. The methods they are using are fascist methods. The Algerians learned them from the SS. Street violence is designed to polarize the populace and make everyone think the only safety lies in being part of a paramilitary organization, and then in winning a civil war. The overall premise is that men are cowards and will run away from anyone more ruthless than they are, that goon-ish-ness itself is the guareenteed route to success and power, that just being more brutal and vicious than the next guy will stun everyone into sheeplike docility and appeasement.

And against John Kerry, or the French, that would all be true. Against men rather than sheep, it is an anachronism. But demonic men cutting others to pieces in broad daylight ruled half of mankind for most of history. They just don't know any other way of even trying to rule anything, or build anything. They are stupid evil men. But there is no mystery in it whatever.

[Logical me]

This article makes no sense because the word insurgents is in error. They are terrorist. Substitute please. Still, a lot of horsesh@@ here.

[Rockingham]

The insurgency is not so hard to understand. They are fighting in order to prevent the US from establishing a functioning democracy in Iraq. Indefinite chaos and a weak Iraqi government without popular legitimacy accomplish the insurgents' purpose without. They do not have a need for a unified command, ideology, or program. They win if they beat the clock and American patience runs out. The insurgents can then fight among themselves to control or carve up Iraq and its oil riches.

Iraq and the region provide the insurgents with plenty of raw material: Al Queda and a stream of foreign terrorists; regime loyalists hoping for a return to power; enduring tribal and sectarian animosities; pervasive criminality and corruption; a devil's storehouse of readily available weapons and explosives; hate and self-loathing among the populace in consequence of Saddam's tyranny and atrocities; hostile, predatory neighbors; the frustrations and humiliations of foreign occupation, no matter how necessary and well-intended; and Islam's perverse tendency toward extremism, violence, and terrorism.

Against that, we have: strategic necessity; a resolute administration; a reasoned belief that democracy can work, even among Muslims; and the best military on the planet.

We win in full if we and the nascent Iraqi military beat all comers and stand up a pro-American Muslim democracy in the heartland of terrorism. We still mostly win even if Iraq effectively fissions into a hostile Sunni region and two pro-American dependent statelets with all the oil wealth and based on the Kurds and the Shias.

I do not see the insurgents as genuinely winning -- unless the Democrats return to power and we give up.

[Tom Bombadil]

there is no logic here...

Oh yes there is.

Intimidation is the tactic used by Saddam's monsters to control old Iraq and it is the preferred tactic of most jihadists. Cutting out tongues and beating women are tactical first cousins to bombing innocents.

[Deetes]

Maybe becuase they are not "insurgents " they are "terrorists" .... DA DA DA !!!!

[finnman69]

"Instead of saying, 'What's the logic here, we don't see it,' you could speculate, there is no logic here," said Anthony James Joes, a professor of political science at St. Joseph's University in Philadelphia and the author of several books on the history of guerrilla warfare. The attacks now look like "wanton violence," he continued. "And there's a name for these guys: Losers."