News0 min ago
Cleaning up Basra
15 Answers
What are they messing about at in Basra? Handing out cash in exchange for the insurgent's weapons.
Why don't they use the same tactics to clear a town of opposition combatants, as they did during WW2?
The Iraqi goverment forces have helicopter gun ships, armoured vehicles and heavy artillery at their disposal, so there should be no problem against these insurgents.
Why don't they use the same tactics to clear a town of opposition combatants, as they did during WW2?
The Iraqi goverment forces have helicopter gun ships, armoured vehicles and heavy artillery at their disposal, so there should be no problem against these insurgents.
Answers
1 to 15 of 15
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Incentivisation. Providing a cash incentive for weapons from insurgents should provide an incentive for those storing them to hand them over. Look to the British success in Malaya during the 50s for an example of this.
Look, you can't compare a modern counter-insurgency to WWII. It doesn't work. They're just two completely different kinds of warfare.
Look, you can't compare a modern counter-insurgency to WWII. It doesn't work. They're just two completely different kinds of warfare.
This "war" in Iraq has been a joke from start to finish. Insurgents, terrorists, ruthless killers, .... all various labels for the people who want us out. The apparent improvement because of the recent "surge" has only been brought about because many of those Iraqis, previously labelled "insurgents" etc. are now being paid to act as militia by the Americans. It is costing 24,000,000 Dollars per month to pay these people. Funnily enough, there was a charity appeal on the radio a couple of days ago, stating that �5 would buy a treated mosquito net which would prevent a child contracting malaria. Work out how many children's lives could be saved!!!!
well correct me if im wrong, but his bloke and his mehdi army thats causing all the problems at the moment, is the same rsole that they had cornered and holed up in a mosque not that long ago.
instead of taking the rswipe out they let him go, because they didnt want to cause any offence by blowing up the mosque, him and its insurgent inhabitants.
will the coalition ever learn any lessons about these people, the only thing they understand is force, show them any sort of mercy and they will take advantage of it and look upon the enemy as weak.
Do they really think this bloke is going to listen to ultimatums dis-arm and just fade away ?
instead of taking the rswipe out they let him go, because they didnt want to cause any offence by blowing up the mosque, him and its insurgent inhabitants.
will the coalition ever learn any lessons about these people, the only thing they understand is force, show them any sort of mercy and they will take advantage of it and look upon the enemy as weak.
Do they really think this bloke is going to listen to ultimatums dis-arm and just fade away ?
The apparent improvement because of the recent "surge" has only been brought about because many of those Iraqis, previously labelled "insurgents" etc. are now being paid to act as militia by the Americans
They're integrating security forces in order to more effectively get the insurgency. Given the current unpopularity of coalition forces (thanks to the mess they made when they invaded...), locals are more responsive Iraqi militias who can then help the coalition to beat the insurgency.
The success isn't 'apparent'. It's working. It's not eliminating problems of course, but the evidence does indicate that things are getting at least a little better.
In December last year in Falluja, an avg. of 20 people a day were dying. Which is terrible. But a year before it wasn't uncommon for 100 to die a day (source: The Economist).
It's also seen lower casualties - scroll down and compare military fatalties by month here.
People also seem to be walking the streets again. Note that there has been a recent spike in violence, and - don't get me wrong, there's still a hell of a lot of work to be done - but the long-term trend has been a positive one.
They're integrating security forces in order to more effectively get the insurgency. Given the current unpopularity of coalition forces (thanks to the mess they made when they invaded...), locals are more responsive Iraqi militias who can then help the coalition to beat the insurgency.
The success isn't 'apparent'. It's working. It's not eliminating problems of course, but the evidence does indicate that things are getting at least a little better.
In December last year in Falluja, an avg. of 20 people a day were dying. Which is terrible. But a year before it wasn't uncommon for 100 to die a day (source: The Economist).
It's also seen lower casualties - scroll down and compare military fatalties by month here.
People also seem to be walking the streets again. Note that there has been a recent spike in violence, and - don't get me wrong, there's still a hell of a lot of work to be done - but the long-term trend has been a positive one.
the reasons for the fall in deaths is still disputed. Maybe the surge is working. Or maybe the rebels are just biding their time till the surge is over. Or maybe there's nobody left to kill: the country has already been ethnically cleansed and split in three. Nobody really knows. But al-Sadr has called off the fighting in Basra. So maybe Baghdad's tactics are working - at least for now.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7 321464.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7 321464.stm
We might not know what the experience is like on the ground, but we can go with what the evidence indicates. Which is a good deal more objective.
Evidence from whom kromovaracun, the media, the politicians? Talking to people who have served out there, they have painted the whole picture for me, not just a glossed over version.
Evidence from whom kromovaracun, the media, the politicians? Talking to people who have served out there, they have painted the whole picture for me, not just a glossed over version.
Evidence from whom kromovaracun, the media, the politicians?
Soldiers are part of it. But they can only give individual viewpoints, which are subjective.
But you've also got people like think-tanks (such as icasualties) who provide objective statistics.
You've also got certain parts of the press that provide well-informed and non-idealised analysis. Like the Economist, for instance. It's only press like the DM that provide 'glossed over' versions.
Soldiers are part of it. But they can only give individual viewpoints, which are subjective.
But you've also got people like think-tanks (such as icasualties) who provide objective statistics.
You've also got certain parts of the press that provide well-informed and non-idealised analysis. Like the Economist, for instance. It's only press like the DM that provide 'glossed over' versions.
Decent point, Kromovaracun. Anecdotal evidence isn't always the most valuable.
For another example, just look at AB debates on the NHS. Every discussion on waiting times, numbers of new doctors or rising costs always seems to be undermined by someone piping up with 'Yes, well my Gran had to wait six months for her operation and she....'
Makes you want to bury your head in your heads.
For another example, just look at AB debates on the NHS. Every discussion on waiting times, numbers of new doctors or rising costs always seems to be undermined by someone piping up with 'Yes, well my Gran had to wait six months for her operation and she....'
Makes you want to bury your head in your heads.
Kromo and Quin, It is the person in at ground level who give the correct version, whether they be Soldiers or Nurses Doctors (not the wait your old Granny had Quin).
Regarding the source of news the Mail tells it like it is, not like some other publication that has a vested interest.
Regarding "Think Tanks" let's not go there.
Regarding the source of news the Mail tells it like it is, not like some other publication that has a vested interest.
Regarding "Think Tanks" let's not go there.
Same in business presumably?
If you were trying to decide whether the economic future of Jaguar would be best protected by selling the firm to Tata, you wouldn't ask analysts, industry experts or finance directors. You'd ask the bloke who stands on the production line, screwing on the wing mirrors. He's there at ground level. He knows best.
If you were trying to decide whether the economic future of Jaguar would be best protected by selling the firm to Tata, you wouldn't ask analysts, industry experts or finance directors. You'd ask the bloke who stands on the production line, screwing on the wing mirrors. He's there at ground level. He knows best.
1 to 15 of 15
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.