Now we're outnumbered in Iraq - some 200,000 to 150,000:

[cyberpj]

Blistering attacks threaten Iraq election
Analysis
By Paul Reynolds
World Affairs Correspondent, BBC News website

While the world's attention has been on the disaster in Asia, the situation in Iraq has deteriorated so much that the insurgency has developed into near-open warfare.

The killing of Baghdad's governor is another example of violence

The head of Iraq's intelligence service Gen Muhammad Shahwani now puts the number of insurgents at 200,000, of which 40,000 are said to be the hard core and the rest active supporters.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4145585.stm

[bluestateguy]

1. Ahem, cough, @#%* draft, ahem...

nothing.

[Pirate Smile]

3. That is exactly what has been going through my mind since I heard about

Rummy sending General Luck over to Iraq to do this:

"One of the officials said one issue Luck would study is the U.S. troop level in Iraq, which stands at about 150,000 after being raised from 138,000 early in December to improve security for the election."

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=578&e=3&u=/nm/20050107/pl_nm/iraq_general_dc

[Cooley Hurd]

22. We need more than "Luck" over there...

...and I agree, PS. We just don't have the manpower to maintain our committments all over the world. With "new committments" pending (Iran, NK), and enlistments and re-enlistments way down, there's little that can be done other than a draft...

[shamanstar]

8. but it is patriotic to support the troops

therefore, everyone who was yelling out the windows while we were protesting the beginning of the war should be signing up to join the military.
it is bound to be a success!!

[vs the introvore]

13. it is kinda breezy. could you close that window, please?

service industry or service academy? you decide.

[buddysmellgood]

14. What's that? Did you say something?

[Earth_First]

2. What happened to a 'band of thugs'

numbered at only a few thousand...

[cyberpj]

6. I guess they're in that Lancet report that came out last year -

estimating around 100,000 Iraqi's have been killed - many of them women and children.

[lebkuchen]

18. 100,000 which would have been killed under Saddam's regime anyway

according to prevailing US military rationalizations I'm hearing.

[LynnTheDem]

23. Hysterical, isn't it.

It's not true that Hussein was slaughtering Iraqis (per HRW reports)

But...

That they'd try to "rationalize" killing 100,000 as being BETTER THAT WE KILLED THEM then Hussein killing them. :wow: :wow: :wow:

[lebkuchen]

42. I have to work with these people.

It ain't easy.

[AlamoDemoc]

4. Hhmmmmmm!

"The head of Iraq's intelligence service Gen Muhammad Shahwani now puts the number of insurgents at 200,000, of which 40,000 are said to be the hard core and the rest active supporters."


I say that's still small number when you factor in; what happened in Abu Qarayb; 12 yrs of devastating embargo, indicriminate bombing, daily hardships, lack of basic necessity (water and electricity), occupation, humiliation, etc, etc.....

[darkism]

5. got draft? n/t

[cyberpj]

9. Cause you KNOW we're not leaving thanks to Bremer's 100 Orders

Bremer's 100 Orders - Illegal Orders give the US a Lock on Iraq's Economy

In the last hours of his reign over Iraq via the Coalition Provisional Authority, Paul Bremer enacted 100 orders which ensure that the Iraqi Government has no authority to determine the direction of the Iraqi economy, and guarantees that US companies have virtually unrestricted access to do business in Iraq. These orders guarantee that Iraq will “transition from a centrally planned economy to a market economy,” privatizing all state-owned businesses, allowing for 100 percent foreign ownership, and allowing 100 percent of the profits earned to be taken out of Iraq by the foreign investors. Tax caps and trade surcharges are being held remarkably low, and foreign contractors have been given immunity from all Iraqi laws. By enacting these laws, the U.S. Government has managed to maintain nearly full control over Iraq’s Government, its economy, and all of its resources.

===========================================================

The Hand-Over That Wasn't: Illegal Orders give the US a Lock on Iraq's Economy
by Antonia Juhasz

Officially, the U.S. occupation of Iraq ended on June 28, 2004. But in reality, the United States is still in charge: Not only do 138,000 troops remain to control the streets, but the "100 Orders" of L. Paul Bremer III remain to control the economy.

These little noticed orders enacted by Bremer, the now-departed head of the now-defunct Coalition Provisional Authority, go to the heart of Bush administration plans in Iraq. They lock in sweeping advantages to American firms, ensuring long-term U.S. economic advantage while guaranteeing few, if any, benefits to the Iraqi people.

The Bremer orders control every aspect of Iraqi life — from the use of car horns to the privatization of state-owned enterprises. Order No. 39 alone does no less than "transition from a … centrally planned economy to a market economy" virtually overnight and by U.S. fiat.

Although many thought that the "end" of the occupation would also mean the end of the orders, on his last day in Iraq Bremer simply transferred authority for the orders to Prime Minister Iyad Allawi — a 30-year exile with close ties to the CIA and British intelligence.

Further, the interim constitution of Iraq, written by the U.S.-appointed Iraqi Governing Council, solidifies the orders by making them virtually impossible to overturn.


http://www.fpif.org/papers/0407iraqtransf.html

[cyberpj]

11. kick

:kick:

[punpirate]

7. If they're saying 200,000...

... one can be reasonably sure that it's more like 300,000. The natural tendency is to lowball estimates of the enemy's troop strength (one of the things which undid the US in SE Asia), and while the US has fairly consistently tried to describe this insurgency as a "handful of dead-enders," that's just the extreme of the tendency.

There's a long history wrapped up in this insurgency. The Islamic revolution in Iran in 1979 convinced Zawahiri that it was possible, and while the same has not happened in Egypt, Syria, Saudi Arabia and Jordan, extremists see the chaos in Iraq as ripe for exploitation. Combine this with the natural and understandable tendency for Iraqis themselves to oust an occupying force, there's going to be continuing supply of people in both groups, the extremists and the nationalists alike.

Elections aren't going to make this situation any better, and if Allawi is "elected," as many suspect, expect that to lead to new levels of repression, making the situation measurably worse. *sigh*

We certainly did open up Pandora's Box with this little invasion....

[lebkuchen]

19. Elections will make things much worse for US troops and Iraqis

Even the Bushies have admitted that.

The Army Reserve chief's rare public warning of the force becoming "broken" will probably be ignored by Bush, however, leaving the US that much more vulnerable to attack.

[anarchy1999]

30. Why don't we just go ahead and take history back a few hundred years

and bring it forward for this little area of the world? And yes, Pandora's box is open, now how can we put everything we let loose back in the box and close it?

[punpirate]

34. Well, the lesson of the fable...

... is that one can't put everything back in.

Even comparing recent history to now is difficult. We're not the first to invade Iraq--most recently, the British tried it, in 1920. It took Iraqis four years to drive the British out of Iraq then.

With very advanced technology to convince the Americans that they can win (shades of Vietnam), the current conflict could stretch out for a much longer period of time, especially since this administration seems to consciously ignore protest (which, at least, got Johnson's and Nixon's attention during the Vietnam years), and has the additional desire to use Iraq as a staging point for other military action in the Mideast.

And, unlike 1920, we (and the Iraqi nationalists) have to deal with the Islamic fundamentalists, who are striving for the sort of theocratic rule which now exists in Iran. In that sense, it's become a three-way fight, possibly a four-way fight, if one thinks about the groups there now--the Americans and the British, Iraqis who are strictly nationalists and want to oust invaders, the fundamentalists who want a theocracy, and the Ba'athists, who want to return to power. This does not even consider the Kurds, who have their own sovereignty issues and will face additional difficulties after we're gone because of their alliances with us and the Israelis.

There are probably any number of temporary alliances between the Iraqis for the purposes of getting out the Americans, which will fall apart once we're gone, so the situation doesn't markedly improve if we manage to put a central government in place and then leave.

One thing is certain, however--the situation will continue to get worse the longer we are there--we are the primary irritant in the country right now.

There are good chances that Allawi will win, by hook or by crook (many Iraqis desire, most of all, security right now and Allawi says he can provide it), and if I read him right, he will run the country in dictatorial fashion. That means he cannot stay in power without American troops to back him up, since the Iraq national police force is in disarray right now, even after almost two years.

Eventually, we will leave, although it may take years for that to happen. When we do, there will likely be a civil war, unless the former Ba'athists consolidate control under Allawi (the former Ba'athist). If that happens, we will have simply returned the country to its pre-invasion state, albeit much more damaged than it was.

The US has run roughshod over the UN, and yet, if we had encouraged the UN to mediate very early on, some sort of compromise might have been arranged, even if it meant partitioning the country into its more ancient tribal boundaries. But, our influence, and Turkey's, and Saudi Arabia's effectively prevented that.

We created an instability, intentionally, that was not there previously, for the purposes of making Iraq a client state of the US, economically and politically, and it very quickly spun out of control, partly because of poor planning, but mostly because of greed. We wanted something so much that we didn't think at all about the consequences.

That's the lesson of Pandora's Box.

[anarchy1999]

46. Just a sweet kick to the top on behalf of punpirate. Lessons to Learn....

n/t

[leesa]

10. We've been grossly outnumbered since day 1. We are fighting the entire

population of Iraq. Every man, woman and child will work in some way to fight the invaders...even if only to provide news, clothes, shelter, etc. Of course they will fight against invaders. Why wouldn't they??

[The_Casual_Observer]

12. Considering the fact that nobody in Iraq helps the US to identify

the "insurgents" and the Iraqi military is plagued with desertions, one would have to assume that chimp & co have been pushing against a brick wall in their effort to "let freedom reign". Perhaps the people in Iraq know better than to trust bush, unlike the idiots in this country.

[leftchick]

26. Just think about what all of those thousands of Iraqi deserters

take with them. Let's see... uniforms, check. New weapons, check. Inside information, check. I suppose all of this just might come in handy for the resistance. Isn't it great to know our tax dollars are helping the other side?
FUBAR! Bring the troops home!

[MrSlayer]

15. You know it's way more than 200k.

There are millions of Iraqis involved in this "insurgency". I'm sure most of the citizens want us out and a lot never wanted us in to begin with. You can bet, just as sure as if someone invaded Cleveland, that this fight against the foreign invaders is being fought by all but the most cowardly of citizens. Even the few who did welcome us are now wondering what the fuck we are still doing there killing their people indiscriminately long after Saddam has been removed. That whole situation has been a clusterfuck from the door and everyone involved is suffering, everyone.

[yorgatron]

16. why do i have the feeling this will end with TV footage of people

dangling off the landing gear of helicopters? :wtf:

[Nevernose]

31. We have to destroy their cities...

...in order to save them. This is, apparently, one of the few lessons the BFEE learned from Vietnam.

[LiberalFighter]

44. Wondering if they or a close one will be the next one killed by US troops

[Tight_rope]

17. How is that...thought we were killing them all....It's like having roaches

Damn...it's like they are multipling like roaches. The more we kill the more come back out.

[Seabiscuit]

20. "Lone Ranger" Shrub to "Tonto" Chalabi: "Looks like we're surrounded!"...

"Tonto" Chalabi to "Lone Moran" Shrub: "What you mean 'we', Kimosabe?"

[wellst0nev0ter]

21. On The Bright Side

If it's only 200,000 insurgents outta 25 million people in Eye-Rack, then that means the 24.8 million people left must love us!

(end neocon rationalizing)

[BlueManDude]

24. But Rummy said it was just a few "dead-enders"?

[Moderator]

25. In the future

please remember that one of the rules for posting in LBN forum is that the subject line of your post should exactly match the headline of the article:


Blistering attacks threaten Iraq election

[cyberpj]

27. You're right. I'm sorry.

I remembered that when I started then forgot because I'm so used to posting in the other forums. Don't usually post here, just read 'em.

Sometimes the problem is that the title doesn't really SAY what you're trying to emphasize though.

Thanks for reminding nicely.

PJ

[VegasWolf]

28. I'll bet that if they take out Allawi the "election" will be over in a

nanosecond.

[NYC]

32. I would expect Allawi to be the winner

dead or alive.

[Skittles]

29. and the numbers will just keep growing and growing

because Bush Inc is creating terrorists by the tens of thousands. Keeping us safe? What a f***ing bad joke this is.

[tibbiit]

33. And something that is not often mentioned

Where did they get all of their amunition and bomb explosives???

Bushies dont bring up Al Quaqua(sp) and other spots like it.

Our soldiers being blown up daily is a direct result of the US not securing the amunition dumps. Where is the Liberal Media on this matter?

tib

[spanone]

35. Hey, our president said everythings alright! Democracy is hard.

It's real hard. No Fucking Shit George.

[Pharaoh]

36. Hey folks cheer up!

Don't ya know freedom is on the march!

We just need to kill a whole shitload more people and everything will work out just fine.....:dunce:

[dkofos]

37. And * won't be happy until it's 25,000,000 to 150,000

Keep up the good work *
I know what hard work it must be

[Vidar]

38. We're fighting the Iraqi people. Population over 20 million I believe.

[Karenina]

39. Population: 25,374,691

last I saw... :shrug:

[Vidar]

40. Thank you., Won't ask how you knew the 91.

[AlbizuX]

41. i can't wait for the draft

the draft will be the moment the anti-war movement has an issue which to crystallize around...

Most people continue to not think this war is as bad as Vietnam...the draft would be the ultimate reminder of that shithole of a war...

Bring the draft on...i'll be the first to publicly burn the card...Ain't no government in the world going to force me to go to fight overseas for illegitimate wars...and if everyone adopts that same courageous and adamant stance, the draft will be nothing but an order on paper.

[buddysmellgood]

43. Maybe Bush will try to make the draft fun! Like he did with his Iraqi

deck of cards! It could be like the NFL draft! Collect all the cards of your neighborhood's children!

[Amigust]

45. No surprise here. Look for the number to keep rising as long as

the Moron-in-Chief keeps forces there.

Looking ahead, how do you suppose the neocons are going to keep a strong military presence there for years like they want while the number of insurgents keeps rising? And when the neocons are finally chased home, how are they going to keep the Iraqis from nationalizing all that the Moron and his buddies have stolen?