As battles go, Fallujah has been a big disappointment to the U.S. military, which had wanted to draw the Iraqi insurgents into a cataclysmic mistake: a “fair” fight. Not that any officer relished the prospect of a Stalingrad- or Hue-like street-to-street, house-to-house blood-letting. But the alternative has even less to recommend it: a continuing series of roadside bombings and mortar and grenade ambushes that bleed American forces and frustrate efforts to secure Iraq ahead of January’s elections.
Unfortunately, from a military standpoint, the latter, less attractive option is the reality, and the choice was never the U.S. military’s to make. Iraq’s insurgents, with weeks to react as U.S. forces gathered and postured about what was about to happen in Fallujah, decided against turning it into al-Alamo. They saw the folly of taking on the Americans on their own terms, and they did what intelligent, determined guerrilla movements have always done in the face of overwhelming force: They faded away and lived to fight and kill and maim another day.
Anticlimax
For those who accepted the notion, propagated by the Pentagon in the week leading up to the attack, that many thousands of Iraqi insurgents had dug in to defend their vital base in Fallujah, news that only light resistance greeted the U.S. and Iraqi government forces may be perplexing.
“In military terms, Fallujah is not going to be much of a plus at all,” says Bernard Trainor, a retired three-star Marine Corps general. “The downside is that we’ve knocked the hell out of this city, and the only insurgents we really got were the nut-cases and zealots the smart ones left behind — the guys who really want to die for Allah.”
Fire with fire
And Godspeed to them, you might well say. But if all of this sounds anticlimactic and slightly dismal, don’t despair. For the attack on Fallujah, while not decisive militarily, could mark a political turning point in Iraq. For the first time since the interim Iraqi government of Ayad Allawi took power, the interim Iraqi leader showed that he was willing to deal with the insurgents on their own terms: with raw power and violence.
More ... http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6452966
I guess these people still do not learn anything from Vietnam. Pity.
Unfortunately, from a military standpoint, the latter, less attractive option is the reality, and the choice was never the U.S. military’s to make. Iraq’s insurgents, with weeks to react as U.S. forces gathered and postured about what was about to happen in Fallujah, decided against turning it into al-Alamo. They saw the folly of taking on the Americans on their own terms, and they did what intelligent, determined guerrilla movements have always done in the face of overwhelming force: They faded away and lived to fight and kill and maim another day.
Anticlimax
For those who accepted the notion, propagated by the Pentagon in the week leading up to the attack, that many thousands of Iraqi insurgents had dug in to defend their vital base in Fallujah, news that only light resistance greeted the U.S. and Iraqi government forces may be perplexing.
“In military terms, Fallujah is not going to be much of a plus at all,” says Bernard Trainor, a retired three-star Marine Corps general. “The downside is that we’ve knocked the hell out of this city, and the only insurgents we really got were the nut-cases and zealots the smart ones left behind — the guys who really want to die for Allah.”
Fire with fire
And Godspeed to them, you might well say. But if all of this sounds anticlimactic and slightly dismal, don’t despair. For the attack on Fallujah, while not decisive militarily, could mark a political turning point in Iraq. For the first time since the interim Iraqi government of Ayad Allawi took power, the interim Iraqi leader showed that he was willing to deal with the insurgents on their own terms: with raw power and violence.
More ... http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6452966
I guess these people still do not learn anything from Vietnam. Pity.