Iraq battling more than 200,000 insurgents: intelligence chief

[floda]

BAGHDAD, Jan 3 (AFP) - Iraq's insurgency counts more than 200,000 active fighters and sympathisers, the country's national intelligence chief told AFP, in the bleakest assessment to date of the armed revolt waged by Sunni Muslims.

"I think the resistance is bigger than the US military in Iraq. I think the resistance is more than 200,000 people," Iraqi intelligence service director General Mohamed Abdullah Shahwani said in an interview ahead of the January 30 elections.

Shahwani said the number includes at least 40,000 hardcore fighters but rises to more than 200,000 members counting part-time fighters and volunteers who provide rebels everything from intelligence and logistics to shelter.

The numbers far exceed any figure presented by the US military in Iraq, which has struggled to get a handle on the size of the resistance since toppling Saddam Hussein's regime in April 2003.

more...

http://www.turkishpress.com/news.asp?ID=35545

[Massachusetts]

1. Low ball estimate.

[ixion]

6. yeah, I'll bet that's a low ball as well

[leftchick]

10. I agree...

the US creates more resistance fighters daily. I would not be surprised if it was over a million.

[Drifter]

33. Would this be ...

one of the Known Unknowns or Unknown Unknowns. I lost my scorecard, and have not been keeping track.

How could they possibly put a number on this ?

Cheers
Drifter

[Algorem]

2. Bringing it on.

[egbtpl]

57. Not to worry

"America came here for a purpose … to change the regime and promote self-government and freedom. We’ve made substantial progress toward that goal ... A democracy is being born. Despite the troubles that continue, it’s easy to lose sight of progress."

- Joe Lieberman

[Algorem]

62. Lieberman sounds like a neocon,no that can't be.

"Sen. Mark Dayton,traveling with Lieberman,added:"It's not a partisan issue.We will do everything possible to provide everything" that the military requests." Sounds like what the military wants is more important than "partisanship" in U.S.Nah that can't be.

[tabasco]

77. Not to worry ...

freepers and college republicans are flocking to the recruiting stations to enlist to battle these insurgents. The military is facing a dire personnel situation, but these heroes are walking the walk.

Or not.

[indepat]

3. Hmmm. Less than one in a hundred: I would hope the US would have a much

higher percentage of insurgents, being the land of the free and home of the brave, were it invaded and occupied by a foreign power.

[leesa]

4. Oh, let's blame it on the Sunni Muslims, shall we?

200,000?? Those are the people of Iraq resisting occupation by a hostile force.

[Just Me]

5. Hmmm. I guess they reject the "freedom" delivered by Busholinis.

Perhaps they simply cannot grasp the "occupation and economic control is freedom" concept that the Busholinis have sold hook and sinker to half the American people.

[Rose Siding]

7. Freedom's not so much marching

as playing hopscotch.

This is AFP. Maybe the US press will pick it up.

[Tempest]

8. Now wait a minute

The geniuses at the Pentagon said there were only 5,000 insurgents.

Do you mean they were WAY off, just like they were in the number of U.S. soldiers needed to control Iraq?

/sarcasm off

[PA Democrat]

12. What was Rummy's description?

"A handful of dead-enders" or some such nonsense?

[leesa]

89. A few rabble rousers..a couple of malcontents..

[NYC]

79. Interesting ratio of 40 to 1.

Iraqi says 200,000.
U.S. says 5,000.

That's 40 times as many. Doesn't everyone remember Rumsfeld saying there was no looting of the Iraqi museums? We were seeing the same vase 40 times.

[Demeter]

9. Tell It Like It Is: They Are Patriots

and just like our patriots, they not only deserve to win, they are going to win.

[forintegrity]

13. You're absolutely right!

They are the Patriots that want the U. S. the hell out of their country. I don't have a link but I read an interesting article about this in Harper's Magazine, September 2004 issue called "Baghdad Year Zero; Pillaging Iraq in Pursuit of Neocon Utopia"" by Naomi Klein.

A great read if you can. It explains exactly what has happened and who these insurgents really are...common folk like you and I just simply defending their rights against the * administrations corporate Utopia plans for Iraq!

[Just Me]

14. "Baghdad Year Zero:" is an EXCELLENT read!!!!

EXCELLENT read!!!

It completely dispenses with the notion that the neoCONimperialists didn't have a plan. They had a plan, alright,...to sell off the whole country to the highest bidder (assuming the Iraqi people would simply give up their country and identity). Any normal, decent, democracy-loving person would feel outrage after reading this EXCELLENT article!!!

[Tempest]

28. Link to "Baghdad Year Zero" article

http://www.harpers.org/BaghdadYearZero.html

A more reader friendly link:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6930.htm

[forintegrity]

31. Thanks, Tempest, for getting that link on the board!

It's a MUST read for all concerned Americans!

[Cocoa]

53. Naomi Klein should be all over the TV

the info in that great article is NEVER shared with the public, not even the basic framework of the economic issues in Iraq.

(But I don't recall much of an emphasis in that article on the insurgency).

[GHOSTDANCER]

41. Yes.......and Osama is the new Jesus...ooooo snap ...n/t

[RaleighNCDUer]

88. They are the minutemen. We are the Redcoats. The Brits, and

the 'coalition' are the Hessians.

Will Iran be the French?

[rfkrfk]

11. When there're gone, what then?

Who will defend Fallugah?

[Bouncy Ball]

87. Fallugah?

[benburch]

15. How many troops do we currently have "in theater"?

I'm betting we're outnumbered.

[NNN0LHI]

16. Bush and the media are admitting to 150,000. I think it is much higher n/t

[malaise]

19. Weren't we told that

there were only a few foreign terrorists in Iraq. Are these insurgents the same peeps who were expected to throw garlands of flowers to greet the liberators? Isn't that what we were told via MSM. What has gone so horribly wrong -sarcastic sigh!!!

[benburch]

21. Yes, we were told that.

These are just "dead enders". Nothing to worry about, citizen! The Mission Is Accomplished!

[fedsron2us]

17. Just to put the figures in perspective

according to Kevin Toolis book 'Rebel Hearts' the IRA only had 400-600 active service members tying down over 30,000 British troops at the height of the troubles in Northern Ireland. On that basis the US army may as well pack up and come home now because they can not defeat this level of resistance.

[benburch]

22. I concur.

We've lost already. The only question is how many more people will have to die for a mistake?

[lebkuchen]

26. Probably a lot more considering the ineptness w/which * has begun 2005

Very sad to say...

[slor]

18. Remember when it was...

5,000 "dead-enders"?

[shadowknows69]

20. just like the length of the war

would be counted in weeks and months not years

[Jacobin]

51. I remember when it was "a handful"

Obviously millions of Iraqis are either assisting and/or fighting American troops and their puppet soldiers. Can't say as I blame them. I wouldn't be too happy with what we have done 'for' Iraqis either.

[rocktivity]

23. Actually, the Bush empire is battling more than 25 million Iraqis

That's the approximate population of Iraq, according to the CIA World Fact Book.

:headbang:
rocknation

[not fooled]

50. yep, anyone capable of handling a weapon...

...or supporting the RESISTANCE (NOT "insurgence") in that country is going to do so, until the US is kicked out. = Millions and millions.

But, in the short term, look for the US to cut back troop levels after the "election", then retreat to the 14 bases and basically just garrison themselves in those, going out into the rest of the country only to the extent needed to control the oil fields and enforce the rule of corporations. So, I predict that the next level of resistance will be directed even more at the oil industry and supply lines for the occupier bases, until the Americans are finally driven out (could take yrs and yrs).

[klyon]

54. What if we gave an election and nobody showed-up?

Could we just leave then?
KL

[ilovenicepeople]

78. Are you talking about the election

in Iraq or in the USA???:shrug:

[klyon]

83. Iraq

If I am not mistaken we had our chance already.

[LibDemAlways]

63. You beat me to it.

Our national treasure is being squandered and the lives of thousands of Americans and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis snuffed out in a futile and foolish attempt to conquer an unconquerable nation and its people. The use of the term "insurgents" is insulting and incredibly misleading. The so-called "insurgents" are the people of Iraq doing what any people would do -- fighting back against an illegal war of aggression against them.

[warrens]

24. Citizen, citizen, citizen. What are we going to do about you?

Mr. Rumsfeld has explained over and over that it's just a handful of bitter dead-enders, and total victory is just around the corner. But you keep spreading these canards. How would you like a nice, long tropical vacation?

[lebkuchen]

25. "I think the resistance is bigger than the US military in Iraq."

After 21 months of the US military kicking in doors, torturing Iraqis, killing them, and leveling their cities, you'd have to think that there are few Iraqis who don't have a personal vendetta against the US. With an Iraqi population of approx. 22 million, the US has its hands full.

[benburch]

27. Think "Red Dawn"

Only - We play the part of the Russians.

[GHOSTDANCER]

42. quote from Red Dawn...........

"All that hates gonna burn you up inside, boy."
"It keeps me warm at night!"

[OhioBlue]

30. my thoughts exactly

for the love of God - when you drop f_cking bombs on people and kill their families they are going to try and kill you. It is a mess and to hell with all the pukes crying about not enough coverage for the school and shopping mall that was built. For the rest of my life I will HATE Bush& Co for lying their way into this BS war.

[leftchick]

29. How long before CNN interviews this guy??

:eyes:

[Jacobin]

52. Sorry, no time for that. Must show Lacey Peterson's girlfriend again

Maybe in 2008.

[leftchick]

59. I think more like...

never! :(

[Johnyawl]

32. according to all the military experts on guerilla war...

...a conventional army needs a 10 to 1 advantage to defeat a guerilla army. That means if there are "only" 40,000 hardcore fighters in the insurgency we need 400,000 troops on the ground right now.

And consider that this insurgency is based in the Sunni sector of the country, and they only account for 20% of the population.

[Barkley]

34. The "200,000" figure justifies killing 25 'insurgents' per day.

This is also propaganda to increase the troops size and re-instate the draft.

[donkeyotay]

35. Is this another catastrophic success?

"I think the resistance is bigger than the US military in Iraq..."

Oh by the way, all you un-American, morans out there? YOU WERE RIGHT, AND THE RIGHT WAS WRONG. Wonder if they'll ever admit it.

[GOPBasher]

36. Wow.

I knew it was getting horrible over there, but I didn't know quite how horrible it was getting.

[Barrett808]

37. What's the tooth-to-tail ratio for US forces? Maybe 1 to 5?

For the insurgency, I'd imagine it's much closer to 1:1.

Thoughts?

[TomClash]

38. FREEDOM IS ON THE MARCH nt

[Dancer]

39. Vanquished

* Veteran Middle East Correspondent Robert Fisk says, "Over the past year, there has been evidence enough that our whole project in Iraq is hopelessly flawed, that our Western armies - when they are not torturing prisoners, killing innocents and destroying one of the largest cities in Iraq - are being vanquished by a ferocious guerrilla army, the like of which we have not seen before in the Middle East." Fisk joins us from Beirut, Lebanon. In a year-in-review article by veteran Middle east correspondent Robert Fisk in the Independent of London, Fisk begins his piece with a question: *

Watch, or read, here-

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/01/03/1447225

[THUNDER HANDS]

40. part-time fighters?

what, they only work weekends and alternate Tuesdays?

[alcuno]

55. My thought exactly. What is a part-time insurgent? Is it a hobby?

Are they consultants? What do they do the rest of the time? Work for the "coalition?"

[Seabiscuit]

66. What is a part-time insurgent?

Iraq's version of a weekend hippy?

[TheKingfish]

76. Part time insurgent = Iraqi Police on lunch break n/t

[The Traveler]

81. They're the most dangerous kind

The backbone. They run the corner convenience store. They maintain a normal appearance. They keep eyes and ears open. They make contacts. They channel money, weapons, munitions. They provide intelligence. They give safe haven to the hard core/most wanted.

[Chimpanzee]

43. Funny, Colin Powell said yesterday there were only a few thousand

[LynnTheDem]

44. Blame it all on the Sunnis; I don't THINK so!

There have been 3 major SHIA UPRISINGS.

BASRA...KARBALA...SADR CITY.

They be SHIA, not Sunni.

Al Sadr, bush's latest "terrorist"; he's a SHIA, not a Sunni.

Yes, let's just blame it all on the Sunni. :eyes:

[Horse with no Name]

45. There is only one legitimate course of action in Iraq at this time

That is to withdraw troops immediately and start paying reparations to that country.
I am sooo ashamed we are part of this genocide.

[pokercat999]

61. Plus arrest and prosecute the war criminal Bush and

his cohorts, including the congress of the US.

[klyon]

85. Double YES

War Is NOT The Answer

KL

[klyon]

84. yes

War Is NOT The Answer

KL

[Ezlivin]

46. When no mistakes have been made, how can corrections occur?

There is nothing going wrong in Iraq.

The economy is getting better.

Social Security is in trouble.

Bush has never made a mistake that he can think of.

That should put everyone's mind at ease.

Well, that and a couple of shots of 151 and a bong-load or two.

[klyon]

86. Fear Not

Respect the Troops
War Is NOT the Answer

KL

[The_Casual_Observer]

47. Could it be that all the mistrust in bush's "wisdom" was justified?

The bravado with which we went to war with god on our side appears to have been in misplaced and in error. In actuality, we had no business invading and occupying that country. But, as with all things bush, because of the good ol' boy Texas hold'em style logic they apply to all arguments and decisions, where it is hard to dispute them with facts, it takes a couple of years to prove them wrong through the course of actual events. This is the case with his tax cuts and the resulting out of control deficit, failed no child left behind plan, failed Medicare prescription plan, and now his march to freedom in Iraq.

[PurityOfEssence]

48. When are we gonna admit that we just don't have a clue?

Okay, all right; that's a sucker question: never.

It just boggles the mind how we just make sweeping proclamations about reality when we obviously don't have any idea at all. We were so sure that it was all a bunch of "Dead Enders" and oh so many foreigners. We couldn't find 'em, didn't know anything about 'em, but knew all the answers anyway. Now it turns out that there are very few foreigners. Hussein's safely parked in some dungeon, so his loyalists aren't the problem.

If you want to count sympathizers, it adds up to well over 20 million.

Who are they? Damn near every group. It's just ridiculous.

Junior and his faith-based buccaneers just pronounce reality as they see fit and dismiss any evidence to the contrary. Why not? That's what they do in every facet of their plundering and blundering.

It's the "because I said so" administration. How long can they keep so many so suckered?

I'm a little scared to hear the answer to that last one.

[Earth_First]

49. What happend to "a small band of thugs"

which was reported by Rummy to be in the thousands not HUNDREDS of thousands...

[Gloria]

56. Wow, they were saying it was maybe up to 20,000 only a few

short weeks ago....can you feel the love???

[Disturbed]

58. This secret is a known "known" to Iraqis?

Full Sovereignty?

"Throughout the spring, as hundreds died in the spiraling conflict, as Regime bosses applied their hardcore "anti-terrorist" tortures to innocent bystanders raked up in their occupation nets, as Regime mouthpieces prated endlessly of "liberation" and "sovereignty," Bush viceroy Paul Bremer was quietly signing a series of edicts that will give the United States effective control over the military, ministries -- and money -- of any Iraqi government, for years to come, The Wall Street Journal reports.

Bremer has placed U.S.-appointed "commissions" made up of Americans and local puppets throughout Iraqi government agencies; the ministers supposedly in charge weren't even told of the edicts. These boards "will serve multiyear terms and have significant authority to run criminal investigations, award contracts, direct troops and subpoena citizens," the Journal reports. Any new Iraqi government "will have little control over its armed forces, lack the ability to make or change laws and be unable to make major decisions within specific ministries without tacit U.S. approval, say U.S. officials.


Earlier Bremer edicts laid the Iraqi economy wide open to ruthless exploitation by Bush-approved foreign "investors"; dominance of such key sectors as banking, communications -- and energy -- is already well advanced. The latest dictates aim to ensure that this organized looting goes on, no matter what kind of makeshift "interim government" the United Nations manage to piece together. Bush's plans to build a Saddamite fortress embassy in Baghdad and 14 permanent military bases around the country are designed to provide the knee-breaking "security" for these lucrative arrangements."



http://context.themoscowtimes.com/stories/2004/05/21/120.html

[teryang]

60. What is not mentioned is that we unjustifiably and cruelly

...bombed and invaded this country, killed and wounded tens of thousands of civilians, destroyed the country's infrastructure and are now dictating it's economic and legal structure. The lack of legitimacy of any American sponsored efforts to organize a government after effectively destroying the country is a fatal flaw which cannot be overcome.

The insurgency is very advanced in development for such a short time. This suggests that an even larger portion of the population already believe that the American occupation and its political objectives are doomed. The large number of supporters foretell the end of the occupation and the social system it has tried to imposed on an enraged people. The armed insurgency is institutionalized, which means it is forever. It is already a government in formation, it is just waiting for us to leave. The fact that the former leadership organized and trained guerilla fighting units and studied Vietnamese organization and fighting strategies should have been a clue to the idiots in Washington.

[leftchick]

64. You are repeating exactly what I read just this morning teryang...

It is an excellent read...

http://www.axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/article_14813.shtml

~snip~

The "Interim Government of Iraq" endorsed in the resolution has no credibility or popular constituency within Iraq, and is headed by an acknowledged agent of the C.I.A. who was flown in with the invasion forces. The "multinational force" entrusted with "promoting security and stability" is the same force that unleashed this war on Iraq in the first place and continues to wage it today. The condemnation of terrorism in Article 17 does not, and legally cannot, deprive the Iraqi Resistance of the fundamental right to resist the invasion and occupation of their country that is guaranteed by Article 51 of the United Nations Charter. By its refusal to turn over any real power to legitimate representatives of the Iraqi people or to the U.N., the Bush administration has squandered the legitimacy it sought to gain by this resolution as well as precious time and many more lives.

The reality in Iraq is that the United States has now been engaged in an unsuccessful war for 21 months to gain control of the country, and that U.S. military operations are killing two or three times as many Iraqi civilians as the Iraqi Resistance and foreign "terrorist" groups put together. <7> In any case, as the aggressors in this conflict, the United States and the United Kingdom are ultimately responsible for "the accumulated evil of the whole."

Legitimacy is not something that can be conjured out of illegality by finding the right political or military strategy. International law actually requires us to end our offensive military operations, and to submit the crisis we have created to the U.N. Security Council without prejudice, not to win approval of a new American plan for Iraq, but so that we can withdraw our forces, Iraq can regain true sovereignty and the U.N. can offer its assistance as needed or requested by the Iraqis. The legitimate ongoing role of the United States in this process would be the payment of reparations to enable the Iraqi people to recover from the war and to rebuild their country.

[robertpaulsen]

70. Thanks leftchick! This is a fantastic article!

This details specifically how illegal every aspect of the war has been according to international law. What could the possible punishment be for Bush? According to the article:

When the president of the United States signs a treaty and it is ratified by the U.S. Senate, our country is making a solemn undertaking. The seriousness of such commitments is exemplified by the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials and subsequent international trials, in which individual national leaders have been held criminally responsible for treaty violations and, when convicted, have been sentenced to long terms of imprisonment or even death by hanging.

Normally, I'm not a big advocate of the death penalty. But this is not a normal President!

[leftchick]

71. I agree it is a great article. Quite damning of bushco*...

This is why they CAN'T go off message about the war and agree to any treaties. They are War criminals and need to be subjected to The Hague!

[teryang]

74. Brilliant article!

<The illegality of so much of what the U.S. is doing in Iraq is a direct consequence of the illegality of the occupation itself, and a restoration of legitimacy remains the necessary first step to resolving the crisis.>

Is there any doubt that a truly sovereign Iraq would repudiate the invasion and occupation, assume a hostile posture toward Israel and its sponsor, and promptly reverse the expropriation of national assets under occupation rule?

This is the real reason the neo-con agenda rejects the rule of international law. The fault lines of Straussian nihilism, absorbed during the fascist era, completely repudiate the enormous sacrifices and efforts of the "greatest generation." The neo-cons are an extremist group operating on behalf of corrupt corporate elites who now dominate the nation's policy apparatus. They have established as a national policy a fascist doctrine that law doesn't apply to foreigners, that foreigners have no human rights, and that subtrefuge and deceit are the currency of international and domestic discourse rather than truth and justice. It's historical underpinnings are found in Machiavelli's works which laud the role of the dictator during wartime and the role of creative or pre-emptive war in the effort to shore up the legitimacy of princes with questionable claims to political rule. The Nazis also were great afficionados of this tact, which ultimately reduced even the corporate puppeteers to the tyranny of the state dictatorship.

These so called "intellectuals" in the Pentagon, "justice department," NGOs, and press, are the vanguard of the dictatorship of a society, democratic in name only. They have buried our history and misrepresented our fundamental principles, in pursuit of money and power for themselves to the lasting detriment of freedom, commerce and security at home and abroad. Because there is no lasting constructive application that results from violation of international law and human rights, their expedient and necessary juggling act of belligerence and fraud results only in a steadily deteriorating circumstance.

Such developments, left unchecked, will ultimately come to a bitter and diastrous end.

[PROUDNWLIBERAL]

65. 10 to 1

The ratio to win a guerrilla war is 10 troops to every guerrilla. Let's see if we do the math 200,000 X 10 = we're fucked!!!!!!!

[robertpaulsen]

67. WHOA! Can you feel a draft coming?

And will there be enough 18-25 year olds who will stand for it?

[peacebird]

68. on the brighter side -

* doesn't have enough troops left to start another war...

but my money is on * declaring "victory" after the Iraqi (s)election and using the bases we've built there to stage "preempitve attacks" and "surgical strikes" on Iran, or maybe Syria....

in keeping with his war pResident image and all.

i mean - he never finished Afghanistan, moved on to Iraq, now leave Iraq a shambles and move on to his next glorious shock'n'awe shuck'n'jive...
:eyes:
freedom is on the march...

[leftchick]

72. 200,000 is a very conservative estimate....

The US is creating hundreds more for every Iraqi life they destroy. Pandora's box was opened 21 months ago and there is nothing but chaos in Iraq as long as the US is there.

and yes, we are indeed fucked!

[The Traveler]

82. That ratio is historically correct

And so your conclusion is inescapable. We are verily very much fucked.

[Bouncy Ball]

69. What I find intriguing is that we had a little over 600,000 troops

mobilized in the Gulf area to get Iraqis out of Kuwait in 1991. The buildup of troops and equipment took place in Saudi Arabia over the course of 6-7 months.

But for the complete takeover of Iraq we have 150,000 troops?

Makes no fucking sense at all.

[clem_c_rock]

73. Hmm do I detect another beheading??

I mean everytime we need to make the "insurgents" (people fighting an occupation) look like psychotic monsters all we have to do is show one of those video tapes of a head being sawed off and the victim doesn't struggle and barely bleeds. Oh yeah and make sure that we say it's by that Zarqawi super dude who used to have only one leg but now has both.

[quaoar]

75. Can the Tet Offensive be far behind?

[barb162]

80. Let the Sunnis have their own state separate from the

Kurds and Shiites. That could possibly settle things down. Use of the word "could" is VERY conditional.

[wellst0nev0ter]

90. On The Bright Side

If there are only 200,000 insurgents outta a population of 25 million Iraqis, then that means 24.2 milllion Iraqis are waiting to throw bouquets of daisies at us

(end laughingly weak neocon rationalization)

[bozo299]

91. Bush kills

Given the current rate of military deaths, on what date will George Bush have killed more Americans that Bin Laden?

[Bo]

92. Blinded by the light

neocons are going down