Those 54 Iraqis killed looks like a major guerilla victory to me.

[J B]

How I'm reading the story is that one of two things happened.

- There was no ambush and the US forces got scared and fired randomly and started taking out buildings from which they thought there was enemy fire. Civilians came out with guns and were so pissed that they started attacking the Americans and were summarily slaughtered and posthumously declared terrorists.

- There really was an ambush which induced the Americans to fire randomly as well as putting deliberate and heavy fire on certain buildings used by the guerillas. The indiscriminate killing pissed off civilians, who came out with guns and started attacking the Americans, Mogadishu-style, and were summarily slaughtered and posthumously declared terrorists.

A mosque was hit with a tank shell. A kindergarden was attacked but, mercifully, the children were pulled out in time. The front of a hospital was shelled several times to attack those dropping off the wounded since, well, they were live Iraqis during a firefight and that's a threat.

Either way here, isn't this a huge guerilla VICTORY? The US Army is now fighting the People in Iraq. The People are, furthermore, starting to fight back. That they were slaughtered is of no consequence. The Iraqi People are siding with the guerillas and actually attempted rash, and in hindsight, suicidal direct action against Americans who decided to shoot up their streets. They may portray these civilian dead as martyrs and use them as poster children for why the US must be opposed. The guerillas and the Iraqi People are now being driven closer together, as a result of either US negligence, months of guerillas goading the US into mistakes, or more than likely, both.

So again I ask: Isn't this a major Iraqi guerilla VICTORY?

[Gman]

1. It takes a while to digest the initial information

and when the dust settles, it appears you're analysis may be right on the money.

[J B]

2. I'm trying to account for new information.

It sickened me how the initial reports were 100% uniform and compliant with the US' propaganda. But, other information just didn't exist yet..

It's just that, I've heard US commanders say again and again that the enemy is counting on the US *NOT* being able to retaliate with overwhelming force. I thought it was BASIC guerilla warfare to rely on the opposite and to goad an occupying power into losing its cool and doing needlessly excessive damage while fighting, engaging in terror tactics against the general population (like dropping sat-guided 2000lb bombs on empty buildings nearby), and basically polarizing and radicalizing the population.

Don't US command ranks study Sun Tzu? It's a rhetorical question - of course they do. So why can't they remember? The guerillas are attacking the US' strategy, which is what makes that "these attacks are militarily irrelevant" line so laughable...

[htuttle]

8. They are making military decisions for domestic political reasons

Same as in Vietnam. They've been purging the officer corps for 2 years, especially at the Pentagon, and have been ensuring that all the high ranking officers owe their first loyalty to the Bush administration.

What you are left with is a bunch of toadies who would have been unable to advance on merit alone. Same old, same old -- this is how the US loses wars.

[newyorican]

3. Dozens killed in Samarra carnage

An unnamed military spokesman on Monday did not specify if those killed were resistance fighters or civilians.

---

But local residents said US troops killed innocent bystanders when they opened fire on anything that moved around midday.

A hospital in the town said it received the bodies of eight civilians, including a woman and a child. Also, more than 60 people wounded by gunfire and shrapnel from US rounds are being treated at the hospital.

Workers at a nearby pharmaceutical plant said at least two colleagues were killed and many wounded as they walked out of the factory gates at the end of their shift. A US tank was shooting randomly in all directions, they said.

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/E56B8E35-2484-40C5-935E-B452A2C74769.htm

[MSchreader]

4. It's an American victory

Like the Tet Offensive was a North Vietnamese defeat.

Martin

[sistersofmercy]

5. I'd say I agree with your post completely, the US forces are certainly

making it easier for recruitment of resistance fighting.

[LittleApple81]

6. I, unfortunately, have to agree with you. When private citizens grab

arms openly to join the guerrillas because they MUST defend their homes, the US army has been totally transformed from a "benevolent" occupying force to being THE ENEMY. And this is even for people that were happy to see Saddam go.

[J B]

7. Yep. My point exactly.

Very ominous.

As if the faction leaders in Iraq weren't jockeying for when the US cuts and runs before...

[SahaleArm]

9. Oxymoron - Benevolent Occupying Force *nm*

[kentuck]

10. That is predictable with any occupation Army over a matter of time...

Stuff happens that turn the population against you. Good point, JB!

[leftofthedial]

11. using Chimpy's standards

I'd say it's proof that the insurgents are being successful and the coalition is getting desparate.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

12. American casualties??

Has anyone heard anything about killed or wounded Americans in the debacle?

I find it hard to beleive that with the Iraqi numbers that are cites, not ONE American came out of it dead/seriously wounded.

I know we generally never hear about the wounded, but I can't imagine there weren't numbers that would rate being mentioned.

[J B]

13. It's not impossible.

- Tanks were involved.

- Civvies with small arms were involved.

It explains a lot.

[nostamj]

15. there were 5 reported wounded n/t

[jonoboy]

14. meanwhile some idiot flies in to serve up turkey

[Ocean188]

16. And two of them went to Afghanistan first.

[LittleApple81]

17. ? With the "liberal" press and Fox News the only way for non-Bush

people to TRY to find out what is really going on over there is to GO there. Clinton was performing her duty as a member of Congress. Bush did it EXCLUSIVELY for his political campaign and to counteract Clinton's visit.

[bobbyboucher]

22. We got another one.

The two in Afganistan weren't so scared that they had to sneak over there like a theif in the night and then high tail it out of there after 2.5 hours. Wonder why? Oh, I know, the Chimp is a fraidy cat.

[NYC]

18. Thanks for your analysis, JB.

I don't even know how many people died.

[J B]

19. Well late breaking reports say the US didn't collect any bodies.

"The enemy picked them up and took them back to its base."

...

Whatever.

[Patriot_Spear]

20. No bodies there chief...

How do you know that ANY guerilla's were killed when we failed to recover even ONE from an engagment we supposedly won?

This is an old trick from the Viet Nam era.

BAGHDAD (AFP) - A top US military commander said that 54 insurgents were believed killed in deadly clashes in the Iraqi town of Samarra, and not a single civilian, but he acknowledged the toll was based entirely on estimates gleaned from troop debriefings.

Not a single Iraqi body was recovered by US forces from the scene of Sunday afternoon's clashes following ambushes against two heavily armed currency exchange convoys and another convoy of engineers, admitted the coalition's deputy director of operations in Iraq (news - web sites), Brigadier General Mark Kimmitt.

"There were 54 estimated killed, 22 estimated wounded and one confirmed in detention," said Kimmitt.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/afp/20031201/wl_mideast_afp/iraq_unrest_samarra_us_031201173037&e=2

[killbotfactory]

21. This is how the bastards work. It was completely predictable.

And it's been working for years in Palestine.

1. Get group A to attack group B in public place.
2. Group B reacts and kills innocent people.
3. Group A gets more support from the public since Group B is randomly killing them in self defense.
4. Repeat.

Thanks to the amazing lack of forsight of everyone involved in this stupid war, we now have to face the possibility of this daily.

And for what?

You'll never get a straight answer.

[SpiralHawk]

23. Appointment in Samarra

"The Appointment in Samarra"
(as retold by W. Somerset Maugham <1933>)

The speaker is Death

There was a merchant in Bagdad who sent his servant to market to buy provisions and in a little while the servant came back, white and trembling, and said, Master, just now when I was in the marketplace I was jostled by a woman in the crowd and when I turned I saw it was Deaththat jostled me.  She looked at me and made a threatening gesture,  now, lend me your horse, and I will ride away from this city and avoid my fate. 

I will go to Samarra and there Death will not find me. 

The merchant lent him his horse, and the servant mounted it, and he dug his spurs in its flanks and as fast as the horse could gallop he went. 

Then the merchant went down to the marketplace and he saw me standing in the crowd and he came to me and said, Why did you make a threating getsture to my servant when you saw him this morning? 

That was not a threatening gesture, I said, it was only a start of surprise.  I was astonished to see him in Bagdad, for I had an appointment with him tonight in Samarra.