NationStates Jolt Archive

Every good assault needs a nice body count for the press. The higher the better. And you have heard about how the resistance in Falluja is primarily a set of ragtag groups runnign the streets. But we have also heard that the army feels that the bulk of the insurgents already fled.

So who is fighting?

Sometimes, saddly, people who have no choice.

The US has allowed the citizens of Falluja to leave. Well, not all of them. The idea was to allow the women and children to leave, but males of military age they are unable to know if they are insurgents or not. So, they have been forced to remain.

Case in point, from today's update (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=540&ncid=736&e=10&u=/ap/20041112/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_fallujah_refugees)


Hundreds of men trying to flee the assault on Fallujah have been turned back by U.S. troops following orders to allow only women, children and the elderly to leave.

The military says it has received reports warning that insurgents will drop their weapons and mingle with refugees to avoid being killed or captured by advancing American troops.

As it believes many of Fallujah's men are guerrilla fighters, it has instructed U.S. troops to turn back all males aged 15 to 55.


"We assume they'll go home and just wait out the storm or find a place that's safe," one 1st Cavalry Division officer, who declined to be named, said Thursday.

Army Col. Michael Formica, who leads forces isolating Fallujah, admits the rule sounds "callous." But he insists it's is key to the mission's success.

"Tell them 'Stay in your houses, stay away from windows and stay off the roof and you'll live through Fallujah,'" Formica, of the 1st Cavalry Division's 2nd Brigade, told his battalion commanders in a radio conference call Wednesday night.

...

Fallujah has been under relentless aerial and artillery bombardment and without electricity since Monday. Reports have said residents are running low on food. An officer here said it was likely that those who stay in their homes would live through the assault, but agreed the city was a risky and frightening place to live.

U.S. military says it does all it can to prevent bombing buildings with civilians inside them.

Once the battle ends, military officials say all surviving military-age men can expect to be tested for explosive residue, catalogued, checked against insurgent databases and interrogated about ties with the guerrillas. U.S. and Iraqi troops are in the midst of searching homes, and plan to check every house in the city for weapons.





If you were a male who lived in Falluja, you are being forced to stay there while the operation continues. No quarter is being given. No opportunity even to surrender and await some faint hope that eventually you will be deemed as not a threat. No - if you try to leave the city you are forced back into the crossfire at gunpoint.

Stay in your house and hope for the best?

Hope that a strafing run, an errant bomb, a mortar barrage doesn't kill you? Hope that a sweep operation skips past your home? That a soldier doesn't come in and mistake you for an insurgent? Or shoot first just to be safe? I mean - soldiers are trained NOT to allow any enemy behind them. How many chances are they giving people?


Ask yourself this: If we were put into such a situation, how many of us would say to ourselves "well fuck it. If I'm going to die I'm going to do my best to take a couple of those assholes with me!"


I would. I may not have training. I may have no chance of survival. But sometimes DOING something... anything... is better than just waiting to die. And maybe I'll get lucky and nail one of them first.


I can't think of any policy I've heard in Iraq more guaranteed to generate more hatred and resistance than this one.

It's like the bible, but not in a good way.

These are the same people who allowed the insurgents and terrorists to stay in the first place. They did not defend their territory from them and it has come back to haunt them.

These are the same people who allowed the insurgents and terrorists to stay in the first place. They did not defend their territory from them and it has come back to haunt them.

Still, you don't sentence every male between 15-55 to death.

If they are worried about insurgents they should segregate all the escaping men in camps until they can sort out who they are.

These are the same people who allowed the insurgents and terrorists to stay in the first place. They did not defend their territory from them and it has come back to haunt them.


Oh silly me... of course... it was Joe Average Citizen's job to provide the country's security after the invasion. It was up to the local grocer to spontaneously form a militia and battle trained terrorists....


In other news, it is the fault of the Afghanis' that the Taliban was in power, and the fault of the Kurds that Saddam was in power.

You live under armed oppression your whole life, you learn to keep your head down and survive. It was the duty of the Coalition to provide security after doing away with the previous regime. It was their duty to secure the borders to keep the foreign terrorists out.

That was NOT a job handed to the people you were "liberating".

:rolleyes:

In other news, it is the fault of the Afghanis' that the Taliban was in power, and the fault of the Kurds that Saddam was in power.



Actually I think the Taliban did have to go.

If they are worried about insurgents they should segregate all the escaping men in camps until they can sort out who they are.
I agree, just detain them, send them to a camp and sort them out later. Sending them back makes no sense at all.

Oh silly me... of course... it was Joe Average Citizen's job to provide the country's security after the invasion. It was up to the local grocer to spontaneously form a militia and battle trained terrorists....


In other news, it is the fault of the Afghanis' that the Taliban was in power, and the fault of the Kurds that Saddam was in power.

You live under armed oppression your whole life, you learn to keep your head down and survive. It was the duty of the Coalition to provide security after doing away with the previous regime. It was their duty to secure the borders to keep the foreign terrorists out.

That was NOT a job handed to the people you were "liberating".

:rolleyes:
If the town had stood together the terrorists would have been screwed. A good example would be towns on the Old West. Gangs tried to take over towns on several occasions and most of the time got there asses handed to them. The only time they didn't was when the town rolled belly up for the gangs.

Actually I think the Taliban did have to go.

I don't believe anybody (well maybe a few people on here) would disagree with you there.

But this is another example of a situation where the US has created a for us or against us situation. They have to realize it isn't black or white.

I really feel bad for these people, they are forced to either fight against the terrorists and their fellow Iraqis, fight for us, or face being killed by one of the sides.

I agree, just detain them, send them to a camp and sort them out later. Sending them back makes no sense at all.


And not for nothing, they could set up some decent camps for the rest of the refugees too. Even if it's just out of self interest. You catch more flies ...&ct.

It's insanity.

Actually I think the Taliban did have to go.


Oh, I agree... I was just trying to make a silly comparison to this person's blaming of the citizens for all of the ills that have befallen them since the invasion.

http://www.techcentralstation.com/111104B.html

http://www.techcentralstation.com/111104B.html

All the more reason not to send the male refugees back. Like I said segregate them in some type of camp until it can be sorted out.

I don't believe anybody (well maybe a few people on here) would disagree with you there.

But this is another example of a situation where the US has created a for us or against us situation. They have to realize it isn't black or white.

I really feel bad for these people, they are forced to either fight against the terrorists and their fellow Iraqis, fight for us, or face being killed by one of the sides.


They are absolutely caught in the crossfire with almost no option but to pick a side and take up arms. Of course, one wonders if any who might have sided with the American's in April survived after the pullback......

They are absolutely caught in the crossfire with almost no option but to pick a side and take up arms. Of course, one wonders if any who might have sided with the American's in April survived after the pullback......

Which begs the question of whether or not there is any coherent strategy anymore. After they started in April they should have seen it through at that point. Or not done it at all.

If the town had stood together the terrorists would have been screwed. A good example would be towns on the Old West. Gangs tried to take over towns on several occasions and most of the time got there asses handed to them. The only time they didn't was when the town rolled belly up for the gangs.


I'm trying to remember a time in the old west when thousands of paramilitary trained gang members armed with fully automatic weapons and RPG's were repulsed by the local townspeople....


I'm also trying to determine the parallel of a frontier community of free people defending their own, and comparing that to a city of the downtrodden who have just endured a four decades of dictatorial ruthlessness and a decade of crippling sanctions, and who were under the jurisdiction of the new occupying forces and were operating under the instructions that ANYONE seen carrying a weapon would be considered a combattant and shot on sight.


Now tell me again... when exactly did the citizens of Chicago band together and get rid of Capone and the rest of the gangsters during Prohibition? When did the dockworkers throw the mob off the waterfront? When did Compton band together to toss the Crips out?


It is NOT the job of citizens to be the police. And cetainly not their job to do so under the umbrella of a military occupation.

Which begs the question of whether or not there is any coherent strategy anymore. After they started in April they should have seen it through at that point. Or not done it at all.


I never thought there WAS a coherent strategy beyond "get Saddam". It felt from day one as if they thought that it would all just work itself out.


HArdly suprising that it hasn't....

Which begs the question of whether or not there is any coherent strategy anymore. After they started in April they should have seen it through at that point. Or not done it at all.

They had an election strategy to limit casualties before the election. Now they are free to take a big dump on Iraq and our soldiers.

They had an election strategy to limit casualties before the election. Now they are free to take a big dump on Iraq and our soldiers.

Yeah, I know. But I still don't approve of doing things that way though. Plus political strategy != millitary strategy.

Yeah, I know. But I still don't approve of doing things that way though. Plus political strategy != millitary strategy.

Hell yeah, its a stupid way of doing it. Whenever you politicize military decisions you make bad military decisions. History has shown that time after time.

Hell yeah, its a stupid way of doing it. Whenever you politicize military decisions you make bad military decisions. History has shown that time after time.


Generals may make good politicians, but rarely have politicians made good generals....

Every good assault needs a nice body count for the press. The higher the better. And you have heard about how the resistance in Falluja is primarily a set of ragtag groups runnign the streets. But we have also heard that the army feels that the bulk of the insurgents already fled.

So who is fighting?

Sometimes, saddly, people who have no choice.

The US has allowed the citizens of Falluja to leave. Well, not all of them. The idea was to allow the women and children to leave, but males of military age they are unable to know if they are insurgents or not. So, they have been forced to remain.

If you were a male who lived in Falluja, you are being forced to stay there while the operation continues. No quarter is being given. No opportunity even to surrender and await some faint hope that eventually you will be deemed as not a threat. No - if you try to leave the city you are forced back into the crossfire at gunpoint.

Stay in your house and hope for the best?

Hope that a strafing run, an errant bomb, a mortar barrage doesn't kill you? Hope that a sweep operation skips past your home? That a soldier doesn't come in and mistake you for an insurgent? Or shoot first just to be safe? I mean - soldiers are trained NOT to allow any enemy behind them. How many chances are they giving people?

Ask yourself this: If we were put into such a situation, how many of us would say to ourselves "well fuck it. If I'm going to die I'm going to do my best to take a couple of those assholes with me!"

I would. I may not have training. I may have no chance of survival. But sometimes DOING something... anything... is better than just waiting to die. And maybe I'll get lucky and nail one of them first.

I can't think of any policy I've heard in Iraq more guaranteed to generate more hatred and resistance than this one.

Just sounds like good military tactics to use against terrorists to me.

According to this article they *are* taking prisoners

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4008255.stm

I don't know how it jives with the original post though.

Just sounds like good military tactics to use against terrorists to me.


Assuming, of course, that every male in the city aged between 15 and 55 are terrorists.

And if that IS the case - get out now. Because you are not going to beat a country where EVERYONE is a terrorist. You certainly aren't going to fashion a democracy out of them....

otherwise, this is a tactic to CREATE terrorists.

Just sounds like good military tactics to use against terrorists to me.

We are fighting one group of people on another's soil.

There is no good conventional way to fight terrorism. The only thing that a conventional war does in this situation is to force the people to pick sides. If you were an Iraqi, which side would you pick, the mostly caucasian, christian soldiers from a nation with different values on the other side of the world, or the Arab terrorists who appear to be fighting invaders.

There is no way we are winning the "hearts and minds" of the people in Fallujah. By forcing them to stay in Fallujah, we are pretty well forcing them to side with the group that will accept them.