Author Topic: Dowding, re: comparison between N. Ireland and Iraq guerilla warfare...  (Read 378 times)

Offline wulfie

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 792
      • http://www.twinkies.com/index.asp
...I thought you'd find this interesting.

From http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A54345-2003Jul27.html (you don't need to register but you need to enter M or F, birth year, and zip code to get to article) -

"As Iraqi fighters launched guerrilla strikes, the U.S. Army adopted a more nimble approach against unseen adversaries and found new ways to gather intelligence about them, according to dozens of soldiers and officers interviewed over the last week.

Thousands of suspected Iraqi fighters were detained over the six-week period, many temporarily, in hundreds of U.S. military raids, most of them conducted in the dead of night. In the expansive region north of Baghdad patrolled by the 4th Infantry Division, more than 300 Iraqi fighters were killed in combat operations, the military officials said. In the same period, U.S. forces in all of Iraq have suffered 39 combat deaths. The continuing casualties -- such as the four soldiers killed Saturday -- are the direct result of the intensified U.S. offensive, the military officials added."

As high skilled as the British personnel in N. Ireland were, they never came close to 300 vs. 39 in terms of KIA in a 6 week period. Mainly because the IRA understood guerilla warfare, operated in cells, had great OPSEC, careful target selection (to conserve force levels), etc. The Iraqis are conducting hit-and-run attacks without any such considerations and they are paying dearly for it.

Also, when we last 'spoke' I compared the motivation of the IRA with the (lack of) motivation of the average Iraqi. From the same article -

"At the beginning of June, before the U.S. offensives began, the reward for killing an American soldier was about $300, an Army officer said. Now, he said, street youths are being offered as much as $5,000 -- and are being told that if they refuse, their families will be killed, a development the officer described as a sign of reluctance among once-eager youths to take part in the strikes."

I don't think the young men recruited by the IRA were bought with cash and/or had their families threatened. From what I know, the IRA had volunteers coming to them - because they actually believed they were opressed by the U.K. The average Iraqi doesn't seem to feel the same right now about the U.S. You can also compare this to Vietnam - where diaries taken from KIA NVA soldiers often mentioned that even though they missed their families terribly, they felt it to be their patriotic duty to fight for the reunification of their homeland under a government of self-rule (poor misguided bastards).

Can you give me an email address for you 'phoenetically' on this BBS (i.e. dowding at earthlink dot net)? I don't get much internet time as of late but I have more opportunities by far to send and receive email. I could discuss things more often via email, at least for the next couple of months.

Mike/wulfie

Offline -tronski-

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2825
Dowding, re: comparison between N. Ireland and Iraq guerilla warfare...
« Reply #1 on: July 29, 2003, 03:30:21 AM »
I would think the main difference is that the Iraqi resistance fighters have only had in months, what the IRA has had in years to get their tactics and organisation right.

 Tronsky
God created Arrakis to train the faithful

Offline Dowding

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6867
      • http://www.psys07629.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/272/index.html
Dowding, re: comparison between N. Ireland and Iraq guerilla warfare...
« Reply #2 on: July 29, 2003, 03:57:23 AM »
I think to say that the IRA was purely motivated by nationalistic ideology (and good Christian nationalistic ideology) is over-simplisic. Just looking at the drug trafficking and other racketeering they do is proof of that. I don't doubt many joined to fight British tyranny, but many do it for the cash and for power they can have within their bcommunities by being affiliated with the paramilitaries. I should think more than a few business deals have been skewed by paramilitary influence.

Iraq is a different case, I agree. They are losing combatants at a rate of knots - but they are killing a soldier a day and sometimes more like 2-3 a day. The IRA never had that kind of success. Like you say, they chose their targets carefully and made sure they didn't expose themselves. I think the rules of engagement were different in Northern Ireland. The British Army could never had blown a house to pieces and had long gunfights supported by helicopter gunships, in the middle of Belfast.

I doubt the Iraqis will ever be allowed to find a footing - they have so many foreign nutjobs trying to get in on the act, I should think there will be infighting before long.

Interesting article, cheers. :)

Oh, here's my email stanga at genie dot co dot uk.

I do have the question though - the British in Basra and the South have not experienced anything like the kind of losses the US have in Baghdad and the North. Why do you reckon that is?
War! Never been so much fun. War! Never been so much fun! Go to your brother, Kill him with your gun, Leave him lying in his uniform, Dying in the sun.

Offline wulfie

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 792
      • http://www.twinkies.com/index.asp
Dowding, re: comparison between N. Ireland and Iraq guerilla warfare...
« Reply #3 on: July 29, 2003, 04:34:07 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Dowding
I do have the question though - the British in Basra and the South have not experienced anything like the kind of losses the US have in Baghdad and the North. Why do you reckon that is?


This is a 'quick and dirty' reply I'll send you a full one via email. It's not just the UK forces in Basra and the South that are seeing fewer attacks - everyone in that area is. Anti- and pro- coalition feelings (you could call pro-coalition anti-Hussein or anti-Baath fairly safely I think) are largely regional, which (so far - it's only been a couple of months) causes the intensity of the guerilla warfare situation to be a regional issue as well.

I agree on the motivation of the IRA - I don't doubt that some looked at 'generating financial support for the IRA' to mean 'how to get rich dealing drugs with IRA gunmen as free security units'. I didn't mean to imply that every IRA fighter was a 'freedom fighter'. I use the quotes because I don't consider the UK presence in N. Ireland to have ever been 'tyrannical'. Fighting for self government and fighting against tyranny are often no the same thing.

Mike/wulfie

Offline wulfie

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 792
      • http://www.twinkies.com/index.asp
Dowding, re: comparison between N. Ireland and Iraq guerilla warfare...
« Reply #4 on: July 29, 2003, 04:44:34 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by -tronski-
I would think the main difference is that the Iraqi resistance fighters have only had in months, what the IRA has had in years to get their tactics and organisation right.

 Tronsky


The military/paramilitary leaders and organizers of the current attacks vs. Coalition forces in Iraq are well trained in unconventional warfare tactics/theory/etc. One key thing they lack when compared to the IRA is the almost total 'local support' the IRA had in the areas in which they operated 'North of the border'. When you compare them to N. Vietnam they lack (among many other significant assets) the backing of the Soviet Union and China in the form of weapons, advisors, intelligence, etc.

They're a minority fighting for a regime that kept the people in line with terror, fear, etc. Every day that they don't score a major victory is a day where most of the population feels a little more certain that Hussein and his Baath party are not coming back. This slowly erodes their local support. They have no steady and/or reliable external support (the Coalition controls the borders for the most part, not to mention political pressure on possible sources of external support appears to be having some effect on the 'willingness' of external support organizations), and when the local ('internal') support dries up they are 'toast'. If you are really good (the better special operations units) you can fight a guerilla war as the cadre for insurgency forces trained from the local populace without having anything but external support and a small degree of internal support (that's where you get your recruits from). But it's very difficult and the casualty rate for the insurgents and the cadre is bound to be painfully high.

If you're an insurgent with no internal and no external support you're on the run as opposed to fighting a guerilla war.

Mike/wulfie

Offline -tronski-

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2825
Dowding, re: comparison between N. Ireland and Iraq guerilla warfare...
« Reply #5 on: July 29, 2003, 06:56:39 AM »
Good points.

I do think the internal support level of the Iraqi resistance is somewhat debatable however. Certainly as pointed out, anti-occupation feelings are more often than not regional based, and in more traditional anti-Hussien areas ie. the Southern/Basra and Kurdish Northern there is markedly pro-occupational feeling.

Perhaps only time will tell if the resistance soley based in pro-hussien, will move on to a wider popular base ie. radicalised/religious or die out completely.

 Tronsky
God created Arrakis to train the faithful

Offline Defiance

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 424
Dowding, re: comparison between N. Ireland and Iraq guerilla warfare...
« Reply #6 on: July 29, 2003, 04:11:45 PM »
Yo,
If any of you have been to northern ireland you would realise what the forces general envolvement is about (nope i am not in army etc before ya jump to conclusions)

A: Stop a bloodbath
B: Allow 2 faiths to stop A:
C: To absorb all the cwap that pops up about unification

Aint it weird, There's the Republic just south of the border, Anyone seen them ranting about how they want the north back ??  Nope ?

It's purely religeon as nearly all conflicts are

While the 2 communities cannot live in peace you will have killings/bombings/maimings etc carried out by "murderers" with some fools (mostly allied to their own beliefs/side) standing up for them and saying it's done for making a whole united ireland or to keep the northern part within the uk

Pahhh, Each side call themselves all sorts of things, If a western army (eg: USA forces in iraq) did the same or similar things as each seperate "Freedom or Pro uk" forces did/do/may-do most here and the rest of the world would be up in arms against it
(damn some idiots on this earth, You only have to look at the darn religeon in the old yugslav area to see what happens if left unchecked/policed) think pulling uk troops etc would enable a instant peace/tollerence for another religeon ?  dream on

I for one see a 2 edges sword, Let the republic have the north back, Or leave as-is until PEACEFULLY it is resolved (NEVER WILL HAPPEN, as long as guys/gals are brought up with hatred bred into them against another religeon)

Or other side is pull the damn uk forces out and let a massacre begin, But who will police the northern part then ? Republican army etc ?? hmm yeah like they have the money or resources

The north costs a damn fortune to control and i have yet to see the republic opt-in to support this as the uk does

This is something you are either for or against there's no middle-ground


Best way is to repost this and get Irish born n bred n living in ireland to post about this, then see the general consensus

No need to have relative of an irish-person spouting you need ones there day to day for correct input/output

Related ex-pats with ancesterial history to ireland tend to have 1 point of view as they tend to be brought up for or against whatever's contrived (united ireland/none united) get my drift ?

Let's see what the irish among us want to happen, Instead of outsiders or distant relatives from the isle post for/against

 As all we can do here is post a bit either for/against (read above)

EDITED:: People who use Terrorism are Terrorists nothing more nothing less, This goes to either pro/against unification
« Last Edit: July 29, 2003, 04:14:16 PM by Defiance »