[lbo-talk] "Unsuccesful" Insurgencies: A Right Wing Blogger Shoots Himself In the Foot

Dwayne Monroe idoru345 at yahoo.com
Tue Apr 13 13:33:42 PDT 2004


Wojtek wrote:

Au contraire, I think he has a valid point which I tried to make on this list time and again - that popular movement or insurgency have a slim chance of success unless aided by a state or conversely, unless the state it opposes collapses under external forces (cf. tsarist Russia).

I do not think there is a single instance of a successful un-aided popular uprising against a functioning state.

==========

Yes, this is, I suppose we could say, "the lesson of history". But let's turn the thing around and ask a question:

Q: how can the United States hope to 'win' a popular guerilla war in Iraq?

A: By employing overwhelming force

Even this 'Tacitus', whose insights you acknowledge (political differences aside for the moment) says this.

Of course, there are also politically clever ways of undermining an insurgencies' support and ability to move but so far the US, grasping the hilt of its sword ever more tightly to swing again and again, shows little ability to employ these techniques.

So by employing overwhelming force the US simply inspires more resistance and around we go (as Chuck Grimes stated a few days ago).

You say the Iraqi fighters are "unaided". Is this true? By which I do not mean aid from other nations but the people of Iraq itself. That is, the US is facing at least two tiers of resistance: the actual fighters and those who, as someone commented a while back, sew the masks, provide food and shelter, refuse to answer questions and so on and so forth.

Also, even victory leads to defeat. Let's assume you are correct -- the US is able to defeat this "unaided" resistance. It collapses from the present level of ferocity to a few ineffective and sporadic acts. Washington proves its power. The Arab world is "shocked and awed" into forced cooperation with whatever the hell it is these idiots are doing.

Isn't this simply laying the groundwork for future resistance -- perhaps even worse for being long delayed? I believe this is precisely the point Chalmers Johnson makes again and again and again.

To ask the question another way, how long will the JDAM enforced 'peace' last? 10 years, a thousand?

DRM



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list