200,000 (was Re: [Marxism] Governor of Baghdad assassinated

["Carlos A. Rivera" <cerejota@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Fred Feldman" <ffeldman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

> On a related subject, I am very skeptical of the 200,000 figure for
> resistance fighters given by an occupation government Defense official.

Your skepticism is sound. I am also skeptical on the figure, simply because
I am skeptical by nature. ;-)

But I believe you miss some information elements in your comments:

> This seems deliberately exaggerated, reflecting the desire of the Allawi
> government  for many more US troops. Allawi needs this both to hold the
> line against the resistance and also to keep the coming Shia-headed
> occupation government (assuming the elections are held) from dumping him
> and to keep it from deviating too far from the US-Allawi course.

This is a good political view. But it assumes Allawi is an independent
figure, much like Chalabi before him. He isn't. He is the worse kind of
puppet.

> Certainly, no battle -- such as Fallujah -- has created any impression
> that US troops were outnumbered.  And the decision of the resistance to
> pull most of its fighters out of  Fallujah, rather than wage a
> Stalingrad-type battle to hold it.

Stalingrad was fought by two regular armies, of to very powerful states, in
a world war. Apples and Oranges.A guerilla, by definition, never suicidally
holds on to territory, specially not in its initial stages.

Still, they really gave a fight in Fallujah. It was attacked by the bulk of
the US combat infantry in Iraq. If the 200,000 figure is correct (see
below), I belive there where at most 2,500 guerillas in Fallujad, with
25,000 of their supporters. 15,000 shock US troops took almost a month and a
half, in two different battles, to overcome them. And then they didn't find
any significant arsenals as was expected. Sounds to me like a strategic
retreat, not a rout.

> Frankly, if the resistance had
> 200,000 fighters, I am not sure they could have occupied Fallujah
> without completely obliterating it,

One of the important part of the analisys, the one that many defense
analysts have agreed with, is that the 200,000 figure is basicaly a
multiplication of the current conservative estimate of 20,000 hard-core
full-time combat guerillas by ten. The Quisling Iraqis are very specific
that their 200,000 figure is not hard-core fulltime figthers, but the people
involved in the logistical, medical, and intelligence infrastructure, with
some part-time figthers.

To give you an idea, of the around 150,000 US troops in Iraq, only less than
50,000 are direct infantry combat troops, the types that attacked Fallujah.
The rest are artillery, logistical, medical, intelligence, police, and air
support troops. And of those less than 50,000, a significant percentage are
not actual combat troops, but HQ staff, field medics, etc, although they are
able to effecitively fight if needed.

Any military structure in the world follows this line, the bulk of their
armed forces are not line infantry, but support troops. The Iraqi guerillas
are no exception to this rule. So the Quislings are simply pointing out that
20,000 troops (the conservative US figure) would need, in their estimation,
a support structure of 200,000 people. And this obvious count multiplication
is why no serious defense analyst is calling the Quislings crazy. They
should have done that math themselves.

There is more:

Like almost every other puerto rican, I have cousins, friends,
ex-girlfriends, ex-in-laws, aquantainces etc etc etc in the war (the Puerto
Rican National Guard has the highest per-capita serving record in Iraq, they
are even in charge of Abu Gharib now). And the letters that come home are
very telling. In almost every US base there are daily harrasment operations,
usually mortar attacks but often firefights and snipers. These operations
very seldomly create casualties, so they don't get media coverage, but when
you realize they are happening almost daily, in almost every US military
base in Iraq, you realize the real hugeness of the resistance. And a mortar
team of 2 or 3 people, needs a support team of 6-10 other people to support
them, give them housing, store and clean their weapons, cure their wounds,
feed them, cover their retreat, and locate good spots to attack and place
the mortar. You ad to this that all patrols get shot at, that there are
dialy 3-5 roadside bombs blowing up convoys, that even a suicide bomber in
"safe" Mosul was able to inflict the largest resistance attack, that the
Quisling police is getting massacred, and you realize there can't be to few
of the resistance.

So the 200,000 figure, if there are indeed 20,000 full-time combatants, is
not such a far-out, althought a bit on the high side. We could call it the
maximum.

sks


_______________________________________________
Marxism mailing list
Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism