Are the attacks in Iraq part of terrorism or guerilla warfare?
597994
Insurgencies are conditions in which the population revolts against a government because the government will not, or simply cannot provide the necessary governance for life.  This population can be likened to the criminal gang and organized crime elements more then conventional war fighters or terrorists.  The insurgency in Iraq is composed of primarily men 18-38.  They tend to be decentralized in operations, are local within a small territorial range and recruit their fighters from local talent.  When the group gets too large, there may be internal violence, mass killings and rival rifts as members compete for upward mobility.   Their “Cause to Die For” is the failure of the government to meet the most basic levels of life and to provide hope.  They almost always spawn from decapitated states especially if the levels of basic services do not improve with time.  Their cause is never an ideology or idealistic dogma and therefore they will have the propensity to ebb and flow based on the need of the day and the targets of opportunity.  Because they are not driven by a single ideology, members can quickly apostatize.  This fact can be used as an important counter insurgency weapon.  \nThe insurgent is apolitical and much more primal in their motives as compared to terrorism or conventional war fighters.  Insurgency warfare is not politically or religiously motivated.  Notice how this flies in the face of the conventional war fighter’s paradigm proposed by Clausewitz, “War is the extension of politics by other means.”  If a word could describe insurgents it is self serving—power, money, lawlessness, food, freedom of oppression, survival, etc., and once spawned, their aim is protractedness; not about winning.  Insurgents don’t have a goal of winning although they would not mind seeing their enemy fail, they win if the struggle continues to gain momentum and they draw others into the fray—that breeds chaos.  Finally, insurgency battles are small scale quick engagements that are executed locally within kilometers of their homes.  \nThe insurgency in Iraq is acting locally without thinking globally whereas the terrorists operating in Iraq (although much smaller in size less than 5%) are thinking globally without thinking locally.  This is not to say that they do not get outside support, momentum and efficacy from the outside, and from each other.  They certainly gain influence and power from the outside and even funding/support may be from external sources but in the aggregate, there is not enough self-interest for large numbers of outsiders to physically risk fighting at the grass roots level.  And, those that do fight are doing so for reasons much different then the primal needs of the insurgents.  It would not be unusual to see uncoordinated terrorist elements operating in the same area as an insurgency.  The primary rebel movement is local insurgency.  The major difference is that the insurgency targets are much more tactical, whereas the terrorist are more strategic in nature.   It is important that the two be kept separate because the methods of engagement are significantly different and the momentum that is gained when one is attached to the other is synergistic.     \n\nThe terrorist in contrast is based on the terrorist’s commitment to violence as a small group (usually ranging in group size from few to less than one thousand members) in order to intimidate a population or government to cause fundamental change.  The group size is limited by command and control capabilities. Their cause is ideological and political, based on group-actualization rather than self-serving.  It is aimed at the establishment, not decapitated states; however, terrorism enjoys the freedom to operate unabated in failed states.  Finally, rarely will anyone ever develop a counter terrorist strategy to change this group’s apostasy.   Their beliefs are so deeply held that they appear to the world as radical and extreme.  The terrorist
825042
Iraq has become the center of the war against the Islamic terrorists. Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia - all of the Islamic nations know this - and so do the terrorists.\n\nAmerica and its allies are the terrorists' last hurdle to their demented ideology and objectives.\n\nIt's a tough pill to swallow, but we must hold true to our promises to the Iraqi people. We must stay and continue to provide training, military aid and humanitarian aid until the Iraqi forces are capable of defending themselves from the terrorists.
1019047
There wasn't that much lawless violence as their is now.  \n\nSaddam - as bad as America as made him out to be - was able to control the people and the cities were not in rubble as they are now.  \n\nThe 'insurgents' are Iraqis fighting the real insurgents - the foreigners who invaded them in retaliation for 9/11 and the acquisition of their oil.
1045318
We're not at war with Iraq. We are helping the democratically elected Iraq government fight the terrorist insurgents and the foreign terrorist invaders (from Iran and Syria). \n\nI don't want to sound harsh, but do you have the slightest clue as to what is going on at all?
781244
They are not and that makes each death and injury all the more tragic. The Republican Congress’ reports (9/11 and the more recent report on pre-war intelligence) make it unmistakably clear that there was no connection between Iraq and any terrorists or terrorist organizations. Hussein did not provide any training camps and there were no terrorist residing in Iraq. Hussein even hated Al-Qaeda before we did. And, of course, there were no WMDs.\n\nEven if that were not the case, the neocon’s plan to spread the ‘American Way’ to the Middle East through military force was a stupid idea doomed to failure, and everyone with any knowledge of the region knew this to be case.\n\nNo Middle East expert gave Bush’s plan to invade Iraq more than a 50 percent chance of any success (on any level at all). Colin Powell knew it (that was the point of his pottery barn analogy [“if you break it, you own it”] to the President. And Bush’s own father knew it. In his book – ‘A World Transformed’ (1998) Bush #41 said that overthrowing Hussein would lead to America being stuck in a quagmire in Iraq that would further destabilize the region and strip the US of its credibility with the other countries of the world (exactly as has happened).\n\nNow Iraq is a hotbed of terrorists and their organizations. Bush has succeeded only in increasing the number, power, and popularity of anti-American radical Muslims He has also, of course, accomplished exactly the opposite for America, making us militarily and economically weaker, more vulnerable to terrorist attacks (which will certainly come), and weakening our status in the world by destroying America’s honor. \n\nWhen Clinton left office we were the most admired and respected nation in the world, probably more so than at any time since the immediate WWII period. After 9/11, the entire world stood beside us. This included nations such as Syria and Iran, who provided valuable intelligence that allowed us to pin the attacks on Bin-laden and track him to Afghanistan.\n\nNow we are the most distrusted, hated, and despised. Even our own friends are disgusted with us. The really bad news is that Bush has earned America this reputation though his ignorance, arrogance in world and domestic affairs, and by his illegal and immoral invasion of Iraq. Thanks to Bush, America now has the blood of hundreds of thousands of innocent people on its hands. \n\nHow is it possible that Iraqis now feel that life was better and more secure under Saddam that it is now? How could anyone have screwed up the situation worse than Bush? How could any American President suffer defeat in both Afghanistan and Iraq (two of the militarily weakest countries in the entire history of mankind)? How could anyone have done more to assist and benefit anti-American terrorist organizations than Bush? The answer is no one. It is impossible to imagine a plan and course of action to destroy America that could have been more successful than the Bush/Cheney administration.\n\n--------------------------------------\nLeAnne -\n\nYou must mean that Iraq is the center of America's war OF terror against the Iraqi people. In case you have not been paying attention, Bush is losing the war ON terror. They are stronger and more popular - we are weaker and less popular (ignoring, for the moment, the Constitutional rights we have lost) - in all things, including warfare, that is called LOSING.
686459
Eh? What did invading Iraq have to do with terrorism?\nIn fact, we've made it a breeding and practicing ground for terrorists.  They can now go there, practice making weapons and terror, and then use it against the west.  Saddam did not tolerate terrorists, and you never heard of a single suicide bomber or terrorist attack in Iraq while Saddam was in control.
4830
Nope. Let's look at the different rationales for war:\n1) WMDs: none found.\n2) Link with Al Qaeda: none proven.\n3) Make Iraq safe for democracy: not accomplished.\n4) Take the fight to the enemy: well, perhaps, but invading an arbitrary Middle Eastern country is hardly the way to go about doing this.\n5) Fight the war on terror: nope. The war in Iraq hasn't decreased terrorist attacks at all; rather, Iraq has become a magnet for terrorists.\n6) Make America safer: it's impossible to prove one way or the other, but any added safety we have is at the cost of the lives of American troops and Iraqi civilians.
44028
No, war is part of human nature. War by rock, by blade, by spear, by bullet, by bombs. The end will come at the end of the world.\n\nAnd Bush is a big part of the problem. Lies about iraq having connections to alquaida, lies about Weapons of mass destruction. Plus 9/11 happened while Bush was in office being incompetent as usual. Watch what the Republicans and Abramoff have been up to. And watch how theylie and blame things on others.
405488
IT WAS IN FACT...IRAQ.   any doubt as to why we are there now fighting someone else's  Holy war?
1091785
Saying Iraq had nothing to do with terrorism is not supported by the facts.\n\nIraq had ties to al Qaeda, and had in fact established a training camp for them. Iraq sent money to families of Pali suicide bombers, to encourage them.\n\nThis has been pretty well established.\n\nNow, Iraq was also grossly violating the terms of the UN brokered ceasefire from Gulf War 1, and repeatedly violated UN resolutions, also. His failure to fully disclose his WMD stockpiles and facilities, and his failure to have proven he'd destroyed the stockpiles he'd had, as well as his violations of the no-fly zones, were all actions that could result in recommencement of hostilities to force compliance.\n\nSo, nobody claimed that Iraq had a direct link with 9/11. I don't know where that meme came from. But the facts clearly show that Iraq supported terrorism, had ties with al Qaeda, and violated cease-fire agreements.
676060
What attack?  Which war?
21537
its a part in the battle against terrorism
519418
what is terrorism ?\nand who is the terrorist ?\nand who is can judge that if this man or the other one is  a terrorist or not ?\n\nanyway ... Iraq war is the beginning of the End Of USA !!\n\ni wish that the west media show some real videos and news from Iraq\n\nlike the yesterday video that show the mujaheddin bomb a base for the US troops and kill 40 solider :)\n\n" VIVA LA RESISTANCE "
1056948
By any definition of terrorism, the US is as guilty as the "insurgents" in Iraq.  Under international law, since they have occupied another country, the US is responsible for civilian safety in Iraq, and over 100,000 have died.  There is too much blood on the hands of the US army.
998148
and while this war is going on, there has not been another attack on US soil.  We are making some serious headway in the global war against radical Islam. Money well spent to me.\n\nHere are the facts.\n\nWe invaded Iraq in March of 2003, can you tell me of a terror attack that has happened on US soil since then?
85094
The US is at war with terror, which includes all terrorist organizations.
1073615
The war in Iraq was/is a good thing.  We need to fight for our freedom.  If we don't goto Iraq and fight Terrorism over there then we will have Terrorism over here in the states.  After the war when was our last Terrorism attack?  Don't remember?  Becuse they are all over in Iraq now fighting there.  \n\n2 or 3,000 dead Amaricans?  They are in the U.S. Military they all know that going to war is part of there jobs.  They are fighting for our freedom right now.\n\nNews flash for thoes of you who don't know yet they did find WMD's in Iraq.  (Read URL down at the bottom of post)