The Cold Reality Of Warfare

For political purposes, to salvage his collapsing public approval standing, and to offer the traditional consistency standards that all American Presidents have to offer on foreign policy matters, Mr. Bush has undergone daily efforts to promote his administration's goals in Iraq and on the economy. However, with the death of 10 Marines in Iraq to a boobytrap, and the deaths of 11 more Iraqi soldiers to a roadside bomb, the cold reality of war once again sets in.

It doesn't matter how well any President will try to defend a war like Viernam, like LBJ and Nixon did, or that Bush is in Iraq, in any insurgent war, these forces will always alter their strategy to up American casualties, in an attempt to drive America out. This is the frustration that the administration must feel. No matter what propaganda face is put on the war effort, or claims of Iraqi soldier improvements, the insurgents will one up these efforts.

At first the administration was way too slow to armor the Humvees, which became a sort of police patrol vehicle in Iraq. And this lack of armor foreced many National Guard units to use sandbags and pieces of plywood to create what they called "plwood coffins" with their Humvees. But now insurgent forces are using a stronger Hezbollah designed explosive that can cut right through this armor. And Thursday's death of 10 Marines came from a new bombmaking idea, in which four shells were tied together to create a bobbytrap that could spray shrapnel over an entire football field size area.

And the kidnapping of some Christian peaceworkers by insurgents means that even Westerners who support a withdrawal of American forces are seen as a target of insurgent forces to further their ultimate political and military goals.

The cold reality of warfare is that no matter what a far superior military like the U.S. can do in the way of aircraft or high tech warfare, a low tech insurgency will attempt to match those efforts in very low tech ways. Insurgents have no airforce, helicopters, navy or tanks, but in a crude way will attempt to match the efforts. The combat means will not even match in the same battle field capability, but in the psychological effect to create terror and to break the will of the American public.

After Vietnam, many in America were very reluctant to enter another long running insurgent war. During the Reagan Administration many thought America should not be afraid to flex it's military muscles again. But a huge miscalculation of the political right, necoconservatives and others, was that the high tech weapons of the this age could defeat any low tech insurgency. But once again, just like in Vietnam, a determined low tech force has proven they can tie down America in a long running insurgent war. These insurgents believe that the U.S. will soon stop fighting and simply go home. And they are right. No American will to continue to fight this sort of war really exists. There just is no appetite for this type of war among many Americans.

The cold and hard reality of war is that an enemy will match the U.S. as well as they can. And any use of America ground forces, is an invitation for the insurgents to follow the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese example, and to continue to battle the U.S. until the American will is broken and then the U.S. will simply go home and hand a victory to the insurgents. Instead of securing peace, this only encourages other insurgents that this type of conflict can be won. The French and American defeat in Vietnam. The Soviet defeat in Afghanistan. And the problems in Iraq, all serve to establish this as a reality of history to inspire insurgents everywhere.