61 of 62

Write now Article Tools

I wrote in a previous article that there was no easy answer to the Iraq issue. In fact, at the time I couldn't see an answer at all (apparently if the current situation's anything to go by, nor could anyone else).

So I put my thinking cap on. Because the situation cannot continue as it is a solution must be found. And after some serious thought and consideration on the subject I have concluded there is only one possible solution

Let me preface by warning you, it's not without price. However, most people are beginning to understand THAT particular inconvenient truth' even the staunchest patriots.

In Ireland during the 20th century, a terrorist group known as the Irish Republican Army was virtually laying siege to the occupation of the North of their island (as they saw it) by the English. The situation became so bad, the RUC (Royal Ulster Constabulary) formed a group of specialists' know as the B Specials (there was an "A" and C' group also but the B's lasted longer and had more effect). With the idea of restricting, even stopping the IRA activity. Working as counterinsurgency teams, they severely hampered the IRA's operations and were credited with the following admission from the commanding officer, IRA's 3rd Northern division.

Northern Ireland's survival owed much, if not everything, to the sterling service of the USC' (Ulster Special Constabulary).

Other IRA divisions suffered the same fate. There is no question as to the effectiveness of the group of operatives known as the 'B' Specials.

The solution in Iraq and indeed globally, rests with the facilitation of a similar group of counter-espionage specialists. The SAS as it happens, were made for this role, though predominately in traditional war time. This new war would require deeper insertion of agents. These agents, trained in the culture into which they would be inserted, could assimilate themselves into their surrounds and fight their enemy on even terms. They could collect and act on information daily - some of which may well lead to the higher echelons of the organization. This is the only way. Martial law or nuclear annihilation are ridiculous suggestions, quite obviously.

Victory cannot be gained with orthodox means, regardless of the might of one's war machine. And you can convey that to your nearest financial institution.
They say stealth is the new tactic of war. In fact, it's not new stealth and keeping one's enemy in the dark has always been a fundamental of prolonged conflict. Upon invasion, America beat Bagdad like a dog, to coin a phrase, but here, four years later, it's on the verge of civil war. And this is a result of insurgents, striking and disappearing into the night, leaving their death and destruction; or dying to be martyrs.
As abhorrent as it may be to the fervent patriots a withdrawal is necessary. A slow trickle may save some face, but a pound of flesh will have to be offered and the enemy will achieve a victory that could see it grow in strength and numbers. Too bad that's the aforementioned price (and one, as it happens, that could have been easily avoided if America had controlled its vengeful president).
America will learn humility from this withdrawal of that, there is absolutely no doubt, but it's a course she must take, if ever she is to defeat this dangerous enemy. This new modern war could shape up into an Armageddon-like battle between good and evil with the two protagonists of equal power warring for the earth. All behind the scenes.

This enemy lives in the dark; to catch him, we must dwell there also.

Learn more about this author, Mutters.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

Add your voice

Know something about Winning the war against terrorism?
We want to hear your view. Write now!