Ritter on the Inevitable US Defeat in Iraq (Again)

Nearly a year and a half ago, as US forces closed on Baghdad, former UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter made a bit of a splash by predicting that we would lose the war (see US defeat in Iraq ‘inevitable’). He was quoted then as follows:

“Every time we confront Iraqi troops we may win some tactical battles, as we did for ten years in Vietnam, but we will not be able to win this war, which in my opinion is already lost,” Ritter added.

Well, he’s still saying pretty much the same thing: The Saddam-ist / Islamist resistance will win.

The transfer of sovereignty to the new Iraqi government of Iyad Allawi is a charade that will play itself out over the next weeks and months, and with tragic consequences. Allawi’s government, hand-picked by the United States from the ranks of anti-Saddam expatriates, lacks not only a constituency inside Iraq but also legitimacy in the eyes of many ordinary Iraqi citizens.

The truth is that there never was a significant people- based opposition movement inside Iraq for the Bush administration to call on to form a government to replace Saddam. It is why the United States has instead been forced to rely on the services of individuals tainted by their association with foreign intelligence services, or drawn from opposition parties heavily infiltrated by agents of Saddam’s former security services.

Regardless of the number of troops the United States puts on the ground or how long they stay there, Allawi’s government is doomed to fail. The more it fails, the more it will have to rely on the United States to prop it up. The more the United States props up Allawi, the more discredited he will become in the eyes of the Iraqi people – all of which creates yet more opportunities for the Iraqi resistance to exploit.

We will suffer a decade-long nightmare that will lead to the deaths of thousands more Americans and tens of thousands of Iraqis. We will witness the creation of a viable and dangerous anti-American movement in Iraq that will one day watch as American troops unilaterally withdraw from Iraq every bit as ignominiously as Israel did from Lebanon.

Food for thought.

14 Responses to “Ritter on the Inevitable US Defeat in Iraq (Again)”

  1. a_stupid_box Says:

    Gee, it’s a shame I hadn’t been saying the same thing since the war began…

    Oh wait, yes, I did. On this very site in fact.

  2. Doc Clarke Says:

    To Ritter, the US is facing a well organized insurgency led by highly trained Baathist operatives and agents of Saddam, yet witnesses on the ground describe a disorganized militia acting on opportunity and relying on popular support for their survival. Are witnesses missing something, or is Ritter trying to save American face by exagerating the nature of the opposition?

  3. a_stupid_box Says:

    “To Ritter, the US is facing a well organized insurgency led by highly trained Baathist operatives and agents of Saddam, yet witnesses on the ground describe a disorganized militia acting on opportunity and relying on popular support for their survival. Are witnesses missing something, or is Ritter trying to save American face by exagerating the nature of the opposition?”

    Gee, you mean something like the colonial forces when the U.S. was fighting for independence against the British? Or maybe the Vietnamese forces in that “skirmish” in the 60’s? Of course, the large, well-organized armies won those, so maybe they’re bad examples… wait a minute…

    Never underestimate a determined fighting force — particularly a decentralized one that will fight until the last man standing. As long as the forces have popular support, their ranks will remain full enough to pose a threat. Ritter realizes this, just as I have since the outset of the war.

  4. Doc Clarke Says:

    The American colonials had a militia organized along similar lines as the European regular infantry, while the Vietnamese relied on the NVA, not just VC insurgents. Descriptions from Falujah and of the Al-Sadr militia paint an image of untrained rag-tag groups attacking targets of opportunity and showing only limited cooperation or coordination with each other.

  5. Tom Buckner Says:

    This war could be WORSE than Vietnam, perhaps, even if we lose less people in Iraq, for one simple reason: when we finally left Vietnam, the victors were content to leave well enough alone. They forgave us, eventually. We didn’t spend the rest of the Seventies worrying about domestic terror attacks by Vietnamese suicide bombers, and so forth. Getting out might not be enough this time. Bush’s campaign song might as well be a David Bowie tune from 1982: Cat People (Putting Out Fires With Gasoline).

  6. myself Says:

    Well, well …
    So Ritter’s comments proved to be valid, after all. His comments stood the test of time, so does the following comment:

    FAILURE IS THE ONLY OPTION

    By: Mohammed A. Hegazi

    Joseph Biden, a US Zionist senator, said about the US venture in Iraq, “Failure is not an option”. Any smart analyst would point out to those deluded US politicians: Failure is the only option left for them. The only other option would be to wipe out the Iraqi people in an unprecedented act of genocide by carpet bombing all Iraqi cities. So, a wise political decision by US Zionists would be: Pack up, cut your losses and leave.

    Sifting through the rubbish dished out by US Zionist spin media, we may come out with sound conclusions. The US is getting a good hiding at the hands of the brave fighters of the Iraqi resistance. US propagandists can call them insurgents, Sunni triangulars, thugs, or Saddam loyalists. They do call them anything but nationalist zealots who are determined to free their country from vile foreign occupation by greedy and ruthless invaders.

    The US is doomed to failure as a result of a brilliant plan by the Iraqi army. It is so simple to comprehend: It would have been stupid to engage the US/UK invaders in a classical war where the aggressors had air superiority. The brilliant tactic adopted by the Iraqi generals was to bring the invaders down to the ground. So, Iraqi tacticians decided to avoid the total destruction of their cities by handing them over, in what the clumsy Yanks and Brits thought was a quick victory.

    One year later, the invaders discovered that they were bleeding to death. It was indeed a brilliant Iraqi tactic. Those hundreds of thousands of Iraqis fighting on the ground today are mainly soldiers of the Iraqi regular army out of uniform, not remnants of “Saddam Loyalists”, as the spin media wants us to believe. They are making the most out of their modest arms and superior training, against a ‘privatised’ US force composed of private ‘security contractors’ and a ragtag regular force of soldiers of fortune, mainly ‘niggers’ and ‘spics’ ( Blacks and Latinos forced by economic necessity). Those US soldiers are people who have no genuine cause for which to fight and die. In the heat of battle, they would hide behind one another. On the other hand, Iraqi fighters do have a cause. They are fighting to free their country from foreign aggression. History attests that if a people are so intent on liberating their country, they will.

    Now, White House thugs can say goodbye to their grand Zionist project. They will never be able to control the world, or even the Middle East. Their war of terror failed dismally. The world owes it to those brave Iraqis fighting for their freedom. Their moment of final victory is approaching.

  7. myself007 Says:

    It is now September 2007. Ritter’s analysis is proven more valid than ever. US mercenaries are now comprehensively defeated. The way out is far more difficult for them than the “mission accomplished” joke suggested.

    Again the free world is indebted to those Iraqi braves fighting for their country and wiping off the occupation scourge.

    Justice may eventually be achieved by putting the Bush-Cheney gang behind bars.

  8. myself007 Says:

    It is now September 2007. Ritter’s comment is still more valid than ever. US mercenaries have been comprehensively defeated by the brave patriots of the Iraqi National Resistance.

    What remains now is to see Bush and Cheney behind bars, for their role in the controlled demolition of WTC in 2001, and their war crimes in Afghanistan and Iraq.

  9. myself007 Says:

    I will post my comments from an outside connection. The AFP agents monitoring my Internet connection can get stuffed.

  10. myself007 Says:

    Today is 25 December 2008. Very little changed since the unwarranted aggression on Iraq in 2003. The fragile ‘coalition of the willing to be stupid” is almost disbanded, in view of the futility of continuing to face the Iraqi National Resistance. Bush suffered the ultimate humiliation dodging footwear missiles on camera, in what was supposed to be a cordial surrender of Iraq by the puppet Iraqi government headed by a traitor of the name “Malky”.

    The US have three options for failure to choose from:
    * Remain at the present level of force and continue to haemorrhage.
    * Reduce force and risk annihilation by the robust Iraqi National Resistance.
    * Tuck tail between legs and run fast out of Iraq and Afghanistan.

    The last option is the more likely, in view of the terrible economic situation at home. Soldiers of fortune employed overseas are needed for the forthcoming Marshal Law. Revolution at home and subsequent secession of many states will lead the USA to the same fate the USSR suffered.

  11. myself007 Says:

    It is now July 2009. Bush has been dispatched to history’s dust bin, where he can enjoy the company of his accomplices Blair and Howard. Obama has been appointed president by the American Zionist electoral system. The Iraqi National Resistance continues to steadily fuck US mercenaries. US economic collapse is eminent. It will take some time but is inevitable, unless WW3 is started by some stupid action like attacking Iran.

  12. myself007 Says:

    It is June 2010. Obama’s rhetoric is now obviously a load of crap. The Zionists who appointed him dictate his foreign and domestic policies. He is just a puppet on strings. US econemy is on the verge of collapse, no matter what the liars claim. His masters in Israel want him to attack Iran. The Iranians are aware and would reply in a manner that would destroy Israel and US interests in the region. We have to wait and see how mad and how irresponsible the American president can be. As to Iraq and Afghanistan, the US continues to be systematically fucked by fighters in both countries.

  13. myself007 Says:

    It is almost June 2011. Obama is totally bankrupt. No worthwhile mouth-tricks. The last of his funnies was the mock killing of Bin Laden in Pakistan. Obama had the guts to stand up and declare the death of the guy “behind the killing of Americans on 911″. What a moron. The whole world knows who was behind the destruction of WTC by nanothermite. The pattern of destruction, which was typical of controlled demolition, will remain documented by the images on video recordings worldwide. but Obama remains hopeful of a second term in office.

  14. myself007 Says:

    It is almost 2013. Obama has achieved what the CIA called “The Arab Spring”, which is the gradual destruction of all dictatorships in North Africa, together with any possible hope for the people. After all, people don’t really matter, non-Americans and Americans alike. The one thorn that remains in Obama’s backside is Syria. It calls for the trump card that allowed the destruction of Iraq: imaginary chemical weapons and weapons of mass destruction. So, the CIA would smuggle chemical weapons into Syria, via Turkey, in order to justify military intervention. Did Obama put Iran in his unbalanced equation? Or is he set to start WW3? Let’s wait and see. Iran is not Iraq; China, Russia and most of Europe are not exactly passive bystanders.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.