Rumsfeld refuses to estimate size of insurgency in Iraq

http://www.cnn.com/2005/ALLPOLITICS/02/17/rumsfeld.ap/index.html

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld steadfastly declined Thursday to give Congress a public estimate of the size of the Iraqi insurgency.

Under persistent question from Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, Rumsfeld said the disorganized nature of the insurgency makes it difficult to pin down a reliable, specific estimate.

"They're not static. The numbers change," he told the Senate Armed Services Committee. "They're made up of different elements: criminals, Baathists, the former regime elements, the Zarqawi network and jihadists. Even though the jihadists are the smallest portion of them, they appear to us to be the most lethal."

Still, McCain pressed for numbers.

"Shouldn't the American people also know the size and shape and nature of the enemy that we're facing, since it's their sons and daughters who are going to serve?" he asked. Rumsfeld said it was not his place to declassify the estimates provided to him by intelligence services.



Well, give us a best guess...mmmkay?

minus the 100K we've already offed, minus a few thousand GI bootlickers.

insurgency...

labelled them as "misfits, criminals, Chinese Communists, troublemakers, bandits and malcontents"

too scary.

a credit to the blog fifth estate!

he has his head so far up his ass, he has no idea.

Please remember this is the guy who wanted to invade Iraq, take over Baghdad and secure the ENTIRE FUCKING COUNTRY WITH 40,000 TROOPS.

Yeah. Fucking idiot.

A freshman political science major knows that's idiotic.

A private in the Army knows that's fucked up.

Hey McCain, you traitor.

You helped put these criminals in for four more long years.

Proud of yourself Mr. Huggiebear??

got a clue. Simple really.

...there every week there is an average of **80** separate insurgent attacks in Iraq.

That's a very high number.

So much for peace and freedom. So glad we had those meaningless elections.

Rumsfeld won't give a number because he's learned in the past that truth telling displays the failure of this war. He originally estimated the insurgents at "a couple thousand at best" when we arrived in Iraq. Later figures, put the insurgency at 20,000 and growing. That rising number demonstrates what a failed piece of trip this war is.

They need to keep that under wraps, as much as possible--so they can sell another round to the American public and do this to another country.

Sickos.

plus there were 50K hardcore insurgents, and 200K part-timers...

no explanation to the 'part-timers' status....are they outsourcing??

dp

edited for clarity, Clarisse.

These numbers are known unknowns or unknowns unknowns?

I wonder if the Insurgency would cease the majority of their attacks if Iraqis decided to bring in a 15% of Sunnin leadership that were non- Ba'athists and told the U.S. to get out with 90 days?

He belittled congress today and appeared to be damn well proud of it.

.
.
.


For every Iraqi that the US has maimed, tortured or killed, and continues to kill, there is a mother, father, brother, sister, friend etc, that will "step up to the plate" to avenge that atrocity.

The young sons and daughters that watched their parents and siblings maimed and slaughtered will rise in their maturity to avenge the carnage they witnessed at the hands of the Americans.

I believe that some of the Middle East culture believes they MUST avenge these killings, so there is no way the US can "beat" the so-called "insurgents". For every Iraqi they kill, more rise against the Americans.

The Americans have created generations of hatred for themselves, and all the bullets and bombs will not kill that hatred.

Murikkka has lost, and will never win with more killing. Too bad the WH knows no other way to "deal" with people.

(sigh)