-Caveat Lector-
Before this war started we were assured that coalition troops would be met by the Iraqui population with "candy and flowers"... Instead, we've seen the coalition troops come up against stiff fighting, by both Iraqui military and "paramilitary" forces, and also a goodly number of the Iraqui citizenry... The spin that the administration has put on this lack of "candy and flowers" greeting is that the Iraqui populace is being 'forced' to fight against the coalition troops by Saddam's troops who, we are repeatedly told, hold the families of these reluctant fighters 'hostage'... Now it would seem to me that this argument only holds up so far...it could perhaps explain a small amount of incidents, but makes no sense when examined closely when it is used to explain why the MAJORITY of the TOTAL population is fighting against the coalition... Namely, just HOW MANY of your loyal, trained, and committed-to-the-point-of-fanaticism troops do you divert from the primary task of fighting the invader to instead hold the majority of the populace hostage, to force a fraction of the populace -- untrained, and ostensibly enemies of your regime -- to fight for your side? In other words, say that a city has a population of 20,000; we are told that the majority of people who live in this city are against Saddam Hussein -- let's say the anti-Saddam number is around 16,000. Now of that number, the majority are women, children, and those too elderly or infirm to fight...let s say the number of noncombantants is around 10,000. That leaves 6,000 men who are supposedly fighting against the coalition under duress -- 6000 supposed enemies of Saddam's state who have been given guns by those who we are told are their enemies... Just how many of Saddam's loyal and highly-trained troops would be needed to watch 10,000 hostages? If we say that 1 soldier is assigned to watch every 5 people, that would mean that it would take 2000 soldiers for the task; would it be worth it to trade 2000 highly-trained and loyal soldiers for the half-hearted services of 6000 untrained men who are supposedly committed to the overthrow of the current regime? Would you trust giving a gun to someone who is supposedly committed not only to your overthrow, but to your death? How many of your highly-trained and loyal troops would you have to divert from the primary task of fighting to policing these enemies-of-the-state that you have just given guns to? And this example is just one town/city -- multiply the numbers by every other town/city encountered... Can you imagine the same line of spin used during WWII? That we'd have been told that the reason Allied troops encounted stiff fighting on the beaches of Normandy was because the Nazis were holding the majority of the French population hostage, thereby forcing French men to fight for the Nazis? Why don't we hear about any Iraqui 'resistance movement'? If there are so many Iraquis who supposedly would welcome the demise of Saddam, how come we aren't hearing anything about them? How come we're not hearing about any acts of sabotage against Saddam and his troops carried out by all these Iraquis who supposedly hate him? This "Iraquis are being forced to fight" spin only makes sense in a limited way -- when one is perhaps describing an out-of-the-way hamlet with a populace of a few hundred or so; it makes no sense when one considers that the administration is using this story to explain why cities with populations in the tens of thousands are fighting against the coalition...it would just take too many of the trained and loyal troops to 'hold the population hostage' to make such a tactic useful.... June <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http://archive.jab.org/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http://archive.jab.org/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
