This triggered some thoughts:
The NYT fronts a dispatch from Iraq reporting snipers are proving not to be as effective as initially hoped in stopping insurgents. With the war lasting as long as it has, insurgents have become familiar with the U.S. tactic of using snipers and are now careful to avoid them. Their positions are well-known, and insurgents often have local civilians who warn them when a sniper is spotted.
Pardon me if this seems obvious,
but don't you need the support of the general population to defeat an insurgency?
To me, this is the big mistake made by the west in dealing with the middle east. Iraqi insurgents and terrorist are really no better than anyone else who thinks force and violence are the way to win. The insurgents in Iraq aren't winning because they're good fighters, they're winning because they have the support of the general populace. Whether it's a democracy or any other type of government, power really does eminate from the support (or lack of opposition) of the people. Lose that, and you're simply a thug. In Iraq, American soldiers are thugs, which is why it doesn't matter what St. John says about more troops .... in Iraq, we're toast.
The same thing is true regarding the great war on terra. The U.S. is getting it's ass handed to it in the great Islamic war because we don't have the support of the average middle eastern citizen. As long as we continue with the hypocrisy of supporting oppressive governments while our foes provide food and social services to the poor, we'll continue to get our ass handed to us. Israel too (see Hezbollah).
As an average citizen, wouldn't you do the same?
Yep, just like George Washington, Paul Revere, Ben Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, et al.