By NICK WADHAMS - Associated Press Writer
MOSUL, Iraq - (AP) When Capt. Pat Flynn and his squad knock on
doors in Mosul in search of intelligence tips, Iraqis often welcome them
inside with chocolate candy and tea in tiny glasses. When he asks if they
have been intimidated or threatened, they emphatically shake their heads
"no."
That's a bad sign.
"Ninety percent of them say it's the safest place in the world to
live," said Flynn, 29, a platoon commander in the 172nd Stryker Brigade's
2nd Battalion, 1st Infantry Regiment. "But we know that's a lie because it's
that 10 percent that comes and tells you what's really going on."
That disconnect reflects the task the U.S. Army faces in Mosul, a
city that has been hailed as a major success in recent months. Free to move
around the city as never before, U.S. troops are realizing that they simply
are no longer the main target.
Commanders with the 172nd Stryker Brigade, whose troops patrol
Mosul, believe that since Dec. 15 elections, insurgents have shied away from
U.S. soldiers with their heavily armored attack vehicles. In the meantime,
they have begun to prey on civilians who are allowed one gun and 50 rounds
of ammunition per household.
As evidence, U.S. military officers point to an apparent
assassination campaign against neighborhood leaders called "mukhtars" and
recent attacks on gas stations and tanker trucks, a tactic they suspect is
tied to a government decision to raise fuel prices. The next step may be a
wave of assaults against those elected in December and candidates in an
upcoming local election.
"We have determined a significant change in who the insurgents are
targeting," said Maj. Richard Greene, the executive officer of Flynn's unit.
"Up to the elections, they were targeting the Iraqi police and the Iraqi
army. They don't want to tangle with us. Now we've noticed a lot of the
violence seems to be intimidation of civilians."
The problems in Mosul, where troops mostly escape attack but
civilians do not, exemplify a larger issue in Iraq. And how the Americans
handle Iraq's third-biggest city could point the way for the rest of the
country, because of Mosul's size and ethnic complexity _ a mixture of
Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds. That makeup means some refer to Mosul as a
microcosm for the entire country.
U.S. President George W. Bush, in a speech in December, said
residents in Mosul and the southern city of Najaf "are seeing tangible
progress in their lives." Indeed, the city had come a long way from the
previous year, when police fled their posts and U.S. troops fought
gunbattles with the insurgents head-on.
U.S. troops are free to park their heavily armored Stryker vehicles
at intersections and dismount, walking through the city's winding streets
without fear of major assault.
But what's clear is that Iraqis believe the insurgents are keeping a
close eye on them, and frequently plead with U.S. troops for more security.
Soldiers say that when they visit a house, the family may sometimes ask them
to fake a shouting match as they leave, or, when they emerge from the house,
put them up against a wall and search them in a mock show of force.
"They will invite us into their homes, give us tea, and say nothing,
and that could mean to us that they're being watched or that they're being
intimidated," Greene said. "They may not invite us into their home, which is
a clear indication that we're not welcome there and there's probably a
reason for it."
The knowledge that the insurgents are out there has essentially led
the Americans to compete for civilians' loyalty while they can. The few
hundred troops actually on patrol in the city at any one time spend much of
their day going house to house in search of information about the insurgents
they rarely see face to face anymore.
Interviews by U.S. troops are far different from the raids that
gained infamy early in the war, when soldiers kicked down doors and
handcuffed men in the dust outside. Now, soldiers make a point of removing
their helmets and sunglasses, and putting their weapons on the floor.
While the training of Iraqi army and police units continues,
American soldiers have also tried to bolster the Iraqi authority's image
here _ in one case, instructing Iraqi commanders to deliver supplies to
schools in a public relations campaign.
"They've realized we're not going to be here forever," Flynn said.
"It's a waiting game, and they can wait us out."
During one recent visit after dark, soldiers sat sipping coffee with
a man whom they nicknamed Joseph, who had relayed information in the past
about insurgents launching mortars and firing shots. He complained of kidney
stones and heartburn, pointing to his stomach.
"My medic can get you something for the stomach," said Sgt. Adam
Smith. "So when we come back, I'll have him bring it. I wish there was more
I could do."

Thanks for the article. Sounds like good news. If the insurgency targets the weaker it means they are getting weaker themselves.

If they are getting weaker, why have coalition fatalities only dropped slightly in the past 3 months?

If they are getting weaker, why have coalition fatalities only dropped slightly in the past 3 months?

Momhar id be half willing to say that your rooting for the insurgency.

Momhar, the fatalaties are slightly lower in the last 3 months because the insurgency is getting weaker.

Originally Posted by Rabs

Momhar id be half willing to say that your rooting for the insurgency.

I'd be fully willing to say that I'm half rooting for the insurgency.

Originally Posted by System Bolaget

Momhar, the fatalaties are slightly lower in the last 3 months because the insurgency is getting weaker.

If you look at the "Military Fatalities: By Month" list on http://icasualties.org/oif/ you might notice that the slight drop is not much bigger than fatality-fluctuations over the years. Here's a (poorly made) graph illustrating this: http://icasualties.org/oif_a/CasualtyTrends.htm

I'd be fully willing to say that I'm half rooting for the insurgency.

Thats utterly disgusting.

The insurgency thats the good side, the ones that run around chopin heads off, blowing police stations up and trying to return iraq to a theocracy.

Originally Posted by Mohmar Deathstrike

I'd be fully willing to say that I'm half rooting for the insurgency.



If you look at the "Military Fatalities: By Month" list on http://icasualties.org/oif/ you might notice that the slight drop is not much bigger than fatality-fluctuations over the years. Here's a (poorly made) graph illustrating this: http://icasualties.org/oif_a/CasualtyTrends.htm

I am really amazed that you can post that and get away with, I got banned for 3 days for posting something less radical, maybe the mods are sleeping on duty?

Originally Posted by Welshwarrior

I am really amazed that you can post that and get away with, I got banned for 3 days for posting something less radical, maybe the mods are sleeping on duty?

Uh oh I doubt they're sleeping because they edited my previous signature.

Originally Posted by Rabs

Thats utterly disgusting.

The insurgency thats the good side, the ones that run around chopin heads off, blowing police stations up and trying to return iraq to a theocracy.

According to http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/...542824,00.html some Iraqis make a distinction between "good insugents" who only target military personnel and "bad insurgent" that target Iraqi civilians.

Of course, I know your reply will be something along the lines of "the guardian is a commi-terrorist paper that can't be trusted, watch FOX news instead"...so I shouldn't have bothered posting this in the first place

Originally Posted by Welshwarrior

I am really amazed that you can post that and get away with, I got banned for 3 days for posting something less radical, maybe the mods are sleeping on duty?

be patient!

People hailing insurgents will get their wish if you just click on that report button thingy there.