Insurgency in Iraq

Amy Proctor blogged Even and although politicians of both leanings refer to terrorists in Iraq as "insurgents", is that really what they are? An insurgent is someone, usually as part of a group, fighting against the government in their own country. In reality, my understanding is that the Baathist party of Saddam was dismantled pretty soundly (seriously, most of them are dead, as my husband who fought there can tell you).

That is true. There are still some of the criminals that Sadaam let out of jail just before the war started that are creating chaos, but that is because they know that if the new government really gets control over the country, they will be back in jail, and they are more able to conduct their illegal affairs if there is anarchy.

Most if not all of the "insurgents" are coming from outside of Iraq like Iran, Syria, Jordan and Saudi Arabia. It isn't really an insurgency but attacks of terrorism. Will an Iraqi based al-Qaeda take over the government? No, al-Qaeda is based in Afghanistan.

Amy is correct. Zarqawi does call his organization al-Qaeda in Iraq, but then Zarqawi is a Jordanian, and his suicide bombers come mainly from Saudi Arabia.

I only mention this because to my ears the connotation is that Iraq is rejecting its new government, and that simply isn't the case. They have voted for it, are working toward it, sacrificing for it and resisting the terrorists. That isn't a true insurgency. Also, if there was truly no connection between 9/11 and Saddam Hussein, why are the terrorists fighting so hard to keep Iraq from becoming democratic? The 9/11 connection may only be that Saddam was himself a terrorist (see previous entry below), but he was thrilled with the fall of the World Trade Center and Pentagon. He ordered a mural painted in Iraq 9/11. What's happening in Iraq is only an insurgency if it is carried out by Iraqis. Otherwise, consider them terrorists, not insurgents. Food for thought.