Categories

Psychological Warfare in Iraq

WARNING: This is Version 1 of my old archive, so Photos will NOT work and many links will NOT work. But you can find articles by searching on the Titles. There is a lot of information in this archive. Use the SEARCH BAR at the top right. Prior to December 2012; I was a pro-Christian type of Conservative. I was unaware of the mass of Jewish lies in history, especially the lies regarding WW2 and Hitler. So in here you will find pro-Jewish and pro-Israel material. I was definitely WRONG about the Boeremag and Janusz Walus. They were for real.

Original Post Date: 2003-04-05 Published on: ETHERZONE.COM&nbsp  Posted By: Jan

SubTitle: Bomb Texas!
I’m back from my quick trip to Europe where I had a chance to observe first hand, the anti-American
feeling in the Netherlands.

I have been following the war as best I can. But it is difficult, being in a country which is
pro-Iraq. True to form, our government-controlled media did indeed cancel their contract with CNN
so now we get very limited reporting on the war. There has been a tendency for this government to
isolate us from the news in the outside world. It has been a slow and progressive tendency on their
part, which I dislike intensely. No doubt it is their attempt to try to manipulate our views away
from our generally pro-USA, pro-Western stance. We have correspondents in Baghdad,
and the Iraqis only allowed them to show the civilian casualties (atrocity propaganda).

It has been most interesting watching the war, and I have some comments on it.

As I said weeks ago, it does not matter how quickly the victory may come, because the real issue
for me is whether the Russians are going to be successful in making people hate you Americans.

The war got off to a good start – almost too good to be true – and this was soon proven when the
Iraqis began attacking US supply lines. We kept hearing about “Shock and Awe” and how the US
forces could be in Baghdad in 5 days. But there was something else I kept hearing, and it was how
the Iraqis were going to surrender en masse – by the tens of thousands, if not more, as the war
started. It was all this talk of the “quick and easy war”, which got to me, as some of you will
remember from the last article.

The actual question on my mind was whether the Iraqis had learned new tricks since the last Gulf
War. In my opinion, they have indeed improved considerably since then. It all goes to show that
President Bush Snr made a dreadful mistake last time when he stopped the war just as US forces
were on the edge of victory – and now, the USA and Britain are paying for that mistake – in blood.
It is also extremely sad to hear that Saddam slaughtered 300,000 people who rose up against him
after the last war. So in many ways, that decision back then was a terrible mistake.

The Iraqi army is much smaller this time around, and yet, they have been able to engage in fighting
of a surprising ferocity. Many people thought that this remnant Iraqi army would be a pushover, but
that has definitely not been the case. The war is still going quickly, but if you compare it with
the last war, then it is apparent the Iraqis are doing very much better than last time.

I had some serious question-marks about this “quick and easy” victory, and I think, as we are
heading 3 weeks into the war, it has been quite a tough fight to even reach Baghdad. I never thought
the US forces would actually have a problem reaching it, and yet, look at what has transpired until
now. Who could have predicted some of the tough fights as US forces crossed the Euphrates?

I think there was a moment of panic, when it looked as if Iraq was actually surviving for a few
days against all the odds. Of late, there seems to be much more of a news blackout, and this
suggests to me, that there is some very serious fighting going on. There is no more time for
this little jaunt in the sun with embedded journalists. Now soldiers are fighting for their lives.

I have one serious criticism of the US strategy though, which I would like to talk about. It would
be interesting to know who the guilty party is. Maybe it is Rumsfeld. There was a lot of talk up
front of a “quick and easy” war, and how the Iraqis would just surrender. Much was made of the
Iraqi commanders who apparently had been e-mailed and who said they were ready to surrender up
front. The mighty USA would walk in, and the Iraqis would all surrender, and the war would be over.
Obviously the Iraqis, to their credit, lied about their willingness to fight, thereby enabling
people high up in the US government to underrate their ability and to thereby send in less troops.

Might does not always cow weak nations. The British thought they could waltz into a country
run by some farmers, and they would cower before the might of the British Empire. Those farmers,
the Boers, then proceeded to give the British one of the toughest fights they’ve ever had, and it
left the mighty British Empire with a stain on its reputation. The Boers were not good at
conventional warfare. However, they did not surrender even when their capital was taken. In fact,
they put up some of their fiercest fights in the resulting guerrilla phase of the war. The British
eventually needed 250,000 troops to try to control the 60,000 Boers, and they had to burn the
countryside to the ground and throw women and children into concentration camps (where tens of
thousands subsequently died) in order to finally triumph. It was a horrible conflict, and it
showed that irregular forces can be very hard to defeat.

Clearly, the Iraqis were also not cowed by the might of the USA, and the idea that they would
lay down their arms and run away never transpired. It is only now as truly fierce fighting is in
progress that we are seeing many more surrendering, and their will being broken.

I have long believed that US Intelligence is heavily penetrated by the Russians especially and I
have always had reservations about US Intelligence reports on many things. US Intelligence has been
outmanoevred by the KGB on many occasions in the past, and I always treat US Intelligence with a
degree of skepticism. Everything else the USA has, is of excellent quality – but its human
intelligence is not good. They did not see 9/11 coming. They never found Osama Bin Laden, and it
is most doubtful they even knew where Saddam really was, when the decapitation strike took place.
I find this bothersome. It shows that the USA does not have the grip on intelligence which its
leaders think they have. It always worries me whether the USA is being led around by the nose,
by the Russians into attacking nations and fighting in places where the Russians want the fight to
go.

The one place we can clearly see the USA totally misread the Iraqis is with regard
to the US Psychological warfare campaign. It started with all these news stories of how US forces
were dashing forward at great speed, and one place after another was falling to them without
resistance. They would be in Baghdad in 5 days it seemed. The Iraqi army would soon be capitulating.
Then BAM! The whole advance ground to a halt for about a week, as suddenly Iraqi irregulars were
all over the place attacking supply lines, and putting up quite fierce fights in several towns.

The USA had to hurriedly call up another 30,000 troops, and had to try to open a northern front,
etc. Indeed, for a short while, the Iraqis almost seemed to be in control. Their statements about
events in Basra, often seemed to be more accurate than US statements. The USA said the 51st
division had surrendered. The Iraqis said “no”. The Iraqis turned out to be right. The Iraqi
information minister (chief propagandist really), conducted a very confident psychological war,
and sometimes he seemed to be definitely scoring points.

For a while, the psychological war seemed to be going Iraq’s way. Iraqis who had fled the country,
were now actually returning!! Even President Bush had to say “We are 11 days into the war and
everything is going according to plan…” But what was evident was that for several days it seemed
as if the mighty US war machine had been stopped in its tracks.

Now the war has been resumed with a fury, but for a while there, things did not seem good. It is
apparent to me that whoever planned this war, totally underestimated the stiffness of Iraqi
resistance. What clearly saved the day was: (1) Excellent US Soldiers on the ground (2) Excellent
equipment. If it were not for the soldiers on the ground who fought like mad, then this could have
been a disaster. If it were not for the soldiers on the ground and their officers who made do,
even though there were less of them than their generals had originally requested, this ground war
could have gone wrong. Whoever planned the psychological war, and whoever estimated the resistance
of Iraqi ground forces made a huge mistake. If it was not for the excellence of the people in the
field, many bad things could have come from this.

Somebody, somewhere, in US Intelligence, and at the higher levels – including possibly Rumsfeld –
made some big mistakes. The Army Generals are not complaining publicly, but clearly, they had
a better appreciation of the resistance they might encounter. If Rumsfeld overrode them, then maybe
he deserves to be fired.

The previous Gulf war was preceded by 40 days of bombing and a 100 hour ground war. Old Stormin’
Norman Schwarzkopf, really did a good job. He studied the battle of El Alamein and he outflanked
the Iraqi army in a surprise move, which crushed them. If he had been allowed a short time longer
he might have wiped the Iraqi army off the face of the Earth. Apparently, he had conceived the idea
of attacking from a totally unexpected angle, and stretched US tank supply lines to their limit
beyond even what his logistics people had thought possible. This brilliant move on his part must
surely go down as one of the finest moves made by a General in recent times. But, his excellence,
and the Iraqi error of sticking all their troops out in the desert, made it look easy – too easy.

Now, a smaller Iraqi army, which knows its limitations, and has decided on a policy of fighting
in the streets (and maybe even via underground tunnels), is doing a much better job.

In the last Gulf War, the US did not lose a single Abrams tank. In this war, in one day, they
lost two. Exactly how many have been lost I do not know, but it may be reasonable to suppose
that perhaps about 10 have been lost so far (thumbsuck). Some Bradley fighting vehicles were
lost, as were some helicopters and even aircraft. This will not stop the US war machine, nor
dent it, but it does go to show that the Iraqi army is fighting much much better than it did
back then.

Also, the Iraqis are using unconventional tactics of the kind we are so familiar with in Africa,
and which the Russians teach their pupils. There is virtually nothing (except for suicide bombers),
the Iraqis are doing, which we haven’t experienced before in Africa. People did not believe us in
Rhodesia when we said terrorists use human shields and fire at soldiers from behind civilians in
the hope that (a) We would not fire back so we would not kill civilians (b) They hoped to get
the civilians killed so they could exploit it for propaganda purposes.

The African National Congress had people putting on Police and Army uniforms, or mingling
with civilians and would then shoot on soldiers. The Iraquis are doing all that.

Everything the Iraqis are doing is the same old non-conventional, dirty-tricks, which communist
terrorists have been using across the world for decades. I heard a comment that some US General
apparently said something like “The Iraqis are not fighting the way we wargamed”. Now that is a
silly remark. That’s what these people are – they fight dirty.

Don’t be surprised if, after US soldiers have fed them, that they still come and kill some of them.
The Iraqis have shown clearly, what a nasty bunch of people they are when they are directed by
Saddam Hussein. My mother remarked to me that she does not understand why the Americans and British
are feeding them. She said “Starve them!”

But the USA is trying to play the good guy, and showing that it cares for the Iraqi people. This is
good. But it comes with a big price tag. Interestingly, the Iraqis were executing people who even
waved or showed the slightest friendliness to the American troops. They did not respond much at
first when they were freed. Clearly, Saddam’s terror is a much more effective means of keeping
people in line. His approach is identical to that of Robert Mugabe – and it works. People may hate
him, but they fear him, and the fear keeps them in line. They will have to be 100% sure he is gone
before they come out and welcome their liberators.

The USA is trying to win the hearts and minds campaign. It is a noble gesture, however, I am not
always sure how effective this is. Hearts and minds was tried in Vietnam and it did not work – and
we tried it too and it only had a limited effect. Maybe, the fact that the USA is trying it early
in the war gives it a chance of success. However, I personally think, a bit of cruelty would not
be amiss. If the US forces executed some people, or tortured a couple for intelligence (even though
it is against the Geneva convention), I would think it is pretty acceptable. Being too humane can
make you appear soft, and sometimes, with some people, a bit of terror and fear can go a long way.

The Iraqi psychological angle is aimed at exploiting this. It is aimed at the US dislike
for (a) Taking casualties (b) Killing innocents. So Saddam has bunkers under hospitals, etc.

Did you see the news of the market bombing where Saddam’s people claimed that the USA had bombed
a number of civilians? Now the US Army says it has studied this incident and the Iraqis may have
killed their own people by accident. Well, don’t be surprised if the Iraqis DELIBERATELY planned
this with the intention of blaming the US. Clearly, it was a propaganda exercise on their part, and
again, it is the sort of dirty trick, which we in Africa saw often.

One thing nobody has commented on is the fear on the faces of the US POW’s. I was quite stunned,
early in the war, when the Iraqis showed off US captives. They really seemed to be very afraid.
Even friends of mine commented on the fear in their faces. I could not help wondering if it was due
to maltreatment by the Iraqis. I would not envy anyone who falls into their clutches. It can only
be a nightmarish experience. I also would not be surprised if the Iraquis tortured US POWs.

As I was writing this, the Iraquis claimed they had scored a great victory over America by
recapturing the airport in Baghdad. The South African journalists in Baghdad reported that they
had asked to be taken to the airport to see this for themselves, but they were denied the chance.
So I suspect it is really a psychological warfare trick on the Iraqi side. I was curious when the
Iraqis kept saying they were going to use “unconventional means” to re-take the airport and suddenly,
hey presto, they say they have it. The USA says it is still in control.

I suspect this is really nothing more than a trick aimed at boosting the Iraqi will to resist, and
that a lot of the Iraqi psychological warfare is aimed at two targets: (1) Boosting the Iraqi and
Arab will to resist (2) Making people around the world believe the USA is slaughting civilians.

Exactly how much effect it is having remains to be seen. But the Iraqis and the Arabs seem to have
gained a lot of confidence from the war so far. For them, small things such as the shooting down of
a single Apache helicopter may prove to them that the USA is not invincible, and it may give them
the will to fight a lot harder. I feel that they have gained quite a lot of confidence due to the
success of their irregular tactics, and this may be used in the future.

In this type of warfare, casualties may mean little. It is really the hatred, and the will to fight,
which is the key.

I am very curious to see how strong their will is. How many of them will give up when Baghdad is
taken? And how long will it take to conquer Baghdad? If they were to retreat and continue fighting
long after Baghdad is gone, then it will be a problem subduing them, and it may take months – or
even longer.

The biggest question of all, is how this victory will be seen by the world. I believe the Russians
will continue to try to divide the world and turn the world against the USA. In this regard, the
Iraqis may have actually scored the greatest psychological victory of all – by not using chemical
and biological weapons. France said that if they used it, it would turn against them. By not
using these weapons so far, they are giving strong credence to their original lie that they did not
pose a threat to anyone. If they never use these weapons, then this victory may yet haunt the USA.
The real danger is that people will start believing the Iraqis, even in the face of physical
evidence that they had these weapons. By merely saying, they never intended using these weapons,
they could turn a lot of world opinion against the USA. This, to me, is the most dangerous
possibility of all.

When I was in Holland this week, I was at a conference, which was frequented by a lot of Americans,
British and others – mostly on the political left. It was sad to see, the anti-US sentiment among
this gathering of several hundred people. One of the speakers was a Dutch journalist. He had taken
the Dutch government to court for harrassing him some decades ago, and he had won a settlement of
eight million Euros. This “bad boy” of Dutch journalism had interviewed Tariq Aziz recently.
He is famous in the Netherlands, and has some influence. He is busy writing a book called
“Bomb Texas”. I listened to him speak in the most horrible terms imaginable about President Bush.
He oozed hatred, and I found many of his comments utterly shocking. What was even more shocking
was watching left wing Americans, British and Dutch people applauding LOUDLY! The Dutch people
there were very supportive of his hateful comments about the USA and especially about President
Bush. I was quite aghast when Americans, mostly Democrats, stood up and slated their own country.
I could not believe it.

Later I spoke to a Dutch conservative who restored some of my balance and faith that not everybody
in Holland had gone mad. He was very opposed to the Russians and had campaigned for the USA to
keep its nuclear forces in Europe in the 1980’s.

But the Dutch journalist said that he was busy writing this anti-American book and that he thought
Holland should side with Belgium and France against the USA.

His chief argument, was that Iraq has never posed a direct military threat to the USA. He said,
that there is no way one could imagine that Iraq could damage the USA in any significant way. I
have to admit, that is a valid argument. I must say, that I did think President Bush should have
worded his Iraq argument differently, because it is a very difficult pill to swallow that a small
country like Iraq could pose a significant military threat to the USA. That alone, would not
constitute a reason to attack it. I have never quite understood this aspect of the US argument.

I feel, the absolute truth would have made a better argument. Why not just say: Iraq is a dangerous
country, which has attacked its neighbours several times, and it poses a threat to the region,
including Israel. It should therefore be squashed. I think that by extending the argument to
include a direct threat to the USA, President Bush actually lost a lot of people – and this will
bite him.

The USA may be winning the war on the ground, thanks to its excellent troops and generals, in spite
of the miscalculations of some people. But it is these same psychological warfare miscalculations,
which might, in the long run, be the things, which haunt the US government. And it is the stance of
the Europeans, as they are manipulated by the Russians, which may become a big factor once the war
is over.

The big question is whether the USA has won more friends than it has lost. I think the USA
has lost more friends than it won, simply because of the psychological tricks that have been used
to portray the Iraqis as innocents who were misrepresented by the USA as terrorists. This
revisionist view of the Iraqis may lead to problems in the future.

“Published originally at EtherZone.com : republication allowed with this notice and hyperlink intact.”


Etherzone Articles by Jan Lamprecht

Arming Blacks in Zimbabwe
Iraq’s Baffling Moves
The Secret Code of Terrorists
Your Survival Guide to Semantic Warfare. (Understanding the enemies of the West)
The WorldWide War on White People

Click here to see the Archive of Jan Lamprecht’s articles on Etherzone.

Links & Products:

For the most graphic farm murder photos on the Internet go to: www.AfricanCrisis.org/photos.asp
My Website is: www.AfricanCrisis.org   
I can be contacted by e-mail at: [email protected]
My book : “Government by Deception” – Psychopolitics in Southern Africa is now
on sale in the USA.
Click here to read comments by famous Americans who have read the book.