The Fourth Rail has a good post on what the recent shift in Caliphascist tactics in Iraq means. It’s obvious to us, of course, that chosing to engage the USA military in set peice battles is just short of suicide by soldier. So why would the Caliphascists take this tack? Here’s a key quote from an alleged member of Al Qaeda:
“We are going to use the same method that they used when they attacked Iraq,” said Abu Jalal, who uses a nom de guerre and described himself as a former general in the Iraqi military during Saddam Hussein’s rule.
“The old military officers know very well that the attacks on the bases of the enemy army weaken the morale of the soldiers and frighten them. The soldier feels safe when he goes back to his base. If he is attacked in the place that feels safe, that place is really hell,” Abu Jalal said.
Two things leap out at me from this. The first is the idea that the Caliphascists should adopt the techniques used by the Coalition during the invasion. That is, in effect, an admission that the Coalition / Iraqi Interum Government basically own the country. I doubt that was the intended message.
In this vein, the comment about attacking troops in their bases so that they don’t feel safe, thereby sapping their morale looks remarkably like the Coalition tactics against the Caliphascists. Do they know just how horrible that can be precisely because they’ve been experiencing it?