Why are they called "Insurgents" and not "Guerrillas"?

[kittykitty]

The dictionary defines INSURGENT and GUERRILLA as follows:

Insurgent: " one that acts contrary to the established leadership (as of a political party, union, or corporation) or its decisions and policies.Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law, © 1996 Merriam-Webster, Inc."

Guerrilla "A member of an irregular, usually indigenous military or paramilitary unit operating in small bands in occupied territory to harass and undermine the enemy, as by surprise raids." The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition, Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.

Granted, there is now an established leadership in Iraq, thus insurgent might be used, except the definition is too "mild" to describe the operations of the "insurgents".

It seems that Guerrilla is a better word. This is guerrilla warfare.

[nadinbrzezinski]

1. I direct you to the Geneva Convention

guerrilas have recognition and are protected as enemy combattants, insurgents are not

[goodboy]

3. i did not know that. it makes sense though. Same with gitmo detainees

right? and Jose Padilla?

[nadinbrzezinski]

16. Similar to the GITMO Prisoners, they were denied

POW status by being called Enemy COmbatants

Jose Padilla, he was denied all his rights as he was detaiend in the US and IS a US citizen...

No I am not a lawyer but used to be a Red Cross Worker

[DoBotherMe]

4. Was that the reason for the Iraq vote?

To be able to lable them insurgents and avoid international consequences? The whole thing is such a con game. D ; )

[nadinbrzezinski]

17. The decision of labeling came from Justice

not the Congress, and from DoD, not from Congress, but it is tellng the number of JAG officers who have chosen to resing commisions

[wurzel]

12. That information is worth a kick!

[kittykitty]

14. So now I know--Thanks, most enlightening

[knowbody0]

2. most of them are just citizens of Iraq

opposing the invasion and occupation.

[goodboy]

6. yep, but the Bushitlers don't want the public to know that...that's

why all the focus on the boogeyman Zarqawi and "baathist remnants"

That way they won't have to say they're killing, in huge numbers, ordinary Iraqis who want us out of their country.

If the US was invaded and occupied and we fought against the invaders would we be terrorists? Insurgents? Bitter-Enders?

[mitchtv]

10. therefore, the correct term is "Resistance"

See if theyuse that. Partisans is appropriate, I think.

[nadinbrzezinski]

18. Remember under International Law the word you choose matters

if they used Resistance, that is some legitimacy, and Guerrilla is an accepted term under Geneva... insurgent is not a protected combatant, guerrilla, especially after they get recognition from a third national party, are enemy soldiers with the protections of Geneva.

It is a semantics game but in law semantics matters

[baldguy]

5. Another made-up designation; like "enemy combatant"

Because POWs and common criminals have rights.

[ithinkmyliverhurts]

7. I see it the opposite way: "insurgents" lends itself to legitimacy.

Don't you see, they're fighting in a democracy FOR a democracy. "Insurgents" brings with it the idea that we are, in fact, bringing democracy to the Middle East.

[Monkie]

8. the dictionary entry for Resistance

www.m-w.com

resistance
~snip~
5 often capitalized : an underground organization of a conquered or nearly conquered country engaging in sabotage and secret operations against occupation forces and collaborators

while there is a established leadership they are collaborators of the occupation forces?

The RESISTANCE fighting the occupiers and collaborators!

i can see why a milder definition was needed for public consumption..

[Tommymac]

9. It's doublespeak, plain and simple.

Guerilla's are a)legitimate combatants. b)associated in the American psyche with Vietnam.

Insurgents are evil traitorous bastards.

[whistle]

11. Because Guerrillent just doesn't sound right...

...U.S became occupiers when Saddam fled and the Iraqi army collapsed and was captured and the Iraqi government dissolved and the U.S. Regent was the authority in the country.

Iraq became an occupied territory.

Then the U.S. freed all prisoners of the Iraqi military so that they would not have to treat them in a way that would honor the Geneva Conventions for prisoners of war.

Iarq was subject to strange decisions and policies.

Then Iraqis who were left without work, money, food, medicine and a way to live became members of an irregular, indigenous military or paramilitary unit operating in small bands which performed acts contrary to the established leadership to harass and undermine the enemy occupiers, as by surprise raids and suicide bombings.

Dosen't that sound like Guerrillents?

[Eugene]

13. "usually indigenous...in occupied territory"

"Guerilla" and "Resistance" fighters are not pejorative enough
terms for the *Co propaganda machine. They have positive
connotations. In the beginning, they tried to
call them "anti-Iraqi" forces.

Besides, Iraq is sovereign. There is no occupation.
The insurgents are fighting a legitimate government.
Let freedom reign! :sarcasm:

[leesa]

15. Why not Iraqis?

[Stinky The Clown]

19. The answer is, they control not only all of government .... they also

contral the national lexicon. Insurgent suits their purposes and schemes far better than does guerilla. Legal issues obtain as well .... the cabal is always careful on that front ... save their asses dontcha know.

[leveymg]

20. What do they call Americans?

Counterinsurgents or devils? Something worse?