Holy ****! (Iraq) Helo shot down, up to 35 aboard, 20+ casualties - Page 6

MichaeltheGreat · November 2, 2003, 20:26

Quote:

Originally posted by St Leo

Hmm. Their ex-roster may be militant, but it is not necessarily Ba'athist.

If they were the enforcement arm of the enforcement arm of the Baath party, and personally swore oaths of loyalty, then I'm not really interested in semantic disctinctions. Their brains will look the same on the wall.

Alexander's Horse · November 2, 2003, 20:28

Quote:

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat

The slant towards the MPs, Transport and Civil Affairs types takes the line company casualty rates down, but I haven't seen any type of organizational breakdown. The thing is that there's nothing so far that indicates we're seeing large scale resistance, just a fairly small to moderate number who are getting some operational tempo established.

I've seen some comment about the growing sophistication of the ambushes - killing zones, cut offs etc. well planned. The withdrawal of killing parties covered by mortar fire. That last part got people's attention.

It suggests organised resistance and well drilled military style ops. Not a good sign for the future unless the source is rooted out. I haven't noticed any "commanders" of this resistance apprehended yet.

Ted Striker · November 2, 2003, 20:36

yeah that's what i'm saying

it's time to yank some special forces out of africa

and send them to find these **** heads and kill them

MichaeltheGreat · November 2, 2003, 20:38

Quote:

Originally posted by Ted Striker
MTG do you buy the theory that if we can locate the ringleaders and either kill them or jail them, that most of this will stop?

Not really, no. Two reasons - one is there's no indication of large scale command and control in most of the areas these guys are operating. It's an IED here, an RPG there, some opportunistic small arms fire. I think it's spreading not due to larger scales of operations or command persona, but due to the fact that every success goes through the popular grapevine, and more people are encouraged to act.

Second thing is we tend too much in this country (in the war on drugs, organized crime, and in warfighting) to concentrate a lot of resources on decapitation. In reality, organizations grow new heads, and/or learn to function without heads. But if you remove the arms and the legs and the viscera, the head can't do much on it's own, whether you find it or not.

That's why I think we need to up the manpower, but not tie the newly arrived units (all light infantry/airborne) to physical occupation zones. I think we also need to free up 101 ABD and replace it with another heavy division, attach 25 LID (Tropical Lightning) to XVIII Airborne Corps, and bring 82 ABD from brigade to divisional strength, and give XVIII Airborne Corps the operational responsibility to move into one hot city or sector at a time, and shut the **** down. 30-40,000 new troops spread out is an increase in overall density of only 20-25%. 30-40,000 new light and airmobile troops concentrated in a trouble spot for 2-3 weeks at a time, then moved elsewhere as needed) is an increase in density of hundreds of times in those trouble spots. Fallujah has been a pain in the ass from the get go, so we need to start there.

Bush will never do it though, because increasing the force in country and going to a large, concentrated reaction force would be an admission that the present plans and policy aren't working.

MichaeltheGreat · November 2, 2003, 20:40

Quote:

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse

I've seen some comment about the growing sophistication of the ambushes - killing zones, cut offs etc. well planned. The withdrawal of killing parties covered by mortar fire. That last part got people's attention.

It suggests organised resistance and well drilled military style ops. Not a good sign for the future unless the source is rooted out. I haven't noticed any "commanders" of this resistance apprehended yet.

Which is good platoon level tactics, supported by a mortar squad from your weapons company. That's the level at which we integrate ops like that. So maybe they're fat and have a company level guy available instead of just an LT or a good platoon sergeant.

Alexander's Horse · November 2, 2003, 20:45

The other thing was the indirect fire support was accurate and effective - that suggests 2 - 3 layers of command for some of the convoy ambushes.

Kirnwaffen · November 2, 2003, 20:52

Quote:

it's time to yank some special forces out of africa

You'd hardly have to yank them from anywhere. Almost the entire 10 SF is sitting around at Carson.

MichaeltheGreat · November 2, 2003, 20:53

Quote:

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
The other thing was the indirect fire support was accurate and effective - that suggests 2 - 3 layers of command for some of the convoy ambushes.

Depends - are they using 60's, 82's or 120's? They have maps, they have the luxury of knowing transport routes and being able to survey and pre-register their tubes without advance firings, and I'm sure Saddam managed to find some money out of all those sanctions for portable GPS receivers for the officers of his politically reliable units.

It's still a platoon level op.

Alexander's Horse · November 2, 2003, 21:06

jesus if they were using 120's......

MichaeltheGreat · November 2, 2003, 21:51

They wouldn't need to bother with the "ambush" side of things if they could accurately bring 120's on command. To the extent they're using mortars to cover, I'd assume they're using light infantry mortars from rooftops with LOS, or using medium mortars from modified truck beds.

Case · November 2, 2003, 22:20

Out of interest, why were the troops being transported by helicopter in the first place? Is this an indication that the road between Fallujah and Baghdad is really unsafe?

Kirnwaffen · November 2, 2003, 22:21

Quote:

Out of interest, why were the troops being transported by helicopter in the first place? Is this an indication that the road between Fallujah and Baghdad is really unsafe?

I would guess that it's an indication that the R&R area is a good distance from Bagdhad.

Case · November 2, 2003, 22:47

Yeah - the United States. AFAIK, the troops were being moved from Fallujah to Baghdad airport for a flight home. Given that the distance between the two cities is less then 100 km, it seems curious that they traveled by helicopter.

Ned · November 2, 2003, 23:01

I assume if MtG were emperor, we still be in Vietnam searching for the enemy tunnels and never doing anything decisive to win the war. If the population supports the resistance, it can go on indefinitely.

Also, the fact that the resistance is centered in the Sunni triangle indicates that the people who are doing this are he Ba'athists even if they are getting support from al Qaeda.

If Saddam is captured, we may have a chance to move on. But I doubt that that will be sufficient. We have to have a new Iraqi government with both the resources and the balls to do what is necessary to win.

I understand we are considering reactivating some of the Iraqi army. I think that makes a lot of sense.

Alexander's Horse · November 2, 2003, 23:29

Quote:

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
They wouldn't need to bother with the "ambush" side of things if they could accurately bring 120's on command. To the extent they're using mortars to cover, I'd assume they're using light infantry mortars from rooftops with LOS, or using medium mortars from modified truck beds.

yeah i assume light mortars probably 82's which would be the most common.

but platoon or company its disturbing that it can be described like that, in those mil terms

Sikander · November 2, 2003, 23:56

Quote:

Originally posted by Sandman
Helicopters are deathtraps. Don't rely too heavily on them.

Oh, and I bet the weapon used was an RPG. It always is.

Not at 500 meters it isn't. This was almost certainly a guided missle.

Sikander · November 2, 2003, 23:59

Quote:

Originally posted by NeOmega

Vietnam was driven by an ideology and fear, an atheist ideology.

Iraq is being driven by a religious ideology. Vietnam had sappers, Iraq has suicide car bombers.

Winning a war requires one thing and one thing only, destroying your enemy's will to fight.

When people are commiting suicide to win.... you are SoL. You cannot destroy, on their home turf, a religio/suicidal faction's will to fight.

So our victory over Japan was completely illusory? They used suicide as a weapon throughout the war until the end when they used literally thousands of suicide planes against us, and they were no less doomed. We may have to alter our techniques, but we can win against even suicidal foes.

Sikander · November 3, 2003, 00:01

Quote:

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat

This is why I've been saying for a while we need to put in two more divisions into the Sunni triangle, and take it apart one city and one area at a time. When we concentrated an entire brigade in Fallujah, the *******s quited down. Let's see what they do with two full divisions taking the town apart, uncovering these weapons caches, stripping them bare of unauthorized weapons, and arresting and removing every ******* we find.

Then secure the town, and move on to the next one.

I agree completely, and Fallujah has to become the example. If we don't have the guts to do it, we need to arm and mobilize a force of Shiites to set up shop there and remind the locals of how Saddam ran things. They might see the value of the rule of law once they themselves have been outlawed.

Sikander · November 3, 2003, 00:02

Quote:

Originally posted by The Viceroy
A sad day for the families .. all this politics means little to them now.

However, we must not forget that these guys gave their lives to rid us of an evil dictator. Don't forget in haste, that not all Iraqi's are so anti-American. This crime occured right at the heart of the Sunni Triangle, the area most likely to support Sadam. If the US pulled out, what then for the majority Shia people ? What for the Kurds ?? more than 2/3 of the country are not arabic in decent. Not all of the Arab Sunni's are unhappy with Sadams demise.

Basically, don't let these guys die in vain by blaming the Iraqi people. These murderers are not patriotic men standing up for their country... They are people who have lost out because Sadam has gone, and they are resorting to what they only know ... Death and destruction.

The people of Iraq have suffered for many years under this barbarity .. and they have survived. Are American's so weak that they cannot cope with this for more than 6 months ??? Absolultly not ..

Stick with it guys, your doing a job no other country had the balls to do ..

Good post.

Dis · November 3, 2003, 00:33

Quote:

Originally posted by Sikander

So our victory over Japan was completely illusory? They used suicide as a weapon throughout the war until the end when they used literally thousands of suicide planes against us, and they were no less doomed. We may have to alter our techniques, but we can win against even suicidal foes.

the problem is the japanese culture is nothing like the middle eastern culture. they think differently. You could say the Japanese are more rational

MichaeltheGreat · November 3, 2003, 00:51

Quote:

Originally posted by Ned
I assume if MtG were emperor, we still be in Vietnam searching for the enemy tunnels and never doing anything decisive to win the war. If the population supports the resistance, it can go on indefinitely.

The trolling is getting a bit old, Ned and my brother died as a result of Agent Orange, so you can **** off now with the what I would have done in 'Nam commentary. If I'd been emperor, I never would have gotten involved in the war, from 1946 on, and certainly wouldn't have felt the need to kiss French shlong wrt their former empire and national ego to get them to go along with NATO and oppose the Russkies. So, you heard right, we never would have been there.

All you're doing is sugarcoating the fiasco of "Vietnamization" as excuse to say, "Gee, we invaded, but you haven't welcomed us with open arms and we can't hack it, so we're looking for an excuse to get the hell out while still being able to rationalize to ourselves we won even if we can't convince anyone else." Sorry, but your Commander in Chief said things would be a bit different. We don't have the option of watching our proxies lose two years after we pull out.

Your buddy Bush of the noble and glorious Republican party said the goal was to make Iraq a "model" and a "beacon of hope" for the ME. And what about all that talk about basing American troops in Iraq so we can exert leverage on Saudi, Iran, and Syria? What about all that talk?

Hard to make sure we get those contracts and get Iraq to play swing producer on oil prices if the new Iraqi government gets knocked over in a coup by former Baathists, or goes into a sectarian civil war. We're stuck with a mess, whether you like it or not.

Quote:

We have to have a new Iraqi government with both the resources and the balls to do what is necessary to win.

And you're a good two to three years from that, depending on what you get for a representative government scheme, assassinations, and the diverging interests of different Iraqi interest groups.

MichaeltheGreat · November 3, 2003, 00:55

Quote:

Originally posted by Case
Yeah - the United States. AFAIK, the troops were being moved from Fallujah to Baghdad airport for a flight home. Given that the distance between the two cities is less then 100 km, it seems curious that they traveled by helicopter.

Not really. Depending on what units and commands these guys were from, they may have had organic air transport - the one guy I've seen identified so far was an E6 from III Corps field artillery brigade, so a Corps level unit would have air transport available. Since a lot of the US army is air transport rich, it may have been as simple as going from airfield direct to airfield without screwing around on scheduling, refueling, and number of vehicles for ground transport.

orange · November 3, 2003, 02:29

Quote:

Originally posted by Space05us
First they welcome us then they celebrate when we are killed, as far as Im concerned they can go **** themselves.

who? The Iraqis or the media which is presenting an obvious misnomer? When we want to show the Iraqi people as lovers of Democracy, we show the good shots. When we want to portray them as evil Saddam backers who need a war to set them straight, we show them cheering in the streets at the death of Americans.

NeOmega · November 3, 2003, 03:28

Quote:

Originally posted by Sikander

So our victory over Japan was completely illusory? They used suicide as a weapon throughout the war until the end when they used literally thousands of suicide planes against us, and they were no less doomed. We may have to alter our techniques, but we can win against even suicidal foes.

You missed the "backyard" part of my statement I guess. Note we never invaded Japan, and Truman decided a nuke was a better option.

Also, the Japanese did not use suicide as a tactic throughout the war, nor were they ever stuck defending their homeland, nor did they have a common religion with the people in which America was occupying when they were in such an "occupational" defensive status. finally, "thousands" of Kamikaze planes were not used in the late stages of the war, way less than that.

WW II Japan is not a relevant comparison.

techumseh · November 3, 2003, 04:33

Thousands of Iraqi's have died so the Americans can gain control of Iraq's oil resources. Apparently before the American people decide that their government is the modern equivilent of the Third Reich, many more young Americans will have to die. I saw it happen once before during the Vietnam War. I have confidence in the American people. Given enough blood, they will see through the lies of the most controlled media in the Western world and say "Enough is Enough!"

MichaeltheGreat · November 3, 2003, 06:29

techumseh · November 3, 2003, 08:17

It's so much simpler this way, isn't it MtG? No messy sifting through facts or contradictory arguments. Just a label. A tinfoil hat....or a yellow star.

Alexander's Horse · November 3, 2003, 08:39

hmmm, not quite Hitler but he's certainly managed to get the U.S. in a fine mess.

One thing abut the U.S. army - they seem to need to believe in what they are doing. It's a big weakness.

That's different from the British tradition armies which just do what they are told because they are professionals.

Kropotkin · November 3, 2003, 09:15

Regarding casuality-figures, that are brought up from time to time in this thread and elsewhere, I can recommend the site belows that gives quite good info about that:

http://lunaville.org/warcasualties/Summary.aspx

Pekka · November 3, 2003, 09:41

Alexander's Horse, agreed. The US has the most powerful army, strongest and professional. Still, it seems to rely so much on the support of the home and the media. Meaning, the general outcry in the states is unbelievable when soldiers get killed. By this I do not mean to say that it's not bad when soldiers die. It's bad.
Or that one soldier doesn't count. Every life counts.

But you know what I mean. I could think about general public outcry when the number of casualties is 20 000.
But everything under few thousand is the way business is done, and there's no hiding from it, and that it will always happen in the longer run. And this I see as weakness too. Media should be kept in leash when it comes to portraying casualties in too much emotional way during war. It has nothing to do with free press or limiting it. Victims should not be given faces. Let the relatvies and friends grief in piece and don't make a big fuzz about it, because it starts looking like the war is going bad, when in fact the losses are still unbelievable low.