The Dogs of War

[Cloney 0]

Did you read the article? They have food but like most people know, MREs Suck

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Cloney @ Mar. 29 2003,22:33)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Did you read the article? They have food but like most people know, MREs Suck<span id='postcolor'>

Yes,

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">

Iraqi civilians fleeing heavy fighting have stunned and delighted hungry US marines in central Iraq (news - web sites) by giving them food, as guerrilla attacks continue to disrupt coalition supply lines to the rear

...

At one camp, the buses stopped and women passed out food to the troops, who have had to ration their army-issue packets of ready-to-eat meals due to disruptions to supply lines by fierce fighting further south.

<span id='postcolor'>

And yes, US MREs suck big time Regardless, it was a very nice gesture from those civvies. Imagine then how nice they would be to you if you wern't dropping bombs on them and their country

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Like I said, it makes it sound like we are loosing the war<span id='postcolor'>

It's way to soon for that kind of conclusions. You are however sure as hell not winning it yet.

[Warin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Cloney @ Mar. 29 2003,22:33)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Did you read the article? They have food but like most people know, MREs Suck<span id='postcolor'>

Meals Rejected by Ethiopians?

[Cloney 0]

Yeah, We're not winning. We're only knocking on Baghdad's door. You could say we weren't winning if we were still held up at Umm Qasr.

However, I'm a bit frustrated that we decided to go in so suddenly. Total fucking bullshit. We should have gone with the shock and awe plan, things would have gone much better. Not that they aren't going well already.

[FSPilot 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ Mar. 30 2003,04:51)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">LOL. The supply line situation must be really bad. Wasn't this supposed to go the other way around?<span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Meals Rejected by Ethiopians? <span id='postcolor'>

LOLOLOL

I need to remember never to drink and read this forum at the same time.

[Warin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Cloney @ Mar. 29 2003,22:59)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Yeah, We're not winning. We're only knocking on Baghdad's door. You could say we weren't winning if we were still held up at Umm Qasr.

However, I'm a bit frustrated that we decided to go in so suddenly. Total fucking bullshit. We should have gone with the shock and awe plan, things would have gone much better. Not that they aren't going well already.<span id='postcolor'>

Going well? The only population center even remotely secure is Umm Qasr. You have guerilla tactics causing the slowdown of supplies to the forward units. It's not losing, but it's far from winning. It's funny to me that a few days ago Myers said that everything is going according to plan, but now they are stopping to let supplies catch up.

If your planning is to travel faster than supplies, then there is a fundamental flaw in your planning.

Summing up:

The Coalition controls vast stretches of desert.

Iraq controls the important bits, the cities.

Who is winning?

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Cloney @ Mar. 29 2003,22:59)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Yeah, We're not winning. We're only knocking on Baghdad's door. You could say we weren't winning if we were still held up at Umm Qasr.<span id='postcolor'>

You mean that we should be impressed by the fact that you managed to capture Umm Qasr, population 1,500?

Hell, you havn't even managed to take Basra where people positivly hate Saddam's guts.

So what you have managed until now is a long push through the desert where there hasn't been an Iraqi in sight.

Baghdad? What more can you do then knock on the door? It doesn't look to me that they are going to open.

Nah, your hope on winning this war is right now if the military planners get their shit together and correct the seriously flawed plan. If they manage to adapt it to the real strategic situation, then you stand a chance of winning.

..well, you could always nuke Baghdad

[Cloney 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ Mar. 29 2003,23:05)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">If your planning is to travel faster than supplies, then there is a fundamental flaw in your planning.<span id='postcolor'>

Either that or the Iraqi Army is retreating faster than we expected!

BTW, the guys in the cities will eventually run out of ammo, so I'm not too worried about them.

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Cloney @ Mar. 29 2003,23:10)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">BTW, the guys in the cities will eventually run out of ammo, so I'm not too worried about them.<span id='postcolor'>

With that excellent grasp of MOUT you are qualified to be a US military planner

[Cloney 0]

LOL Denior.

[Warin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Cloney @ Mar. 29 2003,23:10)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Either that or the Iraqi Army is retreating faster than we expected!    <span id='postcolor'>

Either that or the the military planners in Iraq realize that just giving you all that worthless and desolate terrain makes more sense than fighting for it

[IsthatyouJohnWayne 0]

I dont know whats on TV where you are but everyday on the news here they have footage of Marines blowing up or sealing some abandoned Iraqi strongholds...all full of ammo. A few days ago there were reports that the ba'ath party in Basra was giving money to Iraqis who brought them more ammo. Some civilians were caught sneaking boxes of bullets in.

If anything the Iraqi fighters are much more likely to soon start running out of food or water than munitions, but then again i imagine they are some of the best fed people in every town...

[bn880 5]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Mar. 29 2003,17:13)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Cloney @ Mar. 29 2003,23:10)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">BTW, the guys in the cities will eventually run out of ammo, so I'm not too worried about them.<span id='postcolor'>

With that excellent grasp of MOUT you are qualified to be a US military planner <span id='postcolor'>

When they run out of ammo you run out of Americans/Brits to send. I would think.

[PFC_Mike 2]

It really seems as if Ba'ath party forces are the ones in control of the fighting. Apparently, they are doing house-to-house searches for men of military age and shooting anyone who doesn't comply. That seems like a bad move, in the long run the US will win and can execute any justice it desires.

[turms 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (PFC_Mike @ Mar. 30 2003,01:03)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">It really seems as if Ba'ath party forces are the ones in control of the fighting. Apparently, they are doing house-to-house searches for men of military age and shooting anyone who doesn't comply. That seems like a bad move, in the long run the US will win and can execute any justice it desires.<span id='postcolor'>

Do you have any crdible source on that or is it just your opinnion?

[FSPilot 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">But the Iraqi suicide bomber did not attack civilians, he attacked legitimate military targets: enemy soldiers. I frankly don't see any difference between that and blowing away your enemy from an airplane.<span id='postcolor'>

I guess. Suicide bombers in general, for example hamas bombers, tend to target civilians. But, so far, the Iraqi's havent... with suicide bombers at least.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">dead POW's ? if they're dead , they aren't POW's anymore , are they ?<span id='postcolor'>

Well they don't give us the bodies back, they're still being held.

Settle for MIA?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Death toll of market bombing now 62 and rising<span id='postcolor'>

Pentagon says all our missiles are accounted for, don't they?

[Warin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ Mar. 30 2003,01:17)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Pentagon says all our missiles are accounted for, don't they?<span id='postcolor'>

And *gulf war syndrome* the *agent orange* pentagon *friendly fire* never lies/covers things up?

They at first tried to blame it on Iraqi AA (ludicrous claim really) and now they are saying that they are 'investigating'

[Col. Kurtz 0]

Here *warning*-200kb is a fairly interesting map showing the diffrent area's of Baghdad and what class lives there.

[FSPilot 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ Mar. 30 2003,07:32)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ Mar. 30 2003,01:17)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Pentagon says all our missiles are accounted for, don't they?<span id='postcolor'>

And *gulf war syndrome* the *agent orange* pentagon *friendly fire* never lies/covers things up?

They at first tried to blame it on Iraqi AA (ludicrous claim really) and now they are saying that they are 'investigating'<span id='postcolor'>

And the Iraqis haven't?

Well they've confessed to other civilian casualties.  Why would they stop now?

[edc 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Pentagon says all our missiles are accounted for, don't they?

And *gulf war syndrome* the *agent orange* pentagon *friendly fire* never lies/covers things up?

They at first tried to blame it on Iraqi AA (ludicrous claim really) and now they are saying that they are 'investigating'

<span id='postcolor'>

The Iraqi AAA could have hit the TLAM causing it to come down prematurely.

[Othin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (edc @ Mar. 29 2003,17:12)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Pentagon says all our missiles are accounted for, don't they?

And *gulf war syndrome* the *agent orange* pentagon *friendly fire* never lies/covers things up?

They at first tried to blame it on Iraqi AA (ludicrous claim really) and now they are saying that they are 'investigating'

<span id='postcolor'>

The Iraqi AAA could have hit the TLAM causing it to come down prematurely.<span id='postcolor'>

If it was a TLAM or JDAM then it must've misfired massively.  That crater is way to small for a TLAM, and still pretty shallow even for a 1000lb JDAM.  If they were dropping GPs (which they aren't) then I would say it looks like an air detonation from two colliding with each other.

The other thing is that I believe the TLAMS aren't armed until right on their targets.  That's why the ones that have gone down in Turkey and Saudi didn't explode, they just crashed.  Would kinetic energy cause that much damage seen in the marketplace?

I'm not sure how much damage a HARM might cause if it were to go off course, but maybe it's something along those lines IF it is in fact from the Coalition inventory.  I don't have enough information to make a decision either way at this point.

Edited for clarification

[Badgerboy 0]

A HARM might not, but an ALARM has a bigger warhead. Did someone mention that they found a parachute nearby as well.

As we all know , the ALARM deploys a chute when it is actively seeking emitters (Loiter mode. Flies up to about 50k and points down), when it gets a spike, it cuts the chute, and falls toward the emitter.

More likely it was a JDAM that hit the spot that it was targetted at, as I don't think GR4's are hitting that far into Baghdad

We saw how inputted GPS errors nearly blew away an enitre squad in Afghanistan,so no weapon system is infallible. (Human or technical)

[Othin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Badgerboy @ Mar. 29 2003,19:49)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">A HARM might not, but an ALARM has a bigger warhead. Did someone mention that they found a parachute nearby as well.

As we all know , the ALARM deploys a chute when it is actively seeking emitters (Loiter mode. Flies up to about 50k and points down), when it gets a spike, it cuts the chute, fires its second motor and targets the spike.

More likely it was a JDAM that hit the spot that it was targetted at, as Idon't think GR4's are hitting that far into Baghdad

We saw how inputted GPS errors nearly blew away an enitre squad in Afghanistan,so no weapon system is infallible. (Human or technical)<span id='postcolor'>

I agree that it could have been human error, or technical failure. I'm just looking at it from a BDA perspective.

What facts do we have at this point? You have a single blast in a target light neighborhood (though this is supposition, for all we know a Fan Song could have been sitting there an hour earlier). So this leads us to believe that it was either a TLAM or JDAM with incorrectly entered GPS coords or outright technical failure. We also have the comedy option of a GPS jammer working or someone taking their hot pocket out of the microwave at the wrong time. I still don't put any stock into the supposed change of ROE to purposely target civilians, sorry.

Now to the actual BDA process. Single explosion in a civilian area. If it was a JDAM it didn't explode on the ground. I highly doubt that they would have a proximity fuze on a JDAM for the type of bombing and targeteering that they're doing, so we know that it was probaby fuzed for either multistory building penetration, or bunker penetration.

From all the EO I've seen of the site, you have a small shallow crater. The crater is not only shallow, it's also small, so we know that the JDAM couldn't have J-hooked off of something underneath. The front of the nearby building is destroyed, but not burned or scorched. It's very weird.

If it was a JDAM or a TLAM, not only was there a human error or technical failure with the targeting, but there was also a detonation failure of some sort. I'm definately not discounting that it could have been a Coalition munition, but I'm also not discounting that it could have been something else. Maybe even a failed EOD attempt?

[Badgerboy 0]

It's unlikely will will ever find. Keeping track of all the ordance winging its way into Baghdad is nigh on impossible.

The current party line, is that it was a Iraqi SAM. If so, and I find it unlikely, the only SAM to have a warhead that big would be a SA2 Guideline (The telephone pole). It's warhead is usually a sizeable HE charge, or a nuclear warhead!, so it would put a nice hole in the ground. Other SAMs tend to have 'smarter' fragmentation warheads (Smaller charge), so couldn't cause the level of destruction that we saw.

I think people will be umm'ing and arr'ing about this for a while.

[edc 0]

But the SA-2, while its been around since nam, would/is certainly found in Iraq. And I'm sure that since there is a lot of defense around Baghdad that there are SA-2s there. If stealth a/c or cruise missiles were the attack force, then it probably wouldn't have gotten any type of lock and just went dumb.