The Dogs of War

[Schoeler 0]

I think there should have been a follow on force to distribute aid and act as police for conquered areas. They should have held a division in reserve to fill in behind advancing forces for this role. They could fill in the gaps until it was safe for civilian aid workers to move in. Really a stupid plan. Lets hope they've planned the assault on Baghdad better than this, or a lot of people are going to die needlessly.

[MLF 0]

Soldiers never die needlessly, to say that is disresepctful to there families and to the soldiers themself

[FallenPaladin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Bordoy @ Mar. 23 2003,22:57)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tex [uSMC] @ Mar. 23 2003,21:50)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">As far as I know, no non-stealth aircraft are operating over Baghad itself, and the US does not have a stealth plane that has a two-man aircrew. I'm sure that a plenty of two-man aircraft are operating over the outskirts of the city, wild-weasels and such, but so far there is no indication that they have been flying over Baghdad proper. I'd take anything the Iraqis say with several large spoonfuls of salt.<span id='postcolor'>

i'm sure the news crew said there were Tornados over Baghdad.<span id='postcolor'>

Nooooooo, our foreignminister is lying! We Germans are in war, too

[MLF 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Schoeler @ Mar. 23 2003,23:00)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (MLF @ Mar. 23 2003,22:22)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Also Alot of Araqis have celebrated the arrival with civiies chanting sadam ur days are numbered.<span id='postcolor'>

ABC is reporting that in some of the towns in central Iraq, there is quite the opposite reaction.  The civilians are angry and unhappy to see coalition forces.

This does not bode well for winning their hearts and minds, and it seems the Bush administration is really fucking up by not getting humanitarian aid and military police control to captured towns immediately.  The situation in these towns is apparently chaos with a lot of looting, banditry and lack of food going on.  This is a gigantic sized fuckup for the administration.  The idea was to make things better for the Iraqis immediately, not to make things worse for them after we came in.  Now they are saying it will be 36 hours before any aid gets tothese people.  Fucking morons!<span id='postcolor'>

Are these the towns still under iraqi control?

also you cannot bring in humanitarian aid with the port still in dispute.

your also saying apparently they are chaos no Concrete evidence as yet, and if it takes 36 hrs to get the aid in (whihc is probally clearing the port opening of mines) is better than if they dont bring any in at all, to me thats not being moronic just cautious.

[Schoeler 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (MLF @ Mar. 23 2003,23:35)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Soldiers never die needlessly, to say that is disresepctful to there families and to the soldiers themself<span id='postcolor'>

I disagree. I certainly don't intend any disrespect for the military as I myself am a veteran. I do intend disrespect for poor planning and bad command decisions that get men killed who would have stayed alive with proper planning. For example, the Australians getting massacred on the Galipoli peninsula in WW1 was needless and stupid. There was no need for a frontal assault as demonstrated by the British bypassing the Turks dug in there.

Men who die as a result of poor planning or incompetence by the leadership, whether they are our own, the enemy or civilian, have died needlessly. That is not a sign of disrespect for them, it is a sign of ultimate respect for them, their lives and the futures they deserved to have.

[Schoeler 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (MLF @ Mar. 23 2003,23:39)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">also you cannot bring in humanitarian aid with the port still in dispute.

your also saying apparently they are chaos no Concrete evidence as yet, and if it takes 36 hrs to get the aid in (whihc is probally clearing the port opening of mines) is better than if they dont bring any in at all, to me thats not being moronic just cautious.<span id='postcolor'>

Ever heard of airdropping supplies?

Interviews of civilians in these areas have revealed things are chaotic. There has been footage of looting and burning. I saw a shot of marines who were stopping one guy toting away a refrigerator on a cart.

Troops should have gone in after the combat troops to provide security for the civilians in the conquered areas. I think this is a really big oversight and its got me worried.

[MLF 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Schoeler @ Mar. 23 2003,23:45)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (MLF @ Mar. 23 2003,23:39)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">also you cannot bring in humanitarian aid with the port still in dispute.

your also saying apparently they are chaos no Concrete evidence as yet, and if it takes 36 hrs to get the aid in (whihc is probally clearing the port opening of mines) is better than if they dont bring any in at all, to me thats not being moronic just cautious.<span id='postcolor'>

Ever heard of airdropping supplies?

Interviews of civilians in these areas have revealed things are chaotic.  There has been footage of looting and burning.  I saw a shot of marines who were stopping one guy toting away a refrigerator on a cart.

Troops should have gone in after the combat troops to provide security for the civilians in the conquered areas.  I think this is a really big oversight and its got me worried.<span id='postcolor'>

not humanitarian aid that will make a difference, so in your way of thinking every Red Devil in Operation Market Garden died needlessly because of bad planning, i disagree no soldier dies needlesly.

AS you said marines stopped that man looting so there are troops in the area, remember we only know what the media tells us atm we cannot really say and only speculate on how the rear is being delt with.

also food for thought if this thing last for more than 2 weeks the 4th ID will be in the area by then.

[WhoCares 0]

That they leave some jobs(=cities) unfinished behind creates another problem. They have to leave a significant part of the fighting forces behind to seal those threats. And these forces can't participate in the storm on Baghdad.

Has anybody done this calculations?

~300000men in the region

~120000men in air and naval services

=>~180000men ground forces

However, the real fighting units are only about 1/10-1/5 of those; the rest are support, e.g. supply, medical service, transport, staff, maintenance, MP, ...

So there are only ~20000-40000men supposed to do (and are trained for) the actual fighting.

I don't know whether those are enough to conquer a city like Baghdad, but I definatly wouldn't leave many behind to seal other leaks...

[FSPilot 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">True. But the B-2 also often carries a 3rd crewmen, doesn't it?<span id='postcolor'>

I don't think so. Could though, I've never been in one.

[Schoeler 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (MLF @ Mar. 23 2003,23:53)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">so in your way of thinking every Red Devil in Operation Market Garden died needlessly because of bad planning, i disagree no soldier dies needlesly.

AS you said marines stopped that man looting so there are troops in the area, remember we only know what the media tells us atm we cannot really say and only speculate on how the rear is being delt with.

also food for thought if this thing last for more than 2 weeks the 4th ID will be in the area by then.<span id='postcolor'>

If those young men could have gone home to their families instead of to a graveyard in Belgium, and they did nothing to further success in the war effort, then their deaths were needless and their commanders are to blame.  It is important to separate this criticism from any criticism of the troops themselves.  I'm sure they all fought bravely and for a cause that was just, its just that they were used improperly.

In my opinion, not enough security was provided for the iraqi people in the conquered towns.  Why do you suppose the bush administration was quick to point out that aid would be coming within 36 hours after the media showed this oversight.  Even commanders on the ground are speculating that the civilian response to U.S. and coalition forces may be somewhat mixed because of the lack of immediate aid.  The U.S. has clearly based its war strategy upon winning the hearts and minds of the iraqis and convincing them it would be better to capitulate.  It just seems like a huge oversight not to make their lives immediatley better if you are basing the success or failure of the war on these criteria.

Again, I'm not criticizing the troops, just the way this was overlooked.  I hope they get their act together at central command a lot sooner than 36 hours or the psychological war could be in jeopardy.

[Warin 0]

From a reuters report:

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">There was no evidence of weapons of mass destruction being used by Iraq in battle. Instead, Iraqi troops were fighting with machinegun-mounted Japanese pickup trucks against squadrons of the world's most formidable battle tank, the U.S. Abrams.

<span id='postcolor'>

Ok..hands up everyone who thinks it is utter insanity to go after Abrams with a pickup and a machine gune!

[FSPilot 0]

what about the guys who ran out at bradleys with AK-47s? suicidal at best.

[ralphwiggum 6]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ Mar. 24 2003,00:11)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">From a reuters report:

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">There was no evidence of weapons of mass destruction being used by Iraq in battle. Instead, Iraqi troops were fighting with machinegun-mounted Japanese pickup trucks against squadrons of the world's most formidable battle tank, the U.S. Abrams.

<span id='postcolor'>

Ok..hands up everyone who thinks it is utter insanity to go after Abrams with a pickup and a machine gune!<span id='postcolor'>

not me. done it in MP once. had to respawn though.

desperation. maybe they are giving their life up to either distract coalition soldiers or lead them in to Ambsuh?(i know...a far fetched idea)

[FallenPaladin 0]

/me puts hand up

But it shows how desperate and hard they fight. The USA can`t bring them something good, even if planned. The Iraqis will never take it from the USA.

[ralphwiggum 6]

well, at least a pretty decent picture made considering the journalist is a movice. he captured the Javeline getting fired.

[MLF 0]

if any of u are at SA we have an FTP up with a collection of the video feeds more coming in atm of what has been broadcast.

[Tex -USMC- 0]

http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-1084802,00.html

Well now, this could turn into something interesting...

[Warin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tex [uSMC] @ Mar. 24 2003,01:30)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-1084802,00.html

Well now, this could turn into something interesting...<span id='postcolor'>

Well, they need to get some UN inspectors in there and look around. See, US intelligence are the same people that pointed out a plant in Africa, that was then bombed, that turned out to be an aspirin plant

Dont take this the wrong way, but I dont trust american/british intelligence and 'experts' any farther than I can throw them

[PitViper 0]

I was just told that the British craft downed by the patriot had no transponder signal. Can anyone confirm this?

[PFC_Mike 2]

A B-2? Whatever, *unless* our dear comrades in Moscow and Paris were (duh) selling arms to Iraq. But I guarantee that they will never, ever be accused of violating UN charters and resolutions. Anyone who "surrenders" and then opens fire has fucked his mates over badly, the US and UK will probably shoot more than a few suspicious looking surrenderers. Not that I'd do differently.

Watch Saddam call his chem factory an aspirin/baby food/kitten and puppy depot/orphange. I want that man's fat to crackle in the pits of hell...

[PitViper 0]

There are reports that Iraqi soldiers are using women and children as human shields.

Add this to their surrender ruses,donning civilian clothes, and humiliating and executing POW's, its clear that they are abandonning any respect for the geneva conventions of armed conflict.

[Tovarish 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Badgerboy @ Mar. 23 2003,16:09)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">They better hope that the crew are okay, or heads are going roll.<span id='postcolor'>

Not necessarily

[PFC_Mike 2]

Come now PitViper, what self-respecting dictatorial thug respects the Geneva Convention? Stalin didn't (all the german POW's and the Katyn massacre) the Nazis need no explanation. Maybe the US should put a price on Saddam's head...preferably detached from his neck.

[Warin 0]

Ok.

The talk about the Geneva Convention and POW's stops in this thread NOW. It's beginning to get political again. Move it over to the other Iraq thread, where the political discussion may be continued. M'kay?

Thanks

[PitViper 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ Mar. 23 2003,21:04)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Ok.

The talk about the Geneva Convention and POW's stops in this thread NOW.  It's beginning to get political again.  Move it over to the other Iraq thread, where the political discussion may be continued. M'kay?

Thanks <span id='postcolor'>

Geneva convention is not political discussion. it's relevant to actions at the lowest level of action on the battlefield.