Just my 20/20 hindsight opinion, but too think they didn’t start off with enough troops. That while they may say they have prepared for many diffrent possibilities that I think they thought resistance would be less untill right at Bagdag, and supplying would be easier. I’ve herd the 4th mech division is going out and others posted here, but its not like you can move a whole division in a week. If they really have to wait for a couple or more divisions then this will take months.
I heard last night (or was it early this morning) that there are only ~75,000 troops in Iraq. That doesn’t sound like many considering the 300,000 troop build up, though I don’t know how many of those are Navy or Airforce and don’t need to be in Iraq to be effective.
I think the problem is mostly with the unrealistic expectations the media gave the world. Even the president has been trying to temper those opnions begining with his speech at the onset of hostilities warning that this would be longer and more difficult than many expect. I don’t think the reality of how the war has unfolded is out of line with the administration’s expectations. Sure, everyone was hoping the power structure would just collapse as soon as we rolled across the border, but that didn’t happen. The war is still obscenely in the coalitions favour. We have thousands of EPWs, they have like 7. We’ve lost only a handful of troops in combat (and a small number more in accidents and murder by some loose cannon), they’ve lost hundreds (if not in the thousands by now) of combatants. We’ve lost a handful of vehicles, they’ve lost hundreds. Our bombs and missles have hit hundreds of targets, as far as I know they’ve yet to hit anything more important than sand or a patriot missle with a SCUD. I’d say we have the situation pretty well in hand.
That’s not to say we couldn’t have greater control. But I think our extreme caution has held us back (literally) in an effort to preserve the lives of our men. We could just go into Basra, etc, and take these cities. But it would certainly mean a much larger number of casualties. We’ll be in a better position for this when the follow up forces get caught up with the lead. Has the 101 Airbourne crossed the border yet? I can’t remember, but it seems to me they’re basically waiting in Kuwait still, but they have tha ability to move 100 miles in a day.
That’s what I also heard. It was then reported to us by the embedded reporters. The truth was that a few of the already in place Iraqi troops were just repositioning themselves.
I think a big part of the problem in our perception is that we are hearing reporters trying to tell the story. Don’t forget that at central command, they have all the information and they have all the plans and they are not talking about what is going on and they are not telling us what the plan is. The coalition central command knows what is going on much better than the Iraqi forces because Iraq doesn’t have reports from above. We can see them but they can’t see us.
Contrary to pentagon dreams there is every indication that the lines of comunication are holding up between Baghdad and localized forces. Cordinated attacks across the country in the past 24 hours, moves to isolate and split american forces, its a larger strategy - not units flapping about. If anything we can’t see the enemy, or at least he militia forces which are trolling supply lines.
I’ve heard reporting elsewhere, Washington Post I think, that there was a huge column from Baghdad but that it was successfully interdicted by air and the surviving vehicles have dispersed. Who knows?
Even the president has been trying to temper those opnions begining with his speech at the onset of hostilities warning that this would be longer and more difficult than many expect.
Between the President and the sales staff for the war we’ve heard all kinds of different scenarios. The ‘easy war’ was being peddled when they were working on Congress to pass the resolution. The ‘hard war’ came out just before the war started and mainly from the mouth of Bush. It’s a political calculation. If the war did go easily Bush would be able to be relieved and who’s counting in victory? If the war went with difficulty then Bush’s folks could quote him about the unforseen difficulties. This is how Rove works. He’s very good at his job.
From today’s Washington Post: U.S. Warned About Guerilla Resistance If Iraq Invaded.
Intelligence analysts at the CIA and Pentagon warned the Bush administration that U.S. troops would face significant resistance from Iraqi irregular forces employing guerrilla tactics, but those views have not been adequately reflected in the administration’s public predictions about how difficult a war might go, according to current and former intelligence officials.
CIA analysts “thought there was a good chance we would be forced to fight our way through everything,” said one intelligence official who sat in on many briefings. “They were much more cautious about it being an easy situation.”
With U.S. and British troops being forced to defend a more than 200-mile supply line from the Kuwaiti border to U.S. troops 50 miles from Baghdad and to fend off small-scale attacks by the Iraqi irregular forces, analysts at the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency are complaining that their reports would be softened as they moved to the White House. “The caveats would be dropped and the edges filed off,” the intelligence official said.
CIA analysts believe these groups will fight to the end, whether Hussein is alive or not. “This is about surviving for them,” said one former senior Iraqi analyst who still consults with the Pentagon. “A large percent of them acted like secret police and fear what the Americans would do with them.”
Its ass covering time, some claimed that CIA predicted light resistance. The crew at Langley doesn’t want their rep spoiled, especially considering the embarrassment of the Nuclear Documents.
Personally, I’d say this dovetails more with the stories I’ve seen of political pressure being put on the intelligence services to support White House claims of Saddam’s ties to Al Qaida and the threat posed by his WMD. Eye of the beholder I guess.
WRT the ‘phantom’ column of 1,000 vehicles moving South from Baghdad last night, one of NBC’s embedded reporters was on this morning going into specific detail about the battle the Marines had with this column. Specifically he said that two B-52s were used at the end of the battle to clean up. That column would appear to be real (or it was real, anyway) after all.
He also said that the column was mostly trucks carrying soldiers, and that they were in uniforms made to look similar to our own. As he result, he claimed that rules of engagement were being loosened to allow more leeway in firing on people acting suspiciously. My take on that is the downside is more friendly fire, but the upside is less penetration of our areas by these irregular Iraqi soldiers.
No I agree with you but people were shifting blame onto the CIA and they wanted to quash it as quickly as possible.
from what i can tell, the 4th was supposed to come down through turkey, which would have split iraqi forces, and placed baghdad under more pressure sooner - which didn’t happen. all their trucks/tanks/supplies were on ships waiting to be offloaded - which now have to go all the way around to offload at kuwait now.
Solution: invade and conquer Turkey first.
Remember the posts just about a week ago talking about how the Iraqis would welcome us with open arms?[/quote]
Yes they sure are welcoming the U.S. forces - by shooting them in the back once they have surrendered. Bastard Iraqis.
If it wasn’t for oil and the threat of terrorism the rest of the world should just leave the Middle East to fight amongst themselves. Hopefully they will nuke themselves to oblivion.
If it wasn’t for oil and Israel, there would be no terrorism aimed at the West. It would be like the muslims and hindus killing one another in India.
If it wasn’t for oil and Israel, there would be no terrorism aimed at the West.
If it wasn’t for bullets and guns, there would be no war.
If it weren’t for my horse, I wouldn’t have spent that year in college.
So much for having “practically taken Basra.”
Does this sound like they’ll welcome the soldiers with open arms?
I really don’t get the talk about placing blame. I mean the war has been going on for only a week and the coalition foces are within 50 miles of Baghdad. They have control of the oil fields in the south and the port city for Iraq. They are apparently establishing a northern front for the battle of Baghdad. New troops are pooring into Iraq. There have been only like 19 USA fatalities in a week of fierce fighting. Exactly what is it that needs to be blamed on someone?
Not to worry. We’ve got Morocco’s elite anti-landmine monkeys on our side now. This coalition of the willing kicks ass. :roll:
Wow, they really mean monkeys. Talk about your unacceptable simian casualties.
I’m told the monkies will be safe on their battle koalas.
We shouldn’t make fun, though, we train dolfins and sea lions to assist in naval operations like marking sea mines. I hear that’s being protested right now as well.
You guys watch Tough Crowd after the Daily Show? It’s pretty damn good. Though I was annoyed how they promoted it, premiered it, pulled it, promoted it again as if it was new and then premiered it again. It’s like a meaner, funnier, less informed Politically Incorrect.