Replies

Just completed a preliminary examination of the tactics used in Iraq by the Al Sadr militia and its terrorist cohorts to begin this recent uprising.

Although it happened in Iraq, the tactics are pretty much interchangeable, and it is noteworthy for the purposes of Homeland Security.

1) Enemy conducted intelligence and recon missions of areas they intended to strike well in advance of combat operations.

2) Enemy avoided detection and crossed the area of vulnerability in the attack by infiltrating into targeted areas disguised as civilians. Arms, ammunition, and explosives were pre-positioned before the uprising.

3) Enemy combat operations began disguised as a nationwide (Iraqi) civil protest to a percieved threat, which maximized the element of surprise.

4) Enemy maintained relative superiority by maximizing the element of surprise for the initial assault period, and when tactical initiative was beginning to be lost, they orchestrated counter-attacks on supply and logistics lines of American and Coalition troops to relieve pressure on their forces.

5)When the enemy lost tactical advantage and relative superiority, they began to take hostages for insurance.

6)Enemy retreated from armed confrontation and entered into a defensive seige posture, which is still ongoing.

Analysis- US Forces performed brilliantly in blunting this offensive, and the enemy is on the defensive.

Future applications:

The enemy used classic special operations tactics to get on target fast, avoid the area of vulnerability, and keep the tactical initiative in the battle, but superb US tactics and training blunted the offensive and relegated them to a seige. Enemy losses were 10-1 in the US favor.

The tactics of intelligence gathering, infiltration, and disguised initial assault (by feigning a protest) are applicable to Homeland Security because they could be adapted to use in any attack.

regards

J/M