Inside Falluja, a Cease-Fire in Name Only [w/ interesting info about Najaf]

New York Times ^ | 4/26/04 | John Kifner and John F. Burns

[jimbo123]

The New York Times is openly rooting for the enemy. Why would anyone be surprised at their take on the enemy's mosque.

[bluecollarman]

political considerations = Cease Fire, joint patrols, dead Marines.

This is stupid, stupid, stupid.

[McGavin999]

Do NOT go in without 2 Peshmerga for each local IP.

[dalebert]

I am prayig hard for out men and women fighting the war on terror. Shame Sadr does not think so much of his men and is sending them to die while he hides.What a coward. The whole bunch are cowards and don't know how to fight like men.

[FreeReign]

political considerations = Cease Fire, joint patrols, dead Marines. This is stupid, stupid, stupid.

This article describes how there really is no cease fire.

Cease Fire = No Cease Fire.

joint patrols = dead Marines whether you declare a cease fire or not.

You get?

[Unam Sanctam]

I don't think it would be wise to bomb Shia's holiest shrine.

[PokeyJoe]

What do you mean when you say "political considerations"? What evidence do you have that the president is constraining military action for "political considerations"?

What specific mission has the president given the Marines in Fallujah and how is he not letting them accomplish it?

Marines are trained to attack an enemy and achieve victory. Fallujah, with its back alleys along the Euphrates River, presents immensely complicated and dangerous urban combat. Marines expect a high number of casualties in taking the City, but are confident that they can do so at the President's word within 24 hours.

"Political Considerations" include a reluctance to achieve victory because the result may include the destruction of the town of Fallujah. In this regard, I see no reason to differentiate between a "cease fire" and an offensive operation. It's semantics to the Marine on the ground. We are taking casualties.

In Vietnam, LBJ contrained military operations and prevented success as he become obsessed with the operation and interceded in operational planning.

"Your mission is pacify Fallujah?"

"Great Sir, let me sit here in this exposed position on flat ground on the leeward side for a few days while we "talk" it over with the enemy and see if they'll surrender."

Mission identified above.

Mission on hold, and I doubt seriously the order to sit in an exposed position was a military decision.

I think it's kinda obvious.

While I trust the military leadership implicitly to achieve success with minimal loss of life, I have less faith in political leadership that is often concerned with "image" and "perception" and "symbolism."

What we need is Chesty Puller.

In the end, the Marines will do what they are ordered to do. Sit on their butt, or kill the enemy. Either way - they will remain faithful.

[bluecollarman]

There should have been no attempted cease fire nor should there be any Joint patrols at this point. "I get" alright.

I get that they are putting Marines in bad situations for political considerations.

[oceanview]

well, we've all kind of figured that out already. The cease fire appears to only be a talking point for the press conferences. who knows, a "patrol" could easily morph into an assault by our side given this use of words.

[Billthedrill]

"This isn't a cease-fire," a Marine officer snorted. "It's a chance for them to regroup."

Well, I'd be happy to explain to this guy that it is too a cease-fire, but I'm afraid I'd have to shout so he could hear me over the shooting.

[swarthyguy]

Bremer's folly. A ceasefire negotiated with people who don't control the jihadis. Of course, ceasefire is quite the misnomer.

But halting forward leaning operations and only responding is not a winning strategy. And cut it anyway you want, but this has allowed the jihadis to regroup, so the end result is the Marine's job got harder not easier.

[ThermoNuclearWarrior]

"The Marine contingency plans for the patrols call for a heavy response if they are fired upon."

There is absolutely NO DOUBT that the marines will be fired upon during these ignorant patrols. Why don't we just let them make a full offensive into the city? Even if the Marines plan to go in the same as they would, if they were taking the city, it's going to look bad if Marines are killed. Everybody is going to say politics got our troops killed by sending them on stupid patrols that will no doubt be attacked. So why would Bush allow this? Bad move in my opinion.

[FreeReign]

...well, we've all kind of figured that out already.

You and the NY Times may have figured it out, but a few others here on this thread haven't.

[FreeReign]

There should have been no attempted cease fire nor should there be any Joint patrols at this point. "I get" alright.

There really is no attempted cease fire. There really is no attempted cease fire. There really is no attempted cease fire....

I get that they are putting Marines in bad situations for political considerations.

We have only two options. Level the city of Fallujah with all remaining 200,000 people in it or do joint patrols and kill the remaining thousand-or-so bad guys that way. The commander in chief has chosen the tactic of killing the remaining bad guys using joint patrols.

You make the charge that the commander in chief is putting Marines in a bad situation for political reasons -- I say he is choosing a tactic in an attempt to win the WOT.

JMO

[oceanview]

option #2 is ongoing as we speak, that's the reality of it.

anyone listening to Alan Colmes drone on and on about this mosque? geez...

[Tax Government]

It stinks that our government is giving the opposition time to regroup.

[ThermoNuclearWarrior]

"who knows, a "patrol" could easily morph into an assault by our side given this use of words."

We could be using this for an excuse for the full fledged take over of Fallujah. We may conduct these patrols the same as we would an offensive to take the entire city. But if Marines are killed it's going to look terrible no matter what, because everyone will blame Bush and politics. Bush will be blamed for sending our troops on so-called patrols in an extremely hostile city. The way we are going about the battle in Fallujah will make the Vietnam comparisons more accurate. No matter how well these patrols are thought out, politics will be blamed for any Marine deaths during these patrols. Does anyone on here give any chance whatsoever of these patrols not being attacked?

[oceanview]

remember, there are 3 neighboorhoods in Fallujah that the insurgents control - Jolan (sp?) seems to be the center of it. most other parts of the city are "normal" (as best as we could describe).

[FreeReign]

"Your mission is pacify Fallujah?"

The mission appears to be pacify Fallujah using patrols and spot battles to kill the remaining bad guys.

"Great Sir, let me sit here in this exposed position on flat ground on the leeward side for a few days while we "talk" it over with the enemy and see if they'll surrender."

This article describes how we are not sitting. I thought that was obvious.

Mission identified above.

That's how you identified the mission.

Mission on hold, and I doubt seriously the order to sit in an exposed position was a military decision. I think it's kinda obvious.

This article describes how we are not sitting. I thought that was obvious...again.

[bluecollarman]

"This isn't a cease-fire," a Marine officer snorted. "It's a chance for them to regroup."

No offense to you....but he don't like it, I don't like it.