Posted on 04/08/2005 8:38:02 AM PDT by worldclass
The ingredients for a raging storm are gathering around the Pentagon. Any one, under the wrong circumstances and wrongly handled, will have destructive effect and could even reach tsunami proportions. Perhaps not since 1947-1949, when the Defense Department was created, has the Pentagon faced such challenges.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Harlan Ullman is one of the proponents of the 'shock and awe' approach that heralded the start of the Iraq war. That approach didn't work. Since it's failure, Ullman has appeared on Fox News several times and shown himself to be quite pessimistic about our chances of being successful in Iraq. I haven't heard him mention the words 'shock and awe' since before the war began. Surprise, surprise.
"Since its failure", I should've written.
Wow, some interesting warning signals lately.
~Corey
Sorry I can't understand what you're talking about. The invasion of Iraq really could not have gone any better, in my opinion.
The 'shock and awe' approach (as I understand it) argued that all that had to be done to bring down the Saddam regime and win the war was to blow up a lot of stuff from the air, wow the folks, and it would be all over. That wasn't true, clearly. We had to get down and dirty to win over there. It's still tough going.
Well, okay, I think I see your point and maybe you're right. That term got used and mis-used by so many people that I'm not sure what it originally meant. So I can't really say if the tactic was successful or not.
I'm just going by the interviews with Ullman that I've seen on Fox News, one (or two?) from before the war and a couple from after the war.
Sorry - "shock and awe" was expected to make it less likely that the regime's forces would stand and fight, and would instead melt away. That happened. It worked. No one thought Saddumb would simply surrender, or that all his forces would.
Don't know where you got such an idea... ABCNNBCBS-NYSlimes? ... the FRAUDcasters who were trying to set up such an idea in skulls that could easily be discredited later on. Other cable "analysts" that FR easily out-analyzed in every other phase of the BASH?
People have to use at least SOME common sense when interpreting these statements and "news stories", or they are constantly being duped.
I agree. The regular Iraqi army never showed up to fight. It was the Fedayeen that fought and foreign mercenaries, mostly Syrians. This was a ragtag bunch of fanatical idiots that did not represent a significant millitary force. Shock and Awe was not a failure. It was a blazing success.
The problem was that the not enough planning was done on the back end of the operation regarding looting and governance.
I'm associating 'shock and awe' strategy with the desire to have a clean, quick war: in, win, out. The lack of planning for the war's aftermath, which few deny, is evidence that at least some higher-ups thought it was going to be easier than it turned out to be, too.
However, I'm willing to allow that my interpretation is perhaps not what Ullman and his collaborators intended.
The planning was done - we just weren't able to mobilize swiftly enough because the enemy retreated so rapidly - shockNawe may have worked too well as far as that was concerned.
Looting wasn't that bad. Very few artifacts were actually lost. The "palace looting" was great for the Iraqis' morale. The "official regime documents" would have been tough to save no matter our strategy. Governance: well, I don't consider this that bad a progress at all - they've doing very well in rapidly forging toward a democratic nation. Reconstruction: going very very well, with far more electricity (and reliability) than ever before in Iraq. (Just don't ask the FRAUDcasters ...)
As you said, it was a BLAZING SUCCESS.
Good. Really, there has seldom been such a successful strategy so vilified as shockNawe. It was an incredible strategy that saved many lives on both sides, and possibly, many months of grinding out mile-by-mile successes. Trying to figure out how the "after war" scene would be different is extremely difficult - would such a scenerio increased or decreased "insurgency", etc? Personally, I think it is safe to say that we are much further along on the "democracy" route than we would be had we created so many more casualties over so long a period of time, especially when countries other than Iraq are taken into account.
I don't think anyone wants to see us repeat shockNawe in a neighborhood near them.
Public pillories and vetoes are rare with this administration.
Not needed you know .... no mistakes are made.
I agree with you about the mobilazation part. This is true. A vacuum was created so swiftly, and no one expected EVERYONE to dissapear. But the looting was a significant problem. There were many public structures and pieces of the civil infrastructure that were completely dismantled by the looters. This has hampered the reconstruction as well as helped create a sense of lawlessness. I don't think the Coalition is at fault for this. The Thunder Run was an amazing piece of millitary history. Nobody ever expected tanks to be rolling though downtown Baghdad with impunity that quickly. The Iraqis were being fed propoganda and their are many accounts of the suprise Iraqis encountered on their way to work about 2 years and a week ago in Baghdad. Meanwhile, Americans were being fed the 'quagmire' line and even our top politicians were dumbfounded at the fact the US Army Cpt. Jason Carter was calling his boss from the lobby of one of Sadam's palaces. Most of them learned by watching FOX news that day.
It is important we learn from our mistakes and contigency planning is everything in war. You can't just make one plan for any aspect of a campaign and you have to expect the unexpected. I can't remember what famous General made the comment about first contact being the last use of the battle plan. History shows this to be true. I'm not sure if there is anything we could have done though. The Baathists just disappeared along with every government worker in every major Iraqi city.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.