Dang. Couldn't resist.
Posted on 05/21/2007 6:07:13 PM PDT by elhombrelibre
Iraq is the central front in the war against Al Qaeda. And we are beginning to win. These are not talking points. They are facts on the ground, as I saw during my recent trips there.
Though you may be getting the opposite impression from news reports, the sectarian violence that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi had unleashed by destroying the Samarra Mosque in February 2006 has subsided. Measured weekly, sectarian killings are down by almost two-thirds since the start of the Baghdad security plan. Anbar Province, Al Qaeda's former sanctuary in western Iraq, has turned against the terrorists. Anbaris by the thousands are signing up to fight against Al Qaeda. Violent attacks in the province are down by 50% and combined casualties down by 65% between early January and mid-May.
The movement is spreading. Sheiks in Diyala, Salah-ad-Din and Babil provinces are reaching out to coalition forces to help us.
This is not the moment to consider withdrawal time lines that would snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, as the U.S. Congress seems determined to do. It is the time to redouble our efforts.
It is true that the overall level of violence in Iraq remains high, and American soldiers are still dying. Scores of terrorists flow into Iraq every month, detonating suicide car bombs against civilians, Iraqi security forces and American troops. This is the core of the security problem faced by our troops and by innocent Iraqis.
But looking at these casualty numbers alone distorts reality. Security is improving across Baghdad, even in traditionally bad areas. In early May, I walked and drove through these neighborhoods. Haifa St., scene of day-long gunfights between Al Qaeda terrorists and coalition forces in January, is calm and starting to revive. Its market is open and flourishing.
Even in Baghdad's Dora neighborhood, some of which remains very dangerous, the market now has more than 200 shops - up from zero in February. Across the city, Iraqis are reaching out to coalition and Iraqi troops with tips and requests for help.
In some areas, that help takes the form of attacking the enemy and responding to enemy counterattacks. But as we kill and capture these evil people, we create safety in our wake. We are not standing between warring communities. We stand between terrorists and murderers and their innocent victims, both Sunni and Shia.
It will take time for that safety to take hold. It will take time for our enemies to accept their defeat and stop fighting. Demanding total victory by September is unrealistic. But we are making progress, and by then, I am confident we will be making more.
One thing impressed me above all on my most recent trip, from which I returned on May 13: Ordinary Iraqis have not given up. Sadrists in the parliament may demand our withdrawal, but the government of Iraq has repeatedly asked us to stay. Iraqi soldiers and police are fighting Al Qaeda and Shia militias every day, sacrificing alongside our troops.
One Iraqi commander told me, "Anyone who says the Americans should leave now is not a real Iraqi citizen."
Growing numbers of Iraqis are joining the struggle against those who want to derail Iraq's chances for security and stability. We must not let them down, and we must not let ourselves down. This is a fight that we can and must win.
Kagan, resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, is author of "Finding The Target: The Transformation of American Military Policy."
http://www.usmc.mil/marinelink/mcn2000.nsf/0/E4885590CF8E34DB8525702A007DAB4F?opendocument
Submitted by: Marine Forces Pacific Story by: Computed Name: Pfc. J. Ethan Hoaldridge
U.S. MARINE CORPS FORCES PACIFIC, CAMP H. M. SMITH, Hawaii (June 24, 2005) -- “Block off all their main and secondary supply lines for these are their main arteries, and ambush them along those routes for they are exposed and easy prey.”
These words from Abu Musab al-Zarqawi were cited by the Winds of Change website, showing the real danger for convoys traveling Marine supply lines in Iraq.
There have been 341 Marines killed in action and 4,099 wounded in combat during Operation Iraqi Freedom since February 16, 2004. How many of these fatalities and casualties have been caused by improvised explosive devices and ambushes on convoys? Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicles could’ve saved some of those lives and kept those Marines in the fight.
With its flat bottom and soft-skin plastic doors, if a humvee is directly hit by a land mine or IED, most likely the passengers inside will lose their life and the vehicle will be destroyed beyond repair, said Maj. Gert de Wet, Central Command plans officer.
“In 1968, South Africans in conjunction with Rhodesians started developing the technology to create new vehicles that would counter the land mine threat introduced in the Bush War in Southern Africa. They developed the technology that created a new modular design for their military vehicles. For example, the vehicle’s wheels could be blown off in a mine/IED blast, but the passengers and the rest of the vehicle survived,” said de Wet.
“South Africa and Rhodesia did not have a large military and realized that you cannot afford to loose lives on the battlefield,” said de Wet. “These countries also didn’t have a large military budget and soon found that it was too expensive to loose a vehicle every time it hit a mine. It was far cheaper to replace an axel or wheel than an entire vehicle.”
“The military in South Africa and Rhodesia have been using these vehicles for the past 30 years, steadily improving the technology,” said de Wet.
The Marine Corps recognized these vehicles’ successful track record and became interested in incorporating them into the fleet.
The Corps decided to do business with Force Protection, located in South Carolina, which is the company that developed a version of a Mine Resistant Ambush protected vehicle named the Cougar.
“These vehicles are all designed from the ground up specifically built to survive IEDs and ambushes. The v-shaped hull assists deflection of a mine or IED blast away from the vehicle’s capsule keeping the passengers safe and the vehicle intact. The vehicle is also built to rollover and is equipped with multi-point, racing style harnesses, so if the vehicle rolled 360 degrees the passengers inside would avoid injury,” said de Wet.
Ballistic glass, another feature on the Cougar, allows Marines to see and engage an enemy ambush through the gun ports in the glass not exposing themselves to fire.
In a humvee, gunners are usually perched above the vehicle on a 50-caliber machine-gun open to enemy fire, while in some vehicles the passengers inside cannot see what direction enemy fire is coming from.
“When I was deployed forward, a friend of mine was in an ambush in a light-armored vehicle,” said de Wet. “They got out of the vehicle not knowing they were being attacked on the left side and luckily didn’t take casualties. In a Cougar you could just look out the glass and engage.”
Marines started reaping the benefits of the MRAP vehicles in Fall 2004 after procuring around 27 Cougars.
Because of these benefits the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force requested 1,169 MRAP vehicles. There are different variants such as, multi-mission combat vehicles, ambulance variant vehicles, troop transport vehicles and so on.
“The Corps presently uses them in Iraq for explosive ordinance disposal. When receiving calls from convoys that come upon land mines or IEDs, they could send an EOD team out in a Cougar. So even if the mine hits the Cougar, its passengers will stand a far better chance of survival due to the v-shaped hull design and other special features incorporated in the vehicle,” explained de Wet.
The Cougar is scalable as well, meaning that it can be used for humanitarian efforts as well as combat by detaching the arms and gun systems to look less lethal, but still protects the crew against threats from terrorists such as, Al Queda.
"The Cougar has been hit by IEDs and ambushes and done very well. As far as I know to date, no one has gone to the hospital as a result of an attack,” said de Wet. “I have a friend in Iraq right now who has survived four IED blasts in the same MRAP vehicle, and after some repair, the vehicle is still in use,” he continued.
The Cougar may be the rebuttal to al-Zarqawi’s statement that the supply lines are unprotected. This vehicle could cause a role reversal between the predator and its prey. “The Marine Corps now has an opportunity and a way to alleviate the problem of so many casualties from IEDs and ambushes in Iraq,” said de Wet.
Apparently, just as some Liberals hate Bush enough that they want to mock the war effort some “conservatives” now do as well.
What kind of strategy would we develop to defeat the threat of hidden explosive devices? Sure, we all hope for the development of some kind of technology that would sniff out an explosive device some distance in front of a vehicle, but when people want to kill other people, there are limits to what can be done.
Heck, we have been searching for strategies for defeating gunpowder and projectiles since those two things came together to revolutionize warfare. The bottom line is: any time our troops are willing to venture into areas where someone wants to do them harm, the likelihood exists of them being harmed.
As William Shedd once said: “A ship is safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for.”
We can always do more to make our men and women in uniform safer, but unless we cloister them in their barracks...they will never be entirely safe.
True, but to make a comparison with statistics, numbers are numbers and words are words.
But Shakespeare used words one way, and the New York Times uses them another.
As another poster said, casualty counts are not always the best indicator of the success or failure of a mission.
Unless, of course, that is how you define sucess or failure. Then, then any mission that keeps the troops safely on the base is by definition a successful one.
The movement is spreading. Sheiks in Diyala, Salah-ad-Din and Babil provinces are reaching out to coalition forces to help us.
Public Multimedia Inc. (PMI) is a not-for-profit media organization (The Long War repors...)
The Fourth Rail ^ | May 21, 2007 8:45 AM | Bill Roggio
Posted on 05/21/2007 11:04:28 AM CDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1837203/posts
From the Fourth Rail:
Iraq Report: The Salahadin Awakening forms
***************************************EXCERPT*****************************
The most important event to occur in Iraq over the weekend was the formation of the Salahadin Awakening, which opposed al Qaeda’s atempt to Talibanize Iraq and errode the power of the tribal leaders. Stars & Stripes reported that the Baghdad tribes met to form a front, however the information in the report indicates this was a meeting of the tribes in Salahadin province. The meeting occurred in Taji, and the tribes are from the northern portion of Baghdad province and Salahadin. recently, the tribes from Diyala formed the Diyala Awakening, which was built on the same principle as the Anbar Salvation Council, which has led to a dramatic turnaround in the security situation in Anbar province.
Evidence of the formation of the Salahadin Awakening was seen earlier last week, when Iraqi civilians in Duluiyah in Salahadin province came to the aid of Iraqi police as they were attacked at their checkpoint in the city. “In response to the attack, 20 armed men from a nearby neighborhood assembled and quickly came to the aid of the policemen manning checkpoint,” Multinational Forces Iraq stated. “This grass roots effort contributed a significant impact in thwarting the attack... local citizens also responded according to a plan they developed for neighborhood defense.”
Elsewhere in Salahadin, Coalition forces nabbed “the alleged leader of an Al-Qaeda affiliate group” along with “eight other suspicious individuals,” weapons and bomb making equipment. Also, the curfew and shut down of Samarra, which went into effect after a suicide bomber killed 11 police and wounded 12 in an attack on a checkpoint, has been lifted.
Task Force 145 is continuing the hunt for al Qaeda leaders and operative. On Sunday, Coalition forces killed 8 al Qaeda and captured 34 in raids in Baghdad, and Karma and Fallujah in eastern Anbar province. Coalition forces also killed or cpatured two high value targets. Maj. Gen. William Caldwell also reported that Coalition forces killed Azhar al-Dulaimi, the “masterminded” behind the assault on the Provincial Joint Coordination Center in Karbala, which resulted in the kidnapping and murder of 5 American soldiers.
5 posted on 05/21/2007 11:19:38 AM CDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (The DemonicRATS believe ....that the best decisions are always made after the fact.)
I like Strawberry ice cream with Chocolate syrup!
Hey this thread hijacking is fun..and easy!
“Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.”
Martin Luther King Jr
Dang. Couldn't resist.
Better than nothing and I'd like to read about it if you recall the name but, even on its face, that's not an impressive strategy as it's very likely to be defeated by more sophisticated bomb making or use. Further, it does not protect soldiers out of their vehicles. Lastly, part of the strategy is to be able to actually deploy them but if they're expensive there be a lot of friction in the deployment.
What is very frustrating is that, presumably, we have a lot more and smarter people but we're always a step or two behind instead of being a step or two ahead.
This is what you were talking about in the other post? I see it’s nearly two years and the vehicle has not made any impact on IED deaths. I guess my point about affordability being a necessary part of the strategy was prescient.
In a war against terrorists, I think dramatically reducing civilian casualties does define success.
I think it is fair to say (in my experience, at least) that the parameter that defines success is very dependent on what task or mission it measures, and it may take some digging to to find the correct parameter which presents the most accurate and succint yardstick by which to measure.
BTW...I was lazy in making my statement...in the sentence "Unless, of course, that is how you define sucess or failure". I actually meant it generally.
I should have worded as "Unless, of course, that is how one defines sucess or failure. That wasn't actually directed AT you...:)
One that immediately comes to mind is pressure on Iran. These devices are coming from there. When the Brits were abducted recently I thought to myself, finally we've engineered an incident that will let us fully engage the main enemy, but no. Why am I not reading about how some of those Iranian supplied IEDs make their way routinely into the hands of dissident Iranian Kurds to be employed against Revolutionary Guard units? Why am I not reading about economic sabotage in Iran? Why aren't mullahs dying in riots?
I can think of some more ideas too is you care to hear them.
Heck, we have been searching for strategies for defeating gunpowder and projectiles since those two things came together to revolutionize warfare.
And we've pretty much succeeded at least against conventional forces.
The bottom line is: any time our troops are willing to venture into areas where someone wants to do them harm, the likelihood exists of them being harmed.
Undoubtedly but that's beside my point which is that we've been faced years now by a specific and successful enemy tactic and have not defeated it nor really even tried. Compare that with what happened a a couple months ago when the terrorists brought down several helicopters in a short period. Obviously they'd developed a successful tactic. But we quickly developed counters and I haven't heard of it happening again. One is tempted to conclude that the brass don't think the IED threat really matters.
I totally agree that it is situation dependent. But this particular situation is that table of Iraqi casualties on the web site. I figure the President has until the end of the year or maybe a little longer and if that situation isn't dramatically improved by then the political pressure will overwhelm him.
I could not agree more strongly. That would help in many ways. However, Iraq is a country the size of California, and was the single most militarized area on earth. There are explosives all over that country.
I disagree vehemently with your statement that "the brass don't think the IED threat really matters"
Can I restate what you said...let me know if I have misunderstood you: Because we have not developed countermeasures to IED threats, the upper levels of the military have decided that it is not worth the effort to find solutions to the weapon that kills 40 or 50 men a month.
Is that the message I should have received when I read that?
ping!
I’ve always supected that you KNEW where the duplicate key was.
There was an article in the summer of 03(?) in the American Enterprise that said Iraq was one giant bomb dump.
Yes, it is and that’s the big news, and it’s what will turn the war obviously. When I was in Iraq, I remember an 0-6 telling me, “We’ve figured everything out but the tribes.” It looks like we’ve finally done that too.
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.