Posted on 03/04/2003 3:54:42 AM PST by MadIvan
The arrival of nine B-52 Super Fortress bombers at RAF Fairford overnight gives a clear indication of the timing of the long-forecast US strike on Saddam's Iraq and the kind of operation that President Bush has in mind.
The B-52s are veterans of the Cold War. They carry huge payloads of conventional and satellite-guided bombs, JDAMs, and air-launched cruise missiles. The stationing of the planes at Fairford signalled the overture to the air campaign over Iraq in January 1991 and Nato bombing of Kosovo and Serbia in 1999.
In the Gulf War in 1991, the tons of iron bombs dropped on the demoralised Iraqi troops in the southern desert did not prove too effective. Touring across those wastes after the ceasefire, the dunes and wadhis were littered with the carcasses of bombs - many yards wide of their targets. In Afghanistan the B-52s' satellite-guided bombs proved more accurate-and were decisive in breaking the Taliban lines.
Both the Taliban and the Iraqi prisoners of war testified to the terrifying psychological effect of huge sticks of bombs, 30 at a time, being unloaded from the B-52s' bellies.
As in Kosovo the Americans intend most of the business against Saddam Hussein to be done from the air. In Kosovo, President Clinton's reluctance to commit ground forces bedevilled Nato planners for months, and appeared to let Serb forces off the hook. It was only when Britain and France seemed serious about following up with a ground attack that Milosevic agreed to terms.
The concept established by the Nato commander of that day, Wesley Clark, was "90 per cent from the air, 10 per cent from the ground". This seems to be the rule of thumb for General Tommy Franks and his planners.
The campaign would open with a "firepower demonstration" of precision attacks by the B-52s and B2 Spirit stealth bombers from Diego Garcia, B1 Lancers from Oman, F117 stealth fighter bombers from Kuwait, plus fleets of British and American fighter bombers from all round the Gulf, and 3,000 cruise missiles from ships and aircraft.
This would be aimed at communication centres, air defences, and what remains of Iraq's armed forces, now estimated at around 60,000 or fewer. The tempo of such an air assault cannot be maintained for long. While the USAF has little shortage of air crew, it is no different from its allies in having a shortage of skilled maintenance crews for turning round, repairing and bombing up their planes.
The US Navy will not be able to fly its main strike planes, the F/18A and F Hornets and F14 D Tomcats, without the RAF's assistance in inflight refuelling.
The aircraft carriers provide the key to the precise timing of the air campaign. Yesterday the USS Nimitz left San Diego for the Gulf where it will be on station towards the end of March, possibly to replace the Abraham Lincoln. The Lincoln is one of five carriers in the Gulf region or the eastern Mediterranean. This means that half the US carrier fleet is now involved in operations in the Gulf, and three of the remaining six are in long refit.
Sustained air operations put huge strain on carrier crews and can only last a few weeks at most. The carriers are vital for the American plan for Iraq and will fly at least a third of the strike missions.
With the new resolution being voted on by the Security Council by next Monday at the latest, the US seems to be heading for war a week later - whatever the UN says. But if there is no further mandate from the UN, will Tony Blair be prepared to commit Britain's forces to battle, too?
They don't call B-52's BUFF's (BIG UGLY FAT F****RS) for nothing!!!
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.