Replies

"I understand the importance of armor. However, I believe situations such as this indicate the need for viable alternatives to traditional armored assets. Alas this may represent the end of the line for the M1A2. More flexible platforms are needed for situations like this one. Platforms that can be more easily prepositioned. Just a thought."

11 posted on 03/14/2003 11:09 PM CST by Don'tMessWithTexas

There has been a lot of discussion here and in the media about Turkey, the 4th Div and air access to N Iraq. I am getting the impression that this is begining to be similar to the same situation during Gulf War 1.

There was endless speculation about the Marine amphibious invasion of Kuwait. The speculation of casualties, the numerous scenerios of attack and the methods that the Marines would use to carry it out. Saddam concentrated his forces to counter this sea attack. Wrong move.

Saddam last night shifted forces to the west and south. A thrust from Turkey in the north(wink wink) is out of the question. You can't attack without the M1A2 tanks.

I am watching what happens in the north. A WAG would be a thrust south by Turkish forces with American forces behind them to protect the Kurds positions in the area. The Turks would advance on Bhagdad while the US forces would move in behind to protect Kurd interests.

Just speculation.

I believe that we have assets in the region that can take advantage of speed and flexibility. I believe that air assets can be rapidly deployed to locations in northern Iraq once hostilities begin. Hence, overflight rights in Turkey are not necessary. Meanwhile, air cavalry will be able to transport troops to northern Iraq with impunity to secure oil fields and protect the Kurds.

The battleground will quickly concentrate in the area around Baghdad. This will be made much easier to exploit with the use of E-bombs and our air capability. I get the feeling that securing the Baghdad airport will be a major objective.

In the end, therefore, the armor destined for Turkey may not be needed in the long run. However, it is possible that we will send armor in a flanking move quickly through Kuwait to northwestern Iraq, to secure positions there and to be put into position for the battle of Baghdad. Just some thoughts.

That scenario makes no sense, for a number of reasons.

First of all, there is no discernible motivation for the Turks to mount an assault of Baghdad, thereby assuming the political and military consequences & casualties.

Secondly, they would risk an explosive outburst of domestic anger from a Turkish population both intensely hostile to & completely unprepared for such a deployment.

Third (and closely related), Turkey would be furiously vilified in the Arab world - which already views them with extreme prejudice - and therefore become a target of terrorist organizations for probably a generation.

Fourth, and quite importantly, the Turkish military (while admirable in regional comparisons) is notably inferior to an American force. The element of potential surprise would get more than outbalanced by the reduced effectiveness of the invasion force.

Fifth, this would practically guarantee exactly that scenario most feared in northern Iraq: a chaotic conflict between Turkish military forces, Kurdish insurgents, Iranian backed Shi'ites, and Iraqi Sunni radicals.

Sixth, one need only take a quick trip down to Fort Hood in Texas to see that the 4th Infantry has not been deployed anywhere - which includes a backup deployment for a hypothetical Turkish invasion of Iraq.

Finally, there's little reason to believe that the Iraqi military would assume a tactical stance much different than the present whether or not a surprise Turkish invasion force were in the cards. Indeed, I think there's a general expectation of both a limited Turkish intervention and a northern front opened by airborne American forces.

I suppose there's an outside chance for the oft-speculated Turkish based surprise northern front scenario, but I'd find myself rather surprised if that proves the case. I personally don't think this would be the wisest course - for the various reasons outlined above - but I suppose we'll find out soon enough.

Just speculation.

And a good speculation at that. IMHO

Interesting speculation, IF the Turks even decided, withtheir new parliment, that they would even PARTCIPATE in this conflict - which they have not.

We most definitely want overflight rights in Turkey for cruise missiles at a minimum. There could easily be targets in Northern Iraq that would be very difficult to reach after we move further South because of this diplomatic debacle.

No way will Turkish troops move on Baghdad.