Posted on 03/29/2003 7:22:41 PM PST by 11th_VA
Iraq (AP) - A U.S. Marine was captured and put on display in the town of Shatrah, and military officials do not know if he is alive or dead, the Richmond Times-Dispatch reported.
The Marine was captured Friday after a convoy of 200 vehicles heading north on Route 7 toward Baghdad was hit with rocket-propelled grenades and heavy machine-gun fire while passing through the town.
The Marine was part of an aircraft support squadron. Officials have not released his name.
Shatrah is about 25 miles north of Nasiriya and 160 miles southeast of Baghdad.
Maj. Dave Holahan, executive officer of the 1st Battalion, 4th Regiment, 1st Marine Division, told the Times-Dispatch's embedded reporter, Rex Bowman, that the battalion had cleared the town of resistance Thursday.
Early Friday, Holahan said, the Marines drove several lightly armored vehicles through the town to clear a path for the convoy. The vehicles came under attack. The squads killed or drove away the attackers.
But Friday night, as the 200-vehicle convoy drove through, the last vehicles in the convoy came under attack. A 7-ton truck overturned, Holahan said, and Marines raced to fend off the attack and put the truck's occupants in other vehicles.
As they left, he said, they discovered a Marine was missing. Intelligence reports Saturday indicated he had been displayed in the middle of town.
Holahan blamed the attacks on the Republican Guard. "They've got death squads in some of these towns, and that's where we get this resistance."
Holahan said the Marines were still contemplating their response to the attack in Shatrah.
Once cannot be a saint when fighting barbarians. Yet that is what we tell the world, which not holds us to that standard. Naturally, any human will fail when measured by supra-natural standards.
There are numerous missions which need over - the - horizon and immediate - area vision that helicopters are tasked to perform in "the new military." They were so, in the old military.
Now, some units on the ground have new-fangled airborne observation toys, but these are few; however, their numbers should be increasing.
Yet, over a given area that in the old days, a larger number of troops might cover, now, in "the new military," a smaller number of troops covers that same area, putting a greater demand on, and for, more equipment. These troops are more mobile, which assists with adjusting them to threats and offensive tasks. But, to affect contact observation with potential threats, requires airborne vision in over and around the immediate area and in addition, just - over - the - horizon --- jobs for an elevated platform: the helicopter and its human eyes.
Supply missions and patrols in the rear areas especially need this visibility.
Presently, given a wish to prove some of the budget, the desire to prove the combat assault worthiness of the Apache and Cobra aircraft, has these platforms husbanded for attack plans, when the need for these platforms is more, at this time, for the many troops on the ground in the rear areas.
Visibility is not great, and columns on the roads to the rear, are routinely attacked --- they cannot see the enemy at 200 - 500 yards out, a job for helicopters, not F-15's and A-10's who really can do damage up at the front, tasked in the priority stack for assault and protection, there.
Story after story of lamentation regarding our losses is self-evident here, and by other communications, pointing to the lack of area visibility for our operations beind the front lines.
As you may now know from other stories, the British have discovered evidence of Saddam's henchmen experimenting with the possible use of delivering chemical weapons via mortar fire.
Such mortar fire, which our supply units have been encountering, must be considered chemically potent as well.
Now, as we bore in on Baghdad, and a chemical attack stretches along 100 plus miles to the rear and near Basra, because we could not observe well-enough close-in to detect and defeat it imprimis, that will cause quite a lot of consternation. The routes are going to be loaded with humanitarian supplies and civilian contract drivers; and I mean a whole lot.
The routes must be heavily patrolled by close-in air support, in addition to strike aircraft. We cannot go merrily down the road, ignoring what is going on left and right at 150 yards, 250 yards, 350 yards . . .
We need helicopters for these missions, and to free up the Apaches and Cobras from the diversions, so that they can head back to the front.
Also, we are going to lose helicopters; and therefore we need even more helicopters.
The application will save many more of our ground troops.
At Baghdad, we are going to need a whole lot of helicopters, hovering nearby on call for every small unit.
It'll be a nasty business, but our people on the ground cannot be valued any less.
We need more troops in the field, and we need the transport and air support to maintain force protection.
I do not see a shortage.
If there is, it is likely due to a lack of pilots, but I believe that they have gotten that under control since Clinton. many were opting out then and working for private industry.
Who in their right mind would work for that bunch of morons.
BTW, is your middle name NEED?
According to you, we need everything.
Watch and learn.
According to reports, that is precicely what they are doing.
They also have quick response marines on standby 24/7 and positioned at intervals.
The problem is that not all of them are.
The recent story of some locals risking their lives to properly bury a couple of our guys and collect their personal effects which they turned over to the command was touching.
No, they are not all animals! If they were, we would not have a reason to be there dying for them.
We could just stand back and bomb them like we did our friends the Serbs.
That was sarcasm: I meant that we sacrificed one of our own without any reson at all. These generals think, apparently, that they are still fighting a desert war, and the nation high-fived itself for its fast vehicles. The enemy's retreat to Bagdad made it clear from the start that they are fighting a querilla war. And, in response to that, we are not covering the rear when driving a convoy through a hostile city? I am far from being an armchair general --- I am just very angry for the needlessly lost life of this brave soldier, and for the agony of his family. This was completely avoidable.
And, no response of of stand-by marines can save from a machine-guns fired from a second floor. Those thugs would not dare if they saw sufficent protection. Forces on stanby are good for the extrication of those already ander attack in an open field --- even in the jungle, where you might hover a helicopter, perhaps under fire from below. You cannot extricate someone from gragged into an unseen apartment in a myriad of tiny, narrow streets. Especially if you are given orders not to have a single civilian casualy. Prevention rather than correction of a problem is therefore a solution. We did not follow it.
We could just stand back and bomb them like we did our friends the Serbs.
No, we are too week to do that, both internally and externally. When we bombed the Serbs, the world did not fully wake up to the fact that we are the only power left. Now they realize it, do not like it (regardless of what we do or do not do), and hate us for that.
Internally our problems started in Vietnam and continue todat: our nation, in contrasrt to our brave soldires and most of their families, does not have resolve to fight to the death. Under Carter, it did not have resolve to fight at all. We recovered a little under Reagan and Buhs, are much better yet in this conflict: as a nation, we are willing to fight and support the President so far. But do not see us being ready to fight to the their death.
During WWII, if our boys dorve through a street of a concurred city and someone fired a show from a window, a tank would stop, turn the turret, and level a few floors of that building (or the whole thing, depending on its size). We did not wait for the popular German uprising and thanks for the "liberation:" we fought. That is how you acquire and retain control of concurred cities. There are no other precedents in history of which I am aware. Since this is based on human nature, "smatness" of weapons does not change this fact at all.
Almost since inception, we have this unchakabke belief that, if given a chance to live the way we do, other peoples would prefer it. Since WWII dozens of new countris sprung up --- in Africa, Asia, former Soviet Union. Not one adopted our constitution. Iraqis will never be greatful for "liberation" (just look at the Germans and the French that are more close to us culturally). I really do not care what they feel: I want a government there that is not a threat. In the meantime, all I care about is the lives of our boys and girls over there.
This distinction between the Middle East and most of Western Civilization is a direct result of religious heritage, I believe. We, Israel, Western Europe have a Judeo-Christian background which values human life as a gift of God, so we are shocked and appalled at terrorist acts, suicide bombings, etc. The "Religion of Peace" evidently does not see it that way.
This (as stated by Gen. Meyers and others) is a wholly new concept of warfare from the ground up. This is not Patton's army, and I am quite sure he would be screaming bloody hell over the tactics employed here.
This entire operation when viewed as a whole, appears to be working.
Although we know the end game, we do not know how the end game will play out. There may and have been some adjustments to peculiarities on the battlefield. Everything looks good so far to me.
After it is all over, we can get out our critical pens and go to town, but for now, let's be as supportive as we can and not scare the hell out of the family members who await the return of their loved ones.
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.