Posted on 04/05/2003 12:18:37 AM PST by JohnHuang2
LONDON, March 24 (Reuters) - The U.S.-led force in Iraq risks as many as 3,000 casualties in the battle for Baghdad and Washington has underestimated the number of troops needed, a top former commander from the 1991 Gulf War said on Monday.
Retired U.S. Army General Barry McCaffrey, commander of the 24th Infantry Division 12 years ago, said the U.S.-led force faced "a very dicey two to three day battle" as it pushes north towards the Iraqi capital.
"We ought to be able to do it (take Baghdad)," he told the Newsnight Programme on Britain's BBC Television late on Monday.
"In the process if they (the Iraqis) actually fight, and that's one of the assumptions, clearly it's going to be brutal, dangerous work and we could take, bluntly, a couple to 3,000 casualties," said McCaffrey who became one of the most senior ranking members of the U.S. military following the 1991 war.
"So if they (the Americans and British) are unwilling to face up to that, we may have a difficult time of it taking down Baghdad and Tikrit up to the north west."
McCaffrey said Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld had misjudged the nature of the conflict. Asked if Rumsfeld made a mistake by not sending more troops to start the offensive, McCaffrey replied: "Yes, sure. I think everybody told him that."
"I think he thought these were U.S. generals with their feet planted in World War Two that didn't understand the new way of warfare," he added.
U.S. forces have advanced more than 200 miles (320 km) into Iraqi territory since the start of the war and are beginning to confront an elite division of the Republican Guards deployed to defend the capital.
"So it ought to be a very dicey two to three day battle out there." McCaffrey said of the confrontation with the Republican Guards.
He said his personal view was that the invading troops would "take them (the Iraqis) apart."
"But we've never done something like this with this modest a force at such a distance from its bases," he warned.
McCaffrey, a former Commander in Chief of the U.S. Armed Forces in Latin America, served overseas for 13 years and took part in four combat tours.
He twice received the Distinguished Service Cross, the second highest medal for valour in the United States.
Barry must be sleeping soundly now, what with our forces deep into Baghdad, without 2-3000 casualties. Pray it remains that way.
Barry & Wesley would make a great "hawk" tag team on the new counter-Rush liberal talk show.
McCaffrey's estimate was not all that unrealistic at the time he made it, which was before the collapse of the Republican Guard. If the RG pulled back into Baghdad and fought block to block, with civilians in the mix, then we would looking at a very ugly situation. Military operations in urban terrain in past major conflicts have produced casuality rates as high as 30%. Insert thousands of troops into a city of several million, where the populace could be hostile, and it is not that much of a stretch to project casaulties in the 1,000s. It is absolutely great that we have done so well and if a large segment of the population of Baghdad lacks the will or motivation to fight to the end then we will prevail with casaulty numbers that are far below 2,000 to 3,000. That remains to be seen, although things are looking good for us right now.
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.