|
|
|
 |
FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794
|
|
|
|
Posted on 04/08/2003 11:38:28 AM PDT by mrustow
Toogood Reports [Tuesday, April 8, 2003; 12:01 a.m. EST]
URL: http://ToogoodReports.com/
It will be years before the whole story of the taking of Baghdad comes out. Indeed, according to the Iraqi information minister, "There is no any existence of American solders in Baghdad," so maybe we're not even going to take the city. After all, a few million Americans — most notably staffers at the New York Times — prefer to believe Saddam's people over our own. Some people may believe the war footage we are seeing on TV 24/7 was shot by the U.S. Information Ministry, in India or New Mexico. (I know there's no U.S. Information Ministry, but a lot of people don't seem to know that.) So humor me, if you will, as I presume that we will prevail in Baghdad, and as I ruminate over how we will do it.
One commentator — one of the countless on-air retired military men, I believe — spoke of a battle from the inside out, where coalition forces targeted strategic points including power, communications, and transportation facilities. An Israeli scholar, recalling Israel's battles last year to control the urban Arab (so-called Palestinian) terror centers Jenin and Nablus in the West Bank territories, wrote of new tactics developed for urban warfare, in order to limit casualties. Still other observers speak of the increased use of special forces, improved human intelligence, and problematic rules of engagement.
The inside-out scenario, which is heavily reliant on special forces, reminds me of the Soviet playbook, which the Red Army developed after it crushed, amid much bloodshed, the 1956 Hungarian uprising, in Budapest. After Budapest, the Soviets developed the strategy of embedding local military forces in each satellite nation with Soviet military and intelligence officers (whose identities were not secret), who at the first sign of an uprising, would draw their weapons and block weapons rooms, take over radio and TV stations, and otherwise thwart the resistance's attempts to seize control.
The Soviet strategy worked like a dream in 1968 in Prague, the capital of the former Czechoslovakia, where bloodshed was limited. It seemed to work in Afghanistan's capital, Kabul, in December, 1979. Soon after the Soviet invasion, however, the Soviet strategy hit a snag: The Afghani people refused to cooperate, and as the Soviets learned the hard way, the typical Afghani is about as easy to deal with, as a member of the American militia movement.
Well, we obviously can't operate just like the Soviets used to, because we're not confronting a popular uprising in a country we already control. And yet, we have enjoyed great success at getting forces on the ground early (those oil fields), and got the sort of human intelligence on the ground, that many Americans — this writer included — didn't think possible anymore, after the years-long neutering of America's intelligence capabilities.
The danger of house-to-house urban fighting — the ultimate outside-in scenario — lies ahead.
When I visited East Berlin intermittently between 1980 and 1989, I never got over the sight of the pre-war buildings pockmarked with gunfire from the taking of Berlin, in the spring of 1945.
The German Wehrmacht was one of the world's great military forces, but by early 1945, it was bloodied, bedraggled, and decimated. And yet, it fought tenaciously in the Battle of Berlin.
Today, unlike (with some exceptions, such as the former Yugoslavia) in 1945, soldiers in much of the world routinely fight out of uniform, and use novel methods such as homicide bombings. And so, the Israeli Defense Forces, in hunting down Arab terrorists in the West Bank last year, came up with a novel strategy. Instead of patrolling the streets, where they would be sitting ducks, Israeli soldiers went from building to building from within. They cut holes in the walls of Arabs' apartments, and burrowed into the apartments of suspected terrorists in adjacent buildings.
Another factor that will be debated for years to come, will center on the rules of engagement that were imposed on coalition troops in Iraq. Never in the annals of war, have soldiers been so hamstrung by rules which aided the enemy, and cost American lives. As some critics have also noted, stealth rules introduced by the Clinton Administration moved female soldiers to just behind the front lines, and have already resulted in "G.I. Janes" in support roles being taken prisoner, and even killed.
All of the above strategies may prove to have played a role in victory in Iraq — the role of women negatively — but as the war continues, we must also keep in mind, as war historian Robert Baumann notes, "The dynamism of the Clausewitzian trinity as summarized in On War – the interplay of reason, violent passion, and chance ..."
To comment on this article or express your opinion directly to the author, you are invited to e-mail Nicholas at adddda@earthlink.net .
|
|
|
|
|
FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794
|
|
|
|
Selling snow balls in Antarctica, are we?
This thread has gone over their heads :o)
That's what worries me the most. I think the potential for the loss of life on each side is much greater.
The isolated bands of resistence will be *fingered* by these grateful -- no longer terrorized -- peoples who may very well enjoin the fight with us & against them on behalf of their own best interests, freedom.
Time will tell.
As for this "going over people's heads"?
Maybe.
While a few of us are simply fashionably late.
...again. {g}
The crazy thing is, the alleged reporters have been scrambling to change their spin, so as to turn every American victory into a symbolic and political defeat. The other day, I saw a British reporter at a briefing, and you had to see the guy's face, to appreciate the hatred behind the words of his rhetorical "question." To paraphrase, it went, "Since the Iraqis have fallen so easily, how can you say that they ever represented a threat to world peace?"
LOL.
Let's just say, I'm being cautiously optimistic. I just hope our boys don't get overconfident in Baghdad, and get their a**es shot off. I suppose -- or hope -- that after Ambush Alley, they will take due care.
A wise posture given *who* we're talking about just got routed, there.
"I just hope our boys don't get overconfident in Baghdad, and get their a**es shot off. I suppose -- or hope -- that after Ambush Alley, they will take due care."
Something's telling me there isn't one single solitary troop who's not on their guard; &, will remain so.
And remain vigilant as long as they're in Iraq, & long after this has been declared offically "over."
...I sure in the hell know I would be.
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.