Posted on 08/08/2002 2:26:55 AM PDT by kattracks
WASHINGTON, Aug 8 (Reuters) - Iraqi President Saddam Hussein plans to avoid open desert fighting and mass his forces in major cities in case of a U.S. invasion, the Los Angeles Times reported on Thursday. The strategy was outlined in general terms to Iraqi regional officials, unnamed current and former U.S. intelligence officials told the newspaper. The statements were relayed from Iraq to U.S. intelligence operatives through Iraqi defectors and opposition groups. "Hussein's comments on a defensive strategy represent the first indication of how he intends to respond to any U.S. attack. A former U.S. intelligence official said he was told of Hussein's comments during recent meetings with Iraqi dissidents and opposition groups in London. A U.S. defense intelligence official said American intelligence has collected similar information and considers it reliable," the Times reported. Saddam's strategy appears to center on drawing U.S. forces into Baghdad and other cities, where his equipment and troops would be surrounded by civilians and less exposed to United States warplanes, which played a major part in the Gulf War. "Military targets in Baghdad are sprinkled among a population approaching 5 million. Hussein has constructed an elaborate warren of underground bunkers and escape routes," the Times reported. President George W. Bush and his national security team were briefed on several options on Monday by Gen. Tommy Franks, head of U.S. Central Command. Among those options was a plan in which the United States would strike Baghdad first in an attempt to separate Iraq's military forces and equipment and cause a collapse of the regime, the newspaper said. Experts told the Times it was difficult to assess how long it would take for U.S. forces to seize Baghdad, partly because of questions about the potential performance and loyalty of Saddam's elite troops and intelligence agencies. President Bush promised on Wednesday to be "patient and deliberate" in considering options concerning Iraq but signaled that the United States remained committed to toppling a dictator accused of developing weapons of mass destruction and supporting terrorism. "These are real threats, and we owe it to our children to deal with these threats," Bush said in a speech at Madison Central High School in Madison, Mississippi. In Baghdad on Thursday, Saddam said he was not frightened by U.S. threats and his country was ready to repel any attack. "There is no other choice for those who use threat and aggression but to be repelled even if they were to bring harm to their targets," Saddam said in a 22-minute taped televised speech to the nation. "I say it in such clear terms so that no weakling should imagine that when we ignore responding to ill talk, then this means that we are frightened by the impudent threats ... and so that no greedy tyrant should be misled into an action the consequences of which are beyond their calculations," he said. ((Americas Desk, Washington, 202-789-8015))08 AUG 2002 08:39:11 Saddam plans urban campaign if U.S. attacks-LA Times
© 1999 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved.
"You idiot! You ride the camel to town where the women are!"
As for Mercenaries, please read the context...it is in reference to Afghanistan.
Well, there are several who aren't expecting the Kurds to run anything...one of which is the Turks...remember their Kurdish issue?
I don't count the Sheites in this, their loyalty is to Persia. Again, I'm speaking of city warfare. Counting on all the civilians just rolling over is silly and dangerous...just like the oooh so grateful civilians in Afghanistan are now shooting at the US troops. And by the way a brief history of Lebanon: the Sheite were grateful to the Jews for freeing them from the PLO Sunni...unfortunetly that gratitude ran out after less then a year...heard of Hezbullah?
America has revolutionized warfare in the last few decades in a way that hasn't been seen since the mechanized infantry of the Franco-Prussian War. We are the high-tech army. We don't get stuck with house-to-house fighting. We leave that to low-tech armies who don't care about their own casualties like the old Soviet Union. 72 hours of carpet bombing and Baghdad surrenders. Saddam has ruled through fear and intimidation. He has no admirers in Iraqi society. The generals in the Iraqi army know what's in their best interest and will execute Saddam themselves and sue for peace. If Americans start getting killed in large numbers and that is an enormous IF given our strategy and tactics, we will only need to remind ourselves of the World Trade Center to get recruits
Here you really amaze me. By the way, how long will even average Americans put up with thousands of dead babies from US bombs...and bombing never got the civilians to surrender...remember Yugoslavia...only after Yeltsin sold out and backstabbed them did they go. Or do you believe in the Klintoon/Albright they just need some bombing idiocy.
Oh, yeah, being dependent on foreign oil, trade and key rare resources does mean having to say you're sorry. And I'll say I'm sorry for having to bring you back down to reality.
Well hell, since Warfare is so revolutionized, why not just beam it over or hell, just make it appear from nothing...instantaneously. Reality...Turky is on the other side of the world. Sand degrades machinery very quickly. Drinking water alone and food takes up a lot of room. The US merchant marine and air carrier fleet is heavily degraded. Tank parts don't grow on trees...neither does the fuel they use come out of the ground but is highly processed. Do you know how many gallons of fuel one US Abrams burns just to turn the tubine over? I'll let you in on it: 6 gallons, yup, just to start...the rest eats more. As for bullets and bombs, that's a whole different thing too...something the Turks just don't "have".
But tell me how exactly you are going to conquer a city without city fighting...since you are so high tech. Teleport the enemy out? Use your tricorders to find their bunkers? Shoot them with phasers? Should I go on or is the sarcasm getting to thick? Oh, as for the Gulf...a little military know how...mines don't take much to put out...shallow waters keep subs near the surface and very narrow confined waters are not good for Aircraft carriers...especially from shore fired silkworms....speed boats with suiciders do wonders too....oh but Iran and Syria, on the list of Evil, would never do that...and the House of Saud is just ooooohhhh sooooo stable. NEXT!
A lot of what ifs make for lousy military strategy. By the way, maybe you noticed, but except for a few German generals, most stayed loyal to Hitler even when the end was an obvious thing...and kept fighting to it.
Mechanized Infantry in the Franco-Prussian War? I musta missed that one in my history books! I always throught that the term Mechanized Infantry refered to the wedding of the internal combustion engine with the transportation needs of the Infantry -- something that really didn't begin until WW1. The organization of true mech units didn't happen until the interwar years since the tactics really hadn't been worked out by 1918.
Yes and no. The peacekeeping mission really ended when the US Marines withdrew. Naturally, things spun out of control as the warlords began to re-assert their authority. Then Clinton sent in the Rangers/Delta/160th SOAR with an offensive mission: to defeat the Adid's militias and grab Adid. Essentially we failed because we no longer overawed the natives with our small, unarmored force.
BTW, the Russians had some very tough troops involved in the Grozny operations of the Second Chechen War. The conscripts were largely on the sidelines. Elite forces are by their very nature small and irreplaceable; furthermore, they surrender many of their advantages in urban fighting. You really ought to listen to Stavka -- he knows what he's talking about.
If only this were true!
5 million people at a crack?
Does anyone else see the golden opportunity here for the perfect minimum-loss campaign for the good guys?
hint: groceries do not grow in the grocery store.
Who cares what the Germans think? After WWI & WWII they need to behave for about 500 years before I give a darn about what they have to say.
Military disasters are based on assumptions like that. MacArthur didn't think the Red Chinese would come across the Yalu, either. These Iraqis might just decide to defend their homes. No loyalty to Saddam is required.
What a crock.
You have no notion of what it takes to support 5 million people indefinitely, evidently.
If this is true waiting is the assured counter-response.
Any attempt at "urban" agriculture can be surgically curtailed.
Water, medical supplies, food, heat, power, communications can all be surgically eliminated one by one.
Saddam has reintroduced the classic Muslim weapon of choice: a long term siege. To his detriment.
Urban house to house combat is not even on the radar screen under those circumstances.
Not quite, Zhukov unleashed the forces on the weak flanks and only through surrounding the Germans did he win. As for Hitler, his fault wasn't equipment, it was the Festung Stalingrad that doomed Paulus.
Sugarcoat it all you want to, the Tsar's army got squashed by a much smaller German force and got bounced out of Poland in short order. Sure, they won against the laughable military of Austria-Hungary which was losing to Serbia and barely holding on against that great military powerhouse, Italy, but who cares? As for Russian morale, who exactly were those mutinying soldiers?
Your military analysis is about as good as me stating that the US troops were crap in Vietnam that got their arses routinely kicked till they ran and mutanied to get out.
Now reality. Again, the German military was not much smaller then the Russian. Secondly, it took 3 years to drive Russia out of Poland...the Revolution was in '17, again caused by that defeat. As for the Austro-Hungarians, it held the biggest empire in Europe, if it was so simply weak, how did it accomplish this? By the way, go read some stuff on Tanenburg and it's lead up...maybe you'll be able to speak intelligently on it.
Oscolon is not a communist. Maybe you don't remember that the Turks deny that there is even a Kurdish race and deny them any cultural rights. For one Turk killed they would napalm a Kurdish village...maybe that's why they killed over 50 thousand Kurds? As for their "power" house...maybe you missed the point that for the last year their economy has been in an economic free fall? Hmmm? As for Georgia, just been in Bilisi...didn't see to many Turks..hardly any really...maybe in Ajaria but not in Turky proper...now Englishmen, quite a few.
As for the ROE for American troops, don't count on it. Once the military lawyers are done the ROE will be quite thick.
I guess since the Russians got chased out with their tail between their legs and we rolled the country in days, you're feeling jealous.
You mean the two months of bombing and the advance of the N. Alliance. Can't quite recall any American divisions rolling into Kandagar or Kabul...maybe you can show me some photos. By the way, did the Russian troops leave with their tails between their legs like the US troops left Vietnam and Samalia and Lebanon??
Actually I know Americans quite well...last time I was there, not that long ago, there weren't all that many flags left waving...maybe you noticed? Hmmm? Lived in the States for quite a while too. I know this, talk's cheap...CNN makes it's money off of public opinion and it's shaping...nothing like images of half burned babies....like in Vietnam....nothing like this was ever shown in America in WW2. As a point of history: it was late 1944 before images of the first dead Americans were show in America. The public had no idea of the terror bombings of all German/Japanese cities. Most still don't.
The oil issue was backed only by your over confidence and contested by quite a few posters...so it still remains only YOUR opinion. As for the world being yours...why come and take it...last I checked, possession was 90% of the law...or aren't you willing to join the military and go campheign for your portion of the Liebensrummen?
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.