iraq uprising

[Holden McGroin]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Westy
"Where are all those RPGs coming from??"

The Iraqi's buried enormous caches of weapons all over thier country. The news media showed many of them found during and just after the invasion. The reports were (as I recal) that they believed those found were a decent but by no means large percentage of caches like that (smal arms, rpg's mines etc) went.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by CyranoAH
Thanks Westy, that explains it.

There are no undiscovered weapons caches because we haven't found them.  Therefore they never existed...

wait a minute....

Yeah, that's right.

[_Schadenfreude_]

Originally posted by CyranoAH
I was just watching the last footage from the Bradley (I think) destroyed in Iraq, with wounded soldiers coming out of it and I just had to ask a question that may sound naive, but...

Where are all those RPGs coming from??

I mean, if those are from the last regime's army, they should have been seized by now, right?

And if they are importing them, then there's not enough border controls (by far). For cod's sake, it's an occupied country after all!

I don't know if it's the lack of intelligence or the lack of forces to control the borders, but I think more attention should be put in known arm dealers. I'm pretty sure that there are not many capable of delivering that much firepower.

As I said, it does sound naive, but nevertheless I'd like to be enlightened (no pun intended) by some of the posters versed in these subjects.

Daniel

There were huge arms dumps all around Iraq - they were all looted to some extent during the confusion of the fall of Baghdad - the insurgent have a lot and I mean a lot of light weapons - up to and including 82mm and 120mm mortars, LAW's, LMG's and probably some MANPADS - they will eventually run out but I think it will be some time - coin operations do not use massive amount of resource on the part of the insurgents - they have the support of the local pops in terms of food and medical supplies they will swim amongst them as a fish does in the sea - to paraphrase Chairman Mao.

In historical terms during the last century the ONLY time a insurgent force was defeated was in Malaya - every other time they won - might have taken them years but they have always won.

[Holden McGroin]

Originally posted by _Schadenfreude_
...coin operations do not use massive amount of resource on the part of the insurgents...
 

Because COIN operations are usually undertaken by those fighting on the counter insurgent side.

[Westy]

"There are no undiscovered weapons caches because we haven't found them. Therefore they never existed...  wait a minute.... yeah, that's right."


 I recognize your imbedded point  and can only say that the critical error in that logic is that caches or even evidence of WMD cahces have not been seen at all.  Even interogations of detainers and POW's have turned up nada, zilch, zipp. That's in stark contrast to the many regular weapons caches that have been found and from interogations they know there are many mnore out there they have yet to get to.
 Regarless. Small arms weapon caches I don't believe the UN or US were tracking before the war.  At least I don't recall the US administration railing before Congress about mountains of RPG's & AK-47's nor Powell whipping out irrefutable "proof" on them in front of the UN body.

[Torque]

When does that new DC mod come out Iraqi Uprising

[cpxxx]

For those of you thinking that the bombing of the Mosque will increase antipathy to the coalition. Well bless your naivety.  Take a look. The game is already on. They don't need an excuse. The shooting has already started.

As for this little adventure uniting the Sunni's and Shiites.  Don't count on it. Just as soon as the Americans are off the streets. They will get stuck into each other.  Any cooperation is low level.
There is as I have read it, three seperate fights going on.  One is against a tribe known for it's smuggling in the western desert.  That just coincides with the move by the Marines against the Fallujah troublemakers and is more or less coincidental with the Sadr's uprising in the south.  

Sadr's uprising is a mistake. He has commited his men and it seems they made the the classic mistake of taking over significant buildings thus making them easy to 'find, fix and destroy'.  There is no general uprising which I suspect he hoped for.  It was a naked grab for power.  He will be eliminated  now as a potential power broker.
 Equally the Sunnis will ground down.  I think they made the mistake of taking on the Americans. Given that they are a minority and seen as Saddam's people. They might have been better to throw in their lot with the Americans. Neither group have enough ammunition or men for a sustained war. The coalition will win and may, by eliminating the most troublesome of extremists in a pitched open battle leave the way open for the more moderate Iraqis.  
On the other hand it could be like the Tet offensive of the Vietnam war. It was a total failure for the Vietcong but was a significant turning point for the American public and made the American pullout inevitable.
This is a significant moment in history, a turning point and will be marked by historians in the future.

[Nashwan]

It was official Iraqi policy pre Gulf War 2 to pay 10-20 000 USD to the family of any suicide bomber attacking Israel. Hamas and Al Acqsa martyrs brigades does just that.

Saddam actually paid money to the relatives of any Palestinians killed in "action" with Israel (suicide bombers, gunmen, stone throwers, innocent bystanders)

He also paid compensation to people who's houses were destroyed by the IDF.

[Pongo]

Yes. I know that Iraq was paying suicide bombers familys
Is that why the US invaded then? But wait..The US was negotiating with the Palistinians..and forcing the Isrealis to do the same...I thought that we didnt negotiate with terrrorists?
So where the palistinians terrorists or not?

Certainly the US doesnt treat them as such..so how can supporting them be supporting terrorists?

Grasp that straw firmly..
the invasion had nothing to do with terrorism.The Iraqis dieing and killing there are not terrorists.

There will certainly be many terrorists created by the invasion..but Iraqi support for terrorists was almost nill befor the invasion..and they hadnt even been asked to stop what support they were providing..why. Because the US didnt and doenst consider the palistinians terrorists..

[Holden McGroin]

Originally posted by Westy
"There are no undiscovered weapons caches because we haven't found them. Therefore they never existed...  wait a minute.... yeah, that's right."

I recognize your imbedded point  and can only say that the critical error in that logic is that caches or even evidence of WMD cahces have not been seen at all.  

No critical error in logic exists, I was pointing out that no evidence proves nothing.  I have been consistant on this regardless of issue.  I was pointing out a flaw in the logic of those advocate the 'hang him because he lied' point of view, that no evidence proves their point as well.  

While oddsmakers probably lean heavily in one direction, the only logical point of view presently on this particular issue is one of agnosticism.  It cost nothing, and one who waits and sees is standing on firm ground.

[Gixer]

Originally posted by Nashwan
Saddam actually paid money to the relatives of any Palestinians killed in "action" with Israel (suicide bombers, gunmen, stone throwers, innocent bystanders)

He also paid compensation to people who's houses were destroyed by the IDF.

I think those payments hardly compare to the level of Terroism now growing,prospering and expanding in and outside of Iraq as we have today since the invasion. Situation is much worse now then it ever was with Sadam making a few payments.

True Sadam himself had said that he had made payments, what the adminstraion was trying to claim  prior to the invasion was that he had ties to Al Qaeda which even Bush has since admited was false intelligence as yet no evidence to prove this has ever been found.



...-Gixer

[Maverick]

Originally posted by GScholz
As the commander in the field I would have ordered the building bombed to spare my men. As the overall commander of the operation I would have ordered the commander in the field to take the building with infantry to avoid the political/PR ramifications of bombing a holy place. As the politician responsible for this hole debacle I would have shot myself.

Frankly I find this statement a bit absurd. There is no way the result, as far as the building is concerned, would be any different. There will still be damage to the building and the enemy will denounce it in whatever way they can for propaganda purposes. Sacrificing infantry to save a building like that is stupid to say the least. As has already been posted here, once the enemy uses the building as a combat asset and fires from it, it becomes a legitimate military target.

American doctrine has been to use firepower to accomplish the military goal rather than losing troops whenever possible.

Rather than criticize the troops and commanders who have to deal with this situation, why do you not criticize the ones who desecrated a place of worship by firing FROM it in the first place? It is how it is used that make any building a target or not. Once they started firing from it it ceased being a "holy place" unless you believe that God meant it to be used that way and that it served His interests for life to be taken by those inside it. I don't see that being supported by either islam or christianity.

[bullett308]

Rather than criticize the troops and commanders who have to deal with this situation, why do you not criticize the ones who desecrated a place of worship by firing FROM it in the first place? It is how it is used that make any building a target or not. Once they started firing from it it ceased being a "holy place" unless you believe that God meant it to be used that way and that it served His interests for life to be taken by those inside it. I don't see that being supported by either islam or christianity. [/B]

HERE HERE!
Well said.

[Capt. Pork]

Originally posted by GScholz
Hmmm ... I don't get how saying that I would do the exact same thing as the ground commander counts as criticism. My point: Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

And bullett308, "hear, hear" would make more sense ... so would bullet308.

I beg to differ...

And It's 'here here', to signify allegiance the the previously-proposed statement.

[Gixer]

Originally posted by GScholz
Hmmm ... I don't get how saying that I would do the exact same thing as the ground commander counts as criticism. My point: Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

And bullett308, "hear, hear" would make more sense ... so would bullet308.

That's true but dont you think that what ever the tactical advantages might of been to use bombs against a mosque to kill a few gunmen. Is far outweighed by the stratigic disadvantages?


...-Gixer

[Capt. Pork]

Originally posted by GScholz
The correct term is, "hear, hear!" It's an abbreviation for "hear, all ye good people, hear what this brilliant and eloquent speaker has to say!"

Yeah, you're right.

I guess I jumped the gun that time, trying to instinctually disagree with whatever it was you had to say.