Author Topic: Iraq underestimated ? (Read 1894 times)

Hristo · « **on:** March 24, 2003, 06:10:52 AM »

Yes, I am aware it might not be very popular, but that's my opinion.

How US troops plan to take big cites like Basra and Bagdad ?

Dowding · « **Reply #1 on:** March 24, 2003, 06:15:21 AM »

I think the only thing underestimated is the lack of surrendering Iraqis. Also, the presence of Iraqi Special Forces in the South maybe surprised them.

I'm hoping Baghdad doesn't have to be taken by force. The number of dead coalition forces will be hard enough to take - but what about the 5 million civilians living there?

-tronski- · « **Reply #2 on:** March 24, 2003, 06:28:07 AM »

I'm not so sure, however it should never be underestimated how people will fight for their country against a foreign invader despite the type of govt. they have.

Tronsky

Hristo · « **Reply #3 on:** March 24, 2003, 06:36:41 AM »

IMO, time is Bush' greatest enemy.

Saddam, OTOH, counts on time.

Eagler · « **Reply #4 on:** March 24, 2003, 07:01:32 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Hristo
IMO, time is Bush' greatest enemy.

Saddam, OTOH, counts on time.

this is very true ...

america is all about NOW NOW NOW

if the war drags on, the media will prey on the dead & captured providing ammo for the peace niks - making the NOW NOW crowd doubt their resolve

I say before that happens take off the PC gloves and fight a war like you fight a WAR

sorry, if that means additional Iraq civilian casualities to save allied lives, so be it... especially when the line between the civilian pop and their army continues to blur each day..

milnko · « **Reply #5 on:** March 24, 2003, 07:24:05 AM »

Coalition Forces have not underestimated the Iraqis. Due to the policy of minimizing civilian causaulties by Coalition Forces the Iraqis have adopted a tactic of ambushing troops by masqaurading as civilians or surrendering troops.

This tactic could lead to a change in policy by Coalition Forces to "shoot first, ask questions later". This would be regretful to say the least, but understandable in light of such behavior.

Urban combat is the most brutal type of warfare known, short of WMD.
See; Battle of Stalingrad, Battle of Berlin, etc.
Any conflict in the cities is going to be costly for both sides.

air_guard · « **Reply #6 on:** March 24, 2003, 08:04:12 AM »

GScholz is right here, this is a 80 % political and 20 % military war.

They have to be carful with civilian losses cause the whole middle east region will might be even more unstable if that happens.
Guess that is why somone says it "goes slow".
I dont think it goes slow its a huge country afterall and alot of citys to take, the citys is the hardest nut to crack.
It seems like somone tough it was a home run to bagdad, but it wont be and I am sure the leaders knew that in the first place.
And i hope people understand that too.
there will be losses ( Sadly enough)
on the allied side cause it is after all a war. And not a show as some stupid reporter said when i was watching tv the other day

Ghosth · « **Reply #7 on:** March 24, 2003, 08:09:58 AM »

I think partly the Coalition is just takeing its time. Getting forces in the area. Securting assests and supply lines.

Once the start the squeeze play on Baghdad It might get ugly for a bit.

I think Turkey has complicated things considerably. They may be waiting to get our forces in the North setup. Locking the last door so to speak.

hawk220 · « **Reply #8 on:** March 24, 2003, 09:14:27 AM »

I say before that happens take off the PC gloves and fight a war like you fight a WAR

Im with you on this one Eagler.. you can't have warm and fuzzy Marines. Let them do what my tax dollars are paying them to do, which is kick bellybutton wholesale.

suspend taking prisoners..F' em. if they want to pretend to surrender and then start shooting, then they have abused the convention and it no longer applies.

Saurdaukar · « **Reply #9 on:** March 24, 2003, 09:22:48 AM »

Bush never underestimated the fighting. He's reported every night as saying something to the effect of "it will be a long, hard fight."

Its the media that underestimated the fighting.

Lizard3 · « **Reply #10 on:** March 24, 2003, 09:28:40 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by hawk220
I say before that happens take off the PC gloves and fight a war like you fight a WAR

Im with you on this one Eagler.. you can't have warm and fuzzy Marines. Let them do what my tax dollars are paying them to do, which is kick bellybutton wholesale.

suspend taking prisoners..F' em. if they want to pretend to surrender and then start shooting, then they have abused the convention and it no longer applies.

Nope, we always observe the Geneva convention. Its what makes us who we are. Everyone got there hopes up right off the bat. Being a little more careful and taking a little more time will do it in the end. The outcome is the same whatever happens as far as Iraq goes. That one is writ in stone. As for what happens after...that one is still up in the air. Suspending the Convention rules just because they have will get us no where fast.

World opinion be damned, but we do have our own opinion of ourselves to live with after. Time to suck it up...and say a prayer.

Dead Man Flying · « **Reply #11 on:** March 24, 2003, 09:47:44 AM »

The sky is falling!

It's amazing how a day of light casualties suddenly undermines an entire war strategy. Given an operation of this size and scope, I'm amazed that we've lost so few people thus far... and several of those as the result of a wrong turn that put them into a bypassed enemy-controlled area (i.e. human error rather than strategic miscalculation).

-- Todd/Leviathn

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #12 on:** March 24, 2003, 09:50:03 AM »

And most of the rest dies to a dirty trick by "surrendring" Iraqi fanatics who hid guns inside their clothes.. Only 10 KIA after all this fighting and progress is amzing. We are now 60 miles south of Baghad according to Tony Blair..

Mini D · « **Reply #13 on:** March 24, 2003, 09:55:08 AM »

I don't believe they were underestimated. It explains why the military representatives have been saying "this will be a long war" for some time (well before the heavy resistance). Anyone with military training knows that urban fights are the hardest of all.

I do believe they were caught off guard by the surrender / ambush thing. At least... they were for a day.

MiniD

Dead Man Flying · « **Reply #14 on:** March 24, 2003, 10:01:06 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Mini D
I do believe they were caught off guard by the surrender / ambush thing. At least... they were for a day.

That we would be caught offguard by such a time-tested tactic is actually kind of surprising. I was talking to my grandfather awhile back (WWII Marine who fought in Iwo Jima), and he said it was a common Japanese tactic in Iwo Jima to feign surrender and then set off a grenade when the American soldiers came to take them into custody.

Needless to say, they didn't take very many prisoners in Iwo Jima as a result.

-- Todd/Leviathn