Originally posted by Zippatuh
Wulfie,
Do a little research huh? I would wager to say that under the current situation we have no idea what’s actually happening. Didn’t they expect to be able to drive clear to Baghdad without a fight because of intelligence reports on how the people would react?
I have a very good idea of what's happening. But I can't really go into any detail why I do have a good idea. So I'm in an impossible situation when it comes to discussions like this.
My 'do some research' comment was not in any way intended to be along the lines of 'read a book handsomehunk' or something like that. I'm sorry if it was taken that way. But I do know that several of those damn cursed evil tool-of-the-enemy open-source intelligence websites have reports that you are never going to see on CNN.com that point to the fact that fedayeen shooters are causing alot of problems. When I said 'do some research' I meant that you'd probably pretty quickly see what I was talking about and then I'd be 'off the hook' for not being able to detail how I know or even what I specifically do know.
You were in the Army - a pissed off Iraqi car salesman isn't going to conduct an RPG attack on a convoy alone and disappear into the desert. 5 guys springing an ambush on a convoy are not going to have a 'who am I?' bio list that reads:
Iraqi Joe - pissed off car salesman
Iraqi Sam - pissed off sanitation worker
Iraqi Steve - pissed off window cleaner
Iraqi Bill - sales seminar speaker
Etc. Even if the untrained locals have a motive or a gripe severe enough to rebel against an occupying armed force (which I don't think the majority of Iraqis do), they still need some leadership and organization from military types trained in fomenting insurgency. I.e. if you were correct that it's a popular uprising (I disagree), there would still be fedayeen or diehard Iraqi military types who were serious Sadaam loyalists behind the operations.
Because you seem sincere I'll repeat myself a little.
He may have wanted to use them - but you need to understand that within 2 hours, maybe 4 hours of the beginning of the attack his communications were in a shambles. I doubt that individual companies could even try to coordinate with other companies in their battalion. This is why you had entire companies of Iraqi vehicles and infantry coming into an unfamiliar area and driving right into the guns of Coalition forces unawares. The Iraqi units that had been in the area for some time knew the operational and tactical situation, but they had no way to relay such intel to the people who needed it. This also explains alot of the surrendering Iraqi units - once the unit commanders were convinced they were 'cut off' from senior Iraqi leadership in terms of C3I, they gave up. Sadaam isn't going to order some Col.'s family executed if he isn't aware the unit surrendered.
Now take WMD - only the most trusted officers are going to be in charge of these assets. Otherwise we would have just 'bought' them before the war (and you can bet that it was tried on more than one occasion) - i.e. Checmical General Bob gets a call on his supposedly secure SATPhone from an American telling him that if he packs the entire battery up - checmical weapons and all and drives to coordinate X he'll be in the U.S.A. with his Family in a couple of months and set for life...and his Family will be in the U.S.A. in 3 days just tell us where they are staying and what the security is like.
But even preparing to launch WMD requires some very specific and very peculiar steps. The kind of steps that are guranteed to be spotted by a satellite - or now to scew the bad guys even more - a predator or something bigger which doesn't have specific overflight times - and Chemical General Bob *knows* that when (not if) a predator spots his artillery crews prepping the rounds in NBC suits that every JDAM and howitzer shell within effective range is going to hit *him* - as in General Bob himself - in about 7, maybe 10 minutes (a full 20 before they can start chucking gas)...well - the war is lost already. Bob can fire the weapons and die, or he can not fire the weapons and be a hero to the new Nation of Iraq for not following the orders of a madman in his final hours in power.
And chemical weapons aren't really expected to cause massive casualties against military units. The Sovs and the US would have fired them at rail hubs, other transport hubs, supply depots, etc. - the point of them was to force the enemy troops to constantly operate in NBC gear, which would significantly reduce their effectiveness, endurance, etc. So he maybe opted to not launch them because he knew he wouldn't have killed many troops by doing so - especially because the weather and other atmospheric conditions were not very often ideal for using them. They hammered the Iranians because they caught them packed together in a swamp (low terrain) with absolutely no protective gear and almost perfect weather for use - and the result was horrible - fatality rates among the Iranian infantry in that swamp were over 80%.
Everything isn't great, and not everyone loves us but the news coming out of the area isn't nearly as bad as certain unbiased reporters *allude* it to be. As far as the daily casualties - it's a heartbreaker. I know more guys personally than I can count on both hands that have been killed since 9/11/2001. But you were in the Army and the fact is better you or me or someone who has fighting wars as a job than 46 kids and 27 Moms at Disney Orlando, or 141 civilians at a soccer match in Spain, or the people being tortured and executed or the kids dying of lack of food and medicine while the top guys in the government of Iraq were hoarding hundreds of millions of USD in cash in Iraq.
Certain political and media types have been chanting 'doom' over every move since 9/11/2001. Remember Afghanistan and how it was going to be a quagmire and no one could topple the Taliban without incurring thousands of casualties? Remember the assurances of more major attacks on U.S. soil in retaliation for the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq? Remember the predictions that an invasion of Iraq would spark a mass Arab/Islamic uprising against the U.S.? The people saying those things are the same people implying that WMD will never be found, that data was falsified (which is very insidious - they know very well that 'proof' can't be readily shown as it would compromise sources & methods in many cases), that U.S. troops will be victims of terrorist attacks in Iraq for 30 years to come, etc. I'm not saying that they will always be wrong - but too many seem to think that they have never been wrong and the exact opposite is true.
I'll tell you one thing - in 5, or 7, maybe 10 years when a really informed book on the campaign in Iraq comes out it's going to blow military history types away - there was some very impressive things done and in terms of technology usage and joing operations between special operations and 'line' military units there has yet to be anything remotely like it. People are going to be impressed.
I have Nieces and Nephews living in the U.S.A. I feel they are safer every day.
Mike/wulfie
