Falluja: Dire Results.....

[Kodiak]

Or wiped out by horrendous attacks of biological weapons. Not that Saddam has them, mind you. But if he did, it would be quite horrible. But he doesn't. But if he did...

Um...

It seems that you may not be aware of this, but Saddam has been captured and imprisoned, and is currently awaiting trial...

 

[Ziggurat]

Re: Iraq

Well, I feel that the insurgents while maybe being crazy, are not crazy crazy. I look for them to disappear into the woodwork like they did when we first went in, and then re-emerge somewhere else to fight another day.

I agree that they're not crazy crazy. But they have to fight, because they can't simply pack up and leave without losing much of their operational capability. Here's a nice discussion:
http://belmontclub.blogspot.com/2004/11/banner-of-zarqawi-ralph-kinney-bennet.html
A short quote from that discussion:
"Zarqawi had invested quite a lot of effort into Fallujah and he would have done this only if it were valuable to him. The interesting and apparently paradoxical thing about terrorism -- which is often characterized as rootless and spectral -- is how rooted it is in sanctuaries, an apparent indication of their utility. Whether South Waziristan, Pankasi Gorge, the Bekaa Valley, Fallujah or the banlieus of Paris, terrorism apparently needs some locus in order to exert a material force."

 

[Suddenly]

Um...

It seems that you may not be aware of this, but Saddam has been captured and imprisoned, and is currently awaiting trial...

HA!! That is what THEY want you to think.....


















since it's true as well just go along with it

 

[Kodiak]

Re: Iraq

Well, I feel that the insurgents while maybe being crazy, are not crazy crazy. I look for them to disappear into the woodwork like they did when we first went in, and then re-emerge somewhere else to fight another day.

Believe it or not the commanders in charge of the attack have considered this, which is why they've surrounded the city and have a numerical superiority of 5 to 1. They've entered the city, and have planned for two possibilities: for the insurgents to fall back into one large condensed group of opposition, or for a disorganized retreat of insurgents resulting in several isolated pockets of resistence. The insurgents in Falluja are screwed either way...

 

[Rob Lister]

Re: Re: Iraq

Believe it or not the commanders in charge of the attack have considered this, which is why they've surrounded the city and have a numerical superiority of 5 to 1. They've entered the city, and have planned for two possibilities: for the insurgents to fall back into one large condensed group of opposition, or for a disorganized retreat of insurgents resulting in several isolated pockets of resistence. The insurgents in Falluja are screwed either way...

Nicely put.

 

[crimresearch]

Double Post

 

[IllegalArgument]

Basically what EvilDave said. The insurgents have already stepped up attacks in other parts of the country. All the important insurgent leaders have probably long left the city.

Now, the sunni or it shia, minority is really mad at the USA and the Iraq prime minister. All this equals more recruits for the insurgents.

If you're interested in a conservative take on the type of warfare that is going on in Iraq and what the USA is doing wrong. Check this site out.

http://www.d-n-i.net/index.html

 

[crimresearch]

Still waiting for the citations hgc asked for.

Why? You couldn't handle the one I made mention of, so you want others, until you get one you can deal with?

Or is it just that you are in denial that pseudo-liberal media hatemongers like Ted Rall predicted that the US in the initial military engagements with Iraq would suffer such heavy losses that the people back home would demand an end to the war?

Anyway, here you go, have some MORE references that such claims were made...and I expect I will be waiting a long, long time for you to provide any references to prove that they weren't.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From Ted Rall:
"but allied casualties will soar if and when ground troops are ordered to take Baghdad."
http://www.uexpress.com/tedrall/?uc_full_date=20030401

And others:
"News stories have long referred to these Iraqi units as the "elite Republican Guards." The honorific stems from the months leading up to the first Gulf War, in 1990-91, when long-ignored specialists on the Iraqi army—mainly from the CIA and the U.S. Army War College—brought out their charts and forecasts of how ferociously these top-of-the-line divisions would fight. The phrase "war-hardened" was also frequently invoked, referring to the Iraqi force's eight years of experience in the war against Iran."
http://slate.msn.com/id/2081055/

"As the United States edges closer to war with Iraq that could begin this winter, many experts predict that Saddam Hussein will make his final stand in Baghdad. There, he would try to lure U.S. forces into a series of bloody street battles designed to maximize U.S. casualties and break the spirit of Americans.
...Saddam's best hope for survival might be to inflict shocking, Somalia-like horrors on American troops in his capital, and broadcast the images of U.S.-caused civilian carnage to the Arab world."
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002-10-30-urban-war-usat_x.htm


"America May Be Forced to Surrender in Iraq
While U.S. soldiers implement the latest Pentagon pedophile policy of using candy to lure Iraqi children into acting as 'human shields' for road convoys, the Republican Guard demonstrates its staggering ability to maroon the entire American Army inside Iraq, then destroy it at leisure."
http://joevialls.altermedia.info/iraq/surrender.html

"But, as some military leaders have privately cautioned in recent days, a fight to the death with Saddam Hussein in Iraq could reap a grim harvest in dead and wounded in terms of American military personnel and Iraqi civilians in whose midst Hussein might make his last stand.
A big unknown facing U.S. war planners as they prepare for operations that could commence as early as next month is the death count and its effect on U.S. and world opinion."
http://iraq-info.1accesshost.com/trib7.html

"This unprecedentedly low loss rate came as a major surprise, despite great efforts before the war to predict losses. These efforts attracted many of the country's foremost scholars and policy analysts, and exploited the best available net assessment methods. The results were way off. All published results radically overestimated casualties: the best got no closer than a factor of three; the next best missed by a factor of six. The majority were off by more than an order of magnitude; official estimates were reportedly high by at least that much, while some official projections were reportedly off by more than a factor of 200"
http://www.comw.org/rma/fulltext/victory.html


"The coming days will be more difficult and harsher on them. By God, they have no way out of this deadly trap except to admit defeat and flee," said the 18-page statement, which was also read on Iraqi state television.
"After the invaders received painful blows from the sons of Iraq, now is the turn of the heroic elite divisions of the men of difficult missions, the men of the great leader Saddam Hussein, the heroes of the Republican Guards. ... At dawn today they carried out their first devastating operations inflicting fear and panic in the hearts of the enemy."
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/03/27/1048653793162.html?oneclick=true

"Iraqi Army is Tougher Than US Believes:
You have always got to hope for minimum loss of life in any war, but Mr Rumsfeld's prognosis about the speed of an Iraqi army collapse is ideologically driven and strategically ill-informed."
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/1116-04.htm

"Iraq is now protected by six to seven divisions of roughly eighty percent capable Iraqi Republican Guards, and five or six reserve divisions that don't have nearly as much capability. Saddam Hussein also has palace guards and personal defense forces....
...If Iraq used such weapons, US casualties could be high. The largest risk is from chemically armed artillery. If employed effectively, chemical shells could wreak extensive damage on US troop formations."
http://www.iraqwatch.org/roundtables/rt2-findings-final.htm

"However, I think the problem with this is that a few tens of thousands of American forces probably cannot take Baghdad, probably cannot by themselves defeat the Republican Guard and probably won't intimidate the Iraqi conscript army into quickly capitulating or turning against Saddam."
http://www.cbc.ca/news/features/iraq/iraq_war_plan.html

"Hussein, if he is still alive and in control of his forces, might like a bloody battle in Baghdad because such fighting could cause heavy U.S. casualties. His last hope for survival might be that the United States loses its taste for such losses and forces President Bush to negotiate a compromise that would allow Hussein and his family to keep power in Baghdad."
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/chronicle/archive/2003/04/03/MN294809.DTL

"But its tough inner core, the Republican guards, total 80,000 men who are specially trained for urban warfare. And then add state security forces of 30,000. Together these could make a battle for cities very bloody. ...
...Analysts like Dyer think Pentagon planners are finding Baghdad a near insoluble problem.
...Before action, the American public may balk at the large U.S. casualties predicted, possibly several thousand dead."
http://www.cbc.ca/news/iraq/military_strategy/battleplans.html



Before you start preaching about intellectual honesty to someone who HAS provided references, you need to take a long hard look in the mirrror, and ask yourself how honest it is to claim that you are still waiting for references that were already provided.

And HGC can live up to his end of the bargain any day now, I'll take those Police Corps references of his that prove my posts were just 'assertions' with nothing to back them up.


Chirp....chirp...chirp...

Hello? HGC?

Having a little trouble with that are you?
...why am I not surprised?

 

[LTC8K6]

I'd still like to know how anybody is counting "civilian" deaths. From what I have seen, Iraqi civilians and insurgent combatants are indistinguishable much of the time. I am guessing that these folks would be called civilians if they showed up in a hospital or a morgue.


http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/041108/481/bag11911081443

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/041108/481/bag11711081423

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/041108/481/bag11811081424

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/041108/481/bag11611081421

 

[evildave]

This site is a good starting point...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_and_occupation_of_Iraq_casualties

http://www.iraqbodycount.net/ (cited by above link) is a nice source for a database of multiply-sourced news of civilian casualties caused directly by coalition forces. If an Iraqi died and it wasn't reported by multiple news services, the number doesn't reflect that... meaning the numbers are probably very low. You can browse the database of incidents there.

Of course, the 'We don't do body counts' attitude of the DOD is apalling. Simply translated, the DOD doesn't give a damn about how many people they slaughter for oil, but that's OK, most U.S. citizens don't apparently care, either.

 

[Kodiak]

This site might make some of you better appreciate what the average 20-year-old soldier or marine must keep in mind as he moves though the city of Falluja.

 

[Ziggurat]

If an Iraqi died and it wasn't reported by multiple news services, the number doesn't reflect that... meaning the numbers are probably very low.

I really don't see how that follows. If Iraqi insurgents lie about deaths (both number and civilian vs. insurgent), why wouldn't they lie to multiple sources? There's no real mechanism to check the reliability of many of those casualty reports (are identities given? are grave sites/bodies confirmed?), and it should be quite obvious that there IS going to be casualty inflation by certain groups opposed to the U.S. And since the press is predisposed to make this look bloodier than it is (a combination of reporters being hostile to Bush/America and the simple desire to sell a bigger story), it's also hard to think that the press wouldn't accept casualty figures that are too high, at least some of the time. So where does the truth lie? Well, that's really hard to say. What you point to suggests under-reporting, just as the factors I list point to over-reporting. And neither of us has a good way to quantify the amount. But it's foolish to assume that this must be a lower limit.

 

[IllegalArgument]

The problem is not an accurate body count, it's the propaganda that follows. I'm talking about popular opinion. It's Iraqi opinion that is important, not the US's, the Sunni's are very unhappy with this operation, which helps the insurgents.

Fulluja will fall, without a lot of deaths, at least on the US side, but what did the US really win here?

 

[Suddenly]

This site might make some of you better appreciate what the average 20-year-old soldier or marine must keep in mind as he moves though the city of Falluja.

Is it any different from what a 22 year old soldier or marine must keep in mind?

 

[Kodiak]

Is it any different from what a 22 year old soldier or marine must keep in mind?

Smart a$$...


The age mentioned is not meant in any way to be exclusive. I only meant it to be indicative of the general youth of our servicemen.

 

[Ziggurat]

Fulluja will fall, without a lot of deaths, at least on the US side, but what did the US really win here?

Is that seriously not obvious? There's two things we will have achieved: first, we will have killed a lot of insurgents. Second, we will deny them a critical base from which to organize. And no, they can't simply just pick up and move elsewhere - they spent a lot of time preparing Fallujah, establishing local organizations and control. That cannot be replicated elsewhere without spending a lot of time and resources. And lastly, of course, we will be sending the absolutely critical message that we will not be intimidated, that insurgents will not be allowed to establish safe havens. You can talk all you want to about how this operation will inflame Sunni opinion, but it would be infinitely more dangerous if we are seen as weak, if the population believes that the terrorists can take control of cities and we won't stop them.

 

[LTC8K6]

Wikipedia is not really a good site for anything, imo.

I agree with the DOD regarding body counts. It is a lose/lose proposition for them.

I still don't see how you can tell who is a civilian. Obviously I'd count most children as civilians, and probably most women, but even then we've all seen women and children take up arms.

I think most Iraqis are very unhappy with the insurgents since they seem to be blowing up far more Iraqis than Americans.

Iraqbodycount appears to be counting those deliberately blown up by the insurgents as well as those killed during U.S. combat ops. That doesn't seem quite right to me.

 

[LTC8K6]

Didn't we surround Fallujah early on making it a bit more difficult for the terrorists to get away?

 

[IllegalArgument]

Is that seriously not obvious? There's two things we will have achieved: first, we will have killed a lot of insurgents. Second, we will deny them a critical base from which to organize. And no, they can't simply just pick up and move elsewhere - they spent a lot of time preparing Fallujah, establishing local organizations and control. That cannot be replicated elsewhere without spending a lot of time and resources. And lastly, of course, we will be sending the absolutely critical message that we will not be intimidated, that insurgents will not be allowed to establish safe havens. You can talk all you want to about how this operation will inflame Sunni opinion, but it would be infinitely more dangerous if we are seen as weak, if the population believes that the terrorists can take control of cities and we won't stop them.

I'm perfectly serious, we don't have enough people on the ground to keep them from reforming elsewhere. It's a short term victory at best, with the long term issue of possibly making it easier for the insurgents to recruit.

I would like to be wrong about this, but I have been reading up on some people call 4th generation warfare.

We need more boots on the ground to make the Iraqi people feel safe. How we get more people, though allies or the draft, I have no opinion at the moment.

Please, go to the link I provided, those folks aren't a bunch of wild-eyed liberals. They are very conservative people, with a great deal of knowledge in things military.

 

[jj]

Re: Re: Iraq

The insurgents in Falluja are screwed either way...

Yes, but how many of them are still in Falluja?

A few, perhaps, but how many vs. how many aren't?

No, they aren't stupid. Vicious, fanatical, and violent, but unfortunately, it seems, not stupid.