Well done to UK senior officers!
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 276
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Danny, I don't disgree with you often, but i am going to on this one for a whole number of reasons.
I will quote what i said on my one and olnly post thus far on the subject:
This isn't pompous pontification, in fact it goes no further than to express a concern that the lives of those taken in this war should not be taken lightly. I am not going to try and put myself in the minds of the USMC at Umm Quasar, but I can comment on what I see. Thomas Aquinas, a greater mind than any who post on this forum, addresses just this issue in his treatise regarding Jus a Bellum, (Justice in War) where he goes to great lengths to understand the morality of taking life in conflict. He argues that none should rejoice in taking the life of another.
In more practical terms it must be asked "what message does this send"? Perhaps, if used in such a way, the images of American troops celebrating the death of Iraqi soldiers can be presented with the subtext of "this is the behaviour of the invading infidel". Perhaps those images could be used as Iraqi propoganda.
This issue goes beyond personal feelings. I would have said the same thing if it had been British troops hollering and whooping. The allied command has invested a lot of effort in the build-up to this campaign to send the message that they come to liberate and not conquer. Images such as these can be used to send an entirely different message. The presence of media reporting in real time is a real double-edged sword. It can convey a message to the Iraqi regime that may lead to it capitulating before Baghdad is levelled and lives on both sides lost. I would hope that it does, which is after all the purpose of the concept behind "shock and awe". However, all it takes are a few unguarded moments to spin that message away from the intended purpose. If you look at the images and words being used by saddam in his rhetoric it is far more emotive and almost prophetic than anything that the more clinical western commentary produces. His words are designed to whip up public support and plays to the arab culture more than our more clinically accurate, and often statistcs driven presentation. Added to this images such as the US Marines at Umm Quasar, it could make a pretty striking package that builds the Iraqi morale that the coalition has tried to erode.
A final word on personal attacks. I don't lose sleep over them so I'm not too concerned at some of the things that have been said towards me. I have no need to justify myself to the readers of this forum or any other. What I will say is that the views of the contributors of this thread do not reflect those of all of the British forces any more than mine do. There is a vocal and collective majority here at the moment that seems to jump on anyone who dares hold a view that does not conform to theirs. Everyone's feelings on the subject of warfare are running high, mine included. Because I am taking a position some of you disagree with I am attempting to argue without inflaming. I mis-judged that already in another thread. What I will say is that these issues should come out, and should be discussed. I have no problem with going against the flow where I think it is right to do so. I expect that some of you will probably come back and rip into me again. So be it.
I will quote what i said on my one and olnly post thus far on the subject:
I have just been watching the most apalling images of our "allies" whooping and screaming like deranged sports fans when a building was taken out in Um Qasr. It seemed to me entirely inappropriate behaviour. Regardless of whose side they were on, the Iraqi soldiers were still human beings and deserved to be treated with some degree of respect in death.
In more practical terms it must be asked "what message does this send"? Perhaps, if used in such a way, the images of American troops celebrating the death of Iraqi soldiers can be presented with the subtext of "this is the behaviour of the invading infidel". Perhaps those images could be used as Iraqi propoganda.
This issue goes beyond personal feelings. I would have said the same thing if it had been British troops hollering and whooping. The allied command has invested a lot of effort in the build-up to this campaign to send the message that they come to liberate and not conquer. Images such as these can be used to send an entirely different message. The presence of media reporting in real time is a real double-edged sword. It can convey a message to the Iraqi regime that may lead to it capitulating before Baghdad is levelled and lives on both sides lost. I would hope that it does, which is after all the purpose of the concept behind "shock and awe". However, all it takes are a few unguarded moments to spin that message away from the intended purpose. If you look at the images and words being used by saddam in his rhetoric it is far more emotive and almost prophetic than anything that the more clinical western commentary produces. His words are designed to whip up public support and plays to the arab culture more than our more clinically accurate, and often statistcs driven presentation. Added to this images such as the US Marines at Umm Quasar, it could make a pretty striking package that builds the Iraqi morale that the coalition has tried to erode.
A final word on personal attacks. I don't lose sleep over them so I'm not too concerned at some of the things that have been said towards me. I have no need to justify myself to the readers of this forum or any other. What I will say is that the views of the contributors of this thread do not reflect those of all of the British forces any more than mine do. There is a vocal and collective majority here at the moment that seems to jump on anyone who dares hold a view that does not conform to theirs. Everyone's feelings on the subject of warfare are running high, mine included. Because I am taking a position some of you disagree with I am attempting to argue without inflaming. I mis-judged that already in another thread. What I will say is that these issues should come out, and should be discussed. I have no problem with going against the flow where I think it is right to do so. I expect that some of you will probably come back and rip into me again. So be it.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: A PC!
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now this may get me editied or deleted but................
It is possible that some of the vitriol aimed at the US Senior Brass by posters here is a reaction to the fact that a US missile shot down an RAF Tornado? Perhaps it's just a little anger transference taking place? It also acts as a pressure release for people who need to vent pent up feelings.
I am not blaming anyone for the tragedy - at least not until the investigators can tell us what happened. The if someone is to blame I want their b*lls in a vice (but that is a different story!).
Anyway, just my attempt at psychology
It is possible that some of the vitriol aimed at the US Senior Brass by posters here is a reaction to the fact that a US missile shot down an RAF Tornado? Perhaps it's just a little anger transference taking place? It also acts as a pressure release for people who need to vent pent up feelings.
I am not blaming anyone for the tragedy - at least not until the investigators can tell us what happened. The if someone is to blame I want their b*lls in a vice (but that is a different story!).
Anyway, just my attempt at psychology
kbf1
What is the point of joining the debate if you aren't prepared to back your arguments?
This thread wouldn't have started if the media were simply prepared to let the military do their thing in peace. Letting every armchair general get an idea of what really goes on just makes it tougher on everyone.
What about those Aussies? Best of both worlds, articulate and cultured but with a real 'can-do' attitude.
I have no need to justify myself to the readers of this forum or any other.
This thread wouldn't have started if the media were simply prepared to let the military do their thing in peace. Letting every armchair general get an idea of what really goes on just makes it tougher on everyone.
What about those Aussies? Best of both worlds, articulate and cultured but with a real 'can-do' attitude.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 276
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Snoozer, I don't feel the need to justify what I have or have not done in my time in the army. It seems disagreement with the opinions voiced by some on this forum has led to personal abuse. I am not so concerned with your credentials or those of anyone else, if a point is worth debating then I am content to debate it irrespective of background. The point I make is that anyone making a point on here at the moment that is disagreed with is derided, insulted, and generally abused. It is the first time I have seen it happen with such viscious antagonism, and that is a pity. It isn't the first time that I have seen words put in the mouths of others, but it is happening in a nasty, personal manner like never before right now. I am happy and willing to debate with you, but it is proving impossible when all I see is a barrage of abuse. Ultimately it is the internet, it happens and if i couldn't take it I wouldn't be here.
Scud, my comments were available to paraphrase, I don't have a copy of Suma Theologica to hand. You have read something into the post that wasn't there and placed on me an intention I never had when i wrote what I did.
Scud, my comments were available to paraphrase, I don't have a copy of Suma Theologica to hand. You have read something into the post that wasn't there and placed on me an intention I never had when i wrote what I did.
aka Capt PPRuNe
Join Date: May 1995
Location: UK
Posts: 4,541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
kbf1, I have already said it once, you are not and never have been a front line soldier in combat. That in itself shows me that you are so out of touch with what really happens when in actual combat. If you don't like the images you saw then as a military man you should know that it is best to get rid of the embedded reporters from front line units or else only let them send edited packages out.
When you and all the other military 'experts' have been in actual front line combat then I will respect your views on this subject but until then I will read it with the contempt it deserves. American, British, Australian and even Iraqi troops will always 'whoop it up' whenever they have a success in battle.
If we were to run this war with all the bleeding heart liberal PC that some of you expect then we may as well give up now and withdraw. It's about time that some of you realise that what you consider to be the norms of civilian life don't apply when in combat. If you have never been a combat soldier in action on the front line then register your disquiet about the etiquette of the troops and leave it at that. I and any of the others who do have combat experience as soldiers in battle will have every right to tell you where to get off your pedestal without getting more claptrap and watching you put down our allies with such sanctimonious pontification!
I seem to remember on the Tornado/Patriot thread that you were the first to introduce that "viscious antagonism" with your poster and conclusion that the US patriot crew had probably just let one rip for the gung ho hell of it without knowing ANY facts! 
In more practical terms it must be asked "what message does this send"? Perhaps, if used in such a way, the images of American troops celebrating the death of Iraqi soldiers can be presented with the subtext of "this is the behaviour of the invading infidel". Perhaps those images could be used as Iraqi propoganda.
If we were to run this war with all the bleeding heart liberal PC that some of you expect then we may as well give up now and withdraw. It's about time that some of you realise that what you consider to be the norms of civilian life don't apply when in combat. If you have never been a combat soldier in action on the front line then register your disquiet about the etiquette of the troops and leave it at that. I and any of the others who do have combat experience as soldiers in battle will have every right to tell you where to get off your pedestal without getting more claptrap and watching you put down our allies with such sanctimonious pontification!
It is the first time I have seen it happen with such viscious antagonism, and that is a pity.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Oxford
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Balderdash
Hal Pilot
What utter rot. Patton was an over rated, over promoted Brigade commander. Monty had his faults but he was a product of the First World War (which started in 1914 not 1917….cheap shot but accurate). He was methodical and careful because of the carnage he witnessed in 14-18 and because Britain didn’t have the manpower to be careless with mens lives and Monty was loved for it. Even when Monty helped with the Ardennes commanding US units, he won the respect and admiration of the American forces. Don’t forget that it was Monty who altered the OVERLORD plan and that he was the commander in the field for that operation.
Funnily enough, its American forces nowadays who we find up-tight and inflexible with no grasp of political realities. They are brave, courageous, open and friendly as well but then, we all our have faults don’t we?
What utter rot. Patton was an over rated, over promoted Brigade commander. Monty had his faults but he was a product of the First World War (which started in 1914 not 1917….cheap shot but accurate). He was methodical and careful because of the carnage he witnessed in 14-18 and because Britain didn’t have the manpower to be careless with mens lives and Monty was loved for it. Even when Monty helped with the Ardennes commanding US units, he won the respect and admiration of the American forces. Don’t forget that it was Monty who altered the OVERLORD plan and that he was the commander in the field for that operation.
Funnily enough, its American forces nowadays who we find up-tight and inflexible with no grasp of political realities. They are brave, courageous, open and friendly as well but then, we all our have faults don’t we?
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 276
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Danny you are an ex-Isareali soldier. Happy that you have been down in the mud and bullets, never disputed that and not knocking it, but your comments also show a lack of understanding of the British Army Orbat, but in spite of that I am not writing off what you say as irrelevant. Not having been in the front inf line of a war fighting operation does not immediately strip me of any and all knowledge of tactics, though you may think so.
As for being a liberal? Piss off! You know full well I am not. As for the other thread I held my hands up and apologised. I'll do it again, i am sorry that I caused offence. I ranted and shouldn't have, and have tried in spite of the comments flung at me not to go back into that frame of mind. I am being more cautious now about my comments so as not to compound matters.
My views diverge from yours. There are a lot of things I would gladly say here in support of some of the arguments I have made, but I think in the current climate these things are best left unsaid as they involve the working procedures of both US and British forces.
I know you are as prone as any of us to your outbursts, but that doesn't mean i am morally obliged to fall into line with your opinions because you have been involved in operations in the west bank that I haven't been. I disagree with you but still take on board what you say. I am entirely supportive of the coalition forces, but that is not to say i cannot and will not point out where I think we have got it wrong.
I am content that we will have opposing views and that neither of us will be entirely won over by the other. I think the best thing is to accept that before things deteriorate further.
As for being a liberal? Piss off! You know full well I am not. As for the other thread I held my hands up and apologised. I'll do it again, i am sorry that I caused offence. I ranted and shouldn't have, and have tried in spite of the comments flung at me not to go back into that frame of mind. I am being more cautious now about my comments so as not to compound matters.
My views diverge from yours. There are a lot of things I would gladly say here in support of some of the arguments I have made, but I think in the current climate these things are best left unsaid as they involve the working procedures of both US and British forces.
I know you are as prone as any of us to your outbursts, but that doesn't mean i am morally obliged to fall into line with your opinions because you have been involved in operations in the west bank that I haven't been. I disagree with you but still take on board what you say. I am entirely supportive of the coalition forces, but that is not to say i cannot and will not point out where I think we have got it wrong.
I am content that we will have opposing views and that neither of us will be entirely won over by the other. I think the best thing is to accept that before things deteriorate further.
Guest
Posts: n/a
There seems to be some disagreement, as to whether or not, "a-whooping and a-hollering" is acceptable war practice.
Personally, I'd have been more upset, that after having been pinned down by a strongpoint, in 30 degrees+ in my NBC kit, that it hadn't occured to my Boss, to just zap the building off the face of the planet. So, whistle up a Bradley or an M1, get some suppresive down, or better still, get an A-10 or a F-18 to deliver the good news.
Whooping and hollering can be seen as being distasteful, and sometimes, is associated with American mistakes, which may be why some posters are getting upset.
The missile directors on the Vincennes (?) were whooping and hollering after they succesfully engaged the target.
I remember vividly, 2 A-10 pilots, pumped up and celebrating, with whooping and hollering , as they described to the reporter, how they had killed 2 tanks in the desert, trying to escape from the "Road o' death". Unfortunately, the two "Tanks" were British IFV's. I have said more than enough in the past on that incident, it is personal to me, and I had friends involved in that.
Yes, there is going to be a fair amount of "spam-bashing" a lot of it, is "Our army is better than yours" , some of it masks genuine anger, some of it, is delivered by people who always have an open season on Americans.
Yesterday, a retired US admiral was interviewed on the BBC. When questioned about the Tornado incident, he said "Well with the Prisoner story breaking, that will be consigned to Page 684 , beside the byline of an American officer going postal in Camp Penn"
Blue-on-Blue , are the serving soldiers biggest fear, the fear of dying for nothing. Already, we have seen too many of them, before the task of war proper even starts. My heart is in my mouth, watching members of my Regiment, friends and colleagues getting ready for OBUA action that a lot of you ,(excepting Danny, who's been there) will never ever understand.
It's bad enough on the streets of Northern Ireland, or patrolling in Bosnia, when the other side aren't trying to zap you en-masse.
A lot of people will die, there will be more Blue-on-blue, if we use heavy kit. This is now the sort of action, that can only be fought, with the bayonet, rifles and grenades.You can't get an Abrams or a C2 up some of those streets, they are natural tank traps. The distinction will be even more blurred, with Arab irregulars, poorly clothed Iraqi soldiers, and civilians all taking up arms. Who the hell do we engage, in a street full of smoke, in the heat of battle?
This war, is being prosecuted in entirely the wrong way. You cannot simultaneously seek to win hearts and minds and bomb. It doesn't work. You can't engage in OBUA, with a city still full of civilians, in recent times, Somalia and Jenin haved proved that. If civilans are in the way when the bullets are flying, they will die.
Closer co-ordination, must be the order of the day. We have seen evidence, that when a formation operates on it's own (Royal Marines) it achieves it's objectives. The entire way different commands operate in this theatre, must be subject to a rolling evaluation, even a pause if necessary. Even on peacetime exercises, I have seen basic mistakes made, when operating with other NATO formations, it is the nature of the beast.
In conclusion, communication is the key. If communication is allowed to break down, then Blue-on-Blue will keep happening.
Personally, I'd have been more upset, that after having been pinned down by a strongpoint, in 30 degrees+ in my NBC kit, that it hadn't occured to my Boss, to just zap the building off the face of the planet. So, whistle up a Bradley or an M1, get some suppresive down, or better still, get an A-10 or a F-18 to deliver the good news.
Whooping and hollering can be seen as being distasteful, and sometimes, is associated with American mistakes, which may be why some posters are getting upset.
The missile directors on the Vincennes (?) were whooping and hollering after they succesfully engaged the target.
I remember vividly, 2 A-10 pilots, pumped up and celebrating, with whooping and hollering , as they described to the reporter, how they had killed 2 tanks in the desert, trying to escape from the "Road o' death". Unfortunately, the two "Tanks" were British IFV's. I have said more than enough in the past on that incident, it is personal to me, and I had friends involved in that.
Yes, there is going to be a fair amount of "spam-bashing" a lot of it, is "Our army is better than yours" , some of it masks genuine anger, some of it, is delivered by people who always have an open season on Americans.
Yesterday, a retired US admiral was interviewed on the BBC. When questioned about the Tornado incident, he said "Well with the Prisoner story breaking, that will be consigned to Page 684 , beside the byline of an American officer going postal in Camp Penn"
Blue-on-Blue , are the serving soldiers biggest fear, the fear of dying for nothing. Already, we have seen too many of them, before the task of war proper even starts. My heart is in my mouth, watching members of my Regiment, friends and colleagues getting ready for OBUA action that a lot of you ,(excepting Danny, who's been there) will never ever understand.
It's bad enough on the streets of Northern Ireland, or patrolling in Bosnia, when the other side aren't trying to zap you en-masse.
A lot of people will die, there will be more Blue-on-blue, if we use heavy kit. This is now the sort of action, that can only be fought, with the bayonet, rifles and grenades.You can't get an Abrams or a C2 up some of those streets, they are natural tank traps. The distinction will be even more blurred, with Arab irregulars, poorly clothed Iraqi soldiers, and civilians all taking up arms. Who the hell do we engage, in a street full of smoke, in the heat of battle?
This war, is being prosecuted in entirely the wrong way. You cannot simultaneously seek to win hearts and minds and bomb. It doesn't work. You can't engage in OBUA, with a city still full of civilians, in recent times, Somalia and Jenin haved proved that. If civilans are in the way when the bullets are flying, they will die.
Closer co-ordination, must be the order of the day. We have seen evidence, that when a formation operates on it's own (Royal Marines) it achieves it's objectives. The entire way different commands operate in this theatre, must be subject to a rolling evaluation, even a pause if necessary. Even on peacetime exercises, I have seen basic mistakes made, when operating with other NATO formations, it is the nature of the beast.
In conclusion, communication is the key. If communication is allowed to break down, then Blue-on-Blue will keep happening.
Solotk, it's bloody impressive how your predictions on this war as posted on here and other forums seem to come true with depressing frequency. (depressing as you've mostly predicted the problems, ballsups, dirty tricks..) Comparison with Battle of Khafji, Iraqi close defence of urban areas with co-ordinated artillery, anti-tank and small arms, supply issues....all very prescient. Good work!
.....but can you tell me next week's pools?
.....but can you tell me next week's pools?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Steamchicken 
I can't tell you this weeks results, because I need the money to make an offer for that slightly used Apache that will be appearing in the Baghdad edition of Trade-a-Plane.
In my opinion , Saddams believes his best chance, is to let Allied heavy formations roll as quickly as they can, stretching their supply lines , increasing the frequency of breakdowns, decreasing the frequency of troop re-supplies etc.
As the supply lines stretch, that's when the small "stay behind" elements, or larger, hidden forces , operating up and down the MSR, will start to pick off targets.
In this sort of war, a high value vehicle, is not an Abrams, a C 2 or an IFV. It's the Breakdown truck, the fuel tanker , the scoffwagon etc. Nice soft targets , critical to an advance and resupply.
The MSR should have a series of "Fighting Forts" established along the route. These need be no more than reinforced sangars, with perhaps a section of infantry, equipped with Anti-Tank missiles, and heavy machine guns, and of course, secure phone links, to the next Sangar, half a mile, to a mile up the road, with at least one Apache/Cobra/Armed Kiowa , no more than 5 minutes flying time from the post.
As our supply lines get longer, Iraqi irregulars and insurgents will be looking for targets of opportunity, and we have to keep that road open. Of course, other people will say, "But we can supply them by air"
Yes we can, but you can't repair tanks by air, you can't recover broken down wagons by air. The Iraqis are going for maintenance crews and Engineers. If you kill or capture them, then how many tanks have you disabled? How many Bridges won't get built, or minefields cleared?
The Iraqis, are fighting with the benefit of experience in warfare in this terrain. I've watched a lot of the talking heads , going on about "Our equipment is superior"
Of course it is. The poor old Iraqis only have T-55's and T-62's and T-72's in the RG. Look at the other side of the coin. They're updated and upgunned, some of them MAY have Czech Fire control equipment. Very capable, very nasty. One thing is sure, the T-55's, 62's, 72's and I suspect, though we haven't been told yet, T-80's function very well in the desert.
As for these reports of "Little bands of fanatics and die-hards" . No they are not. The news is banging on about "An entire division surrendered" An entire division is a lot of men, a typical Iraqi division, (pre-war) could be composed of 2 Tank Brigades ,3 Tank Battalions , 1 Mechanized Infantry Battalion ,1 Motorized Special Forces Company , 1 Engineering Company ,1 Reconaissance Platoon 1 Medium Rocket Launcher Battery (Or Artillery)
Now Mr.Blair announced we had captured 3000 Iraqis all told. So where are the rest of them? We have heard, they've deserted. What, all of the rest? That's the best part of 5,000 troops. If I deserted my unit in wartime, the last place I'd be gong , is anywhere, where there were ba'ath party officials, looking to shoot me. So is it possible, that at least some of them, left a unit that was going to surrender, to join one that will fight?
There is a lot of crap getting spouted , about "Irregulars, stay behinds, fanatics" etc etc. These are the only people who want to fight us. Wrong. Irregulars, stay behinds and fanatics, do not have carefully co-ordinated fire plans, or Artillery and Mortar platoons.How many of these irregulars, are actually REGULAR Iraqi personnel, told to go home, melt into the background, but keep the RPG's and the AK's handy? Why keep them in massed formations in the desert, to be bombed to ******* by B-52's? Do we think he hasn't learnt his lesson from last time? I'd be interested to know, if the formations we have been bombing, are the same size as compositions in GW1? How do we know, that his Tanks and BDR's/BMP's arent parked in domestic garages in towns? Am I the only one, concerned about the deliberate and studied lack of preparations in Baghdad, and other CHOKE points?
I'm afraid the US high command, is going to have to face a simple couple of truths.
1. Not every Iraqi is overjoyed to see us, as evidenced by the fighting, the lack of refugees, trying to meet Allied Forces for safety and liberation, and the numbers of refugees returning home to fight.
2. You can't make an omlette, without levelling a town. Sorry, but there it is. if that building is a strong point, level it, not fart about for the cameras.
Saddam is playing for time, he hopes for some things (Arabic uprisings, volunteers, resupply from Iran and Syria) , but he knows he will get one thing. The Gulf 30/40 day sandstorm. He knows it's coming, and that's when he'll use his Arab irregulars in partisan activities.
I can't tell you this weeks results, because I need the money to make an offer for that slightly used Apache that will be appearing in the Baghdad edition of Trade-a-Plane.
In my opinion , Saddams believes his best chance, is to let Allied heavy formations roll as quickly as they can, stretching their supply lines , increasing the frequency of breakdowns, decreasing the frequency of troop re-supplies etc.
As the supply lines stretch, that's when the small "stay behind" elements, or larger, hidden forces , operating up and down the MSR, will start to pick off targets.
In this sort of war, a high value vehicle, is not an Abrams, a C 2 or an IFV. It's the Breakdown truck, the fuel tanker , the scoffwagon etc. Nice soft targets , critical to an advance and resupply.
The MSR should have a series of "Fighting Forts" established along the route. These need be no more than reinforced sangars, with perhaps a section of infantry, equipped with Anti-Tank missiles, and heavy machine guns, and of course, secure phone links, to the next Sangar, half a mile, to a mile up the road, with at least one Apache/Cobra/Armed Kiowa , no more than 5 minutes flying time from the post.
As our supply lines get longer, Iraqi irregulars and insurgents will be looking for targets of opportunity, and we have to keep that road open. Of course, other people will say, "But we can supply them by air"
Yes we can, but you can't repair tanks by air, you can't recover broken down wagons by air. The Iraqis are going for maintenance crews and Engineers. If you kill or capture them, then how many tanks have you disabled? How many Bridges won't get built, or minefields cleared?
The Iraqis, are fighting with the benefit of experience in warfare in this terrain. I've watched a lot of the talking heads , going on about "Our equipment is superior"
Of course it is. The poor old Iraqis only have T-55's and T-62's and T-72's in the RG. Look at the other side of the coin. They're updated and upgunned, some of them MAY have Czech Fire control equipment. Very capable, very nasty. One thing is sure, the T-55's, 62's, 72's and I suspect, though we haven't been told yet, T-80's function very well in the desert.
As for these reports of "Little bands of fanatics and die-hards" . No they are not. The news is banging on about "An entire division surrendered" An entire division is a lot of men, a typical Iraqi division, (pre-war) could be composed of 2 Tank Brigades ,3 Tank Battalions , 1 Mechanized Infantry Battalion ,1 Motorized Special Forces Company , 1 Engineering Company ,1 Reconaissance Platoon 1 Medium Rocket Launcher Battery (Or Artillery)
Now Mr.Blair announced we had captured 3000 Iraqis all told. So where are the rest of them? We have heard, they've deserted. What, all of the rest? That's the best part of 5,000 troops. If I deserted my unit in wartime, the last place I'd be gong , is anywhere, where there were ba'ath party officials, looking to shoot me. So is it possible, that at least some of them, left a unit that was going to surrender, to join one that will fight?
There is a lot of crap getting spouted , about "Irregulars, stay behinds, fanatics" etc etc. These are the only people who want to fight us. Wrong. Irregulars, stay behinds and fanatics, do not have carefully co-ordinated fire plans, or Artillery and Mortar platoons.How many of these irregulars, are actually REGULAR Iraqi personnel, told to go home, melt into the background, but keep the RPG's and the AK's handy? Why keep them in massed formations in the desert, to be bombed to ******* by B-52's? Do we think he hasn't learnt his lesson from last time? I'd be interested to know, if the formations we have been bombing, are the same size as compositions in GW1? How do we know, that his Tanks and BDR's/BMP's arent parked in domestic garages in towns? Am I the only one, concerned about the deliberate and studied lack of preparations in Baghdad, and other CHOKE points?
I'm afraid the US high command, is going to have to face a simple couple of truths.
1. Not every Iraqi is overjoyed to see us, as evidenced by the fighting, the lack of refugees, trying to meet Allied Forces for safety and liberation, and the numbers of refugees returning home to fight.
2. You can't make an omlette, without levelling a town. Sorry, but there it is. if that building is a strong point, level it, not fart about for the cameras.
Saddam is playing for time, he hopes for some things (Arabic uprisings, volunteers, resupply from Iran and Syria) , but he knows he will get one thing. The Gulf 30/40 day sandstorm. He knows it's coming, and that's when he'll use his Arab irregulars in partisan activities.
Thread Starter
Danny,
Pompous self importance? Yes, how right you are. How dare I ask a question or express an opinion, especially if it differs from your own.
Your own experience in the IDF gives you enormous credibility, naturally – any member of the world’s most experienced army (and arguably the best) will of course know what it’s all about. I don’t doubt that for a moment. The IDF has seldom (if ever) been beaten on the field of battle, after all. Any soldier will always have more insight into these matters than a REMF or even worse a civilian. But anyone’s entitled to an opinion, and sometimes (where there is an extra-military dimension) they may even have a valid argument. It’s a tad arrogant to dismiss anyone’s opinions just because they don’t have your combat experience. I’m not talking about me – I am just a hack, but KBF is a trained military man with experience of the British Army (and working with the US), even if he hasn’t seen combat. I’m astonished that you see fit to dismiss him with quite such vitriol and venom.
And perhaps not all wars are the same. Perhaps KBF wants the Allies to win the war of world opinion and public opinion as well as the military battle. I hope you won’t leap to accusations of anti-semitism if I question whether Israel has done all that well in winning the propaganda war, however brilliantly it has fought militarily. Perhaps to do better on the former front it’s right (or necessary) to pay more heed to civilian mores?
Ralf,
No cheap shots at you. I’m increasingly inclined to agree with your first paragraph, and never disagreed with your second. This thread was intended as no more than a congratulatory note about Britain’s senior chaps, who (in my view) shine by comparison with the US senior chaps who’ve appeared in the media. I am incredibly impressed by what I’ve seen of the UK forces in this war, as a civilian, while I find some of what I see of the Americans as being very foreign. That’s not Yank-bashing, and I make no apology for praising what seems (from my civvy perspective) to be good practise.
I’m sorry that it’s been diverted into an argument about the rights and wrongs of the USMC’s over-the-top and arguably distasteful display at the deaths of their enemies. I’m also sorry that to question such behaviour invites abuse and accusations of ‘santimonious pontification’.
But there does seem to be a contrast between how we see US and UK personnel behaving and this perhaps invites comment and debate. Danny avers that “American, British, Australian and even Iraqi troops will always 'whoop it up' whenever they have a success in battle.” While others of us can see a difference in the way in which soldiers do that ‘whooping’.
What a pity that it can’t remain calm on this thread.
It’s a shame above all, because the nature of the debate makes us concentrate on one narrow aspect of our US allies. But because we can isolate and describe some minor failings doesn’t necessarily mean that we’re anti American. As Sir Percy said: “They are brave, courageous, open and friendly as well”. (And efficient, superbly equipped, very highly motivated, admirably patriotic, tough, disciplined, generous, likeable, etc. etc.)
At the bottom line, I’ll admit that I would use phrases like ‘occasionally trigger happy’ and ‘sometimes gung ho’ if asked for 50 phrases to describe the US military, but they’d be down at No.47 and 48, way behind 46 much more complimentary adjectives.
Pompous self importance? Yes, how right you are. How dare I ask a question or express an opinion, especially if it differs from your own.
Your own experience in the IDF gives you enormous credibility, naturally – any member of the world’s most experienced army (and arguably the best) will of course know what it’s all about. I don’t doubt that for a moment. The IDF has seldom (if ever) been beaten on the field of battle, after all. Any soldier will always have more insight into these matters than a REMF or even worse a civilian. But anyone’s entitled to an opinion, and sometimes (where there is an extra-military dimension) they may even have a valid argument. It’s a tad arrogant to dismiss anyone’s opinions just because they don’t have your combat experience. I’m not talking about me – I am just a hack, but KBF is a trained military man with experience of the British Army (and working with the US), even if he hasn’t seen combat. I’m astonished that you see fit to dismiss him with quite such vitriol and venom.
And perhaps not all wars are the same. Perhaps KBF wants the Allies to win the war of world opinion and public opinion as well as the military battle. I hope you won’t leap to accusations of anti-semitism if I question whether Israel has done all that well in winning the propaganda war, however brilliantly it has fought militarily. Perhaps to do better on the former front it’s right (or necessary) to pay more heed to civilian mores?
Ralf,
No cheap shots at you. I’m increasingly inclined to agree with your first paragraph, and never disagreed with your second. This thread was intended as no more than a congratulatory note about Britain’s senior chaps, who (in my view) shine by comparison with the US senior chaps who’ve appeared in the media. I am incredibly impressed by what I’ve seen of the UK forces in this war, as a civilian, while I find some of what I see of the Americans as being very foreign. That’s not Yank-bashing, and I make no apology for praising what seems (from my civvy perspective) to be good practise.
I’m sorry that it’s been diverted into an argument about the rights and wrongs of the USMC’s over-the-top and arguably distasteful display at the deaths of their enemies. I’m also sorry that to question such behaviour invites abuse and accusations of ‘santimonious pontification’.
But there does seem to be a contrast between how we see US and UK personnel behaving and this perhaps invites comment and debate. Danny avers that “American, British, Australian and even Iraqi troops will always 'whoop it up' whenever they have a success in battle.” While others of us can see a difference in the way in which soldiers do that ‘whooping’.
What a pity that it can’t remain calm on this thread.
It’s a shame above all, because the nature of the debate makes us concentrate on one narrow aspect of our US allies. But because we can isolate and describe some minor failings doesn’t necessarily mean that we’re anti American. As Sir Percy said: “They are brave, courageous, open and friendly as well”. (And efficient, superbly equipped, very highly motivated, admirably patriotic, tough, disciplined, generous, likeable, etc. etc.)
At the bottom line, I’ll admit that I would use phrases like ‘occasionally trigger happy’ and ‘sometimes gung ho’ if asked for 50 phrases to describe the US military, but they’d be down at No.47 and 48, way behind 46 much more complimentary adjectives.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Muscat, Oman
Posts: 604
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Solotk,
Very impressive reasoning and a little worrying. I voiced similar concerns, but nowhere near as well expressed, on the shock and awe thread so I won't repeat it here. One of your acronyms from an earlier post has passed me by - can you decode OBUA please.
Very impressive reasoning and a little worrying. I voiced similar concerns, but nowhere near as well expressed, on the shock and awe thread so I won't repeat it here. One of your acronyms from an earlier post has passed me by - can you decode OBUA please.
Several posts on this thread are falling into the classic intelligence trap - judging other nations by our own standards. Each nation has different characteristics, we may not like all of them, but we shouldn't try to impose our own standards. Just look where its got us in the past (and present?).
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does anybody else find it a little strange that some people apparently consider killing people acceptable but whooping unacceptable? Wouldnt want to go drinking with some of you guys.
