Why we can't "win" in Iraq

[quade 3]

This thread is not a debate about the merits of the war, but rather why we simply will never "win".

Take a look at this story.

It may seem like we have them out gunned by a wide margin, but the fact is that once the insurgents start getting creative, there is simply no way to "win". They will resist until we are out of the country. Same as in Viet Nam.

Rockets fired from donkey carts -- that's all you really need to know.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[usedtajump 1]

That's what I've tried to tell anybody that would listen long before "DUMBASS" dragged us into this Iraq quagmire. Anyone that has substantial funds, unlimited time and no concern for their own life can cause unsustainable damage and loss of life for so long, so cheaply, that there is nothing that can be done about it. Not that hard to figure out, why couldn't the powers that be figure that out? You'd think Robert McNamara was in charge again.

The older I get the less I care who I piss off.

[billvon 2,400]

>Rockets fired from donkey carts -- that's all you really need to know.

I liked this part:

"About 250 meters away from the hotel, an agitated donkey tethered to a toppled cart could be seen in the custody of U.S. troops. According to the U.S. military and local witnesses, the donkey - acting without an accomplice - dragged the lettuce cart down the main street outside the hotel while a timer operated the rockets.

"Apparently upon the beginning of the barrage, the donkey broke discipline and panicked, toppling the cart. At that point, the rockets disconnected from the timer, leaving them strewn around the street. Tethered to the now toppled cart, the donkey was unable to escape before the arrival of U.S. troops."

The question is - will the donkey end up in Guantanamo Bay, or will they just try him for terrorism in Iraq?

[crapflinger2000 1]

"About 250 meters away from the hotel, an agitated donkey tethered to a toppled cart could be seen in the custody of U.S. troops. According to the U.S. military and local witnesses, the donkey - acting without an accomplice - dragged the lettuce cart down the main street outside the hotel while a timer operated the rockets."

Fricken LMFAO!!!

__________________________________________________
What would Vic Mackey do?

[JAC 0]

Interesting article. Don't think anyone ever "really" wins in war.

[TheAnvil 0]

Re-read some things about military theory dude. Might I suggest Krepenovich's book on Vietnam and John Paul Vann as well?

Nice article though. Poor donkey.

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[quade 3]

The article is funny -- and sad.

We need to find Saddam -- kill him -- and get the fuck out of there as quickly as possible.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[andy2 0]

damn dude fucking donkeys!

---------------------------------------------
let my inspiration flow,
in token rhyme suggesting rhythm...

[aero04 0]

Quote

"About 250 meters away from the hotel, an agitated donkey tethered to a toppled cart could be seen in the custody of U.S. troops. According to the U.S. military and local witnesses, the donkey - acting without an accomplice - dragged the lettuce cart down the main street outside the hotel while a timer operated the rockets.

I can hear it now. "Arrest that donkey!!!!! It is a terrorist!!! Sieze the cart too!!!"

I agree Quade, get the f'n out before another 50,000 troops die. Turn it to the UN or something. The US is not the police of the world.

[quade 3]

Quote

Might I suggest Krepenovich's book on Vietnam and John Paul Vann as well?

Tell ya what -- I'll promise to read one of those if you promise to read THIS one.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[billvon 2,400]

>We need to find Saddam -- kill him -- and get the fuck out of there
>as quickly as possible.

I don't think it's that simple. If we killed him and left in a month or so, assassins would kill the current interim government and warlords would take over. (They've already assassinated a few leaders in the new government.) Perhaps they'd be Shi'a, who would decide to wipe out the Sunnis that had been oppressing them for decades. They'd almost certainly turn to a theocracy in reaction to the secular government imposed on them by Hussein (and now the US.) And in a year or so you'd have Taliban II, like the original except they would claim they drove the US out of Iraq and have control over the second largest oil reserve in the world.

We're in it now. Leaving soon would leave Iraq in worse hands than Saddam Hussein's. I would expect to see a lot of US fatalities in the next few years - we have already seen more fatalities in the first year of the war than Vietnam saw in the first _three_ years of the war. And there's no easy way out. Our decision to invade Iraq has consequences, and one of those consequences will be the deaths of hundreds if not thousands of US troops over the next years.

[ScubaSteve 0]

Based one the fine job in the Balkins. Not the grunts fault, but look where the country is today.

[quade 3]

Clearly I -was- over simplifying things, but we absolutely -must- ensure that Saddam can never return to power. The ONLY way I can think of that we can do that is to actually kill him.

Getting out "as quickly as possible" doesn't mean the day after we kill Saddam, but rather as quickly as we can after ensuring that we've allowed the Iraqis to set up their own government and infrastructure. Beyond that -- it's really none of our business -- nor was it ever any of our business.

This entire siutuation sucks and we need to end it as quickly as possible, not draw it out from one political campaign to the next . . . and the next.

People talk about some Dem candidates as stalking horses. Holy crap, look at Cheney. What if this entire stupid thing simply puts HIM in the White House in 2008.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[TheAnvil 0]

Believe it or not, I do plan on reading that. I don't give Clark the credence I give Krepenovich (historical perspective of Vietnam) or J.P. Vann - more of a tactician. I highly recommend both books - they give you a great perspective of guerilla warfare and how to fight one. I'm sure any Army general has read them - most military officers in fact.

The reviews on Amazon were undoubtedly written by Clark supporters - the ones I skimmed anyway. His antics in Kosovo got him relieved - for several reasons. I do plan on reading his book someday, however. It's just not high up on the list at this point.

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[quade 3]

You didn't happen to see Clark on Letterman last night did you?

Interesting interview.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[kallend 1,623]

Quote

Clearly I -was- over simplifying things, but we absolutely -must- ensure that Saddam can never return to power. The ONLY way I can think of that we can do that is to actually kill him.

Getting out "as quickly as possible" doesn't mean the day after we kill Saddam, but rather as quickly as we can after ensuring that we've allowed the Iraqis to set up their own government and infrastructure. Beyond that -- it's really none of our business -- nor was it ever any of our business.

This entire siutuation sucks and we need to end it as quickly as possible, not draw it out from one political campaign to the next . . . and the next.

People talk about some Dem candidates as stalking horses. Holy crap, look at Cheney. What if this entire stupid thing simply puts HIM in the White House in 2008.

If people aren't really voting for GWB but rather are voting against the Democratic candidates, maybe we'd be better off if the Dems didn't field any candidates.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Skyrad 0]

LMFAO

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[Skyrad 0]

I think maybe you can't see the wood for the trees here. Sadam Hussien is not as big a treat to Iraq, the region or the world as Wahibi Islamic fundamentalism. I was against this war from the start. Now though we simply can't pull out unless we want to see lebonon part two. Besides which Bush can't let down his oil buddies. So he's got what he wants......A war without end.

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[rgoper 0]

Quote

That's what I've tried to tell anybody that would listen long before "DUMBASS" dragged us into this Iraq quagmire

that makes two of us. only difference is "DumbAss" as you refer to him, i assigned him the "Wyatt Earp" moniker, and Tony Blair is "Doc Holliday" reason being both of these imbiciles think this is the O.K. coral instead of a modern day Viet Nam. regardless of ol' Wyatt & Doc's ultimately horrific decisions, i do support our troops and wish them all the success in the world. too bad the people of Iraq don't want to be "liberalized" the one thing we cannot "win" over is the Iraqi mindset, they don't want to be westernized by the U.S.A. or anyone else, the sooner we realize this, the better. Ross Pirot said it best at the onset of the "Operation Freedom Of Iraq" he said "I could cure this whole situation with just 2 words....Poisionous Snakes, you just fly over, kick them snakes out of the plane" was Ross kidding? anybodies guess, but you have to admit, it does seem like a quick fix!

--Richard--
"We Will Not Be Shaken By Thugs, And Terroist"

[freeflir29 0]

If they had just turned mercs loose this would have been over by now. Seems to work well in Africa.

[mikkey 0]

My thoughts:

1) US can not "win" this unilaterally - they would face a situation like Vietnam/Afghanistan (when the USSR occupied it).

2) Get the UN involved in the civil administration and the hand over to Iraqis. The UN (no matter how bad people on this board are trying to make them) are quite good in establishing new systems of government.

3) In parallel with the establishment of an Iraqi led administration (facilitated by the UN ) build up Iraqi security infrastructure (the US is already doing that part)

4) In the transition time get the military side of things “multilateralized” further, i.e. get more international troops in to work together with US troops. Even if it means you have to kiss French ass

5) Build more "human" intelligence instead of "technical/military" one to battle the resistance.

6) Counter the perception by Iraqi's that US companies are plundering the assets of the country. Letting the UN run the civilian administration will change this.

7) Be prepared that this will take at least a couple of years....

Don't like the above? Well be prepared for more "donkey attacks...."

---------------------------------------------------------
When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

[Guest]

Dirty Little Secrets: A Bunch of Reasons Why Iraq Is Not Like Vietnam

by James Dunnigan

November 17, 2003

Between March 19 and October 30, 2003, American troops in Iraq have suffered about .9 percent casualties (dead, wounded, or hospitalized for non-combat causes) a month. During the nine year Vietnam war, the rate was 44 percent higher (1.3 percent a month). Moreover, during Vietnam, combat caused sixty percent of the injuries, while in Iraq, combat has only caused 23 percent of the injuries. Thus U.S. troops in Iraq are suffering .21 percent combat casualties a month compared to more than three times the rate (.78 percent) during the Vietnam war. The non-combat injury rate in Vietnam (.52 percent a month) was actually lower than the rate in Iraq (.69 percent). Much of this difference is accounted for by four factors;

1- Iraq is a less healthy place for Americans than Vietnam. Although both are tropical countries, Iraq and the Persian Gulf have long been known as less hospitable, heathwise, to Westerners.

2- More women serving in units. Women in the field, just like women in sports, suffer a higher rate of bone and muscle injuries than men. The reason is simple; men have thicker bones and more muscle mass to protect them while performing the frequent physical labor required in a combat zone.

3- The average age of troops in Iraq, because everyone is a volunteer and there are lots of reservists, is several years higher than the Vietnam war average of 23 years. Older troops, especially the many reservists in their 30s and 40s, are more prone to injury and illness.

4- Medical care has become more accurate in the past forty years and the armed forces are more likely to spot a problem earlier and act. Better diagnostic capabilities are sending troops home for conditions (early stages of cancer or other slow moving illnesses) that no one could have spotted in Vietnam.

Keep in mind that the Vietnam figures are averages for 13 years (1962-75) of action by American troops in and around Vietnam. During that period, some 2.8 million American troops served over there. Moreover, the level of combat activity varied considerably from year to year. Fighting didn't really get serious (for Americans), until 1966, when 6,053 died (including 1,045 non-combat deaths.) Deaths peaked in 1968 (16,511) and trailed off considerably from 1972 (when 561 died) to 1975 (when all American troops, mainly advisors and trainers) left.

The nature of combat was also quite different in Vietnam. There it was a civil war where one side (the communists) had adjacent nations (North Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia) that could be used for sanctuaries and major nations (Russia, China) supplying weapons, money and other support. As a result, most of the fighting was not against guerillas (who were largely wiped out in the 1968 Tet Offensive, a point largely missed by the American media at the time), but by North Vietnamese army units hiding in the South Vietnamese jungle. This kind of fighting involved a lot of helicopters, and 18 percent of American deaths were helicopter related (combat, and non-combat accidents.) This is more than twice the rate so far in Iraq. Same with the bombs and booby traps, which accounted for 12 percent of casualties in Vietnam, versus more than twice that rate in Iraq. The nature of the Vietnam fighting was largely gun battles in the jungle, and this was seen by the fact that, for the first time since the American Civil War, the majority of army combat deaths (61 percent) were from gunfire in Vietnam. The enemy didn't have a lot of artillery (as the foe did in Korea and the World Wars), so there were a lot of firefights in the bush. Iraqis are not very accurate with rifles, and U.S. troops have excellent body armor.

Finally, the reporting of casualties is different in Iraq. There is no "body count" (of enemy dead) mentality, a deliberate decision meant to avoid the mistakes encountered with that sort of thing in Vietnam. According to communist estimates (they admit they have no precise figures), guerilla and North Vietnamese army losses in South Vietnam were some 800,000 dead and 2.1 million sick and wounded. This is against 261,000 Allied combat deaths (mostly South Vietnamese), and 700,000 wounded. There were also 420,000 civilian deaths (mostly in the south) and 1.2 million injured. Iraq is very different, with much more precise firepower and many more journalists running around looking for the few civilian deaths that do occur. But the deaths among those attacking coalition troops is high, but deliberately not reported regularly by the military. However, every time there is an armed encounter with American troops, a detailed report is prepared. This is used to determine if current tactics and procedures could be improved and, if so, the changes are made within hours, or days. While the number of Iraqi attacker deaths are not made public, the higher fees paid to the attackers by Baath Party leaders and increased use of remote controlled bombs indicates that getting too close to American combat troops is seen as a losing proposition. But even the remote controlled bombs are not the perfect weapon. The analysis of each incident generates new tactics for detecting and avoiding them. This battle of wits largely goes unreported, as does an accurate comparison of the casualties, and tactics in Vietnam.

"The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat."

[Amazon 7]

Excerpted.

James F. Dunnigan argues that many of the factors that were crucial to US success in Afghanistan are already being adapted to by the opposition in Afghanistan. Also, the element of surprise in the use of the successful tactics will not be there in future conflicts since the whole world saw what the US military did. We shouldn't overreact and go to far in moving toward a special forces model.

Just as the North Vietnamese quickly learned that you don't fight the American army in a straight ahead battle, the Afghans figured out how to become less vulnerable to smart bombs. The Afghan solution, which is quite similar to the North Vietnamese one, is to stay out of the way of the Americans, don't bunch up, and, in particular, dig deeper, and more numerous hiding places. Then you wage guerilla war until the impatient Yankees lose interest and go home.

Its worth noting in this context that many other wars have seen changes in efficacy of weapons from the time the weapons first scored their big successes till when the conflicts ended. For instance, tanks lost much of their advantage as WWII progressed and infantry developed tactics for dealing with them.


IT seems the Iraqui's are learning the same things...

Oh by the way..Iraq is "TROPICAL"...... WTF...

[Guest]

I think the upshot of Dunnigan's remarks is that US forces are fighting a whole lot smarter than they were in SEA, where much of the strategy was based upon the last war; i.e. WWII.

mh

"The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat."

[quade 3]

Quote

This kind of fighting involved a lot of helicopters, and 18 percent of American deaths were helicopter related (combat, and non-combat accidents.) This is more than twice the rate so far in Iraq. Same with the bombs and booby traps, which accounted for 12 percent of casualties in Vietnam, versus more than twice that rate in Iraq.

Dunnigan also fails to mention the donkey kill ratio which so far is infinately higher in Iraq than Viet Nam.

I fail to see his freekin' point.

Booby traps and other creative uses of local materials and conditions -are- on the rise.

Yes, there -will- be differences in the -exact- methods used but that's of little comfort to the people receiving the bodies back home.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver