A real report about Iraq

[SkyjunkySean 0]

it's the medal of honor NOT the "congressional" medal of honor.
How dare you belittle AND nullify the beliefs of those who fought and died!
you don't like america or the "heroes"as you put it....Leave. the door is on each coast n two to the north and south.

[nerdgirl 0]

Thanks for the more detailed response. You provided a lot to which I could respond … and most in agreement.

Quote

The real issue isn't that traditional operations and high tech weapons won't work against terrorists and terrorism, but rather that traditional IDEAS won't work. Having a well equipped, well trained military should NEVER be a disadvantage and using it as an excuse for failure is disgusting(not directly aimed at you NG). The problem isn't that we are too good or too big or too whatever. Its that we don't have enough leaders in the military that understand what the real mission is, nor the smarts to effectively use the men they have been charged with to accomplish it.

I reviewing what I wrote, you’re correct that I didn’t specify the specific weaponry.

On technology – I heartily concur on the strategic value of technology whether engaged in traditional military operations against a peer competitor (classic “Fulda gap” scenarios) or fighting an asymmetric urban insurgency. (One can argue, I actually would, that terrorism is a third category with similarities to insurgency but also critical differences; stability operations are relevant to both.) Would you disagree that the types of technology (kinetic & non-kinetic) that are most effective or most critical are different between for traditional military operations against a peer competitor and fighting an insurgency? If so, why & how?

For reference, in 2006 the Defense Science Board (DSB) was charged by the USD(AT&L) with looking back to the Cold War and the technologies (or capabilities in DoD-vernacular) that gave the US operational advantage over adversaries (i.e., precision, speed, stealth and tactical ISR) and identifying equivalent technological capabilities for the 21st century. Any speculations on what the DSB identified? At least one is being operationally deployed in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Requirements – as you may well know, the DoD requirements process hypothetically communicates, analyzes, and makes recommendations of what new technological capabilities the DoD should develop. Now one can argue how effective that process is …

From your perspective, what technological capabilities would you like to have/have had?

We can blow things up like no one else can; innovative technology for blowing things up is not a problem, but can we re-build them? And rebuild them so that when we leave they don’t crumble/disintegrate completely fostering instability and the ungoverned spaces that shelter terrorists?

Quote

SSTR is now fast becoming the new mission and as you said most of the military doesn't do it well. Again I say that we have become distracted from our actual mission which is getting rid of terrorists. Its akin to spraying poison on the entire garden because of weeds. Doing that would just poison the entire population and not be in line with the goals of the garden. Pluck the weeds out and allow the rest of the plants to flower.

Concur. Per DODD 3000.05, my favorite DoD Directive , issued November 2005 stability operations is supposed to be given equal weight across the DOTMLF to traditional military operations. What that means and how it will be implemented is still being worked out and worked through the services, as it should be, imo. That is potentially the single largest change to the DoD since “joint” was mandated by Congress (Goldwater-Nichols).

There have been some very good public dialogues. LTC Gian Gentile (USA) has emerged as eloquent & effective spokesman for the “traditionalists” and a significant part of Army staff seeming to be in concurrence. Among the most well-known proponents of the importance of stability ops and SSTR and the need for a permanent advisory corps, which frequently gets tied into COIN, is LTC John Nagl (USA), who retired early last year. For context: he largely wrote the updated FM 3-24 (the updated Counterinsurgency Field Manual).

If the mission is SSTR (referencing MG Chiarelli’s Stability Lines of Operations, Fig 3, p. 6 document therein) what do you think the US government needs to do to be successful at that mission?

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

This isn't about trying to fool anyone. We have a new government coming into power and some new policies are coming into effect. There is no denying the mistakes that have been made, but now the end is slowly coming into sight. How are we going to meet it?

Excellent question. With the SOFA looking more & more likely to go into effect every day, how will that impact President's Bush strategy, what Sen McCain indicated would be his preferred strategy, and how does it reconcile with the strategy proposed by Sen Obama?

Quote

Every stable government in the middle east brings us one step closer to world peace.

Dictatorships are among the most stable governments in the world (until transition of power occurs). Do you think stability or democracy/freedom should be the goal?

Quote

Also, like I mentioned earlier, this is not propaganda. This came from an actual expert who went there to update the powers that be on the progress that is being made. From reports like this is where the media gets their information and spins it to their liking.

Again, concur w/r/t Gen McCaffrey's bona fides. What media are you referring?

Maybe that's where I'm finding the disconnect ... From your OP: “a real report about Iraq that has not been filtered by a biased news media and given by someone who knows what he is talking about”. Other than the part I noted about retention issues with E-6s, I think I’ve seen/heard everything GEN McCaffrey noted mentioned in one form or another on NPR & PBS over the last few years.

Quote

I thought it would be a fresh change to see something unfiltered.

And thank you again. Always appreciate input closer to primary data.

Quote

Or did you just read the subject line and decide to comment without reading the report, seeing who was interviewed, or how it even came about?

No, as poignantly demonstrated I read the full report.

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[HillerMyLife 0]

No problem and thanks for the reading list. I think you were being ironic in your mention of length for the sake of brevity though...

With regards to technology I think the key question that needs to be asked is why are these groups of people having such success with what would be considered out of date weapons? In other words in a game of rock,paper, scissors how the hell are RPG's and AK-47's beating close air support, superior communications, and powerful armor? Improper usage thats how.

To answer your first question, no I don't believe that we need a completely different set of tools to accomplish this mission. At worst we only need to add a few tools to the box to get this thing done. The difference between killing modern terrorists and killing a conventional enemy(say the Nazi's) is only that the terrorists are better at hiding from our technology. The defeat of both types of enemies involves putting bullets in them. One group has proven to have effective tactics against that and that is why they are still in existence. Rather than look to new technologies for success we need to take a good long hard look in the mirror and question what it is that is holding us back.

One piece of technology that I can think of offhand is ECM tecnology against IED's. No doubt this has saved lives but it hasn't come without its drawbacks, chiefly that it also interferes with our own communications systems. I've experienced this first hand. I've also had the unique opportunity to witness that these systems actually do block signals to hidden IED's, and that turning off ECM to communicate with command has its own way of 'revealing' these weapons. This is an example of technology that allows us to take the proverbial one step forward but also has the capability to take us 2 or more steps back just as quickly.

I never wanted new technologies to deal with my specific set of goals in my specific area. Technology was never as neccessary as the trust of my command, and the willingness to let the experienced guys take the lead in the training structure and occasionaly in the field. Yes we can blow shit up like no one else but just because you can doesn't mean you should. Its akin to using a bulldozer to build a sandcastle. Yeah you CAN do it that way, but there is probably a better way that costs less.

With relation to SSTR I think its only neccesary AFTER we have done enough collateral damage to where we have to do something to fix it. The garden example holds well here as well. Whats more expensive and time consuming: Plucking the weeds out ,or spraying poison on the entire garden and then having to give each of the different vegetables a different supplement to counter the poison? I'd rather do things right once and be done than have to try half a dozen different strategies and analyze which one works best. As usual the best method is prevention.

Finally I don't think that focusing our training efforts more on COIN will be to the detriment of our traditional fighting capabilities. In my limited experience we welcomed a straight up fight, not only because we had trained to do that as well, but also because it would have been something tangible in the war on terror instead of patrolling around for days, occasionally getting blown up, and even rarer still actually detaining/killing someone worth a damn.

Someday Never Comes

[nanook 1]

Quote

chiefly that it also interferes with our own communications systems.

No mean to go off the subject here . . .Just out of curiosity, do you remember which ECM equipment you were using? CVRJ, DUKE, Symphony, Red, Green, ect. ect.

_____________________________

"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln

[vortexring 0]

Guys, is this really the place to be talking about such subjects publically?

Screw the nut. Talk about it by PM if necessary.

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[leroydb 0]

Quote

...I was not, however, aware that E-6s were as critical a concern – or moreso as GEN McCaffrey seems to indicate.

VR/Marg

As an E6, I can reply to this... There are many that have been on 3-5, some even are on their 6-7th deployments. I know we signed up to fight for the country, but when push comes to shove, my family counts to. Some guys (and gals) haven't seen their babies grow up. The tears I have seen a grown, combat hardened soldier shed when their own flesh and blood doesn't know Daddy... So when it is time for them to reenlist... I do not think badly about them at all for not staying in. They have done their share, and no one can ever take that from them.

Not only is it a sacrifice for the Soldier, but the wife or husband left behind to take care of the kids, the house, the bills, the soccer games, baseball games... they are mommy and daddy... it is hard

I know this is common knowledge to some here, but others can not comprehend what its like.

So I don't know the answer to the question of, "How do we keep more E6's in the service," but I also think there isn't an easy answer either. Why are they critical you ask, because they are the ones on the ground, they are combat veterans, they have all the experiance. Experiance is hard to replace.

Le Roy
The Army isn't a job, it's a lifestyle.

Leroy


..I knew I was an unwanted baby when I saw my bath toys were a toaster and a radio...

[nanook 1]

Nothing is being compromised by what he had said or by what i have asked. But you are right. To be on the safe side, it's best to be cautious. However, PM's are definitely not the place for any classified communication. It's not secure enough.

_____________________________

"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln

[vortexring 0]

No shit Sherlock. . .

You might want to reconsider 'Nothing is being compromised'. I've nothing more to say on the matter. If you've any questions regarding this, anything you're not quite sure about, speak to your CoC.

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[Darius11 12]

Hundreds of thousands of people have been killed because of a war that was started on a reason that did not exist we were mislead and lied too.

Unless you have a time machine or Jesus on hand to resurrect the dead the Iraq war is a giant fuck up in all aspects.

All the other talk is BS you can't make a wrong right by closing your eyes, doesn't work that way.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[shropshire 0]

100% agree.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[DanG 1]

Quote

The difference between killing modern terrorists and killing a conventional enemy(say the Nazi's) is only that the terrorists are better at hiding from our technology. The defeat of both types of enemies involves putting bullets in them.

Putting a bullet in a terrorist takes one man out of a fight.

Winning the "hearts and minds" of a village takes a hundred potential terrorists out of the fight.

We can kill as many as we want, they'll keep building new ones. We need to destroy the factory, and that factory is made of poverty, ignorance, hopelessness, and fear.

- Dan G

[nerdgirl 0]

Thanks for the additional information. Appreciate it. Everything that you write makes sense regarding the response of E-6s.

/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

What is an E-6?

Military enlisted rank in the USA:

Staff Sergeant (SSG) Army
Petty Officer First Class (PO1) Navy
Technical Sergeant (TSgt) Air Force
Staff Sergeant (SSgt) Marine Corps


I had dinner with 2 O-6s and an 0-7 last night.

i banged an O-4 this morning.

In the spirit of ‘thread drift’ …

I was called “the red-haired hottie of Corridor 3” by an O-6 Tuesday morning.

Altho’ ... the guy who said that also told me the USN’s “MSC” stood for “Mentally & Socially Challenged” when I asked him about it a few years ago, so his judgement may be somewhat suspect .

(MSC is the Navy’s Medical Service Corps.)

/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

Quote

The difference between killing modern terrorists and killing a conventional enemy(say the Nazi's) is only that the terrorists are better at hiding from our technology. The defeat of both types of enemies involves putting bullets in them.

Putting a bullet in a terrorist takes one man out of a fight.

Winning the "hearts and minds" of a village takes a hundred potential terrorists out of the fight.

We can kill as many as we want, they'll keep building new ones. We need to destroy the factory, and that factory is made of poverty, ignorance, hopelessness, and fear.

Thanks Dan. Concisely put.

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[billvon 2,380]

>I was called “the red-haired hottie of Corridor 3” by an O-6 Tuesday morning.

Why does that sound like something out of a Terry Gilliam movie?

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

>I was called “the red-haired hottie of Corridor 3” by an O-6 Tuesday morning.

Why does that sound like something out of a Terry Gilliam movie?

Which one?
Brazil is near the top of my all time favorite films ... altho' I'm not sure I'd want to live it.

Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[HillerMyLife 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

The difference between killing modern terrorists and killing a conventional enemy(say the Nazi's) is only that the terrorists are better at hiding from our technology. The defeat of both types of enemies involves putting bullets in them.

Putting a bullet in a terrorist takes one man out of a fight.

Winning the "hearts and minds" of a village takes a hundred potential terrorists out of the fight.

We can kill as many as we want, they'll keep building new ones. We need to destroy the factory, and that factory is made of poverty, ignorance, hopelessness, and fear.

Thanks Dan. Concisely put.

VR/Marg

I have a feeling we will disagree on this subject so I'll keep this brief. Terrorist behaviors have no place in society, they are unacceptable. I understand the conditions you've described however, I don't think forcing our way of life is the solution either. If I(or anyone) is faced with someone who wants to harm them or those they love, "hearts and minds" is off the table. Only difficult decisions are left.

Someday Never Comes

[DanG 1]

Quote

I have a feeling we will disagree on this subject so I'll keep this brief. Terrorist behaviors have no place in society, they are unacceptable. I understand the conditions you've described however, I don't think forcing our way of life is the solution either. If I(or anyone) is faced with someone who wants to harm them or those they love, "hearts and minds" is off the table. Only difficult decisions are left.

I agree that terrorism is unacceptable. I just think that prevention is a better long term strategy than reaction.

- Dan G