Ramadi remains a focus of insurgent attacks and Coalition efforts to suppress them. Elections turnout during Saturday’s referendum on the constitution was light in Ramadi, with an estimated 2,000 votes cast of a city of over 400,000, and five U.S. and two Iraqi soldiers were killed by a roadside bomb on Election Day.
Operation Mountaineers was launched on October 4, and was a cordon and search operation designed to disrupt insurgent activity in the southern neighborhoods and secure a bridge used to transport enemy arms and fighters. On October 14, the day prior to the referendum, Coalition forces conducted raids near the city and killed twelve insurgents and captured twenty four. On October 16, Coalition forces conducted a series of air strikes in outlying towns, and insurgents attacked within the city.
The first airstrike occurred east of Ramadi, when an F-15 on patrol detected four vehicles at the site of the roadside bomb attack on Saturday. The terrorists were emplacing a new IED, and the F-15 struck, killing twenty.
The second series of airstrikes occurred north of Ramadi (in Albu Faraj) where insurgents attacks have been both frequent and deadly. A Huey and a Cobra helicopter paired on combat patrol discovered insurgents gathering at a safe house. The insurgents attack the helicopters with their rifles, and the helicopters returned fire, killing ten. Twenty minutes later, a pair of F/A-18s entered the fray, and attacked a group of insurgents, estimated at about forty in strength, loading weapons to move to a new location. A total of fifty insurgents are believed to have been killed in the strikes.
In the city of Ramadi, insurgents attacked Coalition forces guarding the Government Center. Coalition forces called in an airstrike then proceeded to engage the enemy with shoulder-fired weapons. One to three insurgents are believed to have been killed.
The insurgent’s massing in strength in the first two events displays a level of ignorance of the combat power they face from U.S. air assets. The lessons of the repeated targeting and slaughtering of terrorists along the Euphrates prior to recent operations along the Euphrates has either never reached them the insurgents in and around Ramadi, or are being ignored. If the lessons have not reached them, there is a communications problem. If the lessons are being ignored, the massing of troops under the certainty of deadly fire from above smacks of desperation.
The attacks outside of Ramadi are reminiscent of the operations that preceded the assault on Tal Afar, where Coalition forces secured the surrounding towns in an effort to strangle the insurgency’s lifelines to the city. The Coalition may be in the earlier stages of laying the groundwork for such an operation. The Iraqi Army will be instrumental in securing the city and its surroundings, and rooting out the local insurgents and foreign terrorists. The people of Ramadi would be wise to renounce the terrorists and insurgents lest they meet the same fate as Fallujah and Tal Afar.
57 Comments
Many of these terrorists were Iraqi citizens. That means that the US airstrikes killed Iraqi citizens. This has inflamed the pro-Saddam Baathist faction into declaring “to hell with the constitution.” Now it is up to the more rational elements of Iraqi society to decide what to do with the Baathists and other criminals who continue to kill their fellow citizens. Justice may be delayed, but it will not be gentle.
At this point I think it’s important to remember what Iraqi Defense Minister Saddoun al Dulaimi told the press after meeting with President Jalal Talabani in early August.
“Our forces will start from the Syrian border … till we reach Ramadi then to Fallujah,” he said. “We have taken precise measures on the ground and acquired the president’s approval to start the operation.”
I’m starting to come to the point of “Carpet Bombing” the Euphrates River..for effect.
Get the BUFF’s up….bring them in at 1,000 feet above the Euphrates..bomb right down the center of the river…relentlessly…for weeks.
Then head to Sammara…and do the same thing with the Tigris.
The IED game needs to stop. An IED goes off in Ramadi…a months worth of carpet bombing.
Many of these terrorists were Iraqi citizens. That means that the US airstrikes killed Iraqi citizens.
———————————————
Duh, you can’t use airpower in cities like Ramadi without killing civilians as the insurgents are not only around large numbers of civilans they are often working together.
I wouldn’t be suprised Bill if Zarqawi planned this just to get us to kill civilians {deleted by site admin for foul language}.
Remember he tried to inflame Sunnis by trying to chemically bomb Tal Afar when US troops attacked there and then to blame the US, except we stopped it before it happened.
Zarqawi is responsible for maybe 20% of all attacks in Iraq.
The suicide bombings..beheadings..that sort of thing is Zarqawi.
Mortar’s…IED’s..Targeted Assasinations. Pro Saddam Bathists are doing most of that.
The US applied significant pressure to water down the language of the constitution regarding former Bathist’s. Apparently some of them didn’t get the memo.
2 1/2 years to get the message that the US doesn’t wish them ill if they will just stop blowing people up is enough.
Stop the foul language or I will shut down the comments section.
How many times must I ask you all to quit this? What is so difficult about following my repeated requests?
I am extremely angry at having to waste my time cleaning up the comments section.
Justin Capone,
You have been banned for one day. I’ll reset your permissions tomorrow when I get around to it.
My apologies for singling you out, but I have to start somewhere.
I find very interesting the comment section.
I think that closing it is not the right thing to do. But you can/must ban people from posting as they don’t respect your rules.
Micro,
I couldn’t agree more, and have no desire to shut the comments down. But if I have to waste as much time as I have asking people not to do this and modifying comments to remove the filth, then I will strongly consider it. I’ve let a lot slip by because I just haven’t had the chance to do it.
Soldier’s Dad,
The Baathists we are fighting aren’t going to settle for anything less then Sunni minority rule back in Iraq unless they suffer enough that they finally figure out that there is no other option left.
Bing West said it well.
“There will be no political epiphany,” Bing West, a former Marine and former assistant secretary of defense, said last week. “The vote on the constitution will not change the fundamental feelings” roiling Iraq, added West, author of eight books on insurgency and the war in Iraq.
“We are pinning too much hope on politics to end this war,” he said. “It won’t. Brute force will end this war.”
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/10/11/MNGEGF6L7T1.DTL
James,
I agree…nothing short of B-52’s flying low and slow up the Euprates and Tigris will end this war. The N Vietnamese didn’t even consider sitting at the negotiating table until we started carpet bombing N Vietnam. Maybe the Bathists are a little brighter. But not much.
Saddam’s pals only understand pure unrelenting force.
I’m with Bing. Baathists are best influenced when they are dead. Many, many of these guys know with certainty that peace will be their end. They have crimes against humanity on their hands, and they are known faces.
Carpet bombing is a zero.
The solution is to be patient enough to build up the New Iraqi Army and set it loose amoung the evil. Such a course of action will permit the IA to earn societal recognition.
Using American troops is strictly a stop gap. Every player knows that at some point America must leave.
The war is won when it is being fought almost entirely by the New Iraqi Army and the combat involvement of the Americans is no longer deemed relevant by anyone.
That’s the backbreaker.
The use of oversized formations is an indication that the opposition does not have enough unit leaders to go around. It also is in tune with Russian military dogma of centralized control. Seeing such formations is a strong sign that you are fighting a Baathist led crew. Figure on it being tribal.
The possibility of innocent civilians being involved is quite low since the vast bulk of the population is actively participating with the the evil warriors.
These fights will strongly resemble the Indian wars on the American plains. Expect that essentially all Saddam era warriors will have to be killed plus their closer male kin.
This dynamic is exactly why all prior arab tribal conflict has been so staggeringly bloody. Remember the Shia rebellion, etc.
Why not give the Iraqi Air Force (after the December elections) B-52s to deal with the problem?
We have been extremely hesistant to give the Iraqi airforce anything but a few cargo planes.
The international community would never allow us to hear the end of it if we did those kind of bombings. But, what is the international community going to say to the legitimely elected Iraqi government using heavy bombers?
There isn’t the domestic support in the US for America to do those kind of bombings, but if the Iraqi government did it Americans wouldn’t mind.
James,
Donating a few B-52’s to the Iraqi AirForce is a excellent idea!!!
Maybe we could get them to do some training runs over Tehran and Damascus. (The shortage of quality bombing ranges in Iraq is an absolute scandal, Damascus has a much better targeting profile)
Soldier Dad
My respect for you grows with every post you make. Thanks for everything you add to these threads. Without contradicting what you say about force being the ultimate arbiter, I want to add that every political victory increases 1) Iraqi public’s will to persevere (the act of voting and having that matter in practical terms is a powerful tonic for the ego and a builder of individual sel-respect in a population that has been mercilessly repressed for decades, if not centuries); 2) the will to join and strenghten the Iraq army and security forces (it is always easier to fight and die for something–like a constitution, like a national identity, like an ordered society that offers hope to its people–than to fight and die for nothing–ask any Soldier’s Dad); 3)strengthens the president’s hand and sends the terrorists a message about American perserverence; 4) has a psyops value that must negatively effect the enemy’s will to fight and ability to recruit.
In other words, I think the political victories are at least as important, long-term, as the military victories that are making them possible.
B-52s?
Not a good Idea… with tankers you have long range bombing. F-15 A/B sure. C-130 gunships?
Okay, but those should be enough.
James,
“There isn’t the domestic support in the US for America to do those kind of bombings”
To quote Patton, “America loves a winner”
Bush’s numbers are falling because we are in the middle of a war, and we are doing all this “touchy feely stuff”.
No one in America cares what the French think(except John Kerry and Ted Kennedy).
The political and military tools are both required for victory. I am a firm believe that AQI, their Islamist allies and the Baathists will need to be crushed militarily, as Mr. West states, but it must be done while devoting efforts to the political progress as well. Mr. West is quite short-sighted in my opinion, as political progress feeds the creation of democratic insititutions and an effective Iraqi Army that is well suited to root out the terrorists and Baathists in their midst.
Soldier’s Dad,
Sorry, but if the US were doing the bombings the US public and the international community would scream. And, you would have all the TV talking heads screaming.
Not, that I would mind that, but the political support in the US isn’t there to do something like that. Most Americans don’t even know who we are fighting in Iraq and see this as a war of choice to make life better for the Iraqi people. And, using mass bombings would make it easy for the left to bring up the “killing them to safe them arguement”.
However, if the Iraqi government did it the US public, the international community, and the media wouldn’t be at all happy about it, but they wouldn’t be able to say much about it.
Has there been a major operation in Ramadi yet? I don’t recall every seeing one.
The problem is that the military solution has not done much over the past 2.5 years. It seems that when Baathists are killed, they are replaced with unemployed Sunni young men who are very easy to manipulate. My guess is that many insurgents are Iraqis that are fighting for a salary. That may be why the insurgents are so easy to replace. There may also be nationalistic Sunnis fighting against what they see is American and Iranian domination of their country, with or without pay. Economics may be the key more than politics or a military solution. More jobs in the Sunni triangle will probably help greatly. But it’s hard to get business going in the Sunni triangle when there is no security.
The US will not give the New Iraqi Army bombers or gunships.
Simply put, the US can’t trust the Iraqi Army with even armored vehicles or heavy weapons: there are too many infiltrators and the soldiers who are not ‘infiltrators’ are members of the Badr Brigades, SCIRI, and al-Dawa [all fundamentalist extremist Islamists].
Personnally, I think that it would have been easier to transform the secular, modernist, Ba’ath party into a series of democratic sub-parties [and restrict the religious parties ala Turkey]. What we currently have in Iraq is an ersatz-government controlled primarily by pro-Iranian, puritanical, fundamentalist, extremist Islamists who are simply playing along with the “vote” and “constitution” thingy to placate the US Military while they work on their ultimate goal of establishing an Islamic Republic.
================
Major General Bob Scales (Ret) on Fox News Channel (FNC)’s Brit Hume (October 11, 2005) just back from Iraq gave a positive progress report with respect to Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) readiness. He stated categorically that the main stream media are NOT reporting successful military actions by coalition and ISF units. He was particularly impressed with the acumen of Iraqi commanders and their units – the fact that they can discern the bad guys from the good, foreigners from friendly – with respect to body language, speech, etc. He gave a glowing account that several ISF battalions are autonomous and some 80 with US advisors are taking the fight to the enemy, holding ground gained and depriving al Qaeda terrorists sanctuaries. The upshot is that the US and coalition forces must remain in Iraq until ISF, now at approximately 200,000 strength, grow to 300,000 and occupy all 18 provinces destroying the al Qaeda in the process. Scales predicts we will win the Global War on Terror, Iraq being the epicenter, if we remain focused and stay the course, not withstanding the liberal Main Stream Media’s anti-Bush bias. For accurate info, go to talk radio, conservative journals and the Internet.
James,
16 out of 18 Iraqi provinces are “With the Porgram”. Settle their differences thru negotiation, dialog, all else fails..put it to a vote of the people.
Democracy, is instituionalized revolution. Any one..who wants to change their government..should be able to. By rallying the support of the people. If there votes fall short, than they need to work harder to rally the people.
The US administration, intervened forcefully in the constitutional process in Iraq(GWB personally intervened), to water down the wording on the treatment of ex bathists.
What the US got for that, is 6 dead soldiers on election day.
If the head of the most powerful country in the history of the world, personnaly intervenes, and councils peace and reconciliation, and one rejects/betrays that good faith effort. Then the decision is made.
Up until about a year ago, I was all for just turning most of Iraq, Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia into an huge active bombing and missle test range.
And for good measure, Using Egypt and Jordan for training for our SO and Recon forces. Maybe even training for our defunct CIA “wet” people.
But I have mellowed out (yep, without any pot or other drugs, well you can’t count my V8 and Vodka pickmeups in the morning).
Now I think I have evolved to where I think that we should just let the “three states” in Iraq kill off each others enemies. Now you might know that means that they might have to kill off a few of each other and even themselves {tribal alliances and enemies change month to month in the Middle East), and also make a few trips into Syria and Iran to discourage them a little.
Well, they are going to need some help in all those areas. That is what our country does best. Our SO and Air Force (don’t forget the Navy’s missiles) could make sure that they weed out and discourage those that want to take over the process (whomever they are.)
We are kinda doing that now, but on a very small scale. Most people believe that there is an “Iraqi Army”. Those that are there will tell you that is bull. There are “several different” Iraqi armies and their loyalty is not just to Iraq.
Anyway, I forgot my point, just remember that the U.S. is fast losing control over Iraq and that short of taking off the handcuffs and blinders that our military is operating with now, there is not much we can do, that we are not already doing.
And like pointed out by others, whatever we do will be condemed by the everyone and whatever we don’t do will also be wrong.
Everyone knows that Bush’s America can’t do anything right and that everything that goes wrong in the world is his [our] fault.
But everyone is forgetting that there are millions of Islamic followers that not only hate us but really, really want to kill us and they are not all in Iraq or the Middle East.
What a mess.
Papa Ray
West Texas
USA
The mainstream media is reporting that “witnesses” say that at least 39 of those killed in the airstrikes outside of Raamadi were “innocent civilians”.
I’m not sure it’s appropriate to modify the word “civilians” with the adjective “innocent” in this case. Are people who dance on American graves in order to provide photo opportunities or the Baathists, al Qaida, and al Jazeera “innocent civilians” or culpable partisians?
Moreover, just who are these “witnesses?” What are their bona fides? Are they detached observers or interested parties? Isn’t citing “witnesses” no different than using unnamed sources?
Paul
It is also true that the MSM sources on the ground are their nameless, usually Arab, “stringers”–who is going to vouch for them? No one. I don’t believe a word I read from the Associated de(Press)ed or any of the others, including Fox, until I see it confirmed by US military sources (usually at 4th Rail).
Paul Danish,
There is no such thing as an “Innocenet” west of Falujah
It would take at least 5 years to train New Iraqi pilots to fly heavy bombers. That is a Non-Starter.
Rahmadi will be cleaned up before the December 15th elections; probably by the New Iraqi Army without significant American ground troops.
This would create a new power equation. From that point forward, all urban fighting would shift to the Iraqis. The Americans would then cover the open battle space.
The New Iraqi Army troop strength is growing linearly. Its combat power is growing exponentially.
(Stalingrad was close — Kursk was a crusher.)
AQI is decaying exponentially. The battle will end like the Maylay Emergency and the American Frontier Wars — with a whimper.
The next election is quite likely to trim back the Islamist parties. The hefty percentage of female legislators required by the new constitution is going to choke back Islamism. That and their falling poll numbers and the nature of coalition politics should make for a stand-off.
Iran is so radically aggressive that military intervention is practically a certainty. Bush & Co. are preparing the strategic battle space now. That is why India walked away from a huge natural gas deal, and Russia is being solicited.
Russia is so dependent on cash from Iran that Putin continues to deal with Iran. But that could change at a stroke once the time is ripe. Russia could well be a strategic double agent vs Iran. They have to have figured that KSA and Iran are the big supporters of the Chechnya Islamists. Being Iran’s friend today and back-stabber tomorrow would be a very smart play for Moscow.
People, people, people…
1. The “military solution” comes from the Iraqi uniformed services providing security, and, if it happens, extralegal executions of thugs.
2. “Civilian” does NOT equal “non-combatant”. Civilian combatants are fair game for receiving violence.
3. Passive acquiescence or non-military logistical support does NOT make one a combatant. If it did, then almost every US citizen would be a combatant.
4. The Sunnis will NOT give up their fantasy of domination of Shia and Kurds. The best we can hope for is to get them involved in a democratic political process. The Sunnis will continue to try to leverage help from Sunnis outside Iraq to take over inside Iraq. The other Iraqis must develop strong enough institutions to resist this.
5. Demonstrations of military ineffective military power are a sign of weakness, not strength. ‘Tis far more effective to the fence-sitters to capture a thug leader while he sleeps, then to drop tons of bombs into the Tigris and Euphrates.
6. This war is a battle of intellects and will. What I encounter in a lot of these comments is a decided lack of the former, and therefore a counterproductive example of the latter.
— MG
Such negativity going on here!. Soldiers Dad, is your son there? Are you so full of apprehension that this war for civilization has you loosing all hope?
This course of war is the good course for freedom. We are winning the hearts and minds of more and more Iraqi’s, those who’s will can be turned to peace. Some others will have to die for the cause of their own love of hate. Don’t join their lot.
RE: “(don’t forget the Navy’s missiles)”
Give credit where credit is due: don’t forget the Navy pilots flying off the aircraft carriers stationed in theater, the sailors doing medic duty with the Marines, and the Navy personnel on those river boats doing dangerous patrol duty.
RE: “The hefty percentage of female legislators required by the new constitution is going to choke back Islamism.”
That was tried the last election where every third person on the party list was required to be a woman. The brain-dead civilian strategists who came up with this plan assumed that because the Islamists oppress women that they wouldn’t be able to fill those seats. Wrong. There are PLENTY of fundamentalist, deeply-religious, Moslem women who will be happy to sit obediently in every third seat waiting for instructions.
RE: “There are “several different” Iraqi armies and their loyalty is not just to Iraq.”
Absolutely correct. In my book, turning Iraq over to SCIRI [Supreme Council of Islamic Revolution in Iraq] and al-DAWA [call to Islam] would be a disaster. An even bigger disaster would be giving them a well-trained, well-equipt army that will replace their militias. Unfortunately, it looks like that’s where we are heading.
================
Sgt. York,
Do you really believe we couldn’t build a airbase in the Kurdish north and get a few Kurds that are totally vetted to not be insurgents to fly these things with a US advisor aboard?
I think that could be done very easily.
I don’t think the U.S. will leave Iraq in my lifetime (say 50+ years) as Iraq is starting on the very low totem of democracy and it will take several generations to build up democratic institutions. I predict that there will be a “token force” of diplomats and troops (20,000-30,000) not just to train Iraqi troops, but to promote a alternative police/military/government culture to ensure that Iraq doesn’t break down into genocidial behavior as Yugoslavia did.
Lornezo,
“is your son there?”
No, my daughter did her year, in the Sunnia triangle. Nothing like beutigul downtown Sammarra to bring one to their senses.
The reality is, that Saddam knew he would lose a direct confrontation.
There is no shortage of “Friends of Saddam” who will gladly kill an American Soldier for $5 dollars.
My answer is clear.
Kill 5,000 friends of Saddam for every 5 American Soldiers killed.
We have been too nice….
Our president has reached out to former supporters of Saddam.
They have answered clearly…they will kill us until we are no more.
Carpet bomb them.
Let them have a rethink.
Everyone is so scared of the Shia. Iran has been our enemy at in a low level war since the iranian revolution 80’s. But before that Iran Shia used to be rather western and a strong ally of the west like Turkey or todays Kurds. Shia Iran is currentley run by the Mullahs our enemies but that doesnt ban all Shia to be our enemies. The Shia in Iraq seem to be pretty level and good potential allies of the west short the radicals like Sadr. Sistani so far has been more of a Farwell strong morals religious even throwing his 2cents from time to time but not pushing for a Mullah Theocracy like Iran currentley is burdened with. Religion and living by a religious code of laws is not bad just when those people decide to forcibly put such on all others around them and kill or maim all who disagree. The Iraqi constitution based on Islam is not bad as long as religious freedom is also protected as a right.
And to the above I agree Bush has been a little too “sensitive” in the execution of this war and no were near the keeping the people rallied that is nessecary. However random carpet bombing of the population is only a option if you are ready to kill a couple of billion people. If we turn this into a religious war with all muslims we will have to do alot of killing that I dont think this nation or any of the above got the stomach to follow threw. With that in mind we know that the radicals are a small percentage of the Muslims, and just like we control our radicals we need to get the majority to control thier minorities of radicals. Iraq is just that we went to the heart of the muslim world (rather western section with a current leader no body liked) and we have and are working to set up a muslim gov that is democratic that will be the ally we dont have in the muslim world. Iraq is were the majority is learning what their minority is all about they are radicals and in Iraq the majority is getting closer and closer to controling that minority. When this is accomplished the example will be set we at the same time will have finally broken the “paper tiger” image that Vietnam, then multiple times thierafter showed. We dont need them to love us just respect us. But at the same time we dont want them all to hate us either.
Sgt. York: Personnally, I think that it would have been easier to transform the secular, modernist, Ba’ath party into a series of democratic sub-parties [and restrict the religious parties ala Turkey].
The Baath party is a national socialist and fascist party that has embraced Islamism. Even though their roots are secular, they have dropped their objection to Islamist government. I would not call them modernist, except in their desire to use modern weapons and modern methods of mass control. The Turkish fascist parties, such as the Grey Wolves, had absolutely no adherence to democratic principles. The Turkish solution that you propose will not work because of the Islamicization of the Baath, and because there is no “enlightened” or patriotic military tradition in Iraq.
There is nothing in the Iraqi equation that I can see to transform the Baath, already a minority in Iraq, to “a series of democratic sub-parties”.
The US fight against Al-Qaeda and the Sunni insurgents is as much a fight against fascism as it is a fight to establish democracy.
Not all Shiites are puritanical Islamists beholden to Iran. The talk is that the December elections will restrict the levers of power available to these religious Shiite parties. It is projected that with the participation of the Sunnis, the Shiite moderate Islamist (SCIRI, Dawa) will lose the government.
James: Yes, that’s do-able but the Kurds are a small minority and the Kurdish militias have their own agenda [an independant Kurdistan in control of the northern oil wells].
but the Kurds are a small minority and the Kurdish militias have their own agenda [an independant Kurdistan in control of the northern oil wells].
———————————————-
If we don’t bet on a unified federal Iraq we might as well leave. The Pentagon’s current view seem to be that we don’t know what will happen a few years down the road so it is best not to give them a real airforce. My view is that if we don’t bet on a federal and unified state emerging there we might as well leave.
If we are willing to put our soldiers lives on the line on a bet for Iraqs future then we should be willing to take the leap of being willing to give them better equipment then having them buy 60s and 70s Soviet material from former Soviet Republics.
The focus of our ire is soon to view upon Saddam the tyrant. He will be arguing that he was illegally unjustly deposed by George W. Bush while at the same time this war may be called into question by special prosecutor Fitzgerald via the Valerie Plame blame game.
Some terrorists including some Saddam loyalists would desire to spend their life to kill freedom for all. Let us pray that our forward progress of dissolving this terror leader doesn’t become a political punt by our own liberal anti-war bend. Our soldiers deserve our clear support for this fight for freedom for a civilized future. The clear majority of Iraq does!
“Iran is so radically aggressive that military intervention is practically a certainty”.
Blert,
Not necessarily. I agree with your take on the Mullahs, but Free elections in Iraq are Iran’s biggest nightmare. The nightmare is coming True! Free elections MAY give the Iranian people good ideas! Vast numbers hate the Mullahs and the Mullahs know that. It scares the “……………..” out of the Mullahs. Therefore, look for a lot of future problems from the Iranian agent and puppet group known as “Muqtada and the Demons”.
#34 Soldier’s Dad – This is not a beauty contest where we are trying to win world hearts and minds with our moral superiority and good examples. Where we have the option to say – so what if we lose the beauty contest this time.
We do not have such an option. We will be defeating ourselves and our principles and becoming one of them, if we start acting like them (the Islamists and Baathists).
We do not have such an option to carpet bomb. However, psyops bombing of the Euphrates waters to cow the Baathists (worshippers of guns and death squads) may have a positive effect.
Dresden and Hiroshima did cow the fascists and brought an end to war. I wonder if a method can be found that does not incur innocent civilian casualties, but would shatter the Baathist’s morale.
leaddog2
I believe that the Iranians are already wise to the virtues of democracy and do not need a proximate example.
From what I read the mullahs have got the key control positions occupied directly by the Islamic Republican Guard Corps. In Nazi terms that’s like putting SS generals in charge. In Stalinist terms think KGB.
The mullahs have essentially shut down all major publications within the last three weeks. The PRESS is on trial. Many publishers do not figure to re-open under the new regulations.
The whole of the nation is in the sway of the radicals. Expecting them to free themselves at this time is much in the manner of expecting the Russians to throw off Stalin — or the Iraqis to throw off Saddam. Not a chance. Street demonstrations can get the British to leave a colony — but stand no chance against bloody minded tyrants.
I think what Iran is got coming is long term aireal assualt. The US could and looks like may have to make air strikes on Iranian sites while during that a decapitation move of the Mullahs and the current Revolution hardcore gov and thier key figures in military and other locations positions would go along way. After such a no fly zone across Iran and the proper support to the right places to get things moving. I agree the Iranian people or pretty much any people today cant throw of a tyranic leadership wihtout outside support. Even the our revolution needed French weapons and support. Maybe if possible the Iranian student movement could make some widespread protest then we could do the above to come to thier rescue although I doubt that possible and more likley the latter will follow our move. Either way a move into Iran will be a long air campain GW1 type with a land invasion as last result if the poeple dont rise up or if they look to be loosing.
I do agree that if nothing else air strikes are going to be nessecary, the current hardcore Iranian leadership is way to unstable and believing in thier own hype to allow to have nukes. It would just make our options unacceptable. If nothing else they support terrorist groups now with nuclear security blanket they would feel free to openly support terrorist actions and even the worst groups and acts. What would we do if nuclear Iran openly supported a terrorist attack across the US killing a couple of thousand people? Air strikes? Do we try to invade what if they nuke our rally point even worse what nation would let us rally with the threat of thier capitol being obliterated? Special Ops what are we going to fight terrorism with terrorism? Nuke them? Blockade them what if they retaliate by nuking our carrier battle group?(a ballistic tipped nuke could do some serious damage to a carrier) What if they dont even do the above they just threaten cough ask thier fellow muslim bretheren to punish the big satan for support of the little satan? What if that terrorist attack is against Isreal who really things we will be able to tell them to not retaliate against a massive daily missle strike from Hezbollah or worse? The Irania
I think what Iran is got coming is long term aireal assualt. The US could and looks like may have to make air strikes on Iranian sites while during that a decapitation move of the Mullahs and the current Revolution hardcore gov and thier key figures in military and other locations positions would go along way. After such a no fly zone across Iran and the proper support to the right places to get things moving. I agree the Iranian people or pretty much any people today cant throw of a tyranic leadership wihtout outside support. Even the our revolution needed French weapons and support. Maybe if possible the Iranian student movement could make some widespread protest then we could do the above to come to thier rescue although I doubt that possible and more likley the latter will follow our move. Either way a move into Iran will be a long air campain GW1 type with a land invasion as last result if the poeple dont rise up or if they look to be loosing.
I do agree that if nothing else air strikes are going to be nessecary, the current hardcore Iranian leadership is way to unstable and believing in thier own hype to allow to have nukes. It would just make our options unacceptable. If nothing else they support terrorist groups now with nuclear security blanket they would feel free to openly support terrorist actions and even the worst groups and acts. What would we do if nuclear Iran openly supported a terrorist attack across the US killing a couple of thousand people? Air strikes? Do we try to invade what if they nuke our rally point even worse what nation would let us rally with the threat of thier capitol being obliterated? Special Ops what are we going to fight terrorism with terrorism? Nuke them? Blockade them what if they retaliate by nuking our carrier battle group?(a ballistic tipped nuke could do some serious damage to a carrier) What if they dont even do the above they just threaten cough ask thier fellow muslim bretheren to punish the big satan for support of the little satan? What if that terrorist attack is against Isreal who really things we will be able to tell them to not retaliate against a massive daily missle strike from Hezbollah or worse?
In my opinion the key is convincing moderate Sunnis that the campaign of terror is not in their best interest and in fact, their lives will continue to be filled with violence, poverty and despair so long as the insurgency continues.
Most of us can agree on how you deal with the hardline deadenders that cannot be reasoned with. You kill them, period. The challenge and the key to succeeding in Iraq is bringing the moderate Sunnis on board. That is accomplished through a variety of tactics, from encouraging political participation on the soft end of the spectrum, to delivering military power on the hard end.
When the German people started seeing their cities reduced to rubble, they began to get the picture. When the Japanese saw two cities evaporated, they began to get the picture. When the southerners felt the sting near the end of the Civil war, they began to get the picture.
I guess my point here is that the civilian populations that remain ambivelant or support the terrorist campaign must be made to feel the reprocussions for those choices. Things like curfews, controlled checkpoints, and other intrusive methods that disrupt their normal lives will lead some to the conclusion that the campaign of terror is not in theirs, or their families best interest. I’m not advocating killing civilians, but there is a thin line between the insurgent who goes out and plants an IED and the guy that sits and home supporting and advocating his actions.
The United States could turn the entire Euphrates valley into a moon-like landscape if that were the choice, but it is not. So instead I believe coalition forces should be doing everything they can, short of killing civilians, to make life for those who support (but don’t participate) this insurgency absolutely miserable.
They already are miserable….
One gambit that ought to get more consideration is curtailing electric power to the bare minimum to those areas infested with Islamists and Baathists.
Further, full service hospitals in such areas ought to be trimmed back to emergency care. Advanced procedures ought to be performed in Bagdad. It’s close, anyway.
All government improvements ought to be curtailed.
Transit to and fro ought to be restricted, monitored.
Here is my 2cents.
Iraq will become what it will become. It will evolve and change just like other courntries have when they have a new government.
Iran is going to continue as it is doing, stalling while it makes its nukes for their new Russian Missiles.
Syria is going to continue interfering with everybody but Iran and building up their missile defences and offences.
Jordon is going to continue to contribute terrorists but the government is going to deny and acclaim support for the west.
Saudi Arabia will continue to contribute terrorists and spread hatred of the Americans and British.
Turkey will continue to try and fool the EU so that they can spread Islam even more into [e]urope.
The spread of Islam will continue in Africa, Russia and the old soviet union countries. It will continue to spread in Indonesia and other countries including the United States.
What the United States can’t do now.
Invade anyone. We just don’t have the troops, equipment and the rest, now or in the next few years.
Use any kind of nukes unless they are used on us first either in Iraq or the U.S. If we are nuked then we can depend on a huge enlistment and if needed a draft. A chemical or bio attack will have the same results.
Leave Iraq completely, we will have to have thousands of troops there indefinately.
Bomb Iran. That would cause the Iranian people including the kids to turn against us. Persians and Arabs are funny that way. Islam is not funny to them, its a way of life and they know they are on the side of Allah.
Convince Israel to bomb Iran by themselves. They have their hands full as it is. They won’t go it alone.
Convince europe or many other countries to make it hard on Iran, they need the oil and natural gas that Iran has and the weapons sales and don’t forget we don’t have many friends anymore.
Our next shooting war may be to the south of us. It is looking worse every year. Pick your country.
The shoe has got to drop before we will get support for anymore offensive actions.
Papa Ray
West Texas
USA
In this conversation, most of the commenters have forgotten that we are fighting a counter-insurgency in al-Anbar, along with our Iraqi allies. This is the time to heed the lessons of Sun Tzu, Mao, and all of the others who have taught about guerilla warfare.
Guerillas succeed because they have the backing or acquiescence of much of the local population, and those who would oppose them are terrified, killed, or cleansed.
This is why provoking indiscriminate use of force by their Regular opponents is a key tenet of irregular warfare. Facilitating friends, neighbors, or family members getting killed or injured by the Regulars’ forces is a good way to get the uncommitted to sympathize with the insurgency. American dumb bombs are thus AQI and the Baathists’ best friends. Al Jazeera reports depicting US attacks on wedding parties etc are almost as good. As long as the report makes it on air, and Iraqis are alienated, it hardly matters what really happened.
Better intelligence. More and more trustworthy interpreters. Restraint. Careful targeting. GPS guided munitions. Police who don’t run away. Iraqi army units, capable and stationed in the area. Denying easy and cheap propaganda to Al Jazeera. Glimmers in the minds of farmers, housewives, sheiks, plumbers, and students that we are the Strong Horse. That cell phone tips about insurgent safe houses get acted on, with neighboring houses undamaged.
Patience, not B-52s, will win this war.
One difference a Baathist has from the average Islamist deadender is that he is amenable to being bought off. There is nothing that makes the heart of an entitler warmer than a wad of cash. The US should publish flyers listing big rewards for turning in terrorists, their leaders, guns, munitions, IEDs, and weapon caches.
The horrific cost of a successful IED is beyond calculation. NCOs should be given a fat wallet of Dinars to liberally dispense to people who inform on others, or identify the location of a working IED. Since informers do this at a personal risk, the dispensation should be fast and hassle-free.
I would guess $20 – $100 for guns, grenades, mortars, and shells. $200 for IEDs and $500 for planted IEDs. $1000 to $20000 for weapon caches depending on size. $1000 to $20000 for terrroists. More if the terrorist is foreign or if there is evidence to convict the guy, or if the informer testifies.
Then if necessary, destroy electric power substations, telecomunication, telephone, and cellular hubs and nodes, and restrict gasoline and diesel delivery to the Euphrates area (but allow cooking and heating oil delivery). Ban all private automobiles because of VBIEDs.
To Mixed Humor –
Over more decades than I wish to admit to just now, I have read accounts by the contemporary folk in Germany and Japan during WWII. I did not find any evidence that Dreseden or the nukes cowed those peoples. Indeed, the Germans increased their war production directly in the face of day and night bombings of theri cities (RAF by night, USA by day). If anything, Dresden suggested that they better never surrender and filled them with the resolve to continue the struggle. The damage inflicted by the two nukes was far less than the firestorms created in Tokyo (and perahps other places). Hirohito used the newness of the nukes as an unknown horror weapon that could not be defended against to sweep aside the military determined to fight on and his own people who were, by an large, ready and determined to fight to the self-genocidal death for what they considered their honor.
Atrocities do not have much of a history in deterence. They seem, instead, to inspire the victims and all that identify themselves with those victims to revenge in the long term. Tit-for-tat atrocities is a losing strategy, and trying to out-atrocity another must surely be even worse.
Just like the computer at the end of the movie “War Games,” the only way to win is not to play the game.
#36 hamidreza
I am glad to see you pointed out that the Baathists have adopted Islamist politics. This fact is ignored by the MSM ie: “Al Qaeda would never work with Saddam because he was a secularist”. Saddam was never a true ideological Baathist to begin with & he overtly adopted the Islamist banner in 1998 when he wrote “Aluha Akbar” on the Iraqi flag. Coincidentally, this was the same year Saddam & A-Q started getting together.
Carpet bombing is a stupid idea. It would kill thousands of civilians, including those who are now helping the Coalition. The current strategy is working pretty good, the tempo is continuing to pick up and the terrorists’ territory is continuing to shrink.
Next step is to drive home to Syria they must stop support for the terrorists. Regime change is a real possibility, as there are signs of an internal factional struggle already. A few cross-border raids by the US might help to get that ball rolling. The strategy is to take care of Syria first, thereby further isolating the Iranians before turning attention to Tehran.
Then comes Iran. IMO, no chance of a full scale US invasion, but they are likely to use the airforce to attack regime power centers, nuclear development sites and the Revolutionery Guards. Support for Iranian opposition groups is already flowing in. As an outside possibility, the US might support an invasion of the southwestern Arab province of Kuzestan, where most of their oil production is located.
Hamidreza, are you Iranian? What is your take on the mood inside Iran toward US action against the regime? Which forms of action would be acceptable to the Iranian people and which would be objectionable?
The communication problem that Bill speaks of lies in a lack of Ouija Boards to communicate with the dead. Apparently no one in the terrorist chain of command remembered how disastrous the last attack was most likely because they are all dead. This speaks to a mind boggling level of attrition at the leadership and cadre levels.
more here
Iraq needs an oil trust that distibutes checks monthly to each citizen. Let me guess that such a program would increase support for the government and also put money into people’s pockets and help the economy.
The best part would be that you could DENY checks to areas where insurgents threaten to disrupt their distribution, i.e. if your area has insurgent activity this month, you won’t get your checks…creating an incentive to turn in insurgents, convince your nephews to stop sniping, etc. in order to get your monthly check.
politics, economics, and militray need to work together.
I also agree with Papa Ray.
Forget any fantasies of B-52’s or invasions of Iran. There are no silver bullets.
There might be a slight chance for an invasion of Syria…but in that case, I’d suggest an armored raid into Damascus followed by a withdrawl and let their civil war begin. Even then, the results could be like when Israel did this in Lebanon – lots of blowback and the devil you know being replaced by an even worse devil.
So, ixnay on that one, too.
#53 Aaron – can’t agree any more.
Monthly oil checks will boost the economy and also remove the sting of unemployment and destitution.
But most of all, it will make the Sunnis dependent on the state and pacify those who see no hope but to resist the authorities. The flow of funds can be cut off to restive areas in order to punish the insurgency. Raise the price of gasoline to market prices and instead give out vouchers or cash to make up for the difference, and in order to show these people that cheap oil for them is a state credit and not an entitlement. Cut off fuel credit to insurgent areas. Overtime replace fuel credit with cash in order to make the allocation of resources more efficient.
It is amazing why such positive “carrot” programs have not been implemented by the US or by the Iraqi government.
U.S. Forces kill Zarqawi lieutenant
During last Saturday’s constitutional referendum in Iraq, U.S. forces engaged terrorists in Ramadi’s problematic southern neighborhoods for several hours. The following day, fighting errupted again. A CENTCOM press release today indicates that during t…
Bill and all,
Zarkawi’s PAO, Ellen Knickmeyer of the Post, has issued his press release on the subject:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/17/AR2005101700808.html
…acccompanied by photographs by Ba’athist insurgent “made guy” Bilal Hussein.
While the story runs over Ellen’s byline, she’s in the IZ… so the question is who actually “reported” it.
As Zawahiri says, the battle is more than 50% in the media, and Ellen long ago picked her side — whichever side Bush isn’t on, even if she has to wear an abaya….