IRAQI WAR

Mikey · #1 03-23-2003, 06:07 AM

Right now it's 4:59am Eastern Standard Time on March 23rd, and I have been following coverage on the war continuously since it began.

I'm a little baffled why we haven't met any real resistance lately and why it seems like we are basically walking through Iraq.

Iraq still hasn't surrendered and it seems like they don't want to negotiate with US into a surrender. Do you think they'll put up a fight or do you think we'll sweep right through them like we have been doing?

What do you think?

Glenn · #2 03-23-2003, 06:21 AM

It is 508 and I too am watching from New Jersey. I think that the Iraqi army knew they had no chance if they spread out their forces and/or fought in the open desert. It would be logical for them to put all of their well-armed and well-trained troops around Baghdad since we don't win if we don't take it. This explains the lack or real resistance so far. It could get messy when we hit Baghdad. If they try to fight around the city we will crush them mostly from the air, but I think it will take longer than most are predicting. If they fight in Baghdad it could be a real mess. The question is whether they will fight. They have no chance in the end, so any resistance is a suicide mission. Some troops are willing to do this (like the guy who was just firing an Ak-47 at a tank) and others would rather surrender than face certain death. This ratio will obviously determine the difficulty of taking Baghdad. If they fight on foot in the streets it is going to be bad.

Billy LTL · #3 03-23-2003, 06:33 AM

From what we've seen the average soldier would rather quit than fight. Good for him.

The Republican Guard on the other hand seem to be the fellows to fear. It shouldn't be forgotten that there are probably a lot of Iraqis, including the RG, who are most definitely in a lose-lose situation. Being such ayyholes their entire lives, a lot of angry citizens will be looking for a bit of street justice once this is over. I'd guess these are the ones who will be defending Bagdhad. I hope I'm wrong but I think it's going to be nowhere near a cakewalk.

IrishHand · #4 03-23-2003, 12:57 PM

Keep in mind that interested parties in a war scenario always present the picture of the war most favorable to maintaining prestige and support at home (wherever that is). If you want to know what's going on in a war as it transpires, you pretty much need to figure out what each side is saying and reach a compromise of sorts. Pretty well every military action I've studied bears this out. If you want to actually know what happened, you need to wait for a decade or so when a competent historian has had a chance to talk to people from both sides and review documents and other primary sources from both sides. (Often, even the people involved on one side aren't aware of the actual situation no matter how superior your intelligence is.)

Cyrus · #5 03-24-2003, 05:31 AM

If there is going to be armed resistance in the cities, this would mean that quite a lot of people are armed. Most will be keeping their arms at home. If enough people will be privately armed and fighting against the invading troops instead of overthrowing Saddam, what does that tell us? (No, don't call the NRA.) In my opinion, it will mean that even people who would otherwise like to see Saddam shot and hung upside down, are now choosing to defend their homeland as a priority.

You see, persons who behave dishonestly or just plain criminally during peacetime such as neighborhood gauleiters, black marketeers, secret policemen, torturers, etc, tend to haul ass out of any situation remotely dangerous. And even if you force a man to wear a uniform, you cannot press-gang an unwilling person to heroism!

These cannot be yer usual Saddam "fanatics" who are resisting, no matter how many or few they are. They should be mostly made up of average Iraqis who have decided to do battle and maybe die fighting for their country, irrespective of its leader. Their country right or wrong, an' all that, if you heard the expression before...

Jimbo · #6 03-24-2003, 12:31 PM

"They should be mostly made up of average Iraqis who have decided to do battle and maybe die fighting for their country, irrespective of its leader. Their country right or wrong, an' all that, if you heard the expression before...

I could be mistaken but I doubt many civillians in Iraq are armed. It would be very unusual for a military dictator to allow the regular citizens to possess firearms.

brad · #7 03-24-2003, 01:37 PM

not true iraqis can walk in and buy automatic weapons (AKs i would guess).

no link but heard it on radio. google should be pretty quick if you want to search for it.

Clarkmeister · #8 03-24-2003, 01:46 PM

"I doubt many civillians in Iraq are armed"

I also doubt that 'many' are armed, but there have been reports of civillians in Southern Iraq being armed by the military and being 'commanded' to fight. As always, the reliability of unconfirmed reports is at least dubious, but its still worth noting.

Parmenides · #9 03-24-2003, 03:49 PM

You are wrong. brad is right. The Iraqis love guns allmost as much as Americans. Iraqi's are made up of 80% devote Shiite Muslims. For whom do you think they will vote? It won't be Gen.Wesley Clark, or George W.Bush. The US military will have to teach the Iraqis how to count the votes like they do in Florida.

Jimbo · #10 03-24-2003, 03:53 PM

"You are wrong. brad is right. Thanks for you clarification along with presenting your documentation to back this up. I hope you don't mind if I need something more solid than your word, and Brads memory. [img]/forums/images/icons/smile.gif[/img] it is hard for me to be too wrong when I was only speculating using logic, wheras you are adamant without presenting any proof. Odd duck you are Parmenides.