War Strategy

[Clarkmeister]

"I don't think we severely miscalculated"

I don't know how you can make this claim. It is fairly obvious to me that we made the fatal flaw of believing our own hype and really thought this was going to be over in like 5 days with the help of a surrendering Iraqi military and popular uprisings against the regime.

"One reason we don't have as many ground troops as we would like in place yet is because Turkey decided against allowing land passage at a very late date--I think it was 2 days into the war. We have been rerouting that entire division through the Red Sea I believe (a relatively slow process). "

Exhibit A. Even though we knew we hadn't secured passage, and despite the fact that the Turks had already turned us down, we gambled and left that entire division up there sitting on their butts for nearly a week with essentially no backup plan. That is horrific planning and is quite frankly inexcusable. Note that even if they HAD been allowed to go through Turkey, we would still need massive reinforcements in the south of Iraq. In fact, had they gone through Turkey, you would see just how ill-prepared our leadership was by an even longer reinforcement delay in Southern Iraq than the present one.

"Pausing for public opinion reasons would seem counterproductive, since it apears that the long pause leading up to the war was instrumental in the nurturing and flowering of so much worldwide opposition. "

We can debate what caused worldwide opposition to the war all day. What isn't debatable is that this delay is clearly a PR nightmare for the administration. Which should be all the proof one needs when asking whether or not we severely miscalculated when making our initial plan. Its a PR nightmare, they know it, and they are still doing it. They had no choice.

The fact of the matter is that our initial plan was grossly overoptomistic. Now that we are faced with the reality of an enemy that is not only going to fight, but fight effectively, maybe our next phase will be more effective. I certainly hope so. But I doubt it. Yesterdays quote from a pentagon official that Baghdad is going to fall "from the inside out" seems to indicate that we have not adjusted to the realities of the situation at hand.

[Jimbo]

"Our mistake early on was vastly overestimating the chances that the Iraqi soldiers would quit and the chances that the civilians would revolt."

I believe this was a mistake of yours and of the medias but not of the administration.

"Our mistake early on was vastly overestimating the chances that the Iraqi soldiers would quit and the chances that the civilians would revolt."

Again yours not the theirs.

"The delay is simply a byproduct of overconfidence and poor planning."

Or perhaps simply not sharing all their plans with you personally.

[Clarkmeister]

Pssst, Jimbo, its OK to admit that our plan so far hasn't worked as well as we (and our leadership) had hoped. Its also OK to admit that our administration has been clearly caught off guard by both the ferocity and the type of resistance we have encountered. That doesn't make you a bad American. It makes you an objective observer.

PS. If all the better you can do is use the old catch-all "well, maybe you don't know everything the government knows" argument, I know for sure that I'm on solid ground.

[Jimbo]

Clarkmeister you may be too egotistical to believe they have not confided in you but I assure you it is true. How do you know the plan is not working? It totally amazes me that you expected this war to end in a week or two or without any minor changes or losses. JEES!!! Totally exasperating!

[Clarkmeister]

"How do you know the plan is not working?"

I wish I knew why you had such blind faith in the administration. To the point that you ignore what is patently obvious to the rest of the world. Claiming that the war is going to plan (as you imply) is like saying the sky is green.

"It totally amazes me that you expected this war to end in a week or two or without any minor changes or losses. "

I didn't expect anything. Show me one thing I have written that suggests I expected a quick painless war. Heck, I wish it would have been over in one day. But I didn't expect it to be.

Oh, and finally,

"Clarkmeister you may be too egotistical to believe they have not confided in you but I assure you it is true"

They may not have confided in me, but do you think maybe they clued Dick Cheney in?

"He [Cheney] predicted any war with Iraq would end "relatively quickly," defining that as "weeks, not months."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,81291,00.html

[Jimbo]

Clarkmeister I am not displaying "blind faith" but I have participated in a war and understand enough to know that neither you nor I know the plans nor their contingencies.

"He [Cheney] predicted any war with Iraq would end "relatively quickly," defining that as "weeks, not months."

Thanks for the link, if the war lasts longer than 7 weeks and 6 days then I will agree you are correct. With one caveat, the interview was on March 17th, before the campaign began so the "plan" may have been adjusted. Keep in mind he is only the vice-president and although he obviously knows more than you or I it is highly likely Don Rumsfield knws much more about the detailed operational plans than Dick Cheney.

[IrishHand]

How do you know the plan is not working?
(a) US possesses vastly superior intelligence, technology, training and complete dominance of the skies.
(b) US spent several months building their forces up to the level they felt adequate to overwhelm the enemy and acheive their goals.
(c) US chose the time and place to begin the invasion.
(d) Unlike last time, the enemy is - gasp - actually defending their land.
(e) Unlike last time, the enemy figured out that when you're dominated in every area of the war, you need to resort to guerilla tactics and urban warfare.
(f) Unlike last time, we're losing men and equipment even though we haven't even encountered the vast majority of their military.
(g) Less than 2 weeks after the initiation of hostilities, the US decides to being their offensive to a near-halt and dramatically increase their troop commitment to Iraq (120,000 men and accompanying tanks, artillery, etc).

a, b, and c were part of the plan. The rest wasn't - if you can't see this, I assume you weren't listening to anything our political or military leaders were saying two weeks ago. However, none of this probably matters in the long run - as Moltke said long ago - "no plan survivies contact". This adage apparently holds true even in the case of a war between such insanely imbalanced militaries as this one.

[MMMMMM]

Feel free to correct me if I'm mistaken but I believe Turkey forbade the land passage of US troops after the war commenced.

One development that springs immediately to mind was the discovery of a tank and several thousand chemical warfare suits in that hospital in Iraq. The Iraqis know we aren't going to use chemical weapons so what do you suppose those suits were intended to be used for?

Hey I just thought of something: The less benefit of the doubt one gives to Saddam Hussein, the more likely one is to be right. Let's dub this the "Saddam Hussein Axiom".

[Jimbo]

a, b, and c were part of the plan. The rest wasn't -

Another forum poster with the skinny on National Security. Well I wasn't concerned about our success until now.

[MMMMMM]

I could be wrong but I believe Turkey had agreed to allow land passage for our troops (but no air bases) before we commenced the war. Two days later they reneged.

The war is going fine. After all it's only what, ten days yet?

We'll see how effectively the Iraqis fight after some further "degrading" and after our reinforcements arrive. Baghdad will eventually be locked down almost as tight as the IDF locked down Arafat's headquarters and surrounding area some months ago.

What I want to see is live video footage when we start exploring the tunnels and bunkers under Baghdad.