Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > 2+2 Communities > Other Other Topics

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-30-2003, 05:39 AM
Mason Malmuth Mason Malmuth is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Nevada
Posts: 1,831
Default War Strategy

Hi Everyone:

Here's my take on the pause in the war strategy.

First, you need to understand that in the last few wars we have fought, the enemy was bombed into submission and then the ground troops, if needed were sent in to mop up. (Yes I know I'm over simplifying.)

But this Iraq conflict was different because of the WMD. We couldn't afford to slowly degrade thier defenses just by bombing since it might allow Iraq to get a shot off at either Kuwait or Israel. So we had to send the ground troops in immediately.

So what has happened is that the western part of Iraq is now held by the coalition. Thus the chemical shot that we were so afraid of is now very unlikely. But the Iraqi army is not completely degraded which an extensive bombing campaign might have done. So the purpose of the pause is to do that degrading and not risk our troops unnecessarily. So in my opinion, this does not mean a set back has taken place.

All comments welcome,

Mason
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-30-2003, 06:20 AM
Cyrus Cyrus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Tundra
Posts: 1,720
Default American miscalculations

"In the last few wars we have fought, the enemy was bombed into submission and then the ground troops, if needed were sent in to mop up."

There is one more important difference and that is the disproportionate opposition, both in public opinion and in the stance of governments, to the action undertaken by the U.S. among historically both neutral and friendly countries. This opposition, which has its home-grown and very vocal expression as well, must have shaped the War Strategy into one that tries to put the best humanitarian face on it. This implies precision-bombing as opposed to Beograd-style, rather indiscriminate bombing, the latter being the kind that truly saps morale.

"This Iraq conflict was different because of the WMD."

Alright, this assumes that WMDs actually exist and can be used. Bu suppose they don't, what then? More importantly, if the American military and political command knows that they don't (and we have to assume that they base their strategies on cold hard reality and not on what they will say in public), then the War Strategy they followed shows that they had expected a rather quick collapse of the Iraqi regime. Hence, the "Decapitation" opening gambit.

The "Pause" button in this War has been pushed by the United States because, exactly like another conflict in Asia, many many years ago, the attitude of the local population has been vastly misjudged. More ground troops must be called in, once again, in order to persuade the locals to be liberated. But that's where most comparisons with Vietnam end, I'm afraid; things will not be allowed now to drag on, no matter what.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-30-2003, 06:28 AM
brad brad is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,803
Default Re: War Strategy

your argument works without wmd also.

perhaps we simply didnt want all the iraqi oil wells to be ablaze for 6 months again, like last time.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-30-2003, 07:50 AM
MMMMMM MMMMMM is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 4,103
Default Re: American miscalculations

I don't think we severely miscalculated, although we may have miscalculated a little (which is to be expected in such imprecise sciences as politics and war). The pause, as Mason pointed out, allows further degrading of the Repulican Guard by air strikes. It also allows consolidation and resupply to take place, and it allows our forward ground troops to get a little rest after that lightning advance.

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).

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.

I get the impression that you may think there is a significant chance Iraq does not have WMD--even after recent developments. LOL. If so, that's the only severe mistake in judgment I can recall offhand seeing you make: IMO the chance that Iraq does not have some usable chemical shells or missiles is essentially nil.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-30-2003, 08:22 AM
Parmenides Parmenides is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 126
Default Re: War Strategy

What weapons of mass destrcution? The world still awaits any proof. The military is overextended. They don't have enough ground forces, and acknowledged this by ordering up another 100k. This war was a foolish endeavor. Bush looks more and more like Johnson everyday.

There is a good possibility that the USA could lose this war. If both the Syrians and Iranians would join the fight on the Iraqi's side immediately,then I think the Russians would intervene with the threat of nuclear annihilation to stop it.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-30-2003, 10:51 AM
scalf scalf is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: south carolina, usa
Posts: 2,120
Default Re: War Strategy

[img]/forums/images/icons/laugh.gif[/img] actually mason..your analysis more sophisticated than needed...lol

key strategy: have at least ten times fire-power and troops..pound, pound ,pound, them then attack with overwhelming advantage....

best poker analogy...only play aces on button...while opponent has nothing..push all in before flop...

gl [img]/forums/images/icons/cool.gif[/img] [img]/forums/images/icons/diamond.gif[/img]
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-30-2003, 12:19 PM
Jedi Poker Jedi Poker is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: A galaxy far far away...
Posts: 177
Default Re: War Strategy

I agree. The pause is not a setback at all. It's just a simple consolidation. In judo, one can't throw one's opponent until one has put that opponent off-balance. The heavy bombing that is meant to soften up the Republican Guard achieves this off-balancing step. The inevitable throw (massive ground attack) should be quick and decisive.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-30-2003, 01:31 PM
Clarkmeister Clarkmeister is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 4,247
Default Re: War Strategy

"But this Iraq conflict was different because of the WMD. We couldn't afford to slowly degrade thier defenses just by bombing since it might allow Iraq to get a shot off at either Kuwait or Israel. So we had to send the ground troops in immediately."

To me at least, this clearly isn't the case for two reasons. First, we rather easily captured the airfields in western Iraq in the first few days with nothing but special forces. And those fields are the only place close enough to Israel for Iraq to launch their missles. Second, it should have been obvious that even if Saddam has WMD, he wouldn't use them in the early stages of the war because that would instantly let Bush off the hook in the propaganda war when world opinion was so strongly against the invasion.

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

Since neither of these has come to pass, we need more troops on the ground, because now it is a different type of war. Rumsfeld was told this prior to the war but he apparently insisted on only deploying 4 divisions rather than the entire 8 that Bush approved.

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



Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 03-30-2003, 01:34 PM
Clarkmeister Clarkmeister is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 4,247
Default Re: War Strategy

Its not a setback? How can you say that when you said this would be over in 7 days.

It may not be a setback in that we will still win eventually, but clearly its a huge setback in the PR battle.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 03-30-2003, 01:47 PM
Cyrus Cyrus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Tundra
Posts: 1,720
Default Some things will never be known

"I don't think we severely miscalculated, although we may have miscalculated a little. 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."

The U.S. had a plan that included passage through Turkey. Turkey forbid that passage. Then the U.S. went ahead with the rest of its plan anyway, without substantially changing it, if at all. Well, something just isn't right, obviously. A plan cannot be correct if, after an important factor changes, the plan remains the same. This is a severe miscalculation from the part of the planners, by definition.

"I get the impression that you may think there is a significant chance Iraq does not have WMD--even after recent developments."

I don't know what "developments" you are talking about, really. But, come to think of it, Mason might be right! The whole American strategy might be based on the solid conviction that the Iraqis do, in fact, possess WMDs. See, one way that I can be 100% certain that you have the seven of clubs in a card game is when I have given you that card myself.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:50 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.