"The Real Players"? What's this a game?
Acquiunk, thge timing thing is fascinating. Political considerations argue for an attack rather sooner than later. Military convenience lcounter argues powerfully for the addition of not only 4th Infantry Division but also 1st Infantry Division. I suspect The Generals, as generals are wont to contend they require greater force, may be unhappy, but will find a way to successfully execute the mission with the resources at hand. That is something else American Generals are wont to do. I think "The Window" opens on the local evening of 2/3 April. An aggressive move on Saddam's part could speed things, but that would simplify the matter of disposing of his military capability. If he moves it, he loses it. Of course, as it stands, if he leaves it sitting where we can find it, he loses it ... his military situation enjoys scant possibility of improvement. Still, I see political considerations overuling the traditional desire of generals for more resources. I doubt the assault will be delayed into the next weekend. A staged, or sequenced assault would be no surprise, either. Special Ops forces will play perhaps the greatest role such forces have played in any conflict in history.
littlek, It's just semantics, my dear. Don't let it upset you. c.i.
It looks to me like they are setting up a double envelopment. The 1st marine regiment to hold bridges at Al Kut over the Tigris in preparation for the 4th Armored Division and the 3rd Armored at Karbala on the Euphrates . The alternate a feint by the Marines and a push by the Army would be a bit of a gamble If this is the case as most of Baghdad is to the east of the Tigris, I suspect the majority of the effort would fall to the 4th
Timber,
April 2-3 do indeed look very good. We'll be in the dark of the moon again, and the night belongs to us. The next few days will give the infantry and marines a chance to get some rest, resupply, and readjust forces. Hopefully we will see additional reinforcements also.
Though the length of the supply line would normally be a major concern, I don't think it will be much of a problem. With the Republican Guard Divisions defeated, Iraqi irregular forces will be severely undercut. It would certainly be nice to have Saddam's head on a pike as well. So far, so good, actually remarkable progress.
Where did the Silkworm(s) come from? I've tried to stay informed, but the attack with a Silkworm certainly caught me off guard. BTW, the Silkworm didn't appear on Saddam's "full and accurate declaration".
Does Iran have silkworms?
The Silkworms, or possibly follow-on Seersuckers, are permissable; their range is under 90KM, and they are not considered a "Battlefield" weapon. They appear to have been of Chinese manufacturebut indeterminate vintage They were likely launched from somewhere on the Faw Penisnsula Southwest of Basrah, and apparently fell into Kuwait at the extreme limit of their free-flight range. They do not appear to have been guided, merely pointed. Perhaps two earlier, unrecognized-at-the-time lauches have occured from the general area. The Kuwatis have reportedly deployed suitable countermeasures.
Oh, Acquiunk, I tend to believe there is far more force in The West and in The North than is suspected. I believe The Marines will engage from the southeast, the 3rd ID from the Southwest, and elements of the 4th ID, with elements of several other units, will engage from The West and from The Northwest. It will be necessarry to simultaneously mount assaults from both sides of the river through the city. The Brits will likely remain in the South, particularly the Basra area, and may be augmented by elements of 4th ID as they are able to man their equipment. As additional follow-on troops arrive as scheduled, they may either relieve line units which will rotate out of the theater, or be committed to the Baghdad assault as may be appropriate. I am extremely concerned over the potential of Iraqi use of WMD, but I can see no military advatage gained thereby by Iraq, nor any appreciable hinderence given the assaulting forces. My greatest fear is for civilians, really, and I think it prudent we hold the initiative and maintain a level of pressure which might prevent Iraq to effectively organize and execute such an attack.
timber
I think you are being too reasonable by half regarding the disengenous manipulation of citizen opinion by this administration. The rhetoric from them now regarding the pace of the war, its complexities, and its dangers are very different than it was previously. Either incompetence or deceit are the options. Or both, which I believe is precisely the aase. With any luck, Franks will kick Rumsfeld in the nuts on live TV.
nimh
Excellent article from Independent UK. Thank you.
CBC ran a wonderful news piece this evening on the history of the 'neocon' group now so influential in the administration, and on the purposefully deceptive move of agreeing to 'go through the UN', as they needed the time for troop build up anyway. Perle was surprisingly candid in an interview on the show, and added "So why not go through the UN". Of course, as we all saw, various individuals (eg weapons inspectors) and governments began quite quickly to understand it was a mere charade. The open question at the end of the show was whether Tony Blair was going to conclude that he had been deceived and used.
If you want to know where to invest your money, don't listen to the experts (says the expert), don't buy subscriptions to Money and other magazines (says my broker), watch what people are buying. Right -- and it works. Now, what if, as I've been noticing over the past several days, the SUV Republicans in my Republican community are buying extra jerry cans at WalMart filling them (they were in lines today) at the gas station. Do you think they're putting their money on a quick victory? Nuh uh.
The only way I can explain Blair, Blatham, is that he's being deceived and used. The remaining mystery is how he could be so dumb?
Tartarin
Blair himself, several months ago, made this startling leap of explanatory logic to parliament... (paraphrasing from memory) "The defence against US unilateralism is our solidarity with them." Ain't that a dilly? Though I brought this up on the thread at the time, I saw no other mention of this cognitive pretzel until the CBC show tonight where a Brit politician spoke to it.
If we keep in mind the word "deceit," it'll go a long way into explaining many of the inconsistencies coming out of this administration - IMHO. c.i.
'The Independent on Sunday" publishes today another gret leading article:
Quote:They do not know what they are doing or why they are doing it
30 March 2003
Every day public statements on the war are made with great bravado by British and US leaders. A day later most of them turn out to be inaccurate or untrue. Political leaders are understandably evasive about the detailed military strategy, but these evasions and inaccuracies have nothing to do with the movements of the troops.
Leading Article
--------------
I'm a little late to response to 'food in the services'.
The first three months on a minesweeper, we really had excellent food: at leats two warm meals, freshly cooked, coffee and creamy fruit tart every day, soup in the morning and at midnight daily ... . Then the cook left Navy and revision found out that .... (However, it wasn't THAT bad afterwards, just cakes instead of cream cake and once a week only.)
Well, does this mean/suggest that all the cruel weapons, all 'forbidden' stuff, chemicals, nukes etc, are to be found only in or near Bagdad?
Walter..
-- a digression
Your link uses a jsp page. I like it.
(Business, business..)
I was disappointed that my posting of Anti-American jokes was misconstrued as me being Anti-American. I was purely posting something I read on the internet. I should have added the link which was to some Russian website called hateusa or something.
I received a highly offensive reply from gesilgerti (?) who is obviously a member of this website's illuminati for he doesn't seem to be censored. This reeks of hypocisy and double standard. Poor show able2know.com
As an Australian I am a citizen of the coalition of the willing and as an Australian I fully support out troops and wish for their safety regardless of the moral issue of whether or not we should be thier.
The censorship of the list of jokes spoke a lot about the conservatism of this website's moderators who no doubt do not believe in freedom of speech (for anyone outside their purple circle).
I thank Timber for his fairness and equity in allowing people to have their say and I respect his right to criticise other peoples opinions.
Why should every post be a quote, rehash or link to something that has already been written? Where are peoples' real opinions?
Why are the US so afraid to take Israel to task for their breaches of UN resolutions. Why are people afraid to publicly voice crticsm of Israel....wouldn't have anything to do with the fear of being branded Anti-Semtics would it? The 'H' word can justify appalling treatment of the Palestinians.
Advance Australia Fair
Ketamine wrote:Well Puero..if CNN said it then it must be true.
i never said that is was true. just a counter post to the one you posted about 700 coalition casualites. but for the record, if i have to pick who to believe between the iraqi ambassador to moscow and cnn. it's cnn.
Well Puoe
May I quote American poet/singer Lou Reed
"Well Americans don't care for much of anything
Land and water the least
And animal life is low on the totem pole
With human life not worth more than infected yeast
Americans don't care too much for beauty
They'll **** in a river, dump battery acid in a stream
They'll watch dead rats wash up on the beach
And complain if they can't swim
They say things are done for the majority
Don't believe half of what you see
And none of what you hear"
I'm just quoting and yews I'd believe CNN before Abdul also.
