Air Force Lieutenant General: insurgents now more effective.

With each weeks it seems the chaos is getting more out of hand over there. It has come to a point where C-130's must be used to "relieve the pressure on ground convoys."

news.com.au

... "They have had a growing understanding that where they can affect us is in the logistics flow," Air Force Lieutenant General Lance Smith, deputy chief of the US Central Command, told reporters...

The commander of the US Air Force announced yesterday that the military in Iraq had begun using C-130 military cargo aircraft to ferry some food and equipment high above dangerous roadways in order to relieve pressure on ground convoys.

www.news.com.au...

My personal opinion, this is PsyOps or a sincere outcry for more troops to be sent to Iraq.

Blobber



[edit on 16-12-2004 by Blobber]

From day one we didn't have enough troops, supplies & equipment. It's only gotten worse. That's what happens when you throw the Tipfid out the window, as Rumsfeld did in a stunning act of brilliance. (TipFid was our carefully crafted, time and battle-tested bible on troop and equipment ratios needed for specific battles and scenarios. Implemented to the letter in the Gulf War, it proved to be very successful.) No one can tell the smoldering little twit anything. Especially not those of us who have actually been there and fought.

We're losing so many troops and going through so much equipment in repairs and re-supply that this action is not the least bit surprising. It's nothing more than a sign of how desperate the Pentagon is to stop the hemorraging.

[edit on 19-09-2003 by EastCoastKid]

For someone who claims that they've "been there and fought" ECK, you are obviously painfully ignorant that the battlefield is an extremely fluid situation. As any fight progresses, both sides continually change tactics to better make use of their assets. This is no different. It is just a case where the insurgents or "freedom fighters" as ECK would probably call them, are changing their tactics to better hit the enemy�s more lightly defended logistic lines. And I might add, getting better at it as they learn. Humans are known to do that from time to time.

In the article itself, the American commander is quoted as saying �As we adapt, they adapt.� It is only the reporter�s take that this is something that is duly worrying. The fact is, that the TipFid has nothing to do with the fight that the Allies are encountering NOW in Iraq. The argument about the Time Phased Force Deployment Data is mute now as all the required forces are in country.

So you see blobber, it is neither a psy-ops or a �cry for more troops� it�s simply a case of an American general stating a simple fact and those opposed to the war using it for their own agenda.

-Cypher

Originally posted by Cypher
....
So you see blobber, it is neither a psy-ops or a �cry for more troops� it�s simply a case of an American general stating a simple fact and those opposed to the war using it for their own agenda.

-Cypher

There is nothing new about adapting enemies, all parties do that in a war. The commander admits that the insurgents are getting more effective and are slowing down operations. And that is new: a commander admitting that insurgents are hindering military operations.

Let this be clear, commanders always emphasize "good news" and whisper "bad news" in a war. You can think this is propaganda by the anti-war people, but when I read between the lines and read other articles, I have a different opinion.

Even the heavy guarded greenzone is not safe (see rpg and bomb attacks), according to the Australian Minister of Defence Baghdad has become worse (he already visited Baghdad three times earlier), even the road between Baghdad and the airport is not secure and each days we hear of bomb victims whether they are Iraqis or US personnel.

When even Baghad hasn't been pacified, one can imagine how it is like in certain other parts of the country.

Blobber



[edit on 17-12-2004 by Blobber]

Sorry blobber but I have to disagree with you on this one.

If this was such "bad news" why would the commander have even announced it? Why wouldn't they have just quitely went on ferrying the supplies about with C-130s and left it unknown?

Again, this is JUST a case of a reporter who wanted a "bad news" Iraq war story spinning the info his own way.

The article could just have easily read...Coalition forces Confound Iraqi Insurgents with New Air Logistics Campaign and would have been just as factual.

-Cypher

Cypher,

If I have to predict Iraq's future at this moment, I am very much concerned that Iraq will become a Chechnya for the US in the coming year, or in the worst case scenario a Lebanon in the 80's of the last century. And actually this is more or less in line with what the CIA reports are predicting in their scenario's.

But let us hope I am wrong and your optimism is right.

Blobber

[edit on 17-12-2004 by Blobber]

Originally posted by Cypher
For someone who claims that they've "been there and fought" ECK, you are obviously painfully ignorant that the battlefield is an extremely fluid situation-Cypher

Okay, right. Whatever you say.

Guess what though, by your comments it's clear you don't have the slightest idea what I was discussing.

Irony, or should I say Irany, the sji'tes are the key to getting more control in the country, yet the usa government is torn appart about giving them enough power,, because of their ties with iran, yet, the sji'tes could very well police the south and bagdad because of their large numbers.

Also their leaders have told al-sadr to lay low for a while and do not react to the sunni bombings, that attempt to involve them in a civil war/total chaos.


[edit on 21-12-2004 by Countermeasures]