It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bad Anti-Insurgent Strategy - Hit 'em Where They Were

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 02:38 PM
link   
"American strategy is proving to be weak, and it all started when the Iraqis refused to sit still and be blown to smithereens."



The U.S. military continues to try to shut down the Iraqi insurgents with "sweeps" of different towns or hotspots. Typically this is a reactive move following deaths of U.S. servicemen.

It takes time for the U.S. military to respond to any provocation, because the only way Americans will engage the enemy is from heavily armored vehicles with massive firepower. This calls for logistics, planning, and usually eliminates any possible use of stealth or rapid response to achieve tactical advantage.

So, we see the U.S. running their sweeps into towns and villages or utilizing air strikes and bombings or artillery attacks - after the fact, usually well after the fact of any insurgent activity. This means that long after the militants are out of the building, the bomb strikes and killing non-combatants such as local families. Long after the insurgent tactical squads have evacuated a town or village, the tanks roll in and blast the smithereens out of any building from which fire was suspected two days earlier. Oops! More dead civilians.

The American way of warfare was designed to win huge land wars, such on the European theater against masses of Russians with huge tank armies. America needed massive firepower because of being outgunned in that potential theater of war. In Iraq, America has the advantage in numbers of men AND firepower, but little room for maneuver and little initiative. Americans are on their heels and when they do try to take the initiative they fire into buildings long after the battle is over.

And George Bush thought it would be easy! Mission Accomplished, George! George has lost some of that strut he used to use when walking across the aircraft carrier deck. His senior military officers are probably having a hard time looking him in the eye. Rumsfeld is a little less cocky these days, and Cheney is buried in his bunker thinking about nuking Iraq and Iran, because he has no other solution. American strategy is proving to be weak, and it all started when the Iraqis refused to sit still and be blown to smithereens.

Source:
Media Monitors Network

Just like the Once Mighty Soviet Army was stuck in Afganistan and Finally Repelled by the Afganistan Resistance - Today the Mighty USA Army stands in the Middle of Iraq and just counts the Dead. The Massive Military Force is really not Armed and Equipped for this kind of Combat, and that's why the Effectivness is also Seen Today in the News.

And the Number of Insurgent Attacks is on the Rise, just as the Number of Casualties - both Military and Civilan.

No Doubt - Mission Accomplished, George!




posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 02:57 PM
link   
makes u wonder why insurgent attacks go up and down. the insurgents having a hard time? its suppose to go up all the way not go down sometimes.



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 03:06 PM
link   
Actually Michael Yon, who is has been in Mosul for the last 6 months, reports that the USA is winning and being very effective. This guy actualy goes along during patrols and raids, so he knows. The US soldiers change their tactics daily to stay ahead of the insurgents.

You should read his stuff Souljah, get a real view of what is going on in Iraq, not from those rags you read.

michaelyon.blogspot.com...



[edit on 10-8-2005 by skippytjc]



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 03:41 PM
link   
Skippy, Skippy, Skippy...tsk tsk tsk...Souljah can't be bothered with truth, facts, or reality! He has too many anti-US, and anti-freedom sites yet to link to!



posted on Aug, 11 2005 @ 01:06 AM
link   
I'm not the first to say it but it's very hard to fight against a guerilla force on their home terrain. They wear no uniforms so they just attack and slip away. They know the terrain and have the support of local people. The americans advantage is their firepower and the protection those armoured vehicles afford them.

If they were to give up that protection in favour of quicker, more reactive tactics then I think you'd be seeing a far higher casualty rate among the US troops. You may kill more insurgents this way but american casualties would skyrocket as insurgents began ambushing poorly armoured american soldiers.

The way they are fighting now is pretty much the only way they can fight the insurgency and not lose large numbers of troops in my opinion.



posted on Aug, 11 2005 @ 02:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by skippytjc
Actually Michael Yon, who is has been in Mosul for the last 6 months, reports that the USA is winning and being very effective. This guy actualy goes along during patrols and raids, so he knows. The US soldiers change their tactics daily to stay ahead of the insurgents.

You should read his stuff Souljah, get a real view of what is going on in Iraq, not from those rags you read.

michaelyon.blogspot.com...



[edit on 10-8-2005 by skippytjc]



Originally posted by Army
Skippy, Skippy, Skippy...tsk tsk tsk...Souljah can't be bothered with truth, facts, or reality! He has too many anti-US, and anti-freedom sites yet to link to!



Rock on you two! I can never help but sigh at someone who actually believes Mohammed and Akhmed's BS. It's a sad sight really. Now that Michael Yon is a good man. Media Monitors Network is one of the many "news" organizations that are secretly run by Mohammed, Akhmed, Adbul and all their other friends. Yup.

[edit on 11-8-2005 by Barunson]



posted on Aug, 11 2005 @ 03:51 AM
link   
Yes, Ofcourse this is some anti-US, and anti-freedom sites I have been reading?

Why Does then Pentagon Plan to Send More Troops to Iraq - and not Send the Troops Home, if the Situation is "Under Control"?

Why Do ALL the Newspapers Count the Dead on almost Daily Basis - like Reuters?

MOSUL - Fifteen people were killed in separate incidents over the past 24 hours. BAGHDAD - A suicide bomber killed six people and wounded 14. BAGHDAD - A mortar bomb exploded, killing a traffic policeman. ISKANDARIYA - Two civilians were killed as gunmen shot at their car.

Now Sports.



posted on Aug, 11 2005 @ 04:12 AM
link   
thats because its called a war!
you seem to have this weird idea souljah that when you fight a war people dont die, well, they do on both sides. In fact insurgents are often killed more often than americans, with the exception of the last week or two.



posted on Aug, 11 2005 @ 04:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by XphilesPhan
thats because its called a war!
you seem to have this weird idea souljah that when you fight a war people dont die, well, they do on both sides. In fact insurgents are often killed more often than americans, with the exception of the last week or two.

I never Said that in War people DON'T Die - I said that this "War in Iraq" is FAR from Mission Accomplished, as your President Claims it is. I also said that the US Forces are Poorly Battling the Insurgents and their Tactics - with their "Hit'em Where They Were" Strategy, they kill more Innocents then Insurgents.

And Some members report of that the USA is winning and being very effective - WHERE?



posted on Aug, 11 2005 @ 04:26 AM
link   
Souljah, bush said that a year or two ago, get over it. I think we can clearly see that he was either mistaken or refering to the initial invasion.

As for effectiveness, i fear nothing short of incinerating the cities will have any effectiveness in stoping insurgents. So whats your point?



posted on Aug, 11 2005 @ 04:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by XphilesPhan
As for effectiveness, i fear nothing short of incinerating the cities will have any effectiveness in stoping insurgents. So whats your point?

My POINT is, that US Forces are Loosing Grip in Iraq and some people Just can't face this Truth, and start to call it anit-war propaganda dribble. Facts, that we see almost everyday in the News, tell us that the Insurgency in Iraq is RISING and not Falling, as some people would like to belive.

And Belive me, incinerating the cities would only STRENGHTEN the Insurgency. Remember 'Nam?



posted on Aug, 11 2005 @ 04:45 AM
link   
Nam wasnt lost by the soldiers, it was lost by politicians pussy footing around when they could have ended vietnam very quickly. Same situation today, its not "politically correct" to conduct a war as it should be.



posted on Aug, 11 2005 @ 06:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by XphilesPhan
Nam wasnt lost by the soldiers, it was lost by politicians pussy footing around when they could have ended vietnam very quickly. Same situation today, its not "politically correct" to conduct a war as it should be.

And how would You end this War in a Non-Politically Correct Way Quickly?

I was refering to the incinerating the cities Statement, when talking about 'Nam.



posted on Aug, 11 2005 @ 11:23 AM
link   
you really want know how id end this war, i dont think you really want to know. I actually have several ideas and here's one:

Release Sadam hussein and let him keep iraq in line they way he did before. Although if he didnt like the west before, and wasnt making WMD's he probably will now


[edit on 11-8-2005 by XphilesPhan]



posted on Aug, 11 2005 @ 11:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by skippytjc
Actually Michael Yon, who is has been in Mosul for the last 6 months, reports that the USA is winning and being very effective. This guy actualy goes along during patrols and raids, so he knows. The US soldiers change their tactics daily to stay ahead of the insurgents.

You should read his stuff Souljah, get a real view of what is going on in Iraq, not from those rags you read.

michaelyon.blogspot.com...

[edit on 10-8-2005 by skippytjc]


You don't find it strange that an ex-special forces soldier, can take his own money, get a ticket on a Greyhound, go to Iraq, without working for any news agency? How many regular people can do this? Have you tried talking to your travel agent, saying you want a vacation in Iraq. No, you're not a reporter, you don't work for a newspaper or tv, just a little blog.

Sounds a little like some PR campaign, especially with all of those cheerleader pieces he writes. Didn't the Army set-up an agency who's purpose is to create propaganda, in all media?




top topics



 
0

log in

join