NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,11363322%255E401,00.html
The insurgents, it appears, want to break out of the city. They are launching mortars and RPGs at the cordon to the south of the city. This part is my favorite part of the battle: when they are trapped. They either surrender, or will be annihilated. It gets the job done, either way.
Elsewhere, it seems insurgents are waging all-out war in Mosul. Hopefully, not much will come of that. Unlike the southern reaches of Iraq, there is a significant troop presence in the city.

So, no one else is interested?

A bit too early to comment about Mosul - I don't know what's going on there. But I agree with you on Fallujah.

Have not heard much in the way of casualty counts *shock*

But I have read a few claims that the majority high tailed it out before the Americans started to set up....

They did. The buildup to this was so long, and it was played up so much during the presidential campaign, that the bulk of the insurgency had plenty of time to scatter and leave just enough resistance behind to keep the US and Iraqi provisional forces busy.

This operation is shaping up to be another "catastrophic success" thanks to administration grandstanding - the administration wanted to let everybody know we're doing something without having a spate of casualties before election day, so they ended up telling the black-hats exactly what to expect with plenty of time for them to avoid it. Our forces will win the city, but the insurgents will be everywhere else.

Have not heard much in the way of casualty counts *shock*

But I have read a few claims that the majority high tailed it out before the Americans started to set up....
I heard about casualty estimates. No hard facts at this point, but I believe they're approximate. Anyhow, on the American side, 18 Marines and two Iraqi troops are dead, and about a 150 injured. That isn't as high as I feared for an operation of this size. As for insurgents, estimates range from less than fifty to 600 deaths.

They did. The buildup to this was so long, and it was played up so much during the presidential campaign, that the bulk of the insurgency had plenty of time to scatter and leave just enough resistance behind to keep the US and Iraqi provisional forces busy.

This operation is shaping up to be another "catastrophic success" thanks to administration grandstanding - the administration wanted to let everybody know we're doing something without having a spate of casualties before election day, so they ended up telling the black-hats exactly what to expect with plenty of time for them to avoid it. Our forces will win the city, but the insurgents will be everywhere else.
I'm growing tired of this strategy. Doesn't the administration realize that the insurgents refuse to surrender because of the threat of force?
Luckily, this gives us an advantage. As so many insurgents fled Fallujah, it'll take some time for them to regroup. So, we withdraw most of the forces in the area, and leave maybe a battalion of ours and the Iraqis there so that terrorists won't retake Fallujah. Then, we'd have to retake other cities, like Ramadi and Buqubah, very quickly. I would hope there are plans for retaking some of these cities, as they are not in Baghdad's control.

bump

http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,11363322%255E401,00.html
The insurgents, it appears, want to break out of the city. They are launching mortars and RPGs at the cordon to the south of the city. This part is my favorite part of the battle: when they are trapped. They either surrender, or will be annihilated. It gets the job done, either way.
Elsewhere, it seems insurgents are waging all-out war in Mosul. Hopefully, not much will come of that. Unlike the southern reaches of Iraq, there is a significant troop presence in the city.

Oh boy! We are finally going to win the war! Now the troops can come home for Christmas!

Oh boy! We are finally going to win the war! Now the troops can come home for Christmas!
Don't we wish?

Oh boy! We are finally going to win the war! Now the troops can come home for Christmas!
Giftwrapped and all!!!

I think Fallujah and Mosul are the start of something much larger. I think that we can expect to see more fighting like this for months to come, especially in 2005. I think that the casualties on the "coalition" side will steadily rise as well, peaking whenever we're forced to eradicate a city from "terrorists" again.

But....

I think alot.

Luckily, this gives us an advantage. As so many insurgents fled Fallujah, it'll take some time for them to regroup. So, we withdraw most of the forces in the area, and leave maybe a battalion of ours and the Iraqis there so that terrorists won't retake Fallujah. Then, we'd have to retake other cities, like Ramadi and Buqubah, very quickly. I would hope there are plans for retaking some of these cities, as they are not in Baghdad's control.
The taking and retaking would work if this was a conventional war. But the insurgents don't need to hold territory or even have a stable base of operations. They simply need to be able to disappear for a while, let the US amass its forces while leaving other places unoccupied, and regroups in those unoccupeid places. Or simply wait for the troops to get bored and leave.

I'm afraid it won't matter how quickly Fallujah is "taken", or how many times, or how many insurgents are killed. This action is simply for the benefit of TV viewers.

The taking and retaking would work if this was a conventional war. But the insurgents don't need to hold territory or even have a stable base of operations. They simply need to be able to disappear for a while, let the US amass its forces while leaving other places unoccupied, and regroups in those unoccupeid places. Or simply wait for the troops to get bored and leave.

I'm afraid it won't matter how quickly Fallujah is "taken", or how many times, or how many insurgents are killed. This action is simply for the benefit of TV viewers.
Oh, we're back to the "hearts and minds" strategy. Well, to be honest, those will be won not by the US, but with time. Elections will probably be held on schedule, and that should build legitimacy for the government among the people. This gives the US just two big tasks. First, we need to make sure everyone can vote without terrorist intimidation. And second, we need continued training of Iraq's security forces.
In a way, the retaking of Falluja was really a "get out the vote" effort. There are other cities where elections are impossible, and they may be retaken in a little while. Also, as the enemy further organizes, he is becoming more and more conventional in tactics. It may be to his disadvantage, as we find it easier to fight him on this level.

we're back to the "hearts and minds" strategy
First, we need to make sure everyone can vote without terrorist intimidation.
Impossible. On both accounts.

http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,11363322%255E401,00.html
The insurgents, it appears, want to break out of the city. They are launching mortars and RPGs at the cordon to the south of the city. This part is my favorite part of the battle: when they are trapped. They either surrender, or will be annihilated. It gets the job done, either way.
Elsewhere, it seems insurgents are waging all-out war in Mosul. Hopefully, not much will come of that. Unlike the southern reaches of Iraq, there is a significant troop presence in the city.
It appears that you are deriving some sick kind of pleasure out of all of this? I find it all kind of sad. :eek:

It appears that you are deriving some sick kind of pleasure out of all of this? I find it all kind of sad. :eek:
I've got something to cheer you up. Over 100 hundred jarheads where wounded today and flown out to the hospital in Landstuhl. And you only get there if your hurt realy bad. Some 65 yesterday. Feel better now?

Oh, we're back to the "hearts and minds" strategy. Well, to be honest, those will be won not by the US, but with time. Elections will probably be held on schedule, and that should build legitimacy for the government among the people. This gives the US just two big tasks. First, we need to make sure everyone can vote without terrorist intimidation. And second, we need continued training of Iraq's security forces.
In a way, the retaking of Falluja was really a "get out the vote" effort. There are other cities where elections are impossible, and they may be retaken in a little while. Also, as the enemy further organizes, he is becoming more and more conventional in tactics. It may be to his disadvantage, as we find it easier to fight him on this level.
Right now, the Iraqis are registering their votes with bullets, bombs, and grenades.

Anyone that thinks that Iraq will be holding "democratic" elections in January are not thinking clearly?

Right now, the Iraqis are registering their votes with bullets, bombs, and grenades.

Anyone that thinks that Iraq will be holding "democratic" elections in January are not thinking clearly?
With M-16's to their heads? Yes of course. Afterall those are the guns that spread freedom.

I've got something to cheer you up. Over 100 hundred jarheads where wounded today and flown out to the hospital in Landstuhl. And you only get there if your hurt realy bad. Some 65 yesterday. Feel better now?
I don't get satisfaction from casualties on either side. I agree with Kerry....this is the "wrong war, at the wrong time, in the wrong place".

Unfortunately, I believe this cat and mouse game is going to continue for a very long time, at least until the point that the US gets bored and moves on the the next war?

... Over 100 hundred jarheads where wounded today and flown out to the hospital in Landstuhl. And you only get there if your hurt realy bad. Some 65 yesterday...

http://www.nbc10.com/news/3910446/detail.html

http://www.nbc10.com/news/3910446/detail.html
:D Many thanks.

:D Many thanks.you owe me :D

you owe me :D
If I come across something similar funny I'll notify you.

Also, as the enemy further organizes, he is becoming more and more conventional in tactics. It may be to his disadvantage, as we find it easier to fight him on this level.

I agree with you there, bunching up anywhere is stupid for these insurgents. The problem with Muslims is that they have absolutely no fear of death. These moronic insurgents in Falluja obviously learned nothing from Najaf where al-Sadar got most of his followers killed in a futile standoff, although recently I heard the pentagon say they are going to stop listing casualites from Falluja so they "don't give the insurgents any useful information". Sounds like the US is taking more casualties then they would like to admit. So I tip my hat to the Fallujans at least they know how to fight unlike al-Sadr's losers.

Some people talk a lot about "base areas" and how important they are. Well I think that is flat out retarded when fighting an enemy with "daisy cutters", attack drones, appache helicopters and the like. Che said that in a revolutionary war, while the government has to win, the rebels have to avoid decisive defeats and keep inflicting casualties. That is pretty much the case here as well. Hit and run is the way to go.

For those of you who say Iraq can't hold elections, I urge you to look upon the example of Afghanistan, a region controlled by terrorist fior so long, and a nation that is still mainly in the hands of warlords. The Afghani people were brave enough to shove it in the faces of terrorists and vote, and why would Iraqis not do the same?

Right now, the Iraqis are registering their votes with bullets, bombs, and grenades.

Anyone that thinks that Iraq will be holding "democratic" elections in January are not thinking clearly?
:rolleyes: Yeeessss, all less than 2500 Iraqis at most are registering their votes with bullets and bombs, The other 25 million don't seem to be fighting very hard. Instead you have terrorists from other countries coming in and making trouble. When Sadr's forces stopped fighting the legit part of the insurgency disappeared. Now you have what are mainly a few Baathists and extra Sunnis and the rest are all out of towners.

There are some of you who question why we attack Fallujah. The reason is because we can't allow terrorists to run a country within a country! They were developing their own, Iran-like state there, which was the original purpose for invading Iraq.

There are some of you who question why we attack Fallujah. The reason is because we can't allow terrorists to run a country within a country!
But the Americans are running Iraq.

It appears that you are deriving some sick kind of pleasure out of all of this? I find it all kind of sad. :eek:

The U.S. retook the city of Hue after 3 weeks of heavy fighting, that was a big victory and won the war for them. When you see body counts being used for victory you know the Americans are losing. In this type of war the bodies will always be filled by other Iraqi patriots. Speaking of great victories what about the kidnapping of the Prime Minister's relatives? What God takes with one hand he gives with the other.

:rolleyes: Yeeessss, all less than 2500 Iraqis at most are registering their votes with bullets and bombs, The other 25 million don't seem to be fighting very hard. Instead you have terrorists from other countries coming in and making trouble. When Sadr's forces stopped fighting the legit part of the insurgency disappeared. Now you have what are mainly a few Baathists and extra Sunnis and the rest are all out of towners.
Perhaps you could support the numbers you quote?

The "legit" insurgency disappeared?

Do you honestly believe that these battles will magically disappear after the election in January?

Now that the US has bombed out most of Fallujah, where are those citizens who fled the city going to live in the meantime?

But the Americans are running Iraq.
You are absolutely correct, and they will be running/ruining Iraq for quite some time into the future. :eek:

There are some of you who question why we attack Fallujah. The reason is because we can't allow terrorists to run a country within a country! They were developing their own, Iran-like state there, which was the original purpose for invading Iraq.
The original purpose for invading Iraq was for the US to establish strategic bases in the Middle East, take over the economy of Iraq and control the world's 2nd largest oil reserves.