Comments

You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name

Your e-mail (optional)

Website (optional)

	My Original Nic Pic-a-Nic Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Foto

Submit your comments on this article

Iraq

U.S., British Troops Advance Deep Into Iraq

2003-03-21

U.S. and British invasion forces penetrated deep into Iraqi territory on Friday, meeting sporadic resistance on the road to Baghdad where President Saddam Hussein prepared for his last stand. U.S. and British leaders said the campaign to oust Saddam was going according to plan but warned that the real battle still lay ahead. In a day of swift developments:

U.S. Marines captured the Iraqi port of Umm Qasr
while other troops seized two airfields in the Iraqi desert 140 and 180 miles west of the capital, part of a move to encircle Baghdad.
British Marines launched an amphibious and aerial assault and secured key oil installations at the head of the Gulf.
Other British troops headed for the port of Basra which they aimed to capture quickly.
U.S. special forces reported fighting for the Kirkuk oil fields in northern Iraq.
One U.S. unit armored division ran into Iraqi resistance that halted it temporarily near Nassiriya on the Euphrates river while it called for backup. The town is a main strategic crossing point over the Euphrates 235 miles southeast of Baghdad.

Reuters correspondent Andrew Gray, traveling with elements of the U.S. 3rd Infantry Division, said the unit had come under fire near Nassiriya. He saw U.S. troops return fire with rockets. U.S. officers said they expected soon "to go and join the battle." U.S. Marines also met unexpected resistance when they attacked a key southern Iraqi port earlier in the day. Iraqi ministers vowed to "incinerate" the invaders. Washington appeared to be holding much of its air power in reserve, apparently hoping that Iraqi resistance would collapse as invasion troops neared the capital. Commanders said the next 24 hours would be decisive.
Holding the air support back is going to cost lives. Schwartzkopf understood the combined arms concept. ~~Westmoreland~~ Franks doesn't seem to have it down, or else it's not comprehended at the top, which is more understandable but worse...

Posted by:Fred Pruitt

#4 Within hours, however, it would be too late to reach a successful conclusion to the talks

because all the Iraqi talkers will be dead.

You waited a little too long, fellas. Should have taken the first offer.

Posted by: Chuck 2003-03-21 14:38:12

#3 This is a quote from the WaPo announcement of a major bombing raid right now:

"This official said Gen. Tommy Franks, the war's top commander, would "scale" the intensity of the bombardment in accordance with progress in the surrender talks. Within hours, however, it would be too late to reach a successful conclusion to the talks, and then, if no conclusion was reached, the bombing would go full-throttle, the official said."

Maybe the 'scaled' response thing sounds disturbing but it does say we'll get to the end of the scale in 'hours.'

Posted by: JAB 2003-03-21 12:15:45

#2 Simply having "Shock and Awe" hovering over their heads is hard on the intestines. It's distracting and even physically unpleasant.
But.. after all that.. at 2100.00 Baghdad time, Shock and Awe began.

Posted by: Dishman 2003-03-21 12:02:54

#1 holding back strategic air or operational support???
Im not sure about holding back operational support - i saw a report warthogs and AC-130's were used in combat near Umm al qasr. holding back strategic seems based on game plan of holding back "shock and awe" as incentive for Rep. Guard and others to flip. It will also have Grand Strategic value - this is the first step in a larger campaign in the global war on terrorism - the less damage we do to Iraqi infrastructure, the stronger we come out for the next phase.

Posted by: liberalhawk 2003-03-21 11:23:14

00:00