Article

2003-03-29 Iraq

U.S. Orders 4-6 Day Pause in Iraq Advance-Officers

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve White 2003-03-29 02:23 am|| || Front Page|| [4 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Notice how al-Reuters calls the liberation forces an "invasion force"... I'd take any of their "reports" with a few tons of salt.

Posted by Kalle (kafir forever) 2003-03-29 02:47:21|| [radio.weblogs.com/0103811/categories/currentevents/] 2003-03-29 02:47:21|| Front Page Top

#2 There has been no report of attacks against the supply lines. If it is true, it means the coalition forces have met less resistance than expected and went too far, too fast. This happened to the Allied forces in France in WWII.
Does anybody think Iraq losing faster that expected is a problem?

Posted by Caton 2003-03-29 04:37:31|| 2003-03-29 04:37:31|| Front Page Top

#3 It's simply prudent. Time to rest, resupply, perform maintenance on equipment, and refine plans.

So far in this war I've seen absolutely NOTHING that alarms me in the least other than the doom-mongering in the press.

For some of the reporters this can be chalked up to gross ignorance of military matters- so gross that it could have been largely alleviated simply by watching a few hours worth of the various Gulf War One documentaries that have aired recently on the History Channel.

For others, such as those from the BBC, it's a deliberate effort to paint events in the most pessimistic light possible, and it arises from malice and hostility toward either the US, or the military, or to George W. Bush. They want us to lose, period. And they're doing their best to bring that about by the same tactic used in Vietnam: wearing down the public's confidence.

And for some others, it's just sheer laziness. War is always full of surprises, many of them unpleasant. And one way to get a news story without doing any real work or thinking is just to wait for something bad to happen and then speculate anxiously about it in front of a TV camera on the nightly news. It's a nice way to fill air time without going to any real effort.

Sorry for the long rant, Fred...

Posted by Dave D. 2003-03-29 05:58:55|| 2003-03-29 05:58:55|| Front Page Top

#4 An operational pause is well within sop for a military operation.Securing lines of comunication,and resupply are absolutly vital.Of course we will be hearing the Talking Heads(not the band)saying that we are bogged down but that's just bull.

Posted by raptor 2003-03-29 06:02:52|| 2003-03-29 06:02:52|| Front Page Top

#5 Agreed Dave. I think the strategy that we've seen so far is brilliant, whoever thought it up: avoid the cities and head straight for Baghdad. You want to fight? Than you have to come out of the city. If you don't, all the better, we'll take care of you later. Saddam had to spread his thugs all over and out of Baghdad, so there's less to deal with once we get there. And I mean those black-hooded bad-asses that we've seen on tv lately. From what I understand the RG isn't allowed inside Baghdad.
For the media idiots anything with a casualty figure of greater than zero is a defeat, of course.

Posted by RW 2003-03-29 06:43:35|| 2003-03-29 06:43:35|| Front Page Top

#6 Slowing this thing down is too our advantage, the left is busily spinning the angel that its taking too long, what a joke after spinning the slow down side when diplomacy was working, now they've switched to the hurry up angle because they want mistakes, and they know their side is running out of time.

Posted by AnonymousLy yours 2003-03-29 07:26:09|| 2003-03-29 07:26:09|| Front Page Top

#7 "soldiers have had their rations cut to one meal packet a day from three"

Spin, spin, spin. I saw an embedded reporter comment on this. He said they had plenty of food to last 3-4 days, but the re-supply rate at that time was only enough for one meal packet a day. Of course re-supply had just barely begun. Our guys were still eating all their daily meals.

I hate this f#*king tabloid journalism. Any reporter who distorts the truth to spin like this should be fired. The fact that they aren't speaks volumes about the whole industry. Between the malicious and the idiots, journalism is in a sorry state.

Posted by Tom 3/29/2003 8:03:03 AM|| 3/29/2003 8:03:03 AM|| Front Page Top

#8 "soldiers have had their rations cut to one meal packet a day from three"

Spin, spin, spin. I saw an embedded reporter comment on this. He said they had plenty of food to last 3-4 days, but the re-supply rate at that time was only enough for one meal packet a day. Of course re-supply had just barely begun. Our guys were still eating all their daily meals.

I hate this f#*king tabloid journalism. Any reporter who distorts the truth to spin like this should be fired. The fact that they aren't speaks volumes about the whole industry. Between the malicious and the idiots, journalism is in a sorry state.

Posted by Tom 2003-03-29 08:03:03|| 2003-03-29 08:03:03|| Front Page Top

#9 The boys are dog tired. The pace can not be kept at high tempo for extended periods of time. You try it. They need the sleep, 8 hours, to get back into good condition. Without adequate sleep, you start making stupid mistakes which cost lives. The equipment need a damn good cleaning after the sand of the road and the weather. You don't want it to break down right in the middle of the next impulse in the offense.

Posted by Don 2003-03-29 08:26:52|| 2003-03-29 08:26:52|| Front Page Top

#10 Steve, just remember its a pause in forward momentum only, it allows us to get supplies readt, maintenance done, close reconnisance done.
It not a 'cease fire' as some of the left media were calling it this morning.

It also does not apply to Saddam, who will still being pounded into dust from the air. Saddam was counting on us running into cities, now that we have delayed doing that, it means he's still expending people and ammunition, niether of which can be resupplied or reconstituted.

This is a prudent move, given the amount of distance we have covered in just about a week.

Posted by Frank Martin 2003-03-29 10:25:52|| [varifrank.blogspot.com] 2003-03-29 10:25:52|| Front Page Top

#11 Most of the comments above are right on. We do need a break. That will give us time to get the 4ID on the ground, and start moving them north. That will relieve some of the 101st for offensive operations. Everybody gets a night's sleep for a change, and maybe even a few minutes outside that %#%^$#^%$#^$^%$ chemical warfare suit. Hate those things! Work on getting equipment up to 100%, allow the intel guys to pick out the best attack routes, give the choppers a chance to blast away at static positions, and so forth.

You're also giving Hussein heart failure at the same time. "What are they up to, what do they plan to do next? How can we move against them? What should we do now?" Make him (or his subordinates, since there's a good possibility he's not making decisions at the moment)sweat. Make them worry themselves into an ulcer. Also give the people - the ordinary, everyday people of Baghdad - time to stock up on non-perishables and water for the next phase of the battle.

Most of all, give the talking heads an opportunity to screw themselves into the ground. These idiots need to be held accountable for their stupidity. I hope everyday America gets so disgusted with them, they turn their televisions OFF for the duration. No watchers, no reason to pay millions for that commercial air time, no way to keep a network on the air without sponsors. Kill several birds with one stone.

Posted by Old Patriot 2003-03-29 13:02:44|| 2003-03-29 13:02:44|| Front Page Top

#12 I am amused to no end by the hand-wringing and self righteous press. They were against the war from the start, then when we start this huge show, they expect victory and it has been a little more than a week since things started. For a historical perspective, we faced 6 months plus change of steady defeat in the Pacific before we started a limited holding action at Guadalcanal in August of 1942. Then we had months and months of warfare and then we got the 'Canal. Then we began to build on success and learn, and pretty soon we were accelerating. We have made some errors in judgement, and Turkey did not help, but we adjusted and went on. Suicide bombers and Chem Weapons are tools of the desparate. Even the majority of these Iraqi nutcases want to live.

Posted by Alaska Paul 2003-03-29 19:01:02|| 2003-03-29 19:01:02|| Front Page Top

#13 If you look at the reports from the embeddeed reporters, they and the troopies don't seem all that concerned about it. Sounds like they appreciate the chance to rest, resupply and consolidate the supply lines. The hand wringers seem to either be at Centcom in Qatar, the op/ed pages of the Times and the Post, or the anchor desks in New York.

Posted by tu3031 2003-03-30 01:24:18|| 2003-03-30 01:24:18|| Front Page Top

#14 Funny - how they call such attention to the fact that the MRE rations were cut from 3 to 1. Any military person worth his salt can tell you that one MRE has enough calories (somewhere around 3000) to sustain a man in combat for a day. They have merely lost out on variety and ability to eat extra out of boredom.

Trying to convince us that we are neglecting our own troops... silly...

Other than that, it sounds non-sensical to suggest that stopping to readjust supply lines is anything but a good idea!

Posted by Steve 2003-03-30 02:20:16|| 2003-03-30 02:20:16|| Front Page Top

19:47 someone who didn't vote for Bush
19:17 someone who didn't vote for Bush
07:52 raptor
07:30 anon1
05:41 R. McLeod
05:28 R. McLeod
05:17 George
02:33 Steve
02:20 Steve
02:14 Steve
01:29 Steve
01:24 tu3031
01:17 Brew
01:12 Steve
01:07 Brew
01:05 Brew
01:04 tu3031
01:00 Steve
00:58 tu3031
00:56 Brew
00:52 Alaska Paul
00:52 tu3031
00:50 Steve
00:49 Brew