Article

2006-11-21 Iraq

Adaptation: What The US Army Is Learning In Iraq

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 FOTSGreg 2006-11-21 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11126 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Adaption? Does that mean having to have three sworn statments every time a weapon is fired or an accidental discharge (AD) takes place? Or limiting 50 Cal engagement to non-personnel targets, ie, suspected IED? Thank you Cdr, 82nd Abn Div for your mods to the ROE. Please, someone correct me if I am wrong.

Posted by Besoeker 2006-11-21 06:06|| 2006-11-21 06:06|| Front Page Top

#2 No amount of 'adaptation' on the distant battlefield will deliver victory till the brass 'adapts' to the home front battlefield with the intent to win.

Posted by Procopius2K 2006-11-21 08:49|| 2006-11-21 08:49|| Front Page Top

#3 Limited warfare is folly. No 'adaptation' will change that.

Posted by mcsegeek1 2006-11-21 09:25|| 2006-11-21 09:25|| Front Page Top

#4 You are very much right Besoeker. We had similar silliness. Talk about stifling the aggressive posture you need to keep hajji idiots at bay.

Posted by Broadhead6 2006-11-21 11:18|| 2006-11-21 11:18|| Front Page Top

#5 Procopius 2k nails it on the head. We could win this thing outright if brass just got out and did some "selling" of this war. The lack of response from both the DoD and the White House on the constant MSM snipping and daily body counts wears down the "domestic will". This is as big, or possibly bigger, issue to win than the military aspects. We need to stop fighting to a ceasefire or surrender (pulling out) and fight to freakin' win! No holds barred, that's the only thing these goons understand. ALL else is seen as weakness, no matter how much "adaptation" occurs.

Posted by BA 2006-11-21 11:46|| 2006-11-21 11:46|| Front Page Top

#6 Muslims embrace a supremacist ideology. Communication can't shake their Koranic obligation to wage jihad terror. They are only humble, when we are arrogant. At war with Muslims, only harsh intelligence and disproportionate retaliation will work. During the Communist insurgency in Malaysia, post WW2, if British intelligence suspected a village held terrorist arms, villagers were forced to watch their homes being torched, so that they could see and hear the hidden arms explode. In saner times, the Israeli Defense Forces would conduct random investigative detentions of large numbers of Paleos. Few would talk, but enough held grudges against Paleo parasites to spill the goods. While the Paleos have no aversion to murdering informants, they were reluctant to kill all who had been detained.

We will only win in Iraq if the costs of jihad terror, are made higher than the benefits of trophy slaughters by the IED and ambush killers. After US troops pick up the dead, locals swarm the kill zones in celebration. The message is: the IED planters can kill at will, with near impunity.

Posted by Sneaze Shaiting3550 2006-11-21 12:43|| 2006-11-21 12:43|| Front Page Top

#7 Concur w/your tactics. IMO, The first part of that phase militarily would be to have media blackouts in those Areas or Operations and do what must be done on the ground. Loosen up the ROE as well. Select certain religous and tribal leaders for sanction (even parts of whole tribes need to be liquidated). (i.e. Sadr & his ilk) Well past time to throw off the yoke and be the strong horse.

The problem I forsee now is dealing w/the new Iraqi gov't and all their rampant nepotism and ulterior motivations of putting tribe a head of country. That's a tough one. A lot of my previous paragraph would've been much better done before last December's election. I'm not saying it is too late, merely more tenuous. A good start would be to hit the Iranian border crossings and even bomb into Iranian space when applicable to maintain Iraqi border security.

Posted by Broadhead6 2006-11-21 15:13|| 2006-11-21 15:13|| Front Page Top

#8 Breaking radio silnce:

In my corner of the world, we are used to fire disciplne, and minimizing eimpact except on the target. However, in the "special" community that I make my home, individuals and on-scene commanders are allowed considerable leeway and are expected to exercise proper agressive combat leadership and judgement when it comes to completing the mission. If that means using an M2 against personell, then so be it.

The ROE, modifications and restrictions of the ROE in the Regular forces are stupid and counter productive as they stand now, and some commands have made them even worse. We are not losing this war in terms of the individual combas and smal unit actions, we are losing it in terms of higher HQ hamstrining operaitonal elements of the regular forces from doing what they need to do to *decisively* engage and destory the enemy and bring about the end of his will to fight and resist.

This is what struck me - I considered such tales apocryphal at best, until I talked to an old friend and coupel of your line officers who I met that have recently come home.

The US military, with its political inclinations and incorrect judgement of the nature and psyche of "Haji" is doctrinally losing the war in Iraq. And it starts at the top with the President's refusla to see the nature of our opponent: the Radical Islamic Fundamentalist; and his refusal to demand that his military commanders account for the failures, and that people responsible for failures be sacked and replaced with new blood (ref: the CIA and state department).

In the case of our enemy, there is no such thing as the Religion of Peace and saying so feeds thier fanaticism and will to fight as it appears we are fulfilling thier prophecy that we will surrender to their Will of Allah.

There is no treating them gentle because they see that as weakness and it encourages to press further attacks.

There is no bargaining for quarter - they ask not and will not accept it honestly - only as Hudna, a lie told to buy time to build strength.

Tehy are no less fanatic than the Nazis and the Kamikazes. They have a racist ideaology, backed by thier religious certainties and reinforced by local tribal cultures. The only way to defeat them is to defeat their ideaology. The only way to defeat their ideaology is to inflict punishment so deep and severe as to cause them to have fundamental doubts about all of thier systems, and to kill all those who cannot be made to doubt.

It remains to be see whether we have the political will to do this.

I doubt that we do as of now, and that we ever will until we are hit again so hard as to remove all doubt. And that means mass casualties in the west, perhaps nuclear ones.

I grieve for the world and our lack of clear headed leadership needed to save it with lesser loss of innocent lives.

Posted by OldSpook 2006-11-21 16:32|| 2006-11-21 16:32|| Front Page Top

#9 That is the problem with most democratic leaders Spook. A lack of decisive action early leads to higher body counts and destruction later.

Posted by DarthVader">DarthVader 2006-11-21 16:44|| 2006-11-21 16:44|| Front Page Top

#10 Why have we not heard a peep out of Sistani? Where is that old fart hiding?

Posted by Mick Dundee 2006-11-21 17:17|| 2006-11-21 17:17|| Front Page Top

#11 ---Sistani - the last I read about him, he had become discouraged with the deterioration of Iraq and has been less willing than ever to speak about public policy there. He actually seemed to believe in the separation of church & state.
---W has always been unwilling to take firm action against underlings who have performed poorly. He should have fired George Tenet on 9/12/2001, for example.
---Representative governments have always had problems with generating the will to resist a vague threat, which (to about 45% of Americans) is what the current jihad is. If the US is hit by a nuke or just a drastic drop in oil imports, the home front will suffer greatly and might wake up, but even that might not work.
--- I have no doubt about the lack of political will to resist the jihad. Many Americans no longer believe self-defense is a right, much less national defense. Domestically the home front is still very unserious about what's going on in the world, and this has to affect the policy of the Army overseas.

Posted by Anguper Hupomosing9418 2006-11-21 20:45|| 2006-11-21 20:45|| Front Page Top

23:46 Kofi Annan
23:37 Old Patriot
23:36 .com
23:34 .com
23:28 BA
23:04 JosephMendiola
23:03 trailing wife
22:59 Zenster
22:47 wxjames
22:46 GK
22:31 JosephMendiola
22:03 JosephMendiola
22:02 JosephMendiola
22:00 Rob Crawford
21:58 Spavilet Ulomock8907
21:54 Ulinemble Phunter2801
21:52 Cholutch Ulang4315
21:52 Rob Crawford
21:41 JosephMendiola
21:41 eLarson
21:35 Pappy
21:29 closedanger@hotmail.com
21:25 Pappy
21:17 Pappy