Article

2005-07-29 Iraq-Jordan

Lack of precision weapons lead to excessive force in Iraq: report

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 2005-07-29 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11131 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 KhaleejTimes. "Secret" memo. Right.

Sidearms with "la-zers" huh. Hmmm. Okay - there's something there, I guess. Dunno if I'd characterize it the way the article does, however. This storyline might be a tad dizzy. Anyway, Googling to find out more, what I located is this pic of the Gen (3rd pic down, the guy on the right - duh) and this hit piece by Scott Gold of the El Lay Times - which is all over the BDS hate blogs at the moment. About 2/3 of the way down you find out where Chavez comes in, and what the bruhaha is really about:

"Hubbard, the officer at Fort Bliss, also said conditions at Dona Ana are designed to mirror the harsh and often thankless assignments the soldiers will take on in Iraq. That was an initiative launched by Brig. Gen. Joseph Chavez, commander of the 29th Separate Infantry Brigade, which includes the 184th regiment. The program has resulted in everything from an alcohol ban to armed guards at the entrance to Dona Ana, Hubbard said."

So the General is a big bad mean guy and some Guard cheesedicks are having a meltdown for the reporter buying the beer. Okay. Next.

Posted by .com 2005-07-29 06:31|| 2005-07-29 06:31|| Front Page Top

#2 ensure proportional force is used in response to attacks

What's the proper proportion? 8 to 1?

Posted by Shipman 2005-07-29 07:05|| 2005-07-29 07:05|| Front Page Top

#3 Although the March 15 secret memo does not mention any unwanted civilian deaths by Chavezâ troops while defending military convoys, it suggests strongly such incidents have taken place. âPreviously, reports indicated that excessive use of force, to include unauthorized deadly force, was employed by some convoy escorts,â Chaves wrote to the commander of all multinational forces in Iraq.

Ah. The modern press.

Although the papers don't mention reporters fellating jihadis in the field, they strongly suggest such incidents have taken place.

Posted by Robert Crawford">Robert Crawford 2005-07-29 07:19|| http://www.kloognome.com/]">[http://www.kloognome.com/] 2005-07-29 07:19|| Front Page Top

#4 My good friend staff Sgt Harvey was a convoy escort. Any time they were fired on they first determined where it was comming from and how bad it was. A lot of times they were fired on by scumbags standing in the middle of a bunch of kids or grown civilians. They didn't fire back. When possible, they fired everything they had. This is a war, bugwits, not a paintball fight. The object is to kill the othe guy and the best way to accomplish that is to blow the living shit out of everything that moves when the shooting starts. Youd don't stop to try to decide what weapon to use, you use what's in your hand. If you hesitate, you are DEAD! Laser guided pistols? There are pistols with lasers on them to help in aiming but they are not laser guided. a laser guided bullet would be really something. If someone is shooting at me with an RPG or an Ak the last thing I want is a pistol. I might as well just throw it at them. This had to be written by someone who has no idea what combat is really like. It ain't the movies where the hero can shoot the balls off a nat at 100 feet using a 38 special. I qualified as Expert with a 45 and that is only good for about 30 feet. Weinerheads!

Posted by Deacon Blues">Deacon Blues 2005-07-29 07:42|| 2005-07-29 07:42|| Front Page Top

#5 Whatever happened to the concept of overwhelming force?

Posted by John Q. Citizen 2005-07-29 08:12|| 2005-07-29 08:12|| Front Page Top

#6 Great comments guys.

Posted by phil_b 2005-07-29 08:25|| 2005-07-29 08:25|| Front Page Top

#7 Actually, does anyone have an idea just why Brig. Gen. Chavez asserts that a pistol is seen by locals as a status symbol of authority in a soldier's hands? This actually interests me.

I don't know about the "propriety" of underbarrel lasers, but reportedly (StrategyPage) they provided a measure of deterrent effect when their target could see the red dot on the torso.

I am skeptical about the holster recommendation though - more excuse for companies to "glut-glut-glut" and raise costs when soldiers and Marines can (hopefully) get themselves civilian hip-belt or drop-leg thigh holsters.

Posted by Edward Yee 2005-07-29 09:04|| http://edwardyee.fanworks.net]">[http://edwardyee.fanworks.net] 2005-07-29 09:04|| Front Page Top

#8 In situations like what'soing on over there give me a shoulder holster. Much better than a hip or thigh. try it sometime.

Posted by Deacon Blues">Deacon Blues 2005-07-29 09:27|| 2005-07-29 09:27|| Front Page Top

#9 Shoulder rigs are fine when you are standing.

But if you are crawling, or down in cover, then you need a top-draw leg holster.

Plus the thigh (flap) holster is much more secure than a shoulder rig for CQB, and it works better than a conventional shoulder rig does with full body armor.

Don't get me wrong - I wore a shoulder rig for years (still have one for concealed carry, along with a waist paddle holster), and they are great, but given the tactical realities they aren't the best way, unless there is a way to build the holders into the load bearing vests, like we had when I was in helicopter crew - carried a revolver to avoid FOD.

Thigh holsters are the way to go for almost all tactical troops.

Posted by OldSpook 2005-07-29 10:38|| 2005-07-29 10:38|| Front Page Top

#10 OS, I forgot about the body armour. when I was in, there was none.

Posted by Deacon Blues">Deacon Blues 2005-07-29 10:48|| 2005-07-29 10:48|| Front Page Top

#11 A college buddy spent 2.5 years in the Mekong delta on a 4 man kill team. There the average firefight lasted 3 to 6 seconds. No time for aiming... so ... he just carried two sawed-off 8-gauges. On incomming fire he would just respond to each side off the trail.
Since he lived to tell - it seems like a good strategy.

Posted by 3dc 2005-07-29 11:02|| 2005-07-29 11:02|| Front Page Top

#12 Deacon Blues,

Samew here - when I was in uniform, we had a lot of half-assed flak vests mainly for artillery fragments, nothing like the good ballistic stuff they have now. Thats why few people wore it in the first trip over to the sandbox back in 90-1. Especially crews (as opposed to infantry).

And I would think that they should design the covers for these to a holster for the pistol - cant be a high one becasue you cant reach and cross draw when you are prone. Cant be front of the vest (like the aircrew ones) because you may be prone. Can't be at the waist because that soudl stick out and get caugt on crap (like door frames when entering rooms tactically). So it woudl have to be on the side, not high, not on the waist, not protruding. That means maybe a mount right on the kidneys for same-side draw as long as you can flex your arm fully. Or else, a drop holster on the thigh: the very thing that was designed to meet those tactical criteria.

One thing I do laugh about is the "laser guided pistols". Red dot aiming systems are a waste of money, they only give away your target, and in dust/smoke, a conventional laser draws a line straight back to your position.

Somone who wrote this has apparently been watching too much US TV.

Posted by OldSpook 2005-07-29 11:16|| 2005-07-29 11:16|| Front Page Top

#13 Laser sighted pistols my ass. Now laser sighted Ma Dueces sounds about right

Posted by Cheaderhead 2005-07-29 11:17|| 2005-07-29 11:17|| Front Page Top

#14 A soldier wielding a pistol is viewed by local nationals as a token of authority...

And a tank commander is viewed as Gawd Almighty.

Posted by Matt 2005-07-29 11:35|| 2005-07-29 11:35|| Front Page Top

#15 ensure proportional force is used in response to attacks

There ought never be any such thought in an American field Officers' head.

Go head and shoot quail with a cannon EVERY time.
Maybe that will get the message across.

Posted by JerseyMike 2005-07-29 11:45|| 2005-07-29 11:45|| Front Page Top

#16 Go head and shoot quail with a cannon EVERY time

Sure. Don't mind the women and kids being held hostage, that the insurgents are hiding behind/among -- they just up the demand for water and power in the country anyway.

Nitwit.

Posted by too true 2005-07-29 11:59|| 2005-07-29 11:59|| Front Page Top

#17 Sure. Don't mind the women and kids being held hostage, that the insurgents are hiding behind/among -- they just up the demand for water and power in the country anyway.
Jeez I didn't know that happened in every single circumstance, thank goodness your smart enough for the both of us tt.
Asswipe.
You resort to name calling awfully quick tt.

Posted by JerseyMike 2005-07-29 12:29|| 2005-07-29 12:29|| Front Page Top

#18 That was quick TT. Overwhelming immediate force is a battle winner. If that means an automatic shotgun with the quail on the groud in a baited field... so be it.

Posted by Shipman 2005-07-29 12:35|| 2005-07-29 12:35|| Front Page Top

#19 I never have heard this crap about a pistol, sounds kinda ludicrous to me.

Although there is supposedly such a thing as a laser guided bullet, they are not currently in operational use in any unclassified manner that I've ever heard of, although that means nothing, nor are they reportedly being produced for anything smaller than a 50 cal. Works like a laser paint guided JDAM. for 50 cal sniper setups.

Although it would be a great idea to do such a thing. Imagine interfacing that with UAV and satellite imagery and network battle system for enemy/friendly identification and projectile guidance. You could theoretically lay out a well directed spray with confidence of much less collateral damage to the bystander and much higher damage to target.

However, Iraqis are scared shitless of being shot with a shotgun. Evidently shotguns are thought of as a weapon with which to kill dogs and if you are shot with a shotgun you have essentially died like a dog.

So naturally the 12 guage is preferred by many on the ground. However, it ain't a guided weapon and it aint worth shit past 30 ft. So, what logic is there in using a pistol?

EP

Posted by ElvisHasLeftTheBuilding 2005-07-29 12:56|| 2005-07-29 12:56|| Front Page Top

#20 Hmmmm .....

Shipman, there's a good reason our Army carefully trains soldiers and commanders re: the use of proportional force in SASO (stability and sustainment operations).

I've talked with a lot of combat-experienced officers. Can't say many have expressed a desire for rules of engagement that call for massive force against insurgents hiding in a crowd of women and kids. Nor would they want to command units of soldiers who were eager to fire this way. And you can be very sure we are not training our officers to engage in indiscriminate overwhelming force under circumstances where the collateral casualties are likely to be very high. If we had, Baghdad would have been a smoking hole in March 2003, with the remaining Sunni triangle towns following shortly thereafter.

Not everything is solved by overwhelming force. In Iraq we have multiple objectives, some of which are NOT military. Worth keeping in mind, because our Army does every day.

While it might be frustrating for us to watch, it is the professional discipline of our armed forces that makes them both effective and a good representative of our democracy abroad.

Posted by rkb 2005-07-29 12:59|| 2005-07-29 12:59|| Front Page Top

#21 The Military is not sutied for a law enforcement mode. The objectives and responses are different. This just points it out. I would opt for shot guns which they have, in a mix in the arms carried. A 9mm Bretta with a laser is not going to do the job. A 40 cal or larger.

Posted by Sock Puppet 0â Doom 2005-07-29 14:03|| 2005-07-29 14:03|| Front Page Top

#22 What is said about someone who brings a ~~knife~~ pistol to a firefight? If they need to quickly shoulder their personal arms, why not add a secure mount (i.e. gunrack) and straps for their M4s on top of their humvees?

Posted by ed 2005-07-29 14:06|| 2005-07-29 14:06|| Front Page Top

#23 I will stand partially corrected, given the nation building.... but.

Not everything is solved by overwhelming force
Name a war that was lost with the above.? :)

Posted by Shipman 2005-07-29 15:20|| 2005-07-29 15:20|| Front Page Top

#24 Excessive force? Bah! It's not excessive force until large chunks of the planet break off.

Posted by SteveS 2005-07-29 15:58|| 2005-07-29 15:58|| Front Page Top

#25 Exactly right regarding the military SPoD. Its purpose is to protect and defend the U.S. Period.
I say that given our experience in Iraq, I would have to agree with the sentiment expressed here a few days ago, I don't recall by who - but the next time we deploy it ought to be for the sole purpose of blowing things up and killing a-holes.
If we don't like how they have re-constituted and handle themselves post conflict, we reserve the right to blow their ass up again.
They want to see God, I'm all for sending them.

Posted by JerseyMike 2005-07-29 16:09|| 2005-07-29 16:09|| Front Page Top

#26 "And a tank commander is viewed as Gawd Almighty."

Never knew a TC that didnt hink he was God Almighty.

"From my position, On the Waaaaay" (TC OVerriding the gunner)

Posted by OldSpook 2005-07-29 19:08|| 2005-07-29 19:08|| Front Page Top

00:02 MunkarKat
23:46 Asedwich
23:39 SteveS
23:34 DMFD
23:33 SteveS
23:32 Pappy
23:24 jules 2
23:17 djohn66
23:16 Alaska Paul
23:09 Robert Crawford
23:07 Barbara Skolaut
23:02 Laurence of the Rats
22:50 too true
22:48 Super Hose
22:46 JosephMendiola
22:44 JosephMendiola
22:42 Super Hose
22:38 MunkarKat
22:35 Super Hose
22:35 JosephMendiola
22:33 Bobby
22:32 Super Hose
22:26 Jack Ruby
22:25 Just About Enough!