Article

2005-10-22 Iraq

U.S. General: Iraqi Army Needs More Time

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 2005-10-22 00:21|| || Front Page|| [11132 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Lol. Of course it will take time. Hell, most of the morons who are demanding immediate gratification are unaware that it took longer to dismantle their once-capable armed forces than the good General is suggesting it will take to stand up decent Iraqi forces. They're doing an excellent job and, to be perfectly honest, they're coming along far faster than I (or many others who know the history of Arab "armies") ever dreamed possible. To the ankle-biters, such as our home-brew morons in the Congress, fuck the fuck off. You are so far out of your element it's hysterical. The likes of Biden, et al, pontificating on military matters is black comedy.

Posted by .com 2005-10-22 01:20|| 2005-10-22 01:20|| Front Page Top

#2 And when were S.Korean forces ready to stand alone? Or German for that matter. Still there aren't we? When did the wall go down?

Posted by Glealing Sluper3406 2005-10-22 07:51|| 2005-10-22 07:51|| Front Page Top

#3 ``If we're talking about an army that can pick up and move and go out to the borders to defend the country and be able to sustain operations out in the open for a long period of time, it's probably going to be a year and a half, two years before that system is mature enough to operate on its own,''

Sounds way overly optimistic. I expect in two years it'll be able to easily contain the bandits, but a mobile field force in 2 years?

Posted by Shipman 2005-10-22 08:12|| 2005-10-22 08:12|| Front Page Top

#4 Shipman: I have just the opposite impression. Right now, the only army other than Israel in the area for Iraq to contend with is Iran. So the general's calculation would be for Iraq to hold its own long enough for the US military to arrive.

From that perspective, the things the Iraqis need are first an air force that can hold off the Iranian air force. They will have to procure this on their own, so it is not a "US dependent" factor.

Hand in glove with this are sufficient AAA resources to take down both Iranian air and especially missiles. Lots of variables, here.

Lastly, they have the difficult problem of both having millions of pilgrims flood into their country, mostly from Iran, yet keeping a lid on Iranian mischief in the South. This is both border patrol and unconventional forces/internal security issues.

Right now, the Iraqi maneuver units are more than capable of taking on two to four times their number of Iranians. However, nobody is talking about the Iraqi artillery capability, which would be key in this situation.

Lots of stuff to do.

Posted by Anonymoose 2005-10-22 11:29|| 2005-10-22 11:29|| Front Page Top

#5 He's right on the logistics. If the Iraqis had to depend on the US Congress for their support we'd have... Vietnam.

Posted by Pappy 2005-10-22 11:32|| 2005-10-22 11:32|| Front Page Top

#6 Iguess they had better start trainingc-130,and helo pilots as well as suppling the aircraft.

Posted by raptor 2005-10-22 11:53|| 2005-10-22 11:53|| Front Page Top

#7 Let's face it, the troops will stay there until the last day of 'W's presidency. If the American people want the troops out, they're going to have to elect someone who will promise withdrawal upon taking office! I don't see that from either side.

Posted by smn 2005-10-22 12:11|| 2005-10-22 12:11|| Front Page Top

#8 raptor: actually, logistics transport was one of the first priorities the US established in the Iraqi air force. An unusual concept in the region, we persuaded them that supporting a maneuver division could force multiply it many times over.

We trained the heck out of an Iraqi transport detachment, and when they did their first independent mission, and did it right, we threw a party like they had just had a baby. We wanted them to *know* that this was their bread-and-butter, not fighter aircraft or bombers.

In essence, it is deep re-education, and not an easy lesson, to train an army that they can accomplish more with a shovel, in the proper circumstances, than a sword.

Posted by Anonymoose 2005-10-22 13:17|| 2005-10-22 13:17|| Front Page Top

#9 smn - that's known as a "cut and run" (AKA Donk) candidate - a loser

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2005-10-22 13:20|| 2005-10-22 13:20|| Front Page Top

#10 In a strange sense of karma, the constant drum beat by the MSM about US casualties only reinforces the public desire the make sure that the sacrifices were worth it. Meaning that given a choice between a cut-and-run candidate and one to see-it-to-a-finish, the American public is more disposed to selecting the latter.

Posted by Slolet Ebbailing9500 2005-10-22 14:07|| 2005-10-22 14:07|| Front Page Top

#11 "If we're talking about an army that can pick up and move and go out to the borders to defend the country and be able to sustain operations out in the open for a long period of time, it's probably going to be a year and a half, two years before that system is mature enough to operate on its own," Webster said from Baghdad.

Interesting. General Webster is talking about the Iraqi army not as a counter-insurgency force, but as a force focused around conventional military operations. That's a step down the road from current concerns.

Off hand, this article doesn't strike me as bad news, but it does seem to fit a general pattern in which everything we do in Iraq seems to take about a year to a year-and-half longer than was apparently originally planned for.

Posted by Patrick Phillips 2005-10-22 14:39|| 2005-10-22 14:39|| Front Page Top

#12 Iran conventional forces aren't really much of a threat; neither are Syrian.

In reality the only military force in a neighboring country that is capable is Turkey.

The question isn't really when Iraq will be fully capable. The question is how many troops will we be able to withdraw before the 2006 elections. If we can reduce the force by 40k or so, the donks will not be able to use the 'quagmire meme' as effectively with the undecideds.

Posted by mhw 2005-10-22 19:47|| 2005-10-22 19:47|| Front Page Top

23:56 Grush Tholuger7316
23:46 Grush Tholuger7316
23:43 macofromoc
23:42 Grush Tholuger7316
23:27 doc
23:24 Edward Yee
23:24 Grush Tholuger7316
23:24 Hupitle Snomoth2094
23:19 Grush Tholuger7316
23:17 Grush Tholuger7316
23:04 anon1
23:01 Grush Tholuger7316
22:55 FeralCat
22:52 Grush Tholuger7316
22:19 Phemp Glemp1339
22:15 Frank G
22:10 Xenia
22:09 Oldspook
22:05 CrazyFool
22:04 CrazyFool
22:01 Xenia
21:58 John in Tokyo
21:35 Shipman
21:29 Shipman