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.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Iraq-Jordan
Fallujah Cease-Fire "Over"
2004-04-21
Heard on the radio that the Marines have declared the cease-fire over; one or more firefights underway. Closest online story is from Fox:
Up to 40 Iraqi insurgents attacked U.S. Marines in northern Fallujah on Wednesday, setting off a heavy gunbattle as an agreement bringing peace to the besieged city hit snags a day after implementation began. Explosions were heard coming from the scene of the fighting, and Cobra helicopter gunships were blasting from the air. Tanks moved into the Julan neighborhood from which Marines said insurgents their positions. Marine Lt. Col. Brennan Byrne said high-level commanders viewed the battle as a "major breach" of the agreement. "The implication of that I don't know yet," he said.

In response to what the Marines called a disappointing disarmament showing, the Marines halted a key commitment on their side in the deal -- the return of Fallujah residents to the city. The Marine commanders would not say how many weapons had been turned in. About 10 families made it back into the city in the morning before Marines announced to some 600 Iraqis waiting at the checkpoint that no more would be allowed to enter. The crowds massed behind concertina wire, with women and crying children pressing forward, demanding to be let in. Nearby trucks were stacked high with families belongings and other goods. Some 70,000 people -- more than a third of Fallujah's population of 200,000 -- fled the city during the fighting since April 5, flooding Baghdad (search) and nearby areas.

Wednesday's battle began with an ambush by 13 insurgents on Marines, who called in Cobra gunships that killed 10 of the attackers, Byrne said. Nearly three dozen insurgents then joined the fight with Marines in a running battle that lasted four hours. It ended when warplanes dropped two 500-pound bombs. Ten more insurgents were killed, Byrne said.
Thoroughly killed, in fact...
U.S. officials have said the deal's success hinges on whether the Fallujah negotiators -- a group of local civic leaders -- can convince the guerrillas to comply with the call to hand over their arsenals. The military has warned it may resume its assault on the city if the agreement falls through. Implementation of the deal reached by U.S. officials and Fallujah civic representatives began with a spirit of optimism on Tuesday. Several hundred Iraqi police and security forces moved back into the city, and a curfew was pushed back by two hours to 9 p.m. Announcements aired in the city detailed how residents should turn in to police and city officials any heavy weapons such as rocket-propelled grenades, machine guns, rockets and bomb-making material. By noon Wednesday, Byrne said no weapons had been turned in. "These may be early indications that the insurgents may not be living up to the requirements of the agreement," he said.
... dryly...
Later, commanders said some weapons had been surrendered, but almost all were useless. Insurgents opened fire with small arms overnight and fired a rocket-propelled grenade at the Liaison Office where Iraqi security forces are suppposed to hand over to the U.S. military any weapons they collect. During the day, some 300 members of the police and security forces who had left the city were lined up to "re-enlist," said Capt. Steve Coast -- meaning they would receive new documents certifying they are members of the force. Fallujah's mayor was also working from the site. Several hundred other security forces moved into the city Tuesday. U.S. commanders have warned that they could launch an all-out attack on the city if the agreement -- announced Monday after negotiations between U.S. officials and Fallujah civil leaders -- falls through. So far, the U.S. response has been the halt to the return of families who fled Fallujah during the fighting -- a top concern of the Fallujans. A day earlier, U.S. officials allowed 50 families back into the city as provided for under the deal. From the start, the fragile agreement had depended on how much the city's guerrillas complied with a call by city officials for them to turn in heavy weapons.
Posted by:Robert Crawford

#23  Frank:

The PR bit I tried to cover in c) i.e. we are painted pretty badly by the locals no matter what we do, so a PR appeal to them is a waste of time. Dragging out a "siege" just adds more fuel to their sick little fantasies. Getting things done so fast their heads spin is the only way to alleviate the PR hit.

Resupply & consolidation: I don't have any experience in the area, but I would hope that 1) we didn't use up our stocks that fast (the marines just got in theater, right?) and 2) anyway, we should be able to keep the initiative while getting supplies forward.

Intel gathering I can understand, but a certain amount of such activities can be done while moving forward and keeping the enemy fighters off balance and on the run. Plus, once you get the killers out of the neighborhood, you could have locals come out as new sources of intel.

11A5S: To your comment, I recall reading something in the past day or so to the effect that the cordon, such as it is, only covers main roads, so losing the leaders is a distinct possibility. I assume that this is the best we could do with the forces at hand. I don't know what the perimeter of Falluja is, but I am sure it is substantial.
Posted by: Carl in N.H.   2004-04-21 11:51:35 PM  

#22  g) Gives the leaders plenty of time to exfiltrate and live another day.
Posted by: 11A5S   2004-04-21 11:26:11 PM  

#21  Carl: how about PR and resupply/consolidation/sharing of intel?...don't be so down....
Posted by: Frank G   2004-04-21 11:09:26 PM  

#20  Shipman: Carl you seem to be a little down recently

Yep. I think that the decision to call a ceasefire in Falluja was the latest and greatest misstep:

a) it killed the momentum of the troops on the ground
b) the people we are fighting are not negotiable with, so any "ceasefire" is one-sided and meaningless; what's the point ?
c) it is *not* going to stop Al-Jizz atrocity porn -- that will always be a feature in that culture no matter what we do
d) it gives the enemy the source for their own legends about stopping the mighty Yankees and boosts their morale. And recruitment.
e) it makes us look indecisive in the eyes of the rest of the world, and confirms stereotypes about Mogadishu, Vietnam, etc: "kill a few Americans, and they give up"
f) it is the latest manifestation of the political hesitance which I have started to suspect in this administration at home and abroad. The main reason I thought Bush was The Right Man was because he had his eye on the ball. Now I am not sure.

So, I see this as an inflection point. I would be surprised to see any vigorous and positive action against the enemy, and instead expect things to bump along past June 30, maybe into the next year, pretty much along the current pattern of reacting to enemy initiatives.

This is not a way to win.

Posted by: Carl in N.H.   2004-04-21 11:03:36 PM  

#19  Generally agree with the idea that we need to ba a bit pragmatic, but ging 'Roman' on Fallouja would probably increase our support in many parts of Iraq. Not sure the Kurds and Shia would shed that many tears if we liquidated the worst of the Sunni Baathists who had been oppressing them for decades.
Posted by: JAB   2004-04-21 8:04:06 PM  

#18  ... they should shoot to kill

Agreed. The insurgents are shooting to kill. Sauce for the goose is in order.
Posted by: Zenster   2004-04-21 4:59:29 PM  

#17  Not clear, spiff. It'll definitely be a caretaker govt. And I hope the UN backs it, but that doesnt mean theyll pick it. IGC will probably still have a role in picking the new govt, and many will go onto it.

In any case, if the IGC falls apart pre-June 30 that pretty much takes away most of the leverage we have over what happens post June 30.
Posted by: Liberalhawk   2004-04-21 4:56:37 PM  

#16  Isn't the IGC going to now be desolved on 6/30 and replaced with a "UN-backed caretaker goverment?" . . . yeah, that'll work.

But, if that is in fact the new plan of record (no sure it is, but . . . ), doesn't it seem less relevant whether the IGC mutinies over a real siege of Fallujah?
Posted by: spiffo   2004-04-21 4:52:42 PM  

#15  Later, commanders said some weapons had been surrendered, but almost all were useless.

Then they aren't "weapons." Ceasefire over. Open season.

I'm still waiting to see some actual numbers revealing the gender of these "civilian" casualties. If an overwhelming majority of the Fallujan wounded and dead are men of fighting age, all the media pissing and moaning means squat.

Our military really needs to publish these figures immediately in order to counter any accusations of atrocities being committed by our troops.
Posted by: Zenster   2004-04-21 4:52:14 PM  

#14  losing military momentum on the ground is a concern. OTOH keeping the IGC together is also a concern. What good does it to take Fallujah, and have half the IGC resign on us??? Do we then postpone handover??? Resulting in more discontent from folks who are still with us?? Things ARENT as bad in Iraq now as the headline writers in the mainstream media imply, but they COULD go south real fast. We're doing tolerably well cause the insurgencies probably have the support of only about 25% of Iraqis (about half of the Sunni Arabs, and about a quarter of the Shia, at most) IF there were truely to be a general rising, we DONT have enough troops in country to control it, and would have difficulty assembling enough troops. In which case going Roman on Fallujah might make the rest of Iraq hate us, but WOULDNT make them fear us.

Current approach seems best - give the locals a chance to negotiate, show the iraqis you DONT want to destroy Fallujah, but WHEN the baddies come at you, kill as many as possible.
Posted by: Liberalhawk   2004-04-21 4:48:19 PM  

#13  If the "cease-fire" is indeed over, then whenever the Marines find these insurgents, they should shoot to kill. Take no prisoners. They'd be a waste to feed anyway.
Posted by: Bomb-a-rama   2004-04-21 2:21:06 PM  

#12  Re: #10

Hmmmm... I would think gunsight cameras for sniper scopes could be arranged...
Posted by: mojo   2004-04-21 2:10:13 PM  

#11  Carl you seem to be a little down recently.
Posted by: Shipman   2004-04-21 1:44:53 PM  

#10  I hope that we have equipped the marines with video cameras (or any cameras) so they can record the 'noble rebels' hiding behind women and children, using them as human shields, shooting them in the back, etc...

We have to start fighting this war on the airwaves as well as on the ground. As morbid as it sounds people will flock to see some 'rebel fighter' hiding behind a woman or little girl or even some civilians being killed by the 'noble freedom fighters'. Once people start seeing this for real the less 'noble' they will be perceived.

You can bet your ass Al-jitzz will have the hospitals and clinics staked out to get that all-important (now disarmed) 'civilian' with some bloody wound. One or two videos in some press conference (or even available on the net in the media refuses to report it) showing how the 'civilians' get 'wounded' would take the wind out of Al-jitzz's sails.
Posted by: CrazyFool   2004-04-21 1:36:23 PM  

#9  Y. Sam, I agree. At the civilan political leadership level, we have lost the concept of "momentum".

I wil be that we will see cycles of the following:

1. News reports US Marine actions

2. Followed within a day or so by Al-Jizz reports of civilian casualties/US atrocities

3. Which are repeated in "Westenr" media in a day or so

4. Then, calls from CPA, etc for a ceasefire in order to get the "negotiations" "back on track"

5. Halt of US offensive operations

Repeat.
Posted by: Carl in N.H   2004-04-21 1:20:45 PM  

#8  Well now, you wouldn't need to mop up after dropping a few daisey cutters, or MOAB's.
Posted by: Bill   2004-04-21 1:13:59 PM  

#7  Those of you with Abrams tanks are authorized to use the 120-gauge cylinder bore with either the APERS or the depleted uranium "super-size deer slug."
Posted by: Mike   2004-04-21 12:35:09 PM  

#6  Turban hunting season has reopened. No limit. No fire-arm or ammo restrictions.
Posted by: Rex Mundi   2004-04-21 12:30:24 PM  

#5  Water presure might be a bit weak for an effective hosing. But if you do get the ground clear enough the Zamboni could make sense. The Falluja Flames of the mid-east conference.

Yo Sam, man I hope not.
Posted by: Lucky   2004-04-21 11:59:15 AM  

#4  Lucky, mops take too long. If the chunks are small and won't clog the drains, I recommend a one inch diameter hose with a hard jacket that is available on a spool for this application. Note - this hose requires an adaptor for use with most hydrants but is small enough to be used by a single operate.

If the chunks are medium-sized, I would try a Zamboni and two guys with squeegees. Note - Zamboniing after-battle chunks has not been tried to my knowledge and mishaps would probably void any warrantees on the equipment.
Posted by: Super Hose   2004-04-21 11:42:21 AM  

#3  You are now free to exterminate the enemy.
Posted by: Chris W.   2004-04-21 11:37:07 AM  

#2  Prediction: We'll fight for a few days or more and then another cease-fire will be called.

Repeat and rinse.
Posted by: Yosemite Sam   2004-04-21 11:35:53 AM  

#1  Is Fallujah burning? I hope they don't make the marines fight block by block. I hope they mop up after blocks go drop.
Posted by: Lucky   2004-04-21 11:28:36 AM  

00:00