| Submit your comments on this article |
| Iraq |
| 20 miles from Baghdad |
| 2003-04-02 |
| U.S. troops advanced to within 20 miles of Baghdad Wednesday in a multi-front assault that the coalition said destroyed much of the Iraqi capital's defensive force. Army units from the 3rd Infantry Division pushed past the city of Karbala after heavy fighting overnight and moved through fertile agricultural hinterlands to a point about 19 miles outside the city. Marines advancing from the southeast "destroyed" the Republican Guard's Baghdad Division near the town of Al Kut, Brooks said. They then crossed the Tigris River, 60 miles from Baghdad, and advanced to within 25 miles. The Marine vanguard found defensive positions abandoned, the ground littered with Iraqi military uniforms. There was no incoming artillery, and the light resistance raised commanders' fears of potential chemical weapons attacks. 19 miles... |
| Posted by:Fred Pruitt |
| #10 19D is Cav Scout. P is for Para qualified. The 98C is EW SigInt Analyst, P the same, the L is language, DG is Arabic-Iraqi. Couse I got out a long time ago, so my Arabic is probably a 0+ to 1-. Used to be 2+ to 3+ (Better speaking, moderate hearing, worse writing). I preferred the Cav in terms of people and comrades, but (excepting the Gulf War), duty is a lot more comfortable as a 98C. |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2003-04-02 22:34:09 |
| #9 OldSpook, A little airborne, a little light, a little mech. A classic example of the Army's very successful program to make sure its officers don't get too good at anything in particular. I just came off a tour in support of Operation Noble Eagle. I'm back at my civilian job where I once had the responsibilities of a battalion commander but now have the responsibilities of a senior staff captain. Needless to say, I'm pretty bored and have lot's of time to screw off on the internet. 98C, that's a Signals Analyst Linguist??? |
| Posted by: 11A5S 2003-04-02 19:33:14 |
| #8 11A? Tread head officer or Crunchie officer? I'm 19D3P (Retrained into 98C4P-LDG) Thats if I recall all those numbers. Been forever since I needed anything past the first 3 and the 'P". |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2003-04-02 18:34:26 |
| #7 I'm beginning to wonder if there is enough command and control below the brigade unit level to even respond to commands to fire off HE rounds in the artillery units, much less chemical ones. To get chems fired you have to A) Have high-level command release B) Have division commander release and orders C) Have a Brigade/Regiment commander to give the command. D) Have a battery commander accept the commnd E) Have a battery capable of firing (training and right guns) F) That a battery must also be supplied (troops and chem munitions) G) Have proper targets within range H) Have proper conditions for the weapons (wind, humidity, temperature, precipitation) I) Have troops willing to carry out the battery commander's orders. Any break in A to I results in a "no fire". Given how the US has been pounding the "launch chems and become a war criminal" campaign, there is likely a lot of hesitancy at all command levels. Additionally, there has to be communications along the chain of command - which our bombing has taken out the ground component, and I would bet the jammers have all their freqs knocked off the air. Also, there is the practical matter of items E and F. Also, US counterbattery gives an Iraqi artillery unit a lifespan of about 3 minutes from the time that enemy first fires to the time it is destroyed with MLRS delivered multipurpose munitions and tube counter-battery fair (our cannons shoot back). The firefinder radars can track back an artillery launch, figure the firing units' coordinates, digitally deliver those coordinates to the counterbattery unit (Usually MLRS) and have the counterbattery fire launched on the enemy before the enemy artillery has impacted on friendly troops. I've seen those gun bunnies work - they have this stuff down cold - killing the other guy's artillery is their favorite mission. Given that, there are probably very few field artillery units left in the Iraqi army that are operational. Any chemical attack will likely only be 3-4 tubes, and only 1 volley (after which those crews and guns are dead). Not to minimize it, but thats not very much chemical agent on target, can simply be avoided. So thats probably why we have noot seen chem warfare started - there are tons of things against it, and very little for it aside from blind, suicidal fanaticism that must be present fromthe top to bottom of the entire chain of command. |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2003-04-02 18:03:29 |
| #6 One scenario that I keep coming back to is that the Iraqis wait until the coalition troops are inside Baghdad, then threaten to use chemical weapons, thereby holding the entire population (5 million?) as hostage against further advances. It plays off our greatest weakness (respect for human life) against Saddam's greatest strength (an absolute disregard for any life but his own). That's my most dangerous enemy course of action. My most likely (in order of likelihood) are that (1)the Iraqis just don't have any delivery systems left -- 95% plus have been destroyed by airstrikes and counter battery fire or (2) that our propaganda campaign, threatening to hang whoever uses WMD, has been _very_ effective. |
| Posted by: 11A5S 2003-04-02 17:52:19 |
| #5 I'm not convinced they are ready to use WMD for now. Their tactics is to lure the troops into the city and use guerrilla tactics, shooting out of mosques and hospitals. Chemical weapons won't help them much, they are facing troops that are well protected against them. The Iraqi idea is to bog the enemy down until summer gets hot. And who knows: Saddam may already be in Syria. |
| Posted by: True German Ally 2003-04-02 17:01:59 |
| #4 My sentiments three. I think this is their idea of a trap. Hopefully we can reverse it on 'em... |
| Posted by: jrosevear 2003-04-02 16:22:29 |
| #3 My sentiments, too, Tadderly. I posted below my conjecture about this. I think they've been saving their WMDs and air force for one last gasp. |
| Posted by: Dar 2003-04-02 16:18:52 |
| #2 Suit up, boys and girls. Bad feeling on this one ... |
| Posted by: Tadderly 2003-04-02 16:15:39 |
| #1 i presume that why theyre moving so fast - harder to hit when youre moving, and closing with the enemy means that if you get slimed, he gets slimed too, and hopefully you're beter prepared. |
| Posted by: liberalhawk 2003-04-02 16:13:28 |