| Submit your comments on this article |
| Iraq |
| Airstrike Agreement Keeps US Air Controllers Away From Combat |
| 2014-10-03 |
| [Mil.com] U.S. warplanes have been flying close air support missions for Iraqi and Kurdish forces through a complex tactical arrangement that avoids having U.S. troops on the front lines to call in the strikes, an Air Force general said Monday. "We think itÂ’s being very effective right now," said Air Force Maj. Gen. Jeffrey L. Harrigian, the assistant deputy chief of staff for Operations. Harrigian said that Kurdish and Iraqi forces in close contact with Islamic State fighters have been calling in suggested targets to U.S joint terminal attack controllers (JTACs) based at Joint Operations Centers in Baghdad and the Kurdish capital of Irbil. The JTACs then check the suggested targets with live stream video from intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) assets overhead "so that we know where the front lines are" to plan strike missions, Harrigian said. |
| Posted by:Besoeker |
| #6 The JTACs then check the suggested targets with live stream video from intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) assets overhead "so that we know where the front lines are" to plan strike missions So much for rapid response. Then again, I suspect it's more a matter of avoiding one Shiite militia using airstrikes to take out another militia. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2014-10-03 12:41 |
| #5 No. Joe is not allowed to be on the ground because our commander-in-chief with his non-existent military experience has deemed it so. Therfore Ali has to phone Joe in the clear. ISIL wouldn't be intercepting cell calls, now would it. ~ |
| Posted by: Martin de Medici6501 2014-10-03 12:31 |
| #4 Soo....Joe is with Ali, Ali tells Joe the target, Joe cell phones Bob, Bob talks to command, command talks to lawyers, lawyers gather strike packages, strike packages go to prez, prez confirms, lawyers confide with country's reps, then if approved, Ali reconfirms strike, then action made? Please tell me I'm crazy on this flow chart. |
| Posted by: swksvolFF 2014-10-03 12:11 |
| #3 UAV's are an amazing tool, but they have a very difficult time identifying dead enemy combatants, retrieving pocket litter, laptops, document exploitation (DOCEX), weapons, and other items which intelligence analysts find useful. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2014-10-03 10:17 |
| #2 No direct observation of the enemy. No ground troops to do survey and BDA. No use of manned aircraft if a drone is available. This is the stupidest approach I've heard since..., wait. Is McNamara in the building? |
| Posted by: ed in texas 2014-10-03 09:57 |
| #1 This is nuts. FACs (as they used to be known) are combat trained troops, and they are, outside of the PJs, the best ground grunts the USAF has - at least the ones SOCOM uses. And they are vital eyes on the ground in every combat unit I've seen. This whole "do it with a drone" is still unproven, and apparently ineffective because airbreathing overhead assets are not a flexibly tasked as a well trained guy on the ground with a radio, binocs and a laser, who can get into observation points and see things the overhead might miss from 5000+ feet |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2014-10-03 09:04 |