Article

2007-03-14 Iraq

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 2007-03-14 00:00|| || Front Page|| [9 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Baqouba has been one of the worst places for a long, long time - far from a whack-a-mole reaction to the enemy reaction to the Baghdad op, this is long overdue (and almost certainly much too little, even then).

Yesterday when I heard the radio McNews version of the wire-service rip-and-read report about sallying forth to get VBIED/IED factories, I had to shake my head. Of course we've been hunting them down constantly for a long time, but given the still unfathomable performance by commanders last year and back into '05, I now always wonder whether the situation is as bad as the super-dumbed-down news report makes it (i.e., we're just now bestirring ourselves to target a key link in the enemy's capacity to wreak destruction in Baghdad going on 4 years now).

Posted by Verlaine 2007-03-14 00:46|| 2007-03-14 00:46|| Front Page Top

#2 Fake out.

Got them looking in Baghdad, so they decided to hole up someplace safe.

Turns out we had ops set up for their "safe" area, now that we flushed them to it.

Good job. Now follow through.

Posted by OldSpook 2007-03-14 00:53|| 2007-03-14 00:53|| Front Page Top

#3 As "V" indicates, Baqouba is indeed a snake pit. During the Viet era Laos and Cambodia were often referred to as "enemy sanctuaries." Baqouba, Ramadi, and Fullujah are the enemy sanctuaries of our time. There are several amazing parallels to that conflict and this is but one.

Posted by Besoeker 2007-03-14 01:00|| 2007-03-14 01:00|| Front Page Top

#4 Is it one snakepit of many, or is it going to leave a mark in the insurgency? I'm hoping it's the former, but I can never be sure.

Also, if they did this with no warning, I would think it would have way better effect than the SOP of giving a few days warning so all the terrorists have time to get their affairs in order and calmly walk through yet another revolving door with a suitcase full of IEDs in hand. Anybody know?

Posted by gorb 2007-03-14 01:17|| 2007-03-14 01:17|| Front Page Top

#5 latter, not former! :-)

Posted by gorb 2007-03-14 01:50|| 2007-03-14 01:50|| Front Page Top

#6 Allowing terrorist sanctuaries like Baqouba to continue to exist and produce a sustained terror campaign against the rest of Iraq is indeed "unfathomable." Just the fact that places like Baqouba stay in business indicates the situation in Iraq is very bad. Tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis try to escape their country in any way they can, and Baqouba is left to go about its business. I know there aren't enough troops in Iraq to invade all these terrorist sanctuaries -- that's why artillery & heavy bombers exist. Drop leaflets, tell the innocent to get out of town, and level the place. Don't allow resettlement until the rest of Iraq is peaceful. Applied systematically across Anbar province, the net result would be less terror and fewer Iraqi refugees.

Posted by Anguper Hupomosing9418 2007-03-14 03:00|| 2007-03-14 03:00|| Front Page Top

#7 Just the fact that places like Baqouba stay in business indicates the situation in Iraq is very bad.

Actually, no. The idea is to leave the enemy someplace they think is safe, so they concentrate there and place their resources there. Then you hit that area.

When they group up, they die. The key is to letting them think it's safe to group up.

Posted by Robert Crawford">Robert Crawford 2007-03-14 05:29|| http://www.kloognome.com/]">[http://www.kloognome.com/] 2007-03-14 05:29|| Front Page Top

#8 violence appears to be ebbing in Baghdad.

From the AP, no less!

Nice graphic, Steve!

Posted by Bobby 2007-03-14 05:36|| 2007-03-14 05:36|| Front Page Top

#9 Robert Crawford, we don't really disagree. I can follow your argument about getting the enemy to concentrate in one place so they can be easily hit there. "Hitting the area" hard enough seldom happens in Iraq. Some of these hardcore Sunni strongholds need to vanish from the face of Iraq for a couple of generations.

Posted by Anguper Hupomosing9418 2007-03-14 05:55|| 2007-03-14 05:55|| Front Page Top

#10 Finding IED factories requires local intel. Locals would know of sentry guarded facilities where residents are not gainfully employed. Those are good tells. Prior to the 2-state gizmo imposed on Israel, the IDF would make numerous investigative detentions. Most captives wouldn't divulge but enough would, and that led the IDF to the factories. US field troops should not be forced to rely on Intel from Iraq walk-ins. The terrorists have eyes everywhere.

FYI: short term investigative detentions have been found constitutional in the US since SCOTUS issued "Terry v Ohio." These methods should not be treated as illegal in a combat zone. Time to shake Abu Ghraib fever.

Posted by Sneaze 2007-03-14 06:07|| 2007-03-14 06:07|| Front Page Top

#11 But, Sneaze (w.r.t short-term detentions) - What would the New York Times say?

Yeah, I don't care either.

Posted by Bobby 2007-03-14 06:27|| 2007-03-14 06:27|| Front Page Top

#12 Improvements in many parts of Al Anbar, the apparent result of a dramatic increase in local cooperation, have received little publicity.

This puts US and allied forces (including tribal militias) in a good position to crush the enemy sanctuaries of Baquouba, Fallujah, and Ramadi once and for all.

Posted by Atomic Conspiracy 2007-03-14 07:23|| 2007-03-14 07:23|| Front Page Top

#13 Don't hear much from Anbar anymore, 2005's most wretched hive of scum and villany. Won't hear much from Diyala in 2008.

Posted by ed 2007-03-14 14:16|| 2007-03-14 14:16|| Front Page Top

#14 There has been a lot of red on red going on in Anbar for several months. According to Roggio the locals have set up a militia to fight Al Q (aka the Islamic State of Iraq). My read on it is that a lot of these militia guys were formerly fighting us. It would seem they and their tribes are either getting tired of fighting (in general) and are looking for a better life or they just won't stand for pressure from an external group, even Al Q. I think this could be a case where Al Q's heavy handed tactics, particularly the targeted killings of tribal bigwigs, is coming back to bite them in the ass. It also may be as simple as the tribes finally understanding that the real money to be made will be done so when Iraq is stable. Regardless, it is a very positive development in Anbar and looks to be repeated in Diyala.

Posted by remoteman 2007-03-14 17:52|| 2007-03-14 17:52|| Front Page Top

#15 Nice to see they are cleaning up my old A.O.

Back in '05 we had one good firefight in march just south of Baqouba, and then the AIF restricted themselves to IED/VBIEDs for the rest of our tour.

Be interesting, if we get deployed back there when deploy again.

O/T-- I just graduated OCS this past sunday.

Now I'm 2LT N guard. yay me.

Posted by N guard 2007-03-14 20:08|| 2007-03-14 20:08|| Front Page Top

#16 Now I'm 2LT N guard. yay me.

Congrats, 2LT N guard. Yay our side!

Posted by SteveS 2007-03-14 20:14|| 2007-03-14 20:14|| Front Page Top

#17 Congratulations! ~

drinks in the O-Club, on me!

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2007-03-14 20:18|| 2007-03-14 20:18|| Front Page Top

#18 NG, Congratulations and Thank You.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2007-03-14 20:48|| 2007-03-14 20:48|| Front Page Top

#19 Thanks for your service, NG. Most Americans are very proud of our military--and the ones that aren't are exercising their right to be damned fools. Hooah!

Posted by mac 2007-03-14 23:53|| 2007-03-14 23:53|| Front Page Top

#20 N Guard, congratulations and many thanks for your service (and pass that along to your buddies and everyone's families).

This war thing is harder than it looks, and I haven't had info access to give me high confidence in my own mutterings, but .....

Letting/inducing the enemy to concentrate or otherwise render themselves more vulnerable, as Anguper pointed out, only makes sense IF you are going to apply decisive force when you finally do spring your trap. I think that - mostly - this has been one more "unfathomable" (my word - and by it I mean that the strategy adopted was not comprehensible when the costs and risks it incurred were considered) attempt to use finesse only when that's not what's called for.

Recall that the existence of "sanctuaries" inside a sovereign state (such sanctuaries typically economically marginal at best, with absolutely no defensible geography, nor in Iraq remoteness from government or Coalition forces or roads or communications) means that the enemy gets to apply their only real tactic (intimidation) without hindrance. Which leads to disastrous results - such as the ability to target an otherwise untouchably superior force with IEDs along roadways.

All these tactical gymnastics to 1) avoid the use of force, or of harsh yet effective measures 2) avoid the need for more than token forces have helped yield the slop that was Iraq in 2005 and most of 2006 (other key factor was embassy Sunni engagement strategy - which of course merely reinforced the MNF-I aversion to warfare).

I am nearly convinced that current US counterinsurgency thinking is dramatically and fatally flawed, mostly because we start with an historically perverse and irrational premise: we can't kill people, break stuff, or make things difficult for the society, we must only use positive non-kinetic measures combined with magically pin-point raids.

When the media talked to locals (locals - still there, going about their business) in Haifa Street following the recent unpleasantness there, they casually described how they supported the street executions being conducted by the enemy when the IP and eventually MND-B got involved. Small clue the size of the Milky Way to the US military and embassy: wars are about killing the enemy, capturing the enemy, and breaking their will to resist. If a segment of the society declares war on the rest, and on the country's future - that segment must be killed, detained, and their will to resist crushed. See Anguper's comment above.

If any given area - even one time - backslides following "clear and hold", this means you've left out the most important part - "pacify". That could mean things like, gee, I dunno - mass detentions of military-age males, seizure/destruction of homes and business of anyone involved with the enemy, total restriction on movement and activity, ceasing the local economy and putting everyone on WFP rations, exclusion of the area from national political activities, and general isolation of the area.

Every situation calls for a different approach - in an area with just a few bad apples obviously you can indulge yourself in all sorts of stuff like reconstruction and engagement and even PRTs, or maybe even spelling bees and mosque-painting parties. But in ENEMY areas you actually have be war-like - that is if you're interested in succeeding and not getting more Americans and Iraqis killed.

Did anyone else notice that even Michael Gordon, the NYT's military writer (who is so-so at best), commented as part of his "controversial" interview with Charlie Rose that the US "hadn't even been trying to win" in Iraq under Casey? I'm sure at least part of what he meant was this refusal to use effective measures in a situation almost begging for them.

I doubt there's a 1% chance Petraeus will be any more likely to follow a common sense approach than his predecessors - after all, he's the guru of COIN theory, and we all know how much theory is relevant to life's most practical problems. We'll prevail eventually, but the cost will have been multiples of what it should have been.

Sorry for the rant. Uh, see website name ....

Posted by Verlaine 2007-03-14 23:57|| 2007-03-14 23:57|| Front Page Top

23:57 Verlaine
23:53 mac
22:31 Sneaze
22:28 Sneaze
22:27 Sneaze
22:27 Col. D. Snaud
22:24 Chiper Threreger8956
22:21 Barbara Skolaut
22:19 Sneaze
22:18 Chuck Simmins
22:14 Chuck Simmins
22:13 Sneaze
21:57 Delphi2005
21:49 twobyfour
21:46 3dc
21:44 delphi2005
21:44 3dc
21:38 Anonymoose
21:28 regular joe
21:27 Delphi2005
21:22 doc
21:18 xbalanke
21:12 Frank G
21:06 ed