Does anyone know a site that shows speculative war plans in a reasonably comprehensive but clear manner? Something of the order of breaking it down like a game of modern Age of Empires :)?
Depends, are you an Iraqi general?
I haven’t seen anything but it doesn’t take toomuch to guess at their plan (if they use their brains instead of macho BS).
They got thoroughky stomped in the Gulf War. It is clear that in a stand-up battle on open ground the Iraqis are toast. Likewise their airforce amounts to a turkey shoot for American pilots (note I’m not saying it is all simple for American pilots and ground forces but better training, equipment and command & control far exceed what is available to teh Iraqi military). Add ot that stealth fighters capable of hitting most anything they can find at will and the destruction of communications and command lines and you can see that Iraq will have a bad time of it.
The best option I can see for them is to go into a bunker mentality and force the US into city fighting…street by street and building by building. This will net the Iraqis the greatest number of American casualties as it minimizes the American’s advantages. If the US just wants to pound with missiles and artillery Saddam will get many civilian casualties to parade on TV.
At this point it become a game of who can outlast the other. The only way Saddam will survive is if via high American casualties and/or Iraqi civilian deaths he can get world opinion of US opinion to turn against the continuation of the war.
Of course, Saddam might toss some chemical or biologic weapons the way of the US troops as well. Hard to say if that would galvanize US opinion to kick his ass or cause a recoil of horror that saw demands for the remaining troops return immediately.
If the US is willing to risk significant causalties, then I don’t think it matters much what their stragedy will be. The number of troops in the region is much less than Desert Storm but the constraints on us are much less and the total firepower may be greater as well.
I see Saddam as having only two options. Unlease whatever he has right from the start, which may kill many US soldiers, followed by an overwhelming US military response, or hunker down, allowing his military to be systemactically destroyed. To avoid the former, the US will likely not insert large numbers of men at the beginning.
Since Saddam used the latter plan and believes he won Desert Storm, we can hope he choses it this time as well.
Building by building fighting in Bahdad is a truly remote possibility IMO. The war will be essentially over by then.
Well going on past successes there won’t be an ‘invasion’. Instead, the idea will be to bomb the fuck out of the place for a month, buy the Kurds with some CIA donated folding stuff and have 'em clean up around Bagdad. We then go in and claim victory and siphon off some of the north to the Kurds:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/middle_east/02/iraq_key_maps/html/default.stm
There was a story in last Sunday’s New York Times that detailed the strategy. Though I’m working from memory, I seem to recall that the US would drop about 3,000 bombs in the first 48 hours. That’s roughly 10 times the ammount used in the first
month of Desert Storm*. I’ve forgotten the nuts and bolts of the plan, but it shouldn’t take much time to dig through thier archives and find it.
- I might be a bit off with the specifics of this comparision but it’s something along these lines.
Is there an MSNBC-Iraq, or a Fox News Network- Baghdad? If they have pundits like ours, just tune in and watch them speculate (in great detail, with no worries about “National Security”…) on the Iraqi strategy to repel the Great Satan.
It seems to be what the US version does…
I heard that, but it’s 3,000 missiles (possibly fired from outside Iraq), and each missile is 10x the power of those used in GWI.
Try watching CNN, they often give our plans. Right now looks like we are surrounding Iraq with out troops. I bet Iraq has CNN.
I guess I was looking for a more detailed plan that showed what units we would be using where and why, the range of these units and so forth. You know, like a game!
Look, the pundits on CNN don’t know anything the Iraqis don’t already know. One of the disadvantages of living in a free society is that our governmental decisions are open to criticism and discussion by the population. But of course, that turns out in practice to be a huge advantage. There are hundreds of thousands of people in the US who are thinking about US strategy and plans. In Iraq there is really only one person.
Or are we only surrounding part of it and broadcasting plans that all of it is covered to get them to spread their forces.
I thnk that your post thread title is redundant, or self-referential, or something. Making war plans IS for dummies.
But the strategy that matters should only be debated and hashed out by a certain few (President-maybe, Sec of Defense, Joint Chiefs, high ranking generals, etc…). Let the movers and shakers, if you will, discuss our military strategy in great detail. The general public, other nations, and the enemy, neither need it nor should have it handed to them by network pundits. Sure, they may be throwing out mis-information and all, but it may also be giving the enemy something else to prepare for that they haven’t considered.
Basically, my point is that while I don’t believe for a minute that what they’re doing will effect the eventual outcome of the war, I believe that some things are just better left unsaid, especially when there are national security issues at hand.
Hi, I’m pretty new around here, and I don’t want to step on any toes and get thrown off before I even get started…
…but, I was just wondering if this is pissing anyone else off…
“You know, like a game!”
Kid, I don’t know you. Maybe this is an innocent question, but right now the last word I want to associate with war is “game.” I guess someone who admires Charlemagne would tend to view the world as a giant chess board. :shrug:
Casey, you’d think we would learn something from the mistakes of our football coaches. You keep your plays on a need-to-know basis or you get snagged by a cameraman zooming in over your huddle while the opposite team crowds around the TV to see what’s going to happen next.
CC – I agree.
You want a Persian Gulf II war game? Here you go
“Since Saddam used the latter plan and believes he won Desert Storm”
An arguement could be made that he DID win Desert Storm - he’s still in power and George Bush the Elder is fishing and playing golf.
Your right, you don’t know me. The exclamation point was intended to effect the irony of the statement. And the Charlemagne reference isn’t a nod to the sword and cross but to a Steely Dan song about a drug dealer. From now on I’ll remember to use the tongue in cheek emoticon.
Thanks. I guess that was just too obscure/subtle for me. !
If you’ll think back to the first Gulf War, you’ll remember how all the news outlets and talking heads were going on about the Marine Amphibious Unit sitting just off the Iraqi coast. They went on and on about it, talking about its capabilities and questioning whether or not the hovercraft would be able to make it to the beach over the heavy surf. Saddam saw those reports, too, and was quite surprised when the attack came from a completely different direction.
I wouldn’t worry too much about the “war plans” discussions you’re seeing on the news. Those most likely aren’t the about the real plan.