# Iraqi strategy, the Limbaugh hypothesis **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 28, 2003, 1:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraqi-strategy-the-limbaugh-hypothesis/164673 "2003-03-28T01:26:25Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2003, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraqi-strategy-the-limbaugh-hypothesis/164673/21 "2003-03-28T14:26:07Z")
I have sincere doubts that Limbaugh invented this theory. ---
**Author:** ![Crusoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/49beb7/32.png) [@Crusoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crusoe)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2003, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraqi-strategy-the-limbaugh-hypothesis/164673/22 "2003-03-28T14:40:34Z")
Do Seoul or Panama City count? ---
**Author:** ![Mandelstam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Mandelstam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mandelstam)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2003, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraqi-strategy-the-limbaugh-hypothesis/164673/23 "2003-03-28T15:47:42Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by SimonX \* > \*\*I have sincere doubts that Limbaugh invented this theory. \*\* I agree. As has been pointed out now by several people the so-called “theory” represents an obvious strategy under the circumstances. However, what may well be original to Limbaugh is the use of Somalia, a Clinton affair, in order to try to make political capital out of the episode. I’m not sure who has looked at the link I posted above, but what it describes with reference to Somalia, and what may happen in Iraq is, IMO, a lot more informative than Rush’s obvious, and therefore overstated, “theory.” ---
**Author:** ![light\_strand](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a6a055/32.png) [@light\_strand](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/light_strand)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2003, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraqi-strategy-the-limbaugh-hypothesis/164673/24 "2003-03-28T16:09:56Z")
Well since Iraqi Defense Minister Sultan Hashem Ahmed warned of this yesterday in a public press conference, I wouldn’t give Rush too much credit for stating the obvious > [@](#): > > ‘‘The enemy must come inside Baghdad, and that will be its grave,’’ Defense Minister Sultan Hashem Ahmed said. ‘‘We feel that this war must be prolonged so the enemy pays a high price.’’ > > At a news conference in a Baghdad hotel, Ahmed warned that US-led forces would have to fight for the city street by street. [cite](http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/087/nation/Iraq_warns_US_of_heavy_price+.shtml) ---
**Author:** ![Sofa\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/58956e/32.png) [@Sofa\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sofa_King)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2003, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraqi-strategy-the-limbaugh-hypothesis/164673/25 "2003-03-28T16:26:32Z")
Limbaugh has been [reading my shit](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=149106&highlight=baghdad). Good. It sounds like the fellow is learning something. ---
**Author:** ![msmith537](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d9b06d/32.png) [@msmith537](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/msmith537)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2003, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraqi-strategy-the-limbaugh-hypothesis/164673/26 "2003-03-28T16:29:34Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by London\_Calling \* > Actually, _what was_ the last city taken street-by-street by an army from a democractic country ? \*\* Off the top of my head Hue, Vietnam - That pretty much leveled the city Panama City, Panama (not the spring break spot) - We had a great deal of surprise on our side ---
**Author:** ![AZCowboy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/97f17d/32.png) [@AZCowboy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AZCowboy)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2003, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraqi-strategy-the-limbaugh-hypothesis/164673/27 "2003-03-28T16:34:14Z")
Yeah, I think Rush has been reading the [SDMB](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=164461). Now, what I find most interesting, is that when I proposed this very same theory just over a month ago, nobody on this board, hawks or doves, found it plausible. In this thread, it appears to be “obvious”. 😕 ---
**Author:** ![AZCowboy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/97f17d/32.png) [@AZCowboy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AZCowboy)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2003, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraqi-strategy-the-limbaugh-hypothesis/164673/28 "2003-03-28T16:45:28Z")
Oh, and **Sofa King** , I just read the thread you linked. I believe you have excellent insight. Considering the current situation and the information in **Collounsbury’s** thread, I think your analysis is validated. It holds true today, a full three and a half months after your wrote it. Good job. ---
**Author:** ![Sofa\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/58956e/32.png) [@Sofa\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sofa_King)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2003, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraqi-strategy-the-limbaugh-hypothesis/164673/29 "2003-03-28T17:01:37Z")
Well, thanks, **AZCowboy** , but I’m sure you’ll understand when I say I wish to hell and back that I was wrong. ---
**Author:** ![AZCowboy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/97f17d/32.png) [@AZCowboy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AZCowboy)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2003, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraqi-strategy-the-limbaugh-hypothesis/164673/30 "2003-03-28T17:09:45Z")
Actually, I don’t quite understand. I would have thought that you would have wished that others understood what you find logically apparent, all the way back in December. I surely understand why you wish we weren’t faced with the “medium/heavy” Baghdad dilemma now. ---
**Author:** ![sqweels](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f19dbf/32.png) [@sqweels](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sqweels)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2003, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraqi-strategy-the-limbaugh-hypothesis/164673/31 "2003-03-28T17:19:05Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by X~Slayer(ALE) \* > \*\*Whats really interesting is that the failure of the Mogadishu incident lies with the president who opted to pull out of somalia playing right along with the Osama propaganda. The impression I got was that Clinton was criticized not for pulling out but for engaging in “mission creep” and incurring 18 combat deaths. I also recall howls of protest from the right when Clinton sent troops in to liberate Haiti where in effect he _won a war without incurring a single casualty_. ---
**Author:** ![Sofa\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/58956e/32.png) [@Sofa\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sofa_King)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2003, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraqi-strategy-the-limbaugh-hypothesis/164673/32 "2003-03-28T17:20:19Z")
> [@](#): > > Said **AZCowboy** > > Actually, I don’t quite understand. I would have thought that you would have wished that others understood what you find logically apparent, all the way back in December. Well, saying, “I told you so” in time of war doesn’t do much good. Now that we’re in the middle of it, the most productive thing I can say is, “here is the problem, we now understand it implicitly, so what are we going to do about it?” What are we going to do about it? I’m suddenly a trifle supersticious about playing Nostradamus, so you’ll excuse me if I simply ask the question rather than offer more unpalateable answers. ---
**Author:** ![AZCowboy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/97f17d/32.png) [@AZCowboy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AZCowboy)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2003, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraqi-strategy-the-limbaugh-hypothesis/164673/33 "2003-03-28T17:47:17Z")
**Sofa King** , fools tread where angels refuse to go. I probably qualify, so let me take a shot. I see little alternative besides the “medium” tactics you described in the other thread. The question becomes, will the support for the coalition be able to bear it? At this point, it is truly regretable that the US failed to prepare the public for the worst case scenario (and perhaps even did the opposite). It may bite them in the ass. “Always expect the worst, and you’ll never be disappointed” - Peter Wastholm ---
**Author:** ![december](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/838e76/32.png) [@december](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/december)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2003, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraqi-strategy-the-limbaugh-hypothesis/164673/34 "2003-03-28T18:00:38Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by AZCowboy \* > At this point, it is truly regretable that the US failed to prepare the public for the worst case scenario (and perhaps even did the opposite). Not so. Last October, Bush made a major [speech in Cincinnati](http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021007-8.html) laying out a number of reasons for potentially going to war. He never said it would be easy. On the contrary, he said, > [@](#): > > I hope this will not require military action, but it may. And military conflict could be difficult. An Iraqi regime faced with its own demise may attempt cruel and desperate measures. A pretty accurate prediction, I’d say. Later comments by Bush, Ari Fleisher, etc. have followed this line. ---
**Author:** ![X\_Slayer\_ALE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/bbe5ce/32.png) [@X\_Slayer\_ALE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/X_Slayer_ALE)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2003, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraqi-strategy-the-limbaugh-hypothesis/164673/35 "2003-03-28T19:00:11Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by AZCowboy \* > \*\*Yeah, I think Rush has been reading the [SDMB](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=164461). > > Now, what I find most interesting, is that when I proposed this very same theory just over a month ago, nobody on this board, hawks or doves, found it plausible. > > In this thread, it appears to be “obvious”. > > 😕 \*\* As I mentioned in my response in your original post, its a good theory. It was and it still is. But it will not work based on the reasons I specified over a month ago. Its really a great plan except Saddam cant do it. The only thing that is really working for Saddam in a big way is the worldwide protest. But for that to work, this war has to drag on for more than a year. Its been 8 days, Baghdad is surrounded, Basra and Nasirya are contained and Umm Qasr is now unloading tons of humanitarian aid. Meanwhile the Big Red One is growing day by day in Northern Iraq. I believe they put a temporary hold on the advance to let them catch up. I expected a big push this week. It may be at the end of next week. The US Congress has stipulated on the bill that authorized use of military force on iraq that the President will have to make a report in 60 days after military has taken action. With less than 7 weeks left, This war will be done before Bush ever goes in front of congress. ---
**Author:** ![Riboflavin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Riboflavin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riboflavin)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2003, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraqi-strategy-the-limbaugh-hypothesis/164673/36 "2003-03-28T19:20:15Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by AZCowboy \* > [Now, what I find most interesting, is that when I proposed this very same theory just over a month ago, nobody on this board, hawks or doves, found it plausible. > > In this thread, it appears to be “obvious”. Are you sure they weren’t disagreeing with the ‘Hussein wants the US to invade’ and not ‘Hussein will retreat into the cities and let the US hopefully bloody themselves trying to take him’? I would have been skeptical of the former and called the latter obvious, but I would have (probably did) skip the thread in the first place because of the title. I don’t beleive the theory that Hussein wants an invasion, but I don’t think it’s dismissable out of hand. ---
**Author:** ![ElJeffe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/958977/32.png) [@ElJeffe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElJeffe)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2003, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraqi-strategy-the-limbaugh-hypothesis/164673/37 "2003-03-28T19:21:27Z")
First of all, I wouldn’t be surprised if this is Saddam’s strategy. I agree that as a “theory”, it’s not exactly special relativity. But will it work? Who’s to say that we need to follow Saddam into Baghdad and engage in urban warfare? What’s stopping us from just surrounding Baghdad, and camping there until we can smoke him out by other means? Send in spec ops, let them pick people off and negotiate surrenders like they have been. Send in the occasional convoy of food to keep the people from starving, if need be. Is there any reason why we couldn’t do this? Jeff ---
**Author:** ![Sofa\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/58956e/32.png) [@Sofa\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sofa_King)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2003, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraqi-strategy-the-limbaugh-hypothesis/164673/38 "2003-03-28T20:04:11Z")
**ElJeffe** said: > [@](#): > > Who’s to say that we need to follow Saddam into Baghdad and engage in urban warfare? What’s stopping us from just surrounding Baghdad, and camping there until we can smoke him out by other means? Send in spec ops, let them pick people off and negotiate surrenders like they have been. Send in the occasional convoy of food to keep the people from starving, if need be. Is there any reason why we couldn’t do this? This course of action closely echoes the [CSIS](http://www.csis.org/)’s [“urban warfare light”](http://www.csis.org/features/second_jenin.pdf) (.pdf document) scenario. They conclude that this strategy > [@](#): > > requires light opposition in the city being attacked, a population that is largely neutral or passive, a reasonable degree of tactical surprise, and that the objective can be accomplished quickly and without occupying the urban area involved. Unfortunately, virtually none of those conditions appear to be met in the present circumstance. However, that’s just one more opinion, so it might be well worth deconstructing the strategy to see if it can be applied in some form. Probably of excellent use for the purposes of this thread is a new paper by CSIS, [Saddam’s Last Circle: The Core Forces Likely to Protect Saddam in the “Battle of Baghdad”](http://www.csis.org/burke/mb/iraq_lastcircle.pdf) (another .pdf document). Regrettably I won’t have time to read this until later this weekend, but it looks damned useful. ---
**Author:** ![Yeticus\_Rex](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/a698b9/32.png) [@Yeticus\_Rex](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yeticus_Rex)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2003, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraqi-strategy-the-limbaugh-hypothesis/164673/39 "2003-03-28T20:05:23Z")
Saddam is a known admirer of Josef Stalin and there are a few similarities (but not total coincidences) starting to show between the cities of [Leningrad](http://history1900s.about.com/cs/siegeofleningrad/index.htm) and Baghdad. The Germans knew that capturing Leningrad would deal the crippling blow to the Russians, and the Russians knew that and sent many of their countrymen to defend it. The Russian officers also had authority to kill any unwilling Russian men to defend the city, much like Iraqi officers currently do. The movie “Enemy at the Gates” sensationalizes this 900 day sieze of Leningrad, but not by much. It could be what Saddam is attempting to do in order to gain sympathy from the rest of the world. ---
**Author:** ![Sofa\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/58956e/32.png) [@Sofa\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sofa_King)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2003, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraqi-strategy-the-limbaugh-hypothesis/164673/40 "2003-03-28T20:11:04Z")
I’m sorry, **Scylla**. I think I’m guilty of comandeering this thread straight to Havana. As it happens, I have to bow out for a while as well. If you want to redirect the conversation back toward the OP, perhaps we can spin this discussion off to another thread. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraqi-strategy-the-limbaugh-hypothesis/164673.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraqi-strategy-the-limbaugh-hypothesis/164673.md?page=3)