No.
I doubt that the coalition would want to do this either.
As long as we’re engaging in wildly unfounded speculation, who’s to say this isn’t a bit of Iraqi misinformation?
Maybe it’s a caravan, but it’s not paramilitary — it’s a bunch of women and children and elderly people, herded by a few dozen Republican Guard into a column (cue Orc song: “where there’s a whip”) and driven south. The sandstorm obscures their true nature; they’re hoping the Americans will do exactly what’s being suggested in this thread, i.e. pre-emptively bomb the crap out of them, so they can put pictures of dead “refugees” on al-Jazeera. That, without question, would be an unmitigated disaster.
Unlikely, yes, but possible, certainly as much so as any other scenario (including the “idiotic suicide strategy” theory) given the extremely limited information available in the media. So no wonder coalition forces are holding back on the heavy metal until they have a better idea of what they’re dealing with.
What Blackclaw said.
You can’t use a GPS-guided weapon unless you know what coordinates to punch into the system. Buildings in Baghdad that you have detailed sattelite images of (gathered over the last few months/years) are one thing, a moving column of vehicles obstructed by a sand storm are very much another.
This could be a very smart strategy on Saddam’s part for the reason that the US will have to attack the RepGuard, then move, and then attack Baghdad. Although surely the US will prevail, they will also lose troops and equipment in the shortterm which will pump up Baghdad based PreGuards.
Sort of like playing RISK where you want to hold South America so you have a big defensive army in Brazil. If someone is going to attack from Africa, you put a bunch of troops in West Africa so the attacking army as to wipe them out first, and get diminished along the way, before they can make a strike on Brazil. In other words, you have a defensive of A+B in one place, but that’s not nearly as strong as two smaller armies in a line requiring two steps by the attacking force.
I used this tactic a lot in the game Civilization. If your city is about to be attacked, move a bunch of weak forces onto the land around the city; the offensive army as to attack, them move, then attack again. That move takes time and energy so before the US can attack Baghdad they will be considerably weaker than had they just rolled straight on through. I think most of us have forgotten that the US army is made up of solders that tire. They need time to eat, sleep, and reload. It takes time and energy to get them more food, water, and ammo as mentioned above).
The other advantage to this engagement is that it drags the war out. Saddam doesn’t have to beat the US he just has to last long enough for someone to ring the bell.
It’s also possible that the US will move towards this line of RNG. As the US approaches, the line of RNG pulls back, drawing the US closer, and eventually gets flanked by waiting RNGs. This is one of those strategies I remember from grade 10 history, but I can’t remember which battle this was first used in. I think something in Greece or Rome.
Cervaise’s idea about the women and children seems to fit closer to Saddam’s nature though, well said.
If the Republican Guard moves out of Baghdad to Nejaz.
Why not fly into Baghdad from the west and drop parachuters or somebody into Baghdad to try and take specific spots?
Because, as Arnhem and Mogadishu proved, airborne and heliborne troops can be brought down by sheer weight of numbers and heavily armed troops. You would need to ensure that the heavy forces can break through to relieve them, or else you condemn thousands of soldiers to constant attack and potentially enormous casualties.
Why isn’t the Coalition forces bombing them?
Maybe they want them to move farther from Baghdad…
I think there are two different columns on the road:
MSNBC says the movement from Bagdad to Nejaz is being attacked from the air (at least by 5 EDT). re the OP my WAG (& that is all this is - idle speculation) is that Saddam knows the Medina Divison has been mauled & Saddam is scared. That he thinks he needs to re-arm/reenforce them at any price.
MSNBC says @ this hour the column is not just (or any?) Armour – but trucks, many machine gun mounted.
There is also a second column: a raggedy assed armour column that scooted out from in/around Basra this AM and ran SOUTH on towards the FAW Penninsula. My WAG/speculation was that in Basra they were in a use 'em /or lose 'em situation @ Basra in pounding from the Brits and they scooted.
Speculation on my part … but re the OP neither scenerio is an INSANE military decsion on the part of the Iraqi’s
Since the sandstorm is lifting, and good weather is expected for the next week+, this move (if it really is happening; I have also heard that they are just locally repositioning) will be meet with wicked amounts of airpower, and perhaps some target practice for the M1’s.
Did anyone consider that perhaps this is not an assault, but an evacuation? Perhaps they are moving their troops out because being in Baghdad would put them in harms way (i.e. a massive chemical or biological attack in Baghdad as the coalition forces close in).
Saddam has already shown his contempt for his people, but he might try and save his elite forces…