Well, the tactical invasion of Iraq is now history. Reflecting on what transpired can you discuss your views on two points: 1. should the US have waited to build a large force packet? 2. was the force package employed by the US to conduct the invasion the right size? I am curious to hear from you regarding this event.
thanks
DJ

1. Yes.
2. No.

I wonder about the timeline. Why not wait a bit longer? The political situations with Kuwait and Saudi must have been a nightmare. Certainly it was with Turkey.

Obviously we had what we needed to the job we did. I think lots was held back for non-military reasons.

Maybe I shouldn't discuss this question at all. To be honest, I'm pretty upset about the whole situation and what the cost (not the money aspect) will ultimately be.

Feel free to PM me, and I'm sure we can have a good discussion.

Steve

No.....oooooohhhhh no.....

I'm not gonna dive in that sort of discussion again.... Last time I did that, things got pretty ugly.

The Eagle, that got wiser over the last couple of months, spreads his wings and decides to pass this one....

Why are you guys so gun shy? If the Turk allowed the passage of the 4th Infantry Division through their country the situation would have bee radically altered. Why did we move forward then ith only one division? Possible damage to the oil fields? What would waiting have cost us? We are speaking of tactical employment here.....

I think we did use enough force in Iraq. I think the problem was we stopped using it to soon.
We were still taking sporadic fire " harassing fire" while the Op was stil going on and since they announced that the major combat was over it seems that the "harassing fire" has increased more and more each day
But that just my opinion

Well, obviously in a joint operation you augment your ground force with impressive and effective air and naval firepower. The shortfall as I viewed it was that the ground force consisted of only the one US Army division. While the British and Marine forces cleared their objective areas, the bulk of the 3rd Infantry Division was left with a mission almost beyond comprehension. How they got as far as they did in the time is a feat worth remembering. However, if another armored division supplemented their eforts, I believe that we would not have seen the level of post Baghdad resistance. Why didn't we wait?
DJ

DJ:
Living in the area I do I have the very fortunate opportunity to talk with some of these brave men that were over there in the thick of it and they say basicially the samething you are saying.
The overall plan as the say was that the Marines were never suppose to go into Bahgdad. Thier mission was to secure the bridges over the tigris and Euphrates Rivers for the Armor to cross.
Then the Third ID was suppose to take the city from the Airport.Using it as a Base of Operations
The problem was and this is them talking and telling it to me. Was the Army supply lines for some reason was unable to keep the pace up with the assault and was stretched to the point that the Army Commanders requested a 26 day delay in Operations to secure the Supply Lines.
That is when the Marines were given the word to go and jump off from the bridges and drive to the city.
Now not knowing that much about tactical Operations. The question now becomes do you keep driving while you have the enemy on the run or do you wait the 26 days and give them the chance to reorginize?
What I am saying is why stop the force at Bahgdad? Once the Third ID hooked up with the 22MEU in the city Why not drive north to Mosul and Tirkruit Squeezing the and enclosing the Iraqis between the two forces?

Isn't a big part of this resistance foreign fighters coming in for Jihad?

I think were talking pretty small numbers here. It may sound bad in the news, but most of these attacks are pretty small scale stuff. Bombs in the road, ambusing a few soldiers, blowing up soft-targets, etc.

With the small number of troops killed during the initial combat, I think that does say something about the Iraqi resistance (and how well we performed). We went through them like crap through a goose. Sure it would have been much better to have the 4th come in from the north, but it didn't happen...

Well, the two previous responses offer more food for thought. Logistics are always a pain. The supply lines could not keep up with the pace (shades of the Red Ball Express). Simplistic answer, but it is never a problem of the materiel being on hand. Rather (and this is wise me talking) is that the folks we train to drive the trucks and keep the flow going are not that well trained in navigating and basic soldering. As a result, you see the maintenance people from Fort Bliss caught in an ambush because they were probably driving in circles and the bad guys said "I wonder what they are doing?" Tragedy ensued. My peanut size brain tells me that the Stryker Brigade could have made a huge difference in rear area security and convoy escort. Unfortunately, they were not available. All the more reason why patience would have allow us more than rushing in there. The downside is the bad guys could have blown the oil wells and become more organized than they are currently. No easy choices. I fear that well reasoned military logic was overwhelmed by the civilian side demanding swift and decisive action. Now, we must stay and we must build a stable Iraq. Not doing so means that the US starts going down the tube as a Nation that talks a good line, but never delivers.....$87B is a whole lot of money.

The 87 billion is meaningless. It's only a thing for the presidential candidates to yell about.

(By the way, politics have become a total disgrace and joke in this country. The things I have heard just make me cringe. I hope people are not so stupid as to actually buy this crap.)

Look, I'm much more worried about what was going on in the White House and what we were told. I'm more concerned with why our allies did their best to undermine the U.S. and help us get to this point. There are big problems.

The military did what it needed to do. They performed. The politicians - democrats, republicans or whatever - did not.

Amigo--- As far as this citizen is concerned, the life blood of this democracy is our political forum. I appreciate that the current field of candidates will willow in the days ahead and, therefore, we will see a candidate emerging who will discuss issues with a more balanced view. But, I along with countless others suffered through all this once before....."war versus domestic programs." During the Vietnam era, as you probably can recall, we bounced from tactical victory to domestic disaster. In the context of the current situation, spending that huge amount of taxpayer money is more than a domestic political football. It is a serious indictment of our aims and goals in Iraq. While indictment are accusations, not judgements of guilt or innocence, we might have avoided all this (in 20/20 retrospect) if we placed a more diversified coalition in the field at the outset. The military philospher, Clausewitz said it best "do not take the first step in the war, unless you understand where the last one will be." I believe some folks in comand and control, of our National forces naively believed that when we entered Baghdad it would be like Paris in August of 1944. When it didn't unfold like that they had no back-up plan. Now they appear to be scrambling to get a plan. The perception may not last for long. My money says that when they nail Hussein, poll number will go up and the fickled press will seek another venue for their energies.
My two cents
DJ

I was seriously dissapointed in the fact that we didnt get to see the MOAB used against any targets at all. I wanted to see tanks, buildings, whatever just leveled by that thing.

Sir--enlighten me...the "MOAB"? I am sure it is some ten ton block buster, but I am at a loss.
thanks
DJ

MOAB
http://www.strategypage.com/gallery/default.asp?target=moab.htm

Exactly, it might have been avoided. It wasn't. therefore, we need to spend whatever is necessary to avoid total meltdown in Iraq and the rest of the region.

No matter how long we waited, there would not have been the coalition we'd all have wanted.

When we talk about deficits of trillions of dollars, 87 billion pales a bit in comparison. Contrary to what others are saying, were not going to close schools and throw senior citizens to the wolves. It's just more deficit spending. Maybe this is the price of our haste, arrogance, short-sightedness, or betrayl by others. Who knows.

I hope you are right with your predictions. Personally, I do not feel the situation in Iraq is as bad as you might hear on the nightly news. Yes, there are some big questions and it's not ideal, but at this point it is managable.

Look, I was in Palestine a few weeks after major combat ended. They still had plenty of Saddam photos up alongside the posters of the martyrs. The Arab world is not too thrilled with Americans. We need to do whatever it takes to try and bring order to Iraq and then get the hell out. Its a troubled place and there are no easy answers.

Sniper--let me follow up on your last point about terminating operations and moving onto the next crisis. What do you think our termination goals should be? I define a goal as observable, measurable and achieveable.
thanks
DJ

Why didn't we just send a rouge sniper team into Iraq, and if they made it pay them. And if not, then they died anonymous people.

~Chip :-)

I think we did use enough force once the main goal was aceived the Un should have taken over this might have save a few soldiers lifes as the so called terrorists would be able to to target the US but without being disrespecful I think that the US should be following the UK's lead in this type of confict as we have gained over 30 years of experience in dealing with this in Northern Ireland and refects in the lower casualty rate that we are sustaining I just think that some troops are a little trigger happy and hthis helps cause the back lash from the locals

Shock of shocks....for once Sniper and I are in total agreement. I think the military did their job...far better as in more effective and quicker) than was concevied. What's going on now with the guerilla type operations I think is more due to outside influences. The more success they have, the bolder they are becoming. We are having the same problems the Isreali's are having with the Palestinians. Trying to swat a fly with a cannon

I am glad that everyone considered my option. Sniper and Blaster in agreement! This may be the start of a something new!

~Chip :-)

Goood points. But is the folow on action criminal behavior or an organized guerrilla action?

well for me if it's foreigners causing the trouble it's criminal as they are only there for one thing. OK Saddams followers days are numbered put put it this way if someone overthrew
the goverment you supported and changed the way you live would you take up arms? or how would you see yourself - terrorist/criminal or freedom fighter I'm not anyway supporting the actions against the collaltion but id the action is by locals then they are doing what we ourselves would do

If you get the Washington Post (not exactly a conservative paper), there is an opinion piece by John Marshall. He recently returned from a visit to Iraq and his observation is that things have demonstrably improved for the people. It is not exactly the Garden of Eden nor is it the Garden of Evil that is portrayed and becoming the common perception. The crunch right now is to convince ourselves that investing a huge sum of money in Iraq will ensure the safety of the United States. I am of the opinion that we are at war and need to do whatever we need to do to return to a state of tranquility. Our efforts to have the people assume control of their Nation is the right thing. We should not be dissuaded by a few initial faulty steps. It took quite a while before South Korea became a viable country. But, patience is not a strong American trait.
DJ

Did we use enough force in Iraq?

The answer is yes and no.

If you remember the last go round with Saddam, the allies came under criticism over the use of force and the death toll on the road leading from Kuwait to Iraq.

This time We had enough troops and airpower. The only shortcoming perhaps was underestimating not the Iraqi Army but the irregulars.

Right now we need to stay the course and grind the bad guys into the dust.
Regards,