[Stryke 9]

Originally posted by Mr. Vega

Althought that really doesn't work if the enemy fights does guerrila warfare like in Vietnam,  

Having said this, did you really need to ask that question? There's always somewhere to hide- a desert is slightly more open, but a city certainly isn't, and even in the Iraqi desert it's hardly just endless sand dunes. A people with knowledge of the terrain and experience in using it to their advantage can whup an invading force half the time, as has been demonstrated over and over and over again in the second half of the last century, and throughout this one. You should really read up on some of the fights in Afghanistan- our airstrikes, cruise missiles, and spy drones were next to useless after a VERY short period before the Taliban adapted. They were practically invisible, and spread out enough that bombing only took out part of the entrenched forces. Had we not mostly been using native Afghan grunts, the US casualties would likely have numbered in the hundreds- there were points where Taliban troops opened fire from only about ten feet away.

Guerrilla warfare is stunningly effective when properly done (which it isn't always- it's really much harder to do effectively than the sort of **** the Pentagon's involved in), and it's been used against overconfident superior forces for a long, long time. The American Revolution comes to mind (and I seem to recall the British responding then in exactly the same way as we do now). But that's only the first of the series of new strategies being introduced on the world stage. What's the Army gonna do when seemingly innocuous (or completely previously unknown) people start blowing stuff up with no warning as to where or when? How's all that tech gonna help ya when the enemy's one of a million potentials who you can't hope to sort through or "detain" all of?

[Turnsky]

you mean like killing an ant with a sledgehammer?

I agree US tactics are lacking in finesse.... they also lack refinement.. bigass weapons are good and all but think david and goliath here, all it would take would be a 'lucky shot' and the entire army would be reeling... saddam may have something up his sleave that the entire world may not exepect....

the problem is with war is the human element (i know it's a given )  it makes the whole thing rather unpredictable at best.. and god knows what people can do when they're backed into a corner..

[Stryke 9]

Less like using a sledgehammer to smash an ant than trying to use it to wipe out an entire hill of 'em, when they're all between the (large and multiple) cracks in the sidewalk where you can't get at 'em, spread out so that each hit kills at most two, and headed rapidly for your bare toes.

The interesting thing to note is, you hardly ever see guerrilla tactics used when both sides are relatively weak forces, and the divide isn't so great (some of the civil wars, such as in Bosnia, saw a degree, but similar ones such as most on Africa you don't really get the same thing). I wonder if they wouldn't work so well, or if it's just simpler to fight in the old-fashioned trench-and-rush style if you have half a chance of winning that way.

[deep_eyes]

Originally posted by Warlock
By a tomahawk ? Ummmm not from what I've seen. A missile hit would have hmmm I donno .... left a burn mark ,...perhaps a hole
More so since a tomahawk is a cruise missile.

just for the record i didnt mean a tomahawk hit the apache dude.....

[Bobboau]

seems like there is an anti-Sadam upriseing in Basra, I hope we actualy go in and help them this time, I am getting the destinct impression that we are going to see if they would be able to take the city for us on there own,
besides I want some pictures

and we took out there TV station

[Sandwich]

Originally posted by Pez


I don't know what the muslim organizations said in the US but I think troughout Europe most of the muslim organizations condemned the attacks on 9/11.

Mmmhh....I'm no expert on Islam but does Islam have something like the Pope who can denouce things? But give it some time, if I remember correctly it took a while for the Vatican to denouce the persecution of jews.

Couple of points:

A) You expecteed any Muslim organization in a western/1st world country to praise 9/11??? Of course they're gonna condemn the slaughter. Imagine an organization of Christians (or any non-Muslims) in the middle of a primarily Muslim country, praising America's attack on Iraq (no, I'm not comparing the 9/11 slaughter to the attack on Iraq, I'm giving examples of events that are either applauded or condemned by certain bodies). How long do you think they would remain alive?

Sme thing, IMHO, with the Muslim organizations in the western world - they're not gonna praise attacks that everyone surrounding them condemns - that's the quick way to suicide, without being able to take any of the infidel vermin with you. :-/

B) Please don't look at the Pope as the spokeperson or leader of Christianity world-wide. He's the head of the Roman-Catholic Church, but I know personally that most born-again Christians in the world don't consider him their "leader" at all. And if I may say so, the Pope needs to read his Bible again - and perhaps even pay attention to it this time.

{/rant}

Originally posted by Warlock
By a tomahawk ? Ummmm not from what I've seen. A missile hit would have hmmm I donno .... left a burn mark ,...perhaps a hole
More so since a tomahawk is a cruise missile.

Uhm, a Tomahawk would have literally blown the Apache to bits, not just left a burn mark or a hole. They are quite powerful, as missiles go.

[Turnsky]

of course most muslim organisations world condemn 9/11 and other attacks, they're people just like the rest of us, it's rather unfortune that a majority is seen in this fashion just because of an few people who wish to enforce thier veiws on the rest of the world whether they'd like it or not.. (remember the spanish inquistion)


as far as religion's and thier histories go, catholism is far from squeaky clean.. most religions of the world have blood on its hands it just that people choose to ignore it or see it as 'for the greater good" or "in the name of god/etc" as far as i'm concerned, thats just a excuse for people to wipe thier hands of the responsiblity for a particularly nefarious deed...

as for the tomahawk, well they could blow a house apart quite effeciently...

[Tiara]

Well, the US has done it now with their precision bombing The missile went off course and blew up civvies.

Now, we might know it was just a "mistake", but they will think of it as a direct attack. Especially with all the propaganda going around.

[Turnsky]

well it was only a matter of time..

[icespeed]

almost OT footnote: To Sum Up the History of Warfare

1. In the Good Old Days, war meant one group of people trying to bash the hell out of and in most cases kill another group of people almost indistinguishable from the first save in some trivial way. This second group usually also tried to bash the hell out of or kill the first group with any means possible.

2. In modern times, war now refers to an event where one group of people tries to bash the hell out of and in most cases kill another group of people whom the first group of people invokes a law against, which states that the second group of people have no right to attempt to try and bash the hell out of or kill the first group of people, or they will be prosecuted and/or eliminated, whichever is most appropriate according to the first group of people.

[Warlock]

Originally posted by Sandwich

Uhm, a Tomahawk would have literally blown the Apache to bits, not just left a burn mark or a hole. They are quite powerful, as missiles go.

Yea I know ... was being sarcastic

[Warlock]

Originally posted by Tiara
Well, the US has done it now with their precision bombing The missile went off course and blew up civvies.

Now, we might know it was just a "mistake", but they will think of it as a direct attack. Especially with all the propaganda going around.

Well being Saddam's already moved Civis onto military targets ppl were going to be hit anyways,....besides,....it's a war ,... **** happens

[Tiara]

Originally posted by Warlock


Well being Saddam's already moved Civis onto military targets ppl were going to be hit anyways,....besides,....it's a war ,... **** happens

That doesn't take away the fact that almost anyone in the middle east who is against the war (Example: Syria) to say: "Look at what the evil-doers have done!"

[Warlock]

Like they aren't saying it anyways or wouldn't find another reason too ?


On a different note,...anyone hear about France ? While being against the war,...they don't want to be left out of getting nice juicy post-war contracts in the reconstruction of Iraq and are working on ways to make sure they'll be getting some buisness.

[Tiara]

Originally posted by Warlock
Like they aren't saying it anyways or wouldn't find another reason too ?

...I'm stunned... That must be the most intelligent reply in this thread.

I meant this would make it worse. Bahgdad civvies will now have so much propaganda (more then before) that it will be VERY hard for the Coalition to take Bahgdad without getting into a bloody city war where most civvies are turned against them.

Remember, they now have stacks o' food to hold out long enough. That limits the Coalition choice. They can't wait them out (Cause a long term war would certainly be devastating). Also they can't bomb 'm cause that would cause the entire world to rally against the Coalition. That leaves a city war. Something that almost nullifies the advanced technology and comes down to sheer competence in guerilla warfare. Something where the Iraqi elite troops are far better in then coalition forces.

Also, the pro-Saddam movements in the middle east will hold this as a clear example of US evil. And will try to get more supporters.

[Warlock]

Well if you want to be offended by my comment that's up to you. It's merely a fact, we're at war, we're not there to make friends. What do you expect the Coalition to do ? "**** we missed and hit a Civi building ... well let's pack up and go home this one's over"

Remember, those stacks of food are being provided by the Coalition. They're doing there damnest not to harm civilians, but it's simple fact that it will happen. Ifthey weren't trying and going out of their way not to harm civilians ,... this war would likely be over already since we'd have just completely wiped target areas out.

Besides, currently ... during the Briefing going on right now by Brig Gen Brooks, they don't know if it was one of our missiles that hit the market or not.

[Tiara]

Meh, yeah whatever...

Ow, and do you really think they are going to say "Yeah, sorry, it was our missile that killed innocents?"... If they do they must really be going crazy

[Sandwich]

Originally posted by Tiara
Bahgdad civvies will now have so much propaganda (more then before) that it will be VERY hard for the Coalition to take Bahgdad without getting into a bloody city war where most civvies are turned against them.

I've been personally involved in city fighting, on the "heavily armored" side of things. Yeah, there was the worries about anti-tank rocket bearing gangs, but most of the stuff trown against my APC was makeshift explosives and fragmentation grenades - barely even scratched the APC's armor, and I'm sure Warlock here can explain to you all exactly how tough the M113 APC's armor isn't. The most damage to tanks was from maneuvering through tight alleys and streets - the side armor plates were often ripped off by brushing against the side of a building.

Of course, Bagdad's "civvies" are likely to be more heavily armed than Jenin's "civvies" ("civvies", because in my book, the moment a person starts shooting at military forces, whether they are invaders or not, he's not quite as innocent and helpless as is usually associated with the word "civillian" ).

Well, if America needs help in removing a terror-supporting regieme, all they have to do is ask. We've been told to stay out of it, but unfortunately we do have plenty of experience in fighting as an organized army against gurreilla tactics.

[Warlock]

Originally posted by Tiara
Meh, yeah whatever...

Ow, and do you really think they are going to say "Yeah, sorry, it was our missile that killed innocents?"... If they do they must really be going crazy

LOL Well being they're not holding back on other information.... like our own F-16 bombing a Patriot battery by mistake, etc Yes i do believe they'd make the anouncement that it happened.

Saying sorry on the otherhand I doubt there's even a point to it.

Funny how some ppl just miss the concept of war.

[Sandwich]

Originally posted by Tiara
Ow, and do you really think they are going to say "Yeah, sorry, it was our missile that killed innocents?"... If they do they must really be going crazy

The US admitted to accidentally shooting down that Tornado, didn't they? What's the difference? In both incidents, the casualties were "not supposed to" be hit.