Tiassa
03-29-03, 12:58 AM
Uncensored Info on Iraq War from the Russian GRU (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article2454.htm)
Disclaimer: I make no claims to the veracity of these reports.
It's an interesting article. I found it last night, and it appears to update daily. Sadly, the first topic on this I posted died in the catastrophe, so here we go again.
The March 28 report tends to editorialize; the majority of the report is a critique of the first week of the war:Two enormous mistakes made by the US command during the planning stages of this war resulted in the obvious strategic failure. The US has underestimated the enemy. Despite the unique ability to conduct reconnaissance against the Iraqi military infrastructure through a wide network of agents implanted with the international teams of weapons inspectors, despite of unlimited air dominance the US military command has failed to adequately evaluate combat readiness of the Iraqi army and its technical capabilities; the US has failed to correctly asses the social and political situation in Iraq and in the world in general. These failures led to entirely inadequate military and political decisionsYou know, I'm (obviously) no specialist in the military arts and sciences, but even I wouldn't go so far as to call it a failure. The basis of the term is fair enough, though, as the report notes that the coalition failed to complete certain of its own goals according to projection. But I would say there seems to be a severe miscalculation, or else a severe misrepresentation. For my own editorial point, let me say that I'm not sure which bothers me more. Probably the latter, as it is deliberate.
One of the almost humorous high points of the March 28 report:It should be noted, however, that the way the war is being fought did create a certain sense of disappointment in most of the troops. Many are feeling that they've been lied to and are openly talking about the stupidity of the high command and its gross miscalculations. "Those star-covered Pentagon idiots promised us a victory march and flowers on the armor. What we got instead were those damned fanatics fighting for every dune and the sand squeaking in your ass!" said one of the wounded recuperating at a hospital in Rammstein. (Reverse translation from Russian)I'm sure a few of our troops have uttered something along those lines, but there is no doubt about this war; there will be no fluctuating morale. Internationals: How many of you study Americans when we're angry? We never actually take out our frustrations on the source. In other words, if our troops are in any way frustrated with command, the Iraqi soldiers' day just got worse.
The March 27 (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article2438.htm) report is a little more (allegedly) factual, and bears less editorial content, and furthermore paints a different picture of the war than Americans are getting:- During one of such attacks [the Iraqi forces] caught off-guard a unit of the US 3rd Infantry Division that was doing vehicle maintenance and repairs. In a short battle the US unit was destroyed and dispersed, leaving behind one armored personnel carrier, a repair vehicle and two Abrams tanks, one of which was fully operational.
- During the sand storm the coalition command lost contact with up to 4 coalition reconnaissance groups. Their whereabouts are being determined. It is still unknown what happened to more than 600 other coalition troops mainly from resupply, communications and reconnaissance units communication with which was lost during the past 24 hours.
- Rumors about an uprising by the Basra Shiite population turned out to be false. Moreover, the Shiite community leaders called on the local residents to fight the "children of the Satan" - the Americans and the British.I caught a bit on the BBC feed last night about the idea that this war would be like nothing we'd ever seen before. Aside from the initial air campaign, this is starting to look like a lot of other wars. An anchor pointed out that the battle footage, soldiers shooting from the cover of vehicles, gritty air ... it could have been any war in the twentieth century, it seemed. The retired US Marine General he was interviewing acknowledged this, and pointed out that his boys were quite comfortable, indeed, in that kind of warfare; it's what they do.
So what if it's embarrassing for Bush that the war isn't going as planned? By all indications, that works to the US's favor. First off, Bush can't really embarrass himself any more than he already has; he can't possibly disgrace himself--if he ends up blowing it somehow, we'll all just say we knew he would all along. Come on, it's like shooting fish in a barrel. But a spectacular, new kind of war has the potential to go well afoul. So our Marines have to fight the kind of war they're best at ... I mean, really, when you're the United States, you have the unique position of benefiting unusually from your mistakes. So the fancy crap didn't work like we wanted. Well now, let's just implement the tested theory ....
And still, the day gets worse for the Iraqi soldiers.
:m:,
Tiassa :cool:
Disclaimer: I make no claims to the veracity of these reports.
It's an interesting article. I found it last night, and it appears to update daily. Sadly, the first topic on this I posted died in the catastrophe, so here we go again.
The March 28 report tends to editorialize; the majority of the report is a critique of the first week of the war:Two enormous mistakes made by the US command during the planning stages of this war resulted in the obvious strategic failure. The US has underestimated the enemy. Despite the unique ability to conduct reconnaissance against the Iraqi military infrastructure through a wide network of agents implanted with the international teams of weapons inspectors, despite of unlimited air dominance the US military command has failed to adequately evaluate combat readiness of the Iraqi army and its technical capabilities; the US has failed to correctly asses the social and political situation in Iraq and in the world in general. These failures led to entirely inadequate military and political decisionsYou know, I'm (obviously) no specialist in the military arts and sciences, but even I wouldn't go so far as to call it a failure. The basis of the term is fair enough, though, as the report notes that the coalition failed to complete certain of its own goals according to projection. But I would say there seems to be a severe miscalculation, or else a severe misrepresentation. For my own editorial point, let me say that I'm not sure which bothers me more. Probably the latter, as it is deliberate.
One of the almost humorous high points of the March 28 report:It should be noted, however, that the way the war is being fought did create a certain sense of disappointment in most of the troops. Many are feeling that they've been lied to and are openly talking about the stupidity of the high command and its gross miscalculations. "Those star-covered Pentagon idiots promised us a victory march and flowers on the armor. What we got instead were those damned fanatics fighting for every dune and the sand squeaking in your ass!" said one of the wounded recuperating at a hospital in Rammstein. (Reverse translation from Russian)I'm sure a few of our troops have uttered something along those lines, but there is no doubt about this war; there will be no fluctuating morale. Internationals: How many of you study Americans when we're angry? We never actually take out our frustrations on the source. In other words, if our troops are in any way frustrated with command, the Iraqi soldiers' day just got worse.
The March 27 (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article2438.htm) report is a little more (allegedly) factual, and bears less editorial content, and furthermore paints a different picture of the war than Americans are getting:- During one of such attacks [the Iraqi forces] caught off-guard a unit of the US 3rd Infantry Division that was doing vehicle maintenance and repairs. In a short battle the US unit was destroyed and dispersed, leaving behind one armored personnel carrier, a repair vehicle and two Abrams tanks, one of which was fully operational.
- During the sand storm the coalition command lost contact with up to 4 coalition reconnaissance groups. Their whereabouts are being determined. It is still unknown what happened to more than 600 other coalition troops mainly from resupply, communications and reconnaissance units communication with which was lost during the past 24 hours.
- Rumors about an uprising by the Basra Shiite population turned out to be false. Moreover, the Shiite community leaders called on the local residents to fight the "children of the Satan" - the Americans and the British.I caught a bit on the BBC feed last night about the idea that this war would be like nothing we'd ever seen before. Aside from the initial air campaign, this is starting to look like a lot of other wars. An anchor pointed out that the battle footage, soldiers shooting from the cover of vehicles, gritty air ... it could have been any war in the twentieth century, it seemed. The retired US Marine General he was interviewing acknowledged this, and pointed out that his boys were quite comfortable, indeed, in that kind of warfare; it's what they do.
So what if it's embarrassing for Bush that the war isn't going as planned? By all indications, that works to the US's favor. First off, Bush can't really embarrass himself any more than he already has; he can't possibly disgrace himself--if he ends up blowing it somehow, we'll all just say we knew he would all along. Come on, it's like shooting fish in a barrel. But a spectacular, new kind of war has the potential to go well afoul. So our Marines have to fight the kind of war they're best at ... I mean, really, when you're the United States, you have the unique position of benefiting unusually from your mistakes. So the fancy crap didn't work like we wanted. Well now, let's just implement the tested theory ....
And still, the day gets worse for the Iraqi soldiers.
:m:,
Tiassa :cool: