Understanding Current Operations in Iraq

[patsfan13]

The best explanation of the current strategy and tatics I have seen from the Small Wars Journal. The author has been on the ground in Iraq (right now actually).

http://www.smallwarsjournal.com/blog...rent-operatio/

This post is not about whether current ops are “working” — for us, here on the ground, time will tell, though some observers elsewhere seem to have already made up their minds (on the basis of what evidence, I’m not really sure). But for professional counterinsurgency operators such as our SWJ community, the thing to understand at this point is the intention and concept behind current ops in Iraq: if you grasp this, you can tell for yourself how the operations are going, without relying on armchair pundits. So in the interests of self-education (and cutting out the commentariat middlemen—sorry, guys) here is a field perspective on current operations.

Ten days ago, speaking with Austin Bay, I made the following comment:

“I know some people in the media are already starting to sort of write off the “surge” and say ‘Hey, hang on: we’ve been going since January, we haven’t seen a massive turnaround; it mustn’t be working’. What we’ve been doing to date is putting forces into position. We haven’t actually started what I would call the “surge” yet. All we’ve been doing is building up forces and trying to secure the population. And what I would say to people who say that it’s already failed is “watch this space”. Because you’re going to see, in fairly short order, some changes in the way we’re operating that will make what’s been happening over the past few months look like what it is—just a preliminary build up.”

The meaning of that comment should be clear by now to anyone tracking what is happening in Iraq. On June 15th we kicked off a major series of division-sized operations in Baghdad and the surrounding provinces. As General Odierno said, we have finished the build-up phase and are now beginning the actual “surge of operations”. I have often said that we need to give this time. That is still true. But this is the end of the beginning: we are now starting to put things onto a viable long-term footing.

These operations are qualitatively different from what we have done before. Our concept is to knock over several insurgent safe havens simultaneously, in order to prevent terrorists relocating their infrastructure from one to another, and to create an operational synergy between what we're doing in Baghdad and what's happening outside. Unlike on previous occasions, we don't plan to leave these areas once they’re secured. These ops will run over months, and the key activity is to stand up viable local security forces in partnership with Iraqi Army and Police, as well as political and economic programs, to permanently secure them. The really decisive activity will be police work, registration of the population and counterintelligence in these areas, to comb out the insurgent sleeper cells and political cells that have "gone quiet" as we moved in, but which will try to survive through the op and emerge later. This will take operational patience, and it will be intelligence-led, and Iraqi government-led. It will probably not make the news (the really important stuff rarely does) but it will be the truly decisive action.

When we speak of "clearing" an enemy safe haven, we are not talking about destroying the enemy in it; we are talking about rescuing the population in it from enemy intimidation. If we don't get every enemy cell in the initial operation, that's OK. The point of the operations is to lift the pall of fear from population groups that have been intimidated and exploited by terrorists to date, then win them over and work with them in partnership to clean out the cells that remain – as has happened in Al Anbar Province and can happen elsewhere in Iraq as well.

The "terrain" we are clearing is human terrain, not physical terrain. It is about marginalizing al Qa’ida, Shi’a extremist militias, and the other terrorist groups from the population they prey on. This is why claims that “80% of AQ leadership have fled” don’t overly disturb us: the aim is not to kill every last AQ leader, but rather to drive them off the population and keep them off, so that we can work with the community to prevent their return.

This is not some sort of kind-hearted, soft approach, as some fire-breathing polemicists have claimed (funnily enough, those who urge us to “just kill more bad guys” usually do so from a safe distance). It is not about being “nice” to the population and hoping they will somehow see us as the “good guys” and stop supporting insurgents. On the contrary, it is based on a hard-headed recognition of certain basic facts, to wit:

The entire article is well worth reading.

This quote is not from a commercial site.

[PressCoverage]

Originally Posted by patsfan13

The best explanation of the current strategy and tatics I have seen from the Small Wars Journal. The author has been on the ground in Iraq (right now actually).

http://www.smallwarsjournal.com/blog...rent-operatio/




The entire article is well worth reading.

This quote is not from a commercial site.

"the end of the beginning... changes in tactics... "

the Eagle is about to start whooping some ass....

hey, when US forces put their plan into effect, i have no doubt they're gonna kill a lot of bad people... and i have no doubt that journalists like this will bring the story home of a great tactical American victory, and there'll be a period of resurgance by the pro-war 25% and their "told-you-so" talking points back home...

but it can't, and won't, last... the scab is picked... these people absolutely hate eachother now... we can round up and kill 10,000, heck 50,000 terrorists in August/September, but AQ is just gonna filter back into Iraq across their rather open borders, start blowing things up again to get the dogs fighting and sabotage reconstruction....

you don't just blow up 105 people on a bright sunny afternoon, and then expect it to be all forgotten once democracy gets a foothold... and this is happening almost every day... you don't "get control" of hatred this fresh... these people need to be seperated at this point... sucks, but we asked for it...

spend 400 million on that sewage plant after you've done a "clear/hold" on the neighborhood? great.... expect it to cost 800 million... between looting, sabotage, fraudulent over-charges and kickbacks.. and on and on... boom!!!

you war enthusiasts (sorry, don't know what else to call you) seem to be overconfident that this secret X's and O's plan is some tactical Belichick brilliance that will be unleashed in the coming months... and, militarily, it probably will be... but, ah well... the Baathists are still out of work, the borders are still open, AQ is still training hundreds of new monsters in Pakistan every day...

frankly, i wouldn't be surprised if this "surge" is nothing more than positioning for a strike on Iran... Palpatine is just that sinister and sneaky....

[DarrylS]

From the Article:

"So much for theory. The practice, as always, has been mixed. Personally, I think we are doing reasonably well and casualties have been lower so far than I feared. Every single loss is a tragedy. But so far, thank God, the loss rate has not been too terrible: casualties are up in absolute terms, but down as a proportion of troops deployed (in the fourth quarter of 2006 we had about 100,000 troops in country and casualties averaged 90 deaths a month; now we have almost 160,000 troops in country but deaths are under 120 per month, much less than a proportionate increase, which would have been around 150 a month). And last year we patrolled rarely, mainly in vehicles, and got hit almost every time we went out. Now we patrol all the time, on foot, by day and night with Iraqi units normally present as partners, and the chances of getting hit are much lower on each patrol. We are finally coming out of the "defensive crouch" with which we used to approach the environment, and it is starting to pay off. "

My concern is quite simple that it is felt that 90-120 deaths of american men and women per month is justified in this conflict.. when our reason to be there is suspect.. to rationalize the success of this in how many of our soldiers dies begs the issue, every day we read of extremists blowing up other Iraqi's.. truck bombs, bombs on the police etc. It is not about how many of our soldiers do or do not die, but the effect on this country and figuring out how to transfer power to a country that seems reluctant to accept it and the realities of its political divisions. There is no exit strategy and it seems that the Iraqi Gov't has to first recognize its divisions, neutralize the various factions and then try to proceed with some type of peace.. maybe dividing the country into three sections may be the best way, what is going on now is not the best way. While we measure our success or failure in soldier deaths, the deaths of non combatants, women and children is horrifying. But that is war, great efforts are made to do body counts on soldiers, but there is little attention paid to the women and children who seem to suffer most in this and most wars.

[PressCoverage]

the last sentence being the most troubling... somehow, i doubt our opponents grasp and truly care about the collateral damage... they fall back on the old "it's war... things happen" card...

[PatsSB42]

Originally Posted by PressCoverage

"the end of the beginning... changes in tactics... "

the Eagle is about to start whooping some ass....

hey, when US forces put their plan into effect, i have no doubt they're gonna kill a lot of bad people... and i have no doubt that journalists like this will bring the story home of a great tactical American victory, and there'll be a period of resurgance by the pro-war 25% and their "told-you-so" talking points back home...

but it can't, and won't, last... the scab is picked... these people absolutely hate eachother now... we can round up and kill 10,000, heck 50,000 terrorists in August/September, but AQ is just gonna filter back into Iraq across their rather open borders, start blowing things up again to get the dogs fighting and sabotage reconstruction....

you don't just blow up 105 people on a bright sunny afternoon, and then expect it to be all forgotten once democracy gets a foothold... and this is happening almost every day... you don't "get control" of hatred this fresh... these people need to be seperated at this point... sucks, but we asked for it...

spend 400 million on that sewage plant after you've done a "clear/hold" on the neighborhood? great.... expect it to cost 800 million... between looting, sabotage, fraudulent over-charges and kickbacks.. and on and on... boom!!!

you war enthusiasts (sorry, don't know what else to call you) seem to be overconfident that this secret X's and O's plan is some tactical Belichick brilliance that will be unleashed in the coming months... and, militarily, it probably will be... but, ah well... the Baathists are still out of work, the borders are still open, AQ is still training hundreds of new monsters in Pakistan every day...

frankly, i wouldn't be surprised if this "surge" is nothing more than positioning for a strike on Iran... Palpatine is just that sinister and sneaky....

"war enthisiasts" puts on a negative connotation about anyone who doesn't believe in an immediate pull out. Your heart felt sorrow about having no other term you can come up with is indeed touching. It's like me saying pro-choice folks are pro abbortion enthusists. The extra zinger is quite evident.

[sdaniels7114]

We've all heard the story of Washington's Army and the winter at Valley Forge. The fact that it was still called an Army and not a Division or even a Platoon come spring is the proof that the soon-to-be USA had the backbone to lead itself. Where are the Iraqis? After 4 years Cornwallis was trapped against the sea and about to be forced home by a rag-tag bunch of farmers during our revolution. After four years and with the aid of the most devastating and sophisticated military force ever put together on this planet, the Iraqis are just starting to come around? If theses people were willing to buy what we're selling, it would have happened a long time ago.

[wistahpatsfan]

Originally Posted by PatsSB42

"war enthisiasts" puts on a negative connotation about anyone who doesn't believe in an immediate pull out. Your heart felt sorrow about having no other term you can come up with is indeed touching. It's like me saying pro-choice folks are pro abbortion enthusists. The extra zinger is quite evident.

"War enthusiasts" better refers, for me, to those who accept our continued operation in Iraq. I still haven't heard a cogent rationale for our continued presence being any more beneficial to Americans and Iraqis (I'll allow the "concern for Iraqis" with a cynical wink to those who could have cared less about them when the bombs were coming down on them in phase 1) than an immediate withdrawal. Iraq is less functional than it was 5 years ago. FIVE YEARS have gone by and we still have been unable to solve their problems. What has occurred in that time to leads you to believe that another five years will make things any better?

[Harry Boy]

Time To Come Home

Let The Savages Slaughter Each Other
If The World Is Concerned About These Murdering Pigs Let The UN Handle It.

[wistahpatsfan]

Originally Posted by Harry Boy

Time To Come Home

Let The Savages Slaughter Each Other
If The World Is Concerned About These Murdering Pigs Let The UN Handle It.

....pretty much.....

[patsfan13]

Originally Posted by PressCoverage

the last sentence being the most troubling... somehow, i doubt our opponents grasp and truly care about the collateral damage... they fall back on the old "it's war... things happen" card...

Which opponent are you referring to Al Queda or people who support the idea of thr WOT?