Comments for H&I Fires* 02 Sep 2007

H&I Fires* 02 Sep 2007

2007-09-03T04:35:57Z

Open post for those with something to share, updated through the day. New, complete posts come in below this one. Note: If trackbacking, please acknowledge this post in your post. That's only polite.

You're advertising here, we should get an ad at your place...

***********************************

TigerHawk is sponsoring a photo contest as an excuse to cover his lite blogging this weekend....

Chuck Simmins sends:

It took 12,000 American troops ten years to move 14 miles. Was it one of the worst defeats in American history?
No, it was something that a lot of men and women can be very proud of.

This is a great story about how combining necessary training with humanitarian assistance worked out for everybody involved.

And it uses the word "muskeg" which you will rarely see in connection with American troops.

Stay safe this weekend! -the Armorer

**********************************

Aha! Early footage of the Denizennes! Oddly enough, work-safe except in a "Ms. Thang" environment... "You girls a bunch a nudists, or are you just short of clothes?"

Yet... it's *still* work-safe.

H/t, Gerard Vanderleun, although he was using it for a completely different purpose... -the Armorer

*********************************

Didja hear? Katie Couric's in Baghdad! Finally we're going to get some real news out of Iraq. I've been nice lately, but I couldn't resist a fisking of her inane diary entry. - FbL

*********************************

Two British Generals have criticized US strategy in Iraq. Of course, they are talking about the post invasion planning under Rumsfeld and not the current strategy, though you wouldn't be able to tell that immediately by the headlines or how its being touted in the press. Mind you, they aren't complaining about having invaded Iraq, just that they believe the Rumsfeld Pentagon did not really take into account the many divides in Iraq society or the need for many more troops to secure the nation. All good and well in hindsight. Then again, the British weren't offering very many troops so they are complaining about what they thought the US should have provided.

These complaints are likely in response to some recent remarks from US advisers and generals about British failure to control the southern provinces and destroy the Shi'ite insurgents that have been targeting US forces with EFPs. The British are contemplating a complete withdraw from the area and have already turned over one joint security station that was promptly taken over by the Mahdi Army.

However, as I recently wrote, it may be that, after the horrific repressions under Saddam and the abandonment of the Shi'ite post Desert Storm meant that blood was going to be the necessary payment.

In Iraq, some areas seem to be slowly cooling down as the surge pushes the AQ elements out of the Baghdad area and back in to Salah al Din, Tarmim and Ninewa. This area is heavily inhabited by the Al Jubaar and Al Tikriti tribes who can be nominally blamed for supporting Al Qaeda elements throughout the war with men, money and materials. The Al Jubaar tribe had greatly benefited under Saddam's rule and the Al Tikriti tribe was Saddam's family tribe. His daughter, Raghed, was recently put on Interpol's "most wanted" list for supporting terrorism. Major transit routes via road and river pass through this area via Syria. During the worst terrorist attacks in Baghdad, these areas contained VBIED and IED factories that were used in these attacks.

US forces in the north, in relatively secured areas like Mosul and Tall Afar, are bracing for the squeeze that may push them back into these already secured areas.

Down south, the Sadr-Badr conflict is hovering between assassinations and outright gun battles. Both are looking to consolidate their control of the area.

Democrat's and Republican's are shuffling their positions trying to figure out where the exact median is. Nobody wants to declare victory and nobody wants to be left out if it actually turns out well.

We're at a shaky period right now. Just as it gets interesting, the Iranians pull their top man from the IRGC and make him an "adviser" to the Ayatollah. One has to wonder if they are concerned about their two proxies in Iraq starting to hammer each other with Iranian weapons and money. Or, the possibility that US Air Force assets being sent into the area hasn't made them a little jumpy after the President talked about designating the IRGC as a "terrorist" entity.

-Kat

]]> *A term of art from the artillery. Harassment and Interdiction Fires.

Back in the day, when you could just kill people and break things without a note from a lawyer, they were pre-planned, but to the enemy, random, fires at known gathering points, road junctions, Main Supply Routes, assembly areas, etc - to keep the bad guy nervous that the world around him might start exploding at any minute.

*Not really relevant to today's operating environment, right? But, it *is*

The UAVs (oops, can't call 'em UAVs anymore - they're now Unmanned Aerial Systems... some Colonel got his Legion of Merit for that change...), er, um UAS's we fly over Afghanistan and Pakistan looking for targets of opportunity are a form of H&I fires, if you really want to parse it finely. We just have better sensors and fire control now.

I call the post that because it's random things posted by me and people I've given posting privileges to. It's also an open trackback, so if someone has a post they're proud of, but it really isn't either Castle kind of stuff, or topical to a particular post, I've basically given blanket permission to use that post for that purpose. Another term of art that might be appropriate is "Free Fire Zone"

Comment from Ymarsakar on 2007-09-03

2007-09-03T19:17:22Z

Anyhow, I just read that the Iraqis are sending down a couple of brigades to bolster their presence there. We'll have to see if it is the "infiltrated" brigades or one that is relatively loyal to the central government and the idea of "Iraq". They will face some of the same problems US troops faced. Which was liasioning with the locals. If they have a solid power base in the Shia South, with good relations with local police and what not, then they can begin the pushback on the mafia controlled territories. Like any turf war, you must control the territory and the only way to do that is to gain the loyalty of the people on that territory. No matter how loyal an Iraqi Army force is to the good side, they won't be able to achieve maximum effectiveness without the relationship the US has with Al Anbar at the moment. Iraqi Army units have also historically needed good relations with Iraqi Police. Army comes from somewhere else, while police are recruited locally. A schism between the two was hard enough for the US to overcome, I don't think the Iraqis could gain anything positive so long as such a barrier was in place. And given that Sadr and Company have had quite a bit of time to plan things out and lay contingencies, it will be a good test to see whether American High Command as well as Iraqi leadership have learned from the mistakes of Operation Iraqi Freedom's initial invasion stages. For Iraqis, their examples are Sadr City and Fallujah. For the US, it is using armored divisions to take Baghdad, bypassing the Shia south and the Kurdish north. The grassroots networks that Sadr and our enemies have created in the south will take some time to dismantle. Hopefully whoever is making the decisions at the top will no longer be afraid to take on Sadr, given that AQ is decreasing in potency. Fear is the ultimate weapon. It makes mincemeat of the greatest of weapons and armies.

Comment from kat-missouri on 2007-09-02

2007-09-03T04:22:02Z

Well, I think the Brits were saying for sure that immediately after the invasion, there weren't enough troops. I'm not sure what they think now except that they want out and they are upping their contingent in Afghanistan. The "real" war, you know. Anyhow, I just read that the Iraqis are sending down a couple of brigades to bolster their presence there. We'll have to see if it is the "infiltrated" brigades or one that is relatively loyal to the central government and the idea of "Iraq".

Comment from Ymarsakar on 2007-09-02

2007-09-03T02:47:42Z

The British are contemplating a complete withdraw from the area and have already turned over one joint security station that was promptly taken over by the Mahdi Army. So their answer to not enough troops for security is to make sure there are no troops for security? Interesting. As for the South, there doesn't seem to be much of a toe hold for US forces. There once might have been, but that was in 2003/4. Whatever resources the Brits acquired in terms of humINT is probably going down the toilet, unless the US moves in some soldiers that live amongst Shia Iraqis. Sort of like what a re-look at Vietnam produced.

Comment from Hunter on 2007-09-02

2007-09-03T02:21:50Z

Yup, I've been watching the progress of the road for eight years. Slow, but steady. Every branch has been here, every MOS from runway repair to water purification, POL handlers to D7 operators. You should have seen the barges of damaged equipment leaving here. Dump trucks, cracker boxes, dozers, tractors, pickups, HUMMVs ...waugh! But a huge amount of work and training was accomplished. The most valuable asset on the modern battlefield? A D7 dozer.

Comment from BillT on 2007-09-02

2007-09-02T15:22:39Z

The Alcan Highway Redux! Nice to see that Englineers don't just hang around Fort Useless being a "Break Glass In Case Of Emergency" asset...