American war tactics

[vrus]

Has anybody noticed what happened in this Iraqi war? I live in Kuwait. And I was here during the war. We didn't have any problems. But while doing a project on this topic, I noticed something. Did anybody see that the UN spent so much time trying to disarm Iraq and finally got rid of the Iraqi Al-Samoud-II missile which was a major asset for the Iraqis? And then just as it seemed that war was going to be avoided, the US marches in. In my opinion, they used the UN to weaken them and then attacked. It might not have made much difference, but it was still a major breakthrough as the morale was low in Iraq as I remember from the news. Americans usually use these kind of tactics in war. When I stumble across another of these, which will surely happen, I will post it!

 

[Gremlin29]

The US could have gained more with less if they had simply attacked Iraq without notice. Depending on the UN to do anything but get in the way is absurd to me. IMHO the UN didn't wear Iraq down at all and if the UN was a legitimate and capable organization would have forced a military solution 10 years earlier.

 

[redsoulja]

america had the chance for a complete military solution at its disposal 10 years ago...

 

[vrus]

I feel that the USA is the backbone of the UN and thus they can control it like a puppet. This was the same with the League of Nations, set up after World War I. It was proposed by US President Woodrow Wilson. But the day it opened up, USA was not there as the US Congress had not given approval. It was reasonably successful during the 1920s. But it had some huge failures in the 1930s like the Manchurian and Abyssinian Crisis that led to its failure/ closing and arguably to World War II.

 

[Awang se]

I feel that the USA is the backbone of the UN and thus they can control it like a puppet. This was the same with the League of Nations, set up after World War I. It was proposed by US President Woodrow Wilson. But the day it opened up, USA was not there as the US Congress had not given approval. It was reasonably successful during the 1920s. But it had some huge failures in the 1930s like the Manchurian and Abyssinian Crisis that led to its failure/ closing and arguably to World War II.

are we suppose to discuss tactics here? or my computers translated the title wrong?

 

[kashifshahzad]

I feel that the USA is the backbone of the UN and thus they can control it like a puppet. This was the same with the League of Nations, set up after World War I. It was proposed by US President Woodrow Wilson. But the day it opened up, USA was not there as the US Congress had not given approval. It was reasonably successful during the 1920s. But it had some huge failures in the 1930s like the Manchurian and Abyssinian Crisis that led to its failure/ closing and arguably to World War II.

Vrus i think you are a little bit confused in writing your posts i want some written proof with the link given.I think the UN is just a puppet and US is operating it. It is just like a US depertment whinh is being operated .

I disagre with your previous comments thats you have said US 1stly tried to get rid to Iraqi missiles lol US have longer range and in greater no of missiles and its defence is much more greater then the Iraq then why can you say that they could make some difference.

 

[gf0012-aust]

I feel that the USA is the backbone of the UN and thus they can control it like a puppet. This was the same with the League of Nations, set up after World War I. It was proposed by US President Woodrow Wilson. But the day it opened up, USA was not there as the US Congress had not given approval. It was reasonably successful during the 1920s. But it had some huge failures in the 1930s like the Manchurian and Abyssinian Crisis that led to its failure/ closing and arguably to World War II.

vrus, this has nothing to do with war tactics. either answer the topics accurately or restrain from posting.

 

[vrus]

GF, you're right. I can be quite irrelevant at times. But what I meant to say was, that the I feel that the USA uses the UN to start a war diplomatically. The UN doesn't have much choice as the USA is the backbone and influence it.

 

[Temoor_A]

GF, you're right. I can be quite irrelevant at times. But what I meant to say was, that the I feel that the USA uses the UN to start a war diplomatically. The UN doesn't have much choice as the USA is the backbone and influence it.

The US opens diplomatic front of its conflicts against its enemies in UN, so that talks and negotiations can take place between them in fair manner and appropriate solutions to the conflicts be planned with partiscipation of other countries.

And US tries to legitmize its planned operations against its enemies by passing resolutions in which they make interesting charges against the enemies, in case of a war. You know the concept of "Diplomatic Propaganda"!

 

[Temoor_A]

Has anybody noticed what happened in this Iraqi war? I live in Kuwait. And I was here during the war. We didn't have any problems. But while doing a project on this topic, I noticed something. Did anybody see that the UN spent so much time trying to disarm Iraq and finally got rid of the Iraqi Al-Samoud-II missile which was a major asset for the Iraqis? And then just as it seemed that war was going to be avoided, the US marches in. In my opinion, they used the UN to weaken them and then attacked. It might not have made much difference, but it was still a major breakthrough as the morale was low in Iraq as I remember from the news. Americans usually use these kind of tactics in war. When I stumble across another of these, which will surely happen, I will post it!

Just before the 1991 Gulf War, a secret plan for toppling Saddam Hussain was already under discussion in Pentagon. But due to problem of some Arab states not being content with that plan, it was discarded. A force of approximately 960,000 coalition troops (from 39 nations) was planned and started mobilizing in Iraqi neighbours in August 1990 (the same month when Iraq invaded Kuwait a week earlier).

The real problem with Saddam was his stock-piles of nerve agents (chemical weapons - originally provided by US during Iran-Iraq war). Those can be used again in the up-coming battlefield. But before the start of conflict, US gave Saddam a first-hand warning of not to use such weapons or else it would use Nuclear weapons in response.

After the Gulf War 1991 (which lasted 45 days), UN weapon-inspection teams were deployed in Iraq to disarm all the WMD programs active and that included elimination of SCUD B, SCUD C and SCUD D missiles. Al-Samoud II missiles were allowed but with range limited to 92 Miles.

Then after 9/11 Terrorist Attacks, the situation changed and toppling of Saddam Hussain was once again under-discussion. The UN weapons-inspection teams were sent in Iraq and were actually used for spying purposes (and outside in the UN, a false diplomatic front for the dispute was being purported) and Propaganda was aired that WMD's have been spotted in Iraq.

But Saddam did made some mistakes like;

- Not allowing more then 1 U2 Spy planes to fly over Iraqi air-space as demanded by US
- Not allowing the inspection teams to check Saddam's palaces
- Downing of a Predator Spy Plane by an Iraqi SAM. This plane was operating at 26000 ft before the incident.

These mistakes paved the way for US to solidify its excuse to topple Saddam.

As the US military build-up continued near Iraqi borders. Saddam planned an operation termed as "Armaggedon" - a combination of (Conventional | Gurreilla style Ambush | Sabotage Tactics and Post War Gurreilla opertions). In this operation all possible Iraqi OIL wells were to burned as well if enemy comes under sight

The US planned a lighter version of "Awe & Shock" - a combination of (Conventional blitzkrieg | Commando operations | Iraqi public exploitation and Precision Air-assault). And one part of it was to stop the carnage of OIL wells during military assault. This operation was originally dubbed as "Operation Enduring Freedom".

US sole media projection was to make the war look like a war for "Iraqi Liberation from Saddam". Some 90,000 US | 40,000 British & 12000 Coalition ground troops were assembled initially for assault (260,000 in total involving Naval and Airforce personal).

The conflict began in March 19, 2003 and within 21 days, Iraq was captured. With the elimination of Saddam's regime, the communist influence in Middle-east has diminished and US old Cold War plan for middle-east fullfilled!

 

[Pathfinder-X]

Am I smelling a scent of political issues in this thread? Please stay on the topic itself. Further off topic post will be deleted without notice.

 

[Gremlin29]

Are these really "Amercian" war tactics? This political maneuvering happens on a daily basis, and it's not endemic to the Americans. Isn't this the purpose of the UN? To attempt to solve things short of military action?

 

[driftder]

Sounds more like a "bash the USA" thrtead again - this time from the angle of how despically it make use of the UN to do a Maskirovka on the Iraqis. When will this head in the sand approach end?

Those who have observed or trained with US forces will know their basic tactics - quite common with all militaries. Dominance of the battlefield through firepower, intel and logistics. Don't believe me? Join them in one of their live fire exercise. But then again, you need to be one of their allies to get invited :

 

[root_slack]

C this vid, dunno whether this has been posted before
:coffee
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6648.htm

 

[webmaster]

No politics folks... if you want to discuss TACTICS fine, but for politics and other non-defence issues go here:

http://www.globaltalknetworks.com/forums