|
 |
Monday, March 31, 2003 |
 One of the worst problems with the US military is that it doesn't have a brain trust. We rely on outsiders to think for us. We promote line officers to the senior ranks (a line officer is a person that is great at leading men to take the next hill) to execute on the plans of the civilian brain trust comes up with (in this case led by Rumsfeld). The only exception to this rule in modern times is Schwarzkopf, with his 170 IQ, and his ability to deal in strategy at its deepest level. I would really like to see the US develop a general staff system (I would have signed up for that career path in a second).
11:10:16 PM 
|
|
Interesting. I have read that SARs spreads can now infect everyone in an apartment building but they don't understand the vector. Speculation is centered around the air conditioning and water systems. Why don't they check the front door?
9:47:26 PM
|
|
The emerging second Superpower. I have heard this a couple of times over the last week (I bet the Chinese would disagree ;->). Very intersting how new memes spread so quickly.
4:56:14 PM
|
|
Just a note on the US war plan. It's clear that the war plan is a very flexible document -- potentially even modular in construction (very much like a huge outline of a decision tree). It isn't a serial scenario. In contrast, it is complex, multi-faceted, and clearly a testiment to how computer technology has impacted the planning process since the last Gulf War. Given this flexibility, it is likely that there isn't a sequence of events that would fall outside the plan (from suicide bombers to nuclear detonation). Therefore, the answer we hear from Rumsfeld and Franks: "we on plan" becomes a hollow phrase. Perhaps we should refine the language to: "we have deviated from the optimal course (measured in terms of the length of the war, projected military casualties, projected civilian casualties, etc.)."
4:47:48 PM
|
|
Given the expected extended pause in ground operations, the greatest danger to the war effort isn't terrorism or geurilla attacks. Rather, it is the potential that our withering air campaign against the Republican Guard will cause Saddam to withdraw them to the safety of Baghdad. If that happens, the recrimination and consternation regarding this operation will be robustly intense (and make the last couple of days of media frenzy regarding troop allocations look sallow in comparison).
The next major objective of this war was to destroy the Republican Guard in the open (a secondary objective is to widen the security perimiter of the supply train and the clear the flanks of the forces arrayed against Baghdad). If the RG retreats after weeks of air bombardment before we have the ground forces in place to engage them, that opportunity will be lost. Nothing holds so much hope, given the current status of the administration's war plan, of toppling the regime without bloody fighting in the streets of Baghdad, than seeing 100,000 elite troops (the Praetorian Guard of the regime) utterly destroyed on the outskirts of Baghdad.
4:21:16 PM
|
|
There have been reports (including the BBC this morning) that indicate that the ground assault on the Republican Guard (ringed around Baghdad) will be delayed by up to 40 days (as anticipated by this weblog). We are waiting for more troops to arrive. Given the s**t storm surrounding Rumsfeld and Franks right now in the press, everyone should expect to see a rapid retreat from the "shock and awe" doctrine to the "Powell" doctrine.
2:10:22 PM
|
|
Newsday. The internally conflicted US policy on Iraq continues to do damage. On the one hand we need local support (particularly from the Shiites in the south and central Iraqi cities), yet we aren't willing to talk, negotiate, or work with the person that that could make this happen (and the person who will likely be a major political player in a post-Saddam Iraq): Ayatollah Muhammad Bakr al-Hakim. Our inability to work with this spiritual and political leader of Iraqi Shiites has resulted in the following:
... al-Hakim has sent instructions to his supporters and secret cells in Basra, Najaf, Karbala and other southern Iraqi cities not to start an uprising or support the American-led coalition in any way, according to two of his top advisers. Al-Hakim also issued a "message to the Iraqi people" last week urging them not to side either with the United States or the Iraqi regime.
This has not stopped the Kurds from working with al-Hakim's forces, the Iranian-housed Iraqi Shiite Badr Brigade:
A senior Kurdish official said the Badr forces were invited by the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, which controls the eastern part of the Kurdish self-rule area. The group invited al-Hakim's forces in preparation for sending Iraqi opposition militias into the strategic northern city of Kirkuk, which is home to some of Iraq's richest oil fields. The Kurds want to send some Arab fighters into the city so that it would not appear that they are trying to take it over for themselves, the official said.
It's disheartening to think that the US military and political leadership assumed that there would be popular support for US military action in Iraq without working hand in glove with extremely popular opposition leaders. Granted, these meetings are starting to occur, but they are in many ways too little, too late. In my view, a face-to-face meeting between Bush, Barzani, Talabani, Chalabi, and al-Hakim should have been a prerequisite for any military action in Iraq.
Also, without the support of the men listed above, we will likely see the arrival of real terrorists as opposed to Saddam's manufactured ones (see below).
1:14:52 PM
|
|
One thing I hope people understand re: the recent reckless attacks (including the recent suicide bomber and Toyota "technical" type assaults that routinely effictively result in suicide) by Iraqis on American positions: these attacks don't closely fit the model we routinely see in the suicide attacks on Israel or the assault we experienced in 9/11. These suicide attacks aren't derived from a well-spring of patriotism or religious fervor. They are driven by Saddam's Stalinist tactics. Saddam, like Stalin before him, understands how to use mind-numbing terror to compel people to throw their lives away in support of his goals. To quote Mao: "Power grows out of the barrel of a gun." Who wouldn't drive a car laden with explosives if his/her family was inches away from the barrel of a Fedayeen rifle?
10:22:35 AM
|
|
The Guardian. Bloggers spearhead offscreen opposition.
9:06:41 AM
|
|
© Copyright 2003 John Robb.
|
|
|
