
Historical analogies are imprecise thing, at best. This isn't 1842 or 1940, 1944 or 1950. Every battle, every war, is different, and they end differently. So by looking back at Dien Bieh Phu or Mang Yang Pass or Chosin, we are not saying this is what will happen.
But history also repeats, and those thing which have happened, can happen again.
Now, you may have heard of the Chosin Resevoir in connection with the war in Iraq, but aren't clear about what it means. In November 1950, the US Army X Corps was attacking near the Chosin Reservoir in North Korea. On the evening ot the 27th elements of the Chinese Fourth Route Army crashed into US lines and sent them retreating. During the retreat, US forces had to fend off several attacks on their lines, with road blocks and massive human wave attacks.

Here is the Wikipedia entry on the battle:
Around 30,000 UN troops clashed with approximately 70,000 Chinese soldiers. In fierce fighting that lasted until 11 December, there were 15,000 UN casualties (7,500 to cold related injuries) and possibly 40,000 Chinese casualties (mostly to cold related injuries) as the UN forces withdrew to Hungnam.
On the eastern side of the Chosin Reservoir however, a 3,000-man composite U.S. Army task force from the 7th Infantry Division, RCT 31 ( Task Force Faith), was isolated by two reinforced Chinese divisions (over 17,000) which were en route to finish off the garrison at Hagaru-ri. Worn down by incessant attacks, RCT 31 was virtually destroyed. Nine members of RCT 31 were awarded the Distinguished Service Cross, the Army's second highest award for valor. Survivors from this unit reached Marine lines at Hagaru-ri on December 2, 1950. Some survivors of RCT 31 and other army units including an army tank company and combat engineers, joined Smith's forces and participated in the breakout. Keeping his units concentrated and moving deliberately, Smith made an aggressive assault to break out of the reservoir. When asked if the Marines were retreating, Smith explained that their fighting withdrawal through Chinese lines did not constitute a retreat. His explanation was abbreviated into the famous misquote, "Retreat, hell! We're attacking in a different direction!" (recalling the famous quote from Captain Lloyd Williams at Belleau Wood during the First World War, "Retreat, hell! We just got here!").
Task Force Drysdale
In mid-November 1950, the roughly 300 men of 41 Independent Commando, Royal Marines Battalion, under the command of Lieutenant Colonel Douglas B. Drysdale, were attached to the U.S. 1st Marine Division. This marked the second time that U.S. Marines and Royal Marines had served together. (The first time was during the Boxer Rebellion.)
41 Commando had been at Koto-ri with Colonel Chesty Puller's 1st Marine Regiment when the Chinese attacked. On the morning of November 29, Major General O.P. Smith, Commanding General of the 1st Marine Division, ordered Puller to send a task force to open up the road between Koto-ri and Hagaru-ri, where the majority of the division was. The breakthrough force was composed of Drysdale's 41 Royal Commando, Captain Carl Sitter's G Company, 3rd Battalion 1st Marines (G/3/1), B Company, 31st Infantry Regiment, and various Headquarters and Services Marines. All totaled, the task force was around 900 men and 140 vehicles.
The task force struck out of Koto-ri at 0930 hours on November 29 and by 1630 hours, had advanced only half way to its objective, due to stiff enemy resistance—halfway to Hagaru-ri the Chinese ambushed the task force and cut it to pieces. The units of the Task Force had become bogged down, separated and were not in radio contact in an area later named "Hell Fire Valley" by Lieutenant Colonel Drysdale. After being reinforced by tanks from D Company, 1st Tank Battalion, Drysdale contacted Smith at Hagaru-ri and was told to "Press on at all costs." Drysdale responded by stating, "Very well, then: we'll give them a show." He passed word that they were going to run the gauntlet to Hagaru-ri.
Later that evening, most of the men from 41 Commando, Sitter's Marines, and the tanks from D Company arrived at Hagaru-ri, with a wounded Drysdale entering the division command post to announce "41 Commando present for duty." In the confusion along the road, roughly 400 members of Task Force Drysdale were still left stranded and out of radio contact in Hell Fire Valley and completely surrounded by vastly numerically superior Chinese forces. For his leadership and valor, Captain Sitter was awarded the Medal of Honor, one of eleven Chosin Marines so honored.
The still-stranded forces were composed of about 60 Royal Marines, most of B Company 31st Infantry Regiment, and the assorted Headquarters and Services Marines, strung out in four pockets along roughly two-thirds of a mile. Most of these men were killed, wounded or taken prisoner. A few were able to pass through Chinese lines and make it back to Koto-ri. During the night, army Lieutenant Alfred J. Anderson of B Company, 1/31 Infantry, regrouped those of his company that he could find into a defensive perimeter. Twice, he closed with enemy soldiers and killed them at arm's length, deflecting their weapons with one arm as he used his pistol. Early on the morning of November 30, Anderson received orders to withdraw those troops under his control. He led them back safely to Koto-ri.
Of the 900 men of Task Force Drysdale, approximately 300 arrived at Hagaru-ri, 300 were killed or wounded and about 135 were taken prisoner, with the rest making it back to Koto-ri. Seventy-five of the 141 vehicles were also destroyed. Some considered the mission poorly conceived and doomed from the start. Major General Smith was not so quick to write it off however, saying that it was at least a partial success because it delivered over 300 seasoned infantrymen and a tank company to the beleaguered defenses at Hagaru-ri. [1]
Final phases of the battle
In their withdrawal, US troops were either attacking—conducting numerous assaults to clear Chinese roadblocks and overlooking hill positions—or under furious Chinese attack themselves. The sub-zero temperatures inflicted even more casualties than the Chinese (who also suffered greatly from the extreme cold). US forces enjoyed total air supremacy, with Navy, Marine, and Air Force fighter-bombers flying hundreds of sorties a day against the encircling Chinese. Over 4,000 wounded were flown out and 500 replacements flown in during the operation, contributing considerably to its success. The Marines and soldiers were able to destroy or effectively disable all seven Chinese divisions that tried to block their escape from the reservoir. Despite the effort of many Marines, whose plight attracted world-wide attention and was seized on by the western media as a "moral victory" in the midst of defeat, the strategic situation was now highly unfavorable for UN forces and it was decided to withdraw the entire X Corps from North Korea. The Marines, the rest of X Corps, and thousands of civilian refugees were soon evacuated by ship from the port of Hungnam, which was then destroyed to deny its use to the communists.
When people use this analogy in terms of Iraq, what they mean is that the US will have to engage in a rolling battle south from Baghdad, with Iraqis mining and sniping and occassionally attacking US forces. Now, when I first mentioned this possibility three years ago:
Thursday, October 16, 2003
Failure is an option
http://stevegilliard.blogspot.com/2003/10/failure-is-option-clearly-bush.html
…………………………….
The degree of control and violence is different, but all three mean the end of US control of Iraq. There are too many guns and RPGs and too few employed people for the US tonsurvive any mass uprising without killing thousands of Iraqis in street massacres. There is no center, no Iraqi figure with enough respect to aid the US and those that are respected want the US gone.
Someone said unless there is a miracle in Iraq, Bush is in trouble. The real issue will be how great will the coming disaster be. Will we run like the Chosin Reservoir, walk away like Suez or have some kind of madncollapse like Vietnam. We won't be in Iraq for years. We haven't got enough troops to enforce our will. The only reason we're still there is the patience of the Shia and that will end, oh, starting next with with the start of Ramadan.
And again in 2004:
http://stevegilliard.blogspot.com/2004/11/chosin-ii.htm
What he's talking about is a repeat of the Chinese intervention of 1950, a scenario I have raised for months. He uses Syracuse, but the spectre he's creating is one of Chosin. (On the night of November) 28, 6 Chinese divisions attacked the 1st Marines in the area of the Chosin Reservoir. However hard the Marines might fight, they were outnumbered 6-1 or more. The Chinese attacked both at the head of the American lines and 35 miles behind. The Marines thus were forced to fight their way southward and towards the coast. The Marines first fought their way to Hawkawoo-ri, at the south end of the reservoir. Casualties were very heavy, but the battle did not end there. The troops then had to fight their way south. (Marine Gen.) Smith stated: "Gentlemen, we are not retreating, we are merely attacking in another direction." It took the Marines 13 days of heavy fighting to reach the coast. There. they and tens of thousands of North Korean civilians were evacuated to the coast. I worry less about a destruction of the US Army than a brutal fighting retreat to Kuwait and Turkey. The scale of the disaster would dwarf Chosin because of the loss of billions of modern equipment. The policy defeat would be catastrophic as well. The Europeans clearly would be the dominant power in the Middle East for at least a decade.

So this hasn't been a new concern of mine. But the issue is not so much the Iraqi forces we might face, but the ability to move US equipment outside the country, Much of it would have to be abandoned in place or along the way to distract the guerrillas. If you look at the map of Chosin, you'll note that it is steep mountains and narrow valleys. Iraq is a very different place, far more open, but in the end, we have a long way to go and very little cover.
One of the things Americans have to get over is their belief in American superiority. An American army can be decimated in a retreat, even by an enemy without airpower. The problem for the US Army in any retreat from Iraq will be the thousands of Iraqis who will want to flee with them and the thousands of POG's people other than grunts, who will be in that convoy. They might not do so well when they're attacked.
Looking at the roads of Iraq, there are only a few routes south, and they can be blocked and fought over. Which makes leaving in a fighting retreat difficult.



173 Comments





Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
“0″
Merry Christmas! Or whatever.
Hows about that!
I asked Steve to do this post because he’d been devloping the topic over at his blog and it fit in nicely with what Joe Wilson suggested here last week, that Americans may have to fight their way out. Since Joe is going to be here tomorrow to chat (11am PT/2pm ET) I thought people might appreciate it.
Hope you can stop by and ask him some questions, Steve. Now THAT should be interesting.
If one likes maps, take a look at the Israeli map of Palestine.
I believe it was Mark Twain who once said that “History may not repeat itself, but it does rhyme.”
The map in Jimmy Carter’s book would be a nice place to start.
Been thinking along those lines too. Only Dien Bien Phu came to mind, with the French overconfident in their air superiority as we were expected to believe in our hitech ability to “shock and awe.”
Actually, the situation we are facing is similar to a WWII engagement by the Germans. I am referring to the Battle of Stalingrad, which cost the Germans their entire 8th Army to Russia.
Like the Germans at Stalingrad, we have a long supply line porly defended, with our troops well inside potentially hostile territory.
I happen to think the fact our troops have not already been cut-off shows the inherent leaderless nature of the insurgency, and shows that the insurgents are intentionally fighting each other as much as, or more than, the US troops.
I so admire you Jane!
Steve, Jane, thank you so much. This post and others like it are supporting our troops.
Thanks Steve
(Jane – your name shows as author at the top of the post – which confused me for about 30 seconds)
This IS a heady subject.
It is important to consider that regardless of your attitudes about the inception of this war (I have always considered it a mistake) that the exit strategy would be best managed by those with a record of success. That would preclude our current administration which has managed to make everything they touch worse for everyone but contracting firms.
angie @ 7
I kinda thought you might around.
Thanks for your post, Steve!
Hoping for US out of Iraq NOW.
[and best wishes to Warren Karp, USMC, Korean War combat veteran.
wishing him long life and good health]
Steve is absolutely correct about equipment and vehicles. Sunnis and Shia don’t have heavy weapons, but all it takes is one round from an RPG to disable an Abrams. At Little Big Horn, the Sioux and the Cheyenne shot the 7th Cavalry’s horses first.
Minnesotachuck @ 6
That’s a pretty good summation. It’s pretty easy for the neocons to disregard the lessons of history because the analogies aren’t exact–but that denies the reality that analogy is not and was never meant to be homology.
Sorry about the confusion, I put Steve’s posts up for him and this is twice now I’ve forgotten to change the name. Well, actually I’m just trying to take credit for his always-excellent work, if only for a bit.
this is an incredibly educational post.
I am ever the optimist and find it hard to believe we will suffer a fighting retreat
everyone knows I hated the run up to the war, I hated the manner it was prosecuted, I hated those that conducted the campaign
however I am under the impression that if we have to fight to leave, the president would rather level Iraq then submit to a “fighting retreat”
he’s already laid the ground work, blaming the Iraqi’s for what he caused, he’s villainized the “islamo fascists” and he will enjoy nationwide support if his retreat is aggressive to th point of laying Iraq to waste.
in other words, I do not believe history will repeat itself here…my opinion, we will retreat and the Iraqi’s will be happy with their victory over us and allow us the embarrassing defeat
or, if they fight us on the way out they are leveled…if this happens, sad to say, the president will regain his image as some kind of military strategist
angie @
7
I’m trying to contact him for Book Salon, don’t remember who suggested it — was it you Angie? — but it would be nice.
FWIW, wiki on Chesty Puller.
This guy fought at Guadalcanal in ‘42.
If Native Americans and Palestinians were armed equally with respect to their adversaries, ‘things’ today might be very well be quite different.
Jane Hamsher @ 19
I believe it was angie.
STEVE..I read some of your posts earlier today and the Athens’-Syracuse analogy really connected.
It was a year or so ago that AC-130 gunships were sent to Iraq. At the time a few people asked WTF are they going to use them for? I think it was you who said that they will be used for a fighting retreat. With a psychopath as the commander-in chief, this country and our soldiers are really screwed.
John Casper @
15
Personally, I’d say leave the equipment and get the people as soon as physically possible. If the American Government really thinks it deserves to have its toys, it might just have to buy them back from the Iraqi government (and probably not the Iraqis that are currently ‘in charge’). But perhaps that is some small token of retribution for a modicum of the suffering that America has caused that country’s people.
The issue of the “fighting retreat” is problemmatic at best.
I have this feeling that the settlement will come in two phases… one will include a secure base somewhere near the Kuwaiti border, with runway facilities large enough to handle transport aircraft, and be isolated enough that no Iraqis can get close enough to mortar, shell or use SAMs against any aircraft inbound/outbound. Troops will be “garrisoned” there as a “backup” for the non-existant Iraqi forces, as political cover for “cut and run”/strategic retreat/whatever.
The second phase will be shutting down the base in 2008 and getting the hell out. By then, our Beloved Leader will be so into thinking about how many copies of “My Pet Goat” to send to SMU that he won’t be paying attention to Mess O’Potamia anymore.
my 2cents.
Apropos of this discussion, although those with stronger stomachs than I probably already saw this or commented about it on the Talking Heads thread this morning (apologies to David Byrne and company).
Bush adviser: “We have not failed in Iraq”
Excerpt: “We have not failed in Iraq,” Stephen Hadley said as he made the talk show rounds. “We will fail in Iraq if we pull out our troops before we’re in a position to help the Iraqis succeed.”
But he added: “The president understands that we need to have a way forward in Iraq that is more successful.”
JH….
Please keep trying to get Carter here.
And in the accompanying photo, Hadley illustrates how much U.S. troops have helped the Iraqis succeed so far.
Oklahoma kiddo @ 27
I think if clinton’s wife is really going to run, teh hamsher should be able to get both carter and the big dog here as part of her campaign
Jane Hamsher @ 19
I think all of us would do well by hearing Jimmy just speak, and there are plenty of us that want to and need to hear what he has to say!
btw– xoxo
johnSwifty at 6:37 pm
Completely agree and I don’t think Steve G. or I meant to imply otherwise. If we’re losing equipment and vehicles, however, we will also be losing lots of lives.
OT, the loss of equipment might tempt the Russians wrt former Soviet Republics. I’m not necessarily blaming Putin for this, the pressure inside Russia might just be too strong, if we are perceived as significantly weakened.
ot
crooks and liars has this up
According to the Sacramento Bee, Senator Dianne Feinstein–slated to become Chairperson of the Senate Rules and Administration Committee–will push for legislation requiring paper trails for all electronic voting as well as audits. Her statement (from her website):
“A draft report by the National Institute of Standards and Technology made public today reaffirms my belief that there are serious questions about the security and reliability of paperless electronic voting machines. It further demonstrates the importance of moving forward with new legislation to require that there be an independent paper record of every ballot.
I plan to introduce that legislation at the beginning of the new Congress and hold hearings soon after, with the intent of moving the bill to the Senate floor as soon as possible. As we’ve seen in Sarasota, Florida, where officials have been unable to account for about 18,000 undervotes in the Congressional election, it is crucial that there be an independent record that can be reviewed by election officials.
One-third of voters cast their ballots in the midterm election using new electronic voting machines, and problems arose, not only in Florida, but in various jurisdictions across the country. We must do everything we can to restore confidence in the outcomes of elections by helping to ensure that every vote cast by an American citizen is recorded accurately and that every eligible voter can, in fact, cast a ballot.”
in other words;
RUSS!!!
Agh!! I think I just overwrote a comment!!
Cannot figure out how I did that, either. My Sun Tzu comment should have followed MayDaze…it’s like a rift in the time-space continuum.
I guess, I’d ask the following questions:–
1. Would it really be a fighting retreat? Maybe it’ll be to cheering masses happy to get rid of us. It’s also not completely improbable that we could negoatite a truth with most of the insurgent factions for purposes of retreat. As long as such a truth holds with most of the factions, then we can get most of our assets out.
2. The role of tactical air cover is now significantly different than in the Korean war, and our retreating forces will, conceivably, have plenty of it. Air cover isn’t much use in securing cities (despite what Rummy thinks of it), but it is now quite effective in covering exposed columns on open roads.
3. Should we completely rule out partition? Does the north really really WANT to be part of the quagmire in central and southern Iraq, despite the nice sounds their politicians make? I certainly wouldn’t if I were them. In this case, our troops could be redeployed to secure a single line of partition.. tactically a much easier position to cover than to try to secure countless cities in the hostile south and center of the country.
4. Is it really beyond the moral quagmire that is Bush’s brain to try something insanely immoral, like splash bunker busters or even nukes on hostile cities during a retreat?
perris @ 32
Agreed! This is a wedge issue I can get behind. Looking forward to seeing how any Thug can justify not supporting it…as publicly as possible!
perris @ 29
“…as part of her campaign”?
Hadley would tell Russert that the earth was flat if Bush told him to.
Rayne @ 33
the problem is that the president has shown HE’S NEVER PREPARED, even when he’s SCHOOLED on what is likely to occur, he just doesn’t care.
if our military is prepared for every contingency when we leave, I have complete faith the retreat will be a success
however, if this president is the person that orders the retreat, I sadly suspect our armed forces will be ready for the following;
being sent off with gifts of candy and well wishes
Certainly there is risk of significant losses in any retreat. As Mao said (derived from Sun Tzu), “he retreats, we attack”. And there are always significant losses of materiel in any retreat – the main issue there is whether the enemy can make use of equipment left behind. Having acknowledged that, comparisons of the situation in Iraq to Chosin strike me as quite overblown. UN forces were heavily outnumbered and subject to withering wave attacks; I see no such threat in Iraq.
The current discussion of arming the Iraqis before we leave is much more distressing and, IMO, could result in serious losses as our “ally” turns the weapons over to the militias to use against us.
John Casper @ 31
Man, I bet you where a good Risk player. The picture you paint in consideration of a larger effect to the cause of Bush’s war is dark. But, the assumption is that America should continue its role as the world’s watchdog. I would be willing to entertain the case that the debacle in Iraq is glaring evidence for why we should not.
General Clark on a fighting withdrawal, September, 2005:
The complete transcript of the conference is here: (long but worth the read)
http://securingamerica.com/tsap/050906
Oklahoma kiddo @ 36
ya, the dog would do every venue he could find to promote her office, carter would do the same
firedog lake is surely a great place for them to offer their dialogue to help the roots get behind her as a candidate
I want out of Iraq. I want a Palestinian homeland. Anything less will not do.
I want accountability for those complicit in the deaths of American soldiers and the old, sick, women and children who have perished needlessly in Iraq.
American forces in Iraq are being shot at now and are the target of IED attack. It would be surprising if some of this did not occur during an exit, but for both military and political reasons, the chances of a “fighting retreat” as described by Steve Gilliard are close to zero.
Stop the killing. Bring the people home.
Oklahoma kiddo @ 46
Oklahoma kiddo @ 44
Oklahoma kiddo @ 43
Bless you, your passion for justice, your family, the winter wheat, and your new kitty, Ok kiddo.
I want what you said.
and a pony
for each of us. :)
Oklahoma kiddo @ 46
ditto.
Do we know how many people will have to be evacuated? 141k US military, how many US civilians, third world KBR workers, armed mercs and Green-Zone Iraqis, etc. Total 500k? As Steve shows on the maps, there isn’t a clean and quick way to evac. 1/2 million people.
Damn. I can’t figure out how it happened. I overwrote the same comment not once but twice.
Each time I’d refreshed the comments, started what looked like a new comment, only to overwrite an earlier comment.
I’ve closed the window, re-opened it, and will hope for the best this time.
To restate the first comment overwritten, I said that the ISG was really a tool to help the public get its mind wrapped around that which Gilliard discusses, and NOT a tool to create the exit strategy. The exit strategies are really already prepared, probably at Baker’s behest, but not for public consumption. The recent diplomatic efforts are designed less to support the exit strategies than they are to get the public on board.
My second comment overwritten was in response to MayDaze’s comment, had already been thinking of this from the Art of War:
We absolutely must discuss “fighting our way out” so that both we and our troops are mentally prepared to give this our best. Failing to discuss it is gross negligence.
OT – Chavez wins re-election by wide margin
If the Turks allow us to retreat north, that’s huge. Steve seems to think they will and he knows more about it than I do. Having just set up a Kurdish homeland, I’m not clear why they would be anxious to accomodate us.
On our way out, we can “negotiate” with anyone we want, but it won’t matter. EVERYONE will be trying to score points by videotaping their militias attack on our convoys. I don’t think we know who to “negotiate” with. Also, just because someone accepts a bribe for not shooting at us as we pass through their town, how do we know that they can control everyone in that town? Sadr can’t control his militias in Baghdad.
I agree that tactical air cover, A10 Warthog will play a huge role, but in urban areas they will do unbelieveable damage to civilians. That in turn will galvanize support against us fighting our way South to Basra. It will take weeks to move 140,000 US troops and their equipment to Basra. That gives everyone in Iraq time to really load up against us and possibly fight us in Basra.
If we have to use close air support to cover our retreat, this could all unravel. It would be all over al-Jazeera anyway, and you might not be able to stop combat units from all over the ME from joining in.
That’s a huge question. I completely agree with you, it would make our tactical position much easier. From what I understand, however, there has been a great deal of intermarriage between the Sunni and the Shia. Lots of Sunnis living south of Baghdad, lots of Shia living north. I’ll defer to others who know the situation better.
Once US troops are under attack, he is under enormous pressure to do whatever it takes to get them out. I doubt bunker busters will be an option, but your previous mention of air cover is very appropiate here, imho.
kirk murphy @ 47
The people and the kitty, say to you murph, Merry Christmas!
Steve @ 49
Excellent point.
BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) — Nine U.S. troops died in Iraq during the weekend, including five killed by roadside bombs, the U.S. military reported Sunday.
The butcher’s bill for the weekend and god knows how many Iraqis.
John Casper 52 — doesn’t it strike you as odd that there have been no big splashy diplomatic meetings with Turkey like that with Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia this past week?
Steve @ 55
I won’t be awfully surprised if our tab at the butcher’s shop runs up to three thousand by year’s end. Maybe even by Christmas.
Hugh at 6:55 pm. There’s a first time for everything, I’m disagreeing with a comment you made.
Retreating itself is a humilitating manuver. It absolutely invites attacks. One IED can hold up an entire column. Now you’ve gotta column of pissed off GI’s within a hundred yards of Sunnis or Shia that don’t like them. Sooner or later, somebody throws a rock. Then we send out a “patrol.” Then somebody shoots somebody in the patrol and throws a couple of RPG’s into the column. Then we’re calling for A10’s.
The RPG really changes the landscape. It allows one poorly trained person, the chance to stop or slow down a column with one round.
I really hope I’m wrong.
OT, the Sioux and the Cheyenne at the Little Big Horn didn’t have to annihilate all of Custer’s men. They also didn’t have to allow Benteen and Reno’s men to escape. Benteen and Reno escaped, because they were better soldiers. Gaul, Crazy Horse, and Lame Man outfought Custer. Once you put armed units into any situation, it takes on a life of its own.
Rayne @ 50
I expect that our Generals have been revising their plans for retreat for some time. I therefore don’t see our troops in danger of being surrounded and cut off. The only issue is if “dear leader” foolishly provides our supposed ally the munitions to mount a real attack against our troops, forcing a catastrophic bugout.
Rayne @ 56
Great point!
My take is that this is the current battleground between “Jimmy” Baker and Junior. Baker wants those talks and Junior is having a tempertantrum over “negotiating” with terrorists.
I picked this up from Dennis Ross, a Clinton ME expert on the News Hour, a terrific distinction between “fixers” and “spoilers.”
I think Ross and Baker here are on exactly the same page. We have to talk to these people to keep them from being “spoilers.”
Merry Christmas, Ok Kiddo!
just brought home the tree today.
winter is almost here – last week or two of organic ‘chokes, corn and local raspberries and heirloom tomatoes.
[on the bright side, organic asparagus and blueberries from Lompoc whisper of warmer sun and air to come…]
Merry Christmas, Joyous Holidays, full tables, and warm homes to all at the Lake and in the wide world Outside.
Rayne @ 50
My copy is a translation by Thomas Cleary. Master Sun says in the 11th chapter, “Nine Grounds:”
While the American forces still have organizational and significantly superior transportation systems (moving from hard to soft ground far more quickly); I would prefer that they focus their bravery towards a supremely efficient and immediate withdrawal.
I know you are right that any sort of retreat will incur casualties at this point. We have been reduced to accepting that military fact, but utilizing the superior capabilities of our military and organized systems will allow us to move the ground the conflict is waged upon.
well maybe the Iraqi’s who’ve been forced to leave – often in the middle of the night – can advise the generals on how to get out:
web.int/rw/RWB.NSF/db900SID/LSGZ-6W2F7S?OpenDocument” target=”_blank”>http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/RW…..enDocument inlcudes links to pdf of full report released 11/30/07
Note – number of new internally displaced persons in October – 425,000
(Thanks to GorillasGuides for the link and info)
Situation Reports: Iraq, UNHCR update on the Iraq situation, Contributions: Iraq, UNHCR update on the Iraq situation:
UNHCR update on the Iraq situation
Current Situation
Iraq is haemorrhaging. The humanitarian crisis which the international community had feared in 2003 is now unfolding. The massive displacement has emerged quietly and without fanfare but the numbers affected are in excess of what many agencies had predicted in 2003.
Since the February 2006 Samarra bombings UNHCR, as Cluster Coordinator for displaced groups inside Iraq (1), estimates some 425,000 Iraqis to have been recently displaced (2). In addition, some two to three thousand Iraqis are leaving per day (3) via neighbouring countries as the extent of the tragedy becomes obvious.
UNHCR estimates that there are at least 1.6 million Iraqis internally displaced with at least another 1.6 ? 1.8 million(4) in neighbouring states. The figures in the immediate neighbouring countries are still imprecise but UNHCR estimates that there are some 700,000 Iraqis in Jordan, 500,000 ? 600,000 in Syria, 100,000 in Egypt, 20,000 to 40,000 in Lebanon, 54,000 in Iran and tens of thousands more within the region and further a field. Beyond the mass exodus, which has already occurred, population movements show no sign of abating. The needs of IDPs, returnees, refugees and their host communities are dramatic and to a large extent unmet.
John Casper 60 — which brings us back to Turkey. What will Turkey be, fixer or spoiler? I suspect that if we leave without setting in motion that which will prevent an independent Kurdistan, they will well be spoilers. They’ve been on the fence about their role as fixer-spoiler since 2002.
Could be that Brewster-Jennings knew which way the wind blew on this matter; too bad some spoiled brats decided they’d cut off their noses to spite their faces.
John Casper @ 58
John – I see the A-10s and other air cover being called in at the first sign of a problem – for that matter, close air support during the retreat regardless. I would imagine there will be no mercy shown if our troops are attacked as they leave.
Rayne @ 64
I completely agree with you, but Steve Gilliard and others keep saying we can retreat through Turkey. I sure hope they are right, I just don’t know enough to really defend my position. It’s probably a good question to ask Ambassador Wilson tomorrow.
My father, a Marine Staff Sgt., was there (Chosin). He never talked about the war, so I have no details.
Let’s not do this again.
I wonder if the Iraqis would attack in the event of US withdrawal- or just spread out the red carpet and send em on the way?
I seem to remember before the start of the war that there was a lot of expectation that US troops could be sent in via Turkey … only to be blocked at the last minute. This makes me wonder a lot about the options there for retreat.
Markinsanfran @ 67
Absolutely agree with you.
I’ve been meaning to link to all of Steve’s fighting retret posts. They really lay out the grim choices facing our troops.
I wish the Kewl Kidz would read them.
I just posted a similar comment over at KOS- My freind who is a Non-Comm in Maintanence at March AFB says just destroy the heavy equipment in place because it’s all been at war for way too long to refurb to fighting form. He says it’s better to replace that equipment. He is an Assembly of God member of the religious right, but he knows about maintaining war equipment. If we don’t need to move any heavy equipment, we could airlift every last american within a month.
rwcole @ 68
That was my thought when I first saw this post, too. You would think they might greet our leaving with flowers.
johnSwifty 62 — Nuts, now you are going to make me dig in the boxes in the basement again to come up with my two different translations of The Art of War. Should have brought them up when I was digging for cookie recipes for yesterday’s Pull Up A Chair.
I believe that if we continue to encourage our troops to think that we must win, in spite of every fact on the ground telling them this is not a winnable situation, they will not be as likely to put their full psychic energy into it. However, if we lay out all the facts, show them how serious this is and what the stakes are, while telling them they are now able to work towards the exit, I believe they will put not only their physical but psychic powers into this. (I refer to psychic not meaning sixth sense but the spiritual energy that must be mustered in order to achieve any objective.) It’s not about retreat as much as it is about the desperate nature of the sitution at hand; depending on the translation, Sun Tzu may have said as much.
Killer @ 72
And the 100s of thousands of Iraqis who will need to leave or be killed. Can we airlift them, too? Why wouldn’t we be able to?
Siun 69 — EXACTLY. My stepson was delayed entering Iraq when deployed because of the situation in Turkey.
I also wonder how the PKK has affected Turkey’s disposition towards us, since there has been substantial activity by the PKK during the U.S. military activity in Iraq.
Rayne @ 74
Oh, I’m sure he has something to say. I guess he’s lasted for 3000 years for a reason. I understand you now…you want to be truthful! That’s weird, I heard Jimmy Carter, earlier today, talking crazy talk like that.
johnSwifty @ 75
I wasn’t thinking about anything but the solution to the military dilemma of avoiding the Chosin situation, whatever solutions are available to the Iraqi people.
All I can comprehend and understand is this. I want the killing to stop. We have to start some place. Sometime.
Killer @ 72
Is 155mm howitzer “heavy equipment?” What about a Bradley Fighting Vehicle at $3.5 million per vehicle?
Now you’re talking about Dunkirk. That may end up happening, but it would be staggeringly expensive. Soldiers don’t much like to fight without their weapons.
Jo Fish at 6:38 pm
Well thought out, thanks.
Killer @ 78
No worries, I was ruminating earlier and John Casper broadened my scope of perception by drawing attention to the impact that will be felt in countries recently broken from the USSR.
There’s many things at play here; but I share your immediate focus to just get the hell out, and quick.
Bring the people home.
John Casper @ 80
What is the war costing in Billions per week? How much would be saved by leaving now rather than in 6 months? Seriously, someone do the math for me please, I suck at figures.
You could take those funds and buy off the military industrial complex to make some more, that’s all they really want anyway. What’s some more debt to China? We just get the kids home.
I keep getting chilling images of the retreat of the Iraqis from Kuwait … under fire by “allied” troops … the loss of life was horrifying … read Fisk’s accounts in Great War but be prepared for nightmares. I somehow doubt the Iraqis, whose lives have been destroyed in the lastest war, have forgotten that time …
Forget the equipment.. hopefully they will have time to destroy it.
Good God, I am going to be sick just thinking about the cost.
The cost of lives, the cost of the resources that must be expended or destroyed.
Terrified at the prospects. Oh, to be a stupid American teenager in 1975 again, understanding but unknowing…
I’m not as sure of this Saigon scenario. It’s different in Iraq. Sunnis will be looking for Sunnis who can help them fight against the Shia. Shia will be looking for Shia to fight against the Sunni. That’s what makes this so different from Saigon.
My guess is anyone who works with the Americans already is paying a heavy tax to various militias to stay alive. I’m not saying it won’t happen, it’s just not a leadpipe cinch imho.
James Earl Carter. This man will one day belong to the ages. And I shall miss him.
According to Ned Lamont, $267,000,000 per
fuckingDAYJohn Casper @ 88
I’ll take your humble opinion, it sounds right and well informed.
That means significantly less logistics for an immediate operation, too. What about Haliburton? The company is evil; but the people are real. How many are there?
John Casper @ 80
Expensive is relative. Towing 155’s or M1A1 tanks (or trying to drive the tanks to Kuwait) would be brutal and expensive in more than money if the Chosin scenario becomes reality. It has been suggested that a “retreat in force” could quickly become a rout in which case slow vehicles would be abandoned and probably destroyed in place anyway. While this is a worst case scenario, our Iraq adventure has produced few of any other.
This is OUR government. This government belongs to us. And we are responsible.
John Casper,
Both Bush and the ISG have signaled that arming the Iraqi Army will be a major goal. The actual effect of this policy will be to funnel arms and heavy weapons to the Shia. Being their principal arms supplier will facilitate our withdrawal through areas they control. It is only in the contested region immediately south of the capital that increased attacks might be likely, but even here they will be sporadic and unsustained. There is some danger of intra-Shia rivalries spilling over in attacks against us but these are again likely to be sporadic. Both Shia and Sunni are going to be far more occupied in saving their anger and ammo for each other than wasting it on us.
The current Sunni strategy involves an encirclement of the capital and most notably the Shia Sadr City using tribal forces. It will be in the interests of the Shia to coordinate their movements with ours to avoid this. Our forces are far more mobile and less likely to be isolated than their civilian centers around Baghdad.
In short, I do not see our leaving Iraq as being an insurmountable problem so indeed we disagree. I do think that the power vacuums that our leaving creates will need to be managed carefully, not so much because some Iraqis may take a few parting shots at us but because of the risk that our departure, if poorly handled, may spark a regional war.
Halliburton
AFAIK, it has two divisions, oil and construction. I’m not sure about employee numbers for either.
Rayne @ 87
The real problem is the unquestioning replacement of said equipment, with no thought to simply reducing our military footprint. That would give pause to future leaders intent on the same type of mindless destruction.
Hadn’t noticed the title of this article:
Aide: Bush not seeking cover for pullout
Hadley isn’t on board with Baker, natch, but then neither is his Dark Lord; would they go so far as to duke it out with Baker and sabotage the ISG?
Hugh @ 94
Haven’t we doomed Iraq to some form of Civil War regardless of our organization in retreat?
Rayne @ 97
Another perspective.
Hence the well-earned denomination, “Evil”, Dr. Puma.
Heh-heh.
Rayne @ 100
Evil Club For Men…I’m not just the founder, I’m a customer.
Apparently, if the US pulls out- the saudis and the Iranians- and perhaps other- are prepared to step in- each defending their favorite flavor of moslem..
If they then end up fighting each other- well it could get a little hairy.
rwcole @ 102
Is that why the evil dark lord was in Saudi Arabia recently? Was he brokering a deal to save Haliburton…and maybe the American forces if that just comes with…like grits. Evil dark lords don’t mind grits.
johnSwifty @ 98
The civil war is already happening. Our leaving will make it worse. A regional war means Iran, Saudi Arabia, and possibly Turkey becoming directly involved. Managing the chaos and minimizing the power vacuums is essentially what is left when there are no good options.
Swift- Yeah- at least that’s the story we’re getting- the Saudis apparently want us to stay in Iraq- and got their panties in a wad at the suggestion we might leave.
rwcole @ 106
Are we supposed to know the state of the Saudis’ panties? Don’t they have morality police exactly to prevent that sort of thing from going public?
Hugh @ 104
Ok, I understand you. But why would these other countries necessarily rush into what is certain to be a bloody debacle. Is religious zeal alone enough, or are the oil reserves such an insane draw for them, as well?
I have a family member with the Corps of Engineers on a base, I think northwest of Baghdad (north of the airport). Does anyone have knowledge of the situation or projections for evacuation there or for any of our civilian personnel? Any links?
Puma—The exact nature of Saudi’s panties is a great mystery- but their waddiness is now a matter of public record.
JML @ 109
JML, I hope all goes well for your relative and all in Iraq – every living being.
I fear the evacuees will be using the NOLA plan: sink or swim.
rwcole @ 110
…which is why I still like them better than I like Mitt Romney.
Can I get a rim shot here?
Hugh at 7:49 pm, typically superior analysis.
This is an unbelieveably reasoned analysis, that on my best day I couldn’t even begin to approximate. If we know anything about the Shia, however, it is that they are not disciplined. I’m not disagreeing with you, I’m just saying “reason,” and the chain of command, may not be determining factors when someone with an AK-47 sees a bunch of GI’s in an unarmored transport.
I take it this and iirc, other comments you have made, that the Sunnis want to extend their control of the water resources to leverage their bargaining position vis a vis oil revenues?
I agree and I should have stated this better. Odds are, we will be able to get out without significant loss of troops or material. One historical, however, is that Custer never should have lost at the LBH. The odds heavily favored him, not the Cheyenne and the Sioux.
I agree that regional Civil War is the really scary “floor” that we are moving towards, not away from.
I think I and others have jumped on the issues connected with retreat as an attempt to generate some dialogue that doesn’t sound like the NFL Today.
Thank you again for sharing insights and a command of the facts that is well beyond anything I find anywhere else.
When the time comes to leave Iraq, and it will, I certainly hope that more thought is given to the withdrawal than was given to the invasion…
GW Clusterfuck was a total screwup on the way in- he could easily surpass his record on the way out and leave the entire middle east on fire.
rwcole @ 106
It’s true, isn’t it? The Bush family is tied inextricably to the house of Saud. They probably pull a lot of weight. I wonder that Jr, himself, didn’t have to go on an appeasement mission. Of course, he was out of the country at the same time, who’s to say he didn’t.
But I’m not in a conspiracy theory mood right now (strange for me). My local cable channel played Ed Begley’s symposium on 9/11 truth and Loose Change all afternoon. I’m warn out with speculating on the depths of evil that Dick Cheney can plumb.
Again, only if you feel so inclined, if you were POTUS, what would you do with our troops moving forward?
Puma- if you have a personal understanding of Romney’s panties- well then I’m not sure what kind of shot you get!
rwcole @ 110
Does the public record opine on the Wahabists’ panties’ waddiness?
Apple Canyon 2 — And not to forget the injured who will never be “whole” again.
My stepson being one of them, injuries not physical, but injured all the same and probably not to be healed in the next handful of years. The magnitude of the damage that will come home is immense.
JML — sending you and yours my best wishes for a safe return. I believe it is quite premature at this point to discuss tactical plans, will probably not be known for some time and may not be in the best interest of those immediately affected to be discussed in open forum if we did have any information.
Kirk- yes–they change em in the waddies.
Late Nite is up.
We’re serving roasted Newt.
Rayne, deepest condolences on your stepson’s injuries.
Ditto.
John Casper @ 116
I’d stand up and say, “Laura, I’m sorry, but I just can’t…I just can’t follow the plan…anymore.”
Then I’d admit to being a hopless figurehead and resign.
That would leave Cheney in charge, and wouldn’t be terribly bright; but, then again, I’m George Bush.
TRex @ 121
mmm, amphibian
(non-endnagered, natch – the nation groans beneath the surplus of slimy failed goopers…)
Eye of Newt- didn’t the witch doctor use that when he cursed Clusterfuck?
Rayne @ 119
Rayne, so very, very sorry about your step son. Send love.
johnSwifty — it figures, the books I want are always in the bottom and last box in the basement.
Got the S. B. Griffith translation of The Art of War — cannot recommend it for our purposes. But I do have The Lost Art of War translated by Cleary, will recommend that, in particular the sections, Justice in Commanders, Failings in Commanders and Losses of Commanders. Very telling. [sigh]
In the meantime I’ll have to stick with the online library version of The Art of War. Rather wish I’d seen and read the Sawyer version I sent my stepson while he was in the service; bought it 10 days after 9/11, suspecting that he would be deployed. He was in Iraq less than 18 months later.
johnSwifty,
Could Sunni Saudi Arabia sit idly by while Iraqi Sunni were being slaughtered? How would the Saudis feel about another powerful Shia nation in their region and its influence on the Shia living in Saudia Arabia’s major oil producing province of Dhahran? Conversely, how would the Iranians react if they saw Shia in Baghdad besieged? To increase their own influence would they not become more involved to insure and share some part in an Iraqi Shia victory? As for the Kurds, if they can’t cut a deal with the Turks, they could face invasion and partial occupation from either the Turks, the Iranians, or both.
Kurds cutting a deal with the Turks? Is that even conceivable? Doesn’t seem likely does it?
Rayne @ 119
Rayne, so terribly sorry for your stepson’s wounds – and the pain they must bring to him and all who love him.
For the Kurds- this war is just a comma- placed between “northern Iraq” and “Kurdistan”.
John Casper, johnSwifty — thank you, not to worry. My stepson has more resources in us than the average soldier has; we are very blessed to be able to help him, and more blessed that we only have to contend with PTSD. The point is really more that it is damned hard to forget how costly this mess is when a loved one is so immediately impacted.
If a fairly average upper middle-class American family has to step in and help out a 26-year-old veteran because of failings in the VA and because of PTSD, what must the average soldier have to deal with on their own when they come home? My stepson is unmarried, no kids; I can’t begin to imagine what those younger families are dealing with, especially when they have to handle both PTSD and a physical disability as well. Just breaks my heart; we have so much work to do in the next weeks and months to fix this and make it right.
edit: Apple Canyon 2 — thank you.
Hugh @
129
Yes, I get your points, and valid they are. It sounds like we need a local strongman who is more despotic than religious to hold the two factions at bay.
“Bush breaks out with 4 TDs”
Rayne @
128
Rayne,
I couldn’t tell you the author of my son’s copy. He’s fourteen and one it as a prize in a summer school program where they sat around and played Axis and Allies for two weeks. He was a novice going in and came out the champ…smart little shit.
I have hope for our children, if we can just keep them safe. A better understanding of Sun Tzu is certainly a fine place to start.
JohnSwifty @ 134
Hmmm, sounds like the situation before the American occupation.
johnSwifty @ 134
“same as it ever was”
Kirk Murphy, Rayne and John Casper. Thank you for your kind thoughts. While I have cried and ranted and become politically active over this immoral war and all the death and destruction wrought, my extended family has had a severe case of head in the sand. I am trying to decide if I should reconnect with them and try to persuade them to make our relative leave. I’m not sure how removed from the chaos the people on these bases are or how uninformed or disinformed or indeed what choice there might be in the matter.
Just thinking out loud. Thanks for listening.
johnSwifty — then perhaps this would make a fine Christmas gift for your son; would be a great companion to its predecessor, The Art of War.
Nice stocking stuffer.
Months ago, everyone said, “no, hell no.”
Lately I have been reading that the Kurds are going to pump their oil out through Turkey. I don’t know what to believe.
Rayne @ 133
Rayne,
I went to a brunch today for a 29 year woman’s house warming party, which her mother threw for her since the young woman lives along. She’s married, but she lives alone because her husband is training the police forces in Iraq as a member of the Minnesota National Guard.
He spoke with his wife, the young woman, a few days ago because it was their anniversary. She asked him, “The news says that the Iraqi forces will be trained by March, is that possible?”
He replied, “Absolutely not. These are completely volunteer forces and they come because it is a paycheck and there are no other jobs. Many take the training, take the pay and leave. There is no headway and the task will never be completed. Not by March, not ever.”
And he puts himself in harms way — less than most — but still harms way, every day. And this harkens back to your original point, I believe about keeping the troop’s morale focused. That must be another insurmountable task.
Fern @ 137
Hmmm, sounds like the situation before the American occupation.
Damn! Sure if it don’t. Do you mean to tell me we might not have had to do this at all?
Rayne @ 140
Hey, maybe that’s a good idea for Dad! Thanks!
JML @ 139
Thanks JML.
Should you decide to speak -
Hope they listen to your wisdom.
Reading between your lines, your relative is a civilian contractor. The megacorps will leave the employees to die.
Hope your family hears you.
Whatever you decide – blessings and good luck.
johnSwifty 142 — we lost the war. Utterly and completely lost it.
Because the real war was winning the hearts and minds of a people who had only known Saddam Hussein, his sons and his henchmen. Because the real war was teaching the Iraqis not to war on each other, but how to rebuild their own country without us.
From The Lost Art of War, Failings in Commanders:
For starters. You can see where the young Guardsman’s observations are grounded in these failings.
When I saw this in last week’s news I wondered if it were relevant to plans for a land withdrawal:
Defense eyeing more deployments to Iraq
Rayne @ 146
Man, you got that right. We’re going to have to get that book in this house. Might just have to be an early Festivus present to us both.
I must say, though, those are some eerily prophetic words. Or, I guess they would have been four years ago. Now they’re just apropos.
Hey Kirk @ 138: nice one with the “Talking Heads.” That’s a little too apropos, too.
I gotta get some sleep.
Peace, friends. Out here.
JML, my family has the same disease as yours. This hasn’t helped mine, maybe it will do more good for yours.
Powell Doctrine
The Powell Doctrine, also known as the Powell Doctrine of Overwhelming Force, was elaborated by General Colin Powell in the run up to the 1990-1991 Gulf War. It is based in large part on the Weinberger Doctrine, devised by Caspar Weinberger, former Secretary of Defense and Powell’s former boss.
The questions posed by the Powell Doctrine, which should be answered affirmatively before military action, are:
1. Is a vital national security interest threatened?
2. Do we have a clear attainable objective?
3. Have the risks and costs been fully and frankly analyzed?
4. Have all other non-violent policy means been fully exhausted?
5. Is there a plausible exit strategy to avoid endless entanglement?
6. Have the consequences of our action been fully considered?
7. Is the action supported by the American people?
8. Do we have genuine broad international support?
prostratedragon 147 — When I first read that article last week, I took it to mean that this was part of a possible plan to pull back from outer provinces (like Anbar) and into Baghdad. There has been some chatter about securing Baghdad, but that suggests a potential helicopter-lift withdrawal process.
I think we’re still up in the air until all discussions with third-parties are completed; my gut tells me we don’t have buy-in yet for any particular plan with Syria, Jordan or Saudi Arabia yet.
kirk murphy @ 145
Thank you , He’s not a contractor but an Army Corps of Engineers civilian career employee, a contracts & construction inspector. (I don’t think irony is the right word here.) Only there since September. This was a step toward earlier retirement at a higher pay grade.
johnSwifty @ 148
thanks johnSwifty -
sleep well.
wish our “talking heads” were cronkite and reasoner…
What johnSwifty said, gang. Almost midnight here in Eastern Standard, going to have to hit the hay.
Best wishes to you, JML. John Casper’s offered a strong tool in the Powell Doctrine; it can put you in a position to ask questions rather than telling family anything, encourage them to find the answers themselves that are right there in front of them. Particularly for the family member overseas; if even with a strong grasp of the facts on the ground they can’t answer the questions in such a way that encourages them to stay, then they should look at alternatives.
‘Niters, gang.
JML @ 151
I’m glad for your relative’s safety that they’re a govt. person! (apologies for my assumption re contractor stautus.)
Hope their safe return comes soon, and the retirement is blissful.
Rayne @
150
As in getting selected folk out by chopper and perhaps defending the Green Zone/Airport? [Shudder] I imagine reports like this are probably fogged up for understandable strategic reasons, but did suspect that extra engineers might be useful to keep roads open and relatively de-mined.
By “any particular plan” with the neighbors, do you mean for them to support our withdrawal some how, or to provide some kind of support directly to whomever is left in Baghdad?
Lots of unwarranted complacency out there. A few comments.
1) THERE WILL BE A MASS BLOODLETTING OF AMERICAN COLLABORATORS AND SUPPORTERS WHEN THE US LEAVES. This is not open to discussion. This is a tribal society, they put a lot of stock in feuds. The United States forces have killed a lot of people, perhaps 200,000 directly. They’ve arbitrarily arrested tens of thousands, tortured thousands, they’ve fucked over, insulted, destroyed property and invaded homes for Iraqi’s for four years. America has accumulated literally millions of blood feuds crying out for balance. When your power passes out of the country all the now helpless shmucks are going to be paying the price for every shitty thing you did. The blood will flow.
2) Don’t count on air support too much. Maybe it’ll be there, maybe it won’t. But a fighter jet’s gone down, and there’s a lot of evidence to suggest that helicopters are being pulled out of theatres because of vulnerability. The Iraqi’s aren’t putting aircraft in the sky, no question, but there’s an undefined missile/ground effects threat and there’s evidence reading between the lines that its a lot more worrisome than they want the public to know. Air supremacy is the only card you’ve got, so if its eroding, your position is really goddammed bad. Even in best case, there are major logistical hurdles to the kind of continuous air support you’d need to cover a retreat, and a real risk of logistics breakdowns and shortages. Not fun.
3) People are not understanding that there’s a difference between a formal withdrawal and a retreat in combat. If there’s a formal withdrawal, dates agreed, documents signed, all the clearances set up, sure… there’ll probably be minimal shooting.
On the other hand, if the retreat comes about to due to strategic or tactical collapse of the military situation, such that you have to bug out… yeah, bullets every step of the way.
And finally, there’s this:
You think so? You really think so? You’re so impressed with the performance of the high command these last three years that you’ve got complete faith that they’ve got it all covered do you? Betting a lot of lives, aren’t you?
The real risk is that the United States will explicitly refuse to retreat, or refuse to prepare contingency plans or deploy for emergency retreat. Which means that if things go shit faced militarily, then basically everyone is stuck, in a bad position and improvising like hell. Lots of bodies result.
I’ll remind you that the whole project has been characterized by refusal to plan or even acknowledge potential worst case situations. Planning for the occupation, anyone?
6) Big reminder. American forces are deployed throughout the country in 55 separate detachments, with massively long and unreliable supply lines. The supply lines are extremely vulnerable. The American forces are major fuel hogs, requiring immense quantitites of fuel. Also profligate spenders of ammunition. Require lots of spare parts for servicing. A consistent or decisive disruption of fuel might well cause a collapse of military effectiveness, and paralysis and starvation of the military units effected. Under such circumstances, the only option is to hoard whatever fuel and ammo remains and bug out to the nearest supply depot… almost certainly under fire. Overburdened alternative supply depots or supply lines, unable to meet the influx of new demand, are forced to contract or fails under pressure. The result is more abandonment of positions and retreat. Cascade.
Make no mistake, this thing could go shitfaced so fast and so easily that it’ll make you puke.
Cross your fingers boys and girls, that black day may never come, but if it does, well… The USA has put a lot of work into ensuring that it will be as black as the devil’s arsehole.
And the cherry on this hellhole sundae, is the man in the white house, immature, bad under pressure, frightened, and more than anything else, concerned about how he looks…. the nukes may fly.
God help us all.
I lost three high school buddies at “frozen Chosin” who joined the Marines right after graduating instead of going to college. Ugly memories.
Are you all nuts? Retreat rule number 2: They have to believe someone has the drop on ‘em while you retreat.
So, who’s that gonna be?
How’s about we recruit some of the neighbors who’d like the killing to stop so they can conduct business?
Then, after we’ve got their agreement and they’re in position, we execute—
Retreat rule number 1: Surprise the enemy and retreat so fast they don’t have time to cut us off at the pass.
That way, the neighbors have our backs, but they don’t have to kill too many, maybe even none. And once we’re outa there, the enemy might just be so happy they’ll start shootin the sky instead of each other – or the neighbors.
Rayne – Love, prayers and hugs to you and your stepson. A Daily Kos diarist focuses on PTSD – it should be easy to find her diaries and they give quite a bit of information and caring on the resources that are available and the ones she and others are fighting to be available to all of our citizens and soldiers that bush misused and abused.
Please keep writing to the media to cover the murders, tortures and disappearances taking place in Oaxaca Mexico. http://www.NarcoNews.com is keeping up with this sad story.
Letters@newsweek.com
The Oaxaca Massacre Needs to Be on The Front Cover ——The murder of US journalist Brad Will which was photographed after he was shot for video recording the abuse of Oaxaca citizens involved in peaceful protests needs to be covered in depth by Newsweek.
Shamefully, the US media has not covered the deliberate murder of journalists in Iraq by US forces. The cheerleading for this war which has cost hundreds of thousands of lives is squarely on the shoulders of the corporate media and the rapidly declining figures of those watching or reading the corporately owned media in favor of obtaining news on the Internet blogs shows that the American people know how little the CM can be trusted in even covering the real news that affects our lives and the muted or muffled zone that is created when the CM covers the real news is not acceptible any longer.
Newsweek knows about the death squads in South America and now in Iraq and who is responsible in the bush 2 administration. Connection between the murders and tortures of Oaxaca demonstrators for justice and honest elections and the planned North American Union and corporate profits using Mexican slave labor and the Bush, 41 regimes’ murder and torture in the Iran-Contra scandal which are documented in the Senate Hearings MUST be connected in your articles about the disappearances and torture of Mexican citizens for their peaceful protests to obtain justice.
Please do your job and start reporting the real news in depth with the connections to the bush 43 regime that need to made
Apple Canyon 2 @ 105
Valdron at 156. I’ve been thinking about this scenario, too, having taken a dip into John Erickson’s work on the Soviet disaster of summer and early fall 1941. I’ve also been reading through the lines re: the loss of helicopters and a jet. The retreat scenarios have been predicated on the insurgents having the same weapons they do now. But Saddam squirrelled away a lot of stuff before the invasion, and presumably the Iranians have the capacity to move surface-to-air missiles into Shi’a territory. What would it take to cut American air superiority by, say, 25 percent?
I’m betting this is what the generals were talking to Murtha about.
Share — thanks much, I’ve been following the work of the diarist at DKos on PTSD. Very glad to see the topic gets regular and sustained attention there.
And thank you for the reminder about Oaxaca; I talk with my kids every week about this situation, point out the complete void of coverage in American press on the Oaxacan situation. This is a perfect example of the failures of our media as well as our foreign policy; you’d think having a neighboring country in such political upheaval would merit greater attention from the government and their mouthpieces. [sigh] What else are they failing at besides Mexico? and Iraq? and Afganistan?
Knut Wicksell – Yes, in many respects that is what Vietnam did, kept a generation of people from going to war again; we must hope that the generations alive now convey to the future the failure of preemption as a policy, if we are ever to redeem the past six years.
In Cobra II, Michael R. Gordon and Bernard E. Trainor detail numerous occasions where the advance of the 3ID and other units INTO Iraq were severely disrupted by units of the Fedayeen using RPG’s and other light weapons. We also have recent examples of people dressed in police uniforms interdicting US supply lines through the use of “phony” checkpoints and just today comes a report of a Marine helicopter downed, although from uncertain causes.
My experience with 11 years on active duty and 9 in the Reserves (1978 – 1998) leads me to the conclusion that fighting while surrounded is far far different both mentally and physically than when not surrounded. By definition the fighting retreat such as those depicted is fighting while surrounded. Remember, the U.S. Army only has two units that consistently train to fight surrounded — the 82nd Airborne Division and the 101st Airborne Division. During such operations fire discipline does tend to break down in a manner that causes increased ammunition usage, increased need for equipment repairs and increased logistical demands further straining the system and it is logistics that make successful operations possible. It is outstanding warfighters that make successful operations happen.
The reliance on air superiority is misleading. Aircraft, even the vaunted A-10, only have a limited loiter time and can’t be overhead all the time. Unfortunately! Without Field Artillery, or other indirect fire support, units in contact will suffer greater losses. While I cannot speak to the current force structure in country and its make up of artillery units, I do recall reading that significant numbers of artillery battalions had been removed from artillery duties and were performing infantry or “infantry-like” duties. If the force structure has been tinkered with in order to emphasize infantry units or the artillery units have been deployed without their howitzers, then this sort of operation is going to get real ugly. That sort of organization for combat is not without precedent. When units initially deployed to Afghanistan for OEF, Gen Tommy Dumb*** Franks ordered that the infantry brigades not be deployed with their accompanying artillery battalions and were to rely solely on air support for the indirect fire support. The stupidity of that order was shown to the world during Operation Anaconda in the Shahikot Valley.
I’ve read through the story and all of the comments and have not found one thing that would lead me to believe that the fighting retreat would be anything other than a bloody battle for both sides. To be able to lead in the vacuum that would follow any such US withdrawal, each faction/militia would need to be seen as having successfully fought the US. Each would need to show that they too had “counted coup”, much as the American Indians had done against the US cavalry. How many 100’s of miles would our forces have to traverse during which every man or boy with access to a rock, AK-47 or RPG (let alone heavier weapons) would need to “count coup”?
Thank to Jane for hosting this discussion and to Steve and others for their insightful work expressing and explaining the situation.
Den Valdron @
156
Den,
Your scenarios and situations are truly dreadful to read; but I cannot disagree that all those results are perfectly possible. The one thing all military ‘experts’ seem to espouse in complete agreement is that there are no good military options. The one item you’ve listed that shows any promise, includes an organized political retreat; and that means admitting some level of defeat. I don’t know that this boy king can even fathom that, regardless of whether intelligent people the world over see that it has, plainly, already occurred.
I’d like to thank you for your perspective.
I’d like thank Steve Gilliard for putting this together with the well researched historical perspective. Increased perspective is not always a boon; it does show the circumstance to be very far progressed past any hope of a reasonable resolution. There will be butcher’s bill to pay, somewhere, of that I have no doubt. And the greatest irony is that not one penny of that bill will fall to the boy king, Dick Cheney, or his neo-con masters in the Paul Dundes Wolfowitz cabal.
Glad to see, in a sorry sort of way, that we agree Steve. I’ve been saying this to my friends, especially the wingnuts, as long as you have, since before the insurgency started. Now they’re less dismissive. All’s needed is for the Iraquis to stop shooting at each other and put the same energy into shooting at us and we’d be of to the races.
“I worry less about a destruction of the US Army than a brutal fighting retreat to Kuwait and Turkey. The scale of the disaster would dwarf Chosin because of the loss of billions of modern equipment.”
This is where your analogy completely falls apart and where you again prove to be much more a shouter with strong ctrl-c/ctrl-v skills, and a thinker, not so much.
In the Korea conflict US forces fought a much larger, professioanl, well equipped, well trained, well supplied, enemy. Iraq is asymetric warfare, where the enemy can not muster, nor sustain the kind and scale of attacks that you suggest. We are facing a crafty and determined enemy who has inflicted casualty on US forces by exploiting targets of opportunity with small arms, IED, and RPG’s. These are not the tactics, nor weapons, and certainly not the troop levels required to inflict the kind of casualty you seem to beleive possible.
You go on to state:
“An American army can be decimated in a retreat, even by an enemy without airpower.”
Well again, I think this is absurdly faulty logic. You seem to completly discount the effectivness of US air power in defending a US withdrawl. Yes the case can be made that a determined enemy can be effective without air-power, but that does not mean by any stretch that it can be effective while having to face the unrestricted and overwhelming airpower US forces will have.
To be sure this administration, and it’s leaders on the ground in Iraq have been woefully negligent in the post-invasion conflict, however let’s not forget the brilliant and swift success of the invasion itself, one drawn out over the same hundreds of miles of route you now contend they are inadequate to defend going the other direction.
Steve, spend a little, ok a LOT more time thinking, and a little less time writing.
ROTFL! Cross-Condescend much, Tater?
I’ve already replied to your empty headed post. Sufficient to say:
1) Little Big Horn?
2) Air superiority is not a magic wand.
3) It’s always easier to start the fight than it is to finish it.
Den Valdron @
168
…And perhaps you can describe the state of air power during the battle of Little Bighorn, and how it made a whit of difference either way?
Your logic is even more muddled than Gilliard’s.
I expressly concede that air superiority is no magic wand, and go on to the real point of the matter; lack of a magic wand is no defense against the very real air superiority of US forces. A point that seems to have completley escaped you both.
It may be easier to start a fight, but it is NOT axiomatic that is thus harder to finish it.
Half an argument does not a point make, nor debase.
ROTFL. Here’s the situation of air power, tater-boy, ol pal, ol bud.
The situation is this:
- The Army is now refusing to send Med-Evac helicopters into live fire zones. This is a major change in policy. Now, given the effects of this kind of change of policy on morale and soldier survivability, we can assume that the Generals aren’t doing it to amuse themselves. The fire zones of insurgent activity have become too dangerous to send Helicopters.
- Indeed, if you go looking, you’ll find quite a bit of information on helicopter losses, including indications that the Iraqi’s are bringing online new techniques and new surface to air missiles.
- From the start of the year, losses are listed for Iraq and Afghanistan as: 27 Apache attack helicopters; 21 Blackhawk utility helicopters; 23 Kiowa Warrior assault helicopters; and 14 big Chinook cargo helicopters. There’s also substantial wear and tear on your aircraft, five times that of normal peacetime use.
- There’s also the disturbing loss of a fighter jet recently, a fast mover, but moving relatively low and slow in providing close air combat support.
- All of which goes to suggest that American Air power is not quite as unchallenged as we might be lead to believe. Since its the only real advantage you guys have, any widespread suggestion that its value is eroding, vulnerability increasing or its days are numbered would be devastating. So the odds are that the military high command would go out of their way to lie about it, like they lie about everything else. But reading between the lines, there are indications that America’s wide edge against air power is eroding.
- Is it for real? Is America’s advantage in air power really eroding? Could the Iraqi’s with the advantage of better and better missiles, Iranian funding and supplies, or other access actually offset that advantage. Don’t know. And damnably, we can’t know, thanks in part to an unreliably truthful pentagon. Things may be perky-fine, or the ice may be growing very thin under your feet. Unalloyed optimism, under the circumstances, seems reckless.
- Setting aside whether Close Air Support and Combat Support Aircraft are becoming unacceptably vulnerable, the real question becomes a practical one. I know that practicalities aren’t big with the 101st Fighting Keyboarders, but bear with me.
- Numbers of air support combat vehicles are not unlimited. Indeed, there is a finite upper limit in terms of the resources available. This will deteriorate.
- There are several factors which confine the use of said vehicles in the field. One is the practical issue of the fuel in the tanks and the ammunition in the weapons racks. An aerial combat vehicle can only stay in the field for a limited period of time… then it has to withdraw for refueling and re-arming.
- This means that there are logistics vulnerabilities, particularly fuel. And we’re talking major consumption of fuel issues here.
- Unfortunately, the Iraqi’s are getting better and better at cutting fuel and resupply lines. American forces are dependent upon very long, very restricted and very vulnerable supply lines, which must supply all the forces (and not just Warthog fuel and ammo) needs.
- So there’s a real risk that a major disruption of supply depots or supply lines might well cripple or restrict in theatre air operations. This would be a VERY BAD THING INDEED.
- But not necessarily fatal. Air operations can still be fueled and maintained from out of the country, where supply lines and stockpiles are secure. But then there’s a trade off. Your Warthogs cannot teleport. They have to travel to and from the refueling depots to the theatres, journeys of hundreds of miles, which may take hours. This limits the time that you can actually spend with your Warthog in the theatre providing air support. It means that your Warthog is more vulnerable to attack along a longer and more predictable flight path.
- The reduction of the Warthog’s available time for close air support means several things.
- First, you completely lose flexibility and potential for fast response if you’ve got to send your mission in from three hundred miles away. If you don’t already have an asset in the air in the region, then your besieged marines are screwed.
- Second, you need a major logistics, scheduling, and organizational effort to ensure a continual flow of air support vehicles to, in, and out of the moving theatre. This means that you’ve got a fluid situation, people continually coming into strange territory, lots of scheduling problems, and frequency of gaps.
- Third, to get away with this, you need a lot of air support vehicles. Shitloads of them. Huge quantities of them. And you need a major effort in terms of servicing, pilots, mechanics, refueling, spare parts, ammo racks. So the 64,000 dollar question is, does the American forces have this kind of surplus capacity?
- Because right now, the impression I’m getting is that all of the American forces in Iraq are stretched to the limits. So there’s a serious question as to whether the existing assets are up to the job you propose, or whether there’s any or enough additional assets to bring on line sufficient to do the job.
And there you go. You’ve got a smart mouth, which is irritating but not fatal. You’ve also got this notion that American air superiority is the ultimate magic bullet which will solve the problem completely.
Now, its possible that you are right. But you’re ignoring a lot of things that perhaps, if you weren’t so cocky, you might be needing to pay attention to. It’s also quite possible that you are wrong. In which case the situation is rather more serious than you realize. Disaster is a potential outcome, as it almost always is in military issues.
50% of all the parties who fight wars lose. The ones who win do so by being smart, by accurately and carefully assessing strengths and weaknesses, and planning on that basis. The ones who die, often wind up being the cocky smartasses.
And trust me, its always harder to finish a fight than it is to start it. Four years ago the United States had months to build up its stockpiles, put resources in place, prepare its battle plans and subvert Iraqi generals with huge piles of cash.
Well, today the piles of cash are gone into Halliburton’s pockets, the people opposed to you will not be bribed, you don’t have the advantage of months of stockpiling, you are using what you’ve got as you get it. Your army is overstretched, exhausted and faced with an enemy that grows more sophisticated and aggressive each day.
Way way back, six months after the conquest, when the insurgency was starting up you were looking at 15 attacks a day, and guessing a rump of maybe 3000 bitter enders. Now you’re up to 180 attacks a day, in insurgency whose numbers may go from 30,000 to 60,000, and who are showing up with increasingly better weapons and booby traps.
Lots of guys started fights easily, that the other guy had to finish for them.
Now, go off and be condescending to someone else about something you know about.
ROTFL
John Casper @
116
Any leader, civilian or military, should hold back from committing to any movements until they have some pretty good information. Unfortunately, none of us stateside civilians has good information about troop deployments, capabilities and the dangers they face now or in certain dynamic potential situations.
So, most of our comments have to do with political views.
I wondered aloud when 9/11 happened if Al Qaeda and/or Saddam Hussein had something to do with it. But, with some passage of time we all heard more information and it became increasingly clear Saddam and Iraq had nothing to do with it (the Niger documents helped seal that) and we shouldn’t be there at all. We had no legal leg to stand on. So, I’d personally argue we should just leave — and I’d let the military decide how to move the troops & equipment because that’s what they’re paid to do.
That said, nobody is going to do it that way. I suspect the Iraq Study Group will suggest doing it in late 2007 and it will be stalled so as to occur in spring 2008 and troops will parade across the Republican National Convention stage waving flags. It will all be political.
However, considering only what is ideal for America’s foreign policy, the answer is probably a bit different. Howard Dean said long ago we should help the Iraqis stand up so we could stand down. Bush echos that, but doesn’t allow it to happen. This indicates the plan is set and the only way to get a more ideal plan in place is to replace Bush & Cheney. I don’t see that happening unless they screw things up so badly with their interfering that our troops might be killed in extremely large numbers for no good reason.
So, my conclusion is we’re stuck with Bush & Cheney and whatever plan they want to execute and nobody or nothing is going to ruin Junior’s parade (the one he never got for never serving in Vietnam).
Given another leader, such as a Kerry or Dean, you could look at truly arming the Iraqi government and testing the hypothesis that they can get the job done. Sadly, it’s not gonna happen.
Truly arm the Iraq government? Are you kidding? Those guys are going to be on the aircraft out before the grunts are.
I’m contemplating the Stalingrad and Chosin examples, also Dunkirk and the French Garde Mobile 100 at Ia Drang… Would it not be the case that a relief column would be sent north from Kuwait half way to Baghdad to meet the bulk of the forces that make it down to say Nasiriyah (sp?). Would you not in fact do this before the breakout attempt was made? But anyway you cut it, the solid line of vehicles stretching south from Baghdad, full of civilians, privateers, the wounded, etc. would just be a sitting duck for the ‘insurgents’. Presumably, they would be able to capture stocks of shoulder fired missiles to use on the column…. I tend to think that the intentional destruction of ammunition stocks around Baghdad will the first sign that the occupiers are about to decamp. I also tend to think most will not make it out at all. So be it. Those who put their faith in fire in fire their faith shall be repaid.