06 Dec 09
Originally posted by scherzothe "ragtag" iraqi army of 2003 could have rolled over gaza, palestine, and lebanon, had they been in the vicinity and lsrael not in the way.
Let me rephrase that: no real armies. The Iraqi "army" has been more of a few ragtag militias since 1994.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_invasion_of_Iraq#Defending_force
Defending force
The number of personnel in the Iraqi military prior to the war was uncertain, but it was believed to have been poorly equipped.[101][102][103] The International Institute for Strategic Studies estimated the Iraqi armed forces to number 538,000 (army 375,000, navy 2,000, air force 20,000 and air defense 17,000), the paramilitary Fedayeen Saddam 44,000,republican guard 80,000 and reserves 650,000.[104] Another estimate numbers the army and Republican Guard at between 280,000 to 350,000 and 50,000 to 80,000, respectively,[105] and the paramilitary between 20,000 and 40,000.[106] There were an estimated thirteen infantry divisions, ten mechanized and armored divisions, as well as some special forces units. The Iraqi Air Force and Iraqi Navy played a negligible role in the conflict.
07 Dec 09
http://www.podval.org/~sds/crusade.html
...
Lost before the Start of the Battle
To win, a combatant must firmly believe that his side is in the right and the opponent is wrong, he must be prepared to "go all the way". Thus, when the West suspended its liberalism in the WWII and carpet bombed Germany and Japan, it won (I am not talking about tactical effectiveness of carpet bombing, only about the message - unconditional surrender or certain death - it sent). When the US decided that attacking China during the Korean war was out, it lost (same with Vietnam and now Iraq).
The Western ideological parlance does not provide for an expression you are wrong, it proclaims un-reciprocated tolerance and thus the West it doomed.
Relevant links
* Questions and Answers about Foreign Policy (and the U.S. Invasion of Iraq) [2003-09-04]
* Worse than North Korea? "Europeans tend to regard any discussion of good and evil, or democracy and dictatorship, as `cowboy talk' and terribly unsophisticated" - "Demonizing a democracy under attack is no way to win friends and influence people" [2003-11-17]
* Are Reports of the West's Demise Greatly Exaggerated? [2003-11-17]
07 Dec 09
Originally posted by twhiteheadavoiding bombing your friends or innocent bystanders.
I am sure that carpet bombing your enemy is a very effective strategy. The problem is knowing where your enemy is, and avoiding bombing your friends or innocent bystanders.
oh, thats not a priority, it never was, and it never will be.
07 Dec 09
Originally posted by AThousandYounghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dresden_firebombing#That_the_bombing_was_necessary_or_justified
Current military theory is that bombing civilians did not help either side in WWII.
That the bombing was necessary or justified
Marshall inquiry
An inquiry conducted at the behest of U.S. Army Chief of Staff, General George C. Marshall, stated the raid was justified by the available intelligence. The inquiry declared the elimination of the German ability to reinforce a counter-attack against Marshal Konev's extended line or, alternatively, to retreat and regroup using Dresden as a base of operations, were important military objectives. As Dresden had been largely untouched during the war due to its location, it was one of the few remaining functional rail and communications centres. A secondary objective was to disrupt the industrial use of Dresden for munitions manufacture, which American intelligence believed to be the case. The shock to military planners and to the Allied civilian populations of the German counterattack known as the Battle of the Bulge had ended speculation that the war was almost over, and may have contributed to the decision to continue with the aerial bombardment of German cities.[122]
The inquiry concluded that by the presence of active German military units nearby, and the presence of fighters and anti-aircraft within an effective range, Dresden qualified as "defended".[2] By this stage in the war both the British and the Germans had integrated air defences at the national level. The German national air-defence system could be used to argue — as the tribunal did — that no German city was "undefended".
Marshall's tribunal declared that no extraordinary decision was made to single out Dresden (e.g. to take advantage of the large number of refugees, or purposely terrorize the German populace). It was argued that the intent of area bombing was to disrupt communications and destroy industrial production. The American inquiry established that the Soviets, pursuant to allied agreements for the United States and the United Kingdom to provide air support for the Soviet offensive toward Berlin, had requested area bombing of Dresden in order to prevent a counter attack through Dresden, or the use of Dresden as a regrouping point after a strategic retreat.[123]
U.S. Air Force Historical Division report
A U.S. Air Force table showing the number of bombs dropped by the Allies on Germany's seven largest cities during the war.[2] City Population in 1939 American tonnage British tonnage Total tonnage
Berlin 4,339,000 22,090.3 45,517 67,607.3
Hamburg 1,129,000 17,104.6 22,583 39,687.6
Munich 841,000 11,471.4 7,858 27,110.9
Cologne 772,000 10,211.2 34,712 44,923.2
Leipzig 707,000 5,410.4 6,206 11,616.4
Essen 667,000 1,518.0 36,420 37,938.0
Dresden 642,000 4,441.2 2,659.3 7,100.5
A report by the U.S. Air Force Historical Division (USAFHD) analyzed the circumstances of the raid and concluded that it was militarily necessary and justified, based on the following points:[2]
1. The raid had legitimate military ends, brought about by exigent military circumstances.
2. Military units and anti-aircraft defenses were sufficiently close that it was not valid to consider the city "undefended."
3. The raid did not use extraordinary means but was comparable to other raids used against comparable targets.
4. The raid was carried out through the normal chain of command, pursuant to directives and agreements then in force.
5. The raid achieved the military objective, without excessive loss of civilian life.
(details follow the bullets above.)
08 Dec 09
Originally posted by zeeblebotSo... Military theorists are too young to know about this, Wikipedia contributors aren't. Is that correct?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dresden_firebombing#That_the_bombing_was_necessary_or_justified
That the bombing was necessary or justified
Marshall inquiry
An inquiry conducted at the behest of U.S. Army Chief of Staff, General George C. Marshall, stated the raid was justified by the available intelligence. The inquiry declared the elimination of the ...[text shortened]... ective, without excessive loss of civilian life.
(details follow the bullets above.)