Battle for Baghdad

[tigersqn]

Originally posted by Cheetah772



The Kurds are going to demand something in return for their help.

Before the war, they were generally better off than most Iraqis living under Saddam simply because he couldn't touch them due to NFZ over northern Iraq. Turkey didn't want cross Saddam or the US by sending thousands of troops into that area. The Kurds would be furious if it ever happened despite their frequent squabbles among themselves.

The Kurds will be loud in their demands that they be given at least a few oil fields to pay for their de facto independence by craving out chunks of northern Iraq under their control. They'll never accept going back to living under government control even though NFZs may be no longer in use.

If their demands aren't met, then there will be a real war, alright, between Turkish and new post-Iraqi troops, it could get messy pretty quickly.

Frankly, I think the US has no choice, but to concede the northern Iraq lands to Kurds, and Turkey will bemoaning, but grudgingly accept because it does not want to see renewed terrorist attacks coming out of their southeast provinces, which are mainly Kurdish.

It's all about politics. Kinda sucks, doesn't it?

Dan

The US is still a major player in NATO, as is Turkey. Thus far the Kurds have been very reasonable in their stance. The Kurds also understand that if they ask for too much too quickly, Turkey may very well send troops in to quell any possible insurection in their own territory. The US would have no choice, as a member of NATO and in the interest of keeping a wider peace in the region, but to support Turkey or at least ignore any moves she would make.

The Kurds aren't stupid. They know the US will resist any splitting of Iraqi territory. If they can have a say in a future Iraqi governement with a limited autonomy, I think they'll be happy with that for the present. Of course their is no telling what will happen in the furure.

 

[Cheetah772]

Originally posted by tigersqn


The US is still a major player in NATO, as is Turkey. Thus far the Kurds have been very reasonable in their stance. The Kurds also understand that if they ask for too much too quickly, Turkey may very well send troops in to quell any possible insurection in their own territory. The US would have no choice, as a member of NATO and in the interest of keeping a wider peace in the region, but to support Turkey or at least ignore any moves she would make.

The Kurds aren't stupid. They know the US will resist any splitting of Iraqi territory. If they can have a say in a future Iraqi governement with a limited autonomy, I think they'll be happy with that for the present. Of course their is no telling what will happen in the furure.

True,

But the Kurds will still want some kind of self-autonomous government in their own lands in northern Iraq only (excluding the Turkey's southeast provinces).

But it's not the Kurds that I'm worried about. It's the Arab Sunnis that I am worried about. They are for the most part main backing force behind Saddam's regime. Tikrit, which is Saddam's home, is full of Sunnis, and Sunnis make up the majority of Baghdad and outlaying provinces. Saddam mainly recruits Sunnis for his armed forces, usually from his hometown or loyal tribes.

If the Sunnis refuse to go along with the US troops, then we may have a big trouble than facing any Iraqi force in battle, especially concerning the postwar Iraq. Any situation that arose out of Baghdad is going to be tested by the other groups across Iraq, including, but not limited to Shiites living in southern Iraq, around Basra and Al Najat.

Both Kurds and Shiites never had any real say in the Iraqi politics, and Sunnis always kind of enjoyed that power, but now they find themselves fearing that these minority groups will want to take the matters into their own hands, complicating the political situation. We do need the Sunnis' backing to keep the provisional government running with any degree of efficiency.

The first key to a stable Iraqi government will always and must be the Sunnis, all other matters very little in the grand scheme.

Dan

 

[Deltapooh]

The Kurds lack the political leverage right now. If they are unreasonable now, PKK and other Kurdish groups will jeapordize thier current position in the new government of Iraq taking shape. The euphoria of defeating the Iraqi regime and the promises the future holds is likely to overshadow most desires for dominance. The various faction leaders will finally get a seat in major political offices. For decades they have led their people from tents and caves, always in fear. Now these same leaders will get a seat and say in the shaping government, cooperating with some of the world's most powerful nations.

It's also important to remember the US demonstrated it's power by convincing the Turks not to send troops across the Iraqi border. The Kurds saw that, which strengthens the US-Kurdish relationship.

The real problems, if there are to be any, will come once the euphoria of victory has died down. PDK and PKK forces have fought each other in the past. Now that Saddam's gone, they might resume hostilities. And it's very possible the Kurds will begin demanding more autonomy.

I agree with John Paul, 3 ID's attack into Baghdad caught me by complete surprise. The Iraqis are swearing up and down we are not in the city, and lost the International Airport. I'm quite certain they're going to continue saying that even if Special Forces troops break into their news conference.

SOF team: "EVERYONE, GET DOWN, GET DOWN! Sahaf, you're coming with us!"

Sahaf: "This just in, Imperalist commandos tried to interrupt an official Iraqi press conference, but failed. The men you see cuffing me are NOT American soldiers. It's just another trick by those demons the Americans."

 

[Kraut]

At the beginning of GW 2 the strength of the Iraqi army was belived to be 410.000 men, let's assume 10.000 were captured, 10.000 killed, 100.000 still in the south fighting the coalition and defending the cities, 100.000 in the north and east than approx 190.000 men are defending Baghdad. Even if they lost most of their heavy weapons, and are now fighting with ATGM, RPGs, AK-47 and a few shoulder launched SAMs... I wouldn't underestimate them.
In urban enviroment unprotected tanks are easy prey (as learned by the russians in Grozny) so infantry has to clear the buildings first but as soon as they are up close with the Iraqis the coalition loses their trump card: overwhelming firepower from artillery, tanks or air support.
If the Iraqis put up a fight in Baghdad things can still get pretty bloody.

By the way, I have a 50MB satellite picture from Baghdad, 0.6 m resolution, taken Sep. 2002 (12786 x 10763 pixel resolution!) originally from this side: www.digitalglobe.com but they seem to no longer host that picture. Is anybody interested in this pic ? If yes, is WarfareHQ willing to host the picture ? (I have just 16kb upstream so I can't upload it to every interested person individually)

 

[Deltapooh]

You are quite correct Kraut. The fight isn't over, and we can't confirm what happened to some key units. Fortunately, this was not an sustained effort by 3 ID. It was a recon/show of force. They raided two Palaces and basically let everyone know the Coalition could enter and move about the city.

As for the picture... let me know if Warfare HQ can't host. I'll try to find a somewhere even if it requres cheating.

 

[Siberian HEAT]

I would suspect the reason it is no longer available was the bandwidth that was getting chewed up by 1000's of people downloading that huge image. I downloaded it a couple times myself!

WarfareHQ doesn't have the resources to host something of that size I am sorry to say...

 

[Chuck?]

With the rapid success of American forces one question has to be asked: what's taking the British so long to secure Basra? They have been fighting there for two weeks and made little progress.

 

[Wolfe Tone]

The Raid on Baghdad.

It caught the Iraqis on the hop!

However they responded pretty quickly once they knew something was afoot. Unfortunately for them their attacks were uncoordinated and therefore they could but harry and snipe at the raiding column.

Now in war risks must be taken so the US troops managed to circle through part of the city and make it to the airport Ok. If the Iraqi command had used their wits this column could have been deep in it. Say the Iraqis had blown flyover bridges behind and in front of the column; things could have turned very messy.

I think the US command would have launched further raids if things had not been so hot. Rightly so the column was told to proceed to the airport rather than getting bogged down where it was.

Iraqi resistance is definitely not crushed. Remember too that these firefights took place in relatively open ground. If and when the US forces move off the main highways and into the smaller back streets then if the Iraqis put up as much fight as they did today then things could get quite bloody.

 

[Wolfe Tone]

Originally posted by Chuck
With the rapid success of American forces one question has to be asked: what's taking the British so long to secure Basra? They have been fighting there for two weeks and made little progress.

The Brits can't afford to take too many casualties .....support for the war in Britain is lukewarm and so the troops on the ground have been told to proceed with extreme caution.

If the the attack on Baghdad develops into a siege there is a possibilty that some British troops will move north to partake in this.

 

[Cheetah772]

Iraqi Propaganda!

Hello everybody,

The Iraqi officials are now claiming that they just successfully repulsed the Coalition's lightning raids into southwest portion of Baghdad!

They say that hundreds of people are out celebrating the "defeat" of the incrusion. They also say that they are now moving in more Fedayeen units, tanks, and soldiers into positions to block any incrusion.

Oh boy, the Iraqi officials still don't get it, not even if they went right up to Saddam's personal bathroom, and peed in the tiolet! They will just claim it was Saddam's waste....

I guess it's going to take more dramatic actions to convince that we're not kidding, and we do mean business. Even if it takes days, we will cleanse Baghdad of Saddam loyalists.

Dan

 

[Kraut]

Re: Iraqi Propaganda!

Originally posted by Cheetah772
I guess it's going to take more dramatic actions to convince that we're not kidding, and we do mean business. Even if it takes days, we will cleanse Baghdad of Saddam loyalists.

Dan

Days ? More like month, just as in Umm Qasur, a tiny city compared to Basra or Baghdad that took days to clear. So far the territory held by the coalition is mostly open desert were the coalition forces can bring their full technological advantage to bear but most cities in Iraq are still under Saddams control.
If the Iraqis stop their stupid suicidal attacks (busses filled with soldiers, AK-47 blazing charge over open space against a prepared US positions were M1A1 are waiting) and instead rely on proven soviet urban warfare tactics (Stalingrad, not Grozny ) by defending every house, every street this could still turn into a nightmare for coalition forces.
The best would be if the Iraqi regime would collaps, ending the war befor the street fighting begins but at the moment it doesn't look so.

 

[Deltapooh]

I agree with some of your points Kraut. The Iraqis still have alot of fight in them. Yet, I don't believe they have as much control as they project. The US have secured the strategic areas necessary to attack Baghdad. We saw at Nasiryah just what can happen.

The Iraqis are not the Russians though. The tactics used in there required cooperation. The Germans were actually stupid enough to get into that. It's also important to note that the urban fighting weakened, but didn't break the German Army. The Russians launched an attack that eventually trapped 6th Army. The weather and months of heavy fighting provided the final blows.

I admit Baghdad could be a drawn out, dirty fight, but our urban tactics, and technology are more advanced than in WWII. Our strategy is simple: divide and conquer. Split the city up, and focus your combat power in that specific zone. Once clear, you leave a small force behind to maintain it's security, while everyone else trots off to the next zone.

As Kraut stated earlier, there are still alot of risk. The Iraqis don't need huge forces to inflict serious casualties on our forces in the urban environment, no matter the tactics. We should be prepared for alot more fighting. If today's raids are anything to go on, the Iraqis still don't understand how to fight beyond the company level. However, a company can do alot in a city.

We do need to launch additional raids into the city. At the very least, this could frighten the Iraqi commanders, and force them to evacuate. The further the commanders are from Saddam, the less likely they are to resist.

I believe we have several more weeks of fighting left to secure Baghdad. If resistance doesn't collapse, we will need to take Tirkit. That is going to be another nightmare.

 

[tigersqn]

Iraqi resistance must be less than Coalition commanders expected (that was obvious from the shots on CNN today). Word is 3 Btls are staying in downtown Baghdad tonight to take in the sights.

 

[Tim McBride]

Ah now remeber we are not within 100 miles of Baghdad!

_Tim

 

[tigersqn]

Those crossed swords must be 101 miles from Baghdad.