Interesting article on how the war will be fought.

tigersqn

WWII Forum Staff
Joined
Nov 24, 2002
Messages
800
Reaction score
0
Location
Ontario, Canada
Country
llCanada
Interesting article. I like the way he explained the net-centric warfare aspect.
I started a thread on that a while back while I was pissed. Didn't really make much sense.
:drink:
 

Kraut

Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2002
Messages
1,328
Reaction score
0
Location
Germany
Country
llGermany
how the war will be fought ?

Easily: war begins, people die, war hopefully ends. The only question remaining is how many many ppl from either side will die during the war.
 

Marko

Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2002
Messages
289
Reaction score
0
Location
United Kingdom
Country
ll
Originally posted by Kraut
how the war will be fought ?

Easily: war begins, people die, war hopefully ends. The only question remaining is how many many ppl from either side will die during the war.
Well so far the death toll is 6 civilians, vapourised in a US air attack.
 

Wolfe Tone

Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2002
Messages
407
Reaction score
0
Location
Dublin, Ireland
Country
llIreland
Well If I was running the Iraqi military I would have evacuated all the obvious targets by now and sent my men to more innocent looking buildings. All bathtubs are to be filled on Saddams special orders to conserve water. Large supplies of Kerosene lamps are ready for use. Dried dates and rice can keep for a long time.
As for the oil fields I would have them blown by next Monday to stop them falling into the hands of the enemy, perfectly legit tactic BTW when your own territory is invaded.
Sooner or later the US weapons will be stuck for targets. Also ruins can be used for good defense tactics.
But who knows for sure, we will see. IIRC though the Allies bombed FRY for 78 days without inflicted a great deal of damage on the Yugoslav Army. It was the damage to the country's infrastructure and the economic effects that finally led Milo to call it a day and withdraw from Kossovo.
BTW once NATO moved in it was ethnic cleansing all over again, with this time the Serbs as the victims. The NATO forces did next to nothing to stop it leaving their moral argument for being there in shreds.
 

Deltapooh

Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2002
Messages
649
Reaction score
1
Location
Closer than is safe for my enemies
Country
llUnited States
Saddam doesn't have to worry about non-combatant casualties. The more the better. The Coalition should do what it can, but not at the cost of seriously degrading our military capabilities.

Saddam must believe there is a real good chance war can be avoided. That's why he's not blowing those oil fields.

NATO took action in Kosovo because Milosevic and the war in the Balkans threatened European peace and stability. If the allies cared about the what happened to the people, it would have moved in with ground forces early on.

Individual citizens care about people. Governments care about power and stability.
 

Tex

Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2002
Messages
68
Reaction score
1
Location
Dallas
Country
llUnited States
Apparently around the bigger cities, the Iraqi's are digging small trenches and filling them up with oil. They'll bit lit up once war begins causing thick clouds of smoke which I suppose is supposed to combat any sight-guided weapons.

As far as the oil fields go, I doubt Saddam will set them a light until war is a certainty. My guess is that the first act in the war won't be the massive shock attack, but quick special forces operations attempting to capture the larger fields and the dams along the Tigris and Euphrates before they are blown up.
 

Deltapooh

Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2002
Messages
649
Reaction score
1
Location
Closer than is safe for my enemies
Country
llUnited States
Originally posted by Tex
Apparently around the bigger cities, the Iraqi's are digging small trenches and filling them up with oil. They'll bit lit up once war begins causing thick clouds of smoke which I suppose is supposed to combat any sight-guided weapons.

As far as the oil fields go, I doubt Saddam will set them a light until war is a certainty. My guess is that the first act in the war won't be the massive shock attack, but quick special forces operations attempting to capture the larger fields and the dams along the Tigris and Euphrates before they are blown up.
Good point on the dam issue. If Saddam blows those, he won't need anthrax to kill alot of people.
 

Tim McBride

Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2002
Messages
204
Reaction score
1
Location
Fort Bliss,Tx
Country
llUnited States
Originally posted by Tex
Apparently around the bigger cities, the Iraqi's are digging small trenches and filling them up with oil. They'll bit lit up once war begins causing thick clouds of smoke which I suppose is supposed to combat any sight-guided weapons.

Too bad for Saddam many munitions are now actually GPS guided. No need to light up the target. GPS doesn't care abut smoke as long as it can get that sattelite signal

_Tim
 

tigersqn

WWII Forum Staff
Joined
Nov 24, 2002
Messages
800
Reaction score
0
Location
Ontario, Canada
Country
llCanada
Originally posted by Wolfe Tone
IIRC though the Allies bombed FRY for 78 days without inflicted a great deal of damage on the Yugoslav Army. It was the damage to the country's infrastructure and the economic effects that finally led Milo to call it a day and withdraw from Kossovo.
You have to realise though, conducting an air campaign in largely open desert terrain is a lot different than trying to hit targets in wooded mountainous terrain.
The air campaign against Milosevic had to contend against innumerable opportunities for the FRY to conceal their weaponry.
 

Marko

Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2002
Messages
289
Reaction score
0
Location
United Kingdom
Country
ll
Originally posted by Tim McBride


Too bad for Saddam many munitions are now actually GPS guided. No need to light up the target. GPS doesn't care abut smoke as long as it can get that sattelite signal

_Tim
Tut tut...and Saddam did not know that until you just posted it...! Traitor. :p
 
Top