Page 17 of 58 FirstFirst ... 7151617181927 ... LastLast
Results 321 to 340 of 1150

Thread: Iraq: Out of the desert into Mosul (closed)

  1. #321
    Council Member TheCurmudgeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Woodbridge, VA
    Posts
    1,117

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OUTLAW 09 View Post
    I really do get tired of the Baathists being mentioned---heck everyone in Iraq to include the Shia were Baathists even in southern Iraq. The only ones that one could say they were not Baathists were the AQI and the foreign fighters.

    If you looked at the "resistance" in 2006 by Sunni's it broke into three distinct groups--nationalists who simply did not like be overrun by an outside power, secular Sunni/fundamental Salafists who came out of the tribes and local major city populations , and AQI. And then there were the Iraqi criminals/gangs/smugglers thrown in to the mix.
    I am not an operator (I am an Engineer). My interests have to do with how to make military gains stick politically. ISIS is doing that in spades, at least at the moment. Force ratio numbers vary, and the FM 3-24 did not have a number I saw. Using the most conservative numbers of 3 per 1000 (which really only covers police presence), you would need about 1200 to cover the city of Mosul (assuming a 600K population). ISIS seems to be doing it with less. So I am assuming they are getting local help and that they are not receiving much trouble from the population. From my perspective, this means that they have a relative advantage in regards to legitimacy* – ISIS and its local elements are seen as MORE legitimate than the Maliki government, even if they are not potentially the MOST legitimate form of government. That fight will probably come later.

    As for the term “baathist”, it is important not because they represent a specific group. You are correct that most people in the military or civil service would have had to have been a Baathist. However, Baathists are generally considered secular, ISIS is a group which claims a fundamentalist religious ideology. They two should not mix (and may not in the long run). That is why I find the term important.

    Now compare to the Kurds:

    The peshmerga are no newcomers to fighting Sunni militants. Prior to the US-led 2003 invasion of Iraq, Kurdish fighters helped American Special Forces evict the fanatical Ansar al-Islam group from a stronghold near the Iranian border. And in 2004, the peshmerga fought alongside US troops when Iraqi police and National Guard units in Mosul failed to contain a Sunni insurgency.

    Are they likely to try a repeat of 2004 and assist Iraqi security forces to take back Mosul? “We are fighting a defensive war; not an offensive one,” says a peshmerga commander, who declined to be named for this article. And ordinary fighters don’t seem overwhelmed at the idea of going on the offensive outside Iraqi Kurdistan.

    They see the ISIS uprising as part of a general Sunni revolt. Sunni tribes to the south of Kirkuk rebuffed a peshmerga offer of anti-ISIS assistance and were warned to confine themselves to the northern half of Kirkuk province, says Askari.

    But he holds out the possibility of a Kurdish offensive outside their territory. “If anyone comes and helps us to confront al Qaeda and ISIS we are ready, and that includes Iran, America, Israel, anyone.”
    If ISIS could take territory in Iraqi Kurdistan they would have a fight on their hands.


    *Legitimacy defined as a recognition within the population of a group’s right to rule.
    Last edited by TheCurmudgeon; 06-20-2014 at 04:46 PM.
    "I can change almost anything ... but I can't change human nature."

    Jon Osterman/Dr. Manhattan
    ---

  2. #322
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,392

    Default

    My latest article Replacing Maliki No Panacea For Iraq Pres Obama has called for a more inclusive government in Iraq which some have taken to mean that he wants Maliki out. Replacing him would likely improve the immediate political situation in the Iraq and open up some immediate compromises but would not solve Iraq's institutional problems, win over more Sunnis nor deter the insurgency.

  3. #323
    Council Member davidbfpo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    13,349

    Default US air strikes will sign the death warrant of our Muslim neighbours

    Not a headline I'd expect to see in The Daily Telegraph. The article starts with:
    There are three things that the government of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia strives for above all others: peace, stability and security, for the international community, for our region, and for our country and our people, whether they are old or young, men or women, Sunni or Shia. These are the cornerstones of our government and they lie at the foundation of our thinking.
    The author?
    Prince Mohammed bin Nawaf Al Saud...Ambassador of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to the Court of St James’s(London)
    Link:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...eighbours.html
    davidbfpo

  4. #324
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,392

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JMA View Post
    Does this include what production is available from the area the Kurds claim as their historical homeland and not just from where they were squeezed into by Saddam?
    The Kurds occupied the Kirkuk oil field. That's only producing at about 300,000 bar/day so the KRG has still not reached that 1 mil/bar/day mark.

  5. #325
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default Ratio Of 3 Per 1000 May Not Be Vlid

    The ratio of 3 per 1000 is an American concept to be used in peace time police operations. During civil emergencies it will be much higher. I don't know that it has any validity at all in war situations in a foreign country.

  6. #326
    Council Member TheCurmudgeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Woodbridge, VA
    Posts
    1,117

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by slapout9 View Post
    The ratio of 3 per 1000 is an American concept to be used in peace time police operations. During civil emergencies it will be much higher. I don't know that it has any validity at all in war situations in a foreign country.
    You are correct. I wanted to take the lowest number I could. I used this reference: A Historical Basis for Force Requirements in Counterinsurgency by STEVEN M. GOODE.

    There is also: Troop Levels in Stability Operations: What We Don’t Know by Peter J. P. Krause. It is an MIT pub and is where I took the more robust 20 per 1,000. I would think that this number is more logical if you had to do everything including military and civilian security and providing basic services. Krause includes military and civilian security forces in his number (based on Iraq):

    There are currently 169,000 coalition troops (including 152,000 Americans) deployed to Iraq, a ratio of 6.3 per 1,000 if only these forces are counted. If the Iraqi army is added into the mix, then the figure becomes 11.3 per 1,000, and 18.4 per 1,000 if Iraqi police forces are also included.4 The addition of approximately 20,000 U.S. troops would push those ratios to 7.1, 12.1, and 19.1 per thousand, respectively. These figures include non-combat support troops as well as all Iraqi army and police units that are “in the fight” according to CENTCOM, regardless of readiness. When “tooth-to-tail” considerations are included—the number of combat troops to logistical support troops—the number of U.S. combat troops in country drops to about 60,000, and coalition and Iraqi force figures face similar reductions. Therefore, only if these best case figures are used with all support troops and all Iraqi police included does the current figure even begin to approach the 20 per 1,000 believed to be needed for success.
    Notibly, the numbers do not include contractor support or civilians helping with the Iraqi Government.

    The 3 per 1,000 number is for a U.S. style police department, which is interesting if for no other reason than most people in the U.S. are not likely to challenge police authority or think that the local government and police are illegitimate ... mostly. It would not be a planning factor I would use for an invasion and occupation.
    Last edited by TheCurmudgeon; 06-20-2014 at 06:22 PM.
    "I can change almost anything ... but I can't change human nature."

    Jon Osterman/Dr. Manhattan
    ---

  7. #327
    Council Member davidbfpo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    13,349

    Default

    Two commentaries of value IMHO. The first by Ken Pollack, of Brookings, dissects what the 300 advisers could do:http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/up-fr...s-iraq-pollack

    The socond is 'Why the Iraqi army can't defeat ISIS' on Vimeo. I note it cites several SME from David Kilcullen's company:http://www.vox.com/2014/6/20/5824480...nt-defeat-isis

    The Iraqi forces and the opposition summed up:
    It comes down to two things: training and professionalism. ISIS learned how to fight, while the Iraqi army has long been a weak fighting force. All the weapons in the world won't matter if you don't know how to wield them. And ISIS's victories, not to mention the Iraqi army's repeated failures, tell you a lot about the country's larger crisis.

    (Last sentence) But it's far, far too early to count ISIS out on the basis of hypothetical scenarios. Their military record in Iraq proves that they can outperform expectations.
    davidbfpo

  8. #328
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheCurmudgeon View Post
    You are correct. I wanted to take the lowest number I could. I used this reference: A Historical Basis for Force Requirements in Counterinsurgency by STEVEN M. GOODE.

    There is also: Troop Levels in Stability Operations: What We Don’t Know by Peter J. P. Krause. It is an MIT pub and is where I took the more robust 20 per 1,000. I would think that this number is more logical if you had to do everything including military and civilian security and providing basic services. Krause includes military and civilian security forces in his number (based on Iraq):



    Notibly, the numbers do not include contractor support or civilians helping with the Iraqi Government.

    The 3 per 1,000 number is for a U.S. style police department, which is interesting if for no other reason than most people in the U.S. are not likely to challenge police authority or think that the local government and police are illegitimate ... mostly. It would not be a planning factor I would use for an invasion and occupation.
    A few years ago we had a pretty extensive discussion on this very subject at the SWC. One of the things I uncovered was this article by Lidell Hart from Military review 1960. T.E. Lawrence had wanted Lidell Hart to study this very subject. Here is a link to the article. Not sure how relavent it is to COIN but it does have a lot to say about so called conventional forces.

    http://cgsc.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/s...1/id/705/rec/1

    Having seen first hand how gangs take over a neighborhood in America I am very dubious of any magic ratio. It is usually a combination of factors that come together at the right time and place.

  9. #329
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Red Rat View Post
    Advisor/Mentor teams can also be critical enabler teams, especially for providing linkage between surveillance & strike assets. So if the Iraqi military were going to conduct a counter-offensive and you wanted to link their units on the ground with US air & surveillance assets then these teams would be well placed to do it.

    Remember the old British Army teaching methodology: Explanation, Demonstration, Imitation, Practice? I suspect the Iraqi Army is about to receive a demonstration on the effective use of airpower in irregular warfare...
    Here is the problem--- was that not really what we taught the entire Iraqi Army and the Iraqi Special Forces from 2005 until 2011 so one would think they got it.

    Ex General P got it right ---we are not the Shia Air Force because that would be what is being perceived by the Sunni's being struck.
    Last edited by OUTLAW 09; 06-20-2014 at 08:36 PM.

  10. #330
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by davidbfpo View Post
    Two commentaries of value IMHO. The first by Ken Pollack, of Brookings, dissects what the 300 advisers could do:http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/up-fr...s-iraq-pollack

    The socond is 'Why the Iraqi army can't defeat ISIS' on Vimeo. I note it cites several SME from David Kilcullen's company:http://www.vox.com/2014/6/20/5824480...nt-defeat-isis

    The Iraqi forces and the opposition summed up:
    Here is something that I got today in a conversation with a German source just out of Iraq.

    1. The max number of ISIS that made the run into Mosul was no more than 1000 with a majority being Iraqi's very minimum foreign fighters as they are still majority wise in Syria.
    2. A majority of the inexperienced foreign fighters going into Syria are being used as cannon fodder and sent straight to whatever front needed reinforcements---ISIS has at it's heart remained an true Iraqi organization.
    3. The number of ISIS that peeled off and went south towards Baghdad numbered only a few hundred in numbers.
    4. ISIS's inner circle is comprised of literally former Islamic Army of Iraq and now renamed as the al Duri group Military Council with a large number of ex military officers and intel types
    5. A bulk of the fighting in the various towns is being conducted by the former Sunni insurgent groups/Sunni tribes not ISIS.
    6. ISIS is using the same exact style of infiltration into towns inside Syria based on what they learned in Iraq --ie small intel cells into the town staying in safe houses, then identification of local leaders, local armed group leaders, and government types then a reign of targeted killings and intimidations begins until they control the town.
    7. It appears this was very well planned meaning the local Sunni insurgent groups and supporting tribes knew when to reach for their weapons long before the ISIS units arrived in their areas.

    It appears that the ISIS ground units as he mentioned are being used as a type of Waffen SS meaning they lead the charge into a new area---create confusion and terror and then the local Sunni insurgent groups and tribes members take over the area as ISIS moves on---in critical areas/towns or say at the oil refinery ISIS stays and fights due to their experience and their experience with heavy weapons.

    Thus if the US is intent on air strikes and hits armed truck utilities thinking they are ISIS it might in fact be local Sunni's which will inflame matters and prove to the Sunni the US supports Shia fighters and Iran.
    Last edited by OUTLAW 09; 06-20-2014 at 08:35 PM.

  11. #331
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,392

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by davidbfpo View Post
    Two commentaries of value IMHO. The first by Ken Pollack, of Brookings, dissects what the 300 advisers could do:http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/up-fr...s-iraq-pollack

    The socond is 'Why the Iraqi army can't defeat ISIS' on Vimeo. I note it cites several SME from David Kilcullen's company:http://www.vox.com/2014/6/20/5824480...nt-defeat-isis

    The Iraqi forces and the opposition summed up:
    The Iraqi forces have proven that they can take an area but they have no concept on how to hold anything. They simply raid an area and then leave and insurgents move back in. This is seen again and again in the current fighting in Anbar and northern Babil. Ishaqi in northern Salahaddin was just cleared twice in about one week or two. This will be repeated throughout the country. Iraq is looking to be a very bloody war of attrition that will likely drag on for years.

  12. #332
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by davidbfpo View Post
    Two commentaries of value IMHO. The first by Ken Pollack, of Brookings, dissects what the 300 advisers could do:http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/up-fr...s-iraq-pollack

    The socond is 'Why the Iraqi army can't defeat ISIS' on Vimeo. I note it cites several SME from David Kilcullen's company:http://www.vox.com/2014/6/20/5824480...nt-defeat-isis

    The Iraqi forces and the opposition summed up:
    David---this sentence from the Kilcullen SMEs is what I have been saying---the AQI has learned from the IAI which has become al Duri's group and they have fed off of each other---this Iraqi ISIS is now a solid Sunni insurgency block and I seriously doubt they will split as they fully understand this is why they failed the last time.

    This SME sees now the trend I have seen since 2005 as well in the battle videos---why analysts have failed to monitor since 2005/2006 these battle videos is beyond me. IE the IAI for example became by 2010/2011 the largest producer of HME for IED usage in the entire ME and it was all in their videos down to the actual production processes and chemical mixtures.

    But between 2007 and now, something changed:
    When you like at the [ISIS] training videos from the mid 2000s, and compare them to ones from 2010, they're moving from terrorist tactics like how do you create an IED to things that include operations, strategy tactics..
    by Nathaniel Rosenblatt, the head of Caerus' Middle East Division
    Last edited by davidbfpo; 06-20-2014 at 10:04 PM. Reason: fix quote

  13. #333
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default

    Another question for all. Would it be a better overall and long term solution to go ahead and partition old Iraq into 3 new and perhaps stable ethic states as opposed to try and force a faux united single state like we are doing now?

  14. #334
    Council Member davidbfpo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    13,349

    Default Is partition a solution?

    Quote Originally Posted by slapout9 View Post
    Another question for all. Would it be a better overall and long term solution to go ahead and partition old Iraq into 3 new and perhaps stable ethic states as opposed to try and force a faux united single state like we are doing now?
    If there was ever a time for Iraqis to decide on such a partition it is not now. Those outside Iraq do not have the capability, will or design to provide such a solution.

    If one had a reliable time machine I'd expect Kurdistan to become an independent state; reliant on some odd allies and staying out of the rest of Iraq.
    davidbfpo

  15. #335
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,392

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by slapout9 View Post
    Another question for all. Would it be a better overall and long term solution to go ahead and partition old Iraq into 3 new and perhaps stable ethic states as opposed to try and force a faux united single state like we are doing now?
    If it were to happen the Sunnis would be screwed. All Iraqi provinces are dependent upon the central budget for money. Most of that money comes from southern oil fields. Kurdistan is developing its own petroleum industry. There are no developed oil or gas fields in Sunni areas. There is I think only one field which is in Anbar. There are some in Ninewa as well but those are in the disputed areas which the Kurds hold. With no economic base the Sunni areas would become poverty stricken quickly.

    I should add outside of ISIS not many Sunnis in Iraq actually want their own country. Some want federalism, but they might even be a minority. Rather most Sunnis actually believe they are the majority and should run the entire country, an idea that comes from the Saddam era.

  16. #336
    Council Member Dayuhan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Latitude 17° 5' 11N, Longitude 120° 54' 24E, altitude 1499m. Right where I want to be.
    Posts
    3,137

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by slapout9 View Post
    Another question for all. Would it be a better overall and long term solution to go ahead and partition old Iraq into 3 new and perhaps stable ethic states as opposed to try and force a faux united single state like we are doing now?
    Is that a decision to be made by Americans, or anyone other than Iraqis?

    Arguably what we are seeing right now is the process of partitioning Iraq. It's not pretty, but I don't know that it would be any prettier if imposed by some external Deus ex Machina.
    Last edited by Dayuhan; 06-21-2014 at 02:27 AM.
    “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary”

    H.L. Mencken

  17. #337
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Durban, South Africa
    Posts
    3,902

    Default

    Iran says Obama lacks will to combat terrorism in Iraq

    US President Barack Obama lacks "serious will" to combat terrorism, a top Iranian official said Friday after an Iraqi appeal for American airstrikes went unanswered.

    Deputy Foreign Minister Hossein Amir Abdollahian's comments followed a statement from Obama on the Iraq crisis in which he pledged to send military advisors to Baghdad but stopped short of further action at this stage.
    He is correct of course and it looks more likely that the token force of advisors the US will deploy is designed to counter the need for Iranian special forces and others to deploy in significant numbers to assist with the defense of Baghdad.

    It is not as if there should be any lack of knowledge of Iraq to inform the US Administration in making decisions but is this Administration will probable not be willing to ask those with the - hard earned - knowledge of Iraq for advice. After all we have a new bunch of smart guys now who believe they have all the answers.

  18. #338
    Council Member Dayuhan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Latitude 17° 5' 11N, Longitude 120° 54' 24E, altitude 1499m. Right where I want to be.
    Posts
    3,137

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JWing View Post
    I should add outside of ISIS not many Sunnis in Iraq actually want their own country. Some want federalism, but they might even be a minority. Rather most Sunnis actually believe they are the majority and should run the entire country, an idea that comes from the Saddam era.
    I'm sure that's true, but do they have the capacity to impose Sunni rule on the rest of the country, especially if the Shi'a are getting active support from Iran?

    I'm wondering whether the ISIS/Sunni forces will try to impose control on the core Shi'a regions, where I expect they'd face much more serious resistance. I'm also wondering whether Iranian-supported Shi'a forces would try to push into core Sunni areas, where an Iranian presence would be... provocative, to put it mildly. And I wonder whether either wants to try to impose control on the Kurds.

    In short, while there will certainly be areas along the uncertain ethnic/sectarian lines of division that will be contested, I wonder if we're seeing a fight for control of a discrete "Iraq" or a fight over where the lines of an eventual partition will be drawn. It just seems difficult to envision a scenario that would allow any of the parties to establish sustainable control over the others.

    That's largely a speculation, would welcome ideas from those with area expertise.
    “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary”

    H.L. Mencken

  19. #339
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Durban, South Africa
    Posts
    3,902

    Default

    The - minority - Sunnis appear to have another problem and that is adjusting to the loss of hegemony they exercised over the majority of Shia and Kurds in the past. Someone needs to break the news to them that there can be no return to those days and the best they can hope for - as they lack oil reserves in their geographical area - is crumbs from the Shia table if they remain in Iraq or abject poverty if they seek independence.

    Quote Originally Posted by JWing View Post
    If it were to happen the Sunnis would be screwed. All Iraqi provinces are dependent upon the central budget for money. Most of that money comes from southern oil fields. Kurdistan is developing its own petroleum industry. There are no developed oil or gas fields in Sunni areas. There is I think only one field which is in Anbar. There are some in Ninewa as well but those are in the disputed areas which the Kurds hold. With no economic base the Sunni areas would become poverty stricken quickly.

    I should add outside of ISIS not many Sunnis in Iraq actually want their own country. Some want federalism, but they might even be a minority. Rather most Sunnis actually believe they are the majority and should run the entire country, an idea that comes from the Saddam era.

  20. #340
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Durban, South Africa
    Posts
    3,902

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dayuhan View Post
    It just seems difficult to envision a scenario that would allow any of the parties to establish sustainable control over the others.
    And so it should be. Who gives the Shia, Sunni or Kurds the right to exercise hegemony over any other group?

    Secondly, can anyone really even attempt to make a serious case for the retention of the vestages of the Sykes–Picot Agreement?

Similar Threads

  1. The USMC in Helmand (merged thread)
    By Wildcat in forum OEF - Afghanistan
    Replies: 173
    Last Post: 11-12-2014, 03:13 PM
  2. What happens in Iraq now?
    By MikeF in forum Catch-All, OIF
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-21-2011, 04:17 PM
  3. Iraq: Strategic and Diplomatic Options
    By SWJED in forum US Policy, Interest, and Endgame
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 12-02-2006, 11:36 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-20-2006, 07:14 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •