Results 1 to 20 of 61

Thread: The Basrah Gambit

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Council Member Ron Humphrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    1,099

    Question Thought provoking

    After reading this I find myself with some questions

    1- Considering that something like this did have to happen at some point (as the author points out) and that JAM did as expected (which is to say disappeared before incurring too many losses). Then also taking into account that either militia Badr or Mahdi both have Iranian connections. Does anything change the fact that it had to happen and at least in large part seems smarter to have done so when there would be more rather than less backup available if needed.

    2. Am I mistaken and have the militias been effectively providing for and caring for their area and that everything that a government should do was being done by these hero thugs in Basra: if so why did the actual Iraqi government have to go in there and screw it all up? Am I missing something here.

    3. Although I did hear and see that Sadr called a ceasefire I don't remember hearing that the IA/ IP have stopped moving through the area and securing neighborhoods. Are we to believe that Maliki doesn't realize exactly what this means and let's not forget that this operation was Iraqi planned and although support may be provided all in all it would seem that it will be dealt with in more of an Iraqi manner than what might be done in an American operation.

    4. How exactly should this have been handled since everyone seems so certain that this wasn't the right way.
    Any man can destroy that which is around him, The rare man is he who can find beauty even in the darkest hours

    Cogitationis poenam nemo patitur

  2. #2
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Talking Now you quit that!

    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Humphrey View Post
    After reading this I find myself with some questions.
    . . .
    4. How exactly should this have been handled since everyone seems so certain that this wasn't the right way.
    Heh. Fair question, though...

  3. #3
    Council Member tequila's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    1,665

    Default

    If you're going to whack the hornet's nest, and yes it did need whacking, then at least make sure (1) the hornets don't win (2) you don't just go after just one species of hornet when there are at least four that need to get dead.

    What Sadr has done is show that his militia can stand up to and defeat the best efforts of the Iraqi Army, that he can turn the violence on and off even in the face of an offensive by said army, and thus can control the streets of southern Iraq and Baghdad even from a perch in Qom. Maliki looks pathetic while the Iranians preen as the one side that all Shia factions can go to for intercession.

    We'll see how this plays out, but right now it's hard to imagine the last few days as any kind of success.

  4. #4
    Council Member Abu Buckwheat's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Insurgency University
    Posts
    143

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tequila View Post
    If you're going to whack the hornet's nest, and yes it did need whacking, then at least make sure (1) the hornets don't win (2) you don't just go after just one species of hornet when there are at least four that need to get dead.
    BBWwaaaahahahahahaaa.... well that comment made writing the whole blog entry in one flight back to CONUS worth it. Hey tequila, can I use this in my next book?

    Seriously though ...

    My assertion is that this was not part of the surge but a completely different component of a North-South offensive. The MNF-I and the Kurd IA Divisons would clear Mosul while Maliki would be give the chance to use the Badr Corps, er, I mean, the "Iraqi Army" and police to clear Basrah.

    The ruse of going after only the "rogue" JAM units surely weakened the JAM but no one who has spent anytime there (I spent almost a year in Basrah and all of my Iraqi bosyguards are from there) was going to think that the JAM was not wildly popular. they are more popular than the central government, but not because they provide services. They provide a gunweilding voice and see that the future could bear great promise for them. The JAM, the Hizb'Dawa and the Badr Corps have been banging away to gain dominence for five years and this last year the JAM has made headway. Granted, the Garamsheh tribe runs all of the guns and crime, and this is fueled by the money that still flows from the tolerated Ali Baba port at Mina Abu Floos. The big question is what made Maliki think Shiites were going to really fight hard against the JAM when the JAMs could come to their family's front door any given night and kill them all? Thats why policemen surrendered ... for their family's sake. Everyone knows everyone in Southern Iraq.

    4. How exactly should this have been handled since everyone seems so certain that this wasn't the right way.
    To answer the question they could have bought a Kurd/Peshmerga division down south quietly and let them do it. They would have done the job in a slugfest like bloodbath that would probably raze a good piece of western and northern Basrah. However, Maliki would be out of office the next day. The final answer: Train IA units for the mission in secret in Fallujah (live fire training), pretend you are going to Ramadi, turn left, drive overnight and blitz Basrah with heavy US armor and air support from the afloat Marine unit in the Gulf ... then effect the BSP super rapido! ... however this would have taken allot of troops we just don't have and a level of planning they don't have. There was no real airpower or heavy armor (the T-55s and T-72s being up in Taji-stan) supporting the offensive except for some M113s and some police Cougars. This was doomed from the inception and it appears both Cheney and McCain were briefed about it. Thats MHO.
    Putting Foot to Al Qaeda Ass Since 1993

  5. #5
    Council Member Tom Odom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    DeRidder LA
    Posts
    3,949

    Default

    Malcom,

    Great blog, Welcome back!

    Tom

  6. #6
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    567

    Default

    I've noticed a number of editorials that say all of the fighting took place amongst anti AQI groups. That could be a big factor in the domestic debate.
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveMetz View Post
    Sometimes it takes someone without deep experience to think creatively.

  7. #7
    Council Member Abu Buckwheat's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Insurgency University
    Posts
    143

    Default

    All Shiite groups are anti-alQaeda ... they're Shiite! AQ thinks Shiites are apostates anyway which, by Takfiri definition, they're Kufr and that means any Shiite can be killed at anytime.
    Putting Foot to Al Qaeda Ass Since 1993

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
  •