RoadBikeReview.com's Forum Archives - Non-Cycling Discussions


Archive Home >> Non-Cycling Discussions(1 2 3 4 )


So, what's going on?(20 posts)

So, what's going on?Dwayne Barry
Mar 21, 2003 10:15 AM
Were the Iraqi's playing 'possum?

Seeing as the big airstrikes are starting and our troops haven't gotten close enough to Baghdad yet to find-out if RG troops we're going to surrender or not, does anyone think the Iraqis were trying to sucker us in and that alot of this talk of decapitation and confusion at the top wasn't accurate.

It would display more cunning than the Iraqi's have shown to date. I also find it somewhat odd that there aren't reports of massive numbers of Iraqis surrending (or pictures of jubilant civilians) yet.

For the last 24 hours I was leaning toward thinking this was going go-over amazingly better than even the optimistic predictions. Now I'm starting to have my doubts again.
Pretty impressive war against little Iraq...Spunout
Mar 21, 2003 10:29 AM
what a farce. Bully. Starve a country for 12 years, then hit them with the $365B/year war machine.

US Cost: $100Billion. Iraq: $1M in missiles and bullets.

American Military: "We gonna learn them real good!"

/rant
Right....ryder1
Mar 21, 2003 4:08 PM
And just how much was the budget to buy 19 plane tickets and a few box cutter knives?
Depends on the exchange rate in Saudi Arabia (nm)czardonic
Mar 21, 2003 4:52 PM
If Iraq was responsible for that...empacher6seat
Mar 21, 2003 6:51 PM
you'd almost have a point worth posting.
re: So, what's going on?purplepaul
Mar 21, 2003 10:30 AM
Don't know what's giving you that impression. News scroller says that our troops are processing surrendering troops at capacity. There have been reports of civilians singing in the streets along side allied troops and anger being directed towards Saddam and bin Laden.

Who knows what will happen. Thus far, it's been a cakewalk.
I haven't seen any of those reports...Dwayne Barry
Mar 21, 2003 10:36 AM
of surrending on a large scale. And the reports from Bashra said there was "stiff" resistance. Of course, with the lack of reporting of many casualties "stiff" must be a pretty relative term.

I agree it's been a cakewalk but not what I was expecting to hear by now, and the shift in strategy again suggests something probably changed regarding Baghdad, maybe?
I haven't seen any of those reports...purplepaul
Mar 21, 2003 10:41 AM
I think they decided that the top Iraqi leaders were going to hold fast, so we stepped up the bombing.

As disturbing as war is, I feel our leaders really are trying to win with as little force and destruction as is necessary. Can't explain any other way why the massive bombing was held off for two days.
I agree that they desperately want...Dwayne Barry
Mar 21, 2003 10:53 AM
to minimize civilian casualties. But I think it's pretty clear why they held off for two days. They thought the Iraqi military was going to topple from within (and it still might). Consequently they didn't do large-scale bombing that will probably kill a lot of civilians no matter how "smart" it is.

That's what prompted my original questions. Since they're going full-bore now, what ever indications they had that the military was collapsing from within must have changed or been declared a ploy. Why else risk the huge political fall-out and civilian resentment large-scale bombing will create if you don't have to?
I agree that they desperately want...purplepaul
Mar 21, 2003 11:04 AM
Yes, I think they were hoping that if the leadership crumbled, the entire army would follow.

I can't for the life of me understand why anyone would fight for Saddam, let alone destroy a few oil wells. That seems like punching the air, for all the good it will do them. And make things worse for their countrymen.
I can think of two reasons they are fighting...Dwayne Barry
Mar 21, 2003 11:13 AM
1) if they don't Saddam & co. will kill them

2) a lot of them probably view it as defending their country. Given our record with the muslim world do you really think a large number of Iraqi's view us as liberators and trust us?

Did it ever occur to you that when you hear the "silly" propaganda spewed by the Iraqi's on TV towards us that an Iraqi might view our "propaganda" as equally "silly"? Hell many people even here in the US don't buy the Liberator sell.
I can think of two reasons they are fighting...purplepaul
Mar 21, 2003 11:21 AM
Of course it occurred to me. But when their country is ruled by such an iron fist, I can't see there being much support.

I believe Iraqis are leery of what we say. But I believe they overwhelmingly welcome the elimination of Saddam.
Supposedly a whole division surrendered.Sintesi
Mar 21, 2003 6:30 PM
How ever many that is. Can anyone tell me how many are in a division, an army, a platoon, etc...? I don't understand troop nomenclature.
re: So, what's going on?Me Dot Org
Mar 21, 2003 10:31 AM
I think the the perimeter defenses will be soft. I think the only hope that Hussein has is to hope to hold out long enought for world opinion to possibly halt the bombing. So I think you will see the resistance progressively stiffen the closer the troops get to Baghdad.

It's amazing to watch some of the bomb hits, where you see a secondary explosion. It could be something at the site exploding. But it also could be that multiple bombs hitting the same site, I would guess to get to an underground bunker. The choreography seems pretty amazing.

Also, the anti-aircraft fire seems much diminished from what I remember of the first Gulf War.
To find out what's goin' onNo_sprint
Mar 21, 2003 10:31 AM
Go to the MSNBC website. There is a live feed there that offers the best, most up to date info on exactly what's going on, that I've found so far.

There's one guy who is actually riding in a tank with the 3rd infantry and giving live reports

I've seen pictures of great numbers of Iraqi soldiers captured and surrendered. I've also seen pictures of happy citizens chanting pro American words.

We are successfully liberating the Iraqi people, enforcing resolutions that a spineless political association couldn't enforce, removing a mass murderer from power and playing a leading role with a coalition of over 45 good nations, doing good work.
To find out what's goin' onJon Billheimer
Mar 21, 2003 10:53 AM
The population of Southern Iraq is Sunni Muslim and are opposed to Saddam's rule, so a positive reception of American/British troops is to be respected. Who knows what peoples' private views in Baghdad are. However, overlaying the normal fear of war and dislike of America I would also suspect there might be quite a bit of relief to be rid of Sadaam and his Baath party.

It has occurred to me that American bombing of Iraq's communications infrastructure prior to "formal" hostilities may have left Iraq without any effective central command and communications. Hence the lack of co-ordinated resistance.
O.K. I went there...Dwayne Barry
Mar 21, 2003 11:08 AM
maybe I'm not looking hard enough, a report of a few hundred surrending and a few Bedouin's cheering. I suspected much stronger than that, maybe it's just being reported yet (CNN, BBC, MSN)?

While what the military may accomplish is good, to say their doing good work is a bit much. I would describe it as regrettable yet necessary (if I thought it was). Remember their good work may kill numerous innocent civilians and probably more poor saps drafted into the Iraqi military or just guys figuring their defending their country than die-hard supporters of the regime.
Iraqi's chanting pro-USAContinental
Mar 21, 2003 1:08 PM
I support the war and objectives. However, I think that many Iraqi's have trained themselves to chant and praise whoever wields power. When power passes from Saddam to USA, so do the chants.
Iraqi's chanting pro-USApurplepaul
Mar 21, 2003 1:39 PM
Hmm, I wonder if they learned that from the French.
LOLOL! nmNo_sprint
Mar 21, 2003 1:40 PM