Let me say that these "military advisors" are given more credit than they should by civilian organizations. I've seen a LTC giving his overall analysys of how the war should have been conducted. A Leutenant Colonel! He's never comanded anything over a Battalion and he's trying to armchair general how an Army should move and be placed!


And if weather, Iraqi resistance, chemical weapons or anything else turned things suddenly and unexpectedly sour, the backup force, the Army's 4th Infantry Division, is still in Texas with its equipment sailing around the Arabian peninsula.

4th ID is not the backup force. It was supposed to be part of the origional force, but was put on hold due to Turkey screwing us over. Why not wait to send them through Kuwait? well the longer you wait, the hotter it gets, especiallly for those Marines we see fighing at mopp level one.* Plus it was going to be a logistical nightmare to send them through Kuwait. Whatever you bring in you have to land at a port, you need to transport the stuff over ground to the staging area, you need to provide quaters, food, etc for the men, keep in mind Kuwait normally has in the neighborhood of 5,000 army soldiers at any given time.

I'm not saying it can't be done, but it takes TIME, something we didnt have.

Another retired senior officer said the Apache Longbow helicopter gunships that were shot up badly Sunday had been sent on a deep strike against Republican Guard divisions guarding the approaches to Baghdad. He and others said the Apaches shouldn't have been used that way.

WHAT? Thats what Apaches do. They hunt in packs at night and take out Armor Divisions.

"They should have been preceded by suppression of enemy air defenses," the general said. "There should be a barrage of long-range artillery and MLRS (Multiple-Launch Rocket System) rockets before you send the Apaches in."

I suspect this 'general' was in artilery for most of his carear. In any case he is retired now, and knows no more of the circumstances of that battle than we do, because he is going off the same news reports. Maybe they didn't want to do a rolling barage of arty and MRL on the area because civilians were near, after all this is a predominant tactic of the RG. Maybe There was no Arty in range?! After if the enemy is in range, so are you. Theres hundred of other circumstances that are running through my head about this.

Futher more, I see no reason why you would opt for an artillery strike over any other strike, or why you would need to "soften up the area" for apaches in the first place, I've never heard of them doing this before.

Reports from the field said virtually every one of the estimated 30 to 40 Apache Longbows came back shot full of holes, as the Iraqis fired everything they had at them. One did not come back, and its two-man crew apparently was taken prisoner.

whoever whote that was selectively listening to the reports. Others say that "some came back with bullet holes in them, and of those, some worse than others. Take a look at the video of the downed apache, was it rittled with holes? Go ahead and find one, if it was so damn rittled with holes you should be able to find one on there.

"Every division should have two brigades of MLRS launches for a campaign like this," the general said. "They do not, and the question in the end will be why they don't."

No, the question in the end is who the hell does this guy work for? He definitly thinks artillery is the be all end all, that or he owns stock in a busness that has a vested interest in making MRLs because this is just plain absurd. The normal Brigade has about four fighting brigades per division plus three battalions (a brigade/regiment) of arty/MRL (not country the support or ADA). This head case is proposing that 40% of each brigades divisions be MRL?! That he wants each army division to have 8 artillery battalions standard? Where the hell do we get and extra brigade for each divisiton? Are we supposed to just pull two out of the thin air?!

IT HAS NEVER BEEN STANDARD FOR THE MODERN ARMY TO HAVE TWO ARTILLERY BRIGADES PER DIVISION. WHERE THE HELL DID THEY GET THIS GUY?

He said the Air Force was bombing day and night, but its strikes have so far failed to produce the anticipated capitulation and uprising by the Iraqi people.

Yeagh, Germany proved that wouldn't work in WWII. I agree.

One senior administration official put it this way: "'Shock and Awe' is Air Force bull---!"

Well, I wouldn't use that strong of language to say that.

Dorff said: "Expectations were raised for something that might be quick and relatively painless. What we're seeing in the first few days probably ought to dispel that. Part of the problem is that expectations were raised that we would march in and everybody would surrender - sort of the four-day scenario of 1991."

Expectation were raised by who? The media of course. They were the ones asking rumsfeld on the second day "how many more days shoudl this last? Three, Four?" and Rumsfeld looked at them like they were nuts. Only those who don't know better.

The rest of the report that I cut out refuses to name names of anyone criticising the current plan of action, however it's not afraid to name those its attacking. Pretty weak I'd say.

How can you defend again "this anonymous official said. . . "? The anonymous officials could be cranks, or have hidden agendas. But without names, you can't verify them, so what they say simply cannot stand. (like that nut "former general")

Regards,
Justin Kelly

*this is why they are in woodland camo, they themselves have dessert fatigues, but they are wearing their chemical suits over them.