• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

What's your definition of "cakewalk" ???

Mrburns2007

Platinum Member
Jun 14, 2001
2,595
0
0


I figured it would take 1 to 3 months to oust Saddam, that would be a millitary cakewalk with the focus on keeping our troop loss at a minimum.

These people who think the war should be over in days are retarded.


Rumsfield when asked before the war said he didn't know whether it would last 6 days, 6 weeks or 6 months apparently the press wasn't listening.
 

LH

Golden Member
Feb 16, 2002
1,604
0
0
So far it has been a cakewalk.

People on all sides have died, and thats to be expected. Over 35000 Iraqi military personal have died. Civilian casualities are fairly low, as is our amount of our KIAs.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,872
4,214
126
Apparently Rumsfeld wasnt listening to the Generals in terms of what is needed. He screwed the pooch on this one and is damned lucky it hasnt resulted in massive casualties. Before someone answers "Its a part of the plan to bring in new troops" No, it was not part of the plan to activate divisions after the fact in Texas etc. The troops that will join in the fight were those who were to be in place as a reserve, and not fight right off. It was not part of the plan to restrict soldiers to one ration per day.

How long will this take? Longer than it could have. He must have been looking at the OT boys joking about how this was going to be a repeat of 91. Not encouraging.
 

LH

Golden Member
Feb 16, 2002
1,604
0
0
Ummmm, the 30,000 people from Fort Hood were supposed to go in through Turkey, they have had their deployment papers since Jan, they were just waiting for equipment to get in.

Fact, we have very few that have died. All deaths are saddening but come on our KIAs are low, our blue on blue is fairly low, and we havent killed that many civilains, all the while killing over 35,000 Iraqi toops.
Fact, we are within 36 miles of Baghdad.

We it have been easier with more troops? Sure
Can we do it with what we have on the ground? Yes
Will the war last over a month? Maybe
Over 2 months? Nope
 

LH

Golden Member
Feb 16, 2002
1,604
0
0
It was not part of the plan to restrict soldiers to one ration per day.
MOST units are still receiving the same amount of MREs they were when the war started, and thats 2. Its only those that are on the very front lines in the southern front that are only getting 1 a day. Those in the north and west still get 2, those that are farther behind the front lines still get two. Most are still getting 2. No one ever got 3 once the war started.
 

Morph

Banned
Oct 14, 1999
747
0
0
In '91 it took what, a week to oust Iraq's forces from Kuwait? THAT was a cakewalk. This is no cakewalk, but if it makes you feel better go ahead and keep telling yourself that it is.
 

Mrburns2007

Platinum Member
Jun 14, 2001
2,595
0
0
Originally posted by: Morph
In '91 it took what, a week to oust Iraq's forces from Kuwait? THAT was a cakewalk. This is no cakewalk, but if it makes you feel better go ahead and keep telling yourself that it is.

Yes but the air war lasted 100 days first then the ground war began.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,872
4,214
126
Originally posted by: LH
Ummmm, the 30,000 people from Fort Hood were supposed to go in through Turkey, they have had their deployment papers since Jan, they were just waiting for equipment to get in.

Fact, we have very few that have died. All deaths are saddening but come on our KIAs are low, our blue on blue is fairly low, and we havent killed that many civilains, all the while killing over 35,000 Iraqi toops.
Fact, we are within 36 miles of Baghdad.

We it have been easier with more troops? Sure
Can we do it with what we have on the ground? Yes
Will the war last over a month? Maybe
Over 2 months? Nope
Fact. Resources sat off of Turkey for 26 days when they could have moved.

Fact. We are within 36 miles of Baghdad because it suits both the American AND Iraqi battle plan. What you see is exactly what both sides wanted and expected. It is a "cakewalk" because the Iraqis have no intention of resisting forces as they come into Iraq. That would be supremely stupid from a military perspective. All they want to do is slow us down and annoy us.

Fact. Dont count on that 35000 as being a hard number. The body counts in Vietnam were such that if they were true, they would have depopulated the whole country. It is common to exaggerate in war time. My advice is to treat all numbers with suspicion.


How long? Depends. A determined force could probably hold out in Baghdad until next year. Hard to say really. If you have access to Jane's, they have some good analysis and have been right on target.
 

Marshallj

Platinum Member
Mar 26, 2003
2,326
0
0
Originally posted by: Morph
In '91 it took what, a week to oust Iraq's forces from Kuwait?
No, it took longer than that.

We started our offensive on Jan 17, 1991, and the cease fire was declared on Feb. 27th. That's about 41 days, or a little over 5 weeks. In that war, we used air power exclusively until the enemy was battered and beaten, and then rolled through with out land forces in under 100 hours. But we were not an occupying force back then, we just drove them out of Kuwait.



 

ASK THE COMMUNITY