| Jul 3 @ 12:34 AM |
On Point II released
|
|
nah12
Posts: 3,584
|
Have you read it? Will you just pick out what you want to read from it? Maybe you don't even care or would you like to be a little more informed? The choice is yours right?
WASHINGTON, July 1, 2008 – A new book released by the Army examines the challenging period of transition from conventional combined-arms operations to full-spectrum and counterinsurgency operations in Iraq after the fall of Saddam Hussein’s regime in April 2003.
.......
Wright said that these challenges at the tactical level in the first 18 months after the collapse of the Saddam’s regime are the focus of most chapters in On Point II.
“Most of the chapters of the book are really at the tactical level,” Wright said. “How are the soldiers trying to deal with the guidance that they get from above, as well as the challenges they face in the [areas of responsibility]?
“And they’re all very different,” he continued. “The 1st Armored Division is facing a much different situation in Baghdad than is the 101st [Airborne Division] up in the Mosul area.”
Reese cited some examples of locally developed initiatives -- “everything from simple stuff like rules of the road when driving and how to pick up trash in your neighborhood, to how we’re going to form a local advisory council in your town or your province to help establish some self-government.”
“We try to describe that transition and show the incredible … ingenuity and initiative of units around the spectrum,” Reese added.
Regarding the apparent lack of central leadership during the period the book covers, Reese said he hopes readers won’t walk away thinking senior leaders in the U.S. government and armed forces were unprepared.
“The magnitude of the tasks in [front of] them were so immense and the time so short that it … would have been very, very difficult, no matter how good that planning was and how good the team structure was in these organizations,” he said.
“Even if that planning had been a bit more robust and had … happened earlier on in the process,” Reese added, “a lot of the assumptions on which that planning was done turned out to be incorrect once the coalition got to Baghdad.” Army Releases Account of First 18 Months After Saddam's Fall
Link to On Point II: Transition to the New Campaign: The United States Army in Operation IRAQI FREEDOM, May 2003-January 2005
[Edited on 7/3/2008 12:48 AM]
|
|
  |
|
| Jul 3 @ 12:55 AM |
On Point II released |
|
Novalite
Posts: 2,712
|
Regarding the apparent lack of central leadership during the period the book covers, Reese said he hopes readers won’t walk away thinking senior leaders in the U.S. government and armed forces were unprepared.
Covering his ass so he doesn't get attacked for writing what many would or could perceive as an anti Bush Administration book. The fact is, the US went into Iraq unprepared to carry out an occupation of the scope needed. Instead, they pandered to the left to soften the political backlash by minimizing the troop numbers and level of freedom granted to a hostile country they had just conquered in an unprecedented whirlwind victory.
In this case, at that time, Para would have made a fine advisor. 
|
| |
|
| Jul 3 @ 1:10 AM |
On Point II released
|
|
Nightowl001
Posts: 3,528
|
The fact is, the US went into Iraq unprepared to carry out an occupation of the scope needed. Instead, they pandered to the left to soften the political backlash by minimizing the troop numbers and level of freedom granted to a hostile country they had just conquered in an unprecedented whirlwind victory. So now the administrations abject failure to listen to its generals (as widely reported and widely expounded upon by those self-same generals), is the fault of the left? 
Desperation is so ugly.
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 3 @ 1:13 AM |
On Point II released |
|
nah12
Posts: 3,584
|
so you read the whole book or just picking and choosing a line here and there?
so typical is it not?
|
| |
|
| Jul 3 @ 2:51 AM |
On Point II released
|
|
Novalite
Posts: 2,712
|
NO So now the administrations abject failure to listen to its generals (as widely reported and widely expounded upon by those self-same generals), is the fault of the left?
No, just explaining to you why they did not go in with the 500 thousand troops like Powell wanted and why they did not use that many troops to impose martial law until Iraq was secure. Not the fault of the left at all. In fact, the left really had little role in Iraq save continually bitch and gripe like you do.
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 3 @ 8:54 AM |
On Point II released |
|
SweetNapaGuy
Posts: 3,948
|
No, it was the technowarriors, with their belief that gadgets can replace troops on the ground. At the time of the Iraq invasion, the Democrats were NOT a force to be reckoned with. The administration and the Republican-controlled Congress didn't need to pander to liberals, as they had all the reins of power. Remember, this was in the "Dark Years," when the Congress was nothing but a rubber stamp for every ignorant, hare-brained scheme that the Bush administration put out.
The fact was, we didn't HAVE the 500k troops needed. So they fudged the numbers, gave rosy predictions, and went in with eyes shut and fingers crossed.
Gah, is there no end to the "it's all the fault of the liberals"? Can't you guys EVER "man up" and accept any blame for your utter stupidity?
|
| |
|
| Jul 3 @ 12:12 PM |
On Point II released
|
|
nah12
Posts: 3,584
|
as always the point is missed and nothing but arguing and finger pointing in here...
Lessons learned is not about pointing fingers, placing blame or arguing.... it's about Knowledge gained from the evaluation of the directive... it's about analyzing and acknowledging strength and weaknesses so that it can be used to help modify and improve in the future......
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 3 @ 2:29 PM |
On Point II released |
|
Nightowl001
Posts: 3,528
|
What is the point, Nah? That Shrub and his minions completely failed to understand strategy and tactics? The basic point of the excerpt from the book you posted was "The nature of warfare has changed dramatically in the last half-century or so, and the old ways are no longer applicable. As we figure out new ways to meet new challenges, even the the best of us aren't always far-sighted enough to see all the possible pitfalls, especially under pressure of time constraints where a quick response is felt called for, so to hold the administration and the military command wholly responsible for lack of success through unpreparedness is not valid, as many of them were doing the best they could with the training they had to work with. And very often, planning was found to not address the situations we faced once we got there."
I don't disagree with the premise of the book as outlined (though I say that not having read it). I disagreed with the characterization in a comment that the problems were due to the adminstration somehow bowing to a pressure from the left that they obviously felt no call to bow to. (If they had bowed to pressure from the left, they wouldn't have invaded to begin with.) The excerpt talks about things like attempts to maintain urban infrastructure (getting the lights back on, getting garbage picked up, curfews and traffic rules in a society where you are trying to help people get back to jobs that were interrupted by the war). These are areas in which the average GI is NOT TRAINED. All the advanced weapons and tactics training in the world, and the smartest tanks and laser-guided rounds, don't tell you what to do when the problem before you is 3 Iraqi trucks in a collision at an intersection now blocking a patrol route and two of the drivers are beating the hell out of the third one for causing the wreck. Military commanders are being given roles to oversee operations of urban society that they are not trained for and never expected to be called upon to oversee. This is part of the changing face of the tasks facing the military, and the tasks facing individual units are as varied as the geographic region in which that unit is operating and local conditions which may in no way resemble the conditions facing a unit 25 miles away in another town. Again, without having read it, I'm sure the book raises questions about how we train future military personnel and for what tasks. There is nothing in the excerpt to indicate whether or not suggestions or solutions are offered, or if it simply explains why this conflict was different than any we have been involved in to date.
To answer the OP directly, yes, the choice is mine, but I probably will not read it. Part of the changing face of the military since WWI is that it is no longer a wholly contained operation. Mess halls are staffed by civilian contractors. I don't know if KP is even a punishment that is an alternative any more. I have frankly thought all along that privatisation of too many essential functions within the military was NOT a good thing, and I strongly suspect that were I to read this book, I would come away convinced my position is still correct. The military should be an autonomous unit. Once they purchase supplies from civilian suppliers past a certain stage, from then on their own personnel should be trained to take care of EVERYTHING else they need. First line battle troops should be expected to do just that, fight. Secondary deployments in war zones are support troops for the first line battle personnel (cooks, quartermasters, mechanics, carpenters to build barracks and the like). Tertiary deployments in urban warfare zones should consist of military units trained to be first police, and secondarily liasons with the locals to work at restoring normal operations of infrastructure and utilities in an occupied zone, including civil engineers and NOT deep-pocket private contractors profiteering from rebuilding war-torn areas.
|
| |
|
| Jul 3 @ 2:35 PM |
On Point II released
|
|
eastham
Posts: 5,989
|
And least of all...
and NOT deep-pocket private contractors profiteering from rebuilding war-torn areas
who are engaged in questionable behavior that does little more than put the real soldiers' lives at risk.
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 3 @ 4:01 PM |
On Point II released |
|
nah12
Posts: 3,584
|
The basic point of the excerpt from the book you posted was
See that is where assuming gets one on the wrong track ... The above excerpt was not from the book..... which tells you decided to read neither link as most do ... As normal one takes their own opinion of ½ facts if any and apply them in the direction that best suits only their agenda ... No one gains from these behaviors NO ONE ...
who are engaged in questionable behavior that does little more than put the real soldiers' lives at risk.
Yes their is questionable behavior from some and a lot goes on every day in more ways than most care to know about or even believe because they are not sensational episodes at the moment ... But what is congress doing to correct it?… Yes congress and the over sight committees know about it ... Why do they let it continue? Why do they allow it in their own house? ... If one accepts the behavior and does nothing they are participating in it …. And no bitching, name calling and whining are not considered doing anything about it ...
Without asking questions or making an effort to change or understanding it are they not part of the problem? … OF COURSE THEY ARE... Even when one knows they are fighting a losing battle they are not part of the problem if they are trying to correct the issues … But most just sit by and watch and do nothing but complaining and whining that it's going to hell in a hand basket because of everyone else, but at the same time refuse to even read the facts or lessons learned to actually gain any knowledge or any insight… Are they any different then the ones sitting thousands of miles away that do nothing but complain about it or congress? NO
Most only want and know how to bitch and complain without wanting to take the steps needed to actually correct any problem... no mater how small the steps they do count even when one can not see it.... But that takes putting forth an effort and means one is accountable for their own actions does it not? OF COUSE IT DOES
Remember ½ facts and ½ truths benefits no one any more then bitching, name calling and whining does nor does it correct anything
[Edited on 7/3/2008 4:08 PM]
|
| |
|
| Jul 3 @ 5:24 PM |
On Point II released
|
|
Paralegal_at_Law
Posts: 5,018
|
What is the point, Nah? That Shrub and his minions completely failed to understand strategy and tactics?
Those fools in the White House should have believed in the 10 day war scenario where the only object is swift and sure victory.
Its not that complicated. Its as important to win the war militarily as it is to surprise the leftists at home and to deliver a lightning "already won that war" fait accompli before Cindy Sheehan and the Hollywood pukes even hear that a conflict was in progress, due to not only a total news blackout on our side, but also due to a sudden massive equipment failure in all regional news broadcaster's firmware.
Kind of like all the phones went dead in D.C. for an hour starting when JFK was assassinated in Dallas, courtesy of FBI, CIA, NSA, or DOD.
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 3 @ 5:34 PM |
On Point II released |
|
Novalite
Posts: 2,712
|
Para Those fools in the White House should have believed in the 10 day war scenario where the only object is swift and sure victory.
Its not that complicated. Its as important to win the war militarily as it is to surprise the leftists at home and to deliver a lightning "already won that war" fait accompli before Cindy Sheehan and the Hollywood pukes even hear that a conflict was in progress, due to not only a total news blackout on our side, but also due to a sudden massive equipment failure in all regional news broadcaster's firmware.
No doubt. They played to the left since they started and then allowed it to get out of hand by granting liberties, allowing pro enemy propaganda machines to operate all to show how they were there to grant freedom when in essence, they were there to destroy an enemy then enforce stability until a free government could develop.
Nightowl in his usual rabid thinking believes that I blame the left when in fact i do not as they only do what they know how to do - snipe and bitch. I blame the morons in charge for pandering fruitlessly to the left in order to soften the blow of this operation. It should have been a massive blitzkrieg utilizing 'shock and awe' to destroy the enemy soldiers and their facilities then a brutal occupation until the dust settled and, every person identified and issued an ID card.
Instead, the idiots promoted this as a humanitarian mission pandering to the left to show that they had boats of supplies waiting to unload, and that they granted freedom to the people from day one so they were free to take advantage of no laws and enforcement to stop them from breaking what few were left. Essentially, I blame them for lack of control in a situation that should have been handled with an iron fist, then lightened up as the situation warranted. Not allow complete pandemonium to exist, then attempt to control it.
|
| |
|
|
|
|