Where's the Republican Guard?!

[Vympel]

http://news.sify.com/cgi-bin/sifynews/n ... &page_no=1


"US troops reported on Thursday pushing to within 15 kilometers south of downtown Baghdad a day after claiming the virtual destruction of at least two crack divisions of the Republican Guard.

But commanders spoke of no major tank battles; nor was there any word on significant Iraqi surrenders or losses other than 500 reported dead at a bridge 30 kilometers southwest of Baghdad.

If the US Central Command (Centcom) has rolled out videos of some of their air strikes every day since the war began two weeks ago, they have produced none of any major hits on the Republican Guard.

So what happened to the tens of thousands of Republican Guard, the hardiest and most loyal of Saddam's fighters equipped with Baghdad's most advanced equipment such as T-72 tanks?

US officials say they just don't know."

I am so very surprised. This war coverage is atrocious. Does anyone think that the military is being forced to lionize it's achievements in order to throw scraps at the rabid hounds that are the media?

[Warspite]

Irrelevant.
The news agencies only have a small window into the war, and the need for immediate results generate situations where we see people jumping to wrong conclusions, asking unanswerable questions, or clinging to questions they do not understand.
The propaganda war played by both sides is to be expected. The only variable brought is the live coverage of the front lines, which allows for even greater unfounded claims.
If one waits for comfirmation of reports, and claims, these kind of surprises just don't happen.
(Case in point, the claims today of white powder and vials found. The military are still investiganting, and until then, no opinion should be made. Another cas in point, the Coalition was already less than 100 miles of Bagdad, while the Ministry of Information was still saying they were farther than 100 miles.)

As for for the Republican Guard, either they have been disbanded, as a coherent fighting force (and most will act in small unit militias), or have retreated for Bagdad (or even up North), since there is still a lot of ground out there to disappear.


Your claims of the coverage or war being atrocious is idiotic at the minimum, take a good look at the previous military operations, and their relationship with the media.
The other day, I heard a commentary about the Falkland War, someone joked about some of the news footage being still en route to England.
War is a dynamic situation, and the fact that's being transmitted live creates this sort of situation, where claims made one minute are being refuted the next, due to the fluidity of war, and the fact the military are doing things their way, in their own good time. We are not to be judges of their conduct, we don't have all the plan in our hands. This isn't a operation one can read in a book, it is happening, without a script.

[Montcalm]

I`ve just thought about it i think the RGs are waiting the Americans to enter Bagdad while hiding in peoples home,maybe thats why the expelled the reporters from Al-Jazeera,they do not want them to show other arab countries what they will do with the civilians.

[Vympel]

Irrelevant.

What's irrelevant?

The news agencies only have a small window into the war, and the need for immediate results generate situations where we see people jumping to wrong conclusions, asking unanswerable questions, or clinging to questions they do not understand.

And this makes my 'claims' idiotic, how?

The propaganda war played by both sides is to be expected. The only variable brought is the live coverage of the front lines, which allows for even greater unfounded claims.
If one waits for comfirmation of reports, and claims, these kind of surprises just don't happen.

Well, you're sure doing a great job of calling my claims idiotic.

As for for the Republican Guard, either they have been disbanded, as a coherent fighting force

Don't be absurd. Why would they disband the best 6 divisions in the Iraqi Army in the middle of a war?

(and most will act in small unit militias), or have retreated for Bagdad (or even up North), since there is still a lot of ground out there to disappear.

I doubt that the Republican Guard could slip away into the North. Allied air supremacy would slaughter them- see highway of death.

Your claims of the coverage or war being atrocious is idiotic at the minimum, take a good look at the previous military operations, and their relationship with the media.

Idiotic at the minimum? Previous military operations are irrelevant. They were even fucking worse- that does not make this coverage any less atrocious.

[Warspite]

You're the one that spends most of its time raving about the lying, misinformation, and propaganda of the media, in relation to the current operations, when they are only doing what they usually do, that is, report immediate, fast, news.

But this is a situation where they don't have any control over the flow of information. This is not a traffic accident, where everything has happened, where everything about the situation is knowable, this is a dynamic military situation where we are only allowed to see a small window, we can be armchair generals, we have been doing it for all the previous human wars, but for an ongoing operation, that is impossible, since we aren't reading a history book about it, written by someone in full posession of all the information. The military present the information they see deemable to present, and we can only work from that, with the necessary margin of error that comes with it. You've seen they are usually conservative in relation to all news, since reaching a fast conclusion would lead to loss of credibility if they would be found wrong, something they don't intend to. And I'm specifically adressing Coalition military.



As for the Republican Guard? In the last few days, the bombing has been diverted from the centre of Bagdad into the outskirts, a region possibly populated by RG units.
It's for certain they have suffered heavy equipment losses, and surely command and control is severely disrupted. In view of a mass movement of enemy troops, the local commanders may have exercised their better judgement and disbanded the troops.
Now, what do I mean by this? I simply mean, the troops aren't connected to a specific division, following a strict military chain of command, they are in effect guerilla forces. The lack of coherent attacks, or coherent military movement indicates towards this.
Also, since any movement by military vehicles receives a lot of metal from the air, and they aren't stupid, they may have resorted to other means of transportation, even by foot. You must remember, it is very easy for the military to dissolve into the population, these methods have been employed in the south, as we have been reading in the news, so it would be very easy for them to move about without any telltale of a military movement.

Iraqi military planners have learned their lessons against the Coalition forces through a Darwinian process, and it shows they are more intent on fighting in the urban areas than engaging the Coalition in the open. Does this means they are in Bagdad? Were they destroyed?

Well, using a Brigadier General's words: "We don't know."

[Vympel]

You're the one that spends most of its time raving about the lying, misinformation, and propaganda of the media, in relation to the current operations, when they are only doing what they usually do, that is, report immediate, fast, news.

No, it's fast, immediate, speculation, conjecture, and rumor. The 24 hours news game has made trying to watch coverage of the war an absolute nightmare- there's no breather to check anything.

But this is a situation where they don't have any control over the flow of information. This is not a traffic accident, where everything has happened, where everything about the situation is knowable, this is a dynamic military situation where we are only allowed to see a small window, we can be armchair generals, we have been doing it for all the previous human wars, but for an ongoing operation, that is impossible, since we aren't reading a history book about it, written by someone in full posession of all the information. The military present the information they see deemable to present, and we can only work from that, with the necessary margin of error that comes with it. You've seen they are usually conservative in relation to all news, since reaching a fast conclusion would lead to loss of credibility if they would be found wrong, something they don't intend to. And I'm specifically adressing Coalition military.

Where, in the original post, did I blame the military? Nowhere, though they have been a bit overenthusiastic in some of their reports- and that makes them look bad. Which I don't want to see- the US/UK spewing the same nonsense as the Iraqis (case in point- the Iraqis blew up their own market, no, we don't have evidence, but trust us, we're the good guys)

As for the Republican Guard? In the last few days, the bombing has been diverted from the centre of Bagdad into the outskirts, a region possibly populated by RG units.
It's for certain they have suffered heavy equipment losses, and surely command and control is severely disrupted. In view of a mass movement of enemy troops, the local commanders may have exercised their better judgement and disbanded the troops.
Now, what do I mean by this? I simply mean, the troops aren't connected to a specific division, following a strict military chain of command, they are in effect guerilla forces. The lack of coherent attacks, or coherent military movement indicates towards this.
Also, since any movement by military vehicles receives a lot of metal from the air, and they aren't stupid, they may have resorted to other means of transportation, even by foot. You must remember, it is very easy for the military to dissolve into the population, these methods have been employed in the south, as we have been reading in the news, so it would be very easy for them to move about without any telltale of a military movement.

This is not a bad theory, except that these RG divisions are all either Armor, Motorized, or Mechanized. Their equipment should be littered all around the battlefield. I think they've retreated into Baghdad, most likely.

Iraqi military planners have learned their lessons against the Coalition forces through a Darwinian process, and it shows they are more intent on fighting in the urban areas than engaging the Coalition in the open. Does this means they are in Bagdad? Were they destroyed?

Well, using a Brigadier General's words: "We don't know."

That's the proper answer- the answer they should've given the other day, instead of reporting the total destruction of a division, yet without reports of any major engagements whatsoever. It just doesn't make any sense.

[Warspite]

Sorry, but I must have been seeing different news services, and in most of them all the claims are either supported or refuted latter on, and is always made emphasis when any claims are still unchecked.

As for the military, you missed my point. All news reporters are subjected to military restrictions, so they can only report a small sample of the overall picture, and extrapolate from that. Reaching hard conclusions, when not in full posession of the facts is impossible.

The military have to think about their credibility, more so the Coalition, since they have a permanent oversight of the population back home. If that credibility is lost in some way, they can't do their job anymore, since nobody will thrust them. The same can't be said from the Iraqi military, they are accountable only to their superiors, not to the civilian population, and "exageration of facts" is a daily occurence.
And this is an important point, the market bombing, "we" said we didn't do it, that has been presented by CentCom, and by PM Tony Blair, do you think if they were concerned about their credibility, they would say that so peremptorily (sp?)? If they actually did do it, wouldn't an apology been made already, once again, saving their credibility? It's about credibility!

We never had reports about the RG having a full TO&E, most of the equipment may have already been destroyed in previous occasions (MOD briefing today mentioned 1200 daily fixed wing sorties, not sure, but I think is regarding only to UK aircraft). It's a lot of metal raining down everyday, and with total air dominance, a task possibly acheived in less than a week. Also, take into account we only see limited footage of the battlefield, and it's a big country out there, the smoking AFV's could be spread over the whole desert... Once again, the Iraqi are smart, and they surely know ('91, anybody?) that tanks and APC's tend to attract unwanted attention.

The following is a snippet of Cent Com's briefing, where Brigadier General Vince Brooks says what a destruction of a division is:

From CentCom briefing, 02 04 2003:

Q (Inaudible) -- USA Today. Could you describe to me what you mean when you say the Baghdad division is destroyed? Does that mean they surrendered? Did they run back into the city? Is all their equipment gone?

And then can you give us the status of the other divisions, what kind of damage you think you did to Medina and some of the other Republican Guard divisions?

GEN. BROOKS: When we say a unit is destroyed, another way to characterize it is, it's no longer effective of conducting combat operations as a cohesive force. That means its leadership is broken. That means that some of its equipment has been destroyed or it can't be brought to bear in an organized fashion that will have a favorable outcome on the part of that force. It may mean that we have killed or captured a considerable number of the force to make that possible. In this case, that's what we're seeing.

So, without getting too specific on exactly what the numbers are that remain in there -- and frankly, that's an imprecise process in and of itself -- we can never completely know exactly what the conditions are. And, frankly, neither can the Iraqi forces know exactly what their conditions are.

Other units, same sort of thing. We're in contact with them right now. The situation continues to develop. And it's premature for me to characterize the current condition of the other divisions, other than to say they are in serious trouble, and they're mainly in contact right now with the most powerful force on Earth.

Please?

[Utsanomiko]

Funny thing is, there's a common claim popping up around my university's seethingly anti-war crowd (a small crowd, but regardlessly loud) that the war has too much coverage for us to handle; that Bush and his horribly evil lackeys are trying to smother and confuse us with an overload of useless information, that wee simply will stop knowing what's going on with the war. (Insert roll-eye smaile here when an appropriately large one is one day created)

And this is just from the ingenuity of the average students. The flower childern sitting in tents on the Pentacrest with their "Peace Camp" seem to be claiming that the war has a rascist agenda, among other evil, non-hippie bandwagon ideals.