Victory without Baghdad?

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-04-06 12:14am

http://www.spiked-online.com/Articles/00000006DD31.htm

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-04-06 12:24am

Baghdad is too big of a symbol, and has too much of the Iraqi population within in it not to be captured. Saddam and his top officials and commanders are the ultimate prize, but the capital is right below them and far easier to obtain. There can be a victory without Saddam, but not without that city.

But right now the city isn't even fully surrounded, and with Iraqi troops leaving its possibul the ring might be left open to make the later fight easier. How it is taken, and how long it takes are pretty dependent on just what's inside and able to fight.

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-04-06 12:26am

Sea Skimmer wrote:Baghdad is too big of a symbol, and has too much of the Iraqi population within in it not to be captured. Saddam and his top officials and commanders are the ultimate prize, but the capital is right below them and far easier to obtain. There can be a victory without Saddam, but not without that city.

But right now the city isn't even fully surrounded, and with Iraqi troops leaving its possibul the ring might be left open to make the later fight easier. How it is taken, and how long it takes are pretty dependent on just what's inside and able to fight.

Some of the pictures coming out of there remind me of Somalia- guys crammed into a car with AKs sticking out the windows ... smart

But then- Saddam did reportedly order lots of copies of Black Hawk Down for his forces- I'm sure they'll have a very positive mindset after watching that .....

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2003-04-06 12:27am

Well if you make Saddam and his party irellivant and set up a ligitimate government that has the support of most of the Iraqi people, then Saddam no longer matters. Saddam will preside over only the roof over his own head.

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-04-06 12:33am

Stuart Mackey wrote:Well if you make Saddam and his party irellivant and set up a ligitimate government that has the support of most of the Iraqi people, then Saddam no longer matters. Saddam will preside over only the roof over his own head.

Yes, but with Saddam presiding over the richest, most populous city in the entire country ...

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2003-04-06 12:38am

Vympel wrote:
Stuart Mackey wrote:Well if you make Saddam and his party irellivant and set up a ligitimate government that has the support of most of the Iraqi people, then Saddam no longer matters. Saddam will preside over only the roof over his own head.
Yes, but with Saddam presiding over the richest, most populous city in the entire country ...

Which means what? The US have proved that they can enter Baghdad at will, the Iraqi army has not been able to evict the coalition from Iraq, and have been more or less defeated. Saddam cannot even stop people from leaving the city. Its like Berlin/East Germany before the Wall went up, and Saddam is now dictator in name only.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-04-06 12:38am

Vympel wrote: But then- Saddam did reportedly order lots of copies of Black Hawk Down for his forces- I'm sure they'll have a very positive mindset after watching that .....

"While your platoon may be wiped out to the man, remember that statistically you have a nearly 50% chance of taking a single American with you!"

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-04-06 12:42am

Vympel wrote:
Stuart Mackey wrote:Well if you make Saddam and his party irellivant and set up a ligitimate government that has the support of most of the Iraqi people, then Saddam no longer matters. Saddam will preside over only the roof over his own head.
Yes, but with Saddam presiding over the richest, most populous city in the entire country ...

Which is why the city must be taken. Raids are not enough, but on the other hand a full clearing operation may not be necessary. How many and how well the remaining defenders fight will determine what's going to happen.

Right now I doubt there's a very clear picture of that.

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-04-06 12:42am

Stuart Mackey wrote:
Which means what? The US have proved that they can enter Baghdad at will, the Iraqi army has not been able to evict the coalition from Iraq, and have been more or less defeated. Saddam cannot even stop people from leaving the city. Its like Berlin/East Germany before the Wall went up, and Saddam is now dictator in name only.

It means that he controls the jewel in the crown of the country- and as for people leaving the city, there's absolutely no way that anything approaching the majority of the population is going anywhere. It's not defeat if the enemy can't root you out of your final fortress, it's stalemate. As for 'entering Baghdad at will' as the US puts it, this is a completely different matter from controlling something- this entails more losses, and the very real possibility than in your enthusiasm to take and hold ground you will cop a king hit.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2003-04-06 12:50am

Vympel wrote:
Stuart Mackey wrote:
Which means what? The US have proved that they can enter Baghdad at will, the Iraqi army has not been able to evict the coalition from Iraq, and have been more or less defeated. Saddam cannot even stop people from leaving the city. Its like Berlin/East Germany before the Wall went up, and Saddam is now dictator in name only.
It means that he controls the jewel in the crown of the country- and as for people leaving the city, there's absolutely no way that anything approaching the majority of the population is going anywhere. It's not defeat if the enemy can't root you out of your final fortress, it's stalemate. As for 'entering Baghdad at will' as the US puts it, this is a completely different matter from controlling something- this entails more losses, and the very real possibility than in your enthusiasm to take and hold ground you will cop a king hit.

Sure he may control the crown jewel, but it means nothing with out a nation to go with it. And even then his crown jewel is a pourus thing at best as he has no means of defending it. This is not to say it shouldnt be taken, but it does mean that he is now just a overweight crim with quite a few henchmen.

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-04-06 01:02am

Stuart Mackey wrote:
Sure he may control the crown jewel, but it means nothing with out a nation to go with it. And even then his crown jewel is a pourus thing at best as he has no means of defending it. This is not to say it shouldnt be taken, but it does mean that he is now just a overweight crim with quite a few henchmen.

I agree.