What if Iraq tried to storm a major US city?

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2003-02-08 11:00pm

"But New Yorkers don't have RPG-7s."

This is probably untrue.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-02-08 11:00pm

jegs2 wrote:The Russians had their fourth points of contact handed to them when they invaded Grozny with four reinforced combat brigades. The widespread use of the RPG-7 (especially as a volly-fire weapon system) has forever changed the face of mechanized warfare in urban terrain. For those who think that urban warfare is a cakewalk, I invite you to study the following lessons-learned, focusing specifically on the Russian campaign in Grozny and the surrounding area:
http://call.army.mil/homepage/mout.htm

Some will say, "But New Yorkers don't have RPG-7s." To which I reply they are very easy to obtain and are relatively inexpensive (again, look at the referenced CALL page).

I doubt there are more then a handful of RPG-7's in the city, probably a few with dummy ammo in collector's hand. However the cities National guard armories are more then big enough to have AT-4's and probably 60 and 81mm mortars, the city can field a damn lot of guardsmen.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-02-08 11:04pm

TrailerParkJawa wrote:
There's a guy in California who has two of them along with a few hundred other military vehicles. But the US government took one of them to use out on its training ranges.
Did they pay him for it ? I would hope so.

I doubt they did, I've never heard if it was seized outright or just taken for temporary use. I can't recall the guy's name, though I know whom to ask. But anyway I don't believe he's ever even reveled who he got the things from. Though no doubt once the USAF got hold of the one they could figure it out.

jegs2 · Post by **jegs2** » 2003-02-08 11:13pm

Sea Skimmer wrote:
jegs2 wrote:I doubt there are more then a handful of RPG-7's in the city, probably a few with dummy ammo in collector's hand. However the cities National guard armories are more then big enough to have AT-4's and probably 60 and 81mm mortars, the city can field a damn lot of guardsmen.

That's a good point, and also consider that the mentality of the city (and likely most large US cities) changed after 9-11. The will to fight (and sacrifice) would likely be much higher now than before that critical event.

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-02-08 11:38pm

jegs2 wrote:The Russians had their fourth points of contact handed to them when they invaded Grozny with four reinforced combat brigades. The widespread use of the RPG-7 (especially as a volly-fire weapon system) has forever changed the face of mechanized warfare in urban terrain. For those who think that urban warfare is a cakewalk, I invite you to study the following lessons-learned, focusing specifically on the Russian campaign in Grozny and the surrounding area:
http://call.army.mil/homepage/mout.htm

Some will say, "But New Yorkers don't have RPG-7s." To which I reply they are very easy to obtain and are relatively inexpensive (again, look at the referenced CALL page).

That debacle was sheer incompetence- they would've copped a lot less casualties if their training hadn't been so shit. They did do much better in the second assault in 99-00 though.

Frank Hipper · Post by **Frank Hipper** » 2003-02-08 11:45pm

TrailerParkJawa wrote:
I would however just LOVE... LOVE to see them try and Invade in Texas
Any state that posts signs on stores "Please no conceled firearms." is a partisian nightmare for invaders.

Kinda like Arizona. Nothing soothes the blood pressure like a bunch of bikers with weapons sticking out at every angle from their bike-mounted holsters.
I counted five pistols on a guy pumping gas next to me one day....

Rubberanvil · Post by **Rubberanvil** » 2003-02-09 12:27am

and a #%#%# Armed Sherman Tank, Armed of course once we remove the barrel block which can be uninstalled in under an hour(We are not required to permantly disarm them here)

Unless someone nearby have good surplus 75mm or 76mm ammo (you didn't mention which model). Even if there isn't any for the main gun, the Sherman it still an useful mobile MG platform.

I would however just LOVE... LOVE to see them try and Invade in Texas

Necro99 · Post by **Necro99** » 2003-02-09 01:45am

and a #%#%# Armed Sherman Tank, Armed of course once we remove the barrel block which can be uninstalled in under an hour(We are not required to permantly disarm them here)

Wont be of much help against a modern (ok, maybe not so) T-72 MBT. It will assrape it.

Lots of causualties, both sides because there will be loads of people fleeing and the National Guard will not be able to move in NYC. Yeah, lots of gang streets and cops. But hey, your talking about a professional soldier here! Sure, nuttin compared to a GI, but more training than a gagnsta! Expect a stalingrad.

If they dont get backup or ammo they will not be able to hold the city very long. It will not be long neither to see US troops storm iraq.

It will be the hell of a fight, but i dont think Iraqi troops will be able to hold NY very long. They could also recrute in the muslim population!

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2003-02-09 01:58am

Necro99 wrote:It will be the hell of a fight, but i dont think Iraqi troops will be able to hold NY very long. They could also recrute in the muslim population!

I have a feeling that the local Muslims will fight the Iraqis rather than aid them.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-02-09 03:35am

phongn wrote:
Necro99 wrote:It will be the hell of a fight, but i dont think Iraqi troops will be able to hold NY very long. They could also recrute in the muslim population!
I have a feeling that the local Muslims will fight the Iraqis rather than aid them.

You might get a few fundamentalist whackjobs fighting with the Iraqis, but most of the Muslims in NY (and everywhere else in America) came to this country to get away from that shit. They'd join the partisan brigades along with the gangbangers and other armed civilians.

jegs2 · Post by **jegs2** » 2003-02-09 03:38am

Vympel wrote:That debacle was sheer incompetence- they would've copped a lot less casualties if their training hadn't been so shit. They did do much better in the second assault in 99-00 though.

They also had a much less restrictive ROE in 00 and were toasting civilians left and right. That of course is creating entrenched hatred and bitterness toward the Russians in that AO, and the war continues to this day, even though the Russians currently "hold" Grozny...

Frank Hipper · Post by **Frank Hipper** » 2003-02-09 03:45am

RedImperator wrote:
phongn wrote:
Necro99 wrote:It will be the hell of a fight, but i dont think Iraqi troops will be able to hold NY very long. They could also recrute in the muslim population!
I have a feeling that the local Muslims will fight the Iraqis rather than aid them.
You might get a few fundamentalist whackjobs fighting with the Iraqis, but most of the Muslims in NY (and everywhere else in America) came to this country to get away from that shit. They'd join the partisan brigades along with the gangbangers and other armed civilians.

Iraq is one of the most secular of predominantly muslim countries. No extremist muslim is too gung-ho for Iraq because of it, it's why any Al-Qaeda-Iraq links seem implausible.
Saddam pays lip service to Islam, at best.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-02-09 03:55am

Frank Hipper wrote:
RedImperator wrote:
phongn wrote: I have a feeling that the local Muslims will fight the Iraqis rather than aid them.
You might get a few fundamentalist whackjobs fighting with the Iraqis, but most of the Muslims in NY (and everywhere else in America) came to this country to get away from that shit. They'd join the partisan brigades along with the gangbangers and other armed civilians.
Iraq is one of the most secular of predominantly muslim countries. No extremist muslim is too gung-ho for Iraq because of it, it's why any Al-Qaeda-Iraq links seem implausible.
Saddam pays lip service to Islam, at best.

Nobody ever said fundamentalists were rational. If the Republican Guard came storming up Broadway, they'd probably think, "Ooh, Muslims with guns killing infidels," and worry about whose bed they were hopping into later. If they lived long enough to worry about it.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-02-09 04:06am

It should be pointed out that most of the Chechen fighters were former Soviet soldiers, hence the discipline inherent in their tactics.

If we're talking about army reserves fighting off Iraqis, that's fine. But if we're talking about disorganized mobs of civilians with rifles trying to take on an army, I would tend to think you'd be looking at something more like what the Somalis accomplished in Mogadishu: losing a thousand of their own in exchange for less than 20 American dead. Even with RPG's.

Rubberanvil · Post by **Rubberanvil** » 2003-02-09 06:07am

If we're talking about army reserves fighting off Iraqis, that's fine. But if we're talking about disorganized mobs of civilians with rifles trying to take on an army,

Armed civilians at best would be providing harassing fire while withdrawing from the area. Leaving the area is what they'll have to do to avoid being targets for the tanks main guns and artillery. Through persistant sniper fire will be an ongoing problem for the Iraqis.

jegs2 · Post by **jegs2** » 2003-02-10 10:40am

Rubberanvil wrote:
If we're talking about army reserves fighting off Iraqis, that's fine. But if we're talking about disorganized mobs of civilians with rifles trying to take on an army,
Armed civilians at best would be providing harassing fire while withdrawing from the area. Leaving the area is what they'll have to do to avoid being targets for the tanks main guns and artillery. Through persistant sniper fire will be an ongoing problem for the Iraqis.

One of the failings of even the most modern Soviet/Russian tanks (which are used by the Iraqis) is the failure of their main guns to traverse high enough to hit upper floors of buildings (from which there would come much in the way of harrassing fires) -- again, see referenced CALL page...

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2003-02-10 11:04am

Well, first off we have the fact of a military installation in almost every city in the form of at least a National Guard armory. If this happened, the guardsmen and women would be required to report to the armory to group and be armed. As this was happening, more reinforcements from nearby military bases would begin pouring in.

Top that with large police forces and an armed citizenry. A thousand man army would not be able to take any American city by force.

Typhonis 1 · Post by **Typhonis 1** » 2003-02-10 01:15pm

IF New York was invadfed Iraq can kiss most foreign aid it gets goodbye after all most of the Nations in the UN would be miffed at an attack on there headquarters.Then theres the fact that this would royally piss the American people off ,there hasnt been a successfull atttac on the American Mainland since the war of 1812 I believe.Then as a last straw Bush may Tell Saddam "pull your boys back or Bagdad becomes a parking lot"

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2003-02-10 02:41pm

Typhonis 1 wrote:IF New York was invadfed Iraq can kiss most foreign aid it gets goodbye after all most of the Nations in the UN would be miffed at an attack on there headquarters.Then theres the fact that this would royally piss the American people off ,there hasnt been a successfull atttac on the American Mainland since the war of 1812 I believe.Then as a last straw Bush may Tell Saddam "pull your boys back or Bagdad becomes a parking lot"

Well, there were those invasions in the Aelutians

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2003-02-10 03:22pm

closet sci-fi fan wrote:
phongn wrote:
Typhonis 1 wrote:IF New York was invadfed Iraq can kiss most foreign aid it gets goodbye after all most of the Nations in the UN would be miffed at an attack on there headquarters.Then theres the fact that this would royally piss the American people off ,there hasnt been a successfull atttac on the American Mainland since the war of 1812 I believe.Then as a last straw Bush may Tell Saddam "pull your boys back or Bagdad becomes a parking lot"
Well, there were those invasions in the Aelutians
Since 'attack' is kind of ambiguous, you could list Sept 11 and several more incidents as well.....

in this context, i believe 'attack' means take and control territory and destroy cities. British troops ransacked Washington and the Roal Navy bombarded Baltimore in the war of 1812. (damn limey bastards lol) thats quite a bit diferent from Sept. 11th.

Now that i think about it, wasn't there a battle in or around New Orleans in 1814? Because i do remember some cheezey country song about it....
"In 1814 we took a little trip...Along with Colonel Jackson down the mighty Missisip'..."

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2003-02-10 03:28pm

Andrew Jackson didn't know the war was over, so he attacked the British stronghold @ New Orleans.

Rubberanvil · Post by **Rubberanvil** » 2003-02-10 04:18pm

As this was happening, more reinforcements from nearby military bases would begin pouring in.

Add a 30 minute to 2 hour delay due to noncombatants leaving most likely on the very same roads the reinforcements are coming in on. Won't be a problem for airborne troops with the verying number of airport(s) and helipads a city may process.