Outgoing commander questions tactics in Fallujah

[Stravo]

Outgoing commander questions U.S. strategy on Falluja
From Mike Mount
CNN
Monday, September 13, 2004 Posted: 2:58 PM EDT (1858 GMT)


FALLUJA, Iraq (CNN) -- A former U.S. Marine commander of forces in western Iraq says he was opposed to the method and timing of the U.S. response to attacks on Americans last spring in the Sunni Muslim stronghold of Falluja.

Marine Lt. Gen. James T. Conway said Sunday that he was ordered to attack parts of the city west of Baghdad after insurgents ambushed and killed four U.S. contractors March 31.

After the media showed images of the contractors' dismembered bodies suspended from a bridge over the Euphrates River, the U.S.-led coalition began planning a way to end anti-American insurgent activity in Falluja.

"We felt like we had a method that we wanted to apply to Falluja and thought we ought to let the situation settle before we appeared to be attacking out of revenge," Conway said.

Conway made his comments shortly after relinquishing his command at a ceremony at Marine headquarters outside Falluja.

"Would our system have been better, would we have been able to bring over the people of Falluja with our methods? You'll never know that for sure," Conway said.

The Marines took control of western Iraq in March from the Army's 82nd Airborne Division. The Army had generally left Falluja alone, and Conway and his Marines planned to use reconstruction and civil affairs projects to win support among Iraqis in that volatile part of the country.

A three-day pounding of the city in April by the Marines was ordered to stop by Conway's superior, Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, who was then commander of all U.S. forces in Iraq, paving the way for the creation of the Falluja Brigade, made up of former Iraqi soldiers from the city.

Conway questioned the decision Sunday. "When you order elements of a Marine division to attack a city, you really need to understand what the consequences of that will be and not vacillate in the middle of something like that," he said. "Once you commit, you have to stay committed."

The creation of the Falluja Brigade also fell on Conway through Sanchez's orders. While the brigade had high hopes from Iraqis, it got little accomplished, and reports of soldiers mixing with insurgents eventually led to the end of the brigade.

The Falluja Brigade, labeled by Conway as an experiment, was dissolved last week, and former members were offered a chance to join the Iraqi army.

"You had to have a force that came from Falluja in order for it to be accepted by the people," Conway said. "Because they were from the local area, they were emasculated as far as their ability to do something very aggressive."

The United States gave the Falluja Brigade thousands of uniforms, hundreds of weapons and dozens of radios and trucks. The Marines have asked for them to be returned, and the brigade's former commander has agreed, but there are reports that much of the material is now in the hands of insurgents.

The U.S. Marines remain out of the city, and fighting continues.

Conway said the U.S. military could "crush the city in four days," though he contends that that will not be the way things are done.

Iraqi forces will be the next soldiers to set foot in the city with U.S. support, Conway said, adding that he doesn't know what the immediate future holds.

"I don't know if the Iraqi security forces are capable of making it better," he said. "There is a police force in Falluja, but I think it's very much compromised and is subject to anti-Iraqi forces in the city. But I think in the end there will be a fight in or around Falluja."

Can someone explain to me what the hell is going on in Fallujah? I mean we swept through the country and took it in less than a week. Now we have these pockets of resistance that are allowed to flourish. Seems to me that when you have entire cities in the hands of radicals you haven't liberated jack shit. Why the pussy footing around? Is it possible the administration would like to see as little American casualties as possible before the election? Are we simply fumbling the ball on this? I do not undertsand this phenomenon that I hear is now spreading to other cities.

And is it just me or are the British sectors really really quiet?

[SirNitram]

And is it just me or are the British sectors really really quiet?

By comparison? Yea. There's still spurts of fighting and chaos, but for the most part it's in far better control. I think it's the lessons of Northern Ireland finally getting put to use.

[Darth Wong]

It seems that me that the American military decisions are being influenced by the White House. When there is White House unhappiness about the way things are going, their tactics abruptly change. The result is a lot of what one might call "flip-flopping" , which results in the Americans destroying goodwill among Iraqis whenever they abruptly shift from a conciliatory stance to an aggressive one (because it makes their previous outreach appear insincere) while subsequently losing respect from them when they abruptly shift from an aggressive stance to a conciliatory one again (because it looks like they backed down).

[MKSheppard]

I think this will stop when we resurrect the BIG BELLY modification
for the B-52 and make it policy of simply ARC LIGHTing any CAR
SWARMS.

[Darth Wong]

I think this will stop when we resurrect the BIG BELLY modification
for the B-52 and make it policy of simply ARC LIGHTing any CAR
SWARMS.

However, the people don't comically fly away intact like they do in C&C Generals at the detonation of a MOAB. In any case, that is hardly a serious suggestion; do you agree with my assessment of the situation as an uncertain series of vacillations caused by White House interference?

[SirNitram]

I think this will stop when we resurrect the BIG BELLY modification
for the B-52 and make it policy of simply ARC LIGHTing any CAR
SWARMS.

Once again America shows it simply lacks the sheer bollocks required for a modern land war and the occupation following! For countering insurgency, you need the services of gentlemen.

Specifically, the gentlemen with marksmen training and sniper rifles to target the leaders, and the gentlemen of the Ghurka Regiment.(Insert R. Lee Ermey if Genuine Ghurkas not availiable/in season.)

[MKSheppard]

do you agree with my assessment of the situation as an uncertain series of vacillations caused by White House interference?

I really don't know. The simple fact that Al Sadr survived his brush with
our forces does point to higher up political interference.

Personally, I'd like it to be SOP that if a Car Swarm of people swarming
around destroyed US vehicles is found, it is to recieve a stick of at least
a dozen 1,000 pound bombs from a B-52 that orbits over Iraq for this
purpose.

[MKSheppard]

Specifically, the gentlemen with marksmen training and sniper rifles to target the leaders

What do you think US Marines are?

Seriously, what we have is a lack of will to just kill the enemy
using outrageous overkill. Instead of risking the lives of US
troops to clear out a slum full of Al Sadr militants, drop a stick
of thousand pounders down it, and march in and shoot the
shocked militants while they're still stunned from the concussions.

[SirNitram]

Specifically, the gentlemen with marksmen training and sniper rifles to target the leaders

What do you think US Marines are?

Seriously, what we have is a lack of will to just kill the enemy
using outrageous overkill. Instead of risking the lives of US
troops to clear out a slum full of Al Sadr militants, drop a stick
of thousand pounders down it, and march in and shoot the
shocked militants while they're still stunned from the concussions.

Again, proves my point. America lacks the sheer spne just to wage a ground war; you sniper the top off the leaders and inciters off when they start their shit, and bring down the insurgents. When you do this without inflicting extra casualities and damage, THEN the insurgency will start to get unpopular.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Again, proves my point. America lacks the sheer spne just to wage a ground war; you sniper the top off the leaders and inciters off when they start their shit, and bring down the insurgents. When you do this without inflicting extra casualities and damage, THEN the insurgency will start to get unpopular.

This is ridiculous. You don't think the Marine Corps do this and SFOD-D would love to knock off insurgency leaders? It isn't that easy, numbnuts.

[MKSheppard]

America lacks the sheer spne just to wage a ground war

I seem to recall some major combat where we took their best, chewed them
up, and then shit them out our assholes.

[SirNitram]

Again, proves my point. America lacks the sheer spne just to wage a ground war; you sniper the top off the leaders and inciters off when they start their shit, and bring down the insurgents. When you do this without inflicting extra casualities and damage, THEN the insurgency will start to get unpopular.

This is ridiculous. You don't think the Marine Corps do this and SFOD-D would love to knock off insurgency leaders? It isn't that easy, numbnuts.

At no point did I state it was easy, as much as you'd like to claim it was. I simply stated it has a lot better chance of actually stopping insurgency, as opposed to the other, equally ridiculous strategy claimed.

[aerius]

Sounds like the upper levels of command have no idea what they're doing and are dicking over the ground troops. Maybe they're not listening to the people on scene, who knows, but the end result is things are getting screwed up to the point where the only solution is carpet bombing.

[frigidmagi]

I think the White House is letting domestic politics decide how the occuipation is being run. It makes me bitter to see all the that my unit and I fought for pissed away for a poll point.

[Howedar]

And is it just me or are the British sectors really really quiet?

By comparison? Yea. There's still spurts of fighting and chaos, but for the most part it's in far better control. I think it's the lessons of Northern Ireland finally getting put to use.

It also has to do with the region the British forces are patrolling, the Sunni Triangle or whatever it's called falls in the US region of control. Er, I mean the region where we're being nice and helpful towards the 100% sovereign government.

[Illuminatus Primus]

At no point did I state it was easy, as much as you'd like to claim it was. I simply stated it has a lot better chance of actually stopping insurgency, as opposed to the other, equally ridiculous strategy claimed.

And I say again, you don't think they try to knock off militia leaders - apart from big guys like al Sadr?

[MKSheppard]

And I say again, you don't think they try to knock off militia leaders - apart from big guys like al Sadr?

No, because according to him, only the British know how to do COIN,
despite their massive decades long-fuckup with northern ireland.

From a very old board a long time ago:

You know, there really are a bunch of twerps in Great Britain. They had this problem when they were battling the IRA. They had their stupid policy that prevented them from executing IRA terrorists who had murdered people. So they had to keep 'em in jail, which amounted to an incentive on the part of the IRA to either bust them out or takeover the prison they were in from within.

Guess how the British solved their problem? The SAS just started killing IRA members even where quarter was asked. That seems to me to be both a hypocritical policy, not to mention a stupid one. When you capture a terrorist such as bin Laden you don't want to be forced to kill him right away. You want to work on him for awhile and squeeze every last drop of information from him, all the while holding out the incentive that if he fully cooperates you might not execute him. Then after you have gotten everything you want out of him, then you kill him.

Now some people may say that is pie in the sky where bin Laden is concerned because he wants death. But stranger things have happened. For example, Abimael Guzman, who led Sendero Luminoso on a reign of terror in Peru for 25 years, was broken fairly quickly by the Peruvian police by putting him on a bread and water diet and not letting him sleep. We might be surprised at what bin Laden might do if he was given a choice between cooperating and being executed.

[Stormbringer]

As scary as it is, the wavering sort of policy has been a very big problem. It's no big suprise at all and yes politics are probably the reason for it.

As scary as it is, and as much as I hate to make the comparison, this has uncomfortable echoes of Vietnam.

[Illuminatus Primus]

You feeling the shit-for-brains LBJ-style strategy of having Washington have oversight on soldiers being allowed to take a piss in the sand outside?

Me too.

[SirNitram]

At no point did I state it was easy, as much as you'd like to claim it was. I simply stated it has a lot better chance of actually stopping insurgency, as opposed to the other, equally ridiculous strategy claimed.

And I say again, you don't think they try to knock off militia leaders - apart from big guys like al Sadr?

I think they'd love to knock 'em all off. I think, much like was stated earlier in the thread, that politics is getting involved and hamstringing them. Is that too complex a thread of thought?

[Stormbringer]

You feeling the shit-for-brains LBJ-style strategy of having Washington have oversight on soldiers being allowed to take a piss in the sand outside?

Me too.

Perhaps not that bad, though it is entirely possible that it'll get that bad. However there have been incidents, and more and more, that I can only see as the slimy hand of politics. I definitely feel a bad vibe and am afraid it'll only get worse.

I really worry that whoever's elected this crap won't end.

[Imperial Overlord]

How can it "just end?" This isn't Vietnam where the U.S. can just throw in the towel, say "we've had it", and leave. Saddam was a major league asshole, but he wasn't a friend of Al Queda. If the U.S. leaves now we all know that however it shapes up, the fundementalist terrorist assholes will end up with a slice of the pie and a better position.

[Stormbringer]

How can it "just end?" This isn't Vietnam where the U.S. can just throw in the towel, say "we've had it", and leave. Saddam was a major league asshole, but he wasn't a friend of Al Queda. If the U.S. leaves now we all know that however it shapes up, the fundementalist terrorist assholes will end up with a slice of the pie and a better position.

We can run, I hope we don't. Like it or not we're there.

However what I was talking about ending was treating Iraq, and the conduct there in, as a political football. That can and should be put to an end; it's only making things worse and ruining the chances of achieving anything positive. There's no good reason to subvert military sense for short term political gain, when we tried that we got Vietnam.

Frankly, this war ought to be conducted apoliticallly with us doing the right thing even if it means some one takes a hit in the polls. It's better than an endless cycle of pointless bleeding.

[Imperial Overlord]

This war was a political football before the first shot was fired. It was sold as an attack on Al Queda and WMD and that's not what was found. Politics got the U.S. going in the UK and a few others instead of all of NATO. Politics influenced all the decisions of the Bush admin from force commitments to disbanding the Iraqi army. Bush is running his campaign around his performance as Commander in Chief (his poll numbers in this regard is proof that there is no God or She has a sick sense of humor).

Politics (International relations) may also be the way we are going to get out of this mess.

[frigidmagi]

Wheter it was a politcal football or not then, it should stop being one now. We need to run this with an idea towards victory, not gaining poll points.