WP: Adversary's Tactics Leave Troops Surprised, Exhausted

[RamboLiberal]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A3843-2004Jun24?language=printer

The 1st Infantry Division soldiers who walked off the battlefield Thursday, exhausted by the frantic pace of combat and a baking summer sun, had seen nothing like it in their three months here.

In dawn-to-dusk fighting, more than 100 armed insurgents overran neighborhoods and occupied downtown buildings, using techniques that U.S. commanders said resembled those once employed by the Iraqi army. Well-equipped and highly coordinated, the insurgents demonstrated a new level of strength and tactical skill that alarmed the soldiers facing them.

By the end of the day, infantry and armored patrols had driven the insurgents from the battered center of the city, though some remained in control of two police stations in districts long hostile to the U.S.-led occupation. Two U.S. soldiers were killed in the fight, including a company commander struck by a rocket-propelled grenade.

"They were definitely better than what we normally face," said Lt. T.J. Grider, 25, whose platoon fought for more than 12 hours. "But I think what we did today was pretty significant."

[bemildred]

1. "resembled those once employed by the Iraqi army"

Time for the Summer offensive, perhaps.

[whistle]

2. Boy this is not something you'll hear on Hannity and Limbaugh...

...nor from the White House. This almost sounds like the Muslim version of the Tete' Offensive in Vietnam just before the 1968 presidential election that allowed Nixon to take power with his "secret plan" to end the war. Except this may be the secret plan to allow George W Bush to continue occupancy of the White House. Here is something that suggest maybe there is des ja vous all over again:

Introduction; Background; The Beginning of the War: 1959-1965; Escalated United States Involvement: 1965-1969; Ending the War: 1969-1975; The Troops; Response to the War in the United States; Effects and Recovery in Vietnam

V Ending the War: 1969-1975
Print Preview of Section

Promising an end to the war in Vietnam, Richard Nixon won a narrow victory in the election of 1968. Slightly more than 30,000 young Americans had been killed in the war when Nixon took office in January 1969. The new president retained his predecessor’s goal of a non-Communist South Vietnam, however, and this could not be ensured without continuing the war. Nixon’s most pressing problem was how to make peace and war at the same time. His answer was a policy called “Vietnamization.” Under this policy, he would withdraw American troops and the South Vietnamese army would take over the fighting.

A Nixon’s Vietnamization

During his campaign for the presidency, Nixon announced that he had a secret plan to end the war. In July 1969, after he had become president, he issued what came to be known as the Nixon doctrine, which stated that U.S. troops would no longer be directly involved in Asian wars. He ordered the withdrawal of 25,000 troops, to be followed by more, and he lowered draft calls. On the other hand, Nixon also stepped up the Phoenix Program, a secret CIA operation that resulted in the assassination of 20,000 suspected NLF guerrillas, many of whom were innocent civilians. The operation increased funding for the ARVN and intensified the bombing of North Vietnam. Nixon reasoned that to keep the Communists at bay during the U.S. withdrawal, it was also necessary to bomb their sanctuaries in Cambodia and to increase air strikes against Laos.

The DRV leadership, however, remained committed to the expulsion of all U.S. troops from Vietnam and to the overthrow of the Saigon government. As U.S. troop strength diminished, Hanoi’s leaders planned their final offensive. While the ARVN had increased in size and was better armed than it had been in 1965, it could not hold its own without the help of heavy U.S. airpower.

<more>

http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/refpages/RefArticle.aspx?refid=761552642&pn=2

[shrike]

5. I was thinking Tet offensive too

Just got done reading "A Bright Shining Lie" -- Vietnam book by Neil Sheehan.

[JSJ]

3. who's the superior fighting force?

The righteous defender of his nation and it's future? Or the mercenarial troop who's come to the 'fun' so's he can get hisself an education paid for by taxpayers- if one is to believe the oft stated reasons for signing up for the government's wars?

[lumpy]

4. "They were definitely better than what we normally face,"

A real battle is harder than kicking in doors and handcuffing kids, Lt. ?

[yellowcanine]

6. But * said, "No big deal cause we were expecting this." Did he lie?

The * administration line all along has been that there would be an increase in attacks leading up to June 30. So why weren't the troops ready for this?

[leftchick]

7. It is way past time for the US commanders to pull there heads outa....

their asses...

<using techniques that U.S. commanders said resembled those once employed by the Iraqi army.>

Gee, ya think?!? As long as they pursue the resistance as "al-Zarqawi followers" they are clueless. Though they are doomed to failure anyway, someone should send old Krazy Killer Kimmitt this excellent piece of journalism...

'The liberation of Baghdad is not far away'
By Alix de la Grange

http://atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/FF25Ak07.html

<snip>

"As we have foreseen, strategic zones fell quickly under control of the Americans and their allies. For our part, it was time to execute our plan. Opposition movements to the occupation were already organized. Our strategy was not improvised after the regime fell." This plan B, which seems to have totally eluded the Americans, was carefully organized, according to these officers, for months if not years before March 20, 2003, the beginning of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

The objective was "to liberate Iraq and expel the coalition. To recover our sovereignty and install a secular democracy, but not the one imposed by the Americans. Iraq has always been a progressive country, we don't want to go back to the past, we want to move forward. We have very competent people," say the three tacticians. There will be of course no names as well as no precise numbers concerning the clandestine network. "We have sufficient numbers, one thing we don't lack is volunteers."