Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Military Expert)   Gulf War land deployment will only last four days   (thisisgloucestershire.co.uk) divider line 234
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

72 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Nov 2002 at 4:02 PM (12 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



234 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2002-11-02 04:05:13 PM  
I'll believe that when I see it.
 
2002-11-02 04:06:48 PM  
will they get to visit the brothels in that short time?
 
2002-11-02 04:08:23 PM  
And in this new futuristic war they won't subdue their enemies with guns and bombs. Rather, they will subdue them with MREs, specifically barbeque chicken.
 
2002-11-02 04:10:51 PM  
"There will be little urban fighting"

What a crock! That likely is where the most fighting will occur, among the civilian population, to stir up sympathy.This general sure paints a pretty picture, now if it wasn't for Murphy ~~~~
 
2002-11-02 04:11:01 PM  
Yeah, when monkeys fly outta my arse.
 
2002-11-02 04:11:02 PM  
'tactical' nuclear weapons would be so cool

but of course the rest of the world would view that as a complete lack of tact
 
2002-11-02 04:11:04 PM  
Hell i figured after how short the last one was, this one would last that long total ^_^
 
2002-11-02 04:11:40 PM  
FifthColumn: Hmm, I thought the buffalo wings were a far more effective weapon.
 
2002-11-02 04:12:18 PM  
what about the 3 year PBJ?
 
2002-11-02 04:13:35 PM  
Makes it sound so easy. Well even if the war goes smoothly cleaning up after and setting up a new government will be a biatch. Stay too long and it turns into 'Nam #2, pull out supper quick and everything crumbles and the Arabs hate us even more. It will be a mess either way. Throw Israel and NBC into the mix and you have a pretty good recipe for WWIII, and this time we're the ones directly starting shiat, not the Germans.
 
2002-11-02 04:13:43 PM  
Iraq= New Palestine. I like the simple beauty of solving both problems and installing a recognized Muslim leader. But, could Arafat pull it off? Probably if we and Saudi Arabia +/- Kuwait help.
 
2002-11-02 04:14:44 PM  
It'll take longer, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't do it anyway. This guy sounds like an armchair warrior, this can't be an official thing. Deployment alone will take much longer than that.

Peter North: Well said.
 
2002-11-02 04:14:45 PM  
[image from img.fark.com too old to be available]
 
2002-11-02 04:18:57 PM  
Boy is this writer seriously misinformed.........Its clear that he dosen't understand the big picture.

Not surprised that there is no byline on this fantasy.
 
2002-11-02 04:21:54 PM  
Kpar90
Deployment alone will take much longer than that


The US can deploy the entire army, to anywhere in the world, in 24 hours or less.
 
2002-11-02 04:24:01 PM  
Since Jerusalem is disputed b/w Israel and Palestinians, it should be elevated to an indepedant nation state such as the Vatican +/- Swiss guards. I believe it was Tom Clancy in "Rainbow Six" who thought out this option. Combine this solution with New Palestine in Iraq, and Peace may be possible after the fighting.
 
2002-11-02 04:25:40 PM  
Squirrel etc
Are you nuts? It would take that long to just round up the military and get it organized.
 
2002-11-02 04:26:16 PM  
SquirrelWithLargeNuts=CivilianWithNoClue
 
2002-11-02 04:28:13 PM  
Well the first time around the ground war lasted 100 hours (4days & 4 hours) if memory serves me, and we did not go all the way into Baghdad. Since this time the intent would be to actually go into Baghdad, and remove Saddam from power, I would have to say that it will probably take more in the line of 6 days to complete the task. Give or take an hour.
 
2002-11-02 04:28:14 PM  
I think the author puts too much confidence into the Iraqis wanting the US to come in and take out their current form of government. Yes, the 100% vote for Saddam was a sham but it shows that the Iraqis don't so much like Saddam as much as they hate the US.
 
2002-11-02 04:31:15 PM  
I've never seen someone speculate that much in an article.
 
2002-11-02 04:32:25 PM  
I think Saddam is more powerfull in Iraq than the west figures. What other heads of state have their own music videos?
 
2002-11-02 04:32:34 PM  
OK
 
2002-11-02 04:33:05 PM  
Squirrel with large nuts

"The US can deploy the entire army, to anywhere in the world, in 24 hrs or less"

They couldn't even get it across town in 24 hrs. You must be using the same thing as the general. There mobile but not that good.
 
2002-11-02 04:33:13 PM  
Deployment time would depend on what starting point you assume. If they are already assembled in Saudi Arabia and on tranport crafts waiting for the bombing to stop then thousands could go in at any moment.
 
2002-11-02 04:35:33 PM  
SquirrelWithLargeNuts, spec ops people on 24/7 standby can be anywhere in 24 hours, along with a number of other professions, but the entire takes a while to gear up.
 
2002-11-02 04:36:22 PM  
the entire army, that's supposed to read.
 
2002-11-02 04:37:57 PM  
It's not as if the military would wait until they wanted to invade to actually get the troops together. They would be assembled and waiting for their cue.
 
2002-11-02 04:39:17 PM  
Maybe SquirrelWithLargeNuts Was thinking of deployment time in "America's Army" or "Risk" or something.

3Horn
 
2002-11-02 04:39:42 PM  
The military build-up in the Middle East to engage in the Gulf War took something like 6 months if I remember correctly. So I'd definately have to say that full deployment to anywhere in the world in 24 hours is not possible. Although they have a lot less to move these days after Clinton used up many of the toys without spending money to refill the toybox.
 
2002-11-02 04:41:28 PM  
3horn:

I think he has been reading too many trashy novels about war. Love the innacuracies in those, even though most of the authors claim to have served in Vietnam.
 
2002-11-02 04:42:25 PM  
LOL@3Horn
 
2002-11-02 04:47:42 PM  
This guy is a joke - even if he is writing in my local paper!

Assumtion, conjecture & wishful thinking backed up by a complete lack of any military or political savvy.
 
2002-11-02 04:50:21 PM  

11-02-02 04:08:23 PM FifthColumn
And in this new futuristic war they won't subdue their enemies with guns and bombs. Rather, they will subdue them with MREs, specifically barbeque chicken.


You know, bbq chicken with rice was about my favorite. You could dump the entire bottle of tobasco in there and it wasn't half bad. Compared to the other crap.
 
2002-11-02 04:53:36 PM  
[image from dvdreview.com too old to be available]

It's not a war... It's a pageant !
 
2002-11-02 04:53:48 PM  
I don't agree with the author. His arguement is partly based on the ratio of military power between the US and Iraq. If we're six times more powerful than Irag, we were 600 times more powerful than the Somalis.

Admittedly, the Iraqs may not be that motivated to support Saddam, but I'm pretty certain they'll resent US invaders and make an effort to pick off troops whenever they can.

Urban warfare is a dirty nasty business, if what I've read is true. Won't be anything like Desert Storm.
 
2002-11-02 04:54:33 PM  
He is probably right about parts of it though. The Iraqi army didn't do much last time, and are unlikely to do much better.
 
2002-11-02 04:57:59 PM  
Somalia was quite different in goals and tactics. They don't make a good comparison.
 
2002-11-02 04:58:24 PM  
America may win a war in Iraq, but will lose all its allies in the middle east.

Saddam is a nutter, but to Arabs, he's THEIR nutter...
 
2002-11-02 05:04:31 PM  
Von Moltke said, "No plan survives contact with the enemy" and there is no way we can do a four day ground war in Iraq. It will take four days atleast just to take Baghdad, urban warfare is messy and slow.
 
2002-11-02 05:06:30 PM  
Just a side note, alot of the equipment we brought over there the first time is still overthere ready to be used very quickly.
The Kuwaitis and Saudis were very happy to store it for us, just in case Saddam got froggy again and decided to invade a second time.
How does the saying go? Invade me once shame on you, invade me twice shame on me. Ok, I just made that up. But they are not to keen on being over run a second time.
 
2002-11-02 05:06:41 PM  
You gonna challenge a spec ops warrior? Urban warfare L-O-L. Each spec ops warrior commands about 40,000 of ordnance at any given moment. They carry a little triagulation equipment and big stash of cash. Once a group decides to "resist", fire from sky will suddenly engulf them without any engagement on the part of our warrior other than tagging impact zones for support air power to lock on. It's really a hopeless proposition to resist.

Therefore Saddam's only hope is to take hostage as many Americans in America as possible in the hopes of getting the military to back off. That's the only risk. Every other kind of resistance is futile.
 
2002-11-02 05:10:49 PM  
Kinghorse,

That scenerio doesn't really hold true in ann urban environment. I really don't think Bush wants to be responsible for flattening huge chunks of Baghdad. Also, keep in mind that the civilians and soldiers will probably be very close together.
 
2002-11-02 05:12:04 PM  
Every other kind of resistance is futile.

We are the Borg. ;)
 
2002-11-02 05:13:37 PM  
"Home by Christmas..." Well, in this case Ground Hog day...

Heard that before
 
2002-11-02 05:14:05 PM  
Kinghorse
fire from sky will suddenly engulf them

Uhm...yeah, and all the hundreds (thousands) of womena and children civilians around them....who will be promptly trotted out for the 6:00 news, further polarizing the Arab and Muslim communities.

Wouldnt be too bright a move...special ops or not
 
2002-11-02 05:17:59 PM  
Kinghorse
"Therefore Saddam's only hope is to take hostage as many Americans in America as possible in the hopes of getting the military to back off. That's the only risk. Every other kind of resistance is futile."

You got to admit, thats a good tactic Bush is using there; drum up false fears of a home attack from a near toothless enemy, then force said enemy into a corner where the few teeth it has may be depolyed against the public Bush is supposedly trying to protect.

Of course, I've forgotten about Bin Laden, not to mention a homegrown US bio-terrorist.
 
2002-11-02 05:18:10 PM  
"Uhm...yeah, and all the hundreds (thousands) of womena and children civilians around them....who will be promptly trotted out for the 6:00 news, further polarizing the Arab and Muslim communities."

You mean like he did the first time we smacked him up. As I remember it had the opposite effect last time. Sorta like when he put beat to a pulp captured pilots on the news reading propaganda denouncing the war.
 
2002-11-02 05:19:13 PM  
That means Bush won't start the invasion for about 23 months. That way the victory will come just a couple weeks before the 2004 election. Hey, he may be an idiot, but he's no dummy. His dad's biggest problem was that he won the Gulf War too soon in his term.
 
2002-11-02 05:20:30 PM  
Since Saddam won't allow his mighty army into Baghdad for fear of coup, who is going to be fighting us there?
 
Displayed 50 of 234 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report