on the progress of war in Iraq (fwd)

James Rogers
Thu, 27 Mar 2003 11:16:12 -0800

Justin Mason wrote:
> Interesting bits... I have no idea how accurate this coverage is.

Even if their facts are correct, their analysis is suspect.  While =
is an analyst these days, there are implicit assumptions of doctrine in =
particular analysis that I find to be very dubious.  They are also =
assumptions that seem to be from Russian warfighting doctrine, which =
particularly valid.  It is worth noting that the Iraqis are essentially
following Russian warfighting doctrine, just like they were during the =
War, but it hasn't served them very well because the US military spent =
decades learning how to effectively engage Soviet-style force structures =
apparently did a good job of it.  The analysis seems to be from the
perspective of how the Russians would prosecute the war.

And just as a general note, anybody in the media or otherwise who thinks
UK/US forces have been "delayed" or "slowed down" in any strategic sense =
mad and needs to be severely beaten with a cluestick.  This is =
warfare not an action movie or TV mini-series, and it was never intended =
be finished in two hours on the silver screen.  UK/US forces have moved
across Iraq almost too fast and any resistance they've seen is a speed =
well within the allowable margins.  There is a total loss of perspective =
the media, which has the attention span of a chihuahua with ADD.  They =
exciting action all the time even when doing so makes no military sense.
Fortunately saner people with more patience are actually running the
military campaign and making the decisions.


-James Rogers