We will win but its sad that Americans will have to die. I think we should go back to the times when a leader waged war he rode in the front of the military into battle now thats a leader I can respect.

Boots on the ground invade towns. Gunships, (all gunships are not helicopters) and other weapons systems will do 90% of the "urban fighting". I repeat, the Infantry will not be on point. Any "urban fighting" will bear little resemblance to the movies you may have seen.

Being "for" or "against" the war has nothing to do with your present argument. Your question was to do with "how" they are going to take Bagdad, not if it was right to do so. You said with conviction that it would take years of urban warefare to do it, of which several people posted rebuttals.

That's when I suggested you simply shaddap and wait and see how the US generals do it. What, you think they haven't been planning and strategizing this for many months?? Then you, General mika comes in and says these professional military leaders are all idiots to think they can take Bagdad?


So how long have you been a General?

I was simply expanding my argument. there are as many scenarios as there are assholes of generals

you believe the Great Generals, and I believe what I see. That won't deny me from trying to analyze the situation and think with my own brain. When I call it a day, I'm glad I did some thinking of my own, whether I was wrong or right. You just listen to Franks, he knows it all

I do not suffer "confusion" and I, as much as anyone, and more than most, analyze the actions my government takes. It was with considered, and careful analysis, that I concluded that taking control of Iraq is the best option from a list of bad options.

Zoink, there *IS* a D

Break the terms of the ceasefire made with the USA and that has been broken, the war resumes. Just like the North Korean's just threatened to do with the US (albeit they are arguing pure BS as the reason the ceasefire was broken) Do you NOT know the Korean war is NOT officially OVER??

Get a grip, the war with Iraq NEVER officially ended... a ceasefire is just that. But legally the war has always been 'ON'. Just halted for Iraq to do the things they agreed to do (which they didn't).

IF Iraq had done the things THEN a formal agreement to a end of war would have been drawn up.

Kids! Sheesh, they think this is run by video game rules. Did ANY of you pay the slightest attention in Government classes or haven't you gotten that far in High School yet?

Maybe if they taught government class on the back of Lucky Charms boxes, more of these kids would understand the terms of engagment - ceasefire rulings. And to think some of these clowns are claiming to be college students. *sigh*

Nope. Gunships won't take snipers down. There are hundreds of thousands of buildings in bagdad. Soldiers dressed as civilian. Sniping any marine that enters

If that was the case I'd highly doubt we'd be hearing "Fuck UN!" "We will prevail" "You are either with us or you are against us! (Oops shouldn't have said that! Noone's with us meaning they are all against us meaning I have to fight wars against the entire world now)" :1orglaugh

True, I don't know but I really think they do not teach Government classes any longer, if they do I bet it's dam sure not called Government classes, that might offened someone.:helpme

What ever gave you the idea that a gunship will not take out a sniper? If it comes to "urban warfare" just watch, listen, and learn. I repeat that gunships and other weapon platforms will do 90% of the "urban fighting". End of trying to educate you.

I agree. Let's call it end

Remember that there are tens of thousands of soldiers in Bagdad and even civilians can use an Ak47

They will hide from the Gunships, and snipe when there are no gunships around

I could be wrong so keep your mouth shut as you promised thank you

No my son. My point is that no matter what you *think*, things will be the way things will be. All the second-guessing by armchair generals won't change a fucking thing, unless of course "Franks" has mika the finnish flash on speed-dial. I mean, if he's consulting with you on how best to proceed, please excuse my ignorance.



I'll admit I'm not privy to the extent of all the latest US technology, nor am I an expert on their modern battle tactics. What I DO know is that the US military pumps billions into their training and weapons development so that their troops have the edge in virtually ANY combat situation, whether it be urban, sea, desert or mountainous regions. I also trust that those in command know what the fuck they're doing. My amateur speculations and second-guessings aren't going to affect bugger all, so yeah, I'm pretty much watching to see what happens mika.

Carry on General.

Didn't think your "Physical Education" major included government classes :1orglaugh

I sometimes wonder if they are teaching ANYthing relevant anymore Jimmyf. Some of my college classes a few years ago were at satellite locations in High Schools and it LOOKED like they taught alot but how can you judge my posters and what was written on the boards when you walk into the room? I think they 'teach' it, just not many are listening.

Forgot that it wasn't PC to mention government class as such. :1orglaugh I live with someone that could care less about PC and it rubs off alot of the time. :winkwink:

"promised"? By the way I quit taking orders when I left the military...and I will repeat, watch, listen and learn.

almost all the posts here in GFY is pure fucking speculation

your trying to get me shut up is pathetic

If you don't have your own opinions, don't try to deny me from having those

Thank you my Canadian friend

See Sig.

And by the way, even Bush and co. are now telling people this will be a long, drawn-out, war and the plan from the beginning was to overtake Baghdad WITH ground troops.

What is your definition of urban warfare?

Please accept gravest apologies General mika.


*bows*


Can I get you anything sir? Will you be having wine with dinner?

There are informed and knowledgeable opinions.
There are un-informed and un-knowledgeable opinons.
Then there are the opinions of those that just don't have a clue.

Which category are you in? :)

I'll see your sig and raise you a middle finger :321GFY Understandible, since some morons were thinking that this would be over in a week I see nothing wrong with Bush & co. spreading some caution. Gulf war 1 lasted what, 2 months? We are now on day 4 of this war, it's a little premature to be already second-guessing the military experts in charge of the attack. Combat in a populated built-up area. What's yours?

I'm imagining here......... that the gunners on these gunships might be equipped with infra-red vision tech of some sort. It has been widely reported now that the tank crews have such equipment, and if the airborne gunners have it as well they would be better able to spot hidden snipers and attackers etc and take them out.

A troop of ground forces encountering heavy hidden resistance could call in the gunships to *deal*, which would change the scenario of what most people know of "urban warfare" all around.

CD do you think those infrared can separate soldier from a civilian. Snipers could easily hide in suprising buildings

And theking, in addition to your categories there is the most informed and the most knowledgeable opinion. If we take CD's logic a little bit farther, then any opinion that is worse than that would be useless

I'm quite sure they've been trained to handle it effectively.

Hope so.

By the way, very easy to take out a gunship down with a stinger in an urban fight that we are visualizing here

Not that I'm an expert, just common sense

I'm quite sure they know that too, and have planned for it.

Damn...the boots on the ground will identify where they are taking fire from...the gunships will take the target area out. Will soldiers die...yes...will civilians die yes. Will there be machines of war lost yes. Will it be prolonged, no.

Nope. It is easy to move from one building to the next. Or run to the basement

I thought you were done educating me, my friend

I am now. You belong to the 3rd category.

Damn I think you are right !

Like theking said wait, watch and listen. This will not be a urban that like most people think of as urban warfare. And non military will be killed if the military uses there building, house or whatever. Won't take long for the Iraq's
people to understand they had better get the hell out of said building, house or the area. Do really think we are going to fight like in wwII house to house. Nope, they will call in a Chopper gunship or C130 gunship, and yes they can see very well in the dark, as a matter of fact they prefer the dark. I posted the same like a month or two ago. I've been told common sense and in a lot of cases logic can not be taught to some people.

This is my favorite ignorant post of the day:


http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showth...hreadid=118573

Don't worry about what Kboy says, especially when he's drinking.

The IRS misses him.

Mika,

Yes... civilian or soldier holding a gun, they are a valid target. That's what the army is TRAINED to do using MODERN technology... the army is not a bunch of fucking farmers with shotguns.

Of course we'll call in airstrikes on "said" building. However, when our ground troops are in the middle of a city surrounded by buildings with enemies shooting at them it will be urban warfare as usual. Same goes to you wait and see. The only way I can see this not happening is surrender. All your big guns and airplanes in a city of 5 million aren't going to stop it from being typical urban warfare. We would have to level the city to stop it and that isn't going to happen.

I repeat 90% of the fighting would be fought by gunships and other weapon platforms, so this would make it untypical. We will level the city if it becomes necessary, but it will not become necessary.

To the ignorant (those that do not know shit about the military or war) and America bashers read the initial post again. Read it, learn it, know it.

And for those that are making a big deal about civilian deaths. News Flash...anything that is made and/or controlled by humans is not 100% perfect. News Flash...people die in wars including civilians.

Newsflash: don't disagree with theking because he'll bore you to death with rhetoric

facts: USA doesn't have proofs! this war started on presumptions... who's next?

The UN is not a person....the UN is represented by member from
many different countries. MOST of these countries are against
the use of force at this moment in time......to be precise only 4
countries supported the use of force US and UK included.

So it´s not some person or a few people who are against. It´s
almost the whole world. And that shouldn´t just have been ignored.

DynaMite :2 cents: