I know the United States will win this thing but this sounds distinctly similar to remarks some US military thinkers made after we lost Vietnam due to *restrictions* on strategy from those in power. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14328-2003Mar23.html British troops and U.S. Marines are facing defiant defenders holding out with Soviet-made tanks and artillery positioned deep in Basra's heavily-populated civilian areas. This tactic of moving heavy weapons into residential areas, long anticipated for the defense of Baghdad, has slowed what was expected to be a quick takeover of Basra, Iraq's second-largest city. British troops of the Royal Fusiliers and Queen's Lancers said they had been ordered not to fire on civilian areas without a clear view of their targets.
I think treeman said it best, Saddam is trying to make this into another Vietnam, is hoping and praying it is another Vietnam, but the U.S.'s technology and intelligence is to good to let it become another Vietnam. In the end the U.S. could just use that "Shock and Awe" until they're all dead, so I don't see another Vietnam.
The main strategic problem in Vietnam (ignoring the political factors involved) was terrain. The lack of reinforced rural roads and the proliferation of jungle and rice paddie (almost swamp) terrain made tanks almost impossible for anything more than base defense and urban warfare (read: smashing buildings). It also help neutralize in part America's air power. Planes couldn't see infantry due to cover, and helicopters couldn't really loiter much due to the proliferation of SAM's and AA batteries. Jungle also limited line of sight, thereby helping even the field on the infantry level. It basically came down to tactics, where the Viet Cong's knowledge of the country and it's ability to blend into civilian populations with little effort gave it a tremendous advantage. The air infantry school of thought (drop troops in country and then back them up with supply drops, thereby allowing for lightning attacks) during this time helped a little, but not enough. It Iraq what do you have? Wide open spaces with the occasional small town or city. This allows for air support (as we've see to great effect so far) and tanks. The Iraq Republican Guard units are using mainly Soviet era T-72 tanks that are about a generation behind ours. Our tanks have almost twice the attack range and thermal capabilities. Iraqi regular army units are using tanks even older than those, from right around the Korean War or so. Basically, this discourse (sorry, I loved my military history classes at UH) lead me to believe that this campaign will be radically different from Vietnam. While the fight will be difficult, the Coalition should emerge the victor relatively quickly. To me, the hardest part will be if Saddam pulls his elite units into Baghdad and turns it into an urban warfare situation. That could lead to large civilian casualties.
