http://www.aeronautics.ru/news/news002/news077.htm March 24, 2003, 0800hrs MSK (GMT +3), Moscow - As of morning (MSK, GMT +3) March 24 the situation in Iraq can be characterized as quiet on all fronts. Attacking coalition forces have settled into positional warfare, they are exhausted, lost the attacking momentum and are in urgent need for fuel, ammunition, repairs and reinforcements. The Iraqis are also busy regrouping their forces, reinforcing the combat units and setting up new defense lines. Exceptionally heavy fighting continued for two days and nights near An-Nasiriya. Both warring sides employed large numbers of tanks and artillery. More than 20,000 troops of the US 3rd Motorized Infantry Division, supported by 200 tanks, 600 other armored vehicles and 150 artillery pieces, were opposed by the Iraqi 3rd Army Corps consisting of up to 40,000 troops, up to 250 tanks, more than 100 artillery, up to 100 mortars and 1000 rocket propelled grenade launchers (RPG) and anti-tank guided missiles (ATGM). The two-day battle ended without any significant results. The Americans have failed in trying to use their momentum in capturing An-Nasiriya and attempted to encircle the town from the west, where they encountered strong layered Iraqi defenses and forced to withdraw. The Iraqi forces used this opportunity to attack the US flanks with two brigades, breaking the US combat orders and causing panic among the US troops. The US command was forced to halt the advance of its forced toward An Najaf and once again redirect several tank battalions to support the attacked units. Nearly 6 hours was needed for the US aviation to stop the Iraqi attack and restore combat order of the US forces. During the past day the coalition aviation flew more than 2,000 close support missions in this area [An-Nasiriya]. "We can only thank God for having air dominance!” said the commander of the US 15th Marines Exp. Corps Col. Thomas Waldhauser in a private conversation with one of the CNN reporters. Later the CNN journalist cited the Colonel in a phone conversation with his editor. The conversation was intercepted. According to the intercepted radio traffic, the US forces have sustained up to 40 killed, up to 10 captured and up to 200 wounded during the fighting near An-Nasiriya. There is confirmed information about one lost attack helicopter and an unconfirmed report about a lost ground attack plane. The US forces have also lost up to 40 armored vehicles, including no less than 10 tanks. Several intercepted reports by the US field commanders stated that their troops are unable to advance due to their soldiers being demoralized by the enemy's fierce resistance and high losses. Four days of continuous advance exhausted the coalition forces, which now have settled into defensive positions nearly on every front to rest and regroup. As of this morning (MSK, GMT +3) the coalition forces are in control of the western part of An-Nasiriya but have no foothold on the left bank of Euphrates. The left bank of the river is controlled by the Iraqi forces, which are conducting engineering works to reinforce their defenses. A part of the Iraqi forces have been deployed to strengthen the defense of An-Najaf, where they expect the next coalition attack. Around 2300hrs (MSK, GMT +3) March 23 a British platoon was ambushed by Iraqi Special Forces unit near Basra. Following a powerful initial artillery barrage the Iraqis engaged the British in close combat and destroyed several armored vehicles. After the Iraqis withdrew the British commander reported up to 8 killed, two missing and more than 30 wounded British soldiers. Thus over the 30% of the unit's troops have been disabled in the attack. Reinforcements and medevac helicopters have been dispatched by the coalition to the scene of the attack. During the past day there has been a sharp increase in combat activity in the coalition's rearguard. Reports have been intercepted showing at least 5 attacks on the coalition military convoys, 8 vehicles destroyed by landmines and 2 ambushes. Iraqi special operation units are mining the roads, setting up ambushes and conduct search and reconnaissance operations. The coalition forces have been ordered to halt the movement of convoys during dark hours and to provide each convoy with combat escort units and air cover. The situation around the borderline town of Umm Qasr (population 1,500) still remains unclear. Radio intercepts and satellite images show that the town was under constant bombardment throughout out the night. The morning photos indicate its complete destruction. This shows that the coalition command, fed up with the Iraqi's stubborn resistance, ordered the complete destruction of the town using aviation and artillery. However, according to reports by the British troops ordered to "clean up" Umm Qasr the town still contains many pockets of resistance. The overall coalition losses at Umm Qasr during the past four days amounted to up to 40 killed and up to 200 wounded. Currently it is impossible to estimate the Iraqi losses at Umm Qasr. As of yesterday's morning the Umm Qasr garrison consisted of 1600 troops. The units of the British marine infantry have failed to establish control over the strategically important Fao peninsula. After yesterday's counterattack by the Iraqis the British forces have been thrown back some 3 to 5 kilometers and were forced into defensive positions. Intercepted radio communications indicate that today the British command will attempt to regain the lost ground after spending the night reinforcing their units on Fao with two additional marine infantry battalions. The overall British losses on the Fao peninsula during the past four days of fighting include up to 15 killed and up to 100 wounded. The Iraqis lost here up to 100 killed and around 100 captured. A heated exchange of fire continues near Basra. The coalition units hesitate to enter the city and limit their actions to constant artillery and aviation bombardment of Basra. So far the coalition forces have failed to completely surround the city and to cut off the defending Iraqi garrison from the main Iraqi forces. The US troops continue landing in northern Iraqi territories controlled by the Kurds. It is expected that as early as tomorrow morning these forces supported by the Kurdish units will make an attempt to capture the town of Kirkuk. Aerial strikes against Iraq continued throughout the night. A total of up to 1,500 combat flights were carried out by the coalition aviation. Additionally, B-52 bombers launched more than 100 cruise missiles from the so-called "Turkish corridor". Some 150 more cruise missiles have been launched by the US and British naval forces. Intercepted radio traffic indicates another lost coalition plane this morning. There was a confirmed loss of a "Predator" unmanned aerial reconnaissance aircraft. Any further advances by the coalition within the next 8-12 hours are unlikely. The coalition command in Qatar has been in meeting since the early morning and is expected to come up with significant changes to the overall operational plan. According to most experts the coalition command made a most serious strategic error by starting the ground phase of the operation nearly at the very start of the war. The Americans have violated their own doctrine where the ground phases of a military operation coincide in time with the destruction of the enemy from the air. The US made serious errors in their estimates of the Iraq's army strength and combat readiness. The US military intelligence and the CIA failed to uncover the true potential of the Iraqi forces and, in essence, misinformed the top military and civilian leadership of the coalition member countries.
Didn't Rumsfeld and co. say that a war with Iraq would be over in a week? Surprise, surprise...they are not rolling over as expected.
No, Rumsfeld and "co" never said such a thing. Surprise, surprise...another biased American who doesn't even take time to read a newspaper ignorantly attacks Rumsfeld and Bush.
Geez how many times have Bush, Rumsfeld, Franks, et. al. told us that this would not be a quick and easy war? But I guess it's easier to just blame Bush and his cabinet for all the wrongs in this world rather than listen to them.
For those who haven't heard we have crossed the river at Nasiriyah and are pushing towards Baghdad. Looks like we aren't too bogged down there afterall...
There is no way the US can lose this war due to the serious advantage in firepower. Once Baghdad falls, and Saddam is captured/dead, the "war" part will be over very quickly. What concerns me more is (1)the "occupation" phase, in which I believe there will be "hit and run" style attacks on US servicemen, (2)the potential for stepped-up "revenge" terrorist attacks here in the US, and (3) the actual financial cost of the war, occupation and rebuilding of Iraq, which will increase the already huge deficit and will divert money that is needed to get the US economy back on track.
No, THIS is the REAL story of the war: http://www.theonion.com/onion3910/gulf_war_2.html Seriously, this report is so inaccurate, I can't decide whether to point out the inaccuracies, or just make a one-liner and point out where it is correct. Inaccuracies, I guess... It is anything but quiet. The 3 ID is currently shelling the crap out of the Medina RG division, and anyone who has ever been around artillery on either end can attest to the outright loudness of it. This is a curious statement, as the US army does not engage in positional warfare. I would find it hard to characterize an advancing mechanized division as "positional". Well, they (3 ID) basically took yesterday off to address the sleep, ammo, food, water, fuel, and maintenance questions. After four days with basically no sleep you need to do that every once in a while. Good idea before the final push to Baghdad, too. To the extent that they can, I'm sure they're trying to do this. But it's sorta hard when your LOCs are decidedly interdicted, and all of your forces are already deployed. Well, the numbers are off quite a bit here, but that is not surprising for a Russian commentator (our divisions are different than theirs). With attached units, the 3 ID has about 30,000 troops, anywhere from 300+ to upwards of 500-600 tanks, depending upon who exactly is with them (I do know that other armored units are accompanying). The Iraqi 3 Corps is not all at An Nasiryah; much of it has already been dis[patched to the south. At any rate, the 3 ID is not at An Nasiryah. That is a Marine operation. The 3 ID is bypassing it to the west. That depends on how you qualify "significant". The bridges over the Euphrates have been captured - the primary objective of the operation - and the Iraqi forces there have been decimated. Well of course they're attacking from the west. That is the only way to attack on that side of the river. At any rate, I would hardly say that the battle has failed. It is almost over. We have already passed An Najaf, and nobody was sent to reinforce anybody in ther rear. We flew more than 2,000 sorties nationwide, not just in this area. In his apparent obsession with the battle at An Nasiryah, the author seems to forget that we are attacking on three fronts. Iraqi units throughout the entire country are being pounded relentlessly, not just in that one town. Wrong, wrong, and wrong. US commanders use the term "air superiority", not "air dominance". That is a Russian term. There is no 15th Marine Expeditionary Corps, and the 15th Marine Expeditionary Unit is to the south near Basra helping the Brits there. Again the obsession with this single battle, but those numbers are about double what we have lost in the entire war. Almost exactly double, except for the MIA. I have yet to hear of a single armored vehicle being lost, especially tanks, as the Iraqis don't really have anything that can kill a M1A1 MBT. Unless a T-72 got in about 3 or 4 lucky shots on one. Demoralized? Is that a mistranslation from the Russian of "extremely f*ing pissed off and eager for blood"? Morale is still very high, as the troops know that this war is going quite well. I can go on with this. On and on, but I'm really not in the mood right now. Just suffice it to say, this report is about the least accurate report I have seen to date. Probably exactly what a Russian would want to hear right now. No, Rumsfeld did not say that. I thought that if the Iraqis decided not to fight, it would be over in a week. I also said that it might last as long as a month. And no one "expected" that they would roll over. Many thought they might, and everyone hoped they would. The truth is that some of them are fighting, and some of them are not. As for being a long war, remember that we have crossed nearly 300 miles of Iraqi territory in 4 days, and Saddam has lost control of over half of the country. It took the allies several months to advance that far in Europe during WWII. This is going very quickly.
Yes master. I saw a link and saw a rebuttal underneath it, thus I assumed it was a rebuttal to text quoted from within the link.
I can only hope to one day write a rebuttal against an onion article. It would be hilarious, and I am not that funny on purpose.
I think the Russians are still bitter about their futility in Afganistan in the 80s and our relative ease in blowing through there...
That scares me because the reason the Russians were unable to take Afghanistan is because they wanted to take it over versus we just bombed the hell out of it. I worry about Iraq turning into an Afghanistan in which we have invaded the country but become prisoners there fearing the rebellion populace. There are very few places to hide in the desert though.
They're also pissed because they stand to lose tons in Iraqi oil contracts and also because they got busted selling gps jammers and night-vision equipment to the Iraqis.....screw em...