The Command Post
Iraq
March 28, 2003
Reuters on Battle for Baghdad

Vietnam comparisons raise their ugly head in this piece.

Posted By Andrew Ian Castel-Dodge at March 28, 2003 12:12 AM | TrackBack
Comments

Actually, they're right. We haven't been in an urban battle since Hue and at the time it was looked at as a defeat, even though the Marines hammered the Viet Cong badly. Look at the figures Reuters presents: 2,500 Marines against 10,000 Viet Cong, and we took 'em.

It was looked at as a defeat because it was part of the larger Tet Offensive, when the VC hit most of South Vietnam all at once. The media here at the time thought, "well, if they have the power to do that, the war effort must be failing. So let that be our platform - America is losing and cannot win in Vietnam." Walter Cronkite said it himself.

But then, just as now, the media missed the big picture because they know NOTHING about how war works. After Tet the Viet Cong ceased to exist as a fighting force. Our enemy then became the regular NVA. We had actually turned a big corner in the war. Media never did, and still hasn't, owned up to their mistake.

To make a long point short (too late!) if any Vietnam similarities can be drawn here it's that the media are influencing (or trying to) way too much of something they know way too little of.

The headline of the Chicago Tribune - the morning after this war started - quoted Bush as saying "This is going to be a long hard struggle." And yet, today, there's all this drama about how everyone said it was going to be quick and now they're double backing on it.

No, the media said it was going to be quick. No military leader, civillian or otherwise, would ever say "It's gonna be a quick war." That's just public suicide.

Central Command had two OPLANs: Massive three pronged attack or rolling start. They could not get the former because of Turkey so they went with the latter. They were stating that last year. There are risks associated with the strategy, but it is working as advertised. War isn't a sound bite, no matter how much the media tries to shape it as such.

Anyway, that's my two cents.

Posted by: Eric at March 28, 2003 12:50 AM

Screw an urban battle, it will just kill civilians and endanger soldiers, much better to sit out in the desert with clear lines of fire and
a)hit the bad guys with precision munitions whenever you can.
b)encourage an uprising if possible "your fire support and supplies are right here".
c) protect aid convoys.
d) show the populace that we are not an occupying army and we will leave as soon as the country can govern itself.

Posted by: zack mollusc at March 28, 2003 04:11 AM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?