That's right because they never did. This is a good day.

Tikrit has to be taken eventually, but it doesn't strike me as that strategically important. What I am wondering is when Coalition forces will occupy Mosul and Kirkuk. I wonder if that will have to wait till the 4th ID can make it up there due to the ongoing tension between the Kurds and the Turks.

I wonder if General McCaffrey will eat his words publicly? He was insignificant in the the Gulf - the 2ACR and VII Corps did all the fighting. He was peripheral, holding a flank that the 101 and others already secured.

The word Overrated comes to mind when examining his generalship. Far more was shown by COl Holder in command of the 2ACR in that way.

After all the 4th ID went through to get in to the war it would be a shame to end the war before they could get their combat action ribbon.

I'm with tcm. Mosul and Kirkuk should be objectives for the 4th ID. But Tikrit is not irrelevant, even if it's mostly symbolic.

I don't know what OldSpook's problem is with McCaffrey. Hardly any soldiers of his generation matched McCaffrey's bravery, dedication, and intelligence. If McC. wasn't quite in the right place at the right time in Gulf War I, so what? Many of us can say the same.

Before you slam McCafferey and the rest of the need-more-troops crowd, remember that the offensive got stalled for almost a full week after reaching Najaf, out of a need for the 3ID to take a breather, and to allow supply lines to be secured. If the 4ID was around from the start, maybe this wouldn't have been necessary.

Even now, we've only got 20-25,000 trying to take over a city of nearly 5 million. If the Iraqi leadership wasn't so incompetent (e.g. putting 90% of the Republican Guard outside the city where they were easily decimated), and if most of the Iraqi people didn't want anything to do with the fight (something we could never count on in our planning), there's no way we could pull this off with the troops we have there right now.

I think people may be underestimating the strategic value of taking Tikrit. Tactically, it's irrelevant - a tiny blip of 30,000 people on a map. However, it is highly fortified, is the likely location of Saddam's biggest goons, and is likely heavily fortified, making it sort of the "mountain holdout" of the regime. If they can continue to maintain power there, we haven't beaten them.

That said, because they are so small, I'm guessing they're just the first stop on the way to securing Mosul and Kirkuk. It's sort of on the way.

Tikrit is NOT symbolic. It is Saddam's home town, and will likely be where he makes his last stand (I doubt he's in Baghdad if he's alive). Everyone in the town will fight like mad dogs. Iraq's northern forces are withdrawing from Mosul and Kirkut, my money says they will converge in Tikrit. This may be where we see the chemicals, as well.

If we fail to take Tikrit, Saddam will fester and make an attempt to come back into power. Tikrit is the Alamo for Saddam. The war does NOT end when Baghdad falls.

Secondly, I don't bash McCafferey for his military career. He served well, was smart and disciplined. However, I will bash McCafferey for two things - #1 serving under Clinton he sold his soul to be a miserable drug czar, and #2 not shutting the f**k up when he really should have. I have little doubt that McCafferey was singled out, but not by name, when Meyers complained about retired brass giving their concerns and opinions to the press rather than the Pentagon.

Lastly, the strung-out supply lines was well within the contingency of not having the 4ID up North. Keep in mind, as brilliant as this battleplan has been, it was the 2nd choice. Tommy Franks deserves a lot of thanks from us all and a lot of apologies from the armchair generals who somehow think they know better than him.

The offensive did not "stall for nearly a full week" after reaching Najaf due to lack of troops. The troops moved forward every day, and to the extent they went more slowly it was because of the sandstorm. Supply was never enough of a problem to slow the advance, as far as I can tell, and the scattered guerrilla activity behind the main force was never sufficient to require it to slow down.

A question for the "need more troops" crowd: On the one hand, the Rumsfeld sucks contingent generally argues that we needed more troops while simultaneously arguing that we had supply problems. More troops would have exacerbated the supply problem - our ports and travel routes out of Kuwait were jammed to capacity feeding the three divisions we had in-country (counting the Brits in Basra). How exactly was another heavy armored division going to be supplied?

I have seen no evidence that the scattered and ineffectual fighting in the south choked off supply or slowed the schwerpunkt to Baghdad. Even if it did, the 4th ID is a heavy armored division and uniquely unsuited for guarding a long supply route. Securing a supply route against guerrillas is a job for light and medium infantry, not heavy armor.

Give it up. The Rumsfeld/Franks plan has worked brilliantly so far, and the extra division in the south is coming on line at exactly the right time. Sure, it would have been nice to run the 4th down from Turkey off of its own supply line, but waiting for it to show up in Kuwait to start the war was never an option because it couldn't have been supplied through our initial bases in Kuwait.

Bulldoze it.

They'll probably only send a portion of the 4th ID to take on Tikrit, perhaps a brigade. They won't need much more than that to take on one, pre-pulverized RG division. The rest of the 4th could then assist in the siege of Baghdad.

z

Tikrit? I figured their objective was Damascus.

"I will bash McCafferey for two things - #1 serving under Clinton he sold his soul to be a miserable drug czar, and #2 not shutting the f**k up when he really should have."

Irrelevant complaints, Fred or phred or whoever.

(1) McCaffrey chose to serve his country with the only administration in office at the time of his retirement from the Army. Service to one's country is a GOOD thing, or so professional soldiers believe.

(2) In America, we still have freedom of speech. Gen. McCaffrey evidently thought (he was not alone) that the "brilliant" plan was something less than that. (He has since substantially recanted.) Saddam's generals are expected to shut "the f**k up." Poor McCaffrey must have thought he could speak his mind.

Change the signs outside Tikrit to Hama and then bulldoze it.
In the Guardian article describing the 4ID they mentioned that their tanks were Abrams M2A2. Am I correct in thinking that the latest Abrams is the M1A2?

I wonder what McCaffrey would have thought if someone with his credentials had spoken his mind in a similar fashion in 1991. An unfortunate end to a fine career.

Seems to me that the 3rd ID was always gonna have supply issues. Now, the way to "unexacerbate" them was mass surrenders and ease of supply transmission. THat did not happen and that was the generals comment saying, hey we did not wargame against this. So supply lines were the problem, not the adequacy of the force - again, rumsfeld was right on the amount, but did not know his enemy (see sun tzu). that is why we got bogged down - i am not sure how turkey wouldhave helped, although i guess supply there was easier, the line of departure was so much broader.

what really would have helped was the saudis our friends, allowing supply to cross their border.

1- rg was a sitting duck on outskirts of baghdad and was NOT in baghdad because saddam couldn't trust them in baghdad.

2- not enough troops?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?
and therefore we didn't accomplish WHAT?!
in record time
with record low casualties?!?!?!? !?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?
did we lose one fuckling battle!?!?!?!?
jeeeeeeeeeeez!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
enough already. period.........

Tikrit is the heart of Iraqi Baathism, and any there who still adhere to that ideology must be crushed. The whole political purpose of this war is to drive a stake through the heart of Iraqi Baathism, and dismember the body, thereby maximizing the chance for Iraq to have some semblence of legitimate government. This is what the Syrain Baathists are so frightened of; if Baathism is utterly crushed in Iraq, Syrian Baathism's days may be numbered.

The M2A2 Is the upgraded Bradley. The current top of the line M1 Abrahms is the M1A2.

This was a pretty good summary of the 4thID:
http://philcarter.blogspot.com/2003_03_30_philcarter_archive.html#200083390

I think its way to early to start doing a post game analysis on this...I'm still nervous about Saddams thugs trying to make one big last statement. Tikrit would be the perfect place..before Hussein sneaks into Syria.

I'm just hoping its our strategic excellence military prowress that made
this happen so quick as opposed to some kind of trap being set to bloody our nose. Its starting to look more like the former....