Bombing in Baghdad;
Doubts Cast on Diyala Operation
Guerrillas used a car bomb to kill 8 persons in Baghdad and wound 14
The Iraqi government will order $9 billion in weapons from US firms. This sort of thing, if it continues, would make the Iraq War worthwhile to the Military-Industrial Complex. If you want to turn an enemy into a customer, nothing does the trick like conquering the difficult population. . .
Al-Hayat reports in Arabic that Ra`d Jawad al-Tamimi, the governor of Diyala Province, said that Operation Good Omens had yielded the hoped-for results in his province. Al-Hayat says that security officials, however, privately warned against a repeat of the experience of operations in Mosul, to which violence returned an initial withdrawal of "al-Qaeda" elements, who, however, soon reappeared. Gen. Abd al-Karim Khalaf, spokesman for the Interior Ministry, announced the arrest of Abu Uns Baghdadi and four associates, said to be from the Consultative Council of Holy Warriors.
The US still has 21,000 Iraqis in custody, though it released 10,000 during the past year. The Pentagon is incarcerating 30 new persons each day but letting 45 go.
Jane Dutton reports for Aljazeera International: "Almost all of the wealth generated in Iraq comes from two off-shore oil rigs. Guarding these sites is a priority, not just for war-torn Iraq, but for a world in which oil prices have touched record highs."
Tom Engelhardt on "Bush's Fierce Global War of Denial"
Reuters rounds up political violence in Iraq on Sunday:
' * Denotes new or updated items.
* MOSUL - One person was killed and 10 were wounded when an improvised bomb exploded northeast of Mosul, police said.
MOSUL - Two bodies with gunshot wounds were found in eastern Mosul, 390 km (240 miles) north of Baghdad, police said.
KIFL - A man was shot dead on Friday in the town of Kifl, 150 km (100 miles) south of Baghdad, police said.
BAGHDAD - U.S. forces detained a dozen militants during operations targeting al Qaeda around Iraq on Saturday, the U.S. military said.
BAQUBA - Four members of a neighborhood patrol unit were killed and four others were wounded when an improvised bomb exploded east of Baquba, 65 km (40 miles) northeast of Baghdad, police said.
(Compiled by Aws Qusay; editing by Mohammed Abbas and Missy Ryan.
Labels: Iraq
posted by Juan Cole @ 8/03/2008 01:30:00 AM
|
Facebook
10 Comments:
Dear Professor Cole
Wot, no SAM?
Why do you suspect they think they need Tanks and Antitank weapons?
Against the Turks?, Iranians, Saudis, or Kurds?
Of course the cynical might wonder how some of these billions will find their way to the distressed General Motors.
What is good for General Motors is good for the US
"This sort of thing, if it continues, would make the Iraq War worthwhile to the Military-Industrial Complex."
Like many others, I have come to believe that wars are started for real or perceived economic benefits more than any other reason. I believe Iraq is a case in point.
ref : “The Pentagon said Friday it has notified Congress of proposed military sales to ‘IRAQ’ valued at more than nine billion dollars, including helicopters, tanks and armored vehicles.”
This is such a strange bit of news, Professor ~ that (and i suspect i am not alone in saying this) one doesn't quite know where to begin making a comment about it. i mean, first off: WHO is this customer, these peoples, this so-called country called, ‘IRAQ’?
Does the Pentagon mean, "IRAQ, you know ~ the majority al-Maliki / Ali al-Sistani ruling party = Shi'ite BADR Corps Militia, more or less a proxy party / armed force for the Zone d'Occupation Iranienne client." surely not [!]
then, mebbe the other Shi'ites, you know, Muqtada al-Sadr and JAM? you know, our Marines would dig that (not!)
YouTube => If I had a Rocket Launcher...
ummm... then maybe the Pentagon wants to "armor-up" the Sunni Arabs in, you know ~ that 'triangle' thingy we hear about all the time. Say WHAT?!!
well then, are we gonna give the 'Iraqi' Kurds up there 'roundabout Kirkuk M1A1 tanks and Attack Helicopters? Oh, the Turks'll love that, doncha know.
Here comes the helicopter -- second time today
Everybody scatters, and hopes it goes away
How many kids they've murdered ~ only God can say
If I had a rocket launcher, if I had a rocket launcher,
If I had a rocket launcher...I'd make somebody pay
I don't believe in guarded borders, and I don't believe in hate
I don't believe in Generals, or their stinking torture states
And when I talk with the survivors of things too sickening to relate
If I had a rocket launcher, if I had a rocket launcher,
If I had a rocket launcher...I would retaliate
I want to raise every voice -- at least I've got to try
Every time I think about it, water rises to my eyes.
Situation desperate, echoes of the victims cry
If I had a rocket launcher...Some son of a bitch would die!
_
The GoI and MoD have wanted to buy this equipment for some time. Their increased oil exports combined with high oil prices have made these purchases possible.
Why would anyone want to block the MoD (IA and Iraqi Air Force) from buying this equipment? I seriously question of the motives of anyone trying to block Iraqi weapons purchases. I think the MoD should have bought this equipment a lot sooner (and that the GoI and US congress should have financed it.)
The IA wants what it is buying. If anyone thinks the IA should have purchased different equipment, consider writing a McKinsey style analytical piece explaining what other equipment the IA should have purchased and why. MoD and the GoI are planning for the day when US troops will not be in Iraq. The sooner they start buying the equipment they need the better.
At least now no one can accuse the US and US congress of blocking the IA from buying M1A1M tanks.
"would make the Iraq War worthwhile to the Military-Industrial Complex"
oh, it has already made them a ton of $$$$$
what got the Russians out of Afghanistan was stinger missiles.... but no one has sold these to the Iraqi resistance yet.
Given that the Iraqis do insist upon loading up on infantry gear:
From my experience, which was admittedly thirty years ago, the Russians make far-and-away the best anti-armor weaponry in the world, particularly their man-portable equipment. The RPG-29 is a state of the art one-two man tank killer and the continually upgraded standby, the RPG-7 is possibly the most reliable, versatile, lethal and cost-effective infantry anti-armor weapon ever produced. If the Iraqis purchased those or similar Russian variants that would be money well spent. Both of those weapons and ammo are inexpensive in contrast to their capabilities (The cost of one Abrams tank has been variously listed as between 3 and 5 million dollars per unit. I don't have the Bazalt figures on the cost of an RPG-29 but I would be surprised if the launchers were more than a few thousand bucks apiece and the ammo maybe one or two thousand dollars per round. The RPG-7 kit should be even less expensive. Those are purely guesses but I'm confident they're reasonably close to the market prices.). I do not expect the Americans would be very happy to learn that the Iraqis were considering a large purchase of Russian manufactured arms however. So, in reality, the Iraqis are essentially limited to purchasing American made weaponry or possibly European made, but I'm sure the Americans would do what they could to discourage even the latter.
I would seriously question the Iraqi Ministry of Defence decision to purchase anything more than a nominal number of main battle tanks. In my opinion they would be better off training larger numbers of sapper squads armed with rpgs and squad size anti-armor weapons. Those would serve as tank destroyer units and would be infinitely less complicated and expensive to maintain than large numbers of tanks. Substituting human tank-destroyer units for actual battle tanks would leave much money available to upgrade Iraq's critical air defense capabilities as was mentioned by eurofrank.
But, as eurofrank also mentioned this is an Iraqi "arms-purchase" intended to benefit U.S. arms manufacturers rather than optimize the capabilities of the Iraqi army.
"oh, it has already made them a ton of $$$$$"
Who cares? The IA needs equipment to defend Iraq. So do militaries from other countries. What is important is that the IA buy no more than it needs, and pays a competitive market price for what it buys.
Who makes what is immaterial to the IA, MoD or GoI. And that is as it should be.
But then, dancewater probably supports violent attacks against the IA and democratically elected GoI. Are you an imperialist?
Mark, why are you purposely lying through your teeth. What do you have against the Iraqis? Do you think darkies, especially Ay-RAB darkies shouldn't get the best quality equipment that the US military uses?
If the GoI wants to buy it, who are you to stop them?
See http://www.longwarjournal.org/oob/index.php and http://www.longwarjournal.org/multimedia/OOBpage15-Equipment.pdf
The MoD and MoI are buying a ton of eastern block equipment
Notice that the IA will get a total of 56: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mil_Mi-17
That is Eastern Block. I won't even bother to tell you the rest of the Eastern Block stuff the ISF is buying. But then, you are obviously a smart guy. You "KNOW" that the ISF is buying a ton of eastern block equipment. For some reason you want to deny the ISF top of the line equipment of Western manufacture. Why?
I didn't see anything on that list that was unnecessary. I wish some jests were on it though. But then the price tag would have been much higher.
Mark, why do you fear the IA so much? Where is all this really coming from? Do you really think the IA doesn’t need tanks?
What possible downside is there if the IA buys more tanks?
Mark, why are you purposely lying through your teeth. What do you have against the Iraqis? Do you think darkies, especially Ay-RAB darkies shouldn't get the best quality equipment that the US military uses?
Ah, Anand, I don't "fear" what you call "darkies" at all. In fact I have great affection for, as you say Ay-RABS. My wife is of Syrian extraction as a matter of fact. She's quite fair-skinned actually. She rather resembles Penelope Cruz but my wife is cuter.
The days of the Iraq War I and WWII Kursk-style tank battles are over. The Americans are still equipping themselves for those kinds of fights but to imitate the Americans is to imitate and be locked into the American style of warfare. There were virtually zero long range tank-on-tank battles between the American and Iraqi armies during the most recent invasion (after day three of the war anyway). Subsequently, as has been proved many times in the field, the multi-billion dollar American tank corps are not particularly safe nor effective nor are they necessarily game changers when engaged in urban warfare situations. They're rather vulnerable to anti-armor weaponry as you know.
The Iraqis would be better served to develop their special forces and infantry platoon anti-armor capabilities in my opinion. The Americans can afford fleets of Cadillac tanks whether or not those are the superior weapon in future conflicts and regardless of how many they lose in this fight or that fight. The Iraqis though will never be able to buy as many expensive, high-tech tanks as the Americans can. And they shouldn't bother trying because it's the wrong approach. In a manner of speaking expensive armored vehicles and battle tanks can be knocked out by dime store weaponry. If I were in charge of strategy and purchasing for the Iraqi army I would concentrate on procuring boatloads of cheap yet effective anti-armor ordnance. Let potential foes keep buying or building their über-expensive and complex Cadillacs and I'll send them back to the depot holed through from cheap, man portable anti-armor devices.
"Eastern bloc" weaponry is not "Russian" weaponry. I was exposed to various types of Russian weapons many years ago when I was working for uncle sam and I was in almost all instances quite impressed. The Russians build their weapons to work, and to work in the field under battle conditions and in bad weather. On the other hand there are more than a few items of American equipment and armaments that are inferior. Often it's quite expensive junk. I never saw any regular Russian military issue equipment that was junk.
The Russians had/have a tendency to licence the manufacturing of their armaments to other countries, some in the eastern bloc, some outside, but these are almost always what the Russians refer to as the "monkey model" or a stripped down and simplified, usually less effective and less capable piece of equipment than the version provided to Russian forces.
I saw enormous wastes of money in the American army and although much of it was wasted on highly complex weapons much of it was also wasted on basic weapons and equipment that did not work nearly as well as the press releases claimed.
I would recommend that the Iraqi Army take a lesson from the five year stalemate that the militia and guerrillas have achieved in Iraq against the Americans, the so-called "best army in the world." The Iraqis should ask themselves if fleets of American battle tanks have been more effective against the militia or have the non-traditional warfare tactics and adjustments made by American infantry units caused al-Sadr et al the most problems. Then the Iraqi purchasing officers should let their consciences be their guide: Billions of dollars for tanks, or millions of dollars for weapons that will knock out tanks.
.
You could propose your ideas here.
http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2008/08/iraqi_security_force_18.php
http://www.longwarjournal.org/cgi-bin/mt-comments.r797.cgi?entry_id=15278
The 9th armored tank IAD looks to be Russian/Eastern European equipment based. 197 T72 and 72 T55 upgraded tanks.
The IA is also buying a lot of Eastern Block tracked and wheeled armored infantry fighting vehicles.
The IA and INP could use some more Russian equipment. But the Russians negotiated hard ball and demanded high prices. Until recently, the GoI didn’t increase the ISF procurement budget, and the ISF was very price sensitive in their purchases.
I agree that Iraq doesn’t need many M1A1M tanks (only buying 140.) I wouldn’t have bought any at $4 million a pop. But now that the US congress has cut off foreign aid to Iraq, we no longer influence the Iraqi procurement budget. The Iraqis have publicly indicated that they want the M1 tank. If we denied them the tank, it would have fueled anti-Americanism among the IA rank and file, as well as the Iraqi people more generally.
My best educated conjecture is that the IA is upgrading and buying 1074 M60 and 400 M48s between the HA (Greece) and the USMC. The objective seems to be the ability to deter Iran (1800 plus tanks), Turkey, Syria, Jordan, KSA, Egypt, UAE without American help. The tanks are aimed at external security rather than internal security. Iraqis are planning for a world without long term reliance on American, or American bases. This is all to the good.
For internal security, armored wheeled vehicles are far more valuable. The IA is creating many wheeled mechanized lightly armored cavalry brigades in the IA. They are moving from 1 INP wheeled mechanized lightly armored cavalry battalion to probably 3 brigades.
The IA is also buying more vehicles for their motorized infantry divisions. They need more vehicles.
If you have suggestions for specific vehicles the IA should consider (including of Russian manufacture), please offer your ideas at LWJ.
Perhaps you can offer a line by line assessment of each type of equipment the IA is purchasing. What do you think about the non Tank purchases?
I was pleased to see the IA buying 24 more helos (probably for the Iraqi SOF), Hellfires, and six large new cargo planes. The 120 mm and 81 mm mortars were badly needed as well.
The Iraqi militias were defeated by the Iraqi Army. The Iraqi Army should learn from them, but not adapt the weaknesses of the militias they defeated.
Congratulations on marrying a Syrian wife!!!!!!!! I guess you did something right.
The Mosul bombing reminds me that another recent Mosul bomb fatality was Rakan Hassan. Rakan was twelve years old when his family's car was fired on by American troops, killing his parents and leaving Rakan paralyzed. He was brought to the US and had some of his health restored. Perhaps it is easier for people to recognize individual tragedies as opposed to digesting horrific, anonoymous statistics. If so, then perhaps Rakan's story can stand in for that of Iraq as a whole.
Post a Comment
<< Home