LOSING THE BATTLEFIELD

by

Larry C. Johnson

The ambush of a seven man Marine sniper team in Western Iraq sends some disturbing signals that our leaders and field commanders are not taking the war in Iraq seriously.  The loss of life of these brave Marine reservists is a terrible blow for their families, who deserve our sympathy and prayers.  But as details of their deaths emerge there are some hard questions that need to be answered.

A friend of mine who has spoken to members of the unit indicates that the Marines were talking via radio to their base and trying to arrange an exfiltration.  While they were talking the sound of gunfire erupted over the radio, then the radio went silent.  One possibility is that the insurgents snuck up on the team.  In any event, they were wiped out.

The following link provides <a href="http://www.ogrish.com/archives/ansar_al_sunnah_army_claimed_responsibility_for_killing_six_marines_video_attached_Aug_03_2005.html">graphic and horrific photographic </a>evidence of the aftermath.  WARNING.  The video contains graphic and disturbing images and is not for the faint of heart.

It is important to view the videos to gain an idea of how awry our current strategy on the ground is.  Despite happy talk that we are winning the war, we lost this skirmish and the images portray a happy, confident group of insurgents who are operating virtually unmolested.

One particularly disturbing image shows an insurgent inspecting the body of a partially stripped dead Marine. The insurgent bends down and cuts away the dog tag from the soldier's neck. The insurgent appears to conduct himself in a professional manner to the extent that he does not desecrate the Marine's body. What is so shocking is that this Marine has been left abandoned, albeit temporarily, on the battlefield while an insurgent leisurely and methodically strips him of uniform and weapons.

A second video shows two insurgets with a collection of captured U.S. Marine weapons. Again, with an air of non-chalance, the insurgents provide an impressive equipment display. The fact that they have time to lay weapons out on the ground and pose with them is a reminder that they are operating in territory where they feel comfortable and protected.

A third image from the videos shows two insurgents firing a mortar at an unknown target. The mortar, I'm told, appears to be and 82mm mortar. The individuals operating the weapon appear unconcerned about being discovered or being attacked by a counter battery of some sort. While it is not clear whether or not the mortar was being fired during this operation, it is certain that the insurgents intend to deliver the message that they can do what they want, where they want, when they want.

Taken as a whole the implications of this action are disturbing. The US Marine reservists were not backed up by a Quick Reaction Force that could respond quickly and decisively to the attack. The reservists appear to have inadequate artillery and air support to cover their operations. Unfortunately, reservists have been treated as the red headed step child as far as the regular military is concerned. Add to this that reservists normally do not operate at the same level of efficiency as regular military units. This is, as we see from the latest action, a lethal combination.

The more fundamental, long term problem, is that our force levels on the ground in Iraq are not sufficient to ensure control and command of the battlefield. The task of seizing control is not easy and will require difficult fighting. But this much is certain, without sufficient troop strength, artillery, and air support assets we will lose the insurgency because we will not be able to control the territory.

If we are going to send our young men and women into combat then it is incumbent on the civilian leaders and military commanders to ensure they are prepared and properly supported. The men in this Marine sniper team were not well served by either the political or military leaders. But they cannot complain, they will return home with honor in flag draped caskets to be mourned by family and friends.

One particularly disturbing image shows an insurgent inspecting the body of a partially stripped dead Marine. The insurgent bends down and cuts away the dog tag from the soldier's neck. The insurgent appears to conduct himself in a professional manner to the extent that he does not desecrate the Marine's body. What is so shocking is that this Marine has been left abandoned, albeit temporarily, on the battlefield while an insurgent leisurely and methodically strips him of uniform and weapons.

A second video shows two insurgets with a collection of captured U.S. Marine weapons. Again, with an air of non-chalance, the insurgents provide an impressive equipment display. The fact that they have time to lay weapons out on the ground and pose with them is a reminder that they are operating in territory where they feel comfortable and protected.

A third image from the videos shows two insurgents firing a mortar at an unknown target. The mortar, I'm told, appears to be and 82mm mortar. The individuals operating the weapon appear unconcerned about being discovered or being attacked by a counter battery of some sort. While it is not clear whether or not the mortar was being fired during this operation, it is certain that the insurgents intend to deliver the message that they can do what they want, where they want, when they want.

Taken as a whole the implications of this action are disturbing. The US Marine reservists were not backed up by a Quick Reaction Force that could respond quickly and decisively to the attack. The reservists appear to have inadequate artillery and air support to cover their operations. Unfortunately, reservists have been treated as the red headed step child as far as the regular military is concerned. Add to this that reservists normally do not operate at the same level of efficiency as regular military units. This is, as we see from the latest action, a lethal combination.

The more fundamental, long term problem, is that our force levels on the ground in Iraq are not sufficient to ensure control and command of the battlefield. The task of seizing control is not easy and will require difficult fighting. But this much is certain, without sufficient troop strength, artillery, and air support assets we will lose the insurgency because we will not be able to control the territory.

If we are going to send our young men and women into combat then it is incumbent on the civilian leaders and military commanders to ensure they are prepared and properly supported. The men in this Marine sniper team were not well served by either the political or military leaders. But they cannot complain, they will return home with honor in flag draped caskets to be mourned by family and friends.

Comments

[ismoot]

Larry,

Not sure this would have come out any different if these had been regulars. Other than that, am in agreement. Pat

[Geoff]

Absolutely shocking, I've never been so worried about my friend and family in the theater.

That said; I just got a letter from Jim DeMint asserting that the war is going fine and things are calming down. If only my senator would focus on reality not talking points and propaganda. I have lost all faith in our government.

Can't we invent a time machine?

[J]

Colonel, Larry,

We have lost command and control of the terrain.
1. insurgents 'easily' plant their explosives without detection, that denotes inadequate surveillance on our part. [e.g., drone aircraft]
2. the locals do NOT report incidents to either U.S. or Iraqi police.
3. we're rattling around the border areas like we did near Cambodia, which was a proven failure.
4. our tactics are 'playing into' the hands of the enemy, we're being drawn (or command staff is allowing unwittingly) into the 'enemy defined' kill zones' as opposed to our defined kill zones.

in a desert environment as opposed to a jungle one, it's almost impossible to use lrr's.

side note: during wwii we employed the turks to sneak up on german forces in the dead of night on a flat open desert environments, garrote, and leave with no trace. when the germans awoke in the morning they would find their forces had been neutralized in their sleep. it was an effective use of the turks's stealth abilities.

[J]

Colonel,

items to note in the aipac indictments:

three foreign officials referred to in the indictment as foreign officials 1, 2, and 3 (fo-1, fo-2, fo-3)
rosen passed 'code word protected intelligence' of terrorist activities in central asia in april 99 to an israeli agent.
weismann told that same israeli agent that a 'secret fbi, classified fbi report' had been prepared on the khobar tower bombing.
dec. 2000 6 days before the supreme court decided the presidency to bush, rosen and weismann met with a 'u.s. govt. official' (usgo-1) unknown if bush or clinton admin. official. following that meeting rosen gave classified info to a member of the media concerning 'classified strategy options against a middle east country, and internal u.s. govt. deliberations on those options'.
jan 2002, rosen met with another u.s. govt. official (usgo-2) and received classified info that was sent to other aipac employees in a memo. for the next several months, rosen continued to discuss classified info with usgo-2 and an unnamed dod official, the latter referring rosen to franklin. rosen established a liaison relationship with franklin. rosen told franklin at a feb 2003 meeting that he would try and secure a job at the nsc for franklin so that he would be 'by the elbow of the president'.
mar 2003 rosen discussed a classified internal policy doc concerning iran with a 'senior fellow of a d.c. think tank'. the think tank appears to have been the american enterprise institute (aei).
jun 2003 franklin told weissman that he had a friend - contact in the cia from whom he could obtain a copy of the classified iran policy doc.
oct 2003 franklin had a meeting with fo-3 they discussed the fact that work had ceased on the classified iran policy doc.
july 2004 franklin started cooperating with the fbi and passed classified cia info to weismann as part of the fbi investigation. some of the info concerned a 'foreign government's covert actions in iraq'.
aug 2004 rosen told israeli agents that he and weissman were under fbi investigation over the leaks from dod.

(the indictment states that the intel operation against the u.s. was a 'conspiracy' involving u.s. govt. officials, aipac officials, and foreign agents. indictment also states that iran's nuke program was a primary focus of the espionage conspiracy activities)

the aipac investigation goes hand in hand with the white house cia leak and the niger forged docs. it appears that they are all intertwined.

[J]

Colonel,

here is a url that has the aipac indictment.

http://www.fas.org/irp/ops/ci/franklin0805.pdf

[Mr.Murder]

J, the AIPAC also reaches DSM related campaign.

All the same neocn/OSP cabal.

[Mr.Murder]

Franklin within Office of Near East with State? Elizabeth Cheney.

The VP's daughter's newly created department. Took them very little time to get the bal rolling.