April 6, 2003
THEY'RE HERE:
US thrust into Baghdad (Jonathan Marcus, 4/06/03, BBC)One colleague, perhaps rather tastelessly, called Saturday morning's US operation in southern Baghdad "the longest drive-by shooting in history".It is not a bad description of what the Americans appear to be calling "Operation Thunder Run".
This was essentially an attention-seeking tactic aimed at both the Iraqis and the international media.
The message, as General Gene Renuart, US Central Command Director of Operations put it, was "to put a bit of an exclamation point that coalition troops were in the vicinity of Baghdad and to demonstrate that, whatever their claims, the Iraqi authorities do not control the situation there".
It certainly grabbed our attention.
What began as a small probe into the southern outskirts of the city suddenly escalated into what some journalists thought was the final push on Baghdad.
Piercing through the fog of war, it quickly became clear that this was no such thing. [...]
The probe or raid was just that. But it did demonstrate the ability of US forces to push into the city.
'Too-slow' Marine Commander Relieved (NewsMax.com, April 6, 2003)
"I'm afraid this could mean more casualties," one enlisted man told the L.A. Times embedded reporter, after hearing that Maj. Gen. James Mattis, commander of the 1st Marine Division had relieved and replaced his regimental commander for reportedly being too slow in his drive on Baghdad.Col. Joe W. Dowdy, who had been commander of the 1st Marine Regiment, was reassigned Friday to another position, being replaced by Col. John Toolan, the 1st Marine Division's operations officer.
Toolan hurried to the front and immediately took charge of a speeded-up drive to Baghdad, quickly ordering more troops and more air power to the front lines. By Saturday morning, the Marine forces were racing north on Highway 6 and had begun to enter the capital.
According to the Times report, enlisted men with the 1st Marines were less than happy with the timing of Dowdy’s ouster. Dowdy, a popular commander was cautious with his troops -- reportedly at the expense of speed.
It seems unwise to opine that we aren't going to try and take Baghdad as quickly as humanly possible. Posted by Orrin Judd at April 6, 2003 12:26 AM
Interesting in that that is the precise description of General McClellan, who carried out a logistical miracle in building the Army of the Potomac, and rebuilding and infusing their morale that would set the foundation for victory and saving the country.
But when it came time to fight.... "He has got the slows, Mr Seward. I tire of trying to bore with an auger to dull to bite" said Mr. Lincoln, correctly.
Sometimes the best commander for peace and training is not the guy to lead in the field.
The neocons are known to contemptuously refer to the military guys as "McClellans"
Posted by: oj at April 6, 2003 11:39 AMAs a newly arrived PFC Marine grunt in Korea, I had great confidence in our platoon leader, who seemed obviously cautious. I took comfort in feeling he wouldn't waste my life needlessly. We often were on point for the Company and under his leadership we hoofed it on the ridgelines north, outrunning our supply lines on wheels and tracks in the valleys . We were supplied by parachuted airdrop in the hills as we pursued a retreating enemy fighting rear guard actions. We sustained few casualties and kept the pressure on. I would have felt terrible had he been transfered at that time. I've seen officers relieved inm action and it's not a pretty sight. To this day I still remember that cautious 2nd Lt., now a retired Colonel, with kind admiration and respect.
Posted by: genecis at April 6, 2003 1:56 PMI was surprised by the audacity of the raid
into Baghdad, but now I think it demonstrates
almost complete contempt for the ability of
the Iraqis to fight.
Could be dangerous, though evidence so far
is mostly on the side of contempt.
Although the brief film clips seem to show that
the raid was conducted on broad boulevards
and not through built-up areas, punching an
armored column into a city is ordinarily
dangerous.
A good description of why is in Tibor Fischer's
novel "Under the Frog" about the 1956
Hungarian revolution.
As for the Marine leadership, I know nothing
about that, but NewsMax is wrong to think
that being cautious and going slow results
in fewer casualties.
Not pursuing a beaten enemy is what builds
up the casualty count, because then you
have to beat him again later.
Now I see a US commander as calling it
audacious, too. Speaking from Saddam's
palace. Whooeee!
Actually this gives me the shivers... the British refused to be rushed into taking Basra, Iraq's second largest city, prefering to operate on their own terms, dictating the pace and to an extent the venue of the majority of combat with the enemy. In due time, Basra fell to them (yesterday and this morning) like a ripe plum and at astonishingly little cost in British lives.
If a USMC commander actually put the lives of his troops before the desires of his political masters and the 'perfumed princes' of the Pentagon (to quote Hackworth) for pulse quickening headlines, then I know who I
think is on the side of the angels. What the hell is the hurry? Saddam is not going anywhere.