Military Escort Does a Runner

I suppose that one of the problems is identifying the battleground in Iraq. Is the whole country a battleground? Places that seem to be reasonably 'pacified' or at least not imminently threatening are suddenly erupting. This ambush was ad hoc, but effective. We are supposed to be there to help rebuild the country, so civilian workers will have to get involved at some levels because even a military as powerful as the US's cannot do everything.

I understand what you are saying about standard counter-ambush tactics, but surely they would apply mainly in a completely military context and an attack on a target that includes civilians would operate under different protocols. Just leaving unarmed civs stranded for 40 mins seems a bit more than re-grouping somewhere up the line. I was discussing this with a friend of mine with currently 22 years service (due out soon) in the British Army, who has been involved in lots of ambush situations in N. Ireland, Bosnia, Kosovo, Iraq etc., and he says that when protecting civilians, their protection is the most important factor. Standard procedures are well and good but every situation is different and the response should be tailored accordingly, although that is not easy under extreme duress, but imperative in this situation is the safety and protection of civs. A lot would depend on the quality of the officers and NCOs on the ground.

edit: Where's BG? As an ex-officer he will probably have first-hand insights into this kind of scenario and how it is dealt with.

The fact that he was not captured or killed is evidence that he was not stranded for 40 mins.

What, pray tell, is the point of running in and pulling this man to safety when in fact you have no where safe to take him? Can any armchair generals answer me this?

You save the civies by killing the badguys, and you kill the badguys by establishing a perimeter, drawing them out of their little hiding spots and shooting them. I might also point out that that humvees primary weapon was an M-60, which you don't want to use with friendlies in close proximity to the line of fire. If that contractor thought some AK rounds hurt, wait till he gets downrange of some 60 rounds.

You people still don't get it. It was an ambush. The only mistake here was the navigation and manpower level. Those soldiers are heroes, and shame on everyone who spouts otherwise.

I would say that any Iraqi settlement has the potential to be a battleground. Some more than others, but nevertheless....

Using civilian contracters in a hostile country is merely a way of avoiding difficult political decisions like "do we call people up, give them basic training and a weapon and a uniform and then have them drive a truck/operate a crane/design buildings as part of the armed forces?" "Oh no, that'll look bad and we'll lose votes so best we contract the work out to less accountable organisations who will hire the same Joes out to us at an inflated price while not caring hugely about their welfare because any cock-ups and casualties will get blamed on the military anyway, but at least we won't lose votes by drafting people."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Major Robert Dump

The fact that he was not captured or killed is evidence that he was not stranded for 40 mins.

---

It clearly states that he had to wait 40 mins for help. He seems to have been one lucky guy, unlike his friends.
Nice rant BTW.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slyspy

IUsing civilian contracters in a hostile country is merely a way of avoiding difficult political decisions like "do we call people up, give them basic training and a weapon and a uniform and then have them drive a truck/operate a crane/design buildings as part of the armed forces?" "Oh no, that'll look bad and we'll lose votes so best we contract the work out to less accountable organisations who will hire the same Joes out to us at an inflated price while not caring hugely about their welfare because any cock-ups and casualties will get blamed on the military anyway, but at least we won't lose votes by drafting people."

---

Yes, contracting out some of these tasks is an easier political decision. Numerous complaints (some in service, others out) have been made that we do not have the number of boots needed to truly pacify Iraq. You and I are on the same page on that.

For some of the tasks you name, however, it also makes sense. You don't need military skill to run a crane. Some of the best people in water-treatment and irrigation might not pass a basic military physical. Outsourcing some of this does make sense.

I take exception to your comment on the nature of the organizations who employ such contractors. Blackwell (a local firm here in VA) and Haliburton have excellent records at working toward providing safety for their employees in difficult situations. There may be contractors as callous as you describe, but you are painting with too broad a brush here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Red Peasant

It clearly states that he had to wait 40 mins for help. He seems to have been one lucky guy, unlike his friends.
Nice rant BTW.

---

No, it states he had to wait 40 mins for someone to pull him out of the truck and take his crybaby self to safety. There were soldiers all around him engaging the enemy, and there were choppers flying spook-em patrol overhead. This is no way means he was abandoned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Major Robert Dump

No, it states he had to wait 40 mins for someone to pull him out of the truck and take his crybaby self to safety. There were soldiers all around him engaging the enemy, and there were choppers flying spook-em patrol overhead. This is no way means he was abandoned.

---

Some will not be satisfied that they are being protected until they see the soldier standing in front of them to take the bullet on their behalf -- Secret Service Protection Detail style. Even then, some of those would probably complain that the soldier in question let the bullet get too close.:no:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slyspy

Using civilian contracters in a hostile country is merely a way of avoiding difficult political decisions like "do we call people up, give them basic training and a weapon and a uniform and then have them drive a truck/operate a crane/design buildings as part of the armed forces?" "Oh no, that'll look bad and we'll lose votes so best we contract the work out to less accountable organisations who will hire the same Joes out to us at an inflated price while not caring hugely about their welfare because any cock-ups and casualties will get blamed on the military anyway, but at least we won't lose votes by drafting people."

---

More like it's merely a way to let volunteers do the jobs they're willing to do for pay as opposed to pressing people into service to do jobs against their will. I know which I prefer.

Ah, so this chap's a cry-baby now, and there were soldiers all around him. Where does it state that? Funny, but the only soldiers I can see are those running away, and the only aerial cover is an unarmed and un-manned observation craft. We must be watching different accounts, or the substances you take have been kicking-in, me old mate. ~;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Red Peasant

Ah, so this chap's a cry-baby now, and there were soldiers all around him. Where does it state that? Funny, but the only soldiers I can see are those running away, and the only aerial cover is an unarmed and un-manned observation craft. We must be watching different accounts, or the substances you take have been kicking-in, me old mate. ~;)

---

Ummm, maybe you should read the info in post 46 again...

Here you go again. Two apaches were there within 20 minutes. They did not run away!

Quote:

---

U.S. military officials stress that in the video, Wheeler is describing the experience from his perspective alone, and that it provides an incomplete picture of all that took place.

A military investigation into the attack on the KBR convoy found that the military escorts responded appropriately to the insurgent attack.

"Once the shooting started, the soldiers in the lead Humvees followed established military procedures to move out of the kill zone," concludes the investigation.

According to the report: Once clear of the kill zone, the two Humvees in the lead circled back to set up a "perimeter" and "lay down suppressing fire" against the insurgents. They also arranged for the evacuation of three U.S. soldiers and one KBR employee who had been wounded but managed to drive out of the kill zone. The soldiers also placed an immediate call for a U.S. military Quick Reaction Force and air cover.

The report states that the firefight lasted at least 35 minutes. During that time the soldiers took small-arms fire, rocket-propelled grenades and grenades.

Two U.S. helicopter gunships arrived within 20 minutes after the initial enemy contact. It's not clear whether the helicopters actually fired, but the military investigation indicates their mere presence reduced the amount of enemy fire. The Quick Reaction Force arrived 35 minutes after the first contact.

U.S. military officials say their investigation disputes the claim that the military escorts had abandoned the KBR employees. "They (soldiers) never left." According to the officials, the video does not reveal the Humvees that established perimeters beyond the front and rear of the convoy.

The military officials say the suppressive fire laid down by the soldiers kept the two wounded KBR employees alive.

"If they had been abandoned, they would not have survived," says one official.

The investigation did reveal an error in the convoy route map, and the U.S. military says it was corrected within a week.

---

We should plan more “convoy route errors” but with extra troops in the convoy rather than civilian contractors. Kind of a reverse ambush if you will (I’m sure that has a name). They seem to be a good way of flushing out the enemy, and isn’t that the hardest part. If we can find them we can kill um, and all.

Big ambushes against covoys like this are not common, usually it's just IEDs and popshots. If you put too many troops on covoy duty there's less left to patrol and do raids which are more effective for preventing attacks on convoys then oversized escorts.

And it wouldn't be a reverse ambush, it just wouldn't get hit while a weaker conoy then would. If you tried to make all covoys backed up with escorts up the wazzu then like I said there'll be less troops doing the jobs that actually work. At least with patrols and raids the initiative is partially on coalition's side while with covoy your just an easy target or a hard target. It's not a good way of "flushing out the enemy" have patrols and raids clear areas is.

I think what he's saying is to fake a small convoy. Make it look like some contractors driving a few trucks with a small escort, but do something like hide lots of troops in the trucks waiting for the bait to be taken, and have air support on immediate call. After a couple of these, it might make the insurgents think twice about hitting a small convoy. Seems like a good idea, not sure how you would prevent IEDs from taking out a lot of the troops when the ambush is sprung. Maybe armor up the inside of the trucks.

Like in the olde times when small navy ships where outfitted to appear to be merchant ships...

Still think it'd be a waste of resources. I'm sure the surprised insurgents would just drop their weapons and blend away as they always do when surprised by a strong force.

Also wasn't it fake merchants ships picking on other lone merchant ships? I don't this would have worked well against true convoy raiders such as subs and heavy cruisers.

And the IED taking out a cargo space of soldiers is a good point against it.

The initiative would still lie with the insurgents.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Major Robert Dump

No, it states he had to wait 40 mins for someone to pull him out of the truck and take his crybaby self to safety.

---

I would like to see you get stuck in the middle of a firefight and see how well you respond. He was hired to drive trucks so that the soldiers are free to shoot people. He was not hired to assist them in fighting angry bands of partizans.

I still think we should have barricaded everyone in Fallujah the first time around and firebombed the city from the outside moving in, so that every single human being would be burnt alive. That would let the Iraqis know that they are part of the Imperium Amerikana.

(No, I am really serious about that. If we want to be an empire, we should stop pissing around and do it like we mean it.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spmetla

Still think it'd be a waste of resources. I'm sure the surprised insurgents would just drop their weapons and blend away as they always do when surprised by a strong force.

Also wasn't it fake merchants ships picking on other lone merchant ships? I don't this would have worked well against true convoy raiders such as subs and heavy cruisers.

And the IED taking out a cargo space of soldiers is a good point against it.

The initiative would still lie with the insurgents.

---

You might know better than me, but more often than not it seems like insurgents get pasted by American forces when they try to spring an ambush anyhow. When you have the quick reaction forces and air power, all the insurgents can hope to do is cause some damage with an initial IED and some early potshots. I can't see things going well for them if they stick around to try and consummate the attack.

I wonder how many, if any insurgents were killed/captured during this attack?

When the US gets good intel so it can carry out raids they are usually very effective at conducting those raids and the intel from that raid might lead to more successful raids. Problem is the intel though, the locals in the neighborhoods with the IEDs know who plants the IEDs or fires the potshots at the covoys and even more so who does the ambushes. Problem is of course that they are either too opposed to the coalition or too fearful for the lives at the hands of the insurgents (understandably so) that good intel is hard to come by. This of course leads to a large distrust of locals in neighborhoods were they(the coalition forces) get hit in and that animosity is then reciprocated again by the locals when the Americans are disrespectful and uncaring for the "unapprecitive" locals.

Informants are okay but the information is never accurate enough and the giving of intel too infrequent. Then of course many insurgents used to Saddams's regime give the US the information that they think we want to hear which proves to be worthless but perhaps just feasible enough to keep them in our purse. Furthurmore some informants try to use the coalition forces to knock out rival insurgent groups or militias which the US does very well when given the nessasery information. This of course creates larger militias which informants then give bad information about and the coalition can't do much about.

Generally insurgents don't try regular firefights because like you noted the coalition forces have lots of resources on hand and tend to wallop them once those resources come to bear. I'd rather this suppression though and the enemy just acting out through IEDs though because in a nation where every house seems to have 2 AKs and every neighborhood an RPG and morter team (illegally of course) this nation of millions could cause huge casualities upon the Americans if they really wanted to and could accept even greater losses on their part.


As for your question of how many were killed, I don't know. The Army probably doesn't know either. The fact that the enemy dispersed upon arrival of the gunships shows the nature of the fight. For all we know they were shooting at the convoy from the roof of their house or their neighbors house and they just chucked the the weapons in a hidey hole knowing that now they're untouchable to the americans because they are now civilians. Obviously an inherant problem in this war. If the Iraqis themselves ever see foriegn insurgents and private militias as the threat they are to stability and prosperity the war will end very quickly. As most of you know already, the war will need to be won by Iraqis, there's little the US can do but try provide security even in it's current haphazard form.

In short summary, the suppression is effective to an extent. Raids and patrols do their job well though no perfectly and convoys are mostly safe from ambushes, they are rare occurances when they occur in the scale in this video. Biggest threat is still IEDs and shifting more troops to escorts will probably increase IED usage rather then decrease it.