Can Iraq withstand the yanks?

Seven Myths About Iraq's Military Refuted
Media Monitors

by Mark Gery
http://www.mediamonitors.net/gery3.html

:: 1 ::   The Iraqi army is only one-third the size it was during the 1991
Gulf War.  Morale is poor.

Iraq¹s active army currently totals 375,000 soldiers, including 80,000 elite
Republican Guards.

Iraq¹s reserve army, another 650,000 fighting men, has yet to be called to
duty.  When that occurs, Iraq¹s standing army will total 1,025,000, slightly
exceeding that of the Gulf War.

Claims of low morale are speculative. It is far more likely that the Iraqi
army has become reassured and invigorated in recent weeks, having observed
world-wide protests against the Bush administration¹s march to war.

:: 2 ::   Iraq¹s weapons are old and thoroughly outclassed by those of the
U.S.

While most Iraqi armor was built in the 60¹s and 70¹s, this in no way
decreases its lethality.  Why?  As anyone who owns a classic car knows, a
schedule of sparse usage combined with meticulous maintenance can extend the
performance of any well-built machine for decades.

Augmenting Iraq¹s older equipment are some 400-600 advanced artillery pieces
imported during the Iran-Iraq War. With a range of over 20 miles, these
precision systems out- distance almost every artillery piece in the U.S.
Army.

Baghdad also retains a multitude of modern weapons stolen from Kuwait in
1990.  First among them are hundreds of American-made TOW anti-tank missiles
that can penetrate any combat vehicle, including our M1A1 tank.

:: 3 ::   Iraq¹s air defense system, though large, can be overcome with
relative ease, . . .

High-tech items stolen from Kuwait also include several Hawk anti-aircraft
missile systems that can threaten jets at extremely high altitudes.  Dozens
of hand-held Stinger¹s were also confiscated, complimenting Iraq¹s already
vast array of anti- aircraft artillery and surface-to-air missiles.

We never did overcome Iraqi air defenses in the Gulf War, a key factor as to
why 80-85% of Iraqi ground armor survived the war intact.

:: 4 ::   . . . while our Stealth fighters and bombers will remain
invulnerable to enemy ground fire.

Iraq is thought to have acquired a unique radar system from the Ukraine that
can locate enemy aircraft without detection - including stealth aircraft.

The Kolchuga system, as it is known, ³is capable of tracing practically
every target in the air and at sea in the range of several hundred
kilometers,² reports Alexander Kolotov of the Citizens' Center on Nuclear
Non-Proliferation.

Since they probably have four Kolchuga radar stations, Baghdad will be able
to safely track stealth aircraft traveling over Iraq, eastern Turkey, Kuwait
and the Persian Gulf.  Coordinates on these targets will then be relayed to
anti- aircraft weapons dispersed throughout Iraq.

:: 5 ::   Saddam¹s air force is antiquated.  Pilots are poorly trained.

Recent estimates give Iraq up to 316 combat aircraft, but the true figure
may be 503, as reported by Janes Information Group in 1993.

Among the confirmed planes are 74 relatively modern fighters including the
French F-1EQ Mirage and Russian MiG-29.  These jets, though few, must be
taken into serious account during any assault on Iraqi airspace.

Claims that Iraq¹s pilots have grown lax in their training due to the
³no-fly zones² ignore the likelihood that Saddam has sent many of his airmen
to Yemen or other friendly Arab states to maintain flight proficiency.

:: 6 ::   Iraq¹s command and control will be taken out early on.

Among the biggest failures of the Gulf War was the inability of the U.S. to
take out Iraq¹s communication links.  Fiber optic cables, buried deep in the
ground, were the main reason and there is little reason to think we can get
to these land-lines now.

Baghdad also has hundreds of hand-held field radios left over from the war
with Iran.  And, as pointed out by General Schwarzkopf twelve years ago,
command orders can always be delivered by a lone soldier scooting across the
country on a motorcycle.

:: 7 ::   Saddam Hussein and his generals do not understand modern warfare.

It is precisely because they understand modern combat and contemporary
weapons systems that the Iraqis have prepared themselves in the
comprehensive manner spelled-out here.

Since the early 70¹s Iraqi intelligence has been steadfastly gathering
information on American military capabilities, especially in the Persian
Gulf region.

Moreover, up until very recently, Russian military advisers were known to be
on hand in Baghdad, ready to impart their own extensive intelligence on
western weapons systems.

*****

Mr. Mark Gery is an independent Researcher and Analyst on Iraq and the
Middle East. He is active in the anti-war movement in southern California
and is an affiliate Speaker for EPIC - The Education for Peace in Iraq
Center in Washington D.C. He is currently writing a comprehensive text on
the U.S.-Iraq conflict entitled "Desert Nightmare: the Truth About the Gulf
War, the Middle East and Saddam Hussein's Challenge to America."


----- Original Message -----
From: "bon moun" 

This is sheer bean counting.

The morale question is decisive, and it is not speculative.  And antiwar
movement does nothing to change ground tactical outcomes, and every
Iraqi troop knows it.  Their leadership was poor the last time, and
there is no reason to believe that this has changed.  Poor leadership is
at the root of low morale, and the certainty of tactical defeat doesn't
pretty things up.

Iraq's military defeat is a certainty. Fantasizing otherwise is silly.

Classic car analogy aside, you can have a Model T in cherry condition,
and it still will not compete on the road with a Ferrari.  And the range
of an artillery piece only matters when it can be employed against
someone who is respecting a conventional battle line, or who is in a
static position within range of that artillery when it is functional.
Iraqi artillery will be eliminated from the air well before US troops
are within its range.

The same applies to TOW missiles.  Moreover, firing a TOW missile at an
Abrams tank is now an act of heroic suicide.  The TOW is a wire guided
system that requires the gunner to keep his eye in the sight and hold
the reticle on the target until impact.  (TOW= tube-launched, optically
TRACKED, wire guided)  It takes 20 seconds for the missile to arrive
from its maximum effective range, 3750 meters.  The tank round fired
back at it, however, gets to its target within about one and a half
seconds, and that tends to "suppress" the TOW gunner, who then flinches
and has what is called a "launch excursion." (I love military euphemisms.)

The HAWK system can not touch an American bomber, and it is defenseless
against Cruise missiles.  The HAWK is a dinosaur.  Stingers are
effective, in the hands again of a very courageous soul, against nearby,
slow moving aircraft.  The standoff for many US fast movers is 10, 20,
30 miles, depending on the munitions.

The quantity of equipment that survives is not the determinant of
tactical success.  And the fact remains that US fast movers can destroy
any Iraqi air defense within seconds of it activating its target
acquisition systems and "painting" US aircraft.

Stealth fighters and bombers are expensive toys.  Whether they work or
not is pretty much irrelevant.  The other weapons are doing the work.

I will await results of this Kolchuga system with deep skepticism.
Reports of its efficacy are being propagated by conspiracy theorists,
but most technical experts believe it is highly overrated to make it
salable.  If it's there, it hasn't resulted in a single shoot-down yet.

The Mirage and other tactical aircraft are not even in the same class as
US tac-air.  The claim that they are relatively modern is meaningless.

The claims that the US can not disrupt Iraqi communications is equally
absurd.  This whole piece is a bit of bizarre wishful thinking.
"Command orders can always be delivered by a lone soldier scooting
across the country on a motorcycle" indeed.  Command orders and situation 
reports in battle occur every few seconds.  How fast and numerous are these
motorcycles?

The principle factor, aside from all the others, that virtually
guarantees US tactical success is absolute, unchallengeable air
superiority.  In a conventional fight - of which this may be one of the
last in history - (If we can call it a fight), this is decisive.

The current doctrine is one that is ONLY employed against foes who are
helpless to stop US forces.  Like Iraq.  I am not saying the US military
is invincible.  I am on record to the contrary.

But this piece is horse shit.

Mr. Mark Gery has spent too much time trying to project his wishes into
nutty scenarios based on his poring over the latest edition of Jane's.