Buy Boeing Shares now

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by PartTimePongo, Jan 25, 2003.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:


    I've just read through this report, and I am stunned...

    The sheer size of this has never been contemplated before? Where in the name of fcuk, do they get these "Experts" from?Were the V1 attacks of 1944 against the SE of England a collective figment of Britains imagination? That didn't work either, and they were far more terrifying, for their sheer randomness.

    Of course, I can see their point. If you bomb the enemy very very hard, then of course he'll sack it straight away won't he?

    Let's see
    The Blitz - No
    Coventry - No
    Plymouth -No
    Berlin Big week -No
    Hamburg Firestorm - No
    Dresden -No
    Hanoi - Linebacker I and II -No

    Hiroshima  and Nagasaki -  Yes, at massive casualties to civpop - ahhhhhhhhhhhh

    Lol@Colin, you're absolutely right, conventional area bombing of civpop has never worked, except to stiffen the enemies resolve, as you've put them all in the same boat, and created a siege mentality. Of course, if you really want to harden world opinion against you, then this is the plan you will go with, It's amazing, can't they see what happened to US resolve after the 2 towers? Or is this because the mainland US has never been bombed heavily?

    Let me go see that nice man in Ladbrokes to see what he thinks.

    Fcuking Spam twats, let's get the Brit planners in to run this
  2. PTP - you've got it spot on. Remember when Nato was attacking Belgrade - and the Yanks were attacking the Chinese Embassy;)? The Serbian people were getting sick and tired of Milosevic before then - but the Nato attacks created an attitude of "we're all in this together" (remember the targets people wore?) - and accordingly Milosevic was able to hang onto power a bit longer.

    To my mind, exactly the same thing will happen in Iraq - if the civpop is attacked, they will side with the current regime against the Coalition; and as the Allies found in Berlin, trying to take a city from its populace is not a fun thing to do. Every room, every building, every street will be hard fought for ... and casualties on both sides will become unacceptably high.
  3. I am taking an educated guess that the Brit planners sitting with the American planners are saying exactly what we are all saying. There must come a point, surely, when the PM says to Dubya "do THAT and you lose our support"............doesn't there?
  4. What are they (and the RN)  going to hit with all those CALCM's & Toamhawks.

    The Cruise is not the weapon of choice to attack bunkers and other deep targets - the other targets ie barracks, government offices etc are all going to be vacant come the day.  The Iraqi's will look at all the nice craters from last time and work out they need to be somewhere else.  They have probably got a dispersal plan that will significantly reduce the damage to military forces.

    Indeed the Iraqi's will probably try to cram likely targets with as many women and children as possible.  When the US hit that shelter in 91 the Iraqi's were already aware the Allies were going after hardened sites when they allowed the civpop to use the shelter - they got a lot of propaganda mileage out of that.  If it happens this time they will start squealing about genocide.

    Besides the smart weapons used in the Gulf last time were not as accurate as often claimed - I recall figures of 30%+ missing the target (not taking into account duds).  This time the US is going to be using a lot of wind corrected and GPS ordnance - neither of which are as accurate as LGB's.

    Another concern is that the USAF may be developing a predictable attitude towards planning - they use the same solution to the same problems.  Eg in Kosovo there is a suggestion that the F117 shoot down was as a result of using the same ingress/egresss routes for missions.