ISF Total Force Mobilization Update December 2011

Montrose Toast Blog ^ | 26 December 2011 | DJ Elliott

[DJ Elliott]

This is an update to last year’s article. The major changes are the elimination of the previously planned new IA divisions, the start of mechanizing of 2 IA divisions, the addition of another corps-level Joint Operational Command, further indications of additional planned mechanized/armor upgrades, and indications of planned wartime redeployments.

Forward defense is Iraq’s only real option. Too many key areas are close to the Iranian border. However, Iraq does not have the force to successfully defend Iraq against a conventional invasion. The ISF is trained and equipped for internal security – not external. Iraq is fair game to any and all of its neighbors with the USF-I withdraw. Any neighbor invading could occupy Iraq in less than 2 weeks at this point.

[RC one]

The mujaheddin had none of those things and they still managed to defeat the USSR. There are numerous examples of low tech guerrilla forces overcoming superior forces. Personally, I don’t care what happens in Iraq but I doubt Iran will be invading them. I’m not sure it would be a bad thing for us if they did.

[DJ Elliott]

Wrong.

Stingers from the US. [Air Defense]
Light artillery from US and allies.
ATGWs both captured and provided by west.
And supply depots in Pakistan provided by west and Pakistani Army.

Put together with limited LOCs and very rough terrain in Afghan.
Iraq does not have those terrain/LOC advantages except in the KRG [mountains] and the Hawar Marshes in south Maysan...

There are 3 rules to military analysis:
1. Know yourself. What I am saying is not just my opinion. The public statements of the Iraqi Ministry of Defense, IA Chief of Staff, and IqAF Chief of Staff agree with me. I’m reporting the Iraqi military’s opinion of their own capabilities.
2. Know your enemy. The GoI does not publically state it but, their deployment positions indicate they are planning a defense against Iran and Iran’s ally Syria.
3. Know the ground on which you fight. Iraq is armor country with a serious road network - armor/air terrain - not much cover. Afghan is mostly rough terrain which limits the usefullness of armor and air - plenty of cover - Infantry ground.

[RC one]

here we have a picture of a M1 Abrams MBT destroyed in Iraq by an insurgency that had none of things you mentioned.

here we have another picture of an M1 Abrams MBT destroyed in Iraq by an insurgency that had none of things you mentioned

here we have a picture of yet another M1 Abrams MBT destroyed in Iraq by an insurgency that had none of things you mentioned

BFV versus IED...in Iraq

M1 Abrams destroyed April 2003 outside Baghdad.

Abrams versus IED summer of 2005

all in all, I'd say it looks like you're wrong.

[DJ Elliott]

Ever heard of mine warfare?
That is what IEDs are - hillbilly mines.

Total US Abrams losses for the war = 18.
A reinforced Company’s worth...

Several of your photos are the same tank from differing angles.

MSM likes to do that to give the impression of more action than there really was...

The last time that any Iraqi formation larger than a Battlaion fought against the US was May 2003.
Small scall unit actions [Bn and below] are LIC.
And mine-warfare is the weapon of the weak.
Area denial vice area control weapon...

22 years in USN as an Intel Speciallist.
You are quoting the enemy propagandists - not citing fact.

[DJ Elliott]

PS Your response is classic propaganda.
Those photos have nothing to do with the ISF’s capabilities.
They only point out that any armor can be defeated by mines.

However, unless the Iraqis want to mine the entire country, those mines have limited effect.

The Iranians will just march teenagers over them to clear them like they did in the Iran-Iraq War. Iran does not care about casualties like we do...

[RC one]

Ever heard of mine warfare? That is what IEDs are - hillbilly mines.

That's just a ridiculous argument. A 4.5 million dollar weapon system was repeatedly defeated by an improvised explosive device that probably costs less than a grand each. It's "hillbilly" so none of that matters? some military genius you are.

Total US Abrams losses for the war = 18. A reinforced Company’s worth...

since the March 2003 invasion of Iraq, with tanks in daily combat against the unexpectedly fierce insurgency, the Army says 80 of the 69-ton behemoths have been damaged so badly they had to be shipped back to the United States. That's from an article written in 2005 BTW.

Several of your photos are the same tank from differing angles.

show me which of those images is of the same tank from a different angle.

The last time that any Iraqi formation larger than a Battlaion fought against the US was May 2003.

and yet they still managed to take scores of tanks and BFVs off the battlefield not to mention the uparmor humvees after after 2003.

And mine-warfare is the weapon of the weak.

Weak? Again I ask you, where is our victory in Iraq?

Small scall unit actions [Bn and below] are LIC.

Maybe if fewer people thought that this was a LIC as you do, we wouldn't now be walking away as we are because I'm quite sure it wasn't LIC to the enemy. For that matter, I do not believe that the conflict ever qualified as a LIC just because George Bush thought major combat operations were over.

You are quoting the enemy propagandists - not citing fact.

actually I have cited facts. as Mark twain once said, get your facts first and then twist them anyway you want. that's what you're doing. LIC? 16 tanks destroyed in 9 years? Same picture-different angles? and now you have resorted to the last refuge of the scoundrel, questioning my patriotism. We're done here.

[DJ Elliott]

Read your own quote:
“Damaged” is not destroyed.

A tank without a track is immobilized and Damaged.
A tank with an engine burned out due to sand is immobilized and damaged.
A tank with the transmission worn out is immobilized and damaged.
etc.

Except for the track loss, the above are all depot level repairs that require shipping to the US since we don’t have a depot and never did have a depot in Iraq.

18 were lost = destroyed.

[Even counting damaged, that is 1 tank brigade. In how many years? Including the fighting with the RG. Iran has 1,800 tanks. Syria over 3,000. How is that military insignificant number of losses supposed to stop or even worry Iran?]

As to mine-warfare. Mines have existed since gunpowder was invented. They are nothing special and do not symbolize a capable force. Any kid could place a mine. That does not make him an effective soldier. Nor does mines or any fixed area denial weapon stop an invader.

That crap does not even come close to making the ISF a force capable of winning a fight with any of thier neighbors. It just illustrates your ignorance of what is military significant.

Iraq was mostly a propaganda war. The total losses [US, Iraqi, Iranian, etc.] were less than the per capa murder rate in any major US city. They never exceeded the murder rate in Venesuala or South Africa. That Is why it is called LIC - it was more in line with a high crime area and gang warfare. It was not large scale organized combat - it was Guerilla Warfare which is part of LIC.

Your continued claim that military insignificant losses to the US represent major abilities indicate you either believe the enemy propaganda or are an enemy propagandist. I tend to think the former since you have yet to provide a legit supporting argument. A propagandist would make a better argument.

You have yet to legitimately address the topic. Which is ISF capabilities. After all, we were allies with the ISF against the varies gangs that fought US in Iraq. Instead, you are trying strawman tactics that do not support your claim...

[DJ Elliott]

You do realize that your claim supports my argument about the ISF?

The people that attacked US Forces after May 2003 were/are the same that attack the ISF.

The ISF was on the US side of the insurgency.

Fewer than a dozen incidents of ISF shooting at US in 9 years - all were with personal arms, not IEDs...

[DJ Elliott]

PS The best mines used in Iraq were provided by Iran to their proxies in Iraq. EFP warheads are anti-tank warheads and the ones used in Iraq were made in Iran.

Used against both US and ISF by the Iranian proxies in the fight...

The US was not fighting the ISF. The US and ISF were fighting as allies...