Posted on 04/28/2006 9:17:28 PM PDT by neverdem
Among the Iraqi documents released to the public, at least five deal with the construction of improvised explosive devices (IEDs). One such document (CMPC-2003-005914) is a ten-page worksheet.* The first two pages are entitled, "Annual Plan for the Mechanical Workshop, Sheen-27 -- 1999"; the last eight are entitled "First Season Report of the Sheen-27 Work Plan for 1999." The report of the CIA's Iraq Survey Group explains that "Sheen-27" was a section of the Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) responsible for producing explosives. It had a Chemistry Department, which "developed the explosive materials for the device," an Electronics Department, "which prepared the timers and wiring of the IED," and a Mechanical Department, which "produced the igniters and designed the IED."
The Annual Plans of "Sheen 27" for Producing and Improving IEDs In the period of this report (the "First Season" of 1999**), Sheen-27 produced twenty bombs, "varied in their type and their detonation devices," and it developed "innovative ways of arming them," among other tasks. These bombs went to Saddam's Fedayeen and to two other sections of Iraqi intelligence: M-40, the directorate dealing with the Iraqi opposition, including in Iraqi Kurdistan, and M-5, whose responsibility was counter-intelligence. It also trained representatives of those organizations on how to use these bombs (Sheen-27 had a training unit.)
Another Sheen-27 document (CMPC-2003-005935) from November 1999 details plans to improve bomb-making skills in 2000. A study is to be done on the epoxy used in making the IEDs to find an alternative that does not affect them and research is to be conducted on materials that increase the power of an explosion. This document also deals with training and calls for "preparing theoretical and practical lessons on popular [shaabi, literally, 'of the people'] bombs." Presumably, these IEDs were designed to be relatively easy to use...
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
ping
In the event of invasion, he planned to go to ground and direct an insurgency -- and had prepared the ground to do exactly that. Evidently, we were totally unprepared for this tactic.
Air America Deflates - The “progressive” radio network isn’t long for this world.
From time to time, I’ll ping on noteworthy articles about politics, foreign and military affairs. FReepmail me if you want on or off my list.
All I can think of is the "Martin Sheen - F.A.G." clip from Team America
Cheers!
After what we have learned about CIA opposition to this war, is it any wonder our intel on the Saddam Fedayeen and the Mukhabarat was weak?
See Camp Saddam.
The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) did not have a focused human intelligence (HUMINT) collection strategy targeting Iraq's links to terrorism until 2002. The CIA had no [redacted] sources on the ground in Iraq reporting specifically on terrorism.
FYI
How do you prepare for an insurgency?
Do you kill everyone that looks suspicious?
Do you incarcerate everyone that looks suspicious? When do you release them? How can you prove that that person will not revert to an insurgent?
A stable gov't with popular support can undermine an insurgency. Therefore, the best course was to move forward, setup the gov't, kill insurgents as they arise and hope the people come together.
It looks like our plan is working. Given the fact that we only lost 2500 men over 3 years is a testiment to success, not failure.
Origins of the Iraqi Insurgency
Release/Translation of Classified PreWar Docs ping. If you want to be added or removed to the ping list, please Freepmail me.
Please add the keyword prewardocs to any articles pertaining to this subject.
Operation Iraqi Freedom Documents
Thanks for the ping.
Excellent data. Thanks for posting this.
THAT is the central failure of the administration PR strategy in Iraq.
War, all war, is a series of catastrophes which, if managed well, can lead towards victory.
The catastrophic history of WWII, if you didn't know who won eventually, would curl your hair.
Our people were not prepared properly, nor were they properly led, for the Iraq war.
Similarly, another senior Iraqi politician told a small group of Americans last fall that Zarqawi was "nothing." Zarqawi's operation is essentially run by the Syrian mukhabarrat, this Iraqi figure explained. Jihadis are recruited through the mosques to Syria, where they are trained by individuals from Afghanistan. They then cross into Iraq, all the time under the watchful eyes of Syrian authorities, without realizing that they are, in fact, part of a major Syrian intelligence operation.
This is the core of the problem. We are fighting in Iraq the intelligence organizations of Syria and Iran. The "insurgents" are just extensions and tools of these governments.
How would you have prepared and led our people?
I would have asked Congress for a declaration of war on September 16, 2001. Subsequent to that, I would have imposed full press censorship, started a Federal propaganda agency, detained all nationals of the Islamic nations and screened them for deportation.
I would have issued a call for volunteers for the purpose of expanding the army to 50-60 divisions, and asked Congress for a draft if there were not enough volunteers by December 1, 2001.
I would have expanded the USMC to ten divisions.
I would have told the people from the beginning that our goal was the conquest, occupation, and reconstruction of the Arabian peninsula and Pakistan, that it would take five years of military expansion and heavy combat but that when it was over, we would be much safer.
I would have prosecuted sedition to the full extent of the law.
I would have nationalized GM and Ford for the duration, to assure adequate supplies of military vehicles.
I would have rationed gasoline, since supplies would become very constrained.
I would have used the War Power of the People of the United States to drill for oil in Alaska, and off the California and Florida coasts.
When the 2002 elections gave me a majority of over 300 House seats and 60 Senators, I would have repealed laws blocking the construction of nuclear power stations, and I wuld have built 300-400 of them by now.
By 2006, my only problem would have been how to fund the new GI Bill for my demobilizing army, and where to find enough Arabic and Pushto speakers to run the occupation governments.
For starters.
LOL - that movie just doesn't get old. I have it here and laugh just as hard every time I see as I did the first time I watched it.
Thanks for the ping!
And you would have done all those wonderful and logical things in what country? You could have never gotten any of that done even in the aftermath of 9/11 because of the Democrats.
You are opetrating in your own fantasy vacuum with the benefit of hind sight.
Congress would have unquestionably declared war on 9/16/01. Do you dispute that?
Everything else follows.
If the President was not prepared to fight the war, he should have not started.
That is precisely the pattern they have attempted (and still are attempting) in Iraq. That is why it is central to that effort to get the various Iraqi factions involved in a civil war, just as Lebanon in the 80's. To this end al-Qaeda is either a tool or irrelevant; at the moment it seems to be vacillating between the two. It cannot now be what it wanted: a spearhead of a popular revolution.
Succeed or fail, it's an exercise in butchery. I think it will fail, personally. The Iraqis have one single motivation for remaining a unified state that the Lebanese did not enjoy - nobody gets rich from the oil unless everybody does.
Thanks for post and ping.
Thanks for the PING!
detained all nationals of the Islamic nations and screened them for deportation. Why? Was it a crime to be from an Islamic nation on Sep 16, 2001? Do you think it should have been? Your reverence for the First Amendment is Lincolnesque.
50-60 divisions, Sorry. With that you forfeit any credibility as someone to be taken seriously on military affairs.
I would have expanded the USMC to ten divisions. See above. That's four more than there have ever been.
I would have told the people from the beginning that our goal was the conquest, occupation, and reconstruction of the Arabian peninsula and Pakistan, So you would have alerted the Saudis, Yemenis, Omanis, Emiratis, Qataris, Bahrainis, Kuwaitis and Pakistanis that we were coming to conquer them long before we had the ability to do so.
Hindsight is 20/20 only for some people.
That's a legitimate "slam dunk"...
Yes! Because of the many implications of declaring war there has not been one since WWII. Not Korea, Vietnam, The Falklands, Grenada, Panama, and any others we may have fought. The Senate is even redder now than in those times so it is highly unlikely to have cooperated.
Who would we have declared war against, a group of roaming thugs called Al Qaeda? Afghanistan? Iraq? Saudi Arabia? Iran? Lybia? Syria?
Dream on.
It is easy to be an Internet Rambo and declare bold intentions but quite another to actually get things done in this country where nearly half the Congress, all the media, all the labor unions, school and university teachers, and many, many foreign-funded and inspired agitators oppose your every move.
There are many good conservative solutions to most of our problems but implimenting them in today's environment is nye imppossible. After all, it is the left and their policies that have put us where we are.
Bump
I'm not sure what you are saying.
We live in a Constitutional Republic. The War Power, which is nearly unlimited, was placed in Congress IN ORDER TO PREVENT U.S. forces fighting in wars without adequate support at home.
It is idiocy to send forces into combat with an inadequate mission and inadequate force structure because Congress won't declare war (I think they would have, you don't).
That limitation on Executive power is their to PROTECT OUR TROOPS AND THEIR FAMILIES.
I like it.
I can't figure out all of the Divisions stuff. Sixty Divisions seems like a lot, but there should be expansion and there should be a lot of incentives in the form of an enhanced GI Bill and more. Still, I do like a lot of what you say.
Unfortunately, the media is against us, and the opportunities of 2001 are now lost.
It will take another hit like 9-11 to wake people up.
Yup, the crazies over there will not stop until we take them out. I hope that we don't have to lose NYC or some other places before we wise up. I think it is coming though.
Because Presidents cannot declare war.
Article I, section 8 "The Congress shall have Power... To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water..."
I can name that tune in two words "Bush's fault".
Don't be picky. You know what I mean. Now answer why they didn't ask Congress to decalre war.
Here is a bigger question, why didn't Jefferson ask for a declration war against the Barbary Pirates????
Because the wars in question did not have adequate support from the People.
Because of the legal ramifications of a declaration of war they went to the nearly new UN for support and called the defense of Korea a Police Action. Again, all for the international politics involved. Vietnam they sort of bungled and stumbled into because of domestic politics. Should they not have gone into Korea or Vietnam?
If you are going to wait for universal support in this day and time before you defend this country you will always be just an internet Rambo. Even now, because of the leftist Democrats we can't even get a decent immigration bill passed. Do you think you could ever get them to declare war on anyone except the Republicans? They are still trying to take away the guns of responsible citizens and give illegals the right to vote. Are those the people you are waiting to declare war?
Do you mean without a declaration of war you would take no action? 9/11 you would have let stand?
As I said, there is no question in my mind that Congress would have passed a declaration of war on 9/16/01.
"There is a tide in the affairs of men which, when taken at the flood, leads on to fortune. Omitted, all the voyage of their life is bound in shallows and in miseries. On such a full sea are we now afloat. And we must take the current when it serves, or lose our ventures.”
yup , we have something similar here [figuratively speaking]
... they detonate misinformation IEDs
... MSM , AntiqueMedia , shading "their news" with the abomination known as The Marxist Dialectic
"... they detonate misinformation IEDs"
"... MSM , AntiqueMedia , shading "their news" with the abomination known as The Marxist Dialectic,"
My tagline says basically the same.
"The catastrophic history of WWII, if you didn't know who won eventually, would curl your hair."
Reminds me of when I was in college, doing a term paper on WWII. I thought I'd call my veteran uncle for some info.
"What can you tell me about the war?", I said.
"Well", he said, "we won."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.