CNN: Apache helicopters shot up in Republican Guard attack

CNN live ^ | March 23, 2003 | cnn

[mikegi]

Live report from Karl Penhaul after Apache choppers attacked Republican Guards near Karbala (sp?). This is north of Najaf and WSW 70mi of Baghdad.

He reports that our Apaches were shot up pretty bad. The IRG put up a "wall" of AAA. After returning to base, Apaches were "strewn around" instead of being parked neatly. He wouldn't confirm that all our Apaches made it back.

[Arkinsaw]

Well, duh. It's a war. People die.

Yeah, but we have the capability to make more of the OTHER people die. We have B-52's flying in from Britain to launch ALCM's against buildings in Baghdad. I posit that they should be flying in from Britain to carpet bomb the Republican Guard in front of 3ID.

I watched the Umm Qasr battle. We played around with them for 4 hours when we should have had a big freaking bomb dropped right through the chimney of those two buildings. But did not because we want to avoid destroying "infrastructure".

It is clear now. They are not going to surrender. Time to stop playing.

[Spruce]

I caught the tail-end of this CNN "piece". The reporter did (paranthetically) quote the American commander as stating over 70 T-72s were destroyed.

[Travis McGee]

AMEN to THAT!!!!!!! It takes great skill to return to base with the guages gone, the turbine screaming, hydraulic fluid spraying all over, rotor ends shot off and vibrating like mad, etc etc etc. Great skill!!

[eabinga]

It's called Napalm

I don't think we have any of that left in our arsenal.

[lavrenti]

Well, it's kinda hard to take out a compound these days without an airstrike.

You think anyone is stupid enough to do a Sgt. Rock?

[Arkinsaw]

It would if you were an Apache pilot, and the alternative was crashing and burning after taking hits. Think of the B-17s in WW2 flying back to England on one engine, half a wing gone, and the tail shot off. Being able to fly after being shot up is a VERY GOOD THING.

I didn't say I was unhappy that they can take a lot of battle damage and return. I said that it didn't make me stand up and cheer that they had to take a lot of battle damage. Big difference.

[Scott from the Left Coast]

That engagement last night was a low priority engagement, mopping up surrounded remnants of an Iraqi force. It happened to be caught on camera. The priority is not mopping up in places taken on the road to the goal. The priority is keeping the headlong momentum to Baghdad by the spear-point. This war will be won in Baghdad, not in Umm Qasr. They could very easily sit and wait out that trapped unit until they could free up a strike to take them out. So they did. It wasn't important because it wasn't the movement of force to the goal.

[cake_crumb]

"Political leadership is trying to fight a politically correct war. Trying to avoid killing the enemy. We think they are trying to surrender, when in fact they are lying to us. We must kill all enemy soldiers and leaders now, and only accept a surrender when it is given unconditionally."

...And you got the entire war all figured out from media overreporting of two incidents? Conveniently discounting a couple of thousand Iraqi prisoners, thousands of dead Iraqi military or a 100 to 1 kill ratio, eh? Or the airport secured by the Brits this morning, or the chemical plant secured by US troops? Reports on one of the fake surrender-ploys from an embedded journalist describes Iraqi bodies littering the desert, some literally melted so there was nothing to identify them but a few ribs, but you've apparently discounted the consequences of treachery too.

I'm glad you're not the one in charge. It sounds like you're the one 'fighting' a political war.

[Libertina]

Isn't the Gentlemans' Army the one the British LOST to the upstart rogue Americans who hid behind bushes and up in trees to take shots? I keep thinking of this as our wars are fought. (This does not mean I condone torture, but are we being realistic in the way we fight?)

[TheErnFormerlyKnownAsBig]

If the triple A is that bad, can you fly in a C141 with a moab?

C-130 and no you can't.

[lavrenti]

70 T-72s is most of their armor. Like perhaps 3/4s of an entire division.

No wonder their best fighters are Baathist thugs in Toyotas and RPGs.

[faithincowboys]

they will surrender but we have to carpet bomb them to do it!

[panaxanax]

"Are you talking about the President, you RAT in disguise?"

Just one minute buddy-boy. I think you'll find many conservatives in agreement with Thane_Banquo. Me for one, and yes I AM talking about the President. He is the Commander in Chief and better quit being nice about this thing or we're all going to end up in a grave.

Wake up, we're screwed if we keep fighting like gentlemen.

LEVEL BAGHDAD TODAY....BABIES AND ALL.

[Travis McGee]

Gotcha. No disagreement there!

[Mr. Lucky]

Because high level bombing is virtually ineffective against armor. The Apache and A-10 are exactly the right weapon. The fact that this particular reporter doesn't know his ass from first base is an indictment of the media, not the military.

[ffusco]

Wow, was he still active then? Can't say. Those ops from Macnamara Westmoreland? included Arc-Light , and Overlord

[Scott from the Left Coast]

I caught the tail-end of this CNN "piece". The reporter did (paranthetically) quote the American commander as stating over 70 T-72s were destroyed.

Does anyone here see THIS? Those Apache's took out damn near a regiment's worth of armor and took a few hits in the process, yet made it back to base intact. And we're wringing our hands over this???

This was a massive victory, overwhelming destruction of the enemy's best armor. This is a victory on a legendary scale -- and we're bitching and moaning about an Apache weathering some hits?

[mikegi]

This headline just talks about triple A hitting the Apache's, not about what's left of the stuff the Apache's hit.

That's part of the problem. Apparently, a lot of the Apaches came back with Hellfires still on them.

If we are going to treat a battle as a disaster just because the enemy fires his weapon (to no effect), then we're guaranteed to have nothing but disasters.

I would hold that "to no effect" for a while. The reporter was squirrely when asked if all the Apaches made it back to base, citing embedding rules. Now, why would the rules prohibit him from saying "Yes, all came back"?

[LoneRangerMassachusetts]

We are wasting American lives. We lost fewer combat deaths in Desert Storm. We are trying too hard to be nice. At the end of the war it won’t matter. The usual b@st@rds will hate us. It is better that we kill as many of the Republican Guards as we can before the war ends. There will then be fewer of them to cause problems after the war. The Republican Guards are not going to hang their weapons up and fade away. After the war, they are going to sell their services to other Muslim states. Exterminating them will send a more forceful message to the remainder of the Muslim world. B52’s to the air. MOABS away. Screw precision bombing. Just drop a lot of the good old big stupid bombs on them.

[r9etb]

Amen Scott. And the landscape littered with smoldering blackened Iraqi soldiers' bodies.

Yeah, but apparently Apaches (which sport an M230 33mm Gun; 70mm (2.75 inch) Folding-Fin Aerial Rockets; AGM-114 Hellfire anti-tank missiles; AGM-122 Sidearm anti-radar missiles; AIM-9 Sidewinder Air-to-Air missiles) aren't serious enough for some.

It's pretty certain that the Iraqis are losing a hell of a lot of guys to these beasts.