Category Iraq

Mosul Battle will be finished in days?

By the way, in between all the other rather dramatic news, there is still a battle raging in Mosul. Now, the Iraqi’s are claiming it will be over in days (before 26 May): http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-39882257

The statement was made on the 10th, and it is now the 20th.

Just as a reminder, as it is been a while since we looked at the timeline, back around 18 October, they were claiming that it could take two months: https://dupuyinstitute.dreamhosters.com/2016/10/18/duration-estimate-for-mosul/

  1. They started the offensive around 15 October https://dupuyinstitute.dreamhosters.com/2016/10/16/its-started/
  2. Arrived to the outskirts of Mosul and started taking parts of Mosul in early November: https://dupuyinstitute.dreamhosters.com/2016/11/10/taking-mosul/
  3. Took the Eastern half of Mosul around 22 January: https://dupuyinstitute.dreamhosters.com/2017/01/23/east-mosul-taken/
  4. And then they started fighting for the western half of Mosul around 18 February: https://dupuyinstitute.dreamhosters.com/2017/02/19/offensive-to-re-take-western-mosul-has-started/

Not the fastest offensive we have seen. For example, the Germans arrived on the outskirts of Stalingrad in August 1942, had taken most of the city by the end of November, and were still there, surrounded and starving, in February 1943.

One final note, remember this prediction in early February: https://dupuyinstitute.dreamhosters.com/2017/02/09/timeline-for-mosul-and-raqqa/

It stated that U.S. commander in Iraq, U.S. Army Lt. General Stephan Townsend, said “within the next six months I think we’ll see both (the Mosul and Raqqa campaigns) conclude.”

So, are we still on track to take Raqqa by the end of July?

Back to the Future

The opening sentence of an article by Dan Goure caught my attention: “Every decade of so since the 1960s, the U.S. Army creates a requirement for what can nominally be described as a light tank.” The article is here: http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/its-back-the-future-mobile-protected-firepower-20539?page=show

It reminds me of a meeting we had in late 2000 with Walt Hollis, Deputy Under Secretary of the Army (Operations Research). He started the meeting by telling us that something like “Every now and then, someone seems to want to bring back the light tank.” He then went on to explain that these requirements are being pushed from the top (meaning by the Chief of Staff of the Army) and they should probably have a study done on the subject. He then asked us to do such an effort.

We did and it is here: http://www.dupuyinstitute.org/pdf/mwa-2lightarmor.pdf

We decided to examine the effectiveness of lighter-weight armor based upon real-world experience in six possible scenarios:

  1. Conventional conflicts against an armor supported or armor heavy force.
  2. Emergency insertions against an armor support or armor heavy force.
  3. Conventional conflict against a primarily infantry force (as one might encounter in sub-Saharan Africa).
  4. Emergency insertion against a primarily infantry force.
  5. A small to medium insurgency (includes an insurgency that develops during a peacekeeping operation).
  6. A peacekeeping operation or similar Operation Other Than War (OOTW) that has some potential for violence.

Anyhow, I am not going to summarize the report here as that would take too long. I did draft up a chapter on it for inclusion in War by Numbers, but decided to leave it out as it did not fit into the “theory testing” theme of the book. Instead, I am holding it for one of my next books, Future American Wars.

The interesting aspect of the report is that we were at a meeting in 2001 at an Army OR outfit that was reviewing our report, and they told us that the main point of action they drew from the report was that we needed to make sure our armor vehicles were better protected against mines. As our report looked at the type of tank losses being suffered in the insurgencies and OOTWs, there were a lot of vehicles being lost to mines. Apparently they had not fully realized this (and Iraq did not occur until 2003).

Assessing The Battle For Eastern Mosul

Mosul, Iraq (Institute for the Study of War)

Alexander Mello and Michael Knights have published an assessment of the urban combat in eastern Mosul between Iraqi Security Forces, supported by U.S. and other allied forces, and Daesh fighters.

From the abstract:

The Islamic State’s defense of Mosul has provided unique insights into how the group has adapted its style of fighting to dense urban terrain. While the Islamic State failed to mount an effective defense in the rural outskirts and outer edges of Mosul, it did mount a confident defense of the denser inner-city terrain, including innovative pairing of car bombs and drones. The Islamic State continues to demonstrate a strong preference for mobile defensive tactics that allow the movement to seize the tactical initiative, mount counterattacks, and infiltrate the adversary’s rear areas. Yet, while the Islamic State has fought well in Mosul, it has also been out-fought. Islamic State tactics in the final uncleared northwestern quarter of Mosul are becoming more brutal, including far greater use of civilians as human shields.

The article is in the latest edition of the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point’s CTC Sentinel.

The Iraqi Army Has Entered the Old City

The offensive is continuing and they have entered the old city: Iraq-forces-seize-ground-mosul-old-city

The estimate is that there are about 2,000 ISIL fighters left behind in Mosul (along with 700,000 civilians): in-mosul-a-heavy-but-not-crushing-blow-to-is-group

In Fallujah in 2004, they left behind about a 1,000 fighters. The November 2004 Fallujah operation did turn into a slow mop-up that cost the U.S. Army and U.S. Marines 65 KIA, 582 WIA, 1 NBD (non-battle death) and 54 NBI (non-battle injury).

Right now, I am editing Chapter 16 of my book War by Numbers. That chapter is called “Urban Legends” and covers the findings from the three reports we did on urban warfare in 2002-2004. So, if I have not been posting much lately on the blog, there is a good reason for it. Trying to keep the book on its scheduled August release date.

Fighting in Mosul

The fighting continues in Mosul as the Iraqi coalition slowly advances: iraqi-forces-see-off-counter-attack-mosul

On Tuesday they recaptured the provincial government headquarters, the central bank branch and a museum. The museum was completely empty of all artifacts according to an Iraqi Major General.

The general also noted that most of the fighters that fought around the governorate building were local. He stated that an order was issued for foreign fighters to withdraw.

Makes you wonder if we are nearing the end of this campaign.

Blog post update (around 11 AM EST this morning): leader-baghdadi-abandons-mosul-fight

 

Mustard Gas

ISIL appears to be using Mustard Gas filled mortar rounds: Iraqi-families-devastated-by-chemical-attacks-in-mosul

Early in the Syrian Civil War, the government of Syria used chemical weapons on its own population. I am one of these people who felt the U.S. and international community should have intervened in the first year of the war in response to Asad’s use of chemical weapons. We chose not to…..

Iraqi Casualties in Mosul

I don’t think Iraqi casualties in the Mosul operations have been published. This article has a report that the fight to take the eastern half of Mosul cost Iraqi forces 500 dead, with another 3,000 wounded in three months of fighting (6-to-1 wounded to killed ratio). On Saturday, Iraq had four soldiers killed and 53 wounded in the fight for western Mosul: U.S. Forces Push Artillery, Rockets and Helicopters Closer to the Fight in Mosul

The source of the estimate was General Joseph Votel, head of the U.S. Central Command. Suspect they have more precise figures. Not sure if the figures include Kurdish forces or Iraqi Shiite militia. Also see: iraqi-army-ahead-of-schedule-in-fight-for-west-mosul