Iraqi army prepares to storm Ramadi 'within 24 hours', urges residents to leave
30 replies, posted
[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-34964094[/url]
[quote]The Iraqi army has urged people living in the centre of the Islamic State-held city of Ramadi to leave before an operation to retake it is launched.
A security source told the BBC leaflets had been dropped by planes, warning residents the army planned to storm the city within the next 24 hours.
The call, which was also broadcast on state television, told them to use an exit secured by the army to the south.
Ramadi was captured by IS in May in an embarrassing defeat for the Iraqi army.
Last month, the US military said Iraqi troops and pro-government militiamen had essentially encircled the city, located about 90km (55 miles) to the west of Baghdad, and that conditions were set for a final assault.[/quote]
How about you don't fuck up again and end up handing over a shit ton of a equipment like you did in may.
I find it kinda silly they'd give this sort of advance warning; It gives plenty of time for terrorists to set up booby traps, make fortifications, move armaments and so forth.
Given their past performance, this will probably be a bloodbath. I'm sure they've received better training since their last attempt, but leadership and discipline is still a big issue for the Iraqi Army.
[QUOTE=StrykerE;49215132]Given their past performance, this will probably be a bloodbath. I'm sure they've received better training since their last attempt, but leadership and discipline is still a big issue for the Iraqi Army.[/QUOTE]
It's urban fighting, regardless of how good your army is, you're going to have a lot of bodies.
Just look at Stalingrad and Fallujah.
[QUOTE=The fox;49215127]I find it kinda silly they'd give this sort of advance warning; It gives plenty of time for terrorists to set up booby traps, make fortifications, move armaments and so forth.[/QUOTE]
The alternative is to let there be civilians involved with no warning. Having a panic ensue and having civilians in the way is not a good situation
[QUOTE=BazzBerry;49215179]The alternative is to let there be civilians involved with no warning. Having a panic ensue and having civilians in the way is not a good situation[/QUOTE]
Not to mention that IS wouldn't hesitate to use civilians as shields and hold them hostage during the attack
Well I'll bet ISIS already know now
[QUOTE=CabooseRvB;49215134]It's urban fighting, regardless of how good your army is, you're going to have a lot of bodies.
Just look at Stalingrad and Fallujah.[/QUOTE]Goes both ways though, Iraq may sustain casualties but daesh will too and they can't replace equipment losses so easily. Remember that Iraq has foreign backers and international support, daesh has private donations, criminal enterprises, and no way to replace heavy equipment at all besides capturing it.
Hope the Iraqis are more squared away this time though.
Hoping for the best here. IS most likely will be ready and waiting, hopefully the military has a few tricks up its sleeves.
Hope it's actually the army going in and not a bunch of ragtag Shia militias bent on pushing out any Sunnis, let alone the Islamic State ones.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;49216598]Hope it's actually the army going in and not a bunch of ragtag Shia militias bent on pushing out any Sunnis, let alone the Islamic State ones.[/QUOTE]
Probably both. The Iraqi government is becoming increasingly reliant on the Sunni militias or PMUs. A number of them are ex-ISOF which is a little concerning. They're much more aggressive than the Army and can accomplish more with less. They can help accomplish objectives in the short term, but they're definitely going to be a problem in the long term.
[QUOTE=The fox;49215127]I find it kinda silly they'd give this sort of advance warning; It gives plenty of time for terrorists to set up booby traps, make fortifications, move armaments and so forth.[/QUOTE]
Just guessing but urging residents to leave might make them less restricted by civilian casualties.
[QUOTE=The fox;49215127]I find it kinda silly they'd give this sort of advance warning; It gives plenty of time for terrorists to set up booby traps, make fortifications, move armaments and so forth.[/QUOTE]
That's preferable to massive civilian casualties and people who will get on the way. Not like the place isn't already fortified and what not, not like it's a secret when someone's about to launch a siege either.
[QUOTE=Cypher_09;49215353]Well I'll bet ISIS already know now[/QUOTE]
They knew a fucking while ago dude.
[QUOTE=ZakkShock;49215091]How about you don't fuck up again and end up handing over a shit ton of a equipment like you did in may.[/QUOTE]
Apparently, the sunni tribal leaders in ramadi sold the soldiers to ISIS. They gave them their exact locations and numbers and the soldiers didn't have anti tank weapons to deal with suicide trucks. Also, the US coalition let ramadi fall without much air support.
Weird, I thought this post was from 2003 or something...
[QUOTE=The fox;49215127]I find it kinda silly they'd give this sort of advance warning; It gives plenty of time for terrorists to set up booby traps, make fortifications, move armaments and so forth.[/QUOTE]
We did the same in the lead-up to the Second Battle of Fallujah, so it's hardly unprecedented.
[QUOTE=StrykerE;49215132]Given their past performance, this will probably be a bloodbath. I'm sure they've received better training since their last attempt, but leadership and discipline is still a big issue for the Iraqi Army.[/QUOTE]
Even disregarding their past performance, it's going to be a bloodbath, urban combat tends to be a high-casualty affair no matter how good the opposing groups are.
Is there any way to tell when the battle starts or keep updates with it?
[QUOTE=The Rifleman;49219528]Is there any way to tell when the battle starts or keep updates with it?[/QUOTE]
I don't think they're gonna be livestreaming or live tweeting it, dude...
[QUOTE=Snowmew;49220298]I don't think they're gonna be livestreaming or live tweeting it, dude...[/QUOTE]
ISIS might be.
[QUOTE=Virtanen;49219387]Even disregarding their past performance, it's going to be a bloodbath, urban combat tends to be a high-casualty affair no matter how good the opposing groups are.[/QUOTE]
I wonder what the factors are behind this. something to do with the lack of visibility I assume?
[QUOTE=Snowmew;49220298]I don't think they're gonna be livestreaming or live tweeting it, dude...[/QUOTE]
You'd be surprised. Anyway, check Conflicts news on twitter and related pages, usually very good at getting up to date info.
[QUOTE=Bruhmis;49220661]I wonder what the factors are behind this. something to do with the lack of visibility I assume?[/QUOTE]
Better defensive positions, mazes of buildings, windows/corners, lots of hiding spaces. More difficult for armored vehicles to navigate which also translates to increased difficulty evacuating casualties, insurgents blending in with civillians and obstructive debris are all considerations in urban warfare. For a recent perspective research the Battle of Fallujah; Fallujah was a wake up call for the US since we hadn't been in urban combat since Vietnam.
[QUOTE=InvaderNouga;49221125]Better defensive positions, mazes of buildings, windows/corners, lots of hiding spaces. More difficult for armored vehicles to navigate which also translates to increased difficulty evacuating casualties, insurgents blending in with civillians and obstructive debris are all considerations in urban warfare. For a recent perspective research the Battle of Fallujah; Fallujah was a wake up call for the US since we hadn't been in urban combat since Vietnam.[/QUOTE]
Tbh, we didn't have a lot of urban warfare in Vietnam either.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;49221640]Tbh, we didn't have a lot of urban warfare in Vietnam either.[/QUOTE]
You don't need multiple battles for precedence, you just look at a [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Hu%E1%BA%BF]bloody one[/url]
[QUOTE=InvaderNouga;49221125]Fallujah was a wake up call for the US since we hadn't been in urban combat since Vietnam.[/QUOTE]
When you said urban, do you mean soldiers going into tunnels in Vietnam?
Cause the only thing closely related to urban is probably during the offensive when the North pushed into Saigon.
[editline]2nd December 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=CabooseRvB;49221736]You don't need multiple battles for precedence, you just a [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Hu%E1%BA%BF]bloody one[/url][/QUOTE]
Oh right, missed out that one.
[QUOTE=InvaderNouga;49221125]Better defensive positions, mazes of buildings, windows/corners, lots of hiding spaces. More difficult for armored vehicles to navigate which also translates to increased difficulty evacuating casualties, insurgents blending in with civillians and obstructive debris are all considerations in urban warfare. For a recent perspective research the Battle of Fallujah; Fallujah was a wake up call for the US since we hadn't been in urban combat since Vietnam.[/QUOTE]
US experienced urban combat in Operation Just Cause and Mogadishu. Of course, Fallujah was on a whole different scale.
CNN is reporting that Iraqi Forces have retaken 60% of Ramadi
[url]http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/08/middleeast/isis-iraq-syria/index.html[/url]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.