PDA

View Full Version : Iraqi foreign affairs committee rejects UN resolutions....



Dr Mordrid
11th November 2002, 10:35
They're a rubber-stamp for Saddam, so it's not looking good for the peaceniks....

Dr. Mordrid

GT98
11th November 2002, 10:41
If the Iraqi's are stupid enough I say by January the first bombs will be falling....

Dr Mordrid
11th November 2002, 10:44
That long 'eh? :rolleyes:

I'd say the bombing of his "palaces", radar installations, C & C communications networks and the special forces would start a lot sooner than that.

Dr. Mordrid

Jammrock
11th November 2002, 11:04
Bush was quoted as saying they will basically follow the last plan:

Bombard the hell out of Iraq from air and sea where the US can't be touched, then send in the ground forces once Saddamnit's forces are scattered.

I guess Saddam wants to go round 2 with the US.

Jammrock

Dr Mordrid
11th November 2002, 11:11
The plan I heard sounded more like the Afghan plan in part; attack less populated areas first to set up bases & staging areas THEN hammer them as soon as the runways are ready.

I also hear that they have had the Predator factories chruning them out as fast as they can for months.

Damn.....that's an evil little piece of hardware.

Dr. Mordrid

The PIT
11th November 2002, 11:17
Going back to the predators I hope theres no plans to sell to tin pot countries.

ALBPM
11th November 2002, 12:12
Those Poor Dumb Bastards.......

At least we don't have to wait till Friday to find out.

Technoid
11th November 2002, 13:00
Originally posted by ALBPM
Those Poor Dumb Bastards.......


You took the words out of my mouth :D

Dr Mordrid
11th November 2002, 14:05
Originally posted by The PIT
Going back to the predators I hope theres no plans to sell to tin pot countries.

Problem is they can probably come up with their own for short range use. Have you seen the latest hardware for R/C model aircraft? Damned sophisticated stuff and you can get it for very large "models". One of the largest I've seen was a four engine B-17 that was over 14 feet long...and it could drop "practice" bombs weiging at least a couple of pounds. Even the remote TV viewing is there for the buying.

The development team for birds like the Predator used off the shelf R/C stuff for their concept tests and prototyping then changed over to high-tech control gear for long range testing and production.

Where other countries would come up short is that the Predators are controlled not by line-of-sight radio control but by MilStar2 satellite links that cannot be scrambled (spread spectrum digital transmissions). This allows Predators to be launched close to the target area but then be controlled from as far away as the satellites allow.

They can hover over an area for 24 hours if need be.

Dr. Mordrid

The PIT
11th November 2002, 14:12
Sounds like the terminators coming doesn't it.

Dr Mordrid
11th November 2002, 14:17
You think Predator is bad with the HellFires think what it'll be like in 2007 (or sooner) when those 100 KW solid state lasers go into production. No big chemical tanks necessary, just a turret and a power supply.

Most likely: an APU with capacitor banks for building a big current surge for the shot. Supposedly they'll fit into a HumVee so putting 'em into a large ROV shouldn't be a problem.

Dr. Mordrid

KvHagedorn
11th November 2002, 14:18
Originally posted by The PIT
Sounds like the terminators coming doesn't it.

Nope.. that's a different Schwarzenegger movie. ;)

Dr Mordrid
11th November 2002, 14:19
I think he's referring to the hunter-killers shown in the first Terminator movie.

Dr. Mordrid

The PIT
11th November 2002, 14:22
I've got a better weapon. Nurses just drop them via parachute over any country and they'll surrender in a matter of minutes.
If you don't believe me just come on our helpdesk and they'll have you screaming for forgiveness within five minutes.

RichL
11th November 2002, 14:57
Nurses, pfft!

Nurses are sweet natured angels compared to the hell spawned harpies that are the Doctors secretaties or worse - Administrators.

thop
11th November 2002, 15:01
i say drop lawyers. kill two birds with one stone :D

KvHagedorn
11th November 2002, 15:02
Originally posted by Dr Mordrid
I think he's referring to the hunter-killers shown in the first Terminator movie.

Dr. Mordrid

I know.. I was just teasing.

Technoid
11th November 2002, 16:38
btw, has the (us) army ever considered robots? (as in terminators)

RichL
11th November 2002, 16:46
There are some pretty spiffy looking man-powered exoskeletons the DoD are playing with.
As for robots though...have you ever met a FPS game AI that you couldnt outthink?

dZeus
11th November 2002, 17:03
OT:
though imho it's just a matter of years before we'll reach that step. From what I understand/believe, AI is not a matter of technical limitations, just the primitive stage in designing computer algorythms that mimic though processes as we humans use.

K6-III
11th November 2002, 18:09
The one thing that bothers me considerably about a war with Iraq is urban warfare, where most technological advantage disspears and even scattered forces can use civilians as human sheilds, forcing you to go in house by house, building by building, with incredible losses...

There are other issues, of course, but this one stands out....

Wombat
11th November 2002, 18:32
Which is why we've been training for it so much. I'm not too worried about it though. Baghdad is not Mogadishu - we've been preparing for a visit for a long time, and the intelligence is probably pretty good. Besides that, we're not dealing with true guerillas. Bombing out their weapons caches, armories, and palaces, and they'll be taken down a few notches. You don't hear too much about urban warfare in Kabul, and that seems like more of a hotbed than Baghdad. What a difference a couple dozen Predators makes.

Dr Mordrid
11th November 2002, 19:02
Originally posted by Technoid
btw, has the (us) army ever considered robots? (as in terminators)

Actually this is closer than you think.

The U.S. DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Project Agency) is already working with MIT, Oak Ridge, SARCOS and others on the EHPA (Exoskeletons for Human Performance Augmentation) program. Straight from the DARPA working paper;


The overall goal of this program is to develop devices and machines that will increase the speed, strength, and endurance of soldiers in combat environments. Projects will lead to self-powered, controllable, wearable exoskeletal devices and/or machines. The technological challenges that must be addressed are energy sources, power by generation, haptic interfaces, control algorithm development, as well as integration of actuation systems and all previously mentioned subsystems into a machine with an anthropomorphic architecture. Removing the internal human and adding ROV style controls to them would be the next step before making them fully autonymous.

This progression is also taking place with ROV's like the Predator, Global Hawk & Dark Star and remotely piloted fighter aircraft. They want the fighters to be able to detect enemy aircraft that approach and go into an automatic dog-fighting mode to take 'em out before continuing on mission.

Since the remote fighters could probably pull 40 g's in a turn an opposing human piloted aircraft would be in big trouble.

Another goodie you're likely to see is the deployment of Robot Swarm. This is a treaded land ROV that contains a swarm of networked (and armed) land, wall-climbing and flying robots that could be deployed into a building where they would seek out heat sources (read: humans) as well as human odors and attack under the guidance of a remote operator. Alternatively they could also be used for intelligence purposes. Yet another DARPA project.

Dr. Mordrid

Wombat
11th November 2002, 19:20
I've heard that one of the government's many VC companies, such as In-Q-tel, has been partly funding the Ursus project. http://www.projecttroy.com - and so much fun to read.

K6-III
11th November 2002, 20:12
Originally posted by Wombat
Which is why we've been training for it so much. I'm not too worried about it though. Baghdad is not Mogadishu - we've been preparing for a visit for a long time, and the intelligence is probably pretty good. Besides that, we're not dealing with true guerillas. Bombing out their weapons caches, armories, and palaces, and they'll be taken down a few notches. You don't hear too much about urban warfare in Kabul, and that seems like more of a hotbed than Baghdad. What a difference a couple dozen Predators makes.

If they disperse weapons caches into residential complexes, such attacks would be much more difficult to justify. Secondarily, one can assume that Hussein's troops shall be better armed than the Taliban.....

If they take those steps, there is almost nothing that can keep it from turning into a bloodbath...

Joel
11th November 2002, 20:23
The one thing that bothers me considerably about a war with Iraq is urban warfare, where most technological advantage disspears and even scattered forces can use civilians as human sheilds, forcing you to go in house by house, building by building, with incredible losses...

Sounds alot like what the Israelis faced when they went into the Jenin refugee camp after the terrorist there. Facing bobie trapped houses and terrorist using the civilians there as human shields forcing the Israelis to go house to house at a great loss to their own. But what do you expect from terrorist who are nothing more than a bunch of cowards?

But I think going into Baghdad will be alot like what was faced going into Kabul where the majority of the civilian population are intelligent enough to truly understand who the real enemy is.

Joel

Dr Mordrid
11th November 2002, 21:20
The Israeli's didn't have Predators lurking over the area either.

Trying to set up for urban warfare with those things hovering 15,000 feet over your head, each carrying a load of HellFire missiles, would be a dangerous proposition to say the least :rolleyes:

My bet is that the US and its special forces units will take the outlying regions, seizing air and army bases for staging areas before advancing to lay seige to Baghdad from all sides. Once this is accomplished they'll probably send in the Predators and whatever other attack ROV's we don't even know about yet.

At this point I think the odds are very high any remnants of the Republican Guard and regular Iraqui army that escape to Baghdad will do the rest themeselves out of self-preservation.

Saddam hasn't let large numbers of either group into the city proper for some time for fear of a coup.

Dr. Mordrid

K6-III
11th November 2002, 21:46
You musn't underestimate the power of 10 years propaganda saying that our sanctions are starving the people of Iraq. I believe that the people of Iraq, as well as the armies, shall not disband and bow to us at our whim.

This will be a more extended conflict than the first gulf war, despite our modern weaponry.

Let us not forget the last time the US actually engaged in full-scale urban warfare: WWII.

Seeing as much has changed since then, I would have to truly say the outcome of such a battle is not predictable. It'll depend on the strategy Iraqi forces take, as well as the role the people decide to play.

The war is winnable, but how bloody it will be is anyone's guess.....and if it turns out he didn't have weapons of mass destruction....we would have lost, not the battles....but the war.

Of the chemical weapons he has, we mostly know what they are, for we gave them to him for fighting Iran in the Iran-Iraq war.

Seeing as 1 ton of chemical weapons are less effective at killing a given # of people than 1 ton of conventional weapons, I don't see what the scare is about...(well the media sure can play it up)

Biological weapons would be a foolish form of warfare, for they hurt you just the same.

Nuclear weapons are the only threat, then....(then this is what we should be looking for)....

KRSESQ
11th November 2002, 22:33
""My bet is that the US and its special forces units will take the outlying regions, seizing air and army bases for staging areas before advancing to lay seige to Baghdad from all sides. Once this is accomplished they'll probably send in the Predators and whatever other attack ROV's we don't even know about yet. ""

A better strategy would be to neutralize the Republican Guard before they can even get out of their barracks. Certainly their command and control, staging, and personnel bases have been thoroughly mapped. The proper placement of the right munitions could decimate Saddam's elite forces practically in their sleep. Then heavy lift our ground forces into Baghdad with armor and predator support practically before the echoes die down. Our troops could sieze every strategic site within the city before the Iraqis even realize they're being attacked.

A lightning strike is the best way to catch them off balance and minimize our own casualties and avoid unnecessary civilian deaths. Invading the outlying areas and laying siege just gives them a chance to dig in and wear US down.

Not to mention casting us in a bad light when the "starving baby" footage starts leaking out.

Kevin

Dr Mordrid
11th November 2002, 22:38
Note what I said in this part;


At this point I think the odds are very high any remnants of the Republican Guard and regular Iraqui army that escape to Baghdad will do the rest themeselves out of self-preservation. Do you think those who didn't make it to Baghdad would be playing baseball with our special forces guys? :rolleyes:

My guess is that any Republican Guards that don't retreat to Baghdad or surrender immediatly will end up being hammered by everything with wings.

The "starving baby" footage in Afghanistan was almost immediately negated by the US and UN starting relief flights almost right out of the box. What makes you think the US will forget that PR sucess so fast?

Dr. Mordrid

KRSESQ
11th November 2002, 22:44
I was running on the assumption that Saddam would keep a sizable contingent of RG close at hand in Baghdad. These could create havoc for all concerned if they're not taken by surprise and taken out in the opening minutes of a conflict.

'Course, now that we've shot our mouths off on possible US strategy, nothing we've speculated on here will make it into the final plan.

Kevin

Dr Mordrid
11th November 2002, 23:12
Actually the RG is one of the organizations Saddam will not let into Baghdad in large numbers for fear of that coup. He's had them spread out north & south for years in order to prevent one.

Dr. Mordrid

The PIT
12th November 2002, 01:14
Originally posted by RichL
Nurses, pfft!

Nurses are sweet natured angels compared to the hell spawned harpies that are the Doctors secretaties or worse - Administrators.

Yes but they're mind numbingly thick. Anyone sane having to deal with these people will go nuts in minutes. Most new People who start work with us don't believe us very soon they're saying bloody nurses.
I live in fear of going into hospital.

Technoid
12th November 2002, 05:28
Originally posted by Wombat
I've heard that one of the government's many VC companies, such as In-Q-tel, has been partly funding the Ursus project. http://www.projecttroy.com - and so much fun to read.


<center>
<table border=0 width=566>
<td colspan=2><img src="http://www.projecttroy.com/images/header.gif"></td>
<tr>
<td height=20 colspan=2>.</td>
<tr>

<td width=15></td>
<td><font size=2 face="verdana">
Developer's Note<br>
<br>
<p>This site was initially developed for Internet Explorer, Version 4.0 or higher.
Since you are running Netscape (or another browser), we cannot guarantee that pages will load as they were designed, nor will you be able to enjoy some of the features of our site.<br>
<br>
We are currently working to produce a "Netscape-Friendly" version of our site. Please bookmark the site and be sure to visit again soon.</p>
<br>
<a href="website/index.html">Continue On To ProjectTroy.com</a>
</td></table>
</center>

I HATE sites like this :mad: :mad:

RichL
12th November 2002, 05:38
Originally posted by Dr Mordrid
They're a rubber-stamp for Saddam, so it's not looking good for the peaceniks....

Dr. Mordrid

I'd practically lay money on it being a setup by Saddam.

Latest I heard is that his son was pleading with the parliment to accept the UN resolutions to avoid war.
Then the parliment vote unanimously to reject the UN resolutions, but leave the ultimate decision down to Saddam.

So Saddam gets to overrule the 'will of the people' and look like the peace-loving loveable guy he isnt.

It amazes me that anyone outside of nursery school actually beleives any of it.

Wombat
12th November 2002, 07:16
Technoid, why? At least he lets you click on to the site.

Technoid
12th November 2002, 07:41
Its the general tone of the note as if "Netscape" were subpar or something....

He don't check wich version I got (I'm using mozilla so it should not have come up at all) !
Sure NS 4.** lacked some CSS suport.

But the only thing that "lacks" from NS 6*--> or Moz is all those fancy non standard IE4--> tags...

What anoys me most is that he has actualy taken time to detect my browser so he can tell me that it was intentinal that his site don't work in my browser!!

"netscape friendly" my ass!!
Why don't he say as it is: standards compliant :mad:

Wombat
12th November 2002, 08:12
I'm using mozilla so it should not have come up at all They both have Mozilla tags, IIRC.

K6-III
12th November 2002, 09:42
Oh...and another thing....say we do capture Baghdad...

...that means we have to occupy a foreign city for many years to come....

...how many troops are lost in occupying cities...

Joel
12th November 2002, 10:14
...that means we have to occupy a foreign city for many years to come....

That's why I say we just nuke it and turn it into a big gravel pit and then we don't have to worry about occuping shit. And then just say, Next!!! ;)

Joel

Dogbert
12th November 2002, 10:22
Originally posted by K6-III
Oh...and another thing....say we do capture Baghdad...

...that means we have to occupy a foreign city for many years to come....

...how many troops are lost in occupying cities...

Why occupy ? Just do an in-and-out as thorough and as clean as possible. It's never perfect, nor as clean as everybody would like, but usually after you eliminate most of those you need to, new leaders will rise from the population.

K6-III
12th November 2002, 20:03
But after so many years of no political process, ensuring stability shall be damn near impossible...

Dr Mordrid
12th November 2002, 20:43
Whenever someone says it's "not our business" or some other nonsense I ask them this questions:

1. given the chance would you have locked Neville Chamberlain in a closet before he had the chance to become Prime Minister?

2. given the chance would you have taken out Hitler before WWII?

If you say "no" to either there is no hope for you.

K6III: are you actually saying that the situation in and around Iraq is (or has ever been in the Saddam era) stable?? :confused: :rolleyes:

Even after his involvement in starting the Iran-Iraq war, Gulf War I and his involvement in the WTC bombing and Oaklahoma City? No suppositions on those last two either....

IMHO this is one of those situations where just about anything other than the presence/existance of Saddam Hussein would be a drastic improvement!!

Dr. Mordrid