Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : World Outlook -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Les H who wrote (1495)	3/20/2003 11:36:15 AM
From: Les H	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 49874

Operation Desert Surprise Mar 20, 2003 Summary Everything about last night's attacks was surprising -- from the size, the purpose, the timing and the pause. It was not the way planners had described it. It is not clear whether the war has begun, or whether the action was simply a pre-war maneuver having to do with Baghdad politics as much as strategy. There are still no clear answers at this hour, but there are some theories. Analysis The U.S. Department of Defense promised "shock and awe" in Iraq, but the first strike delivered amazement and puzzlement. The amazement was that the strike did not look like anything expected. The puzzlement was that it was not clear what was actually intended. Rather than beginning in a stunning blow, the war seems to have begun as a tentative probe. As soon as the strikes started, Washington explained them as being triggered by a target of opportunity. Apparently, there was intelligence about the location of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein that triggered an attempt to decapitate the Iraqi regime by killing him and other members of the Iraqi leadership. The goal here had to have been to destabilize the government, create the conditions for a coup and win the war without really having to use massive force. In other words, U.S. intelligence suddenly located Hussein, ordered a rapid and not fully planned strike and tried to end the war before it began. There are two problems with this theory. The first is the fact that there was substantial, quite public, evidence that the air war would begin shortly after the ultimatum expired, and this was known to Stratfor more than five hours before the attack. In other words, if it was an intelligence coup, it had to have had some planning. It is possible that U.S. officials had a general idea that they would try to strike at Hussein last night, but did not know precisely where they were going to strike. The second oddity is that this was not simply an attack on a single location where Hussein might be. The attacks included multiple sites in Baghdad, plus a range of other sites attacks on air bases around the country. That would indicate that that a suppression of enemy air defense attack was under way. Problem there was that while a large number of air bases were in fact hit, none of them appear to have been hit hard enough to really constitute an effective attack. Why supplement the decapitation strike with attacks on air facilities that couldn't really suppress air defenses? Then, after the first strike, the strategic air attacks halted. The halt itself is not that puzzling. The normal doctrine is to do battle damage assessment after a strike. The problem is that the attacks have not resumed as yet. Therefore the United States, rather than seeking to overwhelm Iraq, made a light, surgical strike, then halted the operations. There is no clear explanation for what this was all about. Some possible explanations will have to do: 1. Hussein has multiple residences. It was not known where he might be. It was known that the residences would be struck last night, but not exactly which ones and at what time. What was attacked last night were all known command facilities around the country -- along with the location where intelligence reported that Hussein was most likely to be. 2. The attack was intended to test the Iraqi reaction. Iraqi capabilities in many areas -- particularly in morale -- are unknown. By delivering a light attack, U.S. forces signaled that war was about to start, hoping that this would start the process of capitulation. 3. This was the last moment of diplomacy. Having struck at these targets, the United States has signaled the Iraqis that the war has begun - giving Hussein the opportunity to resign, or alternatively, the opportunity for others to force him out. 4. The attack was the last attempt at a Special Operations/Intelligence plan to win the war with light forces. CENTCOM commander Gen.Tommy Franks gave them the opportunity to try, giving them a window of 12-48 hours to show what they could deliver. After that, the heavy war starts. 5. The attacks were planned to be much heavier, but a failure in planning or coordination caused a major portion of the attack to be aborted. What we saw last night was the portion that went off. The most likely explanations are a combination of options 1-4. We do not think this was a command failure. What we do know is that the United States did not begin this war as expected or when expected. Certainly the attacks were preplanned, and preplanning around targets of opportunity is an interesting concept. We would guess that what is going on in this interregnum is waiting to see what, if any, response there is from Iraqi forces. Will they capitulate? Will they stage a coup? The issue now is how long this interregnum will last.