To: elmatador who wrote (30763 ) 4/4/2003 2:10:18 PM From: RealMuLan Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 74559 this comment echoes yours. Iraqis fighting a mysterious war Somethings Amiss, And No One Can Figure It Out 4/4/03 11:34:03 AM Discuss this story in the forum The Australian Age Analysis -- theage.com.au Iraqis fighting a mysterious war April 4 2003 By John Keegan ... Saddam, or whoever is in charge, is fighting the strangest war. Indeed, it is tempting to wonder, on the evidence so far presented, whether the Iraqis have been fighting a war at all. Admittedly there has been a certain amount of sniping and loose shooting. Iraqis in civilian clothes have been firing at American and British soldiers. However, that seems about the extent of enemy activity. Consider what the Iraqis have not done. They did not defend their frontier with Kuwait. The coalition forces passed through unopposed. They scarcely defended Umm Qasr, Iraq's only and vital port. It fell after three days. They have not fought any large-scale or even small-scale battles, though the territory of their country is being eaten up day by day. More mysteriously, they have neither demolished nor seriously defended any of the bridges over the Tigris or the Euphrates, which are essential to the coalition's movements into the country. If Saddam had some great counter-attack force preparing a trap for the coalition in the national heartland, one might fear that the abandonment of the bridges intact was a devilish plot, designed to make all come right for him in one sudden reversal of fortune. But because he does not possess such a force, Iraq's defensive strategy, if it can be so called, appears casual to the point of carelessness. Moreover, looking through the other end of the telescope, what Iraq has failed to do amounts also to an inexplicable abdication of advantage. Blown bridges are strong defences, as long as blown in time. What is Saddam up to? Does he believe he can inflict such casualties on the Americans outside Baghdad that they will lose heart and go home? Does he believe he can fight and win a battle of Baghdad? Did he so much underestimate his enemies that he made no proper preparations? Did he so much overestimate the importance of Franco-German protest against this war that he was persuaded he did not need to? Or is it simply that Saddam is disabled or dead and that no one of his megalomaniac determination is running the Iraqi war effort? Some explanation is necessary. Strategic analysis does not work. This is a deeply mysterious war. Perhaps there will be a big battle over the next few days, through which the Iraqi hand will be revealed. But that seems improbable. Unless and until there is some serious fighting, observers will be left with the eerie impression that the Second Gulf War is not really taking place. Military historian and author Sir John Keegan is defence editor of The Daily Telegraph, London.