Another monstrous beheading by ISIS

EarthRod

ISIS or IS are spread far and wide in remote desert areas as well as infiltrated into towns and villages. Country borders in remote desert regions are easily breached and, as far as ISIS is concerned, do not exist.

'Boots on the ground' or regular army Western forces, no matter how large or how well equipped, cannot operate in hard desert conditions chasing a force which can quite happily disappear only to reappear somewhere else.

So-called 'special forces' can do a slightly better job, but even they can only 'take out' small pockets of known ISIS forces if and when they can find them.

The old-fashioned methods and tactics of army fighting will not work. Something new needs to be developed to fight ISIS and will need the help of those who are familiar with remote dry desert conditions.

Just to give a little idea of what it's all about, read the sci-fi book 'Dune' by Frank Herbert written many years ago which highlights how whole armies can vanish without trace in hard desert conditions.

alan280170

Surely after all these years of occupation in Iraq the US/UK can work in the desert?

But with GPS now, you can't get lost.

The real problem is how many coalition casualties is acceptable (I'm pretty sure it will be a low number) as it will be a meat grinder, these crazies don't care about collateral damage and some don't care if they die.

Urban warfare is brutal and that's where they will fight the battles (or should if they have an ounce of military training fighting a far far superior force, the trick is to negate that technology and urban warfare is that tool for the crazies).

What will happen next is a coin toss, I would be very surprised if you see any significant US/UK boots on the ground except SF and maybe REMF's.

Sonic67

A modern army has GPS, drones, satellites, vehicles, radios, helicopters, aircraft, digital communications. An army doesn't get "lost". You can coordinate it all electronically.

Blue Force Tracking - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Friendly forces are shown as blue on the computer screen. Enemy forces as they are found are shown in red. Then you coordinate the blue forces to surround the red. In a way it's easier in the desert. The desert is like a vast open sea. There's nowhere to hide and if you just fancy dropping a bomb or firing a missile there is little chance of anyone else being killed.

EarthRod

No, I disagree. This is not a computer game with blues and reds.

Working from a large well-supplied base camp complete with ice-cream and cold beer and patrolling the surrounding area is not working in the desert. GPS can only pinpoint a location and that is all it does. The enemy will also have GPS, maps and compasses etc so no big deal. They also have years of hardened experience and knowledge and a deep understanding of operating in desert conditions.

If a very small part of the desert is 9,000 sq miles of sand dunes and another small part of the desert is 4,000 sq miles of flat desert strewn with sharp rocks and boulders followed by a mountain range and wadis then I wish the US/UK army all the best in chasing the ISIS out. That is just a example of the open desert.

In addition there are the villages and towns and the urban shanty areas where the difference between an innocent civilian and an armed terrorist is zero. Good luck patrolling those areas with US/UK army troops.

alan280170

I understand that, but we were replying about getting lost in the desert, now I assume you me IS getting "lost" as in blending in with the civilians? Only good thing about that is they'll have lose the weapons as well, a minor inconvenience I know.

Sonic67

That is what it looks like. All vehicles report their position via GPS, enemy are highlighted once found. The system is designed to be easy to follow. The idea being to move beyond the enemy reacting to you, to the point that you are operating faster than they can cope. So an enemy reacts to what you did but is too late.

That system is US but there are others.

All you need is a digital radio sending data as to what the vehicle it is fitted to is, GPS to say where it is, and a computer to put it all together and then display it. Once you have all your kit indicating what it is and where it is then you need to locate the enemy. Recce vehicles, Apaches or whatever else can do that. Then you need to coordinate the good guys onto the bad guys. You can even see if the good guys go the wrong way.

Cold beer? Where were you?

paul1979

I too don't think we will see much investment other than may be air strikes eventually. That so as I feel there is a global responsibility to respond.

Nontheless I don't think any wish to get into a long expensive and protracted war which could result in heavy losses. The constitution of any loss is low, so on balance it's easier to be reactive as things deteriorate with public support other than proactive now at this stage.

tapzilla2k

Which has happened countless times before in the Middle East.

Did not stop us fighting Rommel in Desert conditions in North Africa, with the SAS carrying out raids on airfields and other targets to choke Nazi supply lines. We could have quite easily lost that one.

Special forces will be tasked with neutralizing ISIS leadership and rescuing hostages. They will also likely be helping the Kurds as well. You'll find that the US has been bombing ISIS fighters in conjunction with Kurd ground forces. You are also discounting the Shia Militia's who will get involved and take the fight to ISIS.


The US developed tactics to fight the insurgents back in 2006 or so. Which consisted of getting the tribes on side and using hunter/killer units made up of US Navy Seals, the SAS and other special forces. Tasked with taking out the leaderships of insurgents and Al Qaeda in Iraq.

You only have to look at what happened to Rommel in the Deserts of North Africa after Montgomery got the upper hand. Or how the SAS raids on Airfields had to be precisely timed as they had to get in, cause as much damage as possible, get out and then head back to base. Which meant hiding out during the day, avoiding the Luftwaffe strafing them. Not all SAS troops made it back alive.

Don't think anybody said it was a computer game. ISIS will be using technology to move around, difference is the US has more of it.  

The US and British Armed forces (to name a few) are battle hardened to desert conditions i.e.
Forward operating bases in the harsh environments of Afghanistan and fighting insurgents across Iraq during the surge. ISIS can be defeated, however it won't happen overnight. It will take years of hard fighting through air power and boots on the ground.

Which US Military planners will have taken into account of and drawn up battle plans accordingly.
Again look to Montgomery vs Rommel in North Africa. You can still find the evidence of the battles strewn across wide areas, along with a lot of burials of those who survived battles but did not survive the harsh conditions.  

Which is what the US/UK did in Iraq and Afghanistan with varying degrees of success.

EarthRod

You keep on about Montgomery vs Rommel in North Africa during WWII and the SAS in that war.

That was a conventional war of army against army and should not be used for comparison.

Toko Black

and therein lies the rub, nearly 65,000 sq miles of desert with both hostile and civil groups travling through it. They don't have dots on they intel screens till they are actually spotted and identified as hostile or not. When there is known actions taking place, recon can home in locate the forces more readily, but when they are not actually getting reports of fighting in specific locations, it's like the proverbial needle in a haystack.

That's the problem with fighting guerilla forces - they often hit targets then disappear back into the crowds, desert or mountains. It's only when they give you a clear battle front that the military have the advantage.