| Tango01 | 23 Nov 2015 9:24 p.m. PST |
… A Military Offensive From Kurdish/Syrian Rebel Forces. "The group has reportedly shut off the internet, ramped up conscription efforts and is building a network of tunnels and bunkers as its digs in for a potential siege. The Isis militant group is reportedly fortifying its Syrian stronghold of Raqqa ahead of an expected backlash from the international community in the wake of the Paris attacks. France has redoubled its air strikes on Raqqa following the atrocity in the French capital and, with Britain preparing to set out a "comprehensive plan" to combat Isis this week, efforts to strike the group at its heart are growing. On the ground, loosely allied Kurdish and other rebel forces – backed by the US-led anti-Isis coalition, have gathered just 20 miles to the north. In recent weeks they have proven their capabilities on the battlefield, with the Sinjar offensive shutting off a key supply route between Raqqa and Isis's Iraqi command centre in Mosul…"
Full article here
link Also…
Inside Raqqa, the Capital of ISIS (New York Times) link Amicalement
Armand |
| Mako11 | 24 Nov 2015 12:33 p.m. PST |
Playing right into my strategy of strategic bombing. Looks like we may get to test those bunker buster bombs, after all. |
 Editor in Chief Bill   | 24 Nov 2015 12:50 p.m. PST |
Are sieges politically correct? |
 Legion 4  | 24 Nov 2015 3:16 p.m. PST |
Sieges are generally not practiced today. If the Kurds, etc. plan to take Raqqa, with US/NATO support, etc. … It will probably be a "knife fight", "Rattenkrieg", but not for long. As we saw at Kolbani … |
| Lion in the Stars | 24 Nov 2015 6:20 p.m. PST |
Thermobarics don't really care about how much fortification has been done. |
| Generalstoner49 | 24 Nov 2015 7:59 p.m. PST |
I am with Mako. I would flatten the entire city. |
| Generalstoner49 | 24 Nov 2015 10:07 p.m. PST |
I think Bill may be asking if they are ethical as opposed to politically correct. Correct me if I am wrong Bill. |
| Legion 4 | 25 Nov 2015 8:58 a.m. PST |
From a military standpoint, a siege is not "tactically" correct … for a number of reasons … |
| paulgenna | 25 Nov 2015 11:18 a.m. PST |
Attack them with tear gas and then follow it up with a quick ground assault. If they have strong defenses then again use tear gas to paralyze them or force them out of the defenses and attack. It worked in Vietnam and it will work here. |
| Tgunner | 25 Nov 2015 11:33 a.m. PST |
From a military standpoint, a siege is not "tactically" correct … for a number of reasons … But they are necessary if you don't want to decimate your force in head-on assault. The US had Fallujah under siege for several weeks/to months while it exhausted other means to suppress it and assemble the forces to take it by storm. We shut off access to the city and allowed it to be evacuated. Men of military age were cordoned off and fingerprinted and checked and then were interned if they had a "history" or released. Then the US went in. On the other foot, the Shiites had the British in Basra and Al Amara under siege at various points. The British broke the siege at Al Amara and endured it in Basra until they were basically relieved by the Iraqi Army. I don't think anyone likes them and they are appalling from a human rights standpoint. But it's war and honestly anything goes there. That's the way its been and the way it will remain. |
| Legion 4 | 25 Nov 2015 12:49 p.m. PST |
But they are necessary if you don't want to decimate your force in head-on assault. The US had Fallujah under siege for several weeks/to months while it exhausted other means to suppress it and assemble the forces to take it by storm. We shut off access to the city and allowed it to be evacuated. Men of military age were cordoned off and fingerprinted and checked and then were interned if they had a "history" or released.
Very true … and we don't do head on assaults much either. But a siege is a rarity. In any other situation, we'd surround it and by-pass. And of course cutting off the enemy from supplies, etc., is a standard. We studied and trained MOUT at the Infantry School. And elsewhere like Ft. Campbell Ky. But a siege was not discussed much. And would only be pretty much a last resort. We generally don't do head on assaults or long MOUT battles. As we all studied the battles, losses, etc., at Stalingrad, Berlin, etc. … Those long battles in cities and towns just absorb troops. As Paul points, out a quick violent shock action with much support like CS, FA, CAS, etc. would be preferable … But like at Fallujah, sometimes you have to go old school. |
