Hypothetical question fabout the practicalites of an Iraq withdrawal

[TheBaldyMan]

Suppose you were in the services and deployed somewhere in Iraq. I'd like to know if you were given an order to withdraw from your current position in Iraq and relocate across the Saudi border how quickly you'ld be able to organise your gear and get ready to roll.

This is to settle a hypothetic argument in another forum.

Personally I used to be able to roll within a couple of hours for a tactical redeployment. Two minutes if it was a general 'bug-out' (but you always left a ton of kit behind)

[endarkenment]

1. I figure they pull back from peripheral bases

into the BIG ASS BASES and then move out from there either back down the highway to Kuwait or airlift or a combination of both. I've never understood why this would take months to execute. I'd be fascinated by a believable answer that made that case.

[TheBaldyMan]

2. Maybe it's just a logistics problem after handing over local Iraqis

I suspect that the troops might put in that extra bit of effort if they knew they were going home.

[JoDog]

3. Basic logistics

It's not just the troops that need to be moved out...it's also the billions of dollars of military equipment. Everything we don't want used by one side or the other in a civil war has to be moved out of there. There's a lot of planning that has to be done to make sure that all the troops and equipment end up where they are supposed to be. And there's only so many troop transport and cargo plans.

And don't forget all the civilian employees who are American citizens that also must be removed (and guarded every waking moment until they are). And then the refugees. All the while surrounded by increasingly bold Iraqi fighters and panicked civilians.

We're not talking about a situation that can be solved by a swift run to the border. I'm not a fan of Joe Biden, but he earned points with me last night by calling the other candidates on the fact that their speedy pullout plans simply would not work. He's right--pullout will take a year, at least.

[TheBaldyMan]

4. Would it really take a year in what amounts to a tactical redeployment in a war zone.

The transfer of the bases to Iraqi control shouldn't really take that long, most of what is taken would be military gear, the pizza ovens and laundries can be left behind. It sounds like withdrawal on Halliburton's timetable.

Maybe it's because I'm ex-British Army, we just don't have the logistic tail that the US can deploy (believe me if we could we would) but I think that a concerted effort to redeploy a few hundred miles away in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States shouldn't take a year.

Added to that the troop levels could be reduced a lot sooner, say about 80,000 ground troops inside a friendly country. Still high but it would give the opportunity to reduce time deployed and give longer spells between deployments for training and re-equipping.

If it has to take more than a few months I'd say there was something wrong with the basic set-up.

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

5. Huh. Why should we start caring about

that stuff now?

It has been shown time and time again that our own explosives are being used against us.

[sarge43]

6. Well, I was informed Friday afternoon I'd be on a plane to

"somewhere in the Middle East for at least two months" Sunday morning. I was on that plane with a loaded duffel bag, enough stuff to set up a mini office and an assistant. I probably could have been on that plane Saturday morning.

(on edit)

Also, helped moved an entire bomber wing (o/a 900 personnel and all their stuff) half way around the world in under 48 hours. This was in the fun filled days before computers - hand carried records, all the paper work pounded out on manuel typewriters. It was 74 hours I'd not want to live through again, but the Buffs were in place -- in time.

[TheBaldyMan]

7. What do you think of the stars assessment of two years for a move?

Considering the refugees, civilian contract workers and the like had to leave, that would slow it down some. Suppose there was a local handover to Iraqi forces and an orderly withdrawal to Saudi territory. How long would it take, roughly? Weeks? Months? Years?

[sarge43]

8. I'm no logistic wonk, but if history is any example,

the contract workers, depending upon their status, will either hitch a ride or be abandoned ala Vietnam. Dido for the refugees. As for the majority of the military personnel, I think it could be done in a month, two at most, again depending -- how much stuff we'd want to leave behind. Unlike the British military, we Yanks are notorious indifferent to our equipment and material.

Yes, we will leave a God awful mess behind, but whether we bug out tomorrow or stay for the foreseeable future, we'll leave a mess. An army can not impose a political solution; at best it can only defer one.

[TheBaldyMan]

9. thanks for your answer

I'm not too sure about it being a disaster after withdrawal, at least the Iraqi forces speak the language and are familiar with the customs. It might make for better security. They might get the electricity, water and oil online faster than is happening now. I'd say they were better tools for the job than GIs, no offence.

[sarge43]

10. No offense taken and no argument.

I pray you're right.

[Major Hogwash]

14. Damn good answer, sarge43.

Baghdad is 300 miles away from Kuwait.
Highway No.1 is a 6 lane freeway from Baghdad to Kuwait.
That's a day's drive.
Even in an Abrams tank.

It took us all of 2 weeks to fight our way to Baghdad.
And 2 more weeks to take Baghdad.

As I recall, we started the invasion on March 19th.
And pulled Saddam's statue down in Baghdad on April 19th.

[sarge43]

16. Thank you, sir

However, TahitNut has a good, albeit scary, point. How much of the support 'tail' is now in the hands of private contractors? If the majority of it is, 'withdrawal' could be a monumental FUBAR, one for the books.

Landing on fly paper is easy; taking off, not so much.

Say what you will about us REMFs, we had a vested interest in doing the job as best we could; if for no other reason than the retribution could be ugly and, believe or not, most of us gave a solid damn.

[TahitiNut]

11. So much of the military has been 'privateered' that I'm even less able to guess.

Once upon a time (i.e. Viet Nam era), the vast majority of logistical operations were accomplished with G.I. personnel. While it involved private contractors for transportation (e.g. MAC contractors and shipping), such commands as 1st Log (at Long Binh and elsewhere) were extraordinarily adept at moving personnel and equipment at short notice. Believe me, these guys were freaking outstanding.

Like so many things, though, today's military is infested with overpriced and underfacilitated private contractors whose sole mission is profit. In my cynicism, I have to believe a large amount of time would be consumed by 'negotiating' the way the public money gets distributed.

[sarge43]

12. Good point, TahitNut

Probably doesn't resemble the military we knew. It's even money we'll have a Mongolian Cluster Fuck with an extra helping of FUBAR.

[TheBaldyMan]

13. I suppose drafting all the contractors would be out of the question

It would bring them under the MCoJ and cut costs to a fraction of what it is now. Get the Blackwater, KBR and Halliburton execs in camouflage and have them humping gear in 100^O heat with the rest of the guys.

Just thinking outside the box.

[pwb]

15. Women and neocon republicans first.?

[sarge43]

17. Not if she's wearing a uniform with stripes on it. n/t