terryy%sandstorm.Berkeley.EDU@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Terry Yeung) (08/08/90)
From: terryy%sandstorm.Berkeley.EDU@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Terry Yeung) As a couple of people have already posted possible U.S. responses to Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, I would like to know what kind of opposition would American troops face IF they were sent. There has been a lot of talk of how large the Iraqi military is but not much on the type of equipment they use. I would like to know: 1) How good are the aircraft in the Iraqi Air Force? I just saw on the news yesterday that they had MiG-29s. If so how many do they have? How does the rest of their aircraft compare with American fighters? 2) What type of equipment do the Iraqi Army use? I know they have T-72 tanks but again how many and how would it stack up against American tanks? 3) There has been some talk to sending two U.S. tank divisions to Saudi Arabia to protect against a possible Iraqi invasion. How long would it take to mobilize these forces and get them there? 4) To follow up on question 3, what can the U.S. do if Iraq decides to keep going and invade Saudi Arabia? The Saudis would probably not last long against the Iraqis and assuming this what can the U.S. do about it? 5) What kind of assets does the U.S. have in the area? The carrier Independence is in the Gulf of Oman. What other ships do we have headed there? I've heard that there will be three carrier battle groups there when all the forces arrive. True? Which ships? I think without knowing the answers to these questions, we really can come up with a plan for a military operation there. I can't seem to find any information on the state of the Iraqi military today. Terry Yeun
nak%archie@att.att.com (Neil A Kirby) (08/09/90)
From: nak%archie@att.att.com (Neil A Kirby) In article <1990Aug8.030457.25888@cbnews.att.com> terryy%sandstorm.Berkeley.EDU@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Terry Yeung) writes: > 1) How good are the aircraft in the Iraqi Air Force? I just saw on > the news yesterday that they had MiG-29s. Heard this morning (WED) on NPR's morning edition (I forgot who the commentator was) [paraphrased]: The Iraqi air force uses modern aircraft but are lackluster in pressing home their attacks. Their performance against Iran should have been better given their numerical superiority and newer air craft. > 3) There has been some talk to sending two U.S. tank divisions to > Saudi Arabia to protect against a possible Iraqi invasion. How > long would it take to mobilize these forces and get them there? The 45th (?) armour is headed to Saudi Arabia as of today. ETA was not stated. I don't know what the composition of the 45th is. While not tanks, 2 tac air wings from Langley (F-15's) and Myrtle Beach (F-16s) are enroute. > 5) What kind of assets does the U.S. have in the area? The carrier > Independence is in the Gulf of Oman. What other ships do we have > headed there? I've heard that there will be three carrier battle > groups there when all the forces arrive. True? Which ships? Eisenhower (sp?) tranisted the Suez canal last night with Egypt's permission (Nimitz class nuclear carrier). Independence is there, and the JFK (? sudden surge of doubt in my mind) is inbound. Also enroute is the battleship Wisconsin (sp), and a marine assualt ship. Neil Kirby ...att!archie!nak
henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) (08/13/90)
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) >From: terryy%sandstorm.Berkeley.EDU@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Terry Yeung) > 1) How good are the aircraft in the Iraqi Air Force? I just saw on > the news yesterday that they had MiG-29s. If so how many do they > have? How does the rest of their aircraft compare with American > fighters? A better question would be, how do their pilots compare? As the Israelis have consistently shown, that's more important than the aircraft. As for the answer, my guess is "so-so, but better than you'd expect because they have recent combat experience". Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry
smb@ulysses.att.com (Steven Bellovin) (08/14/90)
From: smb@ulysses.att.com (Steven Bellovin) In article <1990Aug8.030457.25888@cbnews.att.com>, terryy%sandstorm.Berkeley.EDU@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Terry Yeung) writes: > > > From: terryy%sandstorm.Berkeley.EDU@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Terry Yeung) > As a couple of people have already posted possible U.S. responses to Iraq's > invasion of Kuwait, I would like to know what kind of opposition would > American troops face IF they were sent. Obviously, the ``IF'' no longer applies... According to newspaper and wire service reports, the exact size of Iraq's army isn't clear. Some sources list it at about 1,000,000 men, with another 400,000-500,000 men in the reserves. Other sources say that at least half of the standing army is poorly trained and equipped, and about 250,000 of the remainder are merely adequate. The remaining 250,000 soldiers, though, form the elite Republican Guard, which mounted most of the successful offensive operations against Iran. They're well-trained, and quite experienced. The Iraqi air force is not considered to be very good. They have essentially no experience in air-to-air operations, since Iran had so few planes in the air to oppose them. Their bombing runs were generally quite ineffective. As for Iraqi chemical agents -- according to the AP, they have a blistering agent (believed to be mustard gas) and a nerve gas. Defense include protective suits and two counter-agents to nerve gas, atropine and pralidoxime choride. In Israel, there are media reports quoting a Defense Ministry aide as saying that the Iraqis have no chemical warheads for their missles.
osmigo@emx.utexas.edu (rn) (08/15/90)
From: ut-emx!osmigo@emx.utexas.edu (rn) [How good is Iraq's air capability?] There was some discussion of this way back when they first moved into Kuwait. It was said that yes, they had some experience from the conflict with Iran, but most of it consisted of medium-altitude bombing operations. In fact, according to the report (this was a CNN segment), many Iraqi pilots flew higher than necessary because "they didn't like getting shot at." They reportedly have very, very little experience and training in deadly, plane- against-plane dogfighting, and the U.S. isn't expected to have much trouble blowing Iraq's air components to smithereens...(-8 Ron Morgan osmigo@emx.utexas.edu
cashman@acsu.buffalo.edu (geoffrey a cashman) (08/17/90)
From: cashman@acsu.buffalo.edu (geoffrey a cashman) In article <1990Aug9.015928.8556@cbnews.att.com> nak%archie@att.att.com (Neil A Kirby) writes: > > >From: nak%archie@att.att.com (Neil A Kirby) >In article <1990Aug8.030457.25888@cbnews.att.com> terryy%sandstorm.Berkeley.EDU@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Terry Yeung) writes: > >> 5) What kind of assets does the U.S. have in the area? The carrier >> Independence is in the Gulf of Oman. What other ships do we have >> headed there? I've heard that there will be three carrier battle >> groups there when all the forces arrive. True? Which ships? > > Eisenhower (sp?) tranisted the Suez canal last night with Egypt's > permission (Nimitz class nuclear carrier). Independence is there, and > the JFK (? sudden surge of doubt in my mind) is inbound. > > Also enroute is the battleship Wisconsin (sp), and a marine assualt ship. Independence was the first to arrive and is parked off the coast of Yemen (That's just outside the Persian Gulf). Eisenhower did in fact pass through the Suez and is now in the Red Sea (Slight tangent here...if I were a carrier battle group command I don't think I'd want to be parked in something as small as the Red Sea). Saratoga's battle group contains the Wisconsin as well. She is either already on station or will soon arrive. Her station will be, or is, the eastern mediterranean. JFK left port this week (yesterday?) and was said to be "conducting routine operations off the coast of Virginia" (taken from UPI on clarinet news service), to which I say hogwash (IMHO). All 4 carrier battle groups have at least one Ticonderoga class cruiser. These are the ships with the aegis missile defense system. Probably of more importance is the fact that these ships carry the tomohawk cruise missile. Some of you might be saying "What can the Wisconsin due to Iraq from the eastern mediterranean?". Answer: (one possible one) She has tomohawk cruise missiles as well. Something to add to that: Some Spruance class destroyers (of which there are at least three in the area, possibly more) now have the tomohawk as well. Also note: Eisenhower has been away from home port for more than six months now. She is due to return home. JFK may relieve her if the situation cools down a bit. -- - Geoff Cashman cashman@acsu.buffalo.edu
stevew@wyse.wyse.com (Steve Wilson x2580 dept303) (08/19/90)
From: stevew@wyse.wyse.com (Steve Wilson x2580 dept303) In article <1990Aug12.214557.2877@cbnews.att.com> henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes: >A better question would be, how do their pilots compare? As the Israelis >have consistently shown, that's more important than the aircraft. As for >the answer, my guess is "so-so, but better than you'd expect because they >have recent combat experience". > > Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology According to news reports I've heard lately the considered opinion is that the Iraqis have an experienced air force, but they also have a tendency to not carry home the attack, i.e. they flench easily. Hope its true if push comes to shove. Steve Wilson
anthony@batserver.cs.uq.oz.au (Anthony Lee) (08/30/90)
From: anthony@batserver.cs.uq.oz.au (Anthony Lee) I have not seen any articles posted here about combined armour and air-ground attacks. I have heard somewhere that the Iraqi in the Gulf war did not have very good co-ordination between their army and air force in terms of combined attacks. It could have been one of the reason why they did not have a decisive victory earlier in the Gulf war. -- Anthony Lee (Michaelangelo teenage mutant ninja turtle) (Time Lord Doctor) ACSnet: anthony@batserver.cs.uq.oz TEL:+(61)-7-371-2651 Internet: anthony@batserver.cs.uq.oz.au +(61)-7-377-4139 (w) SNAIL: Dept Comp. Science, University of Qld, St Lucia, Qld 4072, Australia
scottmi@ncar.UCAR.EDU (SCOTT MICHAEL C) (08/30/90)
From: boulder!snoopy!scottmi@ncar.UCAR.EDU (SCOTT MICHAEL C) Some of the Spruance-class destroyers have two 4-shot box ABL's for Tomahawk. Several more have had the foreward ASROC launcher removed, and a 61-cell vertical launch system added in its place. The 61-cell VLS is supposed to get a VLS version of ASROC, but (apparently) none of these have been delivered yet (the reason is that Sea Lance was supposed to replace ASROC as well as SUBROC, but Sea Lance has been killed by Graham-Ruddman recently, so VLS ASROC has been only just recently reinstated.) These 61 VLS tubes in the Spruances that have VLS are (to my understanding) filled only with Tomahawk. One of these ships would make a significant contribution to US stand-off firepower in the Arabian area. The Wisconsin carries only 32 Tomahawks, and any other missile cruisers (with the exception of the VLS-equipped Aegis ships) carry at most eight rounds apiece, as do the ABL-converted DDs. One can't help but wonder what percentage of the Tomahawks in the area are of the conventional land-attack flavor. These would be most useful for employment against Iraqi air bases, chemical weapons plants, munitions depots, etc. --don't like snow, miss Deirdre, and wish I was still in Santa Cruz.