US forces asserting aggression in Somalia AGAIN!

Scratch said:

ooops, not up to date
Hmm, what else could come from the Ike then besides (Super)Hornets, the Prowlers (these are still in service?) are for EW and such things right ? And currently I can't think of more at the moment anyway.

Click to expand...

That's it. But remember these carry PGM(precision guided munitions). The Prowler is still around and "has the USQ-113 Communications Jammer, and may also be armed with the highspeed anti-radiation missile (HARM) for enemy surface-to-air radar destruction and suppression"..

We shall just have to wait to see what happens and what aircraft are used for the mission.

Scratch said:

If the US has brawny CAS planes like the AC-130 down there, I would presume they also have A-10. I think those would be much better suited for that job, or perhaps A-6 Intruders from the Ike. These could operate with a little more precission I think. But Spectres are just brute force, not my choice when it comes to taking out just specific personal.

Click to expand...

Actually AC-130H/U is very accurate platform and it was designed for this kind of missions... As for collateral damage I would tend to believe that 105mm artillery shell and 25mm ammo will do less damage then two 500 pound bombs... And no matter how precise weapons you use in urban enviroment there will always be civilian casualties(Ground operations (SF ops) aren't way to avoid civilian casualties) ...

bdpopeye said:

You are 100% correct about the attack angle of the C-130 Spectre. I think it was designed not only to kill but terrorize. Just my opinion.

That would be a very foolish move by the US. I hope it is not being considered.

Click to expand...

Various reports that I read noted that the AC-130 was used as well as several attack helicopters, so it's pretty much a done deal. I think they were AH-1s, which is probably the best option (militarily) short of sending in grunts. Still a stupid operation (no offense to anyone) though.

isthvan said:

Actually AC-130H/U is very accurate platform and it was designed for this kind of missions... As for collateral damage I would tend to believe that 105mm artillery shell and 25mm ammo will do less damage then two 500 pound bombs... And no matter how precise weapons you use in urban enviroment there will always be civilian casualties(Ground operations (SF ops) aren't way to avoid civilian casualties) ...

Click to expand...

Granted AC-130s don't do as much damage as full-sized bombs, but they still cause a gratuitous amount of damage that doesn't help anyone. Slightly better than using F-16s for an airstrike, but not much better. While I did say that the only possible way to avoid civilian casualties would be ground ops, that doesn't mean that it's plausible, just technically possible. The reason for doing so was mostly to underscore how civilian casualties would be inevitable for this kind of operation from the air, hence a reason not to do it.

Even with troops on the ground there will be civilian casualties- look what's has happened in Iraq around many US- manned checkpoints, not to mention raids conducted in search of insurgents! Either way, gurerilla wars start that way everywhere- those who didn't pick up a gun promtly do so once their friends & family are killed or hurt!




U.S. Troops Went Into Somalia After Raid

The_Zergling said:

Various reports that I read noted that the AC-130 was used as well as several attack helicopters, so it's pretty much a done deal. I think they were AH-1s, which is probably the best option (militarily) short of sending in grunts. Still a stupid operation (no offense to anyone) though.

Click to expand...

I don't know if I would say that it is a stupid operation. The US is hunting down people who committed terrorist attacks (the East Africa embassy bombings) against us and people who conspire to do the same. I'm perfectly fine with that, as long as we stick with the glamourous raids and avoid sending troops to Somalia, even a small number. As for Special Forces operating in that area, I don't really have an opinion on that because there is no publically available information.

I think that Somalia is actually going to be stabilized.

BLUEJACKET said:

Even with troops on the ground there will be civilian casualties- look what's has happened in Iraq around many US- manned checkpoints, not to mention raids conducted in search of insurgents! Either way, gurerilla wars start that way everywhere- those who didn't pick up a gun promtly do so once their friends & famaly are killed or hurt!

Click to expand...

Don't forger car bombs and human bombs. Not mention friendly fire on civilians that either caught in the cross fire or hit from richoeing bullets. The homeless due to the bombings. Civilians suffer the most in war.

Finn McCool said:

I don't know if I would say that it is a stupid operation. The US is hunting down people who committed terrorist attacks (the East Africa embassy bombings) against us and people who conspire to do the same. I'm perfectly fine with that, as long as we stick with the glamourous raids and avoid sending troops to Somalia, even a small number. As for Special Forces operating in that area, I don't really have an opinion on that because there is no publically available information.

I think that Somalia is actually going to be stabilized.

Click to expand...

Here's why I don't think any good can come out of it: by looking at it from the viewpoint of the Somalians: US forces killing their civilians again. I don't think that the family of an innocent person deemed "collateral damage" really cares if the airstrike also killed some important Al-Qaeda member, all they will remember is that it was the US that killed them. That in itself probably helps create more resentment, offsetting any gains that the deaths of the terrorist leaders may have created.

The_Zergling said:

Here's why I don't think any good can come out of it: by looking at it from the viewpoint of the Somalians: US forces killing their civilians again. I don't think that the family of an innocent person deemed "collateral damage" really cares if the airstrike also killed some important Al-Qaeda member, all they will remember is that it was the US that killed them. That in itself probably helps create more resentment, offsetting any gains that the deaths of the terrorist leaders may have created.

Click to expand...

There will always be such situations when military operations are conducted in civilian areas... This is simple unavoidable...


On other hand I doubt that general population in Somalia will be to much concerned by few more civilian casualties... I know that this sound cold hearted but we are talking about country that is thorn by civil war for so long, where civilians die en mass at regular basis either by the hand of opposed factions or from disease and starvation.

isthvan said:

There will always be such situations when military operations are conducted in civilian areas... This is simple unavoidable...

On other hand I doubt that general population in Somalia will be to much concerned by few more civilian casualties... I know that this sound cold hearted but we are talking about country that is thorn by civil war for so long, where civilians die en mass at regular basis either by the hand of opposed factions or from disease and starvation.

Click to expand...

Well I think that the key is that the United States was involved. If coming from the perspective of civilians dying in civil war anyway, it seems like the US is gratuitously coming in to kill people. That is what they will remember one day if they ever stabilize the country. If you know that civilians will die, and that this will cause even more hate towards the United States, then why even conduct the operation at all? The costs outweigh the benefits.

The_Zergling said:

Well I think that the key is that the United States was involved. If coming from the perspective of civilians dying in civil war anyway, it seems like the US is gratuitously coming in to kill people. That is what they will remember one day if they ever stabilize the country. If you know that civilians will die, and that this will cause even more hate towards the United States, then why even conduct the operation at all? The costs outweigh the benefits.

Click to expand...

It is more of "lets take care of currant threat and we will think about rest later"... I personally don't think that this is correct way of doing things but I can understand that point of view...