Blogging on Meds

The battle for Sadr City grinds on…

Last night araging debate broke out on this site over the use of AC-130 gunships in Sadr City, Iraq…

Drew Says:
May 5th, 2008 at 8:19 pm e
The action of using AC-130U Spooky gunships in the limits of populated areas in Iraq and elsewhere is an action of calling for extremely precise, direct firepower. The AC-130U has the most advanced weapon’s software and the most extensive lines of software code of any aircraft on the planet — more than the space shuttle. The AC-130U uses those computer programs to precisely attack — within 36 inches — a specific and discriminate target with a range of weapons including the 25mm, 40mm, and 105mm howitzer, all of which are extremely accurate. The AC-130U is used mostly to protect elite U.S. special operations forces in combat, and provide surgical firepower in a danger-close manner in relation special forces. The AC-130 was used in Sadr City recently as an alternate to a guided bomb from an F-16, F-15, or B-1 bomber, which would have most likely caused mass collateral damage.

The AC-130U is always, ALWAYS used as a tool to lessen collateral damage while protecting allied troops. That is why it is being used in Iraq, that is why the collateral damage is so low, and that is why the enemy neutralization is so effective.

Azriel Says:
May 6th, 2008 at 1:18 am e
Mr. Drew seems to know a lot about the AC-130U, and maybe it is the most precise weapon for us to be using… But I have to ask if anyone really thinks collateral damage is low in Iraq. Is it really? We blew up a fucking hospital this week didn’t we? What scale do we measure collateral damage at, to reach the conclusion that it is low? At the lowest estimate possible, Iraqi civilians have died at around 15x that of U.S. troops… I’m not saying more of ours should be dying, but I think we can do better at keeping the people we are “liberating” alive before we claim to be inflicting low collateral damage.

Melinda Says:
May 6th, 2008 at 2:18 am e
Yay, Drew! God bless you for what must be obvious service for our great country and for clarifying the ignorance posted previously.
God bless and protect our American and Iraqi heroes!

Jeff Says:
May 6th, 2008 at 2:52 am e
“Collateral damage”…such a nice human term to use for kids killed walking to school, mother’s killed shopping in markets, etc.
http://www.iraqbodycount.org/
–and these are LOW estimates. But I guess death ain’t nothing but a number.

lissa-moon Says:
May 6th, 2008 at 3:23 am e
Exactly Jeff, exactly. God bless murder as long as you give it a fancy technological term.

Drew, have you been to Iraq? Have you fired a Howitzer on Sadr City from the air? Yes, the AC-130 is the most “accurate” flying tank in the world—with the biggest airborne gun ever! My post, however, was not about the technological prowess of a gunship. It was about using this “precision” weapon on one the most densely popultaed places in Iraq.

Overall strategic goals for the ongoing battle in Sadr City remain unclear. The only objectives I’ve heard are lessening mortar fire on the Green Zone and “loosening the grip of special groups.” The second of which means absolutely nothing: There’s been no way to determine the difference between the Mahdi Army and the “special groups.” The more likely US goal is weakening the Mahdi Army before combat troops start leaving Iraq next month. It’s widely believed that the drawdown of US troops to pre-surge levels (from 160k to 140k) this summer will lead to a Mahdi power grab.

Now, in regards to replacing the use of F-16s, F-15s, and B-1s with AC-130s, we were dropping, what, five or so 500-1000 pd bombs per day on Sadr City for past month? If that. Plus, we were using helicopter gunships w/ hellfires too. This wasn’t some sustained campaign over Sadr City.

But an AC-130 gunship, which stays above the battlefield for 12-hours, is used for sustained attack.

Despite all the computers, there’s no way to accurate in Sadr City, even if you used a robot with a knife stabbing arm, never mind a plane thousands of feet in the air firing shells and bullets the size of basketballs onto a ghetto. See NYT today: “The reality is that when forces go after insurgents in urban areas, it is impossible to avoid hitting some innocents as well.”

Finally, if the AC-130 is only employed to lessen civilain casualties, why did the US wait until now—after a month and 1000 killed—to use it? Oh, because the US is losing in Sadr City and the AC-130 is a sign of expanded battle. As AP reports: “On Monday, the U.S. Air Force unleashed one of its most potent weapons, the AC-130 gunship, against Shiite militants in Baghdad.” Note the wording: AC-130 “most potent” not “accurate” weapon.

I’m not even going to acknowledge the “enemy neutralization is so effective.” Just kidding! Of course I am…If we were effectively neutralizing the enemy in Sadr City, mortars wouldn’t still be raining down on the Green Zone.

Azy and Jeff accurately questioned the supposed low “collateral damage” quotient. I wouldn’t say 1000 killed in a month is a low figure—it’s one third of 9/11. Killing civilians with accurate weapons is just as much a crime as using crude weapons.