THE INTENDED MISS STORY
DOES IT STACK UP?
It’s been several days since the attack on the airfields in Iraq, but something still bothers me and bothers me deeply. “The Iranians deliberately avoided US casualties”. That’s the story everyone in the US and Europe is made to understand and most accept it. Not me. I’m writing my post today to challenged this group think. I’ll admit, I too accepted this approach to the crisis, in the beginning, but as I heard the statements coming out of Tehran, I began to wonder. Yes, Team Khamenei is notorious for colorful threats, but when I read an unclassified story on the initial BDA, Battle Damage Assessment, I began to doubt the party line coming from DC and the MSM. Now, let me make a point here. My approach for keeping this blog going for over nine years is simple. I seek the truth and I tell the truth. If my analytical reviews don’t match party lines, in any nation, then I understand when certain groups no longer wish to follow my post. Having said that, this, “they avoided” theory, in my opinion, is a false narrative and I am going to do my best to show why I believe my theory is correct.
https://www.businessinsider.com/satellite-images-show-iraq-base-damage-after-iranian-missile-attack-2020-1
BDA:
Battle Damage Assessment. A process that is executed to the point of perfection by the United States Military. A process I had drilled into my head, over and over and over again. How soon did the the US have a accurate understanding of what damage they has sustained? Within an hour. If not, some board would be getting chewed to pieces. How soon would the US government relates BDA data? As you might expect, casualties reporting is the top priority for briefing the leadership in DC and casualty reporting is the fist thing the public and media want to hear. When the comment was made, “ we will need to wait for the sun to come up to know BDA”, that was a partial truth, not a Clinton truth, but close! Sun rise allows the BDA process to be confirmed to nearly 100 percent. Commanders do not wait for 100 BDA reports. Spot reports is enough to make decisions to adjunct battle plans. Okay, on to the real issue I have with this topic of BDA.
What was hit? If you look at this website I attached, you will see some very disturbing images. Didn’t someone say, early in the event, the missiles or rockets had landed in a field? Wrong, well, many one or two and that might have been the message CENTCOM decided to put out. Controlling “rumors” is a top priority of commands to the rear of the conflict. Facts, but limited always with the understanding of a golden rule of combat. “ The first reports are almost always wrong”!
What was hit? Aircraft, drones to be specific, damage to flight Ops and the tower, and storage locations, actually they were maintenance facilities. Now, like I said, first reports are always wrong, so the story of holes in the dirt may have a legitimate bases. But, and here comes a big, “but”!
If those were the targets chosen, and I doubt the weapon system was that accurate, then how does anyone come to the conclusion the IRGC / Team Khamenei/ intended to not harm US service members? Before you start talking to your computer or tablet about the US getting a “heads up”, let me describe for you the area these weapons hit.
As you may guess, the United State’s Military is not a 9 to 5 job, at least not for those in that AOR. Flight lines are 24/7/ Maintenance facilities are 24/7. Base Ops, the Tower is 24/7. The concept the IRGC fired at targets they knew would not inflict US casualties is insane, so insane, I’m not sure how the MSM or DC came up with this theory.
Once again, let me take on the approach some of you and others like DC and the MSM will counter me with. The story goes, Tehran gave the heads up to Baghdad and Baghdad most likely told the US. This process was something Tehran planned for and it was the bases for insuring US troops were not injured. “ We need to strike you, but we don’t want to hurt you. We need to show our people real damage and tell them how many US soldiers we killed, but we know you already know the truth”. I’m sorry, but if that is the state of warfare in the 21st Century for the US, then I’m not sure how anyone is willing to stay in the services. Did DC / the Pentagon / play a game to limit what was going to happen? Did the US put troops in bunkers and then let missiles rain down on their heads? Did the US do this deliberately? Look at the penetration of those strikes? Who would knowing put their troops inside of bunkers, totally confident the bunkers could take the hit? I know I’ve been out for over five years now, but if I was a Commander again, and I found out someone played this game with the lives of my troops......well...... I won’t finish this sentence.
“ They didn’t mean to harm our troops”. That was the initial message even the US Pentagon put out. Now, on the Friday of the same week of the attack, the US Secretary of State makes the comment, “ We know the Iranians tried to kill our services members”. Wait....what? What storyline are we to believe now? We know the inside of the base was struck. We know Tehran states they tried to kill US service members and will continue to do so. So, how in the world did we end up with a narrative of,
“ They deliberately avoided hurting US members”. Perhaps you can see where my skepticism is coming from now?
BDA doesn’t lie, but, BDA can be manipulated at all levels. I’ve seen it done. The narrative during this event became clear from the beginning; nobody wanted the conflict to get out of hand, and I agreed with that stance. Here is my problem. What level of controlled messaging did the US use to keep that desired narrative? Did the US risk the lives of it’s own service members? Bunkers....look.....I used those bunkers in Desert Storm. I watched SDUDS hit near my bunker. The concept of hiding in a bunker while Tehran is allowed to put on their show,well, that better not be true. Just how bad did the US want to prevent this event from escalating? Would the US and others simply let the reality of a airliner being shot down go unaddressed ? If you read my post from yesterday, you will see my opinion on this topic as well. In the end, both events worry me. Are we moving towards such scripted warfare? Is this something new? Those that served in Vietnam may know this story all too well. Scripted warfare.
I’m not convinced I’m correct in my theory, and honestly, I don’t want to believe what my analytical mind is telling me. Having said that, this so called conflict seemed abnormal from the minute everyone started talking on social media and the networks. Here is the last truism I will leave you with. When nations start manipulating conflicts that are underway, when they allows politically considerations to influence the crisis, again, think Vietnam, I can assure you of one thing. Mistakes will be made and people will die and suffer. Don’t believe this statement, try talking to the families of the downed airliner. Clueless Iranian Anti Air units being led by clueless officers, all with deplorable training. The lesson and it’s one that has not changed for thousands of years. If you are going to go to war, do so violently and make your enemy have only one thought, “ make it stop”! Games, folks, we are playing games.
