Attack on US Embassy in Baghdad

CHIRO1989

Not sure if this should be under political or self defense thread.

Can somebody smarter than me explain why Embassy security has not used live ammo to stop a gate breach and subsequent arson. Sounds like rubber bullets and tear gas are being used, hard to tell if that calmed the crowd down from the pictures and film I have seen. Might be the crowd is only doing stuff that requires a new paint job on the building, but I am pretty sure those Marines have not slept much since Friday. I wish Centermass was able to chime in around here more.

Bigslug

I guess I'm not smarter than you.  We've got the precedents of the Iran, Beirut, and Benghazi embassies to learn from.  The point at which they're breaking into the facility should be the point that Marines are allowed to do what Marines do.  Why this isn't the "DUH!" default setting mystifies me.

CHIRO1989

Me and the wife have been sitting here for 2 days saying the same thing.

Varmintmist

As an aside, I noticed that the Ospreys showed up before needed and no one went back to bed.

CHIRO1989

Varmintmist said:

As an aside, I noticed that the Ospreys showed up before needed and no one went back to bed.

How would you like to be the pilot of an Osprey over that crowd? One RPG, or more sophisticated shoulder fired weapon, away from a bad day, which is probably most days in the Middle East, but still. 

CaliFFL

Why do we still have (and maintain) embassies? I mean the physical buildings and all the costs associated...There are ~300 around the world.

CHIRO1989

Relationships, intel, eyes on the ground, bribery, coercion.

CaliFFL

Yeah, pretty much what Wiki said except the bribery and coercion

I read the Afghanistan embassy cost almost $1B to build. How long before it is attacked? 

Linefinder

The reason "Embassy" Marines usually decline employing deadly force against a mob is two-fold....or possibly a bit more complex than that.

They have no legal authority to employ deadly force beyond the gates of the embassy. Meaning a Marine sniper on the rooftop can't take a shot at folks setting up a mortar 400 yards away as a "defensive" measure.  Dispersal of hostile crowds gathering outside is the responsibility, per prior agreement, of the host country....

Given this simple restriction, it's unlikely that a couple dozen well-armed Marines can fend off a fired up hoard of a few hundred once they've gained access to the grounds. Sure, they can inflict a lot of casualties, but the outcome isn't in doubt.

So, you don't shoot them. That only further enrages the crowd, who may then take revenge against the very diplomats you're there to protect.

The onus of this incident falls squarely on the Iraqi security forces that allowed the aggressors past the previously agreed upon safe zone. 

Mike

CHIRO1989

Watching the activities, I would have assumed we were on fire and about to be over-run, I see what you are saying, but where does the Embassy draw the line? Being taken captive by Muslim Extremists has not ended well for a lot of folks.

CHIRO1989

CaliFFL said:

Yeah, pretty much what Wiki said except the bribery and coercion

I read the Afghanistan embassy cost almost $1B to build. How long before it is attacked? 

I forgot, blackmail too.

Linefinder

Chiro, that's the point. We can't fire because we are about to be over run. We can fire only when we have been over run. At that time, it's time to holster the guns and hope diplomacy saves the day.

OTOH, I'd love to see the "Rules of Engagement" for the Russian embassies around the world. 

Mike

Accipiter

If they had had a couple of 277 furys, it would have ended before it began.

CHIRO1989

Linefinder said:

Chiro, that's the point. We can't fire because we are about to be over run. We can fire only when we have been over run. At that time, it's time to holster the guns and hope diplomacy saves the day.

OTOH, I'd love to see the "Rules of Engagement" for the Russian embassies around the world. 

Mike

*sigh*, I don't imagine Marines are fighting over Embassy duty, sit tight, try not to be a big target. 
As to the Russians, you don't see a lot of their Embassies getting molotoved, probably because there are immediate non-diplomatic repercussions. 

Accipiter

Sorry, but if the mob breaches the walls, the mob should be stacked like cord wood.  If I am going down it will be a 100 to 1 ratio in my favor.  I would not rely on the civility of a radical Muslim mob in this day and age.  1970s Iran was a long time ago.  

Varmintmist

CHIRO1989 said:

Varmintmist said:

As an aside, I noticed that the Ospreys showed up before needed and no one went back to bed.

How would you like to be the pilot of an Osprey over that crowd? One RPG, or more sophisticated shoulder fired weapon, away from a bad day, which is probably most days in the Middle East, but still. 

That is pretty much the job description. If you cant do it, you dont sign up for it.

Linefinder

Accipiter said:

Sorry, but if the mob breaches the walls, the mob should be stacked like cord wood.  If I am going down it will be a 100 to 1 ratio in my favor.  I would not rely on the civility of a radical Muslim mob in this day and age.  1970s Iran was a long time ago.  

The job description doesn't really care how many you are willing to kill in order to save your own life.

It's what are you willing to give up to save others.

Mike

bullsi1911

They should set up a double wall or fence so that once the first wall is breached, then they are on American soil and subject to American 5.56 and 7.62.  

Gila

bullsi1911 said:

They should set up a double wall or fence so that once the first wall is breached, then they are on American soil and subject to American 5.56 and 7.62.  

There you go, talking common sense, and this is the government...

CHIRO1989

This is an acceptable response...

Linefinder

Yep. Both the Pentagon and Iran confirmed it was a US helicopter strike.

Mike

iateadonut

Linefinder said:

Yep. Both the Pentagon and Iran confirmed it was a US helicopter strike.

Mike

Excuse my ignorance; I have two questions:

1) Is killing Soleimani an act of war?

2) What was an high-ranking Iranian military official doing in Iraq?

Diver43

iateadonut said:

Linefinder said:

Yep. Both the Pentagon and Iran confirmed it was a US helicopter strike.

Mike

Excuse my ignorance; I have two questions:

1) Is killing Soleimani an act of war?

2) What was an high-ranking Iranian military official doing in Iraq?

 To answer number 2:  Officials state that he was the one orchestrating the attacks on the embassy and was planning more.

Bigslug

And yet the Democrats are still managing to manufacture outrage over smoking this dude.  "WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN CONSULTED!  WAAAAAAAAH!"   Really?

The guy's operating off his home turf, engaged in kicking down the door of our embassy in a country we have been heavily involved in for a LONG time, and people are wringing their hands about how Iran will retaliate. . .over our retaliation. . .?  Really? 

Diver43

It was a military target he WAS a top military leader. In a war zone they created, what's the problem? 

GunNut

He was declared a Terrorist by our government in 2011.  He was also banned for international travel by the UN (that worked as well as all other UN edicts, right?).  Just another card in the deck, that actually took too long to cross off.

GunNut

alphasigmookie said:

Diver43 said:

It was a military target he WAS a top military leader. In a war zone they created, what's the problem? 

Because it's further escalation of an unnecessary conflict. An all out shooting war with Iran is not a situation we ultimately want to be in, but this pushes us much closer to that. Not only that but it does so with many in the world community not backing us up. 

An all out shooting war with Iran?!?!?  Bomb their oil production facilities and their own people will eat the Ayatollah for dinner.  They are on the verge of a revolution as it is.

Jayhawker

Well...As Grandpa used to say..
."Some people just need killin'"

We have been pussyfooting around with these people far to long...

And I suspect that if the previous occupant of the Whitehouse ordered the guy whacked, you'd be having far fewer problems with it...(Not that he would have...sending another planeload of cash to leave us alone would have been his speed)

GunNut

Jayhawker said:

Well...As Grandpa used to say..
."Some people just need killin'"

We have been pussyfooting around with these people far to long...

And I suspect that if the previous occupant of the Whitehouse ordered the guy whacked, you'd be having far fewer problems with it...(Not that he would have...sending another planeload of cash to leave us alone would have been his speed)

There you go,  Obama sends pallets of cash, Trump smokes them.   HUMMMMMM.  Hard to figure out who is their buddy.

Antonio

Good riddance. Those guys were up to no good. 

Acting against Iran = Troubles; letting them get away with their mischief by imposing deadlines, signing negotiations, drawing lines in the sand, etc. = Also troubles. That doesn't work with thugs and criminals since the only language they understand is violence and they only respect/fear full force retaliation while seeing talking as weakness.

You can talk loud and carry a small stick for so long until it becomes time to switch that practice around. It amazes me how some Americans think they can "civilize" 3rld. world fanatics that have no remorses of wiping out scores of their own people by calling them names and giving speeches about their bad behavior in fancy dinners and bureocratic meetings thousands of miles away from where they rule. 

Other eyes have watched this; betcha they'll feel the Predator's "breath" in the back of their necks knowing that they're not out of reach, just not in the right place at the right time. That's called deterrence.

Will they retaliate? Sure they will, or otherwise will loose face in front of their partners, useful idiots and their own. But at least for a while they'll have to consider the consequences.

BamaakII

Iran has been harnessing the world for the last 40+ years.  While all the socialists cry for peace and negotiations in public, I doubt many will shed a tear if we kick their butts back to Allah.  I don't want to see anyone die but we have the technology to selectively target who and what we want.  Remotely.  No boots on the ground.  Once and for all.  Force what is left of the govt into capitulation on our terms.  Screw the UN