Posted on Feb 20, 2015
Army Times
24.2K
222
82
4
3
1
635599626469317328 1768152
From: Army Times

U.S. and Iraqi military planners are gearing up for the long-awaited battle of Mosul, which will likely begin in April or May and mount a fighting force of up to 25,000 Iraqi and Kurdish troops to force out the Islamic extremists who have controlled the city for nine months.

In a rare public disclosure of future battle plans, a U.S. Central Command official outlined the operational planning for reporters in a briefing Thursday.

Current planning envisions that five Iraqi army brigades of "fighting forces," backed by three Kurdish peshmerga brigades, will "contain from the north," the CENTCOM official said.

Plans also call for a "Mosul fighting force" that will include many former Mosul police officers and Sunni tribesmen, which will push into the densely populated neighborhoods of the predominantly Sunni city, the official said.

For months, U.S. military officials have pointed to Mosul, Iraq's second-largest city, as a major milestone in the campaign against the Islamic State group, which has about 1,000 to 2,000 fighters in Mosul, the CENTCOM official said.

Mosul is the largest city controlled by the Islamic State across its territory in Iraq and Syria and is central to the group's stated intention to recreate an Islamic caliphate. Islamic State forces seized the city in June as several Iraqi army brigades offered no resistance, fleeing the advancing militants and abandoning arsenals of U.S.-made weaponry.

Preparations now underway include "shaping and isolating" the future battlefield of Mosul and providing U.S.-led training for the Iraqi troops who will be fighting. The CENTCOM official said U.S. and Iraqi military planners want to launch the invasion in April or May, in part to avoid the worst of Iraq's summer heat and this year's Ramadan holiday that begins in June.

But that timeframe will be slipped if the Iraqis are not considered ready, the official said.

"If they are not ready, if the conditions are not set ... we have not closed the door on sliding that to the right," the CENTCOM official said of the operation's timing.

About 2,600 U.S. troops are in Iraq, many of them advising, assisting and training Iraqi troops.

It's unclear whether the invasion of Mosul will include a small number of American forces on the ground with Iraqi combat troops to serve as joint terminal attack controllers, or JTACs, to help provide accurate targeting information for U.S. air support.

Pentagon officials say no American JTACs have been on the ground to this point. During the final planning phases for the invasion of Mosul, the potential need for JTACs will be evaluated and options presented up the chain of command for President Obama to consider, the CENTCOM official said.

It is highly unusual for military officials to offer planning details about future operations. When a reporter asked the CENTCOM official, who spoke during an official briefing on condition of anonymity, why he was providing the details, he said it was to show "the level of commitment [the Iraqis] have to this. ... This is their plan, they have bought into it."

The official said the overall effort to defeat the Islamic State, also referred to as ISIL, is going well.

"Militarily, ISIL is in decline," he said. "The military component, the military part of the campaign remains on track" and is "generally unfolding as planned."

He downplayed the suggestion that the Islamic State's influence was expanding beyond Iraq, saying that the group provides "leadership and inspiration" to militant forces that have been operating for years in countries like Afghanistan and Libya.

And he downplayed the attack on Feb. 13 when about 25 Islamic State militants dressed in Iraqi army uniforms attacked the perimeter of al-Asad Air Base in Anbar province. About 320 U.S. troops are helping to train Iraqi troops and Sunni tribal militias were on the sprawling base but were not involved in the fighting or injured.

The CENTCOM official referred to that as "micro-offensive capability" that exists to a limited degree despite a defensive posture overall and a broader erosion of ISIL power.

http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/pentagon/2015/02/19/centcom-battle-of-mosul-could-begin-in-april/23697219/
Posted in these groups: Iraq map MosulCENTCOMIsis logo ISIS
Avatar feed
Responses: 27
Votes
  • Newest
  • Oldest
  • Votes
SPC Joshua H.
4
4
0
Have we faxed, emailed, and built a webpage in arabic so they can read the full plans yet?

There is only one way this makes any sense at all, and that is if this is a ploy to move them into an area, to clear out another area to strike at. Do I feel this is what happened? Nope, this is an epic mistake, and is going to cost A LOT of lives.
(4)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
CPT Craig Church, ASLA, LEED GA
3
3
0
Some people say that these big dummies in ISIS are like what happened when Hitler and his Storm Troopers were harassing Jews and claiming territory in the 1930"s, give me a break, are you kidding? In no way do these people match the horror of the Nazi Regime. No way. Nor are they claiming 1/100th of the lives that were lost under Hitler. Some people just don't know history and the deaths that occurred by 1915 exactly a century ago. World War I was already under way. The the 20th Century with Hitler, Stalin, the Khmer Rouge, Korea, Vietnam, Desert Storm, Rowanda, and all the other "dirty wars" had claimed millions of lives. Read this article;

http://cnsnews.com/commentary/patrick-j-buchanan/best-times-or-worst-times

If we think that this is the end times because of these morons then our perception of the threat is over exaggerated. Yeah, yeah we should stop Iran from getting nukes, I agree. But I suggest we think more about why ISIS came into being rather that simply think about their destruction. Their sons and daughters are little now and some day they will fill their dead fathers and mothers shoes to shoot at my grandchildren maybe, who knows. Let solve this issue with real world solutions and not just big guns and bombs.
(3)
Comment
(0)
CPT Craig Church, ASLA, LEED GA
CPT Craig Church, ASLA, LEED GA
>1 y
ISIS is only using the media to exaggerate their profile and we are letting them do it by believing they are bigger than they are. Maybe they will attract followers but they will never achieve the prominence, organization, and brainwashed killing discipline of the Nazi's. Weather Hitler started early or late killing people (women, children, gypsies, dissidents, Christians, opponents) the point is his killing was on a much more massive scale than these idiots. He didn't hide his rally's, his troops behind masks, or his parades, he killed innocent people in secret yes, nonetheless he killed many more people. You sir cannot defend Hitler in this case!

ISIS can be reckoned with smartly but not with massive campaigns in the typical American WW2/Vietnam tactic. What is this "If we can't see it we won't believe it" warfare? We cannot fall for their antagonizing antic's by sending troops there to eradicate them because we won't. This must be handled smartly and the best way is to know your enemy before you react foolishly. Understand what to do AFTER they are destroyed, where will they go?, what will their children do? Where will they work? How will they live? How do we prevent this from happening again? Like I said before, a hungry man is an angry man.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
COL Charles Williams
3
3
0
I think that would be 3rd battle for Mosul... I think this violates the principle of war - Surprise.
(3)
Comment
(0)
LTC Battalion Commander
LTC (Join to see)
>1 y
If we added all the pieces of information they are showing on a single screen on television about this missing to an offical document it would have to be classified. This, to me, brings to mind Geroldo drawing maps in the sand.
(1)
Reply
(0)
LTC Battalion Commander
LTC (Join to see)
>1 y
*about this mission*
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
CSM Brigade Operations (S3) Sergeant Major
3
3
0
Imagesu511azm9
Here we go again...
(3)
Comment
(0)
COL Ted Mc
COL Ted Mc
>1 y
Sgt. Maj; Possibly you should remember that Lawrence won by getting the Arabs to forsake their differences and all fight on the same side. You might also want to remember that it was the British and the French who sold out the Arabs and parcelled out the Middle East with no regard to anything other than the best interests of the British and the French.
(0)
Reply
(0)
CSM Brigade Operations (S3) Sergeant Major
CSM (Join to see)
>1 y
Sir thank you for the history lesson, I remember that from school. I think maybe my ability to post sarcasm needs some work. The picture portrays the way the Arabs and all other civilized people waged war. Basically meeting on the field of battle with all your pieces clearly visible on the board. The old rank and file so to speak. Make ready! Fire!
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SPC Johnny Velazquez, PhD
3
3
0
I think it's a political ploy. Who in his right mind would telegraph such an offensive move? I hope I'm wrong but if not, ISIS will have the advantage. What a moronic move!
(3)
Comment
(0)
PO2 Terri Myre
PO2 Terri Myre
>1 y
Just more incompetence being shown by this current administration.  Haven't they already done enough damage when it comes to the military? Smh
(2)
Reply
(0)
GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad
GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad
>1 y
Barack obama re elected as us president pg
I couldn't help but answer the question (who in his right mind would telegraph such an offensive move?)!!!
(3)
Reply
(0)
SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SGT Jim Z.
3
3
0
OPSEC or are we trying to pull another D-Day deception plan and hit them elsewhere. I am tired of reading this from open sources and whoever posted this should be investigated for OPSEC violations.
(3)
Comment
(0)
SSgt Geospatial Intelligence
SSgt (Join to see)
>1 y
Like when Geraldo broadcast the location of a SpecOps team. They pulled his @$$ out of there so fast his shadow was still on the ground w/ the team when he touched down in the States.
(3)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SPC Charles Griffith
3
2
1
Proof that the CIC (as if) is totally out of his gourd when it comes to Military operations.
(3)
Comment
(1)
SPC Charles Griffith
SPC Charles Griffith
>1 y
PO3 Roberts would you mind explaining your vote? It is not required but I would love to hear your reason for it so I may include it in future evaluations of my own position on matters of The POTUS's ability to properly perform his duties. Thanks in advance Thank you for your service and have a great day :)
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
PO2 Seth Carron
2
2
0
Considering i lost count of the number of OPSEC violations they just pulled, I'm gonna chalk this up to political maneuvering/sabre rattling. Or it might be a decoy and they're planning something else. Either way it smells really fishy.
(2)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SGT Joseph W.
1
1
0
I wrote a paper in English class years ago on how "TV ready" Desert Storm was with the imbedded reporters/maps of troops movements/et al. I had and still have a problem with the 'immediate gratification' mentality. The willingness to trade our military's safety for the sake of ratings is a stick in my side. Thank you all for your service!!!
(1)
Comment
(0)
SPC Chris Benamati
SPC Chris Benamati
>1 y
In my opinion, if they don't get it from CNN then they're bound to get it from the CIC (yeah whatever) himself in one his endless news conferences.  He's "leaked" more sensitive information than Wiki-leaks!!
(0)
Reply
(0)
SGT Bud Hartrampf
SGT Bud Hartrampf
>1 y
I agree, I had and have a big problem with this too.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SSG(P) S6 Communications Ncoic
1
1
0
You gotta love how the Army talks about how important OPSEC is, yet violates it by allowing this article to come out. You'd think someone would put a stop to it before it went online and everyone started sharing it. It seems like it's only important when it involves is down range, but when it comes to this, they say "screw it" and lets everyone in the world know.
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
COL Ted Mc
1
1
0
"It is highly unusual for military officials to offer planning details about future operations. When a reporter asked the CENTCOM official, who spoke during an official briefing on condition of anonymity, why he was providing the details, he said it was to show "the level of commitment [the Iraqis] have to this. ... This is their plan, they have bought into it.""

Interesting paragraph:

[1] The planning had nothing to do with President Obama.

[2] The "Pentagon official" breached his oath of office.

[3] The "Pentagon offical" obviously doesn't give a damn about the lives of the soldiers (and cares even less about allied soldiers).

[4] Absolutely nothing whatsoever is going to happen to the "Pentagon official" who breached OpSec.

[5] No one is ever going to find out who the "Pentagon official" was.

[6] Everyone is going to blame President Obama when the plan, which the "Pentagon official" released to Da'esh, fails.
(1)
Comment
(0)
CPT Craig Church, ASLA, LEED GA
CPT Craig Church, ASLA, LEED GA
>1 y
Big Dummies!!!
(1)
Reply
(0)
COL Ted Mc
COL Ted Mc
>1 y
CPT Craig Church, ASLA, LEED GA Captain; You have to remember that "No comment - and you know that it's not legal for me to answer that question anyway." doesn't enhance your chances of future employment with a high paying firm.
(0)
Reply
(0)
CPT Craig Church, ASLA, LEED GA
(0)
Reply
(0)
COL Ted Mc
COL Ted Mc
>1 y
CPT Craig Church, ASLA, LEED GA Captain; You also have to remember that "OK, I'll tell you a whole bunch of stuff that I'm not allowed to tell you and which could possibly cause people to get killed on the condition that you don't tell anyone who you got it from because I know that that will help me get a job with your company when I retire." DOES enhance your chances of future employment with a high paying firm.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SGT Jim Z.
0
0
0
According to this article the Pentagon is calling CENTCOM's action a mistake.

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2015/03/04/pentagon-calls-mosul-briefing-a-mistake-by-centcom.html?comp= [login to see] 70&rank=1
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
MAJ Operations Officer (S3)
0
0
0
From the Army Times (1944 Version)

From: Army Times

U.S. and Allied military planners are gearing up for the long-awaited battle of Normandy, which will likely begin in May or June and mount a fighting force of up to 250,000 American and Allied troops to force out the Nazis who have controlled the continent for 5 years.

In a rare public disclosure of future battle plans, a Supreme Allied Command official outlined the operational planning for reporters in a briefing Thursday.

Current planning envisions that five allied brigades of "fighting forces," backed by multiple follow on brigades, will "cross across the channel," and land at various points the official said.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SGM Mikel Dawson
0
0
0
Why are we even seeing this? Why isn't the officials being slapped on the back of the head? Unless?
(0)
Comment
(0)
MAJ Multifunctional Logistician
MAJ (Join to see)
>1 y
You can't really mass that many troops secretly.
(0)
Reply
(0)
SGM Mikel Dawson
SGM Mikel Dawson
>1 y
That's true, but the attack place and time may be different.
(2)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
MSgt Flight Chief, Operations
0
0
0
Edited >1 y ago
Or maybe this is a way to fly predators, identify target packages, shape the battlefield, and get civilians out of the way prior to commencing to a large scale battle that could be very fluid and extremely dangerous in a large city. Then maybe this way we can get more insight to possible variables on the field and let the Kurds vet the squirters that leave now since they have already been in place choking at the bit to move forward but having been waiting on approval of Iraqi forces for the last 2 months.
(0)
Comment
(0)
2LT Scott Armstrong
2LT Scott Armstrong
>1 y
Apparently we're going to focus group our strategy to see what flies with the American people and the world stage before we act. At least this gives us time to host several job fairs and perhaps we will all be living in peace and prosperity before April once the Jihadis are gainfully employed.
(2)
Reply
(0)
COL Ted Mc
COL Ted Mc
>1 y
2LT Scott Armstrong Lieutenant; Please re-read Army Staff Manual 4789.21 / 47b "Language Directions for the Conduct of General Staff Meetings" (especially Chapter 4879 'One ought not instruct one's parent's direct maternal ancestor in the art of extracting the liquid contents of the spheroidal bodies produced by avians through the application of buccally produced negative pressure.') and redraft your post to include at least 37 buzz words and five references to PowerPoint.
(0)
Reply
(0)
MSgt Flight Chief, Operations
MSgt (Join to see)
>1 y
I may not like the approach but I still have faith in my leaders. I believe Gen Austin to be a smart and capable man. When I lose trust that those appointed in positions above the men and women of the US forces, it will be time for me to leave and move on. Until then I have faith that they will not willing accept undue risk the lives of the service members under their command.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SrA Teleservice Representative
0
0
0
So who are the unlucky souls that this administration has sent into the fire this time? Is it the Marines that are already over there or is it the Army soldiers that are on their way over there? This is just like when they broadcast that they are sending an Infantry Brigade combat team over to Kuwait a few months ago
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SFC William Swartz Jr
0
0
0
Amazing that once again "we" telegraph our intentions to the people we are committing ourselves to going after...smfh......
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.