Posted on May 29, 2015
What does "airstrikes struck land features denying ISIL a tactical advantage" really mean?
16.7K
96
70
4
4
0
For a few weeks at least the DoD News service emails have included the phrase "airstrikes struck land features denying ISIL a tactical advantage" usually associated with attacks against small tactical units. I understand how occupation of land or the short-time potential of bringing direct or indirect fire limits the use of terrain [that implies real time observation]; but, I am not certain what the phrase means or how long the tactical advantage will be retained after the aircraft depart the AO.
[5/29/2015 update to question] The phrase seems to be focused on denying ISIL offensive capabilities.
May 28 - Near Tal Afar, Iraq an airstrike struck land features denying ISIL a tactical advantage.
May 14 - Near Asad, Iraq two airstrikes struck an ISIL tactical unit and occupied land features, denying ISIL a tactical advantage
May 11 - Near Mosul, Iraq two airstrikes struck an ISIL fighting position and struck land features denying ISIL a tactical advantage.
May 5 - Near Ar Raqqah, Syria three airstrikes struck land features, denying ISIL a tactical advantage.
Contrasted with -- May 5 - Near Mosul, Iraq seven airstrikes struck two ISIL tactical units and destroyed an ISIL vehicle, two ISIL staging areas, two ISIL excavators and an ISIL defensive position.
I certainly am hopeful for the strategic and operational defeat of ISIS. I hope the use of the phrase means something tangible and is not merely part of an information or deception campaign.
[5/29/2015 update to question] The phrase seems to be focused on denying ISIL offensive capabilities.
May 28 - Near Tal Afar, Iraq an airstrike struck land features denying ISIL a tactical advantage.
May 14 - Near Asad, Iraq two airstrikes struck an ISIL tactical unit and occupied land features, denying ISIL a tactical advantage
May 11 - Near Mosul, Iraq two airstrikes struck an ISIL fighting position and struck land features denying ISIL a tactical advantage.
May 5 - Near Ar Raqqah, Syria three airstrikes struck land features, denying ISIL a tactical advantage.
Contrasted with -- May 5 - Near Mosul, Iraq seven airstrikes struck two ISIL tactical units and destroyed an ISIL vehicle, two ISIL staging areas, two ISIL excavators and an ISIL defensive position.
I certainly am hopeful for the strategic and operational defeat of ISIS. I hope the use of the phrase means something tangible and is not merely part of an information or deception campaign.
Tactics
Military History
11A: Infantry Officer
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 25
1
1
0
...back in the ready room: That means the fuzzy-faced Captain completely missed his target. However, the DoD had to account for the spent munitions.
(1)
(0)
LTC Stephen F.
@Capt Mark Strobl, I hope you are providing primarily a humorous response. It would be really sad in this day and age of "smarter bomb" delivery that missed targets and wasted payloads are rare.
(0)
(0)
Capt Mark Strobl
LTC Stephen F., yes... absolutely. That was definitely tongue-in-cheek. As most aviators don't like to return with ordinance, I'll have to assume that a "target of opportunity" was engaged.
(1)
(0)
It's simple
And no not doctrinal term yet still very real.
Striking a hill top that has tactical advantage before an attack would be terrain denial
Striking that hill top during an attack on the patrol base below would cause the enemy to withdraw or become
Ineffective from that position
And no not doctrinal term yet still very real.
Striking a hill top that has tactical advantage before an attack would be terrain denial
Striking that hill top during an attack on the patrol base below would cause the enemy to withdraw or become
Ineffective from that position
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Agree it's Babblespeak for not doing squat. Unfortunately that is symptomatic of an Administration that doesn't want to hear the truth or get asked about it. It is truly shades of Vietnam all over again. We spend a lot and lose a lot over this type of mentality. It's Whiz Kids deja vu all over again.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
1
1
0
This sounds like typical Pentagon mumbo jumbo to me. It's the kind of bomb damage assessment they give when they don't have a clue what damage they have done. As a former artillery air observer in Vietnam I am familiar with the kind of BDA reports fighter pilots and air observers give
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Today DoD News included the phrase "destroying an ISIL tunnel entrance." It was interesting that the assumption is that the entrance as opposed to the tunnel exit was targeted - unless ISIL is developing one way tunnels.
I noticed last week that a bridge was destroyed by an airstrike - that weakens my assumption that the "land features" struck by airstrikes around Beiji last week were directed towards river crossing capabilities and land features providing over-watch for those crossing.
I noticed last week that a bridge was destroyed by an airstrike - that weakens my assumption that the "land features" struck by airstrikes around Beiji last week were directed towards river crossing capabilities and land features providing over-watch for those crossing.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I just went through the thread again.
From the discussion, it would appear that dropping several busloads of caltrops across Iraq so that the ISIS drivers had to keep stopping to fix flat tires would also produce a "tactical advantage".
In fact, dumping a bunch of loose 2x4s in front of an ISIS advance would ALSO produce a "tactical advantage" because they would have to watch where they were walking and that would slow them down.
On the other hand, so would dropping enough nuclear weapons on Iraq to form a glowing line in the sand which ISIS couldn't cross would ALSO produce a "tactical advantage".
"Tactical advantage" is meaningless bafflegab unless it is put in perspective.
From the discussion, it would appear that dropping several busloads of caltrops across Iraq so that the ISIS drivers had to keep stopping to fix flat tires would also produce a "tactical advantage".
In fact, dumping a bunch of loose 2x4s in front of an ISIS advance would ALSO produce a "tactical advantage" because they would have to watch where they were walking and that would slow them down.
On the other hand, so would dropping enough nuclear weapons on Iraq to form a glowing line in the sand which ISIS couldn't cross would ALSO produce a "tactical advantage".
"Tactical advantage" is meaningless bafflegab unless it is put in perspective.
(1)
(0)
LTC Stephen F.
Thank you COL Ted Mc, I think we could also drop or insert numerous mis-directional Arabic traffic signs including detour, stop and yield or whatever the appropriate translation is.
If reverse psychology would work we could insert no u-turn signs and do not enter - randomly inserted 2x4's, pits, or perhaps more effective - "this way to official Koran burning site" and "pork eaters festival with free beard shaving" as an added bonus may lead them on wild-goose [or pig as appropriate] chases.
If reverse psychology would work we could insert no u-turn signs and do not enter - randomly inserted 2x4's, pits, or perhaps more effective - "this way to official Koran burning site" and "pork eaters festival with free beard shaving" as an added bonus may lead them on wild-goose [or pig as appropriate] chases.
(0)
(0)
1LT William Clardy
You're not being creative enough, LTC Stephen F..
Put a "Koran Disposal Pit" sign next to a fresh mound of dirt, slap a "CLOSED" sticker on the sign and stick a small shovel in the dirt...
Put a "Koran Disposal Pit" sign next to a fresh mound of dirt, slap a "CLOSED" sticker on the sign and stick a small shovel in the dirt...
(1)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
LTC Stephen F. How about a lowered swing arm sign across the highway with a sign (in Arabic, of course) which says "Wait for train to completely clear crossing before proceeding."?
That should produce a sufficiently large traffic jam that it would make an air strike profitable.
That should produce a sufficiently large traffic jam that it would make an air strike profitable.
(1)
(0)
LTC Stephen F.
COL Ted Mc, creating traffic jams would be a good idea. Based on what ISIS is doing to ensure beards are not shaved, I suggest we set up beard inspection tents in strategic locations close to the traffic jams by the rail-less railways which are supposed to move across the sand without leaving a wake - except for the Muslim equivalent of wake after the multiple deaths.
(0)
(0)
Suspended Profile
Degrading trench systems, tunnel networks, berms, etc. Obviously they can be rebuilt, but it forces them to waste time and resources repairing them.
LTC Stephen F.
Well so far the defensive networks including trenches, firing positions are listed separately in the DoD News briefings 1st Lt Matt A.. I believe the "land features" are those that would enable to either conduct offensive operations or expand their influence and control locally.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
LTC Stephen F.
I think it is a target rich environment LCpl Mark Lefler and CPT Ahmed Faried. The reasons I suspect that the land features are near the river is that it takes up such a large area and control of it inhibits east west movement near Beiji which has significant oil refining capability, with an expectation of significant barge traffic associated with tat refining capability.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
LTC Stephen F.
SGT Lawrence Corser, that seems like a reasonable assumption for areas which require bridges to traverse or else have steeper topography such as eastern and northern Iraq.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google