Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 1/22/2002 6:09:10 PM EDT
Saw the movie last night and have read the book 3x. Great movie and seemed true to the book. That said, I never had the impression that there were that many multi-storied buildings in the areas of Mogadishu. Was that part true? and... If it was true, someone tell me why there was no effort to secure the "high ground" roofs and vantage points when the small units went static? Sorry if that's a no-brainer, I'm not a vet, just a student of tactics. No flame implied or intended and I salute all the courage that was portrayed.
Link Posted: 1/22/2002 6:24:32 PM EDT
--> [url]http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/somalia/imagery.htm[/url]
Link Posted: 1/22/2002 8:47:46 PM EDT
I've been there twice...and your impression is correct. There are not that many multi-storied buildings (3 stories and higher) with the exception of a few. Also the airport is much smaller than what was shown in the movie. It consists of one tiny blue terminal with various aircraft wreckage that have been pushed off the runway prior to our occupation...located near the local garbage dump. FWIW, the Somali's were not portrayed harsh enough in the movie...you didn't see them hiding behind women and children using them as a human shields. It just burns my ass hearing about how they were portrayed like animals...and how we should be more sensitive...blah, blah, blah. They [i]ARE[/i] [b]ANIMALS[/b], thats how they act. They only way you can get them to do anything for you, is by paying them off...they call it "bakshish"(sp)...then they will turn around and stab you in the back given the opportunity. RLTW.
Link Posted: 1/22/2002 8:59:55 PM EDT
"Bakshish" means "Tips" in Arabic. They are [b]always[/b] asking for bakshish.
Link Posted: 1/23/2002 5:44:05 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Tuukka: --> [url]http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/somalia/imagery.htm[/url]
View Quote
Thanks for the link Tuukka. I was looking for some kind of map of the battle.
Link Posted: 1/23/2002 6:52:57 AM EDT
They also didn't show the rangers shooting at delta.
Link Posted: 1/23/2002 7:38:38 AM EDT
Highground would only be effective to a point. (In MOUT) Personally, I'd rather have my machine guns on ground level, that way you get better "grazing fire." The higher you put your weapons, the more "plunging fire" effect you get which could reduce the effectiveness of your fire. Not sayin that it would have been completely bad to hold some high ground, but if you do that in a MOUT environment, you have to remember that you have to split up your teams and squads. It would also cause the entire force to move slower. I don't really think it was bad tactics to not occupy much of the high ground, but it would definately help to have a few teams up there for fire support and/or an LP/OP.
Link Posted: 1/23/2002 9:42:16 AM EDT
Did anyone else notice this, on the page that Tuukka posted a link to? [url]www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/1997/97-0364.pdf[/url] You will need Adobe Acrobat to open the file. It's entitled "Critical Analysis on the Defeat of Task Force Ranger." Defeat? I have downloaded it and will report back once I've read it.
Top Top