4 ms·

The Millennium Challenge was a farce but _the Millennium Challenge was completely right_. The point of the millenium challenge was to see if modern advances in

The Millennium Challenge was a farce but _the Millennium Challenge was completely right_. The point of the millenium challenge was to see if modern advances in C3 could allow a numerically inferior force to the one used in Desert Storm could invade Iraq successfully. What they discovered was against a tenacious and unconventional enemy willing to use elite troops in daring and near suicidal ways then America would take unacceptable losses. But..... That's not the enemy they were going to face. They were going to face the Iraqi army. So whislt on the face of it the "reset" was ludicrous it was also appropriate. And, I was a critic of the US military's strategy for the Invasion of Iraq, I thought the force ratios were insufficient and I was wrong. The Millennium Challenge did indeed show that C3 advances were sufficient to allow the lower force ratios to succeed. (Of course the Millennium Challenge did have other failures in the limits of what it was testing. The occupation of Iraq was botched from the opening days as whilst the force numbers were sufficient to beat the Iraq army they were not sufficient to occupy the country in a way that stopped it descending into chaos)

mcguire 5y ago
That's a well-known failure mode of modern professional wargames: they analyze the heck out of the first three days and then hand-wave the rest of the campaign.
bluejekyll 5y ago
Saying this up front, as an American, I believe we were lied to and misled in lead up to the invasion of Iraq, and someone should have gone to jail for that. That said, this statement isn’t quite this simple, “ they were not sufficient to occupy the country in a way that stopped it descending into chaos.” The US administration made a decision to disband the Iraqi military and it’s other paramilitary forces. That meant that all existing structure for maintaining order in the country was lost. By doing this, it necessitated a large occupation force, that never was created, and only made the US more hated there. Look at the occupations of Germany and Japan after WWII and it’s a very different outcome and one where existing systems were left in place to help maintain an orderly transition.
monocasa 5y ago
I was under the impression that the Millennium Challenge's red team was playing as Iran, not Iraq. A "tenacious and unconventional enemy willing to use elite troops in daring and near suicidal ways" particularly known for their use of speedboats blended with more traditional military material is the Revolutionary Guard's MO.
- kilroy123 5y ago
  Same here. That's why I think a war would Iran would be suicide and we would suffer a humiliating "defeat". Or at least many people would die. Unless our strategies radically change.
- jeltz 5y ago
  Yeah, the descriptions I have read of the red team fits Iran much better than Iraq. Simulating an attack against the Iraqi navy seems rather pointless.
- Marazan 5y ago
  Yes, Red team played like peak Iran - but the actual purpose of the Millennium Challenge was to wargame Iraq no matter what might have publicly been said.
  - jeltz 5y ago
    But why the amphibious assault then? And why did they give Iraq, a land locked nation, a navy? Red team were assigned equipment like a peak Iran but were forced to play like a demoralized Iraq. It does not make sense unless there was politics involved.
  - monocasa 5y ago
    They never publicly said either way because that would have been a diplomatic nightmare. But it's clear the game only makes sense if red team was Iran. > In 2002 the Pentagon ran an expensive wargame designed to simulate what a war with Iran would be like—and the U.S. lost heavily. https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a30392654/millennium-challenge-qassem-soleimani/ https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a30392654/millenni... > That time a Marine general led a fictional Iran against the US military – and won https://www.wearethemighty.com/articles/that-time-a-marine-general-led-a-fictional-iran-against-the-us-military-and-won/ https://www.wearethemighty.com/articles/that-time-a-marine-g... > Learning Curve: Iranian Asymmetrical Warfare and Millennium Challenge 2002 https://cimsec.org/learning-curve-iranian-asymmetrical-warfare-millennium-challenge-2002-2/ https://cimsec.org/learning-curve-iranian-asymmetrical-warfa... Iraq's military was set up completely different than what red team did, as Iraq tried to have a traditional, symmetric military. This is because, as a minority controlled nation, they were attracted to the added legitimacy it gave their regime to not have a focus on assymetric warfare. Tanks in columns make the state look stronger to the populace, even if you get trounced in an actual battle.
jvanderbot 5y ago
One nations "near suicidal" is another nations drone army/navy.

mcguire 5y ago

That's a well-known failure mode of modern professional wargames: they analyze the heck out of the first three days and then hand-wave the rest of the campaign.

bluejekyll 5y ago

Saying this up front, as an American, I believe we were lied to and misled in lead up to the invasion of Iraq, and someone should have gone to jail for that. That said, this statement isn’t quite this simple, “ they were not sufficient to occupy the country in a way that stopped it descending into chaos.” The US administration made a decision to disband the Iraqi military and it’s other paramilitary forces. That meant that all existing structure for maintaining order in the country was lost. By doing this, it necessitated a large occupation force, that never was created, and only made the US more hated there. Look at the occupations of Germany and Japan after WWII and it’s a very different outcome and one where existing systems were left in place to help maintain an orderly transition.

monocasa 5y ago

I was under the impression that the Millennium Challenge's red team was playing as Iran, not Iraq. A "tenacious and unconventional enemy willing to use elite troops in daring and near suicidal ways" particularly known for their use of speedboats blended with more traditional military material is the Revolutionary Guard's MO.

kilroy123 5y ago
Same here. That's why I think a war would Iran would be suicide and we would suffer a humiliating "defeat". Or at least many people would die. Unless our strategies radically change.
jeltz 5y ago
Yeah, the descriptions I have read of the red team fits Iran much better than Iraq. Simulating an attack against the Iraqi navy seems rather pointless.
Marazan 5y ago
Yes, Red team played like peak Iran - but the actual purpose of the Millennium Challenge was to wargame Iraq no matter what might have publicly been said.
- jeltz 5y ago
  But why the amphibious assault then? And why did they give Iraq, a land locked nation, a navy? Red team were assigned equipment like a peak Iran but were forced to play like a demoralized Iraq. It does not make sense unless there was politics involved.
- monocasa 5y ago
  They never publicly said either way because that would have been a diplomatic nightmare. But it's clear the game only makes sense if red team was Iran. > In 2002 the Pentagon ran an expensive wargame designed to simulate what a war with Iran would be like—and the U.S. lost heavily. https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a30392654/millennium-challenge-qassem-soleimani/ https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a30392654/millenni... > That time a Marine general led a fictional Iran against the US military – and won https://www.wearethemighty.com/articles/that-time-a-marine-general-led-a-fictional-iran-against-the-us-military-and-won/ https://www.wearethemighty.com/articles/that-time-a-marine-g... > Learning Curve: Iranian Asymmetrical Warfare and Millennium Challenge 2002 https://cimsec.org/learning-curve-iranian-asymmetrical-warfare-millennium-challenge-2002-2/ https://cimsec.org/learning-curve-iranian-asymmetrical-warfa... Iraq's military was set up completely different than what red team did, as Iraq tried to have a traditional, symmetric military. This is because, as a minority controlled nation, they were attracted to the added legitimacy it gave their regime to not have a focus on assymetric warfare. Tanks in columns make the state look stronger to the populace, even if you get trounced in an actual battle.

jvanderbot 5y ago

One nations "near suicidal" is another nations drone army/navy.