Military historians heap praise on war strategists

Back to the War on Saddam Hussein Page

By Dick Stanley
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF

Saturday, April 19, 2003

Brilliant. Audacious. Unprecedented in military history.

The superlatives tumble off the tongues of Texas military historians with the speed of an M1 Abrams battle tank rolling to Baghdad.

"The supply echelons performed at extraordinary levels," said Thomas Hatfield, dean of continuing education at the University of Texas and a specialist on World War II. "The air power was awesome, and the decision to send armor into Baghdad ahead of the infantry was brilliant."

Military professionals say the American coalition's plan and execution of the war in Iraq will be a required case study at war colleges for decades to come. How it will be taught remains to be seen, even to military historians who followed the war with more than the usual interest or understanding.

But UT's Hatfield and military historians Joseph Dawson of Texas A&M University and Charles Endress of Angelo State University in San Angelo heartily agree with one of the stars of their field, California State University's Victor Davis Hanson.

"It is nearly impossible to recall a similar advance that has traveled so far, so fast, with so few losses, without major shortages of fuel, ammunition and food -- without being parasitic on the surrounding countryside," Hanson wrote last week in National Review Online. ". . . blasting through with enough strength to intimidate would-be citizen militias but not appearing so savage as to incite civilian repugnance."

Inevitably, there are comparisons to the German Panzer tank attacks of 1941, Patton's tank assault across France in 1944, and Sherman's infantry march to the sea in the Civil War. But the comparisons break down upon consideration of technology and enemy prowess.

"The Panzers of World War II could stop and engage an enemy tank at 500 yards with a 50 percent chance of a first-round hit," Endress said. "M1s are engaging targets at two miles, while rolling, with a 95 percent hit chance."

Hatfield said forces had much greater distances to cover in World War II, their communications were spotty, and improvisation was the rule.

"Patton outran his fuel, food and ammunition," he said. "Resistance stiffened as he had to slow down."

Dawson, former director of Texas A&M's Military Studies Institute, said the Nazis "were ahead of us, with superior weapons and training, arguably superior discipline and leadership."

The Iraqi forces who were not outled or outgunned by the coalition's attacking divisions -- their night vision equipment letting them fight in pitch dark -- were overwhelmed by accurate air power.

"Targets are much more vulnerable nowadays," Dawson said. "That will be a major feature of how the war is evaluated. Air advocates are coming closer and closer to fulfilling the promise that wars may be largely won by air power."

For Endress, the key point that war colleges will be studying is the American military's increasingly sophisticated battlefield management.

"Friendly fire casualties are so reduced from what they used to be," he said. "That's a function of command and control. They know where the units are. Our opponents are still trying to figure out what to do. We're making decisions faster than they can look at us. Our tank commanders can roll so fast they have to think farther ahead than they can see."

dstanley@statesman.com; 445-3629

Copyright 2001-2003 Cox Texas Newspapers, L.P. All rights reserved.