MC02: The Terrorists Won!

[Snoopy]

This particular story is from 2002, so it is pretty damn old. But nevertheless, this deserves mentioning (especially considering there are people considering an invasion of Iran).

In 2002, there was a war game to test the US Navy-Army doctrines. According to press release, it was to be a fair fight (so to speak), with both sides being treated equally. The USA (the Blue team) was given a high-tech army and fleet, whereas the enemy (unnamed Middle Eastern Country in the Persian Gulf, the Red team) had a small army, low-tech weaponry (some decent troops spread around), and a small fleet mostly composing of converted civilian ships, patrol boats, etc.

Obviously, you would expect the Blue Team to totally trounce the Red Team, right?

Well, not quite.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/ne...0906-iraq1.htm

For those of you who are too lazy to read that, allow me to sum it up for you.

The Red Team commander (General Paul van Riper) wanted to do whatever he could to win (meaning a war game with meaning). Knowing of the famous US first-strike doctrine, he decided to outfox the Blue team. His small navy went circles around the Blue fleet. The Blues began messing up. At this point, Riper decided it was time to strike. He sent his entire navy and airforce straight at the US force. Using tricks like motorcycle messages (which would have easily been counter acted by a more versatile Blue force) and calls for prayer from the Mosques as secret messages, the Blues were completely unprepared. Hundreds of cruise missiles were fired from the Red boats, and then several of the smaller ships were loaded with explosives and crashed into the Blue navy. The sheer force of the attack short circuited the entire Blue force's high tech equipment and radar. About 2/3rds of the Blue fleet and invasion force was sank before it even landed. That equals about 20,000 dead Marines and Sailors.

Then the Pentagon decided to "refloat" their navy, and redid the entire thing, only scripted so as to guarantee a Blue victory.

What kind of war game is that? A war game should expose flaws in doctrines and seek to improve them, not to make the "good guys" win the battle. Imagine what would happen if that were a real battle. It would be a HUGE embarrassment, and the USA would basically have to surrender due to the heavy casualties. Why can't there be REAL war games, to be fine toned until the USA has a doctrine properly prepared for unorthodox tactics?

[Heathen Hammer]

There is one reason - corruption in leadership. Its just like USSR in 1980s..

[CtrlAltDe1337]

I doubt the US army would surrender over 20,000 casualties, but I do agree that they need to work out some better strategies.

[Phier]

Imagine what would happen if that were a real battle. It would be a HUGE embarrassment, and the USA would basically have to surrender due to the heavy casualties. Why can't there be REAL war games, to be fine toned until the USA has a doctrine properly prepared for unorthodox tactics?

So a superior commander who knew the other sides strategy ahead of time won a simulated war game.

Yes you know this sort of thing could happen in RL, heads would roll figuratively, but I think surrender would be a..umm bit premature.

Since we really don't know current training, we can't say for certain if nothing was done, but there is an old saying. Navy regs are written in blood.

[Surgeon]

I've heard of this. IIRC it turned out that the Red Team commander was acting like a schmuck and not playing by the rules at all, with his forces exhibiting god mode and disobeying various laws of physics. Thus they decided to refloat the ships because they thought the idea of the enemy having multiple lives and the ability to warp into perfect position was rather farfetched.

[Snoopy]

I've heard of this. IIRC it turned out that the Red Team commander was acting like a schmuck and not playing by the rules at all,

Since when did war have real "rules"?

with his forces exhibiting god mode and disobeying various laws of physics.

Driving circles around the enemy is not god mode, it is what weaker armies do against stronger opponents, same with the various unorthodox tricks used.

Thus they decided to refloat the ships because they thought the idea of the enemy having multiple lives and the ability to warp into perfect position was rather farfetched.

A preemptive strike with quick boats is not "warping into perfect position". What multiple lives? Were that the case, the Reds would have flattened the entire Blue navy with several survivors. Remember, the Red side was using suicide boats and cruise missiles. If there was serious cheating, it would be fairly obvious.

Furthermore, were this the case, there would be no need to script the entire thing in round 2.

@earlier post

Surrender would be a bit far fetched, but you know what I mean. What exactly happens when the US public, which gasps at the idea of 2,000 dead troops, discovers that most of their invasion force had just been destroyed, losing 20,000 troops and several trillion dollars worth of equipment? It would be a huge disaster at the very least.

[Hunter Makoy]

@earlier post

Surrender would be a bit far fetched, but you know what I mean. What exactly happens when the US public, which gasps at the idea of 2,000 dead troops, discovers that most of their invasion force had just been destroyed, losing 20,000 troops and several trillion dollars worth of equipment? It would be a huge disaster at the very least.

Yes if by some fanciful reason the terrorists matched us in numbers, training, command experience, somehow got a navy and air force, plus hundreds of cruise missiles, yes this could probably happen.

However bringing into account the fact that they completely made up the odds and apparently the Red team broke the special rules made to help them out, I can't really see much caring at all.

Why should we at all be pretending we're facing an enemy that we're not?

[Count of Montesano]

I actually participated in a similar computer wargaming exercise while I was in the Army. The exercise simulated how well the Americans could defend South Korea against a surprise North Korean invasion. The Army team got completely trounced by the North Korean team, who I was assigned to help. The Opfor team commander liked me and decided to give me command of a North Korean Special Forces company. My orders - do something completely crazy that the brass wouldn't expect. I then proceeded to run that company behind enemy lines and wipe out the division's logistic center. Sure my computer unit died, but so too did all the frontline American units who now had no food, bullets or fuel coming in from the rear. One colonel cried foul, saying that in reality the North Koreans would not commit their best men to a suicide mission. But the Opfor commander countered that that's exactly the kind of risk that an outgunned and desperate North Korean unit would take. At any rate, by the end of the exercise the Americans finally won through magical "air superiority" that instantly killed all North Korean units and reinforcements from all across the world. Yes, they even simulated moving entire divisions from Germany to North Korea in 2 days just so the American commanders wouldn't get a black mark on their records for failing the exercise.

In their defense, failing these kinds of exercises can ruin an officer's career. There are plenty of excellent leaders who do very well in real-world situations but who aren't so great at theoretical war games. And vice versa. Perhaps the best solution would be to allow these kind of exercises to be completely free-form and seen as training exercises instead of as evaluations.

[Pious Agnost]

America uses Cheat Codes?

[Surgeon]

I've heard of this. IIRC it turned out that the Red Team commander was acting like a schmuck and not playing by the rules at all,

Since when did war have real "rules"?

with his forces exhibiting god mode and disobeying various laws of physics.

Driving circles around the enemy is not god mode, it is what weaker armies do against stronger opponents, same with the various unorthodox tricks used.

Thus they decided to refloat the ships because they thought the idea of the enemy having multiple lives and the ability to warp into perfect position was rather farfetched.

A preemptive strike with quick boats is not "warping into perfect position". What multiple lives? Were that the case, the Reds would have flattened the entire Blue navy with several survivors. Remember, the Red side was using suicide boats and cruise missiles. If there was serious cheating, it would be fairly obvious.

Furthermore, were this the case, there would be no need to script the entire thing in round 2.

No, by "not following the rules", "god mode" and "warping into position" I mean something along the lines of "o hai, this boat here that just got destroyed by the airstrike has just clipped through these other boats here into the perfect position to strike at your ship".

Anyhow, I can't really make an argument here because as I recall my source wasn't official in anyway, and I can't find anyone else's recount of this wargame other than Riper's own, so I guess it's up to speculation unless someone else knows something I don't.

[Phier]

I've heard of this. IIRC it turned out that the Red Team commander was acting like a schmuck and not playing by the rules at all, with his forces exhibiting god mode and disobeying various laws of physics. Thus they decided to refloat the ships because they thought the idea of the enemy having multiple lives and the ability to warp into perfect position was rather farfetched.

Apparently the US navy needs punkbuster.

[Captain Jin]

I've heard of this. IIRC it turned out that the Red Team commander was acting like a schmuck and not playing by the rules at all, with his forces exhibiting god mode and disobeying various laws of physics. Thus they decided to refloat the ships because they thought the idea of the enemy having multiple lives and the ability to warp into perfect position was rather farfetched.

No, he was just kicking a conventional American force's ass, so they got upset, refloated ships and restarted forcing both teams to follow pre-determined Ops plans.

Van Riper is a former Marine General, and this has been a common problem in the past. There have been joint training operations between Army and Marines in the past and the Army doesn't like to participate with us very much anymore because we don't follow conventional tactics and we do crazy to win.

This is a good show of that, essentially a retired General is trying to make a point that the manner in which we conduct warfare needs to change to reflect the threat of today. Van Riper was very critical of Rumsfeld and one of many retired generals that called for his resignation. The man essentially had nothing to lose, and used the exercise to make a point-- which he did. He resigned half way through saying that the DoD was making a mistake in the way it was operating, basically beauracracy blocked his attempt but the message was still heard, just not by enough of people.

I've seen this sort of thing even in the USMC. Where we've used unconventional attacks to beat one another up, and then have been criticized for it. For instance, I was posted in a two man OP with a fellow of mine during squad exercises. We were calling in position reports to higher. Now a two man OP is unconventional unless you are a sniper team (even then it's generally three guys), but we were opfor so why not? So we ambushed a squad of Marines then high tailed it back to a defensive position. Well the squad didn't know we had vacated our position and continued to assault the hill. Once we were back in our positions with the rest of the OpFor we saw the Marines assaulting our old position, but finding it empty. So we conveniently had the grid coords for that position, so we called in an artillery strike which wouldve annihilated the squad.

We were then criticized by our higher ups for an unrealistic maneuver. And I said, look a highly mobile two man observation unit initiated contact with the enemy, then drew them into a pre-designated artillery position while escaping to a reinforced position, then pounded said enemy with arty, thus destroying them. But no, not 'realistic'. So they brought the squad back to life and let them attack our dug in positions because that is much more conventional and 'realistic'.

[Carach]

We were then criticized by our higher ups for an unrealistic maneuver. And I said, look a highly mobile two man observation unit initiated contact with the enemy, then drew them into a pre-designated artillery position while escaping to a reinforced position, then pounded said enemy with arty, thus destroying them. But no, not 'realistic'. So they brought the squad back to life and let them attack our dug in positions because that is much more conventional and 'realistic'.

but u just acted on initiative. that is realistic. it just ing happened lol.

god...battles have been won on 'unconventional' thinking - hell the history of warfare has evolved on 'unconventional' thinking.

GJ to u tho

[Pandemonium4423]

Ima call Hax on red team! >.>

[Erik]

"A phrase I heard over and over was: 'That would never have happened,'" Van Riper recalls. "And I said: nobody would have thought that anyone would fly an airliner into the World Trade Centre . . . but nobody seemed interested."

He was supposed to play Saddam Hussein, not Al-Qaida.

But hey, can't expect an American to know the difference, all Muzzies look the same to him I suppose.

[IrishHitman]

Happens all the time, although this example is the most prominent.

[Phier]

He was supposed to play Saddam Hussein, not Al-Qaida.

But hey, can't expect an American to know the difference, all Muzzies look the same to him I suppose.

And the point of this post was?

[Erik]

And the point of this post was?

That if this was supposed to be an exercise on how to conquer Iraq, they were right in "reviving" team Blue and forcing team Red to play more conventionally.

Having "Saddam" behave like some kind of craze Muslim terrorist is as unrealistic as the US military using suicide bombers.

[Captain Jin]

That if this was supposed to be an exercise on how to conquer Iraq, they were right in "reviving" team Blue and forcing team Red to play more conventionally.

Having "Saddam" behave like some kind of craze Muslim terrorist is as unrealistic as the US military using suicide bombers.

Uh negative, it wasn't supposed to be Saddam. It was an unknown adversary in the Middle East that the red team was playing. And besides that Saddam is hardly conventional, I'm pretty sure he said he'd strap American POWs to his tanks so we wouldn't fire on the them in the event we invaded Iraq. Sounds conventional .

[Phier]

That if this was supposed to be an exercise on how to conquer Iraq, they were right in "reviving" team Blue and forcing team Red to play more conventionally.

Having "Saddam" behave like some kind of craze Muslim terrorist is as unrealistic as the US military using suicide bombers.

The line you first quoted wasn't political, it was an example of not being ready for an unconventional attack.

The war games could have been vrs anyone and it still fits.