[OT] Black Hawk Down - Somalia Operation

[Rashak Mani]

I just came back from watching the Black Hawk Down movie (takes time to show over here) and thou I have a lot of armchair general knowledge I was kind of lost on some of the military aspects of the movie. Since there are so many ex and current military on this board I thought some of you guys could help me out.

First was the operation that badly planned as shown in the movie ? Throwing away the surprise element... not using APCs... not using air cover effectively ... didnt they use Apache Helicopters as well ? These would have been great in that kind of environment....

Second how come in the movie the Americans never climbed to the roofs ? Would seem the best defensive places... best for helicopter rescue as well... or am I wrong ? I know that might result in their getting boxed in...

Third how faithful overall was the movie to how the action happened ? What aspects were off and which were right on ?

Finally do you guys have any interesting links where I can read about the operation ? Homepages with stuff about not only the movie but the attempt to capture Aidid as well... thanks

(Sorry for the OT thread... but I cant imagine a better place to ask these questions - zes@brturbo.com for e-mail messages )

 

[RogueJK]

The best way to get actual information about the operation would probably be to buy or borrow the book "Black Hawk Down: A Story of Modern War" by Mark Bowden. I've read it, and it's fascinating.

It's what they adapted the movie from, btw.

 

[Rashak Mani]

Pity I just ordered some books from B&N.... will have to wait a good while. The book is very detailed or general overview of the fighting ?

 

[RogueJK]

Very detailed, but not in a boring way. Plenty of combat, too, of course. But it does its best not to glorify the combat. It really opened my eyes as to just what happened there.

In the back, it even has an appendix of images, a list of sources and quotes, and a notes section, which elaborates on certain important events.

It's well written, very well researched, and entirely true.

Sadly, I haven't had the opportunity to see the movie, so I can't comment on how accurate the movie is. I'll hopefully see it as soon as possible.

 

[Rashak Mani]

I very much recommend the movie... they put some sugar on top of course... but they dont make it look like a victory. Very well filmed and keeps you on the edge always... just a little baffled by what seems like some bad soldiering...

(Orlando Bloom aka Legolas was unrecognizable as a green private in the movie )

 

[Wormwood]

While waiting for Bowden's Black Hawk Down to be delivered, check out the following links:

"Critical Analysis on the Defeat of Task Force Ranger"
An exhaustive exmination of the Battle of Mogadishu.

Operation Restore Hope
A decent collection of links and resources concerning the overall operation.

 

[billd91]

Frontline had a documentary about the fighting in Mogadishu. You can check out their website on it here:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/ambush/

They interviewed a bunch of the Rangers involved. It was absolutely fascinating. I think it largely boils down to the Rangers just getting pinned down with a stunning amount of firepower as they tried to protect a helicopter downed by a fairly lucky hit. I don't think they got out-soldiered or anything. They inflicted far more than they received according to the estimates I've heard and that can largely be chalked up to better soldiering.
Historically, in foreign situations, American soldiers go nuts to try to bring back their dead and wounded, even to the point of putting more men in jeopardy than would be recovered. I think that has to have played a part in this situation too.

I haven't seen the movie. Haven't read the particular book it's based on. Saw the coverage on Frontline a couple years ago.

 

[Rashak Mani]

Before anyone gets worked up... the Bad Soldiering I meant was in the movie ... thou I did follow at that time the political consequences of the battle I never read up on the military aspects.. so I cant talk about the actual combat performance.

If the planning and coordination of the actual thing was anything close to what the film showed it in fact was badly carried out... the soldiers on the ground just by body count alone showed some amazing luck and skill probably. I will read the stuff in those links and then I will be able to give some opinions about it.

My original questions were to try to know why they didnt get high and so forth... the military guys in the board could answer these better.

 

[mac1504]

Well I spent some time in a light infantry unit in the Army, and I worked with a lot of Rangers and Special Forces so I'll take a shot at answering your questions.

I think they probably stayed away from going to rooftops since I believe they were trying to stay mobile. The rangers and delta force members never had the intention of staying caught in the firefights that they got into- they were trying to get out of there. Rooftops are good places to start when clearing a building, but not always the best place when in a battle like that.

There is a bit of discussion in Mark Bowden's book (which I can't recommend enough) about the decisions to go in there. Obviously they negated one of America's premiere advantages in warfare right now: nightvision capabilities. American infantry and special forces train constantly with those devices, and when they decided to go in during the daytime they lost that advantage.

There are alot of little decisions similar that seem as if they were errors- but as we all know hindsight is 20/20. The thing is, they (intelligence and those in command) had the information that the guys they were looking for were going to be at a certain place at a certain time. They took a gamble, and unfortunately they lost good American soldiers. I'm sure those in command have lost plenty of nights worth of sleep because of their decisions (and I do believe that).

The biggest tragedy to me seems to be the way the Clinton administration treated the incident, by pulling out so soon afterwards without having finished the mission. And I think there are plenty of others in the military community that felt the same way, and I should know because I was in the military at the time and remembered the impact that day had on the rest of us not directly involved in the tragedy.

Just my two cents though, thanks for listening.

-mac1504

 

[Rashak Mani]

Thanks Mac1504 good comments...

As for Clintons withdrawl of the troops... it was the always present political fear of casualties which now seems somewhat diminished in post 9/11. Politically thou it was a no win situation... Somalia wasnt going to get straightened out militarily.

The rooftops for me seemed the natural place to evacuate troops ... and I had thought about the keeping mobile part. American troops do tend to use Helicopters an awful lot... the rooftops were best place to have acess to them I thought.

Nightvision in urban combat is somewhat riskier than in open ground thou isnt it ? For that mission I agree it wasnt ideal... APCs thou could have helped out a lot... silly not having them as backup or in reserve.

I will read up now before I make any silly comments because I only saw the film itself.