MILITARY: “American military units that participated in the decisive battle for Mosul against Islamic State militants were hampered by difficulties in sharing imagery and sometimes had different understandings of what was happening on the battlefield, according to a new U.S. Army study of the operation.
That conclusion is part of a broader military assessment that raises concerns about the military’s response to Islamic State’s drone threat, the use of private contractors, the Army’s training for urban warfare and how American forces communicated with Mosul’s trapped residents…
It is common for the military to analyze the lessons of its operations, but its examination of the hard-fought Mosul campaign has particular relevance. The battle was a test of a new type of warfare the U.S. has employed in Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan in recent years—one in which most ground combat is done by indigenous forces with Americans providing advisers and firepower.
Prepared by American and British military officers, the study was commissioned by U.S. Lt. Gen. Stephen Townsend, who led the force that fought the militants during the Mosul campaign, which ultimately succeeded in evicting Islamic State. The Wall Street Journal reviewed an unclassified version of the report that hasn’t yet been disseminated.”
-Michael R. Gordon, “U.S. Army Study Finds Flaws With Military’s Pivotal Assault on Mosul,” The Wall Street Journal online, Dec. 15, 2017 05:30am