Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!att!cbnews!military
From: joel@peora.ccur.com (Joel Upchurch)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Lessons Learned
Keywords: lessons, grenada, panama
Message-ID: <12978@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Date: 10 Jan 90 03:28:38 GMT
References: <12601@cbnews.ATT.COM> <12694@cbnews.ATT.COM> <12762@cbnews.ATT.COM> <12860@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Sender: military@cbnews.ATT.COM
Organization: Concurrent Computer Corp, Orlando FL
Lines: 29
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: joel@peora.ccur.com (Joel Upchurch)

I was wondering if is possible that the failure to control looting
in Panama during the first few days of the invasion was not an
oversight, but a policy decision. It seems to me that to control
the looting in Panama City, without shooting a lot of looters
would have needed over 50 thousand troops. I doubt that the
US Army has that many troops trained for riot control duty and
the logistics of getting them to Panama in the necessary time
frame would have been difficult if not impossible.

Trying to control the looting with fewer troops would probably
have involved shooting several hundred more Panamanian civilians.
Considering the extent of the looting, it is probable that
many or even most of those people would not have been habitual
criminals. The PR damage among the Panamanian people would
have been enormous. Letting the looting run its course probably
angered a lot of businessmen, but that afterall is property
damage, and the economic aid and renewed trade will go a long
way toward compensating any uninsured losses.

The whole strategy the US used in Panama seemed to place a high
priority on minimizing US inflicted civilian casulties.
-- 
Joel Upchurch/Concurrent Computer Corp/2486 Sand Lake Rd/Orlando, FL 32809
joel@peora.ccur.com {uiucuxc,hoptoad,petsd,ucf-cs}!peora!joel
Telephone: (407) 850-1040   Fax: (407) 857-0713