Iraq War Pre-Surge: Helicopter Down

By | February 21, 2025

[February 21, 2025]  The day begins badly. It’s Sunday, January 21st; we begin our day attending a memorial service for an Engineer Soldier killed in the line of duty. I sit in a row of chairs reserved for Colonels and Sergeant Majors, front row. Oddly, beside me is an empty chair with COL White’s name affixed. He is the National Guard liaison. It’s not like him to miss a local memorial service. After returning to my duties at the “Boathouse,” I was informed that he was on a Blackhawk helicopter that was shot down returning to our base; all hands lost.  I knew five of the 12 Soldiers killed that day, and I would also later attend their memorial services.

It’s easy to count the dead and wounded when you either don’t know them personally or when you have no skin in the game (of providing security for the people of Iraq).  Many back home, and a number of Democrat politicians, threatened to shut down our efforts and made their positions known by verbal attacks on our troops. This is a classic Liberal method to hold onto political power, and I find it disgraceful and disrespectful. However, for those of us in Iraq, the degenerate behavior we saw was minor when compared to the gross contempt shown to our Vietnam War veterans. To this day, I stand proud of those veterans and always thank them and say, “Welcome home.”

Today, we continued our planning for the Surge. Part of that planning was oversight of our military reduction of outlying bases. We had been withdrawing from those bases, and we did not stop that effort. Initially, I was confused about that effort, but it made sense in a way. U.S. troops were concentrating on larger bases while the Iraqi Army and their Police were filling in behind us in those bases. By doing this, the Iraqi government was taking on a greater role in their own security and also building up a culture of maintaining security for all their people, based on their citizenship, and not based on tribal affiliation.

We were moving fast to meet General O’s orders to prepare to receive five BCTs and a Division Headquarters. To do so meant two things had to happen at the same time. First, we streamlined our construction-approval process to make it more responsive and faster but still retain General Officer oversight. I was given the authority at the G.O. level, as well. Second, we were given the authority to coordinate directly with more units outside III Corps, MNC-I.  This was a big deal but came with additional responsibilities like keeping our chain-of-command informed (through a two-star liaison from MNC-I’s HQ).

We added Living Support Areas (LSAs) and Tactical Operations Centers (TOCs) to our construction priority list but with the assumption that none would be permanent buildings. Tentage would be the primary source of lodging, followed by renovated existing structures. TOCs would be in some form of structure, either concrete or a thin-skinned trailer. General O asked me for a list of potential locations he could send the incoming BCTs, the final location determined by potential threat and ability of Iraqi forces. His primary goal was not to reduce sectarian violence, per se, but as a subset of protecting the population in the Baghdad area. General O’s insights on our mission was correct, given that appropriately 3,000 Iraqis were being killed each month.

We were getting good progress on building Dining Facilities and power distribution efforts. Nevertheless, we modified our construction priorities to reflect these changes and include additional guidance from General O. I had been telling him that we could achieve his goals but it would require considerable reduction in additional inessential capabilities like Moral Welfare and Recreation (MWR) locations. He agreed but wanted these added back into our priorities. Here is our modified construction priorities list that would largely remain unchanged from this point in late January of 2007 to when I departed months later:

  1. LSAs (billeting)
  2. TOCs and Command and Control (C2)
  3. Medical Hospitals and treatment
  4. Ammunition Storage
  5. Detainee enclosures
  6. Power
  7. Water
  8. Waste Water
  9. Solid Waste Disposal and Incinerators
  10. Laundry Pickup and Dropoff
  11. MWR basic facilities

Low on our priority list would be any future project that could be delayed without jeopardizing already approved funding or unnecessary increasing costs. This included bus shelters, additional MWR improvements, and Reconstruction (Iraqi projects).

Late January was when I was blindsided by a piece of crucial information brought to me by an Engineer heavy-haul Soldier. He told me that the Main Supply Route (MSR) from Kuwait into Baghdad – MSR Aspen – couldn’t accommodate two heavy haulers passing side by side going different directions. That was nuts. How could it be that we had rebuilt this supply route and many of our vehicles were too wide to pass one another?  Looking into this problem I found that the U.S. Corps of Engineers had reduced the roadway width due to costs. I am sure someone high up had approved this change but I was not aware. When I told our MNF-I Logistics folks, they nearly blew a gasket.

I sent one of my Air Force Civil Engineers out by helicopter with priority directions to hop a mile at a time and inspect MSR Aspen. When he returned, he confirmed the roadway was too narrow and to make things worse, the edges of it were crumbling due to a failure to correctly prepare the roadway bed. Over time, this meant the roadway would narrow as it decayed. I requested that the Loggies at MNF-I begin the work to submit a plan to either expand the road or find an alternative solution.  Eventually they determined we could build turnouts faster and cheaper and not rebuild the road. This was a good solution but would take lots of time we didn’t have.

Our Engineers were not working alone on these issues. LTC Andy Knight at U.S. Army Central (or Third Army, called ARCENT) was a real goldmine of information and influence. Him and his team helped us with much of the paperwork.  We were also helping U.S. staff at Multi-National Security Transition Command (MNSTC-I); a training and support command assisting the Iraqi military and police. When they could, they would help us too. I also found some help in a few General Officers at MNC-I, like BG Neil Braverstock, an Australian.

We were still getting fast-paced requests that added friction to our main mission. For example, on the 26th of January, we were tasked to construct four or five 1,000 detainee Hasty Compounds within 30 days. Also additional improvements to guard towers and lighting “outside the wire” so our guards had better visibility. And, of course, the enemy “has a vote” and we were getting an increase in mortar and rocket fire. This got everyone excited and wanting more Overhead Protection.

That same evening, we had a memorial service for those killed in the helicopter shoot down.

And, we were told not to call this increase in troops a “Surge” but to call it a “Plus-Up.”  Looking back on the Surge many years later, this was a silly thing to do.

————

Please read my books:

  1. “55 Rules for a Good Life,” on Amazon (link here).
  2. “Our Longest Year in Iraq,” on Amazon (link here).
Author: Douglas R. Satterfield

Hello. I provide one article every day. My writings are influenced by great thinkers such as Friedrich Nietzsche, Karl Jung, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, Jean Piaget, Erich Neumann, and Jordan Peterson, whose insight and brilliance have gotten millions worldwide to think about improving ourselves. Thank you for reading my blog.

17 thoughts on “Iraq War Pre-Surge: Helicopter Down

  1. Danny Burkholder

    Events in Iraq since the US withdrawal have made it all too clear that the US celebrated the end of the Iraq War without any realism as to the impact the war and US occupation had on Iraqi society. Iraq remains a violent and unstable place, with Iranian influence on the rise. The political, economic, and security situation in Iraq, as well as the US and Iranian competition in the country, are all examined in depth in a new report from the Burke Chair entitled “The Real Outcome of the Iraq War: US and Iranian Strategic Competition in Iraq” which is available on the CSIS web site at: http://csis.org/files/publication/120308_Combined_Iraq_Chapter.pdf
    🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸

    Reply
  2. Judy Judy Judy

    Gen. Satterfield, we appreciate this “inside look” at the efforts of our Engineers during the Surge. My brother was there as part of a unit out of Ft. Hood Texas. He was happy – if you can call it “happy” – that he had a bullet with air conditioning and heat. That allowed him to get a good nights rest. A soldier can do alot with a full-night sleep. Keep these coming our way. ❤️

    Reply
  3. Ron C.

    It is always a positive thing to have a microscopic view of what occurred at the surge because it IS famous and the effort that went into making it a success.

    Reply
  4. Army Captain

    Once again, some valuable insight into the going’s on within the MNC-I Engineer staff section to create the necessary buildings, roads, power, WW, water, etc. for the incoming troops. It is unusual, certainly, to get this kind of find details. Sir, I would like to suggest you add a more human dimension by telling us about those involved, the kind of interactions you had, and your views on those you worked with inside the Engineers and outside. Thank you.a

    Reply
    1. The Kid

      Yes! Here is his main point.….
      “The Soldiers were testing Jerome. Can you take a joke? Can you take a bit of dirty humor? Can you at least be a little funny yourself? Soldiers wanted to know if Jerome could pass the test to be part of their team and be useful. Could he take it and dish it out too? A month later, Jerome was sent to our Brigade’s headquarters, never to return. These Soldiers had been testing him to see if he could take the pressure; they might need to depend upon him if the base was ever attacked by a terrorist (which was a real threat). You don’t want someone on a military base who cannot take the stress.” — Gen. Doug Satterfield

      Reply
      1. Judy

        Yes!! That was one of his old Army tales. I just re-read it. Loved it. Be careful about nicknames.

        Reply
  5. Tracey Brockman

    I’m looking forward to this whole series. This is like watching your favorite show weekly. I’d like to see it all right now!!!!!!!!!!!

    Reply
  6. Valkerie

    Gen. Satterfield has a good point here that should not be overlooked. He says that his Engineers were not working alone but were assisted by others outside Iraq. One example is LTC Andy Knight. If Gen. Satterfield mentions a name of someone, then that person deserves our attention. Thank goodness we have Gen. Satterfield telling us this story.

    Reply
  7. Pastor Jim 🙏

    🙏 Praying for all those souls of our troops lost during these wars.

    Reply
  8. Bloomberg

    Thank you, sir, for this wonderful, inside story of the pre-surge event during the war. Almost no one knows anything at all about this. Don’t lose the history.

    Reply
    1. HAL

      Bloomberg, I think you might be new here, at least in the leadership forum that Gen. Satterfield has provided for us. And you are right about no one really knowing what went into the preparation for the better-known “surge.” What we’re going to read in the future from his series is a personal account of what happened and who were the players of the soldiers and coalition members who were there and who contributed. They are the unknowns that we owe so much to. Thanks for being part of our community of those who want to discover more about leadership.

      Reply
      1. erleldech

        HAL, exactly. I’m really looking forward to a real accounting of the thinking behind how army engineers made this work. Boring? Nope. I want to know.

        Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.