Iraq War Pre-Surge: 5 BCT Staff Study

By | December 16, 2024

[December 16, 2024]  In 2006, the Coalition Strategic Plan in Iraq was to reduce the number of U.S. bases and personnel, consolidating them into larger bases near Baghdad. The Iraqi military would take over those bases and increasingly engage in combat, doing so slowly as they gained numbers, experience, and a professionalized force. This plan was feasible and allowed flexibility, but it was a slow, methodical process.

The problem was that the number of attacks on Coalition forces, as well as the Iraqi military, government, and civilians, was more frequent and destructive. No security meant no freedom of movement, and only a small, struggling commercial effort hampered the country’s economic well-being. Plus, these attacks were taking a toll on water, power, wastewater, and transportation facilities.

This growing insurgency had to stop or at least be significantly reduced if we were to leave Iraq. At some point, senior U.S. leaders decided to create a surge of American troops to solve this dangerous situation. I don’t know if President Bush decided on this new strategy but a formal announcement did come a month later. Studying this five BCT surge plan, we were flushing out some of the major operational concepts at the higher headquarters in Baghdad.

The first time I got concrete information that something big was about to happen was when I got a call from a staff officer at the 4-star command’s Resource and Sustainment (MNF-I Logistics).  They wanted me to look at a proposal they were working on that would plus-up forces in Iraq by five Brigades and a Division headquarters. The requirements required that all these units were to be located in or near Baghdad. I got this call on Wednesday, December 13, 2006 to report the next morning early for a presentation at the R&S staff building.

In the presentation, R&S staffers focused on the logistics aspect of this increase in units. By the next day, it became clear this was no simple staff plan to test patience. Word had come down from the highest levels – look at expanding the combat footprint. Somebody important wanted to know if such a concept was possible.

During the briefing, an R&S Navy Commander said, “Basing is a constraint but can accommodate up to five BCTs with a Division HQ in identified Coalition Force bases.”  At first, I thought he was joking. I also thought to myself that this was not going to be easy if the trigger got pulled.

Our Engineer staff was always busy with base consolidation, but this new planning directive kicked us into high gear. We continued with our base consolidation meetings, and on the ground, nothing changed as we turned over more bases. For the Engineer effort, consolidation had been our main focus. Now I also started looking into increasing basing capacity in the Baghdad AOR, who would do the work, where to bring in supplies from, and who could help us stay on track. My section at MNC-I C-7 Engineers would be responsible for that effort.

That evening, I took a few minutes to get some chow in the Dining Facility, and that’s where I met Bill O’Reilly. I thanked him for being here to meet the troops. He is a tall man, I guessed about 6’5”.

The planning we were doing was classified Secret – some parts Top Secret – which created a problem because it restricted my ability to determine the capacity of civilian contractors both in country and back in the states that could be pushed to us.  Clearly, no final high level decision had been made yet and this was not known to us at the time. We asked for more details to refine our planning efforts but received nothing of value.

In the meantime, I was in charge of both the Coalition construction and our Iraqi Reconstruction efforts. Another U.S. Army colonel, still in the U.S., was identified to assist me and was inbound to take over running the Reconstruction effort. Good news because Construction would be my main effort within C-7.

Then I got the news that Task Force Odin needed help and I got the call from BG John McDonald and that is a story for next time.

————

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.

15 thoughts on “Iraq War Pre-Surge: 5 BCT Staff Study

  1. mainer

    Sir, I’m happy now that we are into this long-awaited time for this series that gives us the insight into the very beginnings of the military “surge” that happened in 2007 in the Iraq War. We are told it started in 2007, but what I’m reading here is that the real planning and analysis was in 2006. Thank you sir for your service.

    Reply
  2. Andrew Rannault

    Very nice. I’m already getting excited to read more of the inside story.

    Reply
  3. Army Captain

    Gen. Satterfield, good initial setup here as you are introducing the topic of Engineers “preparing the battlefield “ by planning construction of barracks, motor pools, hq bldgs, PXs, telephone centers, and coffee shops. There is also the primary utilities tool plus roads and bridges and walls. Lots of walls, esp concrete walls that were preform made. I know because I was there and watched the Engineers do miracles with little they had to work with and under the most extreme circumstances. I look forward to follow on articles that lay out the rest of the pre-surge happened. Although I never heard it called “pre-surge.”

    Reply
    1. Good Dog

      Army cpt, right never heard it called pre-surge but hey, what do I know. At least we will get the story before the story.

      Reply
      1. Paladin Gunman

        This is why it is necessary for us to read these articles. But what is most important are the lessons of leadership and details on how that works. ✌️

        Reply
  4. Dead Pool Guy

    One of the advantages we are about to see, is the detailed effort that a true leader of soldiers is able to do. Let’s pay close attention to this new series. Also, another – easy to read book – that does this is “Our Longest Year in Iraq.” The book is available on Amazon, just see the link at the end of this article. Also I recommend buying it because I read it, and was intrigued at how well Gen. Satterfield describes how the early part of the war went.

    Reply
  5. King Henry XVIII

    Good news folks, we’re going to be getting the inside scoop of one of the most well-known military operations since the Vietnam War. This one is big. And it involves throwing a large, augmented Army Division into the fight just where the biggest and strongest part of the insurgency is happening. I look forward to reading more follow-up on this “surge.”

    Reply
    1. Eric Coda

      Jack, I think more importantly, that then-Colonel Satterfield had the authority of his assignment and spoke for the 3-star commander who had overall responsibility for the war theater. As the Coalition Engineer, Gen. Satterfield had the authority, ability, the deep-experienced skills, the no-nonsense personality, and socio-abilities to create groups of high ranking staff officers, so to get them to work in harmony toward a specific goal (in this case planning the pre-surge). Let’s see how this develops , especially after the Official Order is handed down starting with the US President. I think that is when we will get to see all the pieces start to fall into place. We are early early in the planning and that time can seem to be disorganized. But, Gen. Satterfield is going to show us how he was able to pull it off in the Engineer side. He will also be showing us the integration of Logistics too. That is what I am anticipating.

      Reply
      1. Jack of Spades ♠️

        Well said, Eric and thank you for your insights as well.👍

        Reply
      2. Fred Weber

        Eric, I think you’ve hit on the pint of this article. The pint being that if the desire is to put up a whole Division worth of troops into battle, this is not done haphazardly but with great thought and preparation. Gen.Satterfield is about to lint this out over the next few articles. What I’m hoping for, is that he eventually puts this into book form. Nobody is writing about the pre-surge times because it’s not the exciting part.

        Reply
        1. Bryan Lee

          A Division in the US Army is about 10,000 to 12,000 troops. In combat that number might increase to closer to 15,000 to 19,000. That’s the nature of combat. Remember also that there is a big logistical support tail included in this number.

          Reply
  6. Army Vet

    Looks like the “secret” pending military strategy change was not so secret after all. With a “staff study” being tasked – never just an exercise during wartime in country – the word certainly was out that a big operation was pending plus the giveaway was the study’s premise. Would a plus up of 5 BCTs work? There you have the operation in a nutshell. I’m glad we’re getting some of the inside insight into the early times of the real surge. Well done. I look forward to more.

    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.