I didn't quite know what to make of such a big effort, considering I've noted that the enemy has rarely operated above platoon strength. At least as reported in the press. But with no reports of ouposts being overrun, I imagine this is a generally accurate impression. That most of our casualties are from IEDs adds up to the idea that the enemy rarely masses.
Now, up north, the enemy massed again:
As many as 300 militants led by Abu Omar al-Baghdadi, leader of the self-styled Islamic State in Iraq, attacked Mosul's northwestern Badoush prison just after sunset in the ethnically mixed city and overwhelmed police, who were forced to call the U.S. military for backup, officials said.
The enemy freed 140, but somewhere else I read that most were quickly recaptured.
What I don't know is why the enemy has massed and risked heavy losses. In Anbar, the enemy got waxed. In Mosul, the enemy freed a number of prisoners, but why would they risk the losses for this type of operation? Why not continue with the terrorism and IEDs?
Is the enemy getting stronger? Are they getting desperate and pulling together what they have left in order to reverse defeat with efforts to get a spectacular victory?
This is different than the enemy's past method of operating. Why have they changed?
