The Dogs of War

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Balschoiw @ Mar. 26 2003,15:00)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Avon what are you after ?

You don´t believe me ? You don´t have to.<span id='postcolor'>

Thank you.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The next days will show if I am right or not. For sure I am not in the region. But as I mentioned before we have access to a larger variety of info than the averag couch - potatoe.<span id='postcolor'>

Considering the hot seat I'm living in and the "so called" information from your "high up" sources regarding what's been happening here in the last decade or two, the intent, reliability and accuracy of your sources is no more or less dubious than the currently available press sources.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And on another aspect I am with military forces for over 10 years now, have fought in the desert, have knowledge of the current plans the coaltion forces follow and I know that 70 - 90 percent of the info coming from embedded journalists and coalition officials has proven to be wrong.<span id='postcolor'>

Well, then. You're the master of the world.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Don´t piss my leg Avon.<span id='postcolor'>

In a similar vein, watch where you step.

[sn1per 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Oligo @ Mar. 26 2003,16:18)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Mar. 26 2003,13:47)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Pentagon looking seriously at report that seven U.S. soldiers in an ambushed convoy were killed by Iraqis on Sunday as they got out of their trucks with their hands up, surrendering, sources told CNN. Details to come. <span id='postcolor'><span id='postcolor'>

I wonder whether there will be an academic discussion later on about this incident, like there was about the "highway of death"-incident back in the day. I remember our pro-US forum regulars arguing that the Iraqis displayed no "adequate signs of their intent to surrender" and thus got blasted to crap. Too bad we have no Iraqis in the forum who could argue that the US soldiers getting out the trucks did not display "adequate signs of their intent to surrender".

Another thing comes to mind as well. In Saving Private Ryan, there is a moment where surrendering germans are gunned down accomppanied by one-liners as: "He was saying look, I washed my hands for supper." There always seemed to be a bunch of people who saw no wrong with that action, since the US soldiers were so pissed at the germans or something. Well, maybe the Iraqis are just so pissed to what they see as the invaders that they don't want to take any prisoners? Can you really blame them?<span id='postcolor'>

Hmm. Does anyone else see the white flag in this picture.

[Tydium 0]

More info about alledged uprising in Basra

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">

Wed March 26, 2003 07:49 AM ET

TEHRAN (Reuters) - An Iraqi Shi'ite Muslim opposition group said on Wednesday there had been disturbances, but no uprising, in the southern Iraqi city of Basra.A spokesman for the Tehran-based Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI) said there were "some disturbances" in Basra. Asked if this amounted to an uprising, the spokesman, Abu Islam, said: "No, there is no uprising."

British Prime Minister Tony Blair said on Wednesday he believed there had been a limited uprising in Basra overnight.

<span id='postcolor'>

Sky News report

[Blaegis 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Balschoiw @ Mar. 26 2003,14:12)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">It is/was not my intention to start something like that.

I only report things apart from TV shows and official TV interviews. That´s what I do.

If this is not appreciated I will stop it. Saves time for me.<span id='postcolor'>

That's not what I meant, I think it's excellent to hear as many opinions as possible (especially since personally I'm VERY sceptical about what's reported in the "official" media).

It was just a call for maintaining civility and objectivity, nothing more.

[Guest]

Ok, calmn down boys and girls Listen to Blaegis!

Avon you said earlier that you were surprised at the quality of Sky News. I'd like to dispute that very much. Example. This is taken from their site:

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">:: The army. Full-time fighting force, estimated at 300,000 troops, with three armoured divisions and 17 infantry divisions. The CIA reckons there are 3.4 million men of military age in Iraq, out of a total population of 24 million.

:: People's Militia. Huge network of 650,000 civilian volunteers, set up to protect the political ideology of Saddam's Ba'ath Socialist Party. Soldiers have little training, and mobilisation takes several weeks. If the army staged a coup, the People's Militia would be expected to defend Saddam Hussein's regime.

:: Republican Guard. Well-equipped and trained, amounting to about 100,000 troops. Some of them guard Baghdad itself. These men are volunteers not conscripts, and hence thought to be loyal. They're controlled by the state's Special Security Apparatus, which watches for those who show disloyalty.

:: Special Republican Guard. Saddam's personal bodyguard, 12,000-strong. Controlled by his son, Qusay. Soldiers largely recruited from the family's home town of Tikrit.

:: The Fedayeen Saddam. "Saddam's martyrs" who are controlled by his other son, Uday. There are about 30,000 of them. They're not highly trained but are very loyal to the Ba'ath Party. Expected to defend him to the death.

<span id='postcolor'>

There are numerous errors there. I'll list a few of them:

[*] Republican Guard: Estimated strenght of 75,000, not 100,000

[*] Special Republican Guard: Estimated number 25,000, not 12,000.

[*]Fedayeen Saddam: Led by Qusay, not Uday since 1996.

And they forget to mention the Special Security Service that has about 5,000-10,000 paramilitary operatives.

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Mar. 26 2003,15:30)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">There are numerous errors there. I'll list a few of them:

[*] Republican Guard: Estimated strenght of 75,000, not 100,000

[*] Special Republican Guard: Estimated number 25,000, not 12,000.

[*]Fedayeen Saddam: Led by Qusay, not Uday since 1996.

And they forget to mention the Special Security Service that has about 5,000-10,000 paramilitary operatives.<span id='postcolor'>

Are these errors intentional? If so, for what or whose benefit?

I'm not disputing the fumbling of statistics and figures or the red letter headlines that appear.

But, once the dust settles (literally), the overall reports given by the various western press services over the last week do protray a picture of what is happening.

I don't see Reuters cheering on the US or UK, waiving flags in the air. They've presented as much of the good, bad and ugly as they can.

Fact is, the coalition forces are advancing, slowly but surely.

BTW, your analysis of a few days ago of the coalition having to clean up its supply routes can be seen in this AP article at the Jerusalem Post (subscribers only).

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ Mar. 26 2003,14:41)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">BTW, your analysis of a few days ago of the coalition having to clean up its supply routes can be seen in this AP article at the Jerusalem Post (subscribers only).<span id='postcolor'>

I hate being right all the time

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Mar. 26 2003,15:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I hate being right all the time <span id='postcolor'>

Wrong again!

[STS_SolidSnake 0]

Did the japanese send a ship? i heard it has a very good technology

[theavonlady 2]

It's one thing to tell a giant lie and try to get away with it.

What if you increase the size of the lie by a third more?

So, either someone's told too many big fish stories all his life and can't break the habit or something really big did happen.

[shadow 6]

Calm down, everyone

Stop attacking each other and keep on topic

Thanks

[theavonlady 2]

The first of The Mother of all Battles on the horizon?

BTW, getting back to an earlier topic, sandstorms, they come in different shades and intensities. Just so you get an idea of how you can still identify a target in one of these storms, have a look at these pics:

So, sometimes you'll be able to pick out a target as big as a tank at a reasonable firing distance. Other times you might not see your buddy 3 paces behind you.

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Shadow @ Mar. 26 2003,16:23)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Calm down, everyone

Stop attacking each other and keep on topic<span id='postcolor'>

We're all fine. Watcha hyperventilating about?

[turms 0]

I also would like to thank denoir and bal...balckh...Balschoiw (that is a hell of a name to write )for the information posted here,so far havent seen any mistakes in them.

[bn880 5]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Mar. 26 2003,04:57)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">LOL. What a bucket of horse dung! Did you see that soup? Does it look like CAS could work? LOL.

So they are claiming 750 Iraqi dead and 0 coalition dead in an infantry engagement. LOL. Wow, I always thought the the Iraqi propaganda was more outrageous then the coalition. Well, I guess I was wrong...<span id='postcolor'>

Thank you, I can type less.

[IsthatyouJohnWayne 0]

I have no real idea about casualty statistics but an 'imbedded' reporter with the times(who is surely a secret agent sent by Rumsfeld to fool the hapless europeans) -reported today that -most- of the 'ambushes' reported have the taken the form of converted pick-up trucks armed with heavy machineguns (or just with men in the back) supported by columns of infantry with the odd RPG. These things have been going up against Abrahms tanks¬! I think there is certainly exaggeration but i would expect high Iraqi casualties in that situation. OFP is not anything like real i know but try it!

20-30 M1A1/2 tanks against some jeeps with MGs and the odd RPG-you do the math.

Of course there are also areas of very different entrenched resistance and heavier weapons but for the most part according to reports the ambushes have been light.

Balschoiw- you say you dont want to start 'something like that'

and yet you report that British troops are ordered to engage and attack ALL CIVILIANS REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THEY ARE ATTACKERS. Then you fail to give specific details of your source or any proof whatsoever to substantiate this claim.

As a British person with friends in the British army(who i know would not obey such orders), forgive me for being skeptical.

seconds later this evil imperialist marine was seen mowing down these children saying to journalists 'i was only following orders'...

FallenPalledin-"The coalition failed on full scale on their analysis of the Iraqi reaction towards an invasion. There were neither happy crowds greeting the troops nor signs of breaking with Saddam Hussein. Instead of that the coalition forces are fought in a way they never expected to be."

Though definatly its true that the coalition hoped for more of an anti-saddam 'uprising' ,the last part of this is pure -Bullshit-. The military planners knew that Saddam would try to engage in protracted urban combat and conduct guerilla operations in the rear.They knew his war aims and could surmise his methods. Air Marshall Brian Burridge (commander British forces) said as much in an interview -before the war started-. Saddam made no secret of his plans before the war.The dumb ass press and maybe certain politicians have been surprised im sure.

If there if propaganda in US /UK there is equally as much anti-war propaganda in France-Germany etc which you appear to perhaps have fallen victim to.

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (IsthatyouJohnWayne @ Mar. 26 2003,17:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">

seconds later this evil imperialist marine was seen mowing down these children saying to journalists 'i was only following orders'...<span id='postcolor'>

I was told he claimed they grabbed his M&Ms.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">If there if propaganda in US /UK there is equally as much anti-war propaganda in France-Germany etc which you appear to perhaps have fallen victim to.<span id='postcolor'>

No.

Sweden and Norway appear to have their own.

[bn880 5]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Balschoiw @ Mar. 26 2003,08:12)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">It is/was not my intention to start something like that.

I only report things apart from TV shows and official TV interviews. That´s what I do.

If this is not appreciated I will stop it. Saves time for me.<span id='postcolor'>

I appreciate your information, please do not stop because of Coalition lovers,

members count on people with connections like you giving some good intel.

[IsthatyouJohnWayne 0]

Now having said that i still think that there are plenty of dangers for the allies. They are plenty of things that can and/or are going wrong.

Baghdad and the north are still big question marks ,as in fact are the large dwellings in the south (seeing as none have yet been cleared of Saddam goons).I expect a mixed response, neither the worst predicted nor the best.

I hope this war ends satisfactorily as soon as possible thats all i can say.

[FallenPaladin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (IsthatyouJohnWayne @ Mar. 26 2003,16:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">If there if propaganda in US /UK there is equally as much anti-war propaganda in France-Germany etc which you appear to perhaps have fallen victim to.<span id='postcolor'>

Actually I`m not following our german media anymore since the Coalition invaded Iraq. I stick to the Internet which means I even take a look into media such as CNN, BBC, Reuters, AlJazeera, ... , ... Everything I can get so to say. I`m against this attack war, that`s clear, but even with being objective it`s obvious that the Coalition has some problems so far. There`s enough proof around, even the fact that no news can be taken for granted (no matter from which side) tells a lot. How many times has Basra been taken until today? Thirteen times maybe? See, everything is just working fine.  

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (IsthatyouJohnWayne @ Mar. 26 2003,16:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The military planners knew that Saddam would try to engage in protracted urban combat and conduct guerilla operations in the rear.They knew his war aims and could surmise his methods. Air Marshall Brian Burridge (commander British forces) said as much in an interview -before the war started-. Saddam made no secret of his plans before the war.The dumb ass press and maybe certain politicians have been surprised im sure.<span id='postcolor'>

If they did know it then they're plain stupid. Then they would have started off with a different strategy then they did, and they wouldn't be changing it now, as they are doing. The basic premisis for this invasion was that the Iraqi would be happy to be liberated and therefor would not fight. Well, open your eyes and look at what's happening. They've managed to secure Umm Qasr for now it seems, <span style='font-size:11pt;line-height:100%'>Population: 1,500</span> after some heavy fighting. And yes, Basra is completely in Iraqi hands, as the British commander of the area said today.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">If there if propaganda in US /UK there is equally as much anti-war propaganda in France-Germany etc which you appear to perhaps have fallen victim to.

<span id='postcolor'>

There are two major sources of propaganda: one is Baghdad and the other is Washington/London. So JohnWayne, while I do respect your opinion I have about as much trust in your sources as I do of a Iraqi living in Baghdad.

The use of propaganda is essential in any war and has always been so. I find it sad that people think that these things change and that their country's usage of media would be any different. BBC or the Iraqi State Television, it's all the same shite propaganda and going into a debate of who lies the most is pointless since their reporting is more based on omissions and lies then on reporting the true facts, giving a complete picture. That's the situation and we normal mortals have no way of differentiating between the truth and plain lies. With a grain of salt we can perhaps accept the things that both sides admit as own losses. Perhaps.

At least CNN is honest enough to put this disclaimer:

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">EDITOR'S NOTE: CNN's policy is to not report information that puts operational security at risk. <span id='postcolor'>

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FallenPaladin @ Mar. 26 2003,17:37)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">even with being objective it`s obvious that the Coalition has some problems so far. There`s enough proof around, even the fact that no news can be taken for granted (no matter from which side) tells a lot. How many times has Basra been taken until today? Thirteen times maybe? See, everything is just working fine.  <span id='postcolor'>

Yes but who's disagreeing with that? What you're describing is the picture I have of the situation, too.

[FallenPaladin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ Mar. 26 2003,16:42)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Yes but who's disagreeing with that? What you're describing is the picture I have of the situation, too.<span id='postcolor'>

We can only sit, drink green tea and wait who of us was right.  

(well, actually I drink german black tea, pure without milk and sugar)

[Balschoiw 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Hmmm...Isn't this a breach and woulden't one get arrested for this information? <span id='postcolor'>

There is information labelled confidential and there is information labelled public or non-conf.

I only post declassified here. Otherwise I could pack my bags.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Balschoiw- you say you dont want to start 'something like that'

and yet you report that British troops are ordered to engage and attack ALL CIVILIANS REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THEY ARE ATTACKERS. Then you fail to give specific details of your source or any proof whatsoever to substantiate this claim.

As a British person with friends in the British army(who i know would not obey such orders), forgive me for being skeptical.

<span id='postcolor'>

Well I think I made clear where my sources are. I don´t want and I am not allowed to post more than I have already told you. You don´t believe ? Not my problem. The order to fire on civillians has been given. You maybe will hear it in the news tonight. Maybe you will believe me then.

Another thing. You all are fast with doubts and indirect accuses but you fail to point out where I did post wrong/false things here. Doesn´t this at least mean that the info given by me is correct ?

The "Jerusalem Post" is not a very good source for accurate information. Maybe you remember the factory discovered labelled as factory for chemical WMD´s ? It was the Jerusalem post that brought it into public along with some other networks. Credibillity ? None in my eyes.

If you want to see the ROE´s of coaltion forces in action you should have a fixed eye on Basra. This will show you the ROE´s in action.

[Guest]

Above is an example of the confusion in media. It's from the Swedish newspaper Expressen.

The first headline says "Rebellion with axes and knives" talking about British and American media reporting an uprising in Basra.

The second headline says "No signs of rebellion in Basra".

Cute, ey?