The Dogs of War

[Blaegis 0]

The original point was that there were no economic interests for the US in Afghanistan. IMO, there were. They proved to be impossible to exploit, due to factors I stated above (also note the date on the report you quoted). The above mentioned factors were not apparent prior to US invasion of Afghanistan. The end. It's the DOW thread, after all.

[KingBeast 0]

New news I think:

British Push into Basra

British Army spokesman Colonel Chris Vernon told BBC News three 7th Armoured Brigade battle groups were pushing in to the city centre.

"One is meeting minimal resistance, one has gone almost intact with no resistance at all with impunity and the other one is yet to report in.

Hundreds of tanks are heading to Basra

"We're undertaking a brigade-sized push into the middle of Basra with tanks and infantry so we can secure the streets."

[Blaegis 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Blake @ April 06 2003,12:26)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Breaking news is that Russian embassy convoy has been attacked. Details unknown, but at the moment looking likely yet another 'friendly fire' incident.<span id='postcolor'>

According to Interfax, the convoy was heading from the Russian embassy to the Syrian border. An eyewitness reports that the convoy, which was clearly identified with Russian flags, came under small-arms fire twice: 8 and 15 km from Baghdad, resulting in several people being wounded. The attackers were described as "armed men in jeeps".

BrigGen Brooks has confirmed that the coalition forces were aware of the planned movement of the convoy.

[Badgerboy 0]

Right, the US Air Force has a big 'Friendly Fire' problem.

I've trust you've seen the latest fiasco. 16+ dead US Special Forces, Kurds, reporters etc.

CNN are reporting no US casualties! John Simpson (BBC) has shrapnel sticking out of him, and he is adament there are US casualties!

It's getting beyond a joke now. Before people start throwing facts back at me, regarding flight hours + mistakes etc, I have never seen a friendly fire act from an RAF aircraft on allied ground forces. That is includes both Gulf Wars, Afganistan, Kosovo, so thats many, many flight hours, atl east as much as has been flown in this war? So far we havn't blown away our own guys, or our allies with aircraft.

Plus to top it off, US soldiers have been opening fire on our helicopters! Do you know something we don't? Apparantly the pilot of the chopper was so pissed off, he landed, and tried to beat the shit out of the GI's.

(Saywhat you want John Simpson has balls. He reporting away, and an American comes up and mentions something like"Stop what your doing". Simpson then tells him to stick it, and that he's not going to stop him reporting this. The medics reply "Errr, okay, but your bleeding". Simpson? "Its only shrapnel!" Its times like that I'm glad I pay my license fee.

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Badgerboy @ April 06 2003,16:34)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">CNN are reporting no US casualties!<span id='postcolor'>

* cough *

(Read down a few paragraphs)

[Badgerboy 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ April 06 2003,15:42)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Badgerboy @ April 06 2003,16:34)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">CNN are reporting no US casualties!<span id='postcolor'>

* cough *

(Read down a few paragraphs)<span id='postcolor'>

Certainly than different than the broadcast!

I was merely confused, as they obviously have access to the newsfeed the BBC was putting out, but glossed over a few important facts. Still networks progative I suppose.

[Ex-RoNiN 0]

Remains are Iranian soldiers

Russian Diplomats attacked in Baghdad

Brits storm Basra

[theavonlady 2]

Debka has the following on the FF attack on the Kurd and SF convoy:

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Fifteen Kurdish militiamen, 5 US special operations troops, killed by bomb mistakenly dropped by American warplane on their convoy in northern Iraq. Among the dozens injured, Masoud Barzani’s brother is in critical condition.<span id='postcolor'>

[PFC_Mike 2]

Probably some of the remains are Iranians. But some of the photos are of civillians. Anyway, it's probably a war crime to execute and torture POW's and leave the corpses in a warehouse.

[PFC_Mike 2]

I haven't heard whether or not the Pentagon thinks that was the real Saddam Hussein in Baghdad, but this person says no.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_228528,001300180024.htm

Interesting...I would have thought he would flee to Syria.

[johnnylump 0]

Debka notoriously unreliable source of information.

[theavonlady 2]

SwingFire wire guided missile. Shot from a cute little Brit armored vehicle.

Select the TANKS MOVE IN video from this Sky News page,

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (johnnylump @ April 06 2003,18:04)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Debka notoriously unreliable source of information.<span id='postcolor'>

You will now find the same information in AP news wires.

Now the question is who posted it first?

[Cloney 0]

Are there any British units moving towards Baghdad or they all mopping up the last Iraqi resistance?

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Cloney @ April 06 2003,18:08)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Are there any British units moving towards Baghdad or they all mopping up the last Iraqi resistance?<span id='postcolor'>

Looking at Sky News, I can't see any mention of British in Baghdad.

Same with reports like this, on Reuters.

[bn880 5]

Iraqi information minister speaks of many destroyed or disabled coalition tanks. Also there are pictures of several of them. He also says the airport is not really under coalition control and that small numbers of coalition forces return to the airport after retreating, for propaganda purposes. Since this is war, the truth is probably somewhere in the middle, certainly not where coalition tries to put it.

all at www.reuters.com

[Guest]

Saddam orders scattered "fighters" to join nearest units

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

BAGHDAD (AFP) - President Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) ordered Iraqi "fighters" to join any unit they reach to battle coalition forces taking up positions around the capital, in an address broadcast on state television.

Any fighter who is unable to join his unit for any reason, must join another available unit, until further orders," he said in a message read by a presenter.

The call to arms came as US commanders said the 3rd Infantry Division had completed Sunday the western portion of a planned encirclement of Baghdad and were waiting for US Marines to cut off the east.

On Saturday, Saddam told Iraqis the battered capital was still theirs to save and called for attacks on coalition forces across the country to relieve the pressure on the city.

That message followed an initial thrust into the capital by US tanks and ground forces, in which a US commander said an estimated 1,000 Iraqi troops were killed.

<span id='postcolor'>

This could mean two possible things

1) They're fucked

or as an alternative theory

2) They're fucked

Why? Because it tells us two things: the scattering of the Iraqi units is so severe that the local commanders can't handle it, and that the Iraqi command and control channels aren't working since they are broadcasting this through TV.

This does hower not mean that the war will be a piece of cake for the Anglo-American forces. Iraqi troops have shown considerable independence and the ability to mount guerilla style attacks. That kind of warfare does not need a centralized command.

[Potatoman 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ April 06 2003,17:21)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Iraqi information minister speaks of many destroyed or disabled coalition tanks.  Also there are pictures of several of them.  He also says the airport is not really under coalition control and that small numbers of coalition forces return to the airport after retreating, for propaganda purposes.  Since this is war, the truth is probably somewhere in the middle, certainly not where coalition tries to put it.<span id='postcolor'>

Nah he's talking crap.If there were more destroyed US tanks they would surely show them not try and claim a BMP is a US tank

And the fact that sky news are showing pretty regular reports from the airport shows that it is fully under Coalition control.

I think it is fair to say at this stage that the Iraqi army is fucked and no amount of wishful thinking is going to change that.

[johnnylump 0]

AP, now, those guys are solid.

[bn880 5]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Potatoman @ April 06 2003,11:53)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ April 06 2003,17:21)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Iraqi information minister speaks of many destroyed or disabled coalition tanks. Also there are pictures of several of them. He also says the airport is not really under coalition control and that small numbers of coalition forces return to the airport after retreating, for propaganda purposes. Since this is war, the truth is probably somewhere in the middle, certainly not where coalition tries to put it.<span id='postcolor'>

Nah he's talking crap.If there were more destroyed US tanks they would surely show them not try and claim a BMP is a US tank

And the fact that sky news are showing pretty regular reports from the airport shows that it is fully under Coalition control.

I think it is fair to say at this stage that the Iraqi army is fucked and no amount of wishful thinking is going to change that.<span id='postcolor'>

They showed several destroyed tanks...

The're fucked because they are up against the biggest military in the world yes, but we are still talking urban/guerilla warfare in Baghdad, so coalition will be fucked. In the city it doesn't matter if the Iraqi soldiers communicate at all.

And 1000 Iraqi soldiers killed from that incursion into south Baghdad is complete bull. Thank you

EDIT: Is that the same thank they keep showing? Anyway, I don't care, I have no wishful thinking here, the truth is in the middle that's all.

EDIT2: Honestly it looks like they showed at least 3 seperate disabled coalition pieces of armor.

[Badgerboy 0]

I saw a M1, which was pretty much burned out, and what looked like a M113 with it's side panels ripped off.

As for the downed Apache which people said had been taken out by an airstrike, its now in a garage in Baghdad somewhere. They chucked it on a car transporter and nicked it.

If they could get that thing running again, they could cause mayhem!

[Potatoman 0]

As far as i have seen iraqi tv has shown 1 M1 in the last couple of days. It is quite possible the news channels haven't been showing everything but I have seen the same BMP shown several times as a US tank . Overall I've seen I'd say about 5 M1s destroyed. There are probably a few more that we haven't seen. I was quite funny seeing the Apache on the back of the truck

[tracy_t 0]

Yeah,

I must admit that I laughed when I saw that chopper on the back of a lorry. How cheeky can you get?

All's fair in love and war though.

I bet there's a few scientists studying it right now, reading "AH-64D repair for dummies"

And what would the Russian govt pay to get their hands on it too.. nice little earner, as we say in the UK.

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ April 06 2003,18:21)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">He also says the airport is not really under coalition control and that small numbers of coalition forces return to the airport after retreating, for propaganda purposes.  Since this is war, the truth is probably somewhere in the middle, certainly not where coalition tries to put it.<span id='postcolor'>

Maybe the truth just landed on your theory.

[MrMilli 0]

The REALLY burnt out abrams shown in baghdad- the turret is facing backwards

On the Fox news broadcast pretty much nicked by every TV news channel worth its name showed a tank, with its turret facing backwards and a crewmen dropping what looked like a grenade into the tank and then everyone took cover and the rest of the column moved off.

My theory

same tank

With the addition of an a incindiery grenade and a few hours to burn.

The Apache was quite funny on the back of the car transporter

I have a feeling the Americans will be taking it back in the coming weeks