The Dogs of War

[PFC Mongoose 0]

I figured they could dig ditches, leaving a zig-zag pathway through them up to the checkpoint, but that's quite a few manhours of work, as I'm sure is filling enough bags with sand to build a proper barricade. A good idea, but probably not very expedient, especially since from what I gather, most soldiers didn't have much time to even get rest, much less spend a few hours each on labor.

But, again, I know very little about the military, and the conditions in the field for the soldiers, so I don't know.

[FSPilot 0]

If I were a general (I say that too much ) I'd do that after the war has been "won" and the soldiers have more time on their hands. You need a forklift to put those things in so it's not going to happen very fast.

Until then I guess they'll just have to deal with the problems.

[PFC Mongoose 0]

Exactly. My point all along has been, while they need to set up a proper checkpoint, they've basically been fighting a war over the course of days; so, it's kind of hard to expect them to set up proper fortifications.

[FSPilot 0]

IMO, they should prioritize by 1) winning the war, 2) establishing healthy humanitarian aid to the Iraqi people, 3) stopping the looting and lawlessness, then 4) refining their strategies.

Why? Because if you do 1, you might not need to do 2 so urgently, if you do 1 and 2, 3 might fix itself, and if you do 1, 4 might also fix itself.

[FSPilot 0]

One Killer Chick!

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ April 13 2003,08:24)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">One Killer Chick!

<span id='postcolor'>

I wanna be on her OFP squad!

[FSPilot 0]

And people wonder why I want to fly the hog. They say it's ugly.

[theavonlady 2]

Office Depot wins first Iraqi commercial contract bid.

[ralphwiggum 6]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ April 13 2003,07:28)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ April 13 2003,08:24)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">One Killer Chick!

<span id='postcolor'>

I wanna be on her OFP squad! <span id='postcolor'>

FYI. KC(Killer Chick) is taken, so don't try to argue about why you should be called KC(Kosher Chick)

office depot? spam?

All quiet near Tikrit

wonder if there is a new strategy from Iraqi side...

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (RalphWiggum @ April 13 2003,09:17)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">office depot? spam? <span id='postcolor'>

War humor. Smile!

[Mb27 0]

Brent Sadler of CNN just came under fire after turning away from a checkpoint in Tikrit. Live on CNN.

[PFC Mongoose 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ April 13 2003,07:29)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And people wonder why I want to fly the hog.  They say it's ugly. <span id='postcolor'>

I don't think my eyesight is good enough to ever fly a plane.

But I'd like to fly the hog, also. Especially since, in Op Flahs, at least, as far as combat piloting goes, I can't handle anything faster.

[Tex -USMC- 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ April 13 2003,07:29)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And people wonder why I want to fly the hog.  They say it's ugly. <span id='postcolor'>

The Air Force is trying to retire it- apparently it isn't pretty or high-tech enough for the Air Scout brass. Naturally, the Army and Marines pitch a fit every time they hear that lol.

[Schoeler 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (PFC Mongoose @ April 13 2003,04:51)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ April 13 2003,03:59)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">edit - the Iraqi army surrendered or just left.  the SRG or RG, whichever you want to call them, are the ones who stayed behind and fought, causing civilian casualties.  if they really cared about civilian casualties they would of done something when saddam was slaughtering people, not help him.<span id='postcolor'>

IIRC, the Special Republican Guard is the unit based directly in Baghdad, while the Republican Guard is divded up into districts in the area around it.

But otherwise, I agree with your point.

And as far as the checkpoints; yes, I firmly agree that they should have tried to find a way so that cars could not approach the checkpoint itself at high speeds, but whoever suggested flashing lights and sandbag bunkers - I don't know how viable that would have been.  They moved across a large expanse of land in a remarkably short amout of time by being light and mobile.  I think just now are they in a position to ship in things like sandbags, lights, and other such gear.  I don't think it is stuff they could have just stacked between M113s on a transport plane.  Maybe each solider could have carried a sandbag in their kit?  I'm sure they would have loved that.

It may have been viable (getting the stuff there, not soliders carrying sandbag s in their kit) but I'm not certain.<span id='postcolor'>

FYI, sandbags are carried empty.

How hard is it to get a spotlight or something to shine in the driver's eyes?

[PFC Mongoose 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Schoeler @ April 13 2003,09:07)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">FYI, sandbags are carried empty.  

How hard is it to get a spotlight or something to shine in the driver's eyes?<span id='postcolor'>

Yeah, but filling a quantity of sandbags enough to create a blockade, I'm assuming would take some time.

As for the spotlight, depends on if they brought any with them, or not. Or if they came across any between the time they got off the boat and the time they set up the roadblock, or not. If not, they';ll have to get some from Turkey or Kuwait, or something.,

[FallenPaladin 0]

I just wonder. Has there been one incident with british soldiers shooting civilians at a checkpoint?

[thule999 0]

"On the southern outskirts Marines engaged in close-quarters fighting with pro-Saddam volunteers from Jordan, Egypt, Sudan and elsewhere, according to Lt. Col. B.P. McCoy of 3rd Battalion, 4th Marines.

"It's like a jihad. They were given a rifle and told to become a martyr," said McCoy, whose troops used bayonets while battling in the reeds of a marsh." (Saturday, April 05 2003.)

Does any one know when was the last time US troops had to fix their bayonets in combat situation? In Vietnam?

"We're going to drag the drunken junkie nose of Bush through Iraq's desert, him and his follower dog Blair...There are 26 million Saddams in Iraq"

-Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf, Iraqi Minister of Information

"We will welcome them with bullets and shoes."

- Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf, Iraqi Minister of Information

[Longinius 1]

Various newssites now report that six or seven more American POW's have been returned to the coalition side. So I guess the Iraqis didnt butcher all of them, dispite what the coalition supports might have hoped for.

[Cloney 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Longinius @ April 13 2003,14:40)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Various newssites now report that six or seven more American POW's have been returned to the coalition side. So I guess the Iraqis didnt butcher all of them, dispite what the coalition supports might have hoped for.<span id='postcolor'>

What a nice thing to say. I'm sure you wouldn't have said that if your son was a POW. Yeah, and I'm sure we need more evidence about Saddamn harming POWS. (i.e the 8 dead ones we found out on the floor for display when we rescued Jessica Lynch.)

[Longinius 1]

"What a nice thing to say. I'm sure you wouldn't have said that if your son was a POW."

I am sure I wouldnt have too. And I am sure that if those POW's had been killed, a prowar supporter on this site would have said something similar. Its tough when someone gives you back the same attitude as they themselves have recieved, isnt it?

"Yeah, and I'm sure we need more evidence about Saddamn harming POWS. (i.e the 8 dead ones we found out on the floor for display when we rescued Jessica Lynch.)"

I thought those 8 bodies were not just POW's, but also Iraqis? Further more, even if those 8 were US soldiers, why are you so sure they had been executed or mistreated?

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Cloney @ April 13 2003,16:42)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Longinius @ April 13 2003,14:40)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Various newssites now report that six or seven more American POW's have been returned to the coalition side. So I guess the Iraqis didnt butcher all of them, dispite what the coalition supports might have hoped for.<span id='postcolor'>

What a nice thing to say.<span id='postcolor'>

European sore losers.

[PFC_Mike 2]

7 US troops rescued, including the Apache pilot.

My guess as to why they don't appear to have been mistreated as much as expected? I think that communications broke down between Baghadad and elsewhere, and the Iraqi captors realized that (a) hurting US servicemen/women is going to bring you a lot of trouble (b) being able to show the US that you followed the Geneva convention and all is likely to help you personally garner favor and not get your ass kicked.

They torture dissidents and Shias, why not POW's? Becuase there are incentives not to.

[Longinius 1]

"European sore losers."

So it is a loss that the POW's hadnt been tortured and killed. Wow Avon, whose side are you on?

On a side note, American soldiers managed to make themselves even more inpopular today by shooting a man guarding a generator from looters in Bagdhad. They are having some PR issues I reckon.

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Cloney @ April 13 2003,15:42)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Longinius @ April 13 2003,14:40)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Various newssites now report that six or seven more American POW's have been returned to the coalition side. So I guess the Iraqis didnt butcher all of them, dispite what the coalition supports might have hoped for.<span id='postcolor'>

What a nice thing to say. I'm sure you wouldn't have said that if your son was a POW. Yeah, and I'm sure we need more evidence about Saddamn harming POWS. (i.e the 8 dead ones we found out on the floor for display when we rescued Jessica Lynch.)<span id='postcolor'>

You know that the part of the others being executed has already been withdrawn both by CentCom and Tony Blair. Did they not tell you that on Fox news?

And Longinius is right, it is very evident that many supporters of the war want Iraq to be the bad guys so badly that they would be happy if they had comitted some war crimes (like shooting the POWs for example).

[Longinius 1]

"They torture dissidents and Shias, why not POW's? Becuase there are incentives not to."

Of course. But whats your point? We were talking about how the POW's had been treated. We all ready know that the former Iraqi government liked to torture people. The key thing is that these POW's seem to be in pretty good shape. Which is a good thing.