The Dogs of War

[Othin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Badgerboy @ Mar. 29 2003,20:26)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">It's unlikely will will ever find. Keeping track of all the ordance winging its way into Baghdad is nigh on impossible.

The current party line, is that it was a Iraqi SAM. If so, and I find it unlikely, the only SAM to have a warhead that big would be a SA2 Guideline (The telephone pole). It's warhead is usually a sizeable HE charge, or a nuclear warhead!, so it would put a nice hole in the ground. Other SAMs tend to have 'smarter' fragmentation warheads (Smaller charge), so couldn't cause the level of destruction that we saw.

I think people will be umm'ing and arr'ing about this for a while.<span id='postcolor'>

What's interesting about the SAM theory is that the following story broke shortly thereafter.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">LONDON (Reuters) - Britain said on Saturday the commander of air defense forces in Baghdad had been replaced after Iraqi surface-to-air missiles, aimed at Western warplanes, had missed and fallen back on the Iraqi capital.

A spokesman for Prime Minister Tony Blair quoted intelligence reports for the information. U.S. and British officials have suggested stray Iraqi anti-aircraft missiles could have been to blame for explosions in Baghdad which killed scores of civilians this week. Iraq insists Western bombing is responsible.<span id='postcolor'>

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A47288-2003Mar29.html

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">British intelligence sources say Iraq has replaced the commander of air defence forces after Iraqi surface-to-air missiles, aimed at Western warplanes, had missed and fallen back on the Iraqi capital. <span id='postcolor'>

http://www.bbc.co.uk

Regardless, I think you're right. Unless CENTCOM comes out and tells everyone that it was in fact their munition, it's going to be debated. Guess I'll keep my eyes open for the after action reports.

[FSPilot 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Othin @ Mar. 30 2003,11:39)</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">LONDON (Reuters) - Britain said on Saturday the commander of air defense forces in Baghdad had been replaced after Iraqi surface-to-air missiles, aimed at Western warplanes, had missed and fallen back on the Iraqi capital.

A spokesman for Prime Minister Tony Blair quoted intelligence reports for the information. U.S. and British officials have suggested stray Iraqi anti-aircraft missiles could have been to blame for explosions in Baghdad which killed scores of civilians this week. Iraq insists Western bombing is responsible.<span id='postcolor'>

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A47288-2003Mar29.html<span id='postcolor'>

Right, "replaced".

[PFC Mongoose 0]

It's possible, though highly unlikely, that if it was an Iraqi SAM, it was done intentionally, to make it look like a Coalition Bombing.

In which case, that guy may have gotten a paid vacation, instead of being 'replaced' (#1 with a bullet!

[Guest]

I've already told you once and I'm going to tell you again. A two year old kid can see that it was no SAM. Two very basic reasons:

1) SAMs have fragmentation warheads - small explosion, lots of shrapnel. It leaves very typical damage that one can directly recognize on sight. The market bombing blew out a whole damn building.

2) Unlike you seem to think rocket scientists are not complete idiots. SAMs shave altimeters. Go below a speed and height and it won't detonate so it doesn't fall back on your troops.

It's sad to see how people are so blinded by propaganda and prejudice that they think that killing his own people is Saddam's big joy in life.

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Mar. 30 2003,09:12)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I've already told you once and I'm going to tell you again. A two year old kid can see that it was no SAM.<span id='postcolor'>

If it was something fired from Iraq and it wasn't a SAM what might it have been?

There are 2 questions here?

1. Assuming what every two year old already knows, what hit the buildings?

2. Were they fired by Iraq or the coalition.

Propaganda? Well, is it true or not about Iraq's air defense commander being replaced?

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ Mar. 30 2003,08:17)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Mar. 30 2003,09:12)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I've already told you once and I'm going to tell you again. A two year old kid can see that it was no SAM.<span id='postcolor'>

If it was something fired from Iraq and it wasn't a SAM what might it have been?

There are 2 questions here?

1. Assuming what every two year old already knows, what hit the buildings?<span id='postcolor'>

Something with a high-yield explosive warhead and a lot of fuel (evident by the extensive fire damage). Fits the profile of a cruise missile perfectly.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">2. Were they fired by Iraq or the coalition.

<span id='postcolor'>

It must have been Iraqi, and Bush ordered the attacks on the WTC. Right.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Propaganda? Well, is it true or not about Iraq's air defense commander being replaced?<span id='postcolor'>

I could bet money that it's not true.

[PFC Mongoose 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Mar. 30 2003,08:12)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I've already told you once and I'm going to tell you again. A two year old kid can see that it was no SAM. Two very basic reasons:

It's sad to see how people are so blinded by propaganda and prejudice that they think that killing his own people is Saddam's big joy in life.<span id='postcolor'>

A Paladin Mobile Artillery misfired it's own ammo and detonated.

More Coalition helicopters have gone down to accidents and collisions than Iraqi AA fire.

If you are absolutely, 100% without a doubt CERTAIN that

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

A.) It could NOT have been a SAM, even an SA-2 "telephone pole" with an HE warhead

B.) It wasn't an Iraqi munition at all

C.) It was a coalition bomb or cruise missile<span id='postcolor'>

Then I will concede the point to you.

However, unless you can be absolutely certain, then the possibility still exists.

'Once you're eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbably, must be the truth.'

I'm not doubting if it was the Coalition, that the Americans wouldn't admit it; I'm just saying, nothing's certain, and I tend to lean toward the SAM explanation.

If American and British gear and malfunction, and/or fail, then I think Iraqi equipment can, too.

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Mar. 30 2003,09:24)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">It must have been Iraqi, and Bush ordered the attacks on the WTC. Right.<span id='postcolor'>

Well, yuk yuk yuk but the fact is that the US now admits it was one of their own missiles that hit that empty shopping center in Kuwait City.

So why is a slip up not possible on the other side of the border?

I don't see this as far-fetched and I certainly don't one sidedly accuse the coalition's side of being conniving propagandists.

I wouldn't wager money one either side at this point but I find your tilt based on pure speculation so far.

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ Mar. 30 2003,08:27)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I wouldn't wager money one either side at this point but I find your tilt based on pure speculation so far.<span id='postcolor'>

On that it was not a SAM? Listen lady, I'm sorry if you do not have the basic military knowledge to differentiate between the effects of a HE warhead and a fragmentation warhead, but I do. That was no SAM, not a single chance. The difference is huge, the probability of that it was a SAM is about as high as the probability that it was a thermonuclear weapon.

PFC Mongoose: I'm 100% certain that it was not a fragmentation warhead that caused the havoc. SAMs don't use HE warheads and a SAM could never blow out an entire building.

Edit: I'm talking of course about the first missile. Centcom not denied the second (nor confirmed).

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Mar. 30 2003,09:35)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ Mar. 30 2003,08:27)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I wouldn't wager money one either side at this point but I find your tilt based on pure speculation so far.<span id='postcolor'>

On that it was not a SAM?<span id='postcolor'>

Look carefully at my post. I'm not qualified to say whether it was a SAM, a Tomahawk a Silkworm, etc. That's not my point.

[Guest]

Here is what the independent has to say about it. From their correspondent that has been on-site.

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Mar. 30 2003,09:35)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Edit: I'm talking of course about the first missile. Centcom not denied the second (nor confirmed).<span id='postcolor'>

Sorry, now I'm really confused.

Are you referring only to the first strike on the Baghdad market, that killed 14-15 people in the middle of last week?

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ Mar. 30 2003,08:47)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Mar. 30 2003,09:35)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Edit: I'm talking of course about the first missile. Centcom not denied the second (nor confirmed).<span id='postcolor'>

Sorry, now I'm really confused.

Are you referring only to the first strike on the Baghdad market, that killed 14-15 people in the middle of last week?<span id='postcolor'>

Yes. The second one has not been denied by centcom. It could be because there's ample evidence that it was a US bomb - like fragments with the complete serial number.

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Mar. 30 2003,09:46)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Here is what the independent has to say about it. From their correspondent that has been on-site.<span id='postcolor'>

Thank you. That's much clearer now.

Looking up manufacturer "96214 09" in my copy of Good Housekeeping, being sent free to GI Janes in the US forces.

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Mar. 30 2003,09:50)</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">Are you referring only to the first strike on the Baghdad market, that killed 14-15 people in the middle of last week?<span id='postcolor'>

Yes.<span id='postcolor'>

Oh......................................... then........................... never mind.

[Guest]

Dissidents claim Baghdad executed soldiers who tried to defect

During WW2 when the Germans were close to Moscow the population tried in large numbers to escape. Stalin said no and a death penalty was imposed on those trying to leave. After a few hundred were executed, nobody tried to leave any more. Stalin is Saddam's row model so I would not be surprised if he applied the same methods to prevent a mass exodus from the cities.

[FSPilot 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Mar. 30 2003,13:12)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">1) SAMs have fragmentation warheads - small explosion, lots of shrapnel. It leaves very typical damage that one can directly recognize on sight. The market bombing blew out a whole damn building.<span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">http://argument.independent.co.uk/commentators/story.jsp?story=392161

The missile sprayed hunks of metal through the crowds – mainly women and children – and through the cheap brick walls of local homes, amputating limbs and heads.<span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">"We have never seen anything like these wounds before," Dr Ahmed, an anaesthetist at the Al-Noor hospital told me later. "These people have been punctured by dozens of bits of metal." He was right.<span id='postcolor'>

Looks like fragmentation to me.

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ Mar. 30 2003,09:16)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Looks like fragmentation to me.<span id='postcolor'>

Every explosion results in flying fragments. Fragmentation warheads leave however a specific trace. You would find thousands of tiny holes and cracks on every building within a large radius. It would certainly not destroy and collapse a large building. It would not burn out the cars in the vicinity. I've seen a lot of results of fragmentation damage in Kosovo. Artillery fragmentation shells were the weapon of the choice of the Serbs. It's trace is unmistakable, and I'm telling you what hit that market was not a fragmentation warhead.

[madmedic 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Mar. 30 2003,09:13)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Dissidents claim Baghdad executed soldiers who tried to defect

During WW2 when the Germans were close to Moscow the population tried in large numbers to escape. Stalin said no and a death penalty was imposed on those trying to leave. After a few hundred were executed, nobody tried to leave any more. Stalin is Saddam's row model so I would not be surprised if he applied the same methods to prevent a mass exodus from the cities.<span id='postcolor'>

Funny you should mention that Saddam in a Stalinist.

I remember hearing an Iraqi dissident in an interview talking about how he is using all of this "GOD" rhetoric to influence Arab opinion...But when He came into power, and up to a point in his reign...he was a devout Stalinist/Marxist/Socialist or whatever...who renounced God.

Dont remember all of the details...anybody else heard of this?

[ralphwiggum 6]

not really. but i heard that Iran called Iraq un-Islaminc just before Iran-Iraq war.

[FSPilot 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Mar. 30 2003,14:21)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ Mar. 30 2003,09:16)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Looks like fragmentation to me.<span id='postcolor'>

Every explosion results in flying fragments. Fragmentation warheads leave however a specific trace. You would find thousands of tiny holes and cracks on every building within a large radius. It would certainly not destroy and collapse a large building. It would not burn out the cars in the vicinity. I've seen a lot of results of fragmentation damage in Kosovo. Artillery fragmentation shells were the weapon of the choice of the Serbs. It's trace is unmistakable, and I'm telling you what hit that market was not a fragmentation warhead.<span id='postcolor'>

Even though the article you gave me clearly suggests that whatever hit that market fragmented, I'll take your word for it.

But I'm always going to trust the US gov't over the Iraqis. We're the lesser of two evils.

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (madmedic @ Mar. 30 2003,09:23)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I remember hearing an Iraqi dissident in an interview talking about how he is using all of this "GOD" rhetoric to influence Arab opinion...But when He came into power, and up to a point in his reign...he was a devout Stalinist/Marxist/Socialist or whatever...who renounced God.

Dont remember all of the details...anybody else heard of this?<span id='postcolor'>

While this is a political discussion, I'll give you a brief answer, but if somebody wishes to continue this line of discussion, do it in the other thread.

The Baath party is a secular socialist party. They are not at all popular in fundamentalist groups. Saddam has however been known to reference to religion as a way of getting support from the other Arab countries. Since GW1 the people of Iraq have become increasingly religious and Saddam has increased his Jihad-rethorics.

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ Mar. 30 2003,09:24)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Even though the article you gave me clearly suggests that whatever hit that market fragmented, I'll take your word for it.

But I'm always going to trust the US gov't over the Iraqis.  We're the lesser of two evils.<span id='postcolor'>

The article that I gave refered to the second market bombing. I havn't seen any detailed pictures of it so I can't say anything about it. USA has however not denied that one - they say that they are "still investigating".

I was talking about the first market bombing that killed 14-20 people.

[theavonlady 2]

Sky News article on technical solutions for the future to reduce friendly fire incidents.

/thinks back to HUD in Novalogic DF games

There's a Sky News wire that 2 senior Iraqi officials were captured by coalition forces. No other details at this time.

[Balschoiw 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I was talking about the first market bombing that killed 14-20 people.

<span id='postcolor'>

It is getting obviouse that it was a coaltion missile or bomb. This is the pentagon´s press voice:

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Q: Do you have anything new on the first marketplace bombing?

GEN. MCCHRYSTAL: We are continuing to investigate that bombing. As we said the other day, we thought there was a possibility either it could be a mistake or a mechanical error by one of our munitions or any other reason. But we don't have a hard conclusion yet.

Q: Is it correct that some new data has come in that's causing you to re-look at that whole situation, just to double-check and make sure?

GEN. MCCHRYSTAL: Ma'am, they are continuing to collect data; that is correct. And so we are withholding a conclusion until we've got it all.

<span id='postcolor'>

source:

Pentagon