The Dogs of War

[theavonlady 2]

Caption:

An U.S. marine from 1-st Civilian Affairs Group, part of the

1-st Tank Battalion, searches a man whom the U.S. marines

said was an Iraqi officer, dressed in civilian clothes, after he

was detained on the field near the road, some 150-km north

of the town of Nassiriyah on March 29, 2003. The United

States subjected Baghdad to another day of unrelenting air

strikes on Saturday and Iraq hit back with a car bomb attack

that killed at least five people at a U.S. military checkpoint in

the south. REUTERS/Oleg Popov

I think the US better start changing regulations for this type of capture, after the suicide bombing yesterday - and fast!

Caption:

A U.S. marine carries a wounded Iraqi girl from a shooting

scene in central Iraq March 29, 2003. Confused front line

crossfire ripped apart an Iraqi family on Saturday after local

soldiers appeared to force civilians towards U.S. marines

positions. REUTERS/Damir Sagolj

There's a series of pictures from this tragic event on Reuters. From the other pic's captions, it would appear that the family's mother was killed.

As for Reuters themselves..........................

Caption:

Reuters Baghdad bureau chief Hassan Hafidh, inspects the

Reuters office following airstrikes at Iraq's Information

Ministry in Baghdad early March 29, 2003. A U.S. missile

appeared to have pierced the roof of the main 11-storey

ministry building on Saturday, and aerials and satellite dishes

on the roof were broken. A ministry annexe which houses the

offices of several media organisations including Reuters was

also damaged. A U.S. Central Command statement said

Tomahawk cruise missiles had targeted the ministry building,

but that an official assessment of the damage was not yet

available. REUETERS/Faleh Kheiber

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ Mar. 30 2003,11:22)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">There's a Sky News wire that 2 senior Iraqi officials were captured by coalition forces. No other details at this time.<span id='postcolor'>

Here's the update.

LOL for all you 007 fans!

[theavonlady 2]

Reuters Newswire: Iraq claims downing two coalition helicopters today and at least 2 crew members are killed.

Edit: Denied by Pentagon. Iraqis say they burried troops in battlefield. (Sky News Radio)

[theavonlady 2]

Reuters Newswire: In Kuwait, a truck rammed into a group of soldiers. Witnesses reported sounds of shooting and ambulance sirens at the scene.

edit: Details.

[hellfish6 7]

I don't get why everyone is making a big deal about finding these chemical warfare suits. Every modern army has them. And I'm not suprised that the Coalition found them left behind, if I was in combat, that's the first thing I'd get rid of, followed shortly by my shelter half. IIRC, Soviet-style chem suits are totally rubberized. Imagine wearing that in the desert.

[Cloney 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Hellfish6 @ Mar. 30 2003,15:21)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I don't get why everyone is making a big deal about finding these chemical warfare suits. Every modern army has them. And I'm not suprised that the Coalition found them left behind, if I was in combat, that's the first thing I'd get rid of, followed shortly by my shelter half. IIRC, Soviet-style chem suits are totally rubberized. Imagine wearing that in the desert.  <span id='postcolor'>

Aren't ours fully rubberized as well? I've put on one of those MOPP gloves while rumaging through some of my uncles old army equipment. You don't even need to move your hand, it gets clammy instantly. This was in a 50 degrees fahrenheit basement, I can't even imagine putting that on in 90+ degree desert weather.

[theavonlady 2]

Bosnia - tsk! tsk! tsk!

In contrast, Debka stated earlier:

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Their most lethal weapon is the Russian-made Kornet AT-14 wire-guided anti-tank missile that can penetrate up to 1100 mm of steel armor at a range of 3.5km.

It was supplied from Belarus through Syria. Putin’s possible involvement is under US intelligence scrutiny.<span id='postcolor'>

[MLF 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ Mar. 30 2003,12:51)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ Mar. 30 2003,11:22)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">There's a Sky News wire that 2 senior Iraqi officials were captured by coalition forces. No other details at this time.<span id='postcolor'>

Here's the update.

LOL for all you 007 fans! <span id='postcolor'>

any noticed that the British Operation names r soo much better D:

i mean c'mon Operation Iraqi Freedom D:

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Referring to the name of the operation, Bowden said: "People in the command post are, to continue the analogy, shaken by the resistance coming their way - but not stirred by the task ahead."<span id='postcolor'>

rofl

[PFC_Mike 2]

Denoir, what do you think hit the market in the 2nd bombing (~60 dead)

It seems unlikely that a SAM caused it. Perhaps a missle was damaged as it came down?

As for the Kuwait mall-missle, circuit boards recovered from the site had Chinese characters on them. I can probably find the photos if people disagree.

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (PFC_Mike @ Mar. 30 2003,19:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">As for the Kuwait mall-missle, circuit boards recovered from the site had Chinese characters on them.<span id='postcolor'>

Bah! Everything everywhere is made in China nowadays!

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (PFC_Mike @ Mar. 30 2003,18:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Denoir, what do you think hit the market in the 2nd bombing (~60 dead)

It seems unlikely that a SAM caused it. Perhaps a missle was damaged as it came down?<span id='postcolor'>

I'm thinking JDAM or some other bomb. They showed the second market explosion on BBC world, filmed from a distance. It was huge. It looked like the whole block blew up. Way too large for a tomahawk (and not to mention SAM).

[Tydium 0]

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

Their most lethal weapon is the Russian-made Kornet AT-14 wire-guided anti-tank missile that can penetrate up to 1100 mm of steel armor at a range of 3.5km.

It was supplied from Belarus through Syria. Putin's possible involvement is under US intelligence scrutiny.

<span id='postcolor'>

Last time that I checked Putin was the president of Russia. So if these missiles were supplied by Belarus then i don't see what it has to do with Russia and Putin.

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tydium @ Mar. 30 2003,19:58)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Last time that I checked Putin was the president of Russia. So if these missiles were supplied by Belarus then i don't see what it has to do with Russia and Putin.<span id='postcolor'>

Arms deals often go through murky intermediaries. Who knows!

[Guest]

Latest Russian report: Fact or fiction? You be the judge:

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">March 29, 2003, 0924hrs MSK (GMT +4 DST), Moscow - During the past day the situation on the US-Iraqi front remained largely unchanged. The US is continuing reinforcing the attack group near Karabela for a thrust toward Baghdad. By the morning of March 29 up to 20,000 coalition troops were massed in the area of Karabela. This forces includes up to 200 tanks, 150 artillery systems and more than 250 helicopters. The order for the attack will be given by the coalition commander Gen. Tommy Franks, who, according to intercepted radio communications, will personally inspect the troops during the next several hours.

Around 1900hrs yesterday an Apache attack helicopter crashed. Intercepted radio communications show that the helicopter was heavily damaged in a combat mission. The helicopter's pilot lost control during landing and the helicopter crashed, causing serious damage to another helicopter that landed earlier.

The coalition troops have so far failed to take An-Nasiriya despite of the categorical orders from the command and more than 800 combat missions by the strike aircraft. All attempts to break through the Iraqi defense were met by Iraqi counterattacks. After 24 hours of fighting the coalition troops only managed to advance several hundred meters in two sectors near An-Nasiriya at the cost of 4 destroyed armored personnel carriers, no less that 3 Marines killed by sniper and mortar fire, 10 wounded and 2 missing in action. The exact Iraqi losses are being determined.

The Americans have also failed to advance near An-Najaf. Every coalition attack was met by massive artillery barrages from the Iraqi side. Later during the day the Iraqis mounted a counterattack throwing the US forces back by 1.5-2 kilometers. No fewer than 10 Marines were killed or wounded. After exchanging fire for six hours both warring sides remained in the same positions. Iraqi losses in this area are estimated to be 20 killed and up to 40 wounded.

Near Basra the British troops pushed the Iraqi defense lines on the Fao peninsula but were unable to capture the entire peninsula. The British advance was a maximum of 4 kilometers from the highway leading to Basra. Radio intercepts show that in this attack the Iraqis shot down a British helicopter. Additionally, two tanks and one APCs were destroyed by landmines. At least 2 [british] servicemen were killed, around 20 were wounded and 15 were captured by the Iraqis.

Exchange of fire continued in the area of the Basra airport. The Iraqis destroyed one coalition APC wounding two coalition soldiers. The Iraqi losses are difficult to estimate, but available information suggests that up to 20 Iraqi soldiers and local militia members might have been killed in the air and artillery strikes.

All attempts by the British troops to break through the Iraqi defenses from the south along the Al-Arab river have yielded not results. The British command reported that it is unable to storm Basra with the available forces and will require no less than two additional brigades and at least five additional artillery battalions. Thus, to avoid further casualties the British are adopting defensive tactics, while trying to maintain a tight blockade around Basra and trying to improve their positions with small localized attacks. The British are also maintaining pressure on the Iraqi positions on the Fao peninsula.

The psychological levels among the city's residents, according to interviews, is far from critical. The Iraqi military made several public announcements to the residents offering them a chance to leave the city. However, most of the residents do not want to leave, fearing the faith of the Palestinian refugees, who, after losing their homes, gained pariah status in the Arab world. Basra's residents were extremely depressed by the video footage aired by the coalition command showing Iraqis on the occupied territories fighting for food and water being distributed by the coalition soldiers. The city's population views this as a sample of what awaits them if the Americans come...

At the Al-Kuwait airport the unloading of the 4th Mechanized Infantry Division is continuing and is expected to be completed by the night of April 1. During a night flight one of the US military transport aircraft requested an emergency landing. What happened to the plane is still being determined.

Currently the coalition command is deciding how better use the 4th Infantry Division. The complete deployment [of the division] and preparations for combat are expected to take at least 10 days. However, the combat units require immediate reinforcements and it is possible that the [4th Infantry} Division will be joining combat in stages, as the units become ready. This will mean a considerable reduction of the Division's combat effectiveness.

A report was obtained, prepared by the Al-Kuwait-based [coalition] Psychological Operations Tactical Group for the [coalition] Special Ground Forces Command. The report analyzed the effectiveness of the information and propaganda war. According to the report, analysis of the television broadcasts, intercepted radio communications, interrogations of Iraqi POWs show that psychologically the Iraqis are now "more stable and confident" that they were during the last days before the war. This, according to the report, is due primarily to the coalition's numerous military failures.

"...Following nervousness and depression [of the Iraqis] during the first days of the war we can now observe a burst of patriotic and nationalistic feelings. ...There has been a sharp increase in the number of Iraqi refugees, who left the country before the war, returning to Iraq. A "cult of war" against the US and the UK is now emerging among the Iraqis...", the report states. [Reverse translation from Russian]

[Coalition] analysts believe that if this attitude of the Iraqis is not changed within the next 7 days, a "resistance ideology" may take over the Iraqi minds, making the final [coalition] victory even more difficult. In response to this report the US Army Psychological Operations command decided to combine all Iraqi POWs into large groups and to distribute the resulting video footage to the world media. A more active use of the Iraqi opposition was suggested for propaganda work in the occupied villages. The same opposition members will be used to create video footage of the "repented" Iraqi POWs and footage of the local [iraqi] population "opposing Saddam."

Radio communications intercepted during the last five days suggest that the coalition is using Israeli airfield for conducting night air strikes against Iraq. Combat aircraft are taking off regularly from the [israeli] Hatzerim and the Navatim airbases do not return to the same bases but fly toward the border with Jordan while maintaining complete radio silence.

Possibly these are just Israeli Air Force exercises, However, [Russian] radio intercept and radar units observe increased intensity of radio communications coming from the Jordanian air force and air defense communication centers during such overflights, as well as changes in the operating modes of the US Army "Patriot" tracking radars deployed in Jordan. This indicates the Israeli airbases as used as forward airfield or that some of the coalition air force units are based there. Normally the IAF F-15I fighter-bombers and A-4N strike aircraft operate from the Hatzerim airbase and the F-16 fighter-bombers operate from the Nevatim base.

Experts believe that these airbases may be used by the F-117 stealth bombers "officially" based at the Al-Udaid airbase in Qatar. Using these two locations minimizes the risk to the F-117s by allowing them to fly along the left bank of the Euphrates (in the direction of Turkey) and to avoid the dangerous maneuvering over Iraq.

The destruction of the telephone stations in Baghdad did nothing to disrupt the communications of the Iraqi army. The coalition command acknowledged this fact after analyzing the dense [iraqi] radio traffic. Because of that the USAF was ordered to employ the most powerful available [conventional] munitions against predetermined strategic targets. This attacks will be carried out immediately before renewing ground advance.

<span id='postcolor'>

[Guest]

3 Flawed Assumptions - Time Magazine war analysis. It says basically the same thing that the Russian one that IsThatYouJohnWayne posted a couple of pages back, but from a US perspective. It might resonate a bit better with our US/UK members.

[FallenPaladin 0]

I`m just back from 10 hours german red cross duty here in my hometown. I don`t know if it was already mentioned here, but on NBC World they showed videos of burned out M1A2(?) tanks. It seemed if it were four-five wrecked tanks, of which one fell into a kind of traphole or so. My brain is still shaky from work, so I don`t remember if that wrecks were around Basra or Nasarija (sp?) .

[hellfish6 7]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Cloney @ Mar. 30 2003,09:31)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Hellfish6 @ Mar. 30 2003,15:21)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I don't get why everyone is making a big deal about finding these chemical warfare suits. Every modern army has them. And I'm not suprised that the Coalition found them left behind, if I was in combat, that's the first thing I'd get rid of, followed shortly by my shelter half. IIRC, Soviet-style chem suits are totally rubberized. Imagine wearing that in the desert.  <span id='postcolor'>

Aren't ours fully rubberized as well? I've put on one of those MOPP gloves while rumaging through some of my uncles old army equipment. You don't even need to move your hand, it gets clammy instantly. This was in a 50 degrees fahrenheit basement, I can't even imagine putting that on in 90+ degree desert weather.<span id='postcolor'>

The NBC suits I had two years ago were charcoal-lined. Very thick and heavy, usually leaving you as black as night from all the dust when you take it off. IIRC, they are only good for 24 hours after breaking their protective seal, and they degrade rapidly in rain and chemical attacks. The benefit is, though, that they breathe a bit better. It's harder to overheat in an American suit, but I often wondered at home much protection charcoal could offer. Especially since the manufacturer has since been implicated in making defective suits (which, in traditional military style, have been lost in the system - nobody knows who has working suits and who has defective ones now).

I tried looking for a link to the story, but couldn't find it.  

EDIT: Actually, you are correct in one regard - the MOPP suit gloves and boots are still rubber. The trousers and blouse are charcoal.

[hellfish6 7]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FallenPaladin @ Mar. 30 2003,13:07)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I`m just back from 10 hours german red cross duty here in my hometown. I don`t know if it was already mentioned here, but on NBC World they showed videos of burned out M1A2(?) tanks. It seemed if it were four-five wrecked tanks, of which one fell into a kind of traphole or so. My brain is still shaky from work, so I don`t remember if that wrecks were around Basra or Nasarija (sp?) .<span id='postcolor'>

I saw two burned out M-1A1s and an M-88 recovery vehicle. Looked like ATGM hits to the flanks. Maybe they were AT-14s?

[FallenPaladin 0]

I thought about mine damage. Some of the tanks seemed to be damaged from below. Would make sense.

[tracy_t 0]

In the leftie daily mirror (mirror.co.uk) and the very right-wing News of the world (guess) there are articles about UK tanks moving into Basra, risking life and limb just to... erm, demolish a statue of Saddam Hussein.

Isn't this a risky mission, given that Iraq is known to have AT-14 weapons? Is the AT-14 powerful enough to destroy a Challenger 2 tank?

If so, why were the tanks risked?

[Warin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (tracy_t @ Mar. 30 2003,21:38)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">In the leftie daily mirror (mirror.co.uk) and the very right-wing News of the world (guess) there are articles about UK tanks moving into Basra, risking life and limb just to... erm, demolish a statue of Saddam Hussein.

Isn't this a risky mission, given that Iraq is known to have AT-14 weapons? Is the AT-14 powerful enough to destroy a Challenger 2 tank?

If so, why were the tanks risked?<span id='postcolor'>

Because it is a war, and some higher up decided the mission might have some effect on morale.

Dunkirk ring a bell? Anyone with a lick of sense ouwld have seen that was one of the worst places to stage a raidd, but it went ahead anyways. Or Market Garden. Military planners are not all knowing and all seeing, and sometimes you need to take risks to acheive a goal.

[tracy_t 0]

Apparently the Warrior APCs and Challenger tanks suffered multiple RPG-7 hits, but all returned safely.

I thought the RPG-7 would be able to take out a Warrior tank? I'm glad they can't, but bloody hell, what a way to find out!!!

Fuck risking life and limb to destroy a statue.

[Warin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (tracy_t @ Mar. 30 2003,21:49)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Apparently the Warrior APCs and Challenger tanks suffered multiple RPG-7 hits, but all returned safely.

I thought the RPG-7 would be able to take out a Warrior tank? I'm glad they can't, but bloody hell, what a way to find out!!!

Fuck risking life and limb to destroy a statue.<span id='postcolor'>

Being blunt, neither you nor I know the reason they undertook that particular mission. It may have been of importance beyond just the blowing up of the statue.

Then again, it may have purely been a tweak on the nose of the Iraqi commanders... ie: 'Look you wankers, we can blow the hell out of whatever we want. Surrender now, you bloody sods!'

[ran 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ Mar. 30 2003,21:56)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">'Look you wankers, we can blow the hell out of whatever we want. Surrender now, you bloody sods!'<span id='postcolor'>

hmm .... english way .....

[MrMilli 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (tracy_t @ Mar. 30 2003,20:38)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">In the leftie daily mirror (mirror.co.uk) and the very right-wing News of the world (guess) there are articles about UK tanks moving into Basra, risking life and limb just to... erm, demolish a statue of Saddam Hussein.

Isn't this a risky mission, given that Iraq is known to have AT-14 weapons? Is the AT-14 powerful enough to destroy a Challenger 2 tank?

If so, why were the tanks risked?<span id='postcolor'>

that was only one of the targets hit and in my opinion a good one.

What they are trying to do is appeal to those who aren't really sure what to believe at the moment, to show them Saddam could be gone, if they help.

When his face is off the streets and his voice is off the radio some will start to help the UK & US.

Technically, no HEAT based missile can cause a penetrating hit to a Challenger 2.

Or so it says on the sales leaflet.

They will however, stop a lot of stuff and protect its crew.

They are good crews

They are the best tanks.