FallenPaladin 0 Posted April 2, 2003 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ April 02 2003,21:48)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Room for rent. Includes cable and hookup. Â Â <span id='postcolor'> Bad thing, but not surprising. After all Saddam is a tyrant and dictator, like there are a few other bad guys on this planet. But I think if you`d underline that pic with "Seperate Imprisonment in Guantanamo Bay" it could also work. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
edc 0 Posted April 2, 2003 Well, I don't think they get candy bars in Iraq. On something totally different, Its wonderful that we rescued on of the POWs, hopefully we'll get info so we can get them all out. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RaidChip 0 Posted April 2, 2003 Well I'm sure other, more 'important' POWs (pilots and other officers), are kept in a more guarded place, where the commandos cannot get in easily. Jessica and other members of that maintenance company aren't of much use to Iraqis as they don't know any valuable information. Regarding the seven POWs shown on TV, I believe they and their families can in fact be happy that they were shown on the television, as this practically guarantess their safe return. They most probably won't be hurt or killed, because that would be really bad propaganda for Iraq. It goes the same for WMDs. If Iraq has any (which I sincerely doubt, but still), they most certainly won't be used, as this would mean a political (and physical) suicide. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Schoeler 0 Posted April 2, 2003 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ April 02 2003,20:06)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">3--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ April 02 2003,203)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">How about why not count now what should have been counted a long long time ago?<span id='postcolor'> Those people are dead. These are dying now as a result of Bush's war. Saddam's past sins do not justify Bush's current.<span id='postcolor'> Yes Denoir, but what about Saddam's continuing sins? What about his future sins? Maybe we should have just said, "ah Adolf already killed 4 million, we can't go after him for his 'past sins' " back in 1943. Or, maybe we should do the right thing like we did in 1944 and kill the son of a bitch before he continues with his murder and thuggery. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Schoeler 0 Posted April 2, 2003 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Hellfish6 @ April 02 2003,18:52)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tex [uSMC] @ April 02 2003,11:33)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Except for the small, insignificant fact that a large number of Soviets did greet the Wermacht as liberators, at least initially. That all changed when the Schutzstaffel arrived, though. Are you suggesting that the Americans are planning on enslaving or ethnically cleansing Iraqis? Think carefully before you answer.<span id='postcolor'> Well... I do think we plan on "Americanizing" them. Iraq is about to become the 51st State. You can bet Coca-Cola, Pepsi and Royal Crown Cola are all going to have their own Gulf War for the hearts and minds of the Iraqis when the shooting dies down.<span id='postcolor'> Isn't Royal Crown a Canadian cola company? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Balschoiw 0 Posted April 2, 2003 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Yes Denoir, but what about Saddam's continuing sins?<span id='postcolor'> One moment please. The UN did a good job lately and the ones who chose to solve it the John Wayne way were and are the ones who act without UN approval or a global agreement. The ones who ruin the UN are the coaltion forces not the members that insisted on continuing the inspections wich worked in fact very well. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FSPilot 0 Posted April 2, 2003 Theres a time and place for political discussions about Iraq. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bn880 5 Posted April 2, 2003 Stupid ass US forces! (if this is true) </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Wed April 2, 2003 06:27 PM ET UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - The U.N. children's fund UNICEF expressed concern on Wednesday that Iraqi children might mistake yellow food packets being handed out by U.S.-led forces with small bombs with identical coloring. "Confusing unexploded ordinance with food places children at huge risk of injury or death," UNICEF said, calling on the military to urgently change the color of the food packets. A UNICEF statement said food packets known as "humanitarian daily rations" that were being handed out by the U.S. and British forces in Iraq were wrapped in bright yellow plastic. The color of the wrapping was identical to that of an air-dropped bomblet that UNICEF identified as a BLU 97. A similar problem had arisen during the war in Afghanistan, where the U.S. military eventually changed the wrapping on food packets to blue, the U.N. agency said. In Afghanistan, both the food packets and the bomblets were dropped from U.S. aircraft, while in Iraq only the bomblets were being air-dropped. But children can still confuse the ration and unexploded ordinance, because of their identical coloring, UNICEF said. The BLU 97 -- a canister containing 202 bomblets, each the size of a soda can -- has been used by U.S. forces in Iraq against heavily populated civilian areas, according to human rights group Amnesty International. The bomblets scatter over a large area about the size of two football fields, and at least 5 percent of them fail to explode on impact, Amnesty International said. The U.S. military had no immediate comment. <span id='postcolor'> So tell me someone, if the problem was pointed out in Afghanistan, how come they start giving out the food in that colour again? Really god damn foolish. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cloney 0 Posted April 3, 2003 Er, why is that the US being stupid, I think it would be a lot easier for the UN to change the color of the food packets than it would for the US to open up all its bombs and repaint the bomblets. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bn880 5 Posted April 3, 2003 Umm then why did the US change the colour previously and now switch back? EDIT: and the actual problem is, the US is handing out the bomblets and food packets... so it can repaint either. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cloney 0 Posted April 3, 2003 Maybe its because unexploded ordinance is easier to find when it comes time to clear it from the war zone, if it's painted yellow? Contrary to popular belief, there are teams that destroy unexploded ordinance. However, it is impossible to destroy all of it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bn880 5 Posted April 3, 2003 Yeah I didn't catch the assumtion you made immediately, read the edit above, so it's about repainting the food packets. Obviously it's more important for the bomblets to be of best visibility. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cloney 0 Posted April 3, 2003 Heh, we could make them both high visibility and neon colored. My point is that the bomblets are dangerous when unexploded, if its olive drab and not visible, some kid in the desert could come along, blow his foot off because he didn't see it and then everyone will be crawling up our ass saying that we should make the bombs more visible. An "unexploded" olive drab food packet isn't going to do too much laying in some stretch of desert [unless eaten ] . An unexploded bomb IS, make it visible. Hopefully someone won't be unfortunate enough to pick it up. : Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bn880 5 Posted April 3, 2003 Ok, but that doesn't address the apparent stupidity on behalf of the US forces. (both being the same colour AGAIN) Not wanting to repaint bomblets has little to do with both items being of same colouration. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cloney 0 Posted April 3, 2003 I fail to see the point you are arguing because I've refuted both parts. Please cut the crap and state your point. The FOOD PACKETS come from the UN The BOMBLETS come from the US I highly doubt that this is some kind of sick joke where we want little Iraqi children to blow themselves up. Unfortunately, the Department of Defense doesn't consult the UN Board of Fashionable Ordinance whenever it builds a new munition. Maybe the UN should take action for once and change the color of its food packets. [rant off] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bn880 5 Posted April 3, 2003 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ April 02 2003,19:54)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Stupid ass US forces! (if this is true) </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Wed April 2, 2003 06:27 PM ET UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - The U.N. children's fund UNICEF expressed concern on Wednesday that Iraqi children might mistake yellow food packets being handed out by U.S.-led forces with small bombs with identical coloring. "Confusing unexploded ordinance with food places children at huge risk of injury or death," UNICEF said, calling on the military to urgently change the color of the food packets. A UNICEF statement said food packets known as "humanitarian daily rations" that were being handed out by the U.S. and British forces in Iraq were wrapped in bright yellow plastic. The color of the wrapping was identical to that of an air-dropped bomblet that UNICEF identified as a BLU 97. A similar problem had arisen during the war in Afghanistan, where the U.S. military eventually changed the wrapping on food packets to blue, the U.N. agency said. In Afghanistan, both the food packets and the bomblets were dropped from U.S. aircraft, while in Iraq only the bomblets were being air-dropped. But children can still confuse the ration and unexploded ordinance, because of their identical coloring, UNICEF said. The BLU 97 -- a canister containing 202 bomblets, each the size of a soda can -- has been used by U.S. forces in Iraq against heavily populated civilian areas, according to human rights group Amnesty International. The bomblets scatter over a large area about the size of two football fields, and at least 5 percent of them fail to explode on impact, Amnesty International said. The U.S. military had no immediate comment. <span id='postcolor'> So tell me someone, if the problem was pointed out in Afghanistan, how come they start giving out the food in that colour again? Really god damn foolish.<span id='postcolor'> This doesn't seem to be sinking in, so I am now kindly cutting the crap as was suggested: The daily ration was specifically designed by the U.S. Defense Department for use in emergencies to feed and sustain moderately malnourished people until more traditional feeding methods are restored. The meals are nutritious, culturally sensitive and cost- effective and have been praised by the United Nations and the international relief community. Since their first use in 1993, they have emerged as a significant and lasting contributor to the fight against hunger. Such rations are distributed by the U.S. Airforce as it is the sole responsibility of the force in charge in a military conflict area to provide basic survival means to the civilian populaiton. (normally, in this case they are being handed out by service men) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
canukausiuka 1 Posted April 3, 2003 Hey, sorry to break the argument , but can we get back to news about events in the war? I understand that the hand-out rations and such have a place here, but I do not believe the arguments belong here. As for news though, I just read that a UH-60 got shot down over Karbala. Here's some links: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,83010,00.html http://msnbc.com/news/894704.asp?0cm=c40 I looked in BBC briefly, but didn't see it on their page. Did hear it on their webcast though. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bn880 5 Posted April 3, 2003 And this purely operational news: quite interesting </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Israel instructing US: Invest in Armoured Bulldozers <span id='postcolor'> Full Story Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
edc 0 Posted April 3, 2003 I think one tactic we could also use in Baghdad, is after the city is 100% surrounded, to send in some of the Khurdish troops disguised as civilians into Baghdad, not to directly attack any of Saddams forces, but to help start uprisings/revolts against Saddams forces. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted April 3, 2003 Al-Jazeera kicked out from Baghdad. Â Now there is a bright move on the part of the ministry of information. Â </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I think one tactic we could also use in Baghdad, is after the city is 100% surrounded, to send in some of the Khurdish troops disguised as civilians into Baghdad, not to directly attack any of Saddams forces, but to help start uprisings/revolts against Saddams forces. <span id='postcolor'> Hehe, fat chance. The Sunni Arabs are not too fond of the Kurds. They would be spotted far before entering the city. There is no chance in hell that any Sunni or Shia would listen to the Kurds... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tex -USMC- 0 Posted April 3, 2003 I'm pretty sure Al-Jazeera is keeping things fair and balanced, so to speak, as they seem to be pissing pretty much everybody off. That means they must be doing something right lol Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
edc 0 Posted April 3, 2003 They really wouldn't say that they're Kurds. They could just casually go into the city and I'd assume that they could probably blend in. Then they could just act like a Baghdadian(no clue if thats right word) and get things moving. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tex -USMC- 0 Posted April 3, 2003 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (edc @ April 03 2003,05:19)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">They really wouldn't say that they're Kurds. Â They could just casually go into the city and I'd assume that they could probably blend in. Â Then they could just act like a Baghdadian(no clue if thats right word) and get things moving.<span id='postcolor'> Except Kurds aren't Arabs- remember, we're talking two different ethnic/racial groups. Would you ask a black man to infiltrate the KKK? I think not. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turms 0 Posted April 3, 2003 F-18 shot down by missile reuters WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A U.S. FA-18 Hornet fighter-bomber has been shot down over southern Iraq by a surface-to-air missile, U.S. television networks reported on Wednesday. Fox News Channel and ABC News said the fate of the pilot from the carrier-based aircraft was not known. Pentagon officials had no immediate comment on the reports. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bn880 5 Posted April 3, 2003 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tex [uSMC] @ April 02 2003,23:03)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I'm pretty sure Al-Jazeera is keeping things fair and balanced, so to speak, as they seem to be pissing pretty much everybody off. That means they must be doing something right lol<span id='postcolor'> Yep, I agree with you on this one. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
