The Iraq Thread 2

[theavonlady 2]

Kiowas (we call em "Quick Fixes") are a division level asset, fast movers are not. It's likely that they could get one there faster.

Skip the helos:

Quote[/b] ]He said that 10 TOW anti-tank missile fired from Humvees had silenced most of the resistance, apparently killing three of the four suspects. The battle ended at about 2 p.m. on Wednesday, when troops stormed up the stairs to the second floor and shot the remaining suspect.

From this AP article.

[bn880 5]

So this was Saddams message just before the murder of his sons:

Saddam broadcast

We'll see what we hear in a few days.

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

No! Now that I read the newest article....I have to say...what a damn overkill (87 choppers, 25 AVs, 200 soldiers, several days of preparation, and still 4 wounded).

Reminds me of the scene in Faceoff where a special unit dives through the roof into the house of drugdealers and a big battle takes place!

[theavonlady 2]

Head of the Special Republican Guard captured. #11 when playing with a full deck.

[theavonlady 2]

No! Now that I read the newest article....I have to say...what a damn overkill (87 choppers, 25 AVs, 200 soldiers, several days of preparation, and still 4 wounded).

Link? Much less firepower is mentioned in this 20-minute old Reuters report.

[denoir 0]

Quote[/b] ]He said that 10 TOW anti-tank missile fired from Humvees had silenced most of the resistance, apparently killing three of the four suspects. The battle ended at about 2 p.m. on Wednesday, when troops stormed up the stairs to the second floor and shot the remaining suspect.

"Suspects?" That has a nice ring to it, doesn't it?

Quote[/b] ]Reports suggest that Qusay's 14-year-old son was among the group of four people in the fortified section of the building.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3088991.stm

Bn880:

Quote[/b] ]So this was Saddams message just before the murder of his sons

I think calling it "murder" is going a bit too far. They did fire on the occupational power troops so they had the right to shoot back. This was no more murder than those two US soldiers that were killed by Iraqi guerilla today.

Too bad thoguh that they did not try harder to keep them alive. They could have just surrounded the house and waited it out. I'm sure that the both brothers would have important information to give about many things, as for example the supposed WMD. On the other hand, perhaps that was why such extreme force was used.

[bn880 5]

Yeah well maybe murder is a tiny bit too far but not much, seeing that Americans have no business being there in the first place. I think you know exactly what I'm saying.

Quote[/b] ]Too bad thoguh that they did not try harder to keep them alive. They could have just surrounded the house and waited it out. I'm sure that the both brothers would have important information to give about many things, as for example the supposed WMD. On the other hand, perhaps that was why such extreme force was used.

Well yeah, that's what I've been thinkng all along, you don't have to rush in with an entire army... why don't they switch over to "arresting criminals" or just leave them alone.

[Blaegis 0]

To me it's pretty obvious that the aim of the operation was to kill Hussein's sons and not capture them. Any half-decent SWAT team would have been able to execute a takedown and capture the suspects using a fraction of firepower employed in yesterday's situation. According to LtGen Sanchez' briefing the assaulting troops got as far as the first floor of the building before being ordered to withdraw pending the deployment of heavy support firepower. If they had secured the first floor in the first 10 minutes, using less than lethal methods to subdue and capture the people inside after that should not have been a problem.

On the other hand, when you "prep" a building with FFARs and TOWs before going in, it's clear you're just looking to kill those inside. The exact reasons for that remain to be seen.

[FSPilot 0]

I think you guys are misunderstanding what really went on, or at least assuming. As far as we know this issue started off with 4 soldiers getting shot at, calling in back up which turned into 200 soldiers and air support. It's not like they said "Ok, we know the hussein brothers are here, now what kind of nuclear bombers do we have on station"?

denoir

Quote[/b] ]"Suspects?" That has a nice ring to it, doesn't it?

I think the fact that they were shooting back is sort of damning.

Quote[/b] ]Too bad thoguh that they did not try harder to keep them alive. They could have just surrounded the house and waited it out. I'm sure that the both brothers would have important information to give about many things, as for example the supposed WMD. On the other hand, perhaps that was why such extreme force was used.

Pure BS. The US troops don't care about keeping the guy who's shooting at them alive, and neither would I frankly. It's also BS to suggest that the US troops are conspiring to keep information on WMDs secret. You're really stretching it this time.

I know you guys are anti-American and all, but this is just stupid. The brothers were killed because they were shooting at the US soldiers. It's stupid to suggest that the soldiers should of gone waltzing into the house with 4 suicidal gunmen in it who were already shooting at the troops.

[Blaegis 0]

I think you guys are misunderstanding what really went on, or at least assuming.  As far as we know this issue started off with 4 soldiers getting shot at, calling in back up which turned into 200 soldiers and air support.  It's not like they said "Ok, we know the hussein brothers are here, now what kind of nuclear bombers do we have on station"?

You are wrong. According to LtGen Sanchez' briefing, the tip-off on the possible location of Uday and Qusay (sp?) came in the evening the day before yesterday, the following night was spent on operation planning, and when the op actually commenced at 1000 hours yesterday, a full company of 101st was deployed for assault, with additional cordoning units plus on-call CAS including OH-58s, AH-64s and A-10s. So I stand by my earlier post (i.e. the aim of the operation was definitely to kill the occupants of that house).

[denoir 0]

Pure BS.  The US troops don't care about keeping the guy who's shooting at them alive, and neither would I frankly.  It's also BS to suggest that the US troops are conspiring to keep information on WMDs secret.  You're really stretching it this time.

 The brothers were killed because they were shooting at the US soldiers.  It's stupid to suggest that the soldiers should of gone waltzing into the house with 4 suicidal gunmen in it who were already shooting at the troops.

US troops follow orders of the commanders of the occupational force. As Blaegis said, it is pretty obvious that they wanted the brothers dead. You don't fire off 20+ missiles into a building and expect to capture the people inside.

A very reasonable action both from a military and political point of view would be to capture them. They were second in command in Iraq. They knew everything Saddam knew. If they were somehow behind the guerilla movement against the occupational powers then it would make very much sense to interrogate them. Not to mention the political benefit of putting them to public trial in Iraq.

So, once you conclude (which is not very hard to do) that they would have been far more valuable alive then if you have more than two brain cells you will ask: So why were they killed then? What could they have had to say that would not be very popular with the occupational powers? What is the current problem for the occupational powers?

Quote[/b] ]

I know you guys are anti-American and all, but this is just stupid.

FSPilot, why do you hate the Iraqi people so much?

[Ex-RoNiN 0]

I know you guys are anti-American and all, but this is just stupid.  

Being critical does not mean they are anti-American. I fail to see the connection.

[theavonlady 2]

I know you guys are anti-American and all, but this is just stupid.  

Being critical does not mean they are anti-American. I fail to see the connection.

He explained himself both before and after this quote. And I think he has prior posts to base his assumptions on.

[denoir 0]

Avon, why do you hate the Swedish people so much? Why are you so anti-Swedish?

[FSPilot 0]

Blaegis

Quote[/b] ]You are wrong. According to LtGen Sanchez' briefing, the tip-off on the possible location of Uday and Qusay (sp?) came in the evening the day before yesterday, the following night was spent on operation planning, and when the op actually commenced at 1000 hours yesterday, a full company of 101st was deployed for assault, with additional cordoning units plus on-call CAS including OH-58s, AH-64s and A-10s. So I stand by my earlier post (i.e. the aim of the operation was definitely to kill the occupants of that house).

Whether the operation was big or not doesn't make any difference. You can't prove to me that they wanted to kill those people.

denoir

Quote[/b] ]US troops follow orders of the commanders of the occupational force. As Blaegis said, it is pretty obvious that they wanted the brothers dead. You don't fire off 20+ missiles into a building and expect to capture the people inside.

They were returning fire. Once the 4 people inside started shooting at US troops the objective was to kill them, or at least disable them.

Quote[/b] ]A very reasonable action both from a military and political point of view would be to capture them. They were second in command in Iraq. They knew everything Saddam knew. If they were somehow behind the guerilla movement against the occupational powers then it would make very much sense to interrogate them. Not to mention the political benefit of putting them to public trial in Iraq.

Which is exactly why they didn't try to kill them until after they returned fire. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't risk my life or any of my soldier's lifes to capture someone who was shooting at us alive.

Quote[/b] ]So, once you conclude (which is not very hard to do) that they would have been far more valuable alive then if you have more than two brain cells you will ask: So why were they killed then? What could they have had to say that would not be very popular with the occupational powers? What is the current problem for the occupational powers?

Then if you have more than 3 brain cells you can realise that when US troops get shot at, they return fire.

Ex-RoNiN

Quote[/b] ]Being critical does not mean they are anti-American. I fail to see the connection.

There's a difference between being critical, and criticising everything the American forces do.

Tex even criticised the US for not voting on removing Saddam's holidays! How can you not see the connection in that? Some of these people are only out to do one thing: criticise Americans. It doesn't matter if they're right or wrong, but they'll take whatever stance they can come up with against it, no matter how far fetched it is.

[theavonlady 2]

US troops follow orders of the commanders of the occupational force. As Blaegis said, it is pretty obvious that they wanted the brothers dead.

Blaegis also quoted Sanchez. So will I:

Quote[/b] ]Sanchez detailed the array of devastating firepower used against Uday and Qusay, who were barricaded in a fortified section of the villa with two others. Firing AK-47 assault rifles, they wounded four soldiers trying to arrest them.

Source: Reuters

[bn880 5]

Avon, why do you hate the Swedish people so much? Why are you so anti-Swedish?

LMAO! yeah and FSpilot you are so anti Canadian.

[FSPilot 0]

LMAO!     yeah and FSpilot you are so anti Canadian.

Hey, I dated a Canadian for a while.

...

So Yes I am Anti-Canadian.

j/k j/k of course

(this ones already in that stack of FS quotes isn't it? )

[denoir 0]

Whether the operation was big or not doesn't make any difference.  You can't prove to me that they wanted to kill those people.

To you, I'm sure he can't prove it. To a normal person it would be fairly obvious.

Quote[/b] ]Then if you have more than 3 brain cells you can realise that when US troops get shot at, they return fire.

They did not return fire. They withdrew and came back with choppers and tanks and fired 20+ rockets at the building. Normally 200 troops would be enough to kill 4 people, but apparently they were not able to do it so they came back with more firepower.

Quote[/b] ]There's a difference between being critical, and criticising everything the American forces do.

Tex even criticised the US for not voting on removing Saddam's holidays!  How can you not see the connection in that?  Some of these people are only out to do one thing: criticise Americans.  It doesn't matter if they're right or wrong, but they'll take whatever stance they can come up with against it, no matter how far fetched it is.

FSPilot why are you so anti-Swedish? Why do you hate the Swedish people so much? You disagree and criticise every of my arguments. Always. Why do you hate us so much?

Edit: Let me get this straight, you accuse Tex of being anti-American?

[theavonlady 2]

Avon, why do you hate the Swedish people so much? Why are you so anti-Swedish?

If you saw the bills my father's Volvo has run up for him, you'd understand.

[Ex-RoNiN 0]

There's a difference between being critical, and criticising everything the American forces do.

Tex even criticised the US for not voting on removing Saddam's holidays!  How can you not see the connection in that?  Some of these people are only out to do one thing: criticise Americans.  It doesn't matter if they're right or wrong, but they'll take whatever stance they can come up with against it, no matter how far fetched it is.

It is not about the forces, it is about the government that sadly wastes those forces. People, American people too, are dying out there because TBA has their heads stuck up their own arses.

Nobody is holding a grudge against those forces (apart from the Iraqis), it is just that they are being wasted away by their own government for nothing. Remember Vietnam and all those "important" hills? Every WEEK they would storm some hill, take 80% casualties, leave, two weeks later they come back and take it again. It is the same kind of stupidity.

Criticising this is not anti-American, it is anti-stupidity and anti-incompetence, both of which is abundant in the TBA.

Besides, I have not seen anyone criticising "Americans". Everyone is criticising the TBA, for valid reasons too, but did you ever see anyone go "Oh, I don't like your central park" or "Oh, your country smells?"? No, we just try to HELP you see the awfullness of your government. Hopefully you will sooner or later realise that Jefferson was right - a patriot will defend his/her COUNTRY, not the bleeding GOVERNMENT! Because at the end of the day, both the voting public AND the government serve the COUNTRY!

[denoir 0]

Well said Ex-Ronin

[Tovarish 0]

FSPilot, I think you could use a little piece of advice the Pope gave in a speech during his visit to Cuba.

"Do not confuse your governing party with your country"

[FSPilot 0]

denoir

Quote[/b] ]To you, I'm sure he can't prove it. To a normal person it would be fairly obvious.

To a normally biased person, sure.

Quote[/b] ]They did not return fire. They withdrew and came back with choppers and tanks and fired 20+ rockets at the building. Normally 200 troops would be enough to kill 4 people, but apparently they were not able to do it so they came back with more firepower.

Yes, so they returned fire. They did it with a lot of soldiers as the US probably always does. They were shot at first, so they shot back. It's that simple.

Quote[/b] ]FSPilot why are you so anti-Swedish? Why do you hate the Swedish people so much? You disagree and criticise every of my arguments. Always. Why do you hate us so much?

Edit: Let me get this straight, you accuse Tex of being anti-American?

There's difference between disagreeing with someone, which is fine, and taking a reeeally far off stance that shows no logic just to disagree with someone, which is what you're doing and have done in the past.

Ex-RoNiN

Quote[/b] ]It is not about the forces, it is about the government that sadly wastes those forces. People, American people too, are dying out there because TBA has their heads stuck up their own arses.

So thats why he's criticising the forces. Not because of the forces, because of the government.

Quote[/b] ]Nobody is holding a grudge against those forces (apart from the Iraqis), it is just that they are being wasted away by their own government for nothing. Remember Vietnam and all those "important" hills? Every WEEK they would storm some hill, take 80% casualties, leave, two weeks later they come back and take it again. It is the same kind of stupidity.

The reason I think they're holding a grudge against US forces is because they always criticise every single thing they do. Now they're criticising US forces for killing people who were shooting at them. If you can't see how that's far off and illogical then I shouldn't be bothering with you.

Quote[/b] ]Criticising this is not anti-American, it is anti-stupidity and anti-incompetence, both of which is abundant in the TBA.

Criticising is good, yes. Criticising to the point where you have to take a walk to the moon to see where they're coming from is not.

Quote[/b] ]Besides, I have not seen anyone criticising "Americans". Everyone is criticising the TBA, for valid reasons too, but did you ever see anyone go "Oh, I don't like your central park" or "Oh, your country smells?"? No, we just try to HELP you see the awfullness of your government. Hopefully you will sooner or later realise that Jefferson was right - a patriot will defend his/her COUNTRY, not the bleeding GOVERNMENT! Because at the end of the day, both the voting public AND the government serve the COUNTRY!

Did you just get here? Obviously you haven't been reading any of denoir's criticising of the US forces in the region, or in the world in general.

And I'm saying this one last time: by saying "They did not return fire. They withdrew and came back with choppers and tanks and fired 20+ rockets at the building. Normally 200 troops would be enough to kill 4 people, but apparently they were not able to do it so they came back with more firepower." they were not criticising TBA, they were criticising US troops.

[Ex-RoNiN 0]

The forces are not being criticised, their orders are.

Where do the orders come from?