The Iraq Thread 2

[NavyEEL 0]

Okay, I read your post, Balschoiw, and here are my thoughts on it. First of all, my facts come from briefings, as well as from family members and family-friends who are either deployed or in command positions. In fact, I couldn't help laughing when I read the article you posted from the US Army War College, considering I was there just last month and know most of the people there. But anyway...

First of all yes, we see the tractor and pickup truck, and yes the tractor does indeed appear to have been seeding. However, does that mean that they did not have other reasons for being out there as well? Maybe they appear to be just farming, but then again Al Qaeda operatives from 9-11 "appeared" to be ordinary airline passengers, just as suicide bombers and car bombers "appear" to be just ordinary civilians. The video provides a limited view of the situation, and does not provide any of the background information leading up to the mission. ANY picture of someone dying in war will look brutal and inhumane when you aren't presented with the reasons for them being killed. Besides, who plants seeds in the middle of the night? If they have nothing to hide, it would make sense to do their farming in the daytime.

As for the IED not being seen... that does not mean it wasn't there. Please don't try to make a correlation between the IED not being there and WMD's not being in Iraq... that is a different discussion altogether These men were setting up an ambush. Whether the IED was in the truck at the time and didn't explode, or if the IED was hidden is irrelevant. The fact of the matter is that they were staging an attack on US soldiers and, as a result, they were killed before they could inflict any damage.

And as far as the weapons not "exploding" or the explosions not being visible, I do not know what to tell you since I have not seen an Apache destroy weapons firsthand. However, i will tell you that my information was verified by an Apache pilot and a recent head of Army Aviation, with plenty of expertise in the area. I am sure that he has more experience with AH-64's and the effectiveness of their weapons than I do at the moment, and I trust his judgment.

If you have any additional questions, let em rip!

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]However, i will tell you that my information was verified by an Apache pilot and a recent head of Army Aviation, with plenty of expertise in the area.

What information exactly ?

Quote[/b] ]These men were setting up an ambush.

How do you know as there is no visible evidence of that on the tape  ?

Quote[/b] ]Whether the IED was in the truck at the time and didn't explode, or if the IED was hidden is irrelevant

No it is not irrelevant as the suspected IDE was obviously not destroyed and can be used by someone else.

Quote[/b] ]The fact of the matter is that they were staging an attack on US soldiers and, as a result, they were killed before they could inflict any damage.

Where do you get this "fact" from ?

Quote[/b] ] briefings

Wich briefings ?

Did you attend any miltary briefings during the GW 2 ?

Doubted.

Quote[/b] ]from family members and family-friends who are either deployed or in command positions

So ?

If I follow your logic every civillian in Iraq is a camouflaged terrorist. Does that work ?

I don´t care about the brutality shown as this is a matter of war. Seen plenty of that. Doesn´t especially arouse me.

Quote[/b] ]Besides, who plants seeds in the middle of the night?

That´s not uncommon. Even here in germany farmers do work on the fields at night during seeding and harvesting season. I bet that´s not different in the USA.

I want to see fact. I want to see what you base your facts on. No official military spokesman crap. We all know that this is not the truth. There were numerouse examples even during this war were public was informed intentionally wrong, so what facts are you talking about ?

You wanted questions you got some.

Edit: Another thing

The man who wrote the study is not a hobo or regular teacher but

Quote[/b] ]The 56-page document written by Jeffrey Record, a veteran defense expert who serves as a visiting research professor at the Strategic Studies Institute of the Army War College,

I wouldn´t put this down the way you do.

[denoir 0]

Whether the IED was in the truck at the time and didn't explode, or if the IED was hidden is irrelevant.  The fact of the matter is that they were staging an attack on US soldiers and, as a result, they were killed before they could inflict any damage.

....

 However, i will tell you that my information was verified by an Apache pilot and a recent head of Army Aviation, with plenty of expertise in the area.

The problem is that the story you are proposing is completely inconsistent with the extended version of the video (If you havn't seen it, send me a PM, and I'll send you a link).

Transcript:

Quote[/b] ]

Pilot 1: "Uh, big truck over here. He's having a little powwow.

Pilot 2: Yeah

Pilot 1: Now what are these guys gonna do?

Pilot 2: They are looking around.

Pilot 1: You're looking off the left, it looks the guys have stopped.

Pilot 2: Roger that, he went to his truck, ok.

Pilot 2: He's running off into the field! See this?

Pilot 1: Yepp.

Pilot 1: I've got a guy throwing a weapon. Smoke him.

Pilot 1: Over by the other side, he just dropped a weapon. I'm engaging.

Pilot 2: Roger that.

Pilot 1: Get the guy in the field, get the guy in the field. (Camera zooms out)

Pilot 2: Roger that.

Pilot 2: Ready to engage?

Pilot 1: He threw it on the field and he's running back to his vehicle.

Pilot 2: Ready to engage or no?

Pilot 1: Stand by.

Pilot 2: Are you sure it was a weapon?

Pilot 1: Positive

Pilot 2: He has entered the vehicle.

Pilot 1: He is at the vehicle

Pilot 1: He is exiting the vehicle.

Pilot 1:(to command): Personell throwing weapons on the field, running back to the vehicle. 2-4 spotted him, [inaudible]

Pilot 1: Roger, that's a [inaudible]

Pilot 2: Just south of my location.

Command: Roger, point one - will pass it up.

Pilot 2: Now he's running back. What's the other guy doing.

Command: Did you see them with weapons in their hands?

Pilot 1: Yes

Pilot 2: They went out in the field and threw it.

Pilot 1: Yepp. Smoke 'em.

Command: Did you see them with the weapons in their hand and throw them down right next to their vehicle? [inaudible] sure?

Pilot 1: Roger

Command: [inaudible]

Pilot 1: Engaging.

You can clearly see from this and the video that there was no word of those guys preparing an ambush. The pilots specifically requested permission to attack because they claimed that one of the guys dropped a weapon in the field. The controller asked them twice if they were sure about the weapon. Even the gunner (pilot 2) asked the pilot if he was sure.

The obvious from this is that the pilots were not on a mission to kill off these three. Had they had any intelligence about those three setting up a bomb, then they would have not waited to see a weapon. And command would not have asked twice if they were sure that it was a weapon before giving them permission to engage.

The first part of the conversation show that the pilots clearly didn't know what the guys on the ground were doing.

And I'm sorry to say but that doesn't match your story at all NavyEEL.

Evidenced by the conversation on the video is that the pilots requested permission to engage, not because the guys down on the ground were planning to plant a bomb (in the middle of a field btw, LOL) but because one of the guys was carrying something that the pilot thought to be a weapon. While FLIR resolution is slightly better than the video we have, it's not by much. So if you can't tell that it is a weapon that the guy was carrying, there is a very high chance that the pilots couldn't either.

What we have is two guys meeting up with a third one, who is plowing the field with a tractor. One of the guys dropped off a long object near the point where the tractor came. Does this look like guerilla activity to you?

[theavonlady 2]

And for you Avon. Don´t ask questions if you are not interested in answers and prefer to run away if they don´t fit your assumptions.

Good morning.

edit: how obnoxious of you to think that I have to wait here at your beck and call to answer you. Up to the point when I shut down my PC last night, I believe I replied to every or almost every point made by you or others. If I didn't, tough. You don't own me. (You couldn't afford it).

[theavonlady 2]

Quote[/b] ]The more you're lax, the more they'll resort to strengthening their attacks. You're just offering them incentive.

Yes, and the more you opress or strike at a people, the harder they fight back. Living in Israel, you should know this.

I know that the opposite is true. Sorry but you must be ingesting the lukshen they feed you in your local papers.

Quote[/b] ]Giving the enemy hope and a chance at a better life is the only way to stop them from striking back.

Yes and no. Witness the attack yesterday at the Erez checkpoint and the fatal roadside shooting of a civilian car two days ago. These events only occured after Israel (again, for the millionth time) attempted to relax control at border points and road blocks.

Wanna know what some of the Pals think about their own suicide bombers and murderers? "It's simply stupid" (JPost subscribers only). Excerpt:

Looking somewhat bewildered, Salha said he could hardly understand the motivation of the bomber. "After all, this hurts us [the Palestinians] much more than it does the Israelis."

It's time that you should know this.

[Longinius 1]

Quote[/b] ]I know that the opposite is true. Sorry but you must be ingesting the lukshen they feed you in your local papers.

The opposite isnt true. Increased attacks by Palestinians on Israelis lead to increased attacks by Israelis on Palestinians. More dead Palistinians, more walls, less freedom, leads to bigger hatred against Israelis.

If Palestinians thought they actually had a chance at a normal life, I am convinced the amount of terror attacks would drop over time, because the people would have no incentive to fight as the extremists arguments would be mute.

[theavonlady 2]

Quote[/b] ]I know that the opposite is true. Sorry but you must be ingesting the lukshen they feed you in your local papers.

The opposite isnt true. Increased attacks by Palestinians on Israelis lead to increased attacks by Israelis on Palestinians. More dead Palistinians, more walls, less freedom, leads to bigger hatred against Israelis.

You forgot your own words that followed those: "the harder they fight back".

Killings are half of what they are in 2002. Many more terrorists are unsuccessful in reaching their intended targets than they were in the past. Many a terrorist is on the run. Terror organization heads, too. And the change in leadership by constantly popping them off has made it much more difficult for them.

Quote[/b] ]If Palestinians thought they actually had a chance at a normal life, I am convinced the amount of terror attacks would drop over time, because the people would have no incentive to fight as the extremists arguments would be mute.

Read the article in full. They wanted Arafat and his cronies? They're reaping what they've sown.

[Cephalid 0]

Wanna know what some of the Pals think about their own suicide bombers and murderers? "It's simply stupid" (JPost subscribers only). Excerpt:

Can you quote it then?

May be not in under this topic, but The Middle East part 2

Thx Ceph

[theavonlady 2]

Wanna know what some of the Pals think about their own suicide bombers and murderers? "It's simply stupid" (JPost subscribers only). Excerpt:

Can you quote it then?

May be not in under this topic, but The Middle East part 2

Thx Ceph

I'm a loyal JPost fan. Their full content is for subscribers so I don't feel like breaking the rules.

You can subscribe for free. You can even use a disposable HOTMAIL email address for such purposes. I did the same and have not received any junkmail from their direction (though you may have to check on/off the appropriate marketing/privacy question in the subscription form.

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]edit: how obnoxious of you to think that I have to wait here at your beck and call to answer you. Up to the point when I shut down my PC last night, I believe I replied to every or almost every point made by you or others. If I didn't, tough. You don't own me.

Sure Avon. The point is that you asked questions about mortar shells not beeing ignited long before you went to bed. Don´t ask questions to me if you are not really interested in answers. You just waste my time then. Sure I don´t own you but it was you asking the questions or better say setting up some theories. I answered them long before you went to bed.

Again don´t ask if you are not interested in the answers.

That saves my time.

Quote[/b] ]The problem is that the story you are proposing is completely inconsistent with the extended version of the video (If you havn't seen it, send me a PM, and I'll send you a link).

Another interesting thing is that the ABC man said that the identities of the men were known to command.

If that was true it is unlikely the pilot didnt confirm them as identified. This would have been the standard procedure.

As they did not confirm their identified targets I am sure they didn´t know about the identities and were not really interested either.

It was a solo decision of pilot to kill these men on suspicion, nothing else.

[theavonlady 2]

Quote[/b] ]edit: how obnoxious of you to think that I have to wait here at your beck and call to answer you. Up to the point when I shut down my PC last night, I believe I replied to every or almost every point made by you or others. If I didn't, tough. You don't own me.

Sure Avon. The point is that you asked questions about mortar shells not beeing ignited long before you went to bed.

So?

Quote[/b] ]Don´t ask questions to me if you are not really interested in answers.

Who said I'm not interested? Can't I read them the next morning?

Quote[/b] ]You just waste my time then.

Is this a private forum just for you and me? You mean you think your posts are not relevant contributions to others here unless I read them and reply?

Quote[/b] ]Sure I don´t own you but it was you asking the questions or better say setting up some theories. I answered them long before you went to bed.

Did it ever occur to you that there's nothing wrong with your last answer on the subject? Maybe you answered my question to my satisfaction?

Quote[/b] ]Again don´t ask if you are not interested in the answers. That saves my time.

You've gone way overboard, here.

[Balschoiw 0]

Hey Avon forget it. I´m not interested in that kind of conversation. I´ll keep that in my head next time.

[WhoCares 0]

And we thought the time might be working for the coalition.

Quote[/b] ]- At least 21 U.S. troops have committed suicide in Iraq, a growing toll that represents one of every seven American "non-hostile" deaths since the war began last March, the Pentagon said on Wednesday.

...

The suicide toll is probably higher than 21 because some "non-hostile" deaths are still being investigated, he added.

...

The 21 suicides represent nearly 14 percent of non-hostile deaths reported by the military, an increase over the proportion of 11 percent as of three months ago when the suicide number totaled 13.

Edit: Link fixed (Page 1)

[theavonlady 2]

And we thought the time might be working for the coalition.

Your URL is pointing to page 2 of the article. Here's page 1.

How does this compare to the 1991 Gulf War? Vietnam? WWII? Other armies involved in heavy conflict? Same? Worse? Better?

As a statistic on its own, it doesn't come as a surprise.

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]How does this compare to the 1991 Gulf War? Vietnam? WWII? Other armies involved in heavy conflict? Same? Worse? Better?

How can you compare that to other scenarios as the ones listed by you ?

Differnet men strength, duration, conditions (WW2 in Stalingrad was slightly different, dont you think?) and for GW1 there was no occupying force included and US troops never seddled down on Iraq soil for longterm.

They can´t be compared. Simple as that.

Take it as a fact that 14+ percent of US deaths origin from suicide in Iraq. Nothing else.

[theavonlady 2]

They can´t be compared. Simple as that.

Take it as a fact that 14+ percent of US deaths origin from suicide in Iraq. Nothing else.

OK. End of discussion.

[WhoCares 0]

Reopen.

Actually it is 14% of non-hostile deaths.

Closed again.  

Edit: put a little emphasis on the important part.

And it might also be interesting to note, that the suicide proportion is rising...

[theavonlady 2]

Reopen.

Which is 4.23387% of all deaths reported by the military.

Closed again.

[Cephalid 0]

Reopen.

Which is 4.23387% of all deaths reported by the military.

Closed again.

Reopen

Where did you get this figure from?

I will leave it open now.

[theavonlady 2]

Reopen.

Which is 4.23387% of all deaths reported by the military.

Closed again.

Reopen

Where did you get this figure from?

I will leave it open now.

The article states that there have been 496 military deaths so far, of which 21 are suicides.

[Acecombat 0]

Then what about the 10% others how'd they die?

Accidents i assume?

*remembers that freezer walk-in incident*

[WhoCares 0]

Casualties

Quote[/b] ]Example:

Died from a non-hostile gunshot wound in Baqubah, Iraq, on October 26, 2003

[PiNs_Da_Smoka 0]

Quote[/b] ]Staff Sgt. Steven H. Bridges 33 1st Battalion, 23rd Infantry Regiment, 3rd Brigade Combat Team, 2nd Infantry Division Tracy, California Killed when an embankment collapsed, causing his Stryker infantry carrier vehicle to roll over into a canal in Ad Duluiyah, Iraq, on December 8, 2003

An unfortunate accident that i witnessed. My platoon was actually attached to the 5-20 Inf. Battalion but us sappers were needed elsewhere that day, lets just say things like this can be avoided, and it happens more then it should. You'd think we would have to worry more about IED's and UXO more then accidents like this.....but sometimes we don't.

[theavonlady 2]

Max Res Pins!

Tell us something top secret!

[PiNs_Da_Smoka 0]

Can't do that, as i only have "confidential" clearence, top secret is two steps above me, right over "secret". But being out here, not much is kept from everybody. Only thing i can tell you now is that Iraqi's are really good at making bombs now, but we're better at blowing them up. And mortars really suck when they land 100 feet away while you are sleeping in the middle of the night.