The Iraq thread 3

[Tanaska 0]

I also found this:

http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_247.shtml

That is so amazing and strange! What was Sadaam thinking? How could they bury so many jets without CIA or americans seeing it on sattlite? If they could bury 40 jets, what else could be out there?

Iraq is like a big sandbox that we used to play in as child. I finded many hidden toys in there from years ago. I wonder if I can buy a sandy mig? ;)

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]o so 600 Babies, Elderly people and women are the only ones who died in fallujah, source please.

Quote[/b] ]The attack killed more than 600 Iraqis and wounded 1,250, local officials said, with one saying more than half of the dead were women, children and the elderly.

"Among those killed were 160 women, 141 children and many elderly," Fouda Rawi told AFP, providing the first precise figures on the number of civilian deaths from the assault.

it is on page 76 of this thread. Eyes open.

Quote[/b] ]What foces you to be such an apologist?

Nothing. But you know as I know that this expression is used all the time in the ME. All day long. 24 hours. Nothing special about it. You know that Avon. Confess !

People on the streets have slogans. One of the slogans used throughout the ME and in many islamic countries is :

"Allahu Akbar !"

It´s a phrase like "hurrah!" or "for god´s sake" or "God bless america"

[EiZei 0]

Heh, I keep using the words "perkele", "saatana" or even "ristus perkele!" daily and I really dont consider myself very religious.

[MLF 0]

Quote[/b] ]o so 600 Babies, Elderly people and women are the only ones who died in fallujah, source please.

Quote[/b] ]The attack killed more than 600 Iraqis and wounded 1,250, local officials said, with one saying more than half of the dead were women, children and the elderly.

"Among those killed were 160 women, 141 children and many elderly," Fouda Rawi told AFP, providing the first precise figures on the number of civilian deaths from the assault.

erm thats not 600 in total more like 300 odd.

[Balschoiw 0]

Yeah sorry it were "only" 300 dead babies, women and elderlies. If you check the 1250 injured ones you will certainly find out that only a comparably small percentage were fighters.

Doesn´t change the facts though.

[MLF 0]

Yeah sorry it were "only" 300 dead babies, women and elderlies. If you check the 1250 injured ones you will certainly find out that only a comparably small percentage were fighters.

Doesn´t change the facts though.

nowhere did i say "only" just pointed it out, also show me figures of percentages of which those killed or injured were fighters.

[Balschoiw 0]

Haha very funny.

Do you think there are correct figures about injured ones being fighters or not ?

Right now there are no figures like that. Why ?

Because the town is under siege.

I already posted the numbers of killed ones, do I really have to do it again..and again...and again ?

Ok let´s do it step by step:

We have a total of at least 600 killed Iraqis.

Now we have 160 women killed.

Than we have 141 children killed and many elderly

Let´s sum it up: 160 + 141 = 301 women and children and elderlies.

Now we have a total of at least 600 who were killed overall.

301 makes a ~ 50 percent rate.

This calculation bases on the assumption that ALL others who got killed were fighters. That´s not fact as 299 left are just males of a certain age. This does not imply that all of them were fighters.

[quicksand 0]

Please someone help me understand why did they hide their entire air force ?

Why didn`t they atleast try to use them in combat

Also I remember seeing a link of some sort of a bunker where they found Iraqi Mi-28 choppers I belive.

My assumption is that they knew the MIG`s would fail them in combat so they decided to hide them to not be destroyed..It still makes no sense since the rest of the Iraqi millitary was even more outdated then the Mig-25,like their good for nothing Asad Babyl tank.

[NavyEEL 0]

Let´s sum it up: 160 + 141 = 301 women and children and elderlies.

Now we have a total of at least 600 who were killed overall.

301 makes a  ~ 50 percent rate.

This calculation bases on the assumption that ALL others who got killed were fighters. That´s not fact as 299 left are just males of a certain age. This does not imply that all of them were fighters.

Nor does calling them "women" or "children" imply that they were NOT fighters. If a woman is helping to try and kill you, is she still innocent? What about children? What is their definition of "children"... anybody under 18? There are plenty of teenagers willing to take up arms against Americans, which would therefore make them the enemy as well. The media exists to hype up events and make them sound interesting--you can't take these numbers at face value.

Americans would not target what you like to call "civilians" without reason. Don't you find it odd that your calculations put the deaths at 50+% civilian casualties? My guess is that most of these people were not "civilians" at all. When does a civilian stop being a civilian? Does he have to wear a uniform and run around proclaiming his Anti-Americanism before he is no longer labeled as a civilian?

[MLF 0]

I dont doubt Civvie casualties are highbut id take the exact figures of women and kiddies with a massive pinch of salt, EEL does have a point of when does a kid become a kid , im guessing 18 but its mostle a teenager, young men who are fighting the coalition.

[Acecombat 0]

US Remains Unrepentant Over Fallujah Death Toll

Rory McCarthy & Julian Borger, The Guardian

Quote[/b] ]BAGHDAD/WASHINGTON, 13 April 2004 — The United States Sunday night defended its controversial siege of Fallujah which has cost the lives of more 600 people over the past week, by claiming most of those who died were militants who had resisted the coalition.

As a tense cease-fire held in Fallujah and an international hostage crisis continued across Iraq, the US Marine commander in charge of the siege of the city claimed 95 percent of those killed were legitimate targets.*

The death toll in Fallujah has sparked widespread international concern and has led to condemnation by the US-appointed Iraqi Governing Council, and a refusal to fight by the newly trained Iraqi Army.

Asked about the report of 600 dead, US Marine Lt. Col. Brennan Byrne said: “What I think you will find is 95 percent of those were military-age males that were killed in the fighting. The Marines are trained to be precise in their firepower ... the fact that there are 600 goes back to the fact that the Marines are very good at what they do,†he said.

The figure of 600 was gathered from four clinics around the city and and from Fallujah general hospital, which have all been taking in bodies, said the hospital’s director, Rafie Al-Issawi.

Bodies were also being buried in two football fields. “We have reports of an unknown number of dead being buried in people’s homes without coming to the clinics,†Issawi said.

Asked about the number of Iraqi casualties in Falluja, Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt, spokesman for the US military in Iraq, repeated that Marines were “tremendously precise†in their operations and suggested any civilian deaths were caused by “insurgents†hiding among them. At least 47 US soldiers have also been killed over the past week.

Nearly a third of Fallujah’s 200,000 population fled the city during the lull in fighting at the weekend.

A British civilian, Gary Teeley, who was kidnapped in the southern city of Nassiriya, was released on Sunday, and there were reports last night that eight other foreign hostages had been freed. Several other foreigners, including one US contractor and three Japanese civilians, were still being held by their captors.

The bodies of two dead Westerners dressed in civilian clothes were shown on Arabic television. Reports from Bonn suggested they were German private security guards.

US officials persevered with cease-fire talks with Sunni fighters despite the shooting down of a US Apache helicopter over the western Baghdad suburb of Abu Ghraib, killing its two-man crew. The US civilian administrator, Paul Bremer, appealed for fighters in Fallujah to hold their fire long enough for members of the Iraqi Governing Council to enter the Sunni stronghold for negotiations. But Bremer insisted: “We will not negotiate over hostages.â€

The cease-fire calls also appeared to be aimed at freeing US troops and resources for a parallel running battle with radical Shiite militias, after it became evident that US-led coalition troops were being overwhelmed by the two-front conflict. It emerged Sunday that an entire Iraqi battalion had refused to fight with US troops and had returned to barracks, torpedoing any prospects of the US pulling out any of its 135,000 troops and passing on their duties to an Iraqi force.

Bremer confirmed that the 620-strong battalion of newly trained Iraqi soldiers had refused to fight after members of the unit were attacked while passing through a Shiite district of Baghdad.

According to Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton, who is overseeing their training, the Iraqi soldiers had told him: “We did not sign up to fight Iraqis.â€

The report quoted an unnamed senior US officer as saying as many as a quarter of the new Iraqi security forces had “quit, changed sides, or otherwise failed to perform their dutiesâ€. Bremer played down the significance of the issue on Sunday. “I don’t think it’s a significant portion at all,†he told ABC television. The surge in fighting has led to calls for an increase in the numbers of US troops in Iraq.

President George Bush insisted that political sovereignty would be handed over by a June 30 deadline, adding that “we’re plenty tough, and we’ll remain toughâ€.

“Obviously I pray every day there’s less casualty. But I know what we’re doing in Iraq is right. It’s right for the long-term peace,†the president said, after spending Easter Day with troops in Texas. Tony Blair made a similar pledge of resolve on Sunday.

So they went outside and counted the dead and saw who was who to get the 95% figure or is it simple hogwash?

[Acecombat 0]

GIs No Longer Superwarriors

Deborah Pasmantier, Agence France Presse

Quote[/b] ]BAGHDAD, 13 April 2004 — A joke circulating in Baghdad says: “If you want to frighten an American soldier, shout ‘Fallujah’.â€

The town where US troops have been blocked for seven days by Iraqis fighting from street corners, rooftops and minarets — often using less than sophisticated weapons — has become a symbol of the changed attitude to the US-led occupation forces.

In one year, American GIs have fallen from the status of superwarriors to ordinary men in the eyes of Iraqis who have seen them fall victim to old rocket-launchers and home-made bombs.

A year ago, after the rapid collapse of Saddam Hussein’s regime and rout of his forces, the American Army with its high-tech weaponry seemed invincible to many in the Iraqi capital.

“It had an image of incredible force. People attributed extraordinary powers to it, with some saying the tanks were so sophisticated they could deflect the course of incoming rockets. Its soldiers were viewed as supermen,†said Ouissam Taofiq, a geography teacher. But then, the first patrols fell victim to explosions of home-made bombs or the bullets of 30-year-old light arms.

“The Iraqis realized that the Americans were not so sophisticated, that it was easy to hit their convoys or helicopters with old rocket-launchers and Kalashnikovs; that the soldiers were ordinary men, as vulnerable as us,†said the 60-year-old Sunni teacher.

A year later, attacks against US troops have become increasingly frequent and murderous. Respect for them has evaporated.

“They have shown weakness. Instead of getting rid of them, they freed ex-military men or Baathist paramilitaries, who have reorganized,†said a former Shiite commander, referring to the supporters of the former ruling Baath Party.

“American soldiers have shown themselves incapable of ending insecurity here and have lost the respect of part of the population,†added Shamsi Al-Zahawi, aged 70.

For others, the Sunni fighters or the members of the Mehdi Army of radical Shiite cleric Moqtada Sadr, who no longer hesitate to display their weapons, the thing that has vanished is fear.

“The ease with which American soldiers have been attacked for a year has encouraged the mujahedeen (warriors) and the militiamen of Moqtada Sadr,†according to Taofiq.

The culmination of this resistance is the battle for Fallujah, the Sunni town some 50 km (30 miles) west of Baghdad where 2,000 Marines have failed to crush resistance after a week of ferocious combat.

“To see the most powerful army in the world incapable of conquering fighters equipped with light weapons in a small town like Fallujah, is a sort of victory,†said an official of the Baghdad journal Al-Manar.

“Patriotism is the root of the Iraqi people. The rout of our army was seen as a humiliation. The battle of Fallujah is like a renaissance,†he said, asking not to be named.

Since the start of the offensive against Fallujah — mounted to flush out the killers of four US contractors — the Sunni resistance movement has gone strongly to oppose American forces, like in the Adhamiya district, the Sunni center of Baghdad, which has seen clashes over the past week

[Acecombat 0]

And another:

The War Is Being Fought in the Open, by People Defending Their Homes

Naomi Klein , The Guardian

Quote[/b] ]BAGHDAD, 13 April 2004 — April 9, 2003 was the day Baghdad fell to US forces. One year later, it is rising up against them.

Donald Rumsfeld claims that the resistance is just a few “thugs, gangs and terroristsâ€. This is dangerous wishful thinking. The war against the occupation is now being fought out in the open, by regular people defending their homes and neighborhoods — an Iraqi intifada.

“They stole our playground,†an eight-year-old boy in Sadr City told me this week, pointing at six tanks parked in a soccer field, next to a rusty jungle gym. The field is a precious bit of green in an area of Baghdad that is otherwise a swamp of raw sewage and uncollected rubbish.

Sadr City has seen little of Iraq’s multibillion-dollar “reconstructionâ€, which is partly why Moqtada Sadr and his Mahdi Army have so much support here. Before the US occupation chief, Paul Bremer, provoked Sadr into an armed conflict by shutting down his newspaper and arresting and killing his deputies, the Mahdi Army was not fighting coalition forces, it was doing their job for them. After all, in the year it has controlled Baghdad, the Coalition Provisional Authority still hasn’t managed to get the traffic lights working or to provide the most basic security for civilians. So in Sadr City, Sadr’s so-called “outlaw militia†can be seen engaged in such subversive activities as directing traffic and guarding factories from looters. In a way, the Mahdi Army is as much Bremer’s creation as it is Sadr’s: it was Bremer who created Iraq’s security vacuum — Sadr simply filled it.

But as the June 30 “hand-over†to Iraqi control approaches, Bremer now sees Sadr and the Mahdi as a threat that must be taken out — along with the communities that have grown to depend on them. Which is why stolen playgrounds were only the start of what I saw in Sadr City this week.

In Al-Thawra hospital, I met Raad Daier, a 36-year-old ambulance driver with a bullet in his lower abdomen, one of 12 shots fired at his ambulance from a US Humvee. According to hospital officials, at the time of the attack, he was carrying six people injured by US forces, including a pregnant woman who had been shot in the stomach and lost her child. I saw charred cars that dozens of eyewitnesses said had been hit by US missiles, and local hospitals confirmed that their drivers had been burned alive. I also visited Block 37 of Sadr City’s Chuadir district, a row of houses where every door was riddled with holes. Residents said US tanks rolled down their street firing into their homes. Five people were killed, including Murtada Muhammad, aged four.

And I saw something that I feared more than any of this: A copy of the Qur’an with a bullet hole through it. It was lying in the ruins of what was Sadr’s headquarters in Sadr City. On April 8, according to witnesses, two US tanks broke down the walls of the center while two guided missiles pierced its roof, leaving giant craters in the floor and missile debris behind.

The worst damage, however, was done by hand. The clerics at the Sadr office say that US soldiers entered the building and crudely shredded photographs of Grand Ayatollah Ali Al-Sistani, the top Shia cleric in Iraq. When I arrived at the destroyed center, the floor was covered in torn religious texts, including several copies of the Qur’an that been ripped and shot through with bullets. And it did not escape the notice of the Shiites here that hours earlier, US soldiers had bombed a Sunni mosque in Fallujah.

For months the White House has been making ominous predictions of a civil war breaking out between the majority Shiites, who believe it’s their turn to rule Iraq, and the minority Sunnis, who want to hold on to the privileges they amassed under Saddam Hussein’s regime. But this week the opposite appears to have taken place. Both Sunni and Shiites have seen their neighborhoods attacked and their religious sites desecrated. Up against a shared enemy, they are beginning to bury ancient rivalries and join forces against the occupation. Instead of a civil war, they are on the verge of building a common front. You could see it at the mosques in Sadr City on Thursday: Thousands of Shiites lined up to donate blood, destined for Sunnis hurt in the attacks in Fallujah. “We should thank Paul Bremer,†Salih Ali told me. “He has finally united Iraq. Against him.â€

[SpongeBob 0]

Quote[/b] ]U.N. Recommends Iraq Caretaker Government

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-3977097,00.html

Wednesday April 14, 2004 6:01 PM

By HAMZA HENDAWI

Associated Press Writer

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - Iraq should dissolve the U.S.-picked Governing Council and set up a caretaker government of respected Iraqis to lead the country from the U.S. handover of power on June 30 until elections set for Jan. 31, U.N. envoy Lakhdar Brahimi said Wednesday.

The caretaker government would be led by a prime minister and include a president and two vice presidents. It must include ``Iraqi men and women known for their honesty, integrity and competence,'' Brahimi said.

The U.N. envoy has been in Iraq since April 5 trying to work out a framework for the political process despite the worst violence since the fall of Saddam Hussein.

A ``consultative assembly'' should also be created, but not an interim legislature, Brahimi said. The Governing Council would be dissolved when the caretaker government is handed sovereignty by U.S. administrators on June 30.

``I am absolutely confident that most Iraqis want a simple solution for this interim period,'' he said. ``You don't need a legislative body for this short period.''

Brahimi said he was ``confident'' that a government can be set up and that he would give U.N. chief Kofi Annan recommendations on how to do so when he returns to U.N. headquarters. But he acknowledged that security must improve ``considerably'' before the Jan. 31 election can take place.

Violence in Iraq so far this month has killed at least 87 U.S. soldiers and about 880 Iraqis - the deadliest month since the military set foot in Iraq. Most of the deaths are from fighting in the Sunni city of Fallujah west of Baghdad and clashes with forces loyal to radical cleric Muqtada al-Sadr in cities south of the capital.

Brahimi insisted U.N. and U.S. officials were cooperating but he denounced the U.S. military operation against Sunni insurgents in Fallujah, where civilian deaths have reportedly been high.

``Collective punishment is certainly unacceptable and the siege of the city is absolutely unacceptable,'' Brahimi told a press conference.

He also criticized the U.S.-led coalition's holding of Iraqi prisoners and U.S. efforts after Saddam's fall to root out high-ranking members of the ousted Baath Party from official positions.

``It is difficult to understand that thousands upon thousands ... of professionals sorely needed in the country have been dismissed'' due to Baathist ties, he said.

Even some coalition officials have complained that the de-Baathification committee, headed by Governing Council member Ahmad Chalabi, has gone too far in pursuing Baathists.

Iraqi politicians and U.S. administrators have differed sharply over how to transfer power to Iraqis. That led the United States to abandon an earlier U.S. plan to choose a government through local caucuses.

Unable to agree, Iraq's Governing Council and the coalition asked the United Nations to try to find a solution, prompting Brahimi's mission.

[denoir 0]

You guys are so heartless when it comes to Americans dying.  

People were at least as sorry for the victims of the WTC attacks. How short memory some people have...

Quote[/b] ]You think because he was not a civilian, that his death should be expected, and no one should have sympathy for his family?  Just because we care about the death of a fellow American does not mean we don't care about the deaths of others as well.  

There is a limit on how much time and resources you can spend on empathy for people getting killed around the world. You tell me who it is best spent on:

1) An ex-soldier who by choice was in Iraq and who was well paid for the risk.

2) Civillians who happen to be at the wrong place at the wrong time.

Quote[/b] ]Nor does calling them "women" or "children" imply that they were NOT fighters.  If a woman is helping to try and kill you, is she still innocent?  What about children?  What is their definition of "children"... anybody under 18?  There are plenty of teenagers willing to take up arms against Americans, which would therefore make them the enemy as well.

If the women and children are fighting you, then WTF are you doing there? Yes, if they shoot at you, they are legitimate targets. But then you should ask yourself if you should be there when even the women and children have taken up arms against you.

Quote[/b] ]Americans would not target what you like to call "civilians" without reason.  Don't you find it odd that your calculations put the deaths at 50+% civilian casualties?  My guess is that most of these people were not "civilians" at all.

Given the nature of the combat 50% is an extremely conservative estimate. When you fight using the means and scale that the US forces did in a highly populated urban area you're lucky if you're killing people slightly less than random.

We're talking about 1,200-1,500 wounded and 600-800 dead. That's about 1% of the town's population. When some IGC members said that it was genocide, I thought it was a bit over the top - but taking a second look - we're talking about killing and wounding a percentage of the population. The genocide remark was perhaps not entirely out of line.  

And for what? Who controls Fallujah? (Hint: Not the US forces)

[Balschoiw 0]

Nice denoir

*dang*

[SpongeBob 0]

I would like to know of all these civies that were killed, how many were killed by Iraqi's stray bullets and rpgs.

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]I would like to know of all these civies that were killed, how many were killed by Iraqi's stray bullets and rpgs.

I would like to know why the US didn´t take into account that they encircled all the civillians with the fighters together in the town. The civillians were at first not allowed to leave the city.

So is that ok then ?

[SpongeBob 0]

Well duh, then you'd have all the unarmed insurgents leaving the city with the women and children, leaving a few diehards. By trapping them in the city, they have no choice but fight.

[Longinius 1]

You are exactly right. Its a crappy strategy.

[theavonlady 2]

Quote[/b] ]What foces you to be such an apologist?

Nothing. But you know as I know that this expression is used all the time in the ME. All day long. 24 hours. Nothing special about it. You know that Avon. Confess !  

People on the streets have slogans. One of the slogans used throughout the ME and in many islamic countries is :

"Allahu Akbar !"

It´s a phrase like "hurrah!" or "for god´s sake" or "God bless america"

There's another expression quoted there. There are over a hundred people chanting this together in a public display of savagery.

This is not a "How are you?"/"Thanks G-d" standard response.

But if it makes you feel better, you just keep thinking about it the way you want.

[quicksand 0]

Quote[/b] ]I would like to know of all these civies that were killed, how many were killed by Iraqi's stray bullets and rpgs.

I would like to know why the US didn´t take into account that they encircled all the civillians with the fighters together in the town. The civillians were at first not allowed to leave the city.

So is that ok then ?

What you are saying makes absolutley no sense.If the resistance fighters wanted to fled and avoid a confruntation with US soldiers they had countless ocasions.They wanted and did put up a curageous fight.

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]What you are saying makes absolutley no sense.If the resistance fighters wanted to fled and avoid a confruntation with US soldiers they had countless ocasions.They wanted and did put up a curageous fight.

Shooting from apartments (were citizens are in), a school, mosques, and etc. is courageous fighting? Attacking when a crease-fire as been called? Courageous?

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]Well duh, then you'd have all the unarmed insurgents leaving the city with the women and children, leaving a few diehards. By trapping them in the city, they have no choice but fight.

or put down your arms...

[IsthatyouJohnWayne 0]

Well its maybe not very pretty but in my opinion the best way of maintaining coalition control of Iraq right now is to set Iraqi against Iraqi, but preferably in a very limited way(and not along ethnic or religious lines). The coalition should license the local militias and use them against those who are destablising the situation. The army should never have been dissolved so quickly or completely by the coalition and the police will take ages to train in such numbers as to make the necessary impact. Not only would -law abiding- militias help to displace the more extreme elements they would be much better at communicating and negotiating with locals and said extremists (saving coalition troops from continual cock ups and misunderstandings). Of course what a 'license' would/should entitle militias legally to do (apart from uphold the peace in the absence of other authority) would be crucial and debatable. Maybe its a bad idea or almost too late?