The Iraq thread 3

[denoir 0]

There's definitely room for criticism that the US backed down and capitulated to Fallujah's terrorists the way it did.

And what was their option? To level the city? High altitude bombings? The urban combat scenario showed that the cost in terms of civilan deaths and US deaths was not acceptable. They backed down because they had no other choice, short of killing all people in Fallujah.

Quote[/b] ]Maybe the US is in the midst of changing tactics right now, as it worked better against Sadr in Najaf.

Yeah, that tactics is called soft negotiation and diplomacy. They've even backed down from wanting to arrest al Sadr. Now the official line is that the Iraqi goverment will take care of resolving that. And the Iraqi government has said that al Sadr would be included in future political negotiations, and AFIK the US has not protested.

Yes, there has been a great deal of changes - in the right direction. Had they been thinking in these terms a year ago, Iraq would be in a much better shape today. I guess some people need to learn the hard way. Pity it's the Iraqi civilians who paid the price for that learning.

But there has also been a major strategic change as well. When the occupation started, the US had very long term plans on the rebuilding, financial investments, military bases etc Right now it seems like they're trying to get the hell out of Dodge while leaving as little mess as possible, hoping that the Iraqis can pick it up from there.

[theavonlady 2]

There's definitely room for criticism that the US backed down and capitulated to Fallujah's terrorists the way it did.

And what was their option? To level the city? High altitude bombings? The urban combat scenario showed that the cost in terms of civilan deaths and US deaths was not acceptable. They backed down because they had no other choice, short of killing all people in Fallujah.

Could be. Many people left. Everyone was complaining at the time how long it was taking them to be allowed to return back home.

Now we're griping about them being executed by the Taliban wannabees that have established and reinforced themselves in Fallujah.

You can't have it both ways.

But as the article about Sadr and Najaf shows, you can tighten your military grip and siege slowly but surely. Maybe that's what they're starting to do now in Fallujah.

[denoir 0]

Now we're griping about them being executed by the Taliban wannabees that have established and reinforced themselves in Fallujah.

AFIK the only griping is over the US missiles that seem to hit buildings in Fallujah recently and the reports of civilain casualties.

Quote[/b] ]But as the article about Sadr and Najaf shows, you can tighten your military grip and siege slowly but surely. Maybe that's what they're starting to do now in Fallujah.

LOL. You should know better than to quote Washington Times. Read a bit in some more respectable media. It was the US that backed down from chasing Al-Sadr, not vice versa. The militia was disbanded after the US agreed that they would not go after him and his men. From being a rebel leader he has now gone into legitimate politics. Don't take me wrong, it's the right move to do on the US part as al-Sadr is more of a problem as a symbol of resistance than he is as a political alternative. But there has been no 'great victory', especially not military.

These are the consequences of a complete U-turn on the US side. Brute force has been replaced by negotiations and diplomacy. Perhaps you havn't noticed, but the US military is not engaged in any real combat now. They've withdrawn from all hotspots and are negotiating for peace. The few missiles they fire now and then are really just symbolic.

[theavonlady 2]

Now we're griping about them being executed by the Taliban wannabees that have established and reinforced themselves in Fallujah.

AFIK the only griping is over the US missiles that seem to hit buildings in Fallujah recently and the reports of civilain casualties.

I believe war is ugly and tragic by definition.

Quote[/b] ]

Quote[/b] ]But as the article about Sadr and Najaf shows, you can tighten your military grip and siege slowly but surely. Maybe that's what they're starting to do now in Fallujah.

LOL. You should know better than to quote Washington Times.

LOL! I really couldn't care less about what you approve or diapprove of.

I didn't see you LOLling around here yesterday when an article by the World Socilaists was linked to.

To each his own.

If you've got something concrete to say, go ahead.

Your opinions and links can be just as deligitimate as mine.

[quicksand 0]

Quote[/b] ]But as the article about Sadr and Najaf shows, you can tighten your military grip and siege slowly but surely. Maybe that's what they're starting to do now in Fallujah.

You can`t compare Najaf with Fallujah for obvious reasons.

In Najaf the Iraqis fighting were young unexperienced man ill equiped who refused to be part of Saddam`s army and US millitary inflicted high casualies on their side.

On the other hand in Fallujah,even today when they tried to enter a Cobra was shot down highliting their abillities.The resistance in the city has millitary experience,acces to heavy weaponry are extremly mobile and travell in small groups to protect themselves from air attacks.In April the US marines barely made it to the deserted industrial zone where they were met with heavy sniper fire from fighters hiding in ruins.

The restart of the siege would be desastrous for US millitary infuriating the already ticked Iraqi population even further.

[denoir 0]

Now we're griping about them being executed by the Taliban wannabees that have established and reinforced themselves in Fallujah.

AFIK the only griping is over the US missiles that seem to hit buildings in Fallujah recently and the reports of civilain casualties.

I believe war is ugly and tragic by definition.

Is that the same you would say about WW2? Sounds like a very handy excuse. It's war, so anything goes...

Quote[/b] ]I didn't see you LOLling around here yesterday when an article by the World Socilaists was linked to.

To each his own.

If you've got something concrete to say, go ahead.

Your opinions and links can be just as deligitimate as mine.

I didn't link anything to the "World Socialists" and I didn't see it for that matter either. Source criticism is most relevant and the "Washington Times" is about as credible as "the Onion". I mean read the article, it's not journalism. Just read the first line:

Quote[/b] ]

The Army's powerful 1st Armored Division is..

LOL. It's like it was written by a five-year-old.

Quote[/b] ]The Germany-based division defeated the militia with a mix of American firepower and money paid to informants.

LMAO. I'd be surprised if their "journalists" even have a high-school education.

Anyway, what I'm saying, compare their report with the one of some more respected media source (BBC, CNN, FOX.. your pick).

[theavonlady 2]

Now we're griping about them being executed by the Taliban wannabees that have established and reinforced themselves in Fallujah.

AFIK the only griping is over the US missiles that seem to hit buildings in Fallujah recently and the reports of civilain casualties.

I believe war is ugly and tragic by definition.

Is that the same you would say about WW2? Sounds like a very handy excuse. It's war, so anything goes...

No, Iraq is not WWII, though I would say that about lots of events in WWII and other wars.

And I dod not say that anything goes. But pinpoint targetting an enemy location does.

Quote[/b] ]

Quote[/b] ]I didn't see you LOLling around here yesterday when an article by the World Socilaists was linked to.

To each his own.

If you've got something concrete to say, go ahead.

Your opinions and links can be just as deligitimate as mine.

I didn't link anything to the "World Socialists"

I know that.

Quote[/b] ]and I didn't see it for that matter either.

Well, then I'll just wait for you to LOL soon.

Quote[/b] ]Source criticism is most relevant and the "Washington Times" is about as credible as "the Onion".

I saw some great excitement here yesterday from an onion sarcasm piece.

Quote[/b] ]I mean read the article, it's not journalism. Just read the first line:

Quote[/b] ]The Army's powerful 1st Armored Division is..

LOL. It's like it was written by a five-year-old.

I'm looking at subsatnce, not style.

Quote[/b] ]

Quote[/b] ]The Germany-based division defeated the militia with a mix of American firepower and money paid to informants.

LMAO. I'd be surprised if their "journalists" even have a high-school education.

Anyway, what I'm saying, compare their report with the one of some more respected media source (BBC, CNN, FOX.. your pick).

I have no problems comparing this reporter to Jimmy Olsen.

[theavonlady 2]

What worked in Chechnya works in Iraq:

Quote[/b] ]url=http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=540&e=1&u=/ap/20040624/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq]Insurgents Kill 69 People in Iraq[/url]

37 minutes ago  

By HAMZA HENDAWI, Associated Press Writer

BAQOUBA, Iraq - Insurgents launched coordinated attacks against police and government buildings across Iraq (news - web sites) Thursday, less than a week before the handover of sovereignty. Sixty-nine people including three American soldiers were killed, and more than 270 people were wounded, Iraqi and U.S. officials said.

The large number of attacks, mostly directed at Iraqi security services, was a clear sign of just how powerful the insurgency in Iraq remains — and could be the start of a new push to torpedo the June 30 transfer of sovereignty to an interim transitional government.

In Baghdad, the Health Ministry said at least 66 people were killed and 268 injured nationwide. However, the figures did not include U.S. dead and injured.

[IsthatyouJohnWayne 0]

Quote[/b] ]The large number of attacks, mostly directed at Iraqi security services, was a clear sign of just how powerful the insurgency in Iraq remains — and could be the start of a new push to torpedo the June 30 transfer of sovereignty to an interim transitional government.

If that is the case i cant see it succeeding. The US seems determined to get it over with now as quickly as possible (lifting them at least theoretically from the responsibility of government).

[theavonlady 2]

If that is the case i cant see it succeeding.

And yet................

Quote[/b] ]But they can't kill Iraq.

As the sovereignty hand-over getting closer, the insanity of terrorists reaches an extreme so they gave Iraqis another dark, bloody day that shows the terrorists’ dark dreams and their disrespect for human life whether western’s or arab’s, Christian’s or Muslim’s as long as they get in their way to destroy civilization since it represent evil in their sick minds.

The increased severity of theses operations indicate that their greatest fear is democracy in the ME and building democracy in Iraq is the seed for it. It’s obviously not only us who believe this, the terrorists seem to get it too!

The terrorists have proved to be the dictators’ closest allies, especially Saddam. Why didn’t we see attacks from Al-Qaeda or other fanatics on Saddam’s regime? Simply because they were serving each other’s goals. They are not strategic allies (dictators and terrorists)but they have similar tactical goals.

People here are getting more anxious and more worried as the 30th of June gets closer and as the attacks’ frequency increases. But what Iraqis fear most is a pessimistic scenario that includes the US army leaving the cities and armed militias controlling the streets and then killings, looting and chaos return in a manner worse than ever taking advantage of the lack of strong authorities.

Such ideas are having their effect on the behavior of the people despite the cautious optimism they felt when the IP reinforced their presence in the streets. It may seem illogical thinking but many Iraqis find it very difficult to trust any authority after all they’ve been through and reasoning play little role if any here. They need to see solid changes before they regain their trust in the others.

Debates increased recently about a situation similar to that happened after the 9th of April when the police disappeared and the officials left their offices so everything was ready to be looted and burned.

I believe that this is a very pessimistic scenario and those who think things might go in that direction and those who suggest declaring martial laws in the country overlook many facts, and what happened in the last several days proves that the violence is still confined to limited spots that represent a small percentage of this country while in most Iraqi cities the situation is pretty calm. That’s why declaring martial laws-in my opinion-is a gain for terrorism that will make the war zone expand to involve the whole country.

The attacks in the last few days illustrate the spots of the terrorists presence and activity whom foreigners represent a high percentage of their count because of the close proximity of Diyla governorate to Iran and the close proximity of Anbar and Mosul governorates to Syria, the two countries that have the greatest interest in the failure of the democratic process in Iraq. That’s why those spots must be dealt with in a special way but for a very limited time. Besides, there should be active communications between the authorities and the people who live there and there should be also a strong presence of the security forces.

The world should understand that we’re not like what we used to be and we’re not like those around us; a military coup, then an emergency situation imposed for decades to protect the “revolution†that hijacked authority by force against the will of the people. Emergency situations has become the normal situation in these countries because such situations serve the government not the people. And we have the American and the Israeli examples, two nations that are primary targets for terrorism but in spite of all what they’ve been through they never used emergency laws, and these are the examples we have to learn from here.

We should present the best example and I am optimistic because I see the majority of Iraqis, and despite their fears, have decided to go on no matter what. Yes, we’ll give sacrifices and we’ll go through sad days but I’m totally convinced that nothing can stop the process. We’ll pay precious blood but it’s worth the sacrifice. The accomplishment will be a great victory and a turning point in history that will influence the region and the world.

Once again I address those who think that the war on terror was a mistake; take a look at the Iraqi field and you can see how the terrorists have gone crazy proving by themselves that the war is on them. Still they can kill some of us but they can't kill our dreams and they can't kill Iraq. No more martial laws and we're ready to give more sacrifices to achieve our ultimate freedom and build democracy.

-By Mohammed.

[Balschoiw 0]

All these violent uprisings are only possible because the coaltion troops do nothing to prevent acts like that and cover their asses in their camps until their Iraq nightmare will be over. Yes you heard me right, where is the coaltion force ? What are they doing ? Guarding the pretiouse pipelines ?!?

What are they doing to protect the people they violently "liberated" and threw into this mess we have right now ?

Where is their responsibility now ?

Apart from missiles they don´t have much to offer for the average Iraqi right now.

This is the result of a policy that is more directed towards elections in the US than to the wellfare of the Iraqi people.

[denoir 0]

Argh, them bastards. I posted a long reply to Avon, containing four different references and quotes to more mainstream media on the al-Sadr situation. Either somebody deleted it or I forgot to press the "add reply" button and closed the window

[Balschoiw 0]

DLP Seeks Withdrawal of ROK Troops in Iraq

Quote[/b] ]Ten lawmakers of the Democratic Labor Party (DLP) on Thursday submitted a resolution calling for the withdrawal of some 600 South Korean military medics and engineers currently stationed in the southern Iraqi city of Nasiriyah.

``The Seohui and Jema units must immediately return home to prevent Iraqi insurgents from kidnapping other Korean nationals,’’ Cheon Young-se, DLP floor leader, said in a news briefing at the National Assembly.

The two units, though comprised of medics and engineers, are considered a part of the United States-led coalition forces by Iraqi militants, as proved in the homicide case, Cheon added.

The move came a day after 50 lawmakers submitted a resolution invalidating the government’s plan to send 3,000 additional troops to Iraq amid nationwide anguish over the death of South Korean interpreter Kim Sun-il, killed at the hands of Iraqi insurgents Tuesday.

The progressive party demanded President Roh Moo-hyun come up with a plan detailing when and how his government will withdraw the existing troops within 15 days of the resolution’s passage in the National Assembly.

And Bush is still confident of getting the NATO into the mess he started:

Bush Pushing for NATO to Help in Iraq

Quote[/b] ]At a swearing-in ceremony for the new U.S. ambassador to Iraq, John D. Negroponte, Secretary of State Colin Powell implied anew that there may be additions to the 32-nation coalition that is engaged in peacekeeping and fighting insurgents in Iraq.

"Dozens of nations have contributed to and sacrificed for the sake of a new and free Iraq," Powell said Wednesday. "And those contributions will continue. I know that the Iraqi people will welcome new partners."

State Department spokesman Richard Boucher noted that 16 of the 26 NATO countries already are in the U.S.-led coalition.

At the White House, a senior administration official briefing reporters on the NATO summit also hinted that more NATO members could offer assistance soon. "That's what NATO will be debating in the next couple days - how we can respond to that, what form that response takes," the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

Initially, the Bush administration was seeking more troops from NATO heavyweights like France and Germany. Both have emphatically declined to send soldiers. The administration, which is claiming a new spirit of cooperation with European nations that opposed the war, now is urging its allies to help in other ways.

I thought they could do it all alone much better without anyone. Or did Bush say different in the runup of the war ?

Great idea, bring your troops home right before elections and catch a special bonus and let others bleed for the mess you caused. Very smart...

Only problem is that the NATO won´t do that. At least not the way Mr. Bush want´s it to be.

[theavonlady 2]

Well! Well!

Quote[/b] ]Iranian Source: British Sailors Apprehended To Swap For 40 Iranian Volunteers for Suicide Missions Captured in Iraq

The London Arabic-language daily Al-Sharq Al-Awsat reported on what it described as the real reason for the detention of the sailors of British vessels captured in Iranian waters. The following is the article:(1)

'The Real Reasons and Factors in the Apprehension of the British Navy Vessels'

"A source close to the [iranian] Revolutionary Guards told Al-Sharq Al-Awsat of the real reasons and factors in the apprehension of the three British Navy vessels and the arrest of the sailors by Iranian Coast Guard patrol forces on Monday [June 21, 2004]. He indicated that the British Army command in Iraq had understood the message sent them by the Iranian Revolutionary Guards command by their capture of the ships."

'Detention of 40 Volunteers for Suicide Operations Was Great Concern to the Revolutionary Guards'

"According to the source, the content of the message was very simple: 'Release our comrades, whom you are holding, and we will release your soldiers.' The source clarified that the detention of 40 volunteers for suicide operations by the Ukrainian forces acting in Iraq was of great concern to the Revolutionary Guards command, because they [the 40] constituted the first group of volunteers participating in the Organization for the Commemoration of the Shahids, which was established recently by Revolutionary Guards Commander Col. Dhu al-Qadr.

"Al-Sharq Al-Awsat was informed that one of the senior leaders of the Revolutionary Guards, who had formerly held the post of head of the Committee for Iran-Ukraine Military Cooperation, had gone to Kiev for talks regarding the Iranian detainees. However, it turned out that the Ukrainian units had already handed the volunteers for suicide operations over to British forces acting in southern Iraq.

"Despite contacts between the Iranian and British military committees at the borders and daily contact between them in small conflict resolution - [such that] this has become routine since the British forces entered southern Iraq - the British command has so far refused to acknowledge that it is holding 40 Iranian volunteers in one of its detention camps. According to the Iranian source, this caused the Revolutionary Guards leadership to seek a semi-military solution to bring its men back from Iraq."

A Major Problem for President Khatemi

"The seizure of the British vessels is of great concern to the president of the [iranian] Republic Muhammad Khatemi, because foreign relations is the only area that remains in his control, following the harmful reduction of his powers by Iranian Leader Ali Khamenei and other elements connected to him.

"Based on statements by a former reformist MP, the aim of Khatemi's policy was to reduce the tensions with the outside world; his achievements in establishing good relations with the neighboring countries, the European Union countries, and the Arab world provided him a large measure of independence.

"Iranian Leader [Ali Khamenei] and the conservatives had always sensed the importance of Khatemi's role in distancing the threats and dangers lying in wait for them, and therefore they had left the sphere of foreign relations to Khatemi.

"However, the picture has begun to change since the recent parliamentary elections [in Iran], when the Guardian Council banned or prevented the participation of more than 2,800 reformist candidates in the elections [to the seventh Majlis], in order to prevent a repeat of what happened four years ago when the reformists obtained full control of the Majlis. Similarly, 47 Revolutionary Guards officers entered the new parliament, and additionally a Revolutionary Guards colonel was appointed by Khamenei to head the Broadcasting and Television Authority. Also, Revolutionary Guards forces took over a Tehran airport, even though it had been opened by Khatemi, and conducted a campaign of arrests of reformists and student organization leaders on the eve of the anniversary of the July 1999 student uprising."

Endnotes:

(1) Al-Sharq Al-Awsat (London), June 23, 2004.

[Veovis 0]

Bals, do you truly belive that there are 138,000 troops in Iraq just so that they can sit in camps? Last I checked, coalition troops were getting killed almost every day patrolling the streets. I certainly have not seen any article remotely promoting the idea of "Coalition gives up, flees to camps. Iraqi people screwed."

Also, why is it that everybody blames Bush, while Blair, who is equally responsible, escapes any criticism?

Quote[/b] ]pretiouse

What?

[EiZei 0]

Also, why is it that everybody blames Bush, while Blair, who is equally responsible, escapes any criticism?

Yeah, Blair has been real popular lately.

[theavonlady 2]

Quote[/b] ]pretiouse

What?

Precious.

Do as he speaks, not as he spells.

[denoir 0]

Bals, do you truly belive that there are 138,000 troops in Iraq just so that they can sit in camps? Last I checked, coalition troops were getting killed almost every day patrolling the streets. I certainly have not seen any article remotely promoting the idea of "Coalition gives up, flees to camps. Iraqi people screwed."

Actually they don't. If you havn't noticed the last month the US casualties have dropped significantly. They have more or less withdrawn from all hotspots (Fallujah, Najaf, Karbala, large parts of Baghdad...) and are..well.. camping.

[theavonlady 2]

Bals, do you truly belive that there are 138,000 troops in Iraq just so that they can sit in camps? Last I checked, coalition troops were getting killed almost every day patrolling the streets. I certainly have not seen any article remotely promoting the idea of "Coalition gives up, flees to camps. Iraqi people screwed."

Actually they don't. If you havn't noticed the last month the US casualties have dropped significantly. They have more or less withdrawn from all hotspots (Fallujah, Najaf, Karbala, large parts of Baghdad...) and are..well.. camping.

What did the most recent Iraq poll, not voluntarily released by the Coaltion, show Iraqis wanted US troops to do? Leave, wasn't it?

Everyone should make up their minds - that includes both the US and Iraq.

For the record, here are the British boats that were captured:

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]Bals, do you truly belive that there are 138,000 troops in Iraq just so that they can sit in camps?

According to the reports from Iraqi police stations wich have been ambushed: Yes.

There were several calls for help from the police stations and after bomb attacks. In one case the US forces managed to get to the location 5 hours after the incident. It was 2 miles away from their base...

They avoid the enemy wherever they can. They have casualties on their support convois and on patrols that are only held within "pacified" zones. But they miserably fail in assisting the Iraqi security forces to do their job. Do some googling on it.

Quote[/b] ]Also, why is it that everybody blames Bush, while Blair, who is equally responsible, escapes any criticism?

Well Bush is :

the neat guy on the right with the masterplan while

Blair is only his willing

puppy.

Do you actually think Blair has anything to say in this relationship ?

The Blair problem will be solved with the next elections or even sooner while I don´t really see that with Bush right now.

[denoir 0]

What did the most recent Iraq poll, not voluntarily released by the Coaltion, show Iraqis wanted US troops to do? Leave, wasn't it?

Everyone should make up their minds - that includes both the US and Iraq.

I'm surprised that you havn't realised it yet - there isn't always a good and a bad alternative. The only possible alternatives could be equally bad.

I don't think the US leaving now would be a good solution, but I have serious doubts on how capable they are on brining order to the situation. It might be a lost cause already.

[theavonlady 2]

What did the most recent Iraq poll, not voluntarily released by the Coaltion, show Iraqis wanted US troops to do? Leave, wasn't it?

Everyone should make up their minds - that includes both the US and Iraq.

I'm surprised that you havn't realised it yet - there isn't always a good and a bad alternative. The only possible alternatives could be equally bad.

I don't think the US leaving now would be a good solution, but I have serious doubts on how capable they are on brining order to the situation. It might be a lost cause already.

I think we discussed this 700 or 800 pages back.

[theavonlady 2]

They avoid the enemy wherever they can. They have casualties on their support convois and on patrols that are only held within "pacified" zones. But they miserably fail in assisting the Iraqi security forces to do their job. Do some googling on it.

At least 4 US soldiers were killed in today's attacks.

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]What did the most recent Iraq poll, not voluntarily released by the Coaltion, show Iraqis wanted US troops to do? Leave, wasn't it?

Excuse me but when exactly did the TBA or the TBA 2 in the UK do what the Iraqi´s wanted ?

That´s a lame excuse Avon. Especially in the context we have right now. The country wasn´t destabilized by terrorists. It was destabilized by the war. The terrorists only took the chance the TBA and TBA 2 gave to them.

You talk of responsibility ? Guess who has the responsibility for the things that happen in Iraq today.

Edit:

Quote[/b] ]At least 4 US soldiers were killed in today's attacks.

And your point is ?

Erm btw, I can only verify 3 killed ones.

[Akira 0]

Briefly getting back to the "avoiding action"...

I remember a certain press release by the general in charge saying they were shifting from "conflict" to "handing over power."

ie....you clean up the mess we caused....