The Iraq thread 4

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

100.000 AT LEAST. The Lancet report had only limited access to those areas which are currently under attack. We may therefore assume that this number is the tip of the iceberg. Exaggerated? Well sounds pretty shocking but the basis of this report and the statistical approach is highly scientific.

BTW: Members of Alawis family have been kidnapped

[denoir 0]

100.000 AT LEAST. The Lancet report had only limited access to those areas which are currently under attack. We may therefore assume that this number is the tip of the iceberg. Exaggerated? Well sounds pretty shocking but the basis of this report and the statistical approach is highly scientific.

Actually, the media reporting has been flawed on that, probably due to the illiteracy in statistics on the behalf of the news agancies.

The Lancet report concluded that with a confidence interval of 95%, the number of casualties was 8,000 - 194,000.

From the report:

Quote[/b] ]

Methods: A cluster sample survey was undertaken throughout Iraq during September, 2004. 33 clusters of 30 households each were interviewed about household composition, births, and deaths since January, 2002. In those households reporting deaths, the date, cause, and circumstances of violent deaths were recorded. We assessed the relative risk of death associated with the 2003 invasion and occupation by comparing mortality in the 17·8 months after the invasion with the 14·6-month period preceding it.

Findings: The risk of death was estimated to be 2·5-fold (95% CI 1·6-4·2) higher after the invasion when compared with the preinvasion period. Two-thirds of all violent deaths were reported in one cluster in the city of Falluja. If we exclude the Falluja data, the risk of death is 1·5-fold (1·1-2·3) higher after the invasion. We estimate that 98000 more deaths than expected (8000-194000) happened after the invasion outside of Falluja and far more if the outlier Falluja cluster is included. The major causes of death before the invasion were myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular accidents, and other chronic disorders whereas after the invasion violence was the primary cause of death. Violent deaths were widespread, reported in 15 of 33 clusters, and were mainly attributed to coalition forces. Most individuals reportedly killed by coalition forces were women and children. The risk of death from violence in the period after the invasion was 58 times higher (95% CI 8·1-419) than in the period before the war.

What does it mean? It means that you can't say 100,000 at least. You can say with 95% confidence 8,000 at least and 194,000 at most. The 100,000 number is the mean value.

The values have a gaussian distribution:

As you can see from the graph 100,000 value is the most probable one. The 194,000 value is equally improbable as the 8,000 value.

The authors call it "conservative" because they excluded some violent regions like Falluja from their count.

[Colossus 2]

Just wanted to add this, hope it's not added already:

Falluja (3600 x 2986)

Falluja (1300 x 1088, zoomed out)

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

Okay, too confusing what I wrote before. But Denoir, to simply put it down because a Gausian distribution was the final base of their sensitivity analysis is nonesense.

To busy now to state why..  

Gauss is not the ultimate proof of how widespread possibilities and probabilities are. Continue with a Monte Carlo analysis and you get far more precise data out of it. My point is, what counts in the end is their personal judgement of the data collected. And so far, this is all we can count on.

[denoir 0]

Okay, too confusing what I wrote before. But Denoir, to simply put it down because a Gausian distribution was the final base of their sensitivity analysis is nonesense.

To busy now to state why..  

I'm not saying that it is nonsense because of a Gaussian distribution. On the contrary, using a Gaussian distribution works in their advantage.

I'm saying that the conclusions are not solid because of the huge error margin. Their 95% interval of confidence is between 8,000-194,000. That means that they can only say that the death toll was 93,000 +- 85,000. That's a very vague estimate.

Quote[/b] ]Gauss is not the ultimate proof of how widespread possibilities and probabilities are. Continue with a Monte Carlo analysis and you get far more precise data out of it.

You can only run a random sample optimization (MC) if you have enough data - which they did not. The number of collected samples was too small for that (as shown by the huge error margin). A normal distribution is the best guess you can go with.

I'm not saying that the analyis they did is worthless, I'm saying that the interpretations of it in the media is very questionable. They didn't get enough data to show us the distribution - and to estimate the relative probablilites. For all we know, it could be a flat distribution, making the 8,000 number equally likely as the 200,000 number.

Bottom line is that the results are very inconclusive and one should be careful before making statements such as "at least 100,000 killed" when in fact, the only thing we know is "at least 8,000 killed, at most 194,000 killed".

Just wanted to add this, hope it's not added already:

Falluja (3600 x 2986)

Falluja (1300 x 1088, zoomed out)

Quote[/b] ]US forces have been fighting their way through the Jolan and Askari districts in the north of Falluja. There are reports that they have taken control of a compound containing the mayor's office and a police station, and have managed to cross the main highway in the heart of the city.

--BBC

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

In general I agree with you

However the MC (if that is what I meant with Monte Carlo) creates samples itself, 10.000 to be exact. The advantage is that you can show that a curve does not exist. Some cases are generally more possible than other. Gauss simply flattened it to a curve.

This is a very neat example of a Monte Carlo analysis, we are using it a lot in our company (luckily not me)and this one was finalised just yesterday. The shaky light grey line in the back are the results of the Monte Carlo calculation. It is funny to see but .... umh doesnt realy add much to the discussion

[denoir 0]

However the MC (if that is what I meant with Monte Carlo) creates samples itself, 10.000 to be exact. The advantage is that you can show that a curve does not exist. Some cases are generally more possible than other. Gauss simply flattened it to a curve.

This is a very neat example of a Monte Carlo analysis, we are using it a lot in our company (luckily not me)and this one was finalised just yesterday. The shaky light grey line in the back are the results of the Monte Carlo calculation. It is funny to see but .... umh doesnt realy add much to the discussion

http://www.applepics.com/6/userfiles/41920e2eb619d.jpg

Albert, I think you are misunderstanding Monte Carlo. It is a basically a random search optimization procedure. You set the boundaries and definitions for your model and generate random data. The part of the data that is acceptable and within the model boundaries, you keep - the data outside, you reject. You run it many times and get a rough probability  distribution. (Yeah, it's the most dumb method invented by man - there are plenty of better ones, such as genetic algorithms, neural networks, kalman filters etc)

In the case where you have existing data, you use a parametric model with the basic parameters set by the elementary statistics of the existing dataset. Then you use Monte Carlo to optimize the rest of the parameters. This can help "filling out" the distribution function, but it can't help you with accuracy.

Point being that you can't do better than the underlying data. It is what sets the limit. Too little data (as in this case) and the distribution cannot be uniquely determined - i.e there are plenty of parametric models that can fit the data very well while being in contradiction.

The ultimate weakness in this survey is the limited data, which both gives a huge error margin (~90% of the mean value) and inssuficient data for making a function fit (i.e estimate the distribution).

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

Quote[/b] ]The part of the data that is acceptable and within the model boundaries, you keep - the data outside, you reject

not necessarily

Quote[/b] ]misunderstanding Monte Carlo. It is a basically a random search optimization procedure. You set the boundaries and definitions for your model and generate random data. . (Yeah, it's the most dumb method invented by man - there are plenty of better ones, such as genetic algorithms, neural networks, kalman filters etc)

I must disagree, but maybe because I dont get what you mean and my english skills detereorate a bit each day

And I must disagree in especially one point: Monte Carlo is not the dumbest method at all. To analyse the financial investments (e.g. closed ended funds) this is probably the most accurate method currently existing. There are only very few Financial Rating agencies capable of properly using it to estimate the outcome of an investment (especially if the investment has a realisation period up to 25 years). I dont want to say it is wise, nor am I capable to defend it with my semi-knowledge but it is definetly accurate enough for Moodies, Standard&Poors, Fitch....

Correct is that it does indeed create pseudo-samples, but with accurate and precise input it gives pretty realistic picture of e.g. a risk-reward relationship. It is applied and has proven that even pseudo-samples can draw a realistic picture.

The way it is usually applied is that you list up all fact

[denoir 0]

And I must disagree in especially one point: Monte Carlo is not the dumbest method at all.

Albert, just because it's all you economists know, doesn't mean it's the best there is

It is the dumbest possible method, because it is a brute-force method. You can't get more primitive than that. That doesn't mean it isn't accurate - it is just to slow for larger scale models (with tens of thousands of parameters) as the search space is enormous. There are plenty of much "smarter" algorithms such as gradient descent or genetic algorithms. Instead of just randomly jumping around in the search space, they converge to the optimum by each iteration.

The advantage of Monte Carlo is that it works for any optimization problem. You don't need to know anything about the underlying system. As it is simply based on trial and error, it can solve very ill-conditioned problems.

Quote[/b] ]To analyse the financial investments (e.g. closed ended funds) this is probably the most accurate method currently existing. There are only very few Financial Rating agencies capable of properly using it to estimate the outcome of an investment (especially if the investment has a realisation period up to 25 years). I dont want to say it is wise, nor am I capable to defend it with my semi-knowledge but it is definetly accurate enough for Moodies, Standard&Poors, Fitch....

That's hardly an argument - they use just about everything - from trivial linear models to very advanced support vector machines. Today the big trading houses (like Merrill Lynch) primarily use hybrid systems that combine neural nets with traditional technical analysis (the latter is used as a pre-processing input). And then we're talking about large scale parametric models with 100,000+ free parameters.

Anyway, back to Iraq:

Eyewitness: Defiance amid carnage [bBC]

Quote[/b] ]

As US forces battle insurgents in streets strewn with rubble and corpses, Iraqi sources question the claims that the US controls much of Falluja. The BBC News website spoke by phone to Fadhil Badrani, a journalist in the city who reports for the BBC World Service in Arabic.

I went for a walk around the city last night after the Americans pulled back.

It was very quiet - often the only sounds coming from the movement of fighters along streets and rooftops. In places, it was also very dark, with only the occasional rocket or flare lighting the way.

Wherever I went, I found broken buildings and bodies - local people and fighters killed on the streets.

Clutching weapons

I also saw four crippled US tanks and three abandoned Humvees.

In Hasbiyyah, I found the bodies of eight US soldiers lying on the ground.

Some of them were badly mangled with various bits blown off. Others were in better condition, as if they had taken small-arms fire. I noticed two of the US soldiers were still clutching their guns tightly across their chests. But most of their weapons were missing by the time I got there.

Some of the dead are beginning to rot in the streets. But the living do not exactly smell great either - I have not had a bath for a week. Nor have I shaved.

There is no real rest here, day or night.

Jolan flashpoint

The US brought in a very big force on Wednesday morning.

The mosques no longer broadcast the daily call to prayer but nor are they silent.

Every time a big bomb lands nearby, the cry rises from the minarets: "Allahu Akbar" [God is great]. The worst fighting is to the north of the city, in the Jolan district.

This is where a lot of the fighters have been based. Incidentally, it is also where US security guards were ambushed in April, leading to the first siege of Falluja.

I think it is misleading to say the US controls 70% of the city because the fighters are constantly on the move. They go from street to street, attacking the army in some places, letting them through elsewhere so that they can attack them later.

The fighters have told me they are prepared to resist the Americans until the death.

They say they are fighting not just for Falluja, but for all Iraq. They express confidence that they will win in the end. They say the idea is to inflict enough casualties on the American troops to force them to reconsider their mission.

I must say that Falluja is one of the last places on earth where I would like to be now. It really must be hell - for both sides and not to mention the civilians.

A very different report from CNN - much more upbeat:

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/11/10/iraq.main/index.html

..on the other hand, I'm not quite sure that US media can be seen as objective in this.

[Akira 0]

I just have to say that despite what Bush says, and as much as he tries to deflect comparisons, this is indeed turning into a holy war...a crusade. Religion vs. Religion.

Between the Marines and the much publicized prayers and religous gatherings prior to the assualt on Falluja, and the

Quote[/b] ]Every time a big bomb lands nearby, the cry rises from the minarets: "Allahu Akbar" [God is great].

common civilians can only be thinking this is an assualt on their faith, which will on lead to stiffer and stiffer resistance. The insurgents originally tried to make it about religion to which the US denied, but now I think the US is playing into the hand of the insurgents....giving them the ammunition they need for PR among other Arab states (not that they need more). I won't be surprised when there is talk of the Martyrs Of Falluja.

Quote[/b] ]In Hasbiyyah, I found the bodies of eight US soldiers lying on the ground.

Does the US no longer recover the bodies of their fallen? It seems the reporter is alone, so why are there US dead laying in the middle of the street? After the US has pulled back...

[denoir 0]

Quote[/b] ]In Hasbiyyah, I found the bodies of eight US soldiers lying on the ground.

Does the US no longer recover the bodies of their fallen? It seems the reporter is alone, so why are there US dead laying in the middle of the street?    After the US has pulled back...

Not possible in an urban environment. It would make those recovering the bodies a prime target etc

About the casualties, this BBC guy reports himself seeing 8 dead US soldiers. The official Pentagon numbers have been a total of 12 and "about a dozen". It's highly unlikely that the reporter saw 8 out of a total of 12 bodies.

In a normal situation, I'd trust the BBC reporter. What has to be taken into consideration however is that the BBC guy is an Iraqi reporter who has been in Falluja for a while. It's possible that he sympathizes with the rebels and hence his objectivity can be questioned.

On the other hand, the Pentagon has every reason in the world not to give the right numbers. Last time the Falluja operation was aborted due to a high US casualty count - one that was publically deemed unacceptable. I doubt that they would want to go through that again. Plus, one can count on the rebels having TV sets and radios. Reporting a high casualty count would encourage them. So there are good operational reasons not to give the real body count.

[Akira 0]

Apparently they have found "hostage slaughterhouses".

Quote[/b] ]Not possible in an urban environment. It would make those recovering the bodies a prime target etc

Well I was wondering because it would seem that if troops were in any kind of strength numbers, soldiers would not have been left there. There are pictures all over AP showing them evacing the wounded, so I was wondering why these (whatever the number maybe) got left. It would seem a small patrol or maybe recon got ambushed perhaps, but of course I can not possibly know for sure.

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]And since when did 'oxymoron' become name calling?  

Enlighten us please ...

Oxymoron is a term used to describe dubious people like you who go to war to make peace  

You called me a oxymoron...name calling. A fancy word cannot escape being called name calling.

[Akira 0]

Quote[/b] ]And since when did 'oxymoron' become name calling?

Enlighten us please ...

Oxymoron is a term used to describe dubious people like you who go to war to make peace

You called me a oxymoron...name calling. A fancy word cannot escape being called name calling.

Quote[/b] ]ox·y·mo·ron Audio pronunciation of "oxymoron" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (ks-môrn, -mr-)

n. pl. ox·y·mo·ra (-môr, -mr) or ox·y·mo·rons

A rhetorical figure in which incongruous or contradictory terms are combined, as in a deafening silence and a mournful optimist.

Course I'm not sure what you are refering to. Just wanna make sure everyone is on the same page...

[denoir 0]

LOL Education these days, eh?

[Acecombat 0]

Quote[/b] ]And since when did 'oxymoron' become name calling?  

Enlighten us please ...

Oxymoron is a term used to describe dubious people like you who go to war to make peace  

You called me a oxymoron...name calling. A fancy word cannot escape being called name calling.

Oh god are you really this thick or do you pretend to become even more on the forum while debating in OT?

Read the meaning of the word Akira posted and tell me whats so 'name calling' about it? Its an adjective as far as i am concerned and it describes you pretty well here it definitely isnt a pronoun.

Anyway back to IRAQ , been watching TV lately and seeing the footage from inside fallujah on various channels and it sure is dangerous down there , its a bit of a shock to see all those guns/cannons/missiles we play with in OFP and take for granted sound/hurt/destroy so much in Real life , the marines in some footage seem to firing missiles and those mounted GL's like crazy on buildings , and those old buildings cant stand them they simply crumble away , i hope not many people are in there right now non-combatants that is otherwise they will definitely die or get injured since this battle is going from street to street leaving nothing un touched or checked.

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]Oh god are you really this thick or do you pretend to become even more on the forum while debating in OT?

Read the meaning of the word Akira posted and tell me whats so 'name calling' about it? Its an adjective as far as i am concerned and it describes you pretty well here it definitely isnt a pronoun.

Quote[/b] ]I have an even smarter plan you oxymoron's

Use it right, good grief. Nobody can be a oxymoron but what you say can be.

Edit: I called it name calling because it was a sad attempt using the wrong words to get at me....loving it!

Also, anti-semite!!!

[Pathy 0]

Ace i think he took offence because he saw oxymoron

[bn880 5]

Apparently they have found "hostage slaughterhouses".

Quote[/b] ]Not possible in an urban environment. It would make those recovering the bodies a prime target etc

Well I was wondering because it would seem that if troops were in any kind of strength numbers, soldiers would not have been left there. There are pictures all over AP showing them evacing the wounded, so I was wondering why these (whatever the number maybe) got left. It would seem a small patrol or maybe recon got ambushed perhaps, but of course I can not possibly know for sure.

Who kows, they could have been Iraqi soldiers, or even some sort of "unknown US" ones. I always wonder if the US has men it can lose in combat and never report. Can you guarantee they do not.

[Acecombat 0]

Quote[/b] ]Oh god are you really this thick or do you pretend to become even more on the forum while debating in OT?

Read the meaning of the word Akira posted and tell me whats so 'name calling' about it? Its an adjective as far as i am concerned and it describes you pretty well here it definitely isnt a pronoun.

Quote[/b] ]I have an even smarter plan you oxymoron's

Use it right, good grief. Nobody can be a oxymoron but what you say can be.

Edit: I called it name calling because it was a sad attempt using the wrong words to get at me....loving it!

Also, anti-semite!!!

Ah yes the tragic story of everyone getting to you in the forum ... ah for once do some good i mean flaming and end this miserable existence once and for all by a perm ban , maybe that will make you happy?

Quote[/b] ]Ace i think he took offence because he saw oxymoron

Maybe but hey i dont make up those words myself , they are already there and i didnt wanted to use 'hypocrite' its getting a bit old these days .

Btw what happened to all those pvt security contractors or mercs in IRAQ? They still there are the fighting alongside the US too or are they simply used for smalltime security purposes like 'police this compound' or whatever?

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]Ah yes the tragic story of everyone getting to you in the forum ... ah for once do some good i mean flaming and end this miserable existence once and for all by a perm ban    , maybe that will make you happy?

LOL. You should of paid a visit to the presidental thread a few months ago. What you said was nothing, really. Notice, loving it! I will never be banned!

Anyway, the media and military works!

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm....urgents

Quote[/b] ]

Many Insurgents May Have Fled Fallujah

9 minutes ago   Middle East - AP

By JIM KRANE, Associated Press Writer

NEAR FALLUJAH, Iraq - The rapid U.S. push into Fallujah has come without the sort of fateful showdown that would break the back of the insurgency. In fact, advance U.S. and Iraqi government warnings gave the militants plenty of time to get out of town, and it appears many did just that.

Military reports say small bands of guerrillas, with no more than 15 members each, fled the city in the weeks before the U.S.-led onslaught — which was widely telegraphed by public statements and news reports.

"That's probably why we've been able to move as fast as we have," one officer in the Army's 1st Cavalry Division said Wednesday.

Insurgencies typically succeed by avoiding face-to-face battles with stronger military forces and by staging attacks where armies are weakest. The guerrillas who fled Fallujah may simply be repositioning themselves to fight elsewhere, said the officer, who agreed to discuss the Fallujah situation only if not quoted by name. Under embed rules, military officers have the option of refusing to be identified in news reports for security reasons.

The development may mean the world's most powerful army is chasing a smaller band of insurgents than previously thought. Before the assault, the 1st Cavalry estimated 1,200 guerrillas were holed up in Fallujah, with as many as 2,000 more in nearby towns and villages. It was unclear how many were left inside or had been killed.

U.S. military leaders, including Marine Maj. Gen. Richard Natonski, commander of the Fallujah operation, and interim Iraqi Prime Minister Ayad Allawi gave plenty of warnings that the assault was imminent, in part to encourage civilians to leave. Authorities also didn't hide the movement of U.S. reinforcements from elsewhere in Iraq (news - web sites) to take up positions around the city.

"We gave them so much fair warning that the only ones who stayed had a death wish," the 1st Cavalry officer said.

There were unconfirmed reports that two top insurgent leaders, Sheik Abdullah al-Janabi and Omar Hadid, had been killed. But the officer said prominent insurgent leaders and fighters were thought to have fled the city, leaving behind defenders willing to fight to the death with a force of 15,000 American soldiers and Marines and Iraqi troops.

There was no word on the whereabouts of Jordanian terror mastermind Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the al-Qaida-linked extremist believed behind a wave of car bombings and beheadings of foreigners across Iraq and thought to be using Fallujah as a base. Lt. Gen. Thomas Metz, commander of the multinational force in Iraq, said Tuesday he believed al-Zarqawi had left the city.

U.S. commanders built up a big attacking force to prevent a repeat of April's failed siege of Fallujah by 2,000 Marines, when insurgents were able to leave the city to mount attacks on U.S. bases outside the city and also resupply themselves with manpower and weapons.

This time, planners brought in the 1st Cavalry's 2nd Brigade, which blocked bridges and choked off routes into and out of the city seeking to trap fighters inside, but only a few days before the offensive began Monday.

There is little conclusive evidence that guerrillas who fled Fallujah are behind a surge in attacks on U.S. forces and supply convoys elsewhere, the 1st Cavalry officer said. Islamist Web sites have been full of calls on militants across Iraq to attack U.S. facilities in retaliation for the assault on a city that had become the symbol of Iraqi resistance.

U.S. troops have advanced relentlessly from Fallujah's north side, fighting through two of the three rings of insurgent defenses. The fighters, mainly local Sunni Muslims with a few foreigners among them, were reported bottled up in Fallujah's sparse southern neighborhoods Wednesday.

It isn't clear how many foreign fighters were among the insurgents in Fallujah. Before the attack, U.S. military officials estimated foreigners comprised about 20 percent of a militant force in the low thousands, while Iraqi government officials insisted the percentage was much higher.

Fallujah's defenses have crumbled faster than U.S. analysts expected, with resistance lighter than expected. Intelligence indicated fighters' defenses in disarray, and command networks broken down, with bands of three to five guerrillas fighting for self-preservation rather than as part of a larger, coordinated force.

Some militants have surrendered. At a prison camp at the main U.S. base outside Fallujah, troops dropped off more than a dozen men and boys, appearing to range in age from around 12 to around 50. Most were wearing traditional Arab dishdasha robes, including the black robes the U.S. military says is characteristic of the insurgents.

[theavonlady 2]

Some people would give their right arm to get hold of this:

Quote[/b] ]Saddam's left leg seized

German customs officers have seized Saddam Hussein's left leg.

The bronze leg from the statue of Saddam was all that remained when US troops toppled the rest of it to the ground live on TV.

It was later seized as a war trophy by British soldiers who smuggled it into Germany where it was sold to a scrap metal dealer and then snapped up by an art collector who put it on the internet.

The leg was then sold for Å6,000 to a German man who wanted it as a birthday present for his father - but before the leg could be handed over it was seized by customs officers.

They now have the 170 cm cast bronze leg from mid-thigh downward and weighing 600 kilos in a secure compound.

They say the owner, identified only as a Duisburg resident, does not have a valid bill of sale and import-duty documents for the leg.

The art dealer claimed the leg was all that was left on the plinth at al-Ferdaous Square in Baghdad when US forces pulled down the statue on April 9, 2003.

[Akira 0]

Apparently they have found "hostage slaughterhouses".

Quote[/b] ]Not possible in an urban environment. It would make those recovering the bodies a prime target etc

Well I was wondering because it would seem that if troops were in any kind of strength numbers, soldiers would not have been left there. There are pictures all over AP showing them evacing the wounded, so I was wondering why these (whatever the number maybe) got left. It would seem a small patrol or maybe recon got ambushed perhaps, but of course I can not possibly know for sure.

Who kows, they could have been Iraqi soldiers, or even some sort of "unknown US" ones. I always wonder if the US has men it can lose in combat and never report. Can you guarantee they do not.

Most certainly I can't. Can't even guarentee that they were American's as you suggested, I can only go by what the reporter reports. Which only raised more questions for me...

[Pathy 0]

That reminds me. Saw this on the news earlier, was a tape handed to Reuters. BBC website and the like dont seem to show it yet. They said earlier its not validated, so it could well be a fake but.....suprised its not been mentioned in more depth....i guess nobody gives a shit about the Iraqi NG huh?

Quote[/b] ]Rebels, in a video given to Reuters, said they had snatched more than 20 Iraqi National Guardsmen in Falluja, but did not say how and did not make any specific threats.

The footage showed masked guerrillas pointing assault rifles and rocket-propelled grenade launchers at a group of men with their backs turned dressed in National Guard uniforms.

http://www.reuters.com/newsArt....6776845

Edit:

go to this page:

http://tv.reuters.com/ifr_mai....4696988

And click the 5th item along the bottom for the video. It doesnt contain violence ect, just a guy reading something with the "captives" in the background.

[billybob2002 0]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm....0213128

Quote[/b] ]

Washington sets aside 90 million dollars to rebuild Fallujah

1 hour, 3 minutes ago

Add to My Yahoo! Politics - AFP

WASHINGTON (AFP) - The administration of US President George W. Bush (news - web sites) has set aside 90 million dollars to rebuild the stricken Iraqi city of Fallujah, which has come under devastating assault from US forces seeking to oust insurgent fighters.

The money has been appropriated to help rebuild the city which has been the scene of fierce skirmishes and heavy fighting between US troops and insurgents.

"Currently we have a total of 99 US-sponsored projects valued at 89.12 million (dollars) that are scheduled to start in Fallujah before January 31, 2005," said State Department spokesman Richard Boucher.

"Obviously projects, reconstruction work, is not possible while the fighting is going on or while the insurgents have been in charge of the town. But once it's back in (Iraqi) government hands, we'll be able to get on with these projects very quickly," Boucher said.

He said that roads, bridges, clean water supplies and power would take priority once the city has been secured by US troops, and that a special team would then assess further critical needs.