Othin

Does anyone know what forces in Basra are firing on the other Iraqis? Is it the regular forces, or some of the irregular forces? I'm surprised that they started their rebellion this early, I was thinking it wouldn't happen until early April. I guess the water plant was the factor that no one had figured on.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ Mar. 25 2003,06:05)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Denoir, their problem is they are not willing to destroy everything that's theirs and they think will be theirs soon again.  They are 100% confident they will defeat the coalition in Baghdad, which by  current examination they probably will.  <span id='postcolor'> Or possibly they're choosing not to follow orders that they know would hurt their fellow countrymen and women? Many of them are fighting in the areas that they're garrisoned in. There are a few other reasons as well, but I'll go with your favorite statement and say I'm not going to comment on it here... As far as your "examination" that they'll defeat the Coalition, whatever. You've proven your bias over and over again so I would hardley expect you to say anything different or even have an open mind.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (brgnorway @ Mar. 24 2003,17:41)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I believe your intentions are good - but the result is (I think) going to be a surprise. Just to keep this reply in the right thread: I'm stunned that so many of you believe the war will be over when Baghdad and the butcher falls! If anything I predict there will be bombings and other terrorattacks and generally instability. The war will perhaps be over as a campaign - but I bet the fighting will continue - perhaps like in Chechny, Afghanistan etc.<span id='postcolor'> I think after the Regime is removed your're going to see some limited Guerilla warfare from scattered Republican Guard troops and terrorist attacks from opportunist extremists and IIS officers. Once the Iraqi people start getting fed and find out that we're not there to eat their precious babies or steal their oil they're going to be cautious, but welcoming. The quicker we get the country on its feet and get out, the better for everyone involved.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ Mar. 24 2003,16:32)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">We will see who that actually helps. Â <!--emo& Â The ball is almost completely in Iraqi hands now. Â No I won't explain... Â <span id='postcolor'> Then why bother posting? Oh wait, I know why... Keep that candle burning if it makes you feel better though! I think the air strikes on the Iraqi divisions are going to continue to increase over the next few days. The Coalition wasn't expecting the Republican Guard to surrender, so the gloves will be completely off for those battles and you're going to see a significantly different ROE. Time is also somewhat on the coalition side since there will be an influx of troops into the region soon (those that were earmarked for Turkey). As long as they can keep their rear guards from being too harried. As the food and supplies hit the region, the battle for hearts and minds will start to improve. That's mainly on hold until the sea mine clearing operations are finished. I think many of the Iraqi people still aren't sure what to believe. Plus you still have a very active prescense of IIS and others in the cities working on their own propaganda war. I'd be willing to "bet" we see some Shia uprisings in the next month to two month time frame. They want to be sure that the Americans are fully vested in regime change before they rise up again. We should also see the Kurds making their contributions in this time frame.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Mar. 24 2003,15:15)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Well, it's good that you feel safe. That's the whole point. I'll leave it at that since you obviously have no clue what you are talking about. <span id='postcolor'> Nice try, but I have a "pretty" good clue what's going on. I've worked in that world for the last two years.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Mar. 24 2003,14:50)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Mhm, right. And the US near zero casualty policy is because the military can't stand seeing blood, not the politicians and the public. Please. I know you want to give the impression of a united front behind a just cause blah blah blah, but you can't change the facts. The facts are that there is a near-zero casualty policy for a reason. There is a reason why Rumsfeld is commenting on the fate of individual soldiers. So all the talk about making the ultimate sacrifice in the name of a just cause isn't really compatible with the reality.<span id='postcolor'> Please, I know you want to give the impression that Americans are cowards and will run from a fight blah blah blah. It works both ways. As Schoeler pointed out Somolia is a terrible example. Public support wasn't behind that. The majority of people are firmly behind the military and are starting to understand that we're going to take losses. They also understand that we're invested in this now, and that we HAVEN'T EVEN BEEN AT WAR A WEEK. That we haven't taken more combat losses at this point is a testament to the abilities of the coalition forces. As far as your insinuation that the Military can't stand seeing blood, history proves you wrong. There is nothing placed higher in the U.S. military then the lives of its soldiers, but we also understand that we are a military and we're going to take losses. But I encourage you to continue to underestimate us as everyone has in the past. Your assertations about NORAD and the missle defense industry are also laughable as well as completely off. The majority of funding and research for that is done on the black side and thus isn't in the spotlight, nor should it be. PACIII is the tip of the iceberg...

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (nolips71 @ Mar. 24 2003,12:51)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Othin @ Mar. 24 2003,21:12)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (nolips71 @ Mar. 24 2003,09:51)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">no it is military stupidity<span id='postcolor'> The Patriot missile crews don't have the ability or even the option of "asking" every hostile return if they're really a good guy with broken equipment.<span id='postcolor'> the americans dont usally ask anyway<span id='postcolor'> lollo amerikkkanz r dum The point you're trying to make is invalid because in this case there is no way to ask.

Regarding the Syrians, During the Pentagon brief (on now) they confirmed the destruction of the bus and said it happened when they were destroying a bridge. The bombs were in air as the bus showed up.

Al-Jezeera in English - English - HTML

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (nolips71 @ Mar. 24 2003,09:51)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">no it is military stupidity<span id='postcolor'> Because obviously shooting down missiles is done by eye sight alone right? If you know anything about the Patriot System then you would know that the system is slaved to an IFF interregator and if the IFF system on the Tornado wasn't squaking then the system assumed it was hostile. Since you're an expert on the Patriot you also know that it's mainly a SAM system right? If that was an Iraqi plane flying over the border, it wouldn't have the correct IFF codes or IFF codes at all so the system would engage it. Planes move quick, and this system dosen't work like the Russian systems so it's mainly automated (for better or worse). The Patriot missile crews don't have the ability or even the option of "asking" every hostile return if they're really a good guy with broken equipment. It was a sad, horrible event. My heart goes out to the families of the pilots. But I don't think finger pointing and calling it stupidity is helpful or even correct. There was a breakdown in technology somewhere, either the interregator broke, or the transponder on the Tornado broke or was loaded with the wrong codes. There is also the possibility that somewhere someone screwed up on the battlespace deconfliction...

WWITv Internet Portal - Video feed links - All languages - All Formats Tampa Bay Radio links - More video feed links, scroll down a bit. - English, Arabic - All Formats Early Bird Government news clipping service - US servicemembers and DOD only. Â You're going to have to log in if you're not hitting it form you .mil pc - English - Html Salam Pax's Blog - Interesting web log purportedly being posted by an Iraqi - English - Html

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ Mar. 23 2003,09:14)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">If you people are so worried then don't support this atrocity of a war... Al jazeera  is up.<span id='postcolor'> Events like this just reinforce in my mind how important it is to get these sadists out of power.

The part of the video when the reporter props the soldiers head up to make him answer questions is definately against the Genevea conventions.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Mar. 23 2003,08:30)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I've added a new thread where you can post your favourite news sources. It will later be compiled in a list and added to the first post in this thread. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Several of the soldiers were definately executed on the video being run by Al-Jezeera<span id='postcolor'> What makes you think that?<span id='postcolor'> The fact that they were shot in the head.

Several of the soldiers were definately executed on the video being run by Al-Jezeera. As for rape, then POWs from the last Gulf War can attest to the fact that the men have more to fear then the women.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Badgerboy @ Mar. 23 2003,06:59)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I've just been informed that a RAF aircraft just got shot down by a Patriot. Does anyone know the status of the crew? Have they mentioned the type, and Sqn? Oh, and have they asked the Patriot crew what the fuck they were thinking?<span id='postcolor'> What's weird is I'm almost positive the Patriot systems have an IFF interrogator. Did the crew manually fire? Or was there a technical problem with the transponder on the Tornado? Hopefully they find them.

9--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Wires @ Mar. 22 2003,179)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">A RAAF F/A-18 pilot aborted a mission because the target could not be identified to his satisfaction, this is due to the seperate ADF rules of engagement to avoid civilian casualties as much as possible.<span id='postcolor'> I'm curious about that part. Â Having worked in mission planning, and even seen how the Aussies do theirs, I can say with some confidence that all the targets their firing on in Baghdad are preplanned, not targets of opportunity. Did he abort while still on the ground? Â Or was he having technical problems at TOT? Do you have a link? EDIT: lololo enGlish iz haRD

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ Mar. 22 2003,15:33)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And this thread could become enormous over time.<span id='postcolor'> Just happened to think of your post when I clicked out of this thread on another board to go to another. Â We have some catching up to do! We're at page 207. Â MADNESS. EDIT: To give this post some worth: WWITV Media Portal

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tovarish @ Mar. 22 2003,16:55)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Othin @ Mar. 23 2003,01:52)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I think it's a littlebit kneejerk to call it a terrorist attack. Â We are at war now... Â <span id='postcolor'> Classic propaganda. By using that word they subconciously link Iraq to Al-Quaeda.<span id='postcolor'> Since I haven't heard official comment from the Military yet, I'm going to chalk it up to idiotic reporters. These are the same people that screw up the names of Planes EVERY NIGHT. There is one female reporter on a Carrier that keeps calling the F-14s Tomcatters. TOMCATTERS, IT MAKES MY BRAIN HURT MORE EACH TIME AAAAAARRRRRGHHGHHHH12luL2309V

I think it's a littlebit kneejerk to call it a terrorist attack. We are at war now... Foxnews just had a really interesting report from their embedded reporter though. He was saying that all the translators have been accounted for and the only person that's missing is a U.S. serviceman who was in charge of guarding the supply [area]. He also said that his sources in the military said there were grenades missing from this same [area]. This is all wild speculation on his part at this point, but still interesting. If it was a U.S. soldier, he better pray the Iraqi's find him before we do.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tex [uSMC] @ Mar. 22 2003,13:25)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Othin @ Mar. 22 2003,22:24)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Has anyone seen/heard anymore about the purported shoot down of a coalition jet over Baghdad? Â Or a screencap if you can get it.<span id='postcolor'> I have heard exactly jack about it. In fact, there is a Pentagon briefing going on right now, and not a single reporter has mentioned it yet, nor have the spokespeople.<span id='postcolor'> Yeah, I know I did like it how that first reporter grilled them on the 51st surrendering en masse story. Wait to keep them clean. In related news Victoria Clarke is dressed up as Two Face!

Has anyone seen/heard anymore about the purported shoot down of a coalition jet over Baghdad? Or a screencap if you can get it.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ Mar. 22 2003,12:52)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">copy/paste http://winmedia.ish.de/al-jazeera into WMP or whatever you use.<span id='postcolor'> Maybe it won't allow me to watch it since I'm on 56k? Day after pictures from Spiegel

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ran @ Mar. 22 2003,08:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">http://winmedia.ish.de/al-jazeera all jazeera free , medium quality , high speed stream<span id='postcolor'> Is there a video version of this? Or is this supposed to be video? I need to see the lips!!!!

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Mar. 22 2003,12:31)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Precision weapons ey? Or perhaps it was a precision attack  <span id='postcolor'> Out of how many that were fired, there were two failures? From a non-emotional point of view I would call that a sucess. I'm thinking it was probably due more to humor error entering the GPS coords, then the GPS receiver actually failing. Statistics were stacked against that refinery I guess. The %rate of predicted failure against the %rate of settled areas in Iran. I think Allah had it out for that refinery... Regardless, I'm glad that no one was killed.