Insurgents Pound U.S. Base in Najaf

[dmcowen674]

5-4-2004 Insurgents Pound U.S. Base in Najaf

NAJAF, Iraq - Militiamen launched a barrage of mortar shells against a U.S. base in this holy city and government buildings guarded by Bulgarian forces in Karbala on Tuesday, a day after intense clashes in Najaf that killed up to 20 Iraqis.

"Enemy attackers had engaged two aircraft providing close air support for a ground patrol with small arms fire," the command said in a written statement. "A coalition forces ground patrol engaged the enemy attackers and called in artillery support."

But the military has been cautious about returning fire. Al-Sadr's office is located only a few yards from one of the holiest Shiite shrines and not far from the U.S. base. U.S. officials repeatedly have accused militiamen of storing weapons in shrines and mosques.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Dammed if we do, dammed if we don't.

Political repercussions if we clean up the rats nest.
Politcal loss if we walk away from our threat to take care of the problem.

The pols need to decide what they want to do with the country and do it.
Not tippy-toe around and generating a poll oon whether the action will look good.


As much as I hate to state this, Iraq is turning into another Russian Afganistan or US/French Indochina.

The leadership needs to determine what they want done, do it and exit. Half ass efforts will only aggrivate the situation. Be willing to take your lumps and/or loss of face if needed, but stop wasting time and lives.

 

[ThePresence]

This is the way these guys and their ilk operate. They play on our sensibilities. They know we will hesitate to flatten a mosque. If they were fighting against some random other middle eastern country's army, that mosque would be up in smoke really quickly. Now, I'm not saying we should do that, but you gotta decide if you want to fight or if you want to sit on your ass and get shot at.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: ThePresence
This is the way these guys and their ilk operate. They play on our sensibilities. They know we will hesitate to flatten a mosque. If they were fighting against some random other middle eastern country's army, that mosque would be up in smoke really quickly. Now, I'm not saying we should do that, but you gotta decide if you want to fight or if you want to sit on your ass and get shot at.

The problem is that the people that need to make those decisions are not sitting there and getting shot at.
Those who provide the leadership at the top are sitting back safe and sound looking for a easy no cost way out.

The grunts can not go in or get out without orders. Those orders are now politcal driven

 

[maddogchen]

Al Sadr is trying to draw us in to attack Najaf, so he would gain support or become a Martyr. Otherwise he is losing support in the city as people get tired of putting up with his bullying militia. The US is doing the right thing by standing back and letting the negotiators try to find a settlement.

 

[SuperTool]

Peace with honor?

 

[ThePresence]

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper

Originally posted by: ThePresence
This is the way these guys and their ilk operate. They play on our sensibilities. They know we will hesitate to flatten a mosque. If they were fighting against some random other middle eastern country's army, that mosque would be up in smoke really quickly. Now, I'm not saying we should do that, but you gotta decide if you want to fight or if you want to sit on your ass and get shot at.

The problem is that the people that need to make those decisions are not sitting there and getting shot at.
Those who provide the leadership at the top are sitting back safe and sound looking for a easy no cost way out.

The grunts can not go in or get out without orders. Those orders are now politcal driven

It's always been that way.

 

[rickn]

Originally posted by: ThePresence
This is the way these guys and their ilk operate. They play on our sensibilities. They know we will hesitate to flatten a mosque. If they were fighting against some random other middle eastern country's army, that mosque would be up in smoke really quickly. Now, I'm not saying we should do that, but you gotta decide if you want to fight or if you want to sit on your ass and get shot at.

the differnce between us and as you put it, some other middle eastern army, is the USA is suppose to be there to liberate, not to destroy infrastructure and holy shrines. If the destroy that building, the backlash would be enormous.

 

[burnedout]

Anyone else see something wrong with this Headline?

Maybe because the headline isn't as undramatic as, say, "U.S. Base in Najaf Sustains Intense Indirect Fire with No Casualties".

 

[Perknose]

It became necessary to destroy the mosque in order to save it.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: burnedout

Anyone else see something wrong with this Headline?

Maybe because the headline isn't as undramatic as, say, "U.S. Base in Najaf Sustains Intense Indirect Fire with No Casualties".

Indirect?

What? Are the mortars bouncing off buildings and then landing on the U.S. base?

 

[Zephyr106]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: burnedout

Anyone else see something wrong with this Headline?

Maybe because the headline isn't as undramatic as, say, "U.S. Base in Najaf Sustains Intense Indirect Fire with No Casualties".

Indirect?

What? Are the mortars bouncing off buildings and then landing on the U.S. base?

Silly liberal, shell and rocket artillery are referred to as indirect fire.

Zephyr

 

[lozina]

Originally posted by: Zephyr106

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: burnedout

Anyone else see something wrong with this Headline?

Maybe because the headline isn't as undramatic as, say, "U.S. Base in Najaf Sustains Intense Indirect Fire with No Casualties".

Indirect?

What? Are the mortars bouncing off buildings and then landing on the U.S. base?

Silly liberal, shell and rocket artillery are referred to as indirect fire.

Zephyr

The problem is, these liberals never played with GI Joe dolls, so they can never understand war.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Zephyr106

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: burnedout

Anyone else see something wrong with this Headline?

Maybe because the headline isn't as undramatic as, say, "U.S. Base in Najaf Sustains Intense Indirect Fire with No Casualties".

Indirect?

What? Are the mortars bouncing off buildings and then landing on the U.S. base?

Silly liberal, shell and rocket artillery are referred to as indirect fire.

Zephyr

Ah...silly me...unaware of politically correct military terms.

 

[burnedout]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: burnedout

Anyone else see something wrong with this Headline?

Maybe because the headline isn't as undramatic as, say, "U.S. Base in Najaf Sustains Intense Indirect Fire with No Casualties".

Indirect?

What? Are the mortars bouncing off buildings and then landing on the U.S. base?

Oh, sorry. I forgot that our Channel 11 military analyst (aka the '31W Warrior') hasn't the slightest clue as to what in the hell the term "indirect fire" implies.