Iraqi elite units overrun terrorist camp

[yllus]

Originally posted by: CaptnKirk

Originally posted by: yllus

Originally posted by: Infohawk
What's holding you back? When will you make your decision?

I wrap up my university degree in about four weeks. At that point it's a decision between serving and taking a potential X-year deficit in getting a career started, and potentially regretting not serving for the rest of my life. Going to be talking to some veterans here and elsewhere in the weeks to come.

Back in the Days of 'Nam that was called hiding behind a draft deferment -
using attending college in order to keep from being in the service.

Let me reccomend either the Marines or the Army to you, sooner the better.

Since there's no draft (and none to come in the future) and I'm a Canadian to begin with, it'd be odd to be hiding from something that is not occuring and that I wouldn't be subject to. 😛

Yep, I think it would be Marines or Army (armor) for me if I decided to go with serving. Which, of course, I haven't actually decided on yet. Also have to look into employment in the private sector in the field I've studied in to see if there's an offer out there that I can't refuse. Military service would be great if one of my goals was American citizenship, though...

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
You can sign up now for OCS now.

It will take time to process your paperwork and determine a school and training slot for you.

Make the mental and emotional committment now and let the wheels of the military paperwork system start turning. You will still have to collect paperwork, do interviews, take physicals, etc.

I have an aversion to putting my signature on anything when I haven't come to decision yet. 😛 But I'll be visiting NYC soon though and looking at talking to a recruiter immediately after those four weeks.

 

[ahurtt]

Originally posted by: Proletariat

Originally posted by: ahurtt

Originally posted by: Proletariat
Wow GJ. *Golf clap* I'm sorry but I'm not all that impressed by air bombardment on people without any weapons that can shoot back and hit.

Oh, so you would rather send in ground troops to do ALL the work and get how many more of our guys killed by the enemy in the process? Fortunately for the rest of us and all the soldiers from around the world and their families, the war in Iraq is not happening just to impress YOU. Way to miss the big picture. . .douche-bag.

No I didn't say that. Way to go on the neo-con-family-argghhh-soldiers-are-the-best train of logic. I just simply don't care. Wow we just dropped a huge bomb on them and then cleaned up the 5 or 6 invalids left crawling on the ground after being half-incinerated. BRING EM' ON. HOO YA.

I'm sorry I've probably just encroached on the only Political Correctness conservatives accept.

SUPPORT THE TROOPS.

YELLOW RIBBON.

LIBERALS ARE <insert negative attribute here>.

No, you obviously do care or you wouldn't have posted in the first place. Nor would you have replied to my comment. Obviously something touched a nerve in you enough to make you post. I just think that maybe what you care about is the possibility that this development could be looked upon as a positive and favorable one for the US and you just can't accept that.

[EDIT] And I take back and appologize for calling you a "douche-bag." That was inappropriate.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Infohawk
Interesting the article mentions US and Iraqis, but Genx only mentions Iraqis in his title.

Is the title not factually correct?

CsG

 

[ahurtt]

Originally posted by: yllus

I have an aversion to putting my signature on anything when I haven't come to decision yet. 😛

And that is probably a safe and logical choice. I'm sure everybody here realizes that since you are Canadian you have no obligation whatsoever to join the US military and that even if we did reinstate the draft you would not be affected by it whatsoever. That you are even considering joining I think is worthy of some respect and speaks about your character. Don't let people with their "put up or shut up" attitude talk you down. It is a major life decision to make and the choice is yours and yours alone. Whatever you decide, nobody here has the right to respect you any less if you don't join. And I am sure everybody will respect you more should you decide to sign up since it will be solely of your own accord. Not as if it should matter to you one way or another what a bunch of tards on ATP&N think 🙂

 

[Miramonti]

I'm waiting for the facts to come in from aljazeera before I make any judgement on this. 🙂

 

[NyteCrawler]

I really hope this is true. The sooner the Iraqi government can handle the situation themselves the sooner our troops get back.

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Infohawk
Interesting the article mentions US and Iraqis, but Genx only mentions Iraqis in his title.

Is the title not factually correct?

CsG

haha factually correct and iraq in the same sentence...your a real laugh...keep em coming!

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: yllus

Originally posted by: Infohawk
What's holding you back? When will you make your decision?

I wrap up my university degree in about four weeks. At that point it's a decision between serving and taking a potential X-year deficit in getting a career started, and potentially regretting not serving for the rest of my life. Going to be talking to some veterans here and elsewhere in the weeks to come.

Wow, I solute you for even considering joining the military of another country. Good luck if you do.

 

[da loser]

Originally posted by: yllus
AFAIK, the second-in-command of coalition forces in Iraq is a Canadian general, and there are a number of our troops in the country attached to British and American units. In general, I was disappointed by our Prime Minister's decision not to officially send troops to Iraq.

are you sure you're not talking about Afghanistan? I was not aware of any canadian troops in iraq. only some navy ships possibly.

 

[kogase]

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: yllus

Originally posted by: Infohawk
What's holding you back? When will you make your decision?

I wrap up my university degree in about four weeks. At that point it's a decision between serving and taking a potential X-year deficit in getting a career started, and potentially regretting not serving for the rest of my life. Going to be talking to some veterans here and elsewhere in the weeks to come.

Wow, I solute you for even considering joining the military of another country. Good luck if you do.

You know ntdz, I hear North Korea is looking for new recruits...

 

[Velk]

Originally posted by: Proletariat
Wow GJ. *Golf clap* I'm sorry but I'm not all that impressed by air bombardment on people without any weapons that can shoot back and hit.

You are right, that attack showed an astonishing lack of chivalry.

As everyone knows, the correct procedure in war is to ride up to your opponent, strike him with your gauntlet and then hurl it to the ground, and then have your second arrange a time and place for the duel.

As the challenger, you should give the insurgents the choice of weapons in the duel, which will probably be bombs strapped to the duellists.

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: ahurtt

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex

Originally posted by: Genx87
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/03/23/iraq.main/index.html

They made it wound like the U.S. forces were primarily air support. Does anybody else have any information on this battle? If it is true the ground forces were primarily Iraqi this is very good news.

I was just reading that article. THe part I think is funny is that no Americans were killed in the battle but 7 Iraqi's were and 6 were wounded. It struck me as funny because of the picture included with the article, because a thought occurred to me: Could it be no Americans were killed because they're wearing desert camo colored HELMETS, whereas the Iraq's are wearing BRIGHT RED beret's? 🙂 Why not paint a big, friggin' bullseye over the left side of their chests, for chrissakes 🙂

Jason

Or maybe it is a possibility that we are trying to send a loud and clear message that these are NOT US TROOPS! If you dress them like our guys, they will be perceived more as "collaborators with the imperialists' because they wear the same uniforms as us. It needs to be crystal clear to the bad guys and the rest of the world that these are in fact IRAQI soldiers fighting for their OWN country.

And that's a fair enough observation, I can't disagree with it. However, it strikes me that they could have thought of a better differentiator than BRIGHT RED BERET'S!!!! 🙂

I mean seriously man, if you were one of the insurgents where would you be aiming? Anything BRIGHT RED is frickin' TOAST!! 🙂

Jason

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: ahurtt

Originally posted by: Proletariat
Wow GJ. *Golf clap* I'm sorry but I'm not all that impressed by air bombardment on people without any weapons that can shoot back and hit.

Oh, so you would rather send in ground troops to do ALL the work and get how many more of our guys killed by the enemy in the process? Fortunately for the rest of us and all the soldiers from around the world and their families, the war in Iraq is not happening just to impress YOU. Way to miss the big picture. . .douche-bag.

Well, of *COURSE* she/he/it wants to send in ground troops and get more of our guys killed! If less of our guys die in combat there will be less to bitch about from the Unthinking "War bad! Want hair!" crowd!

Jason

 

[OffTopic1]

Originally posted by: yllus

Originally posted by: kogase

Originally posted by: yllus

Originally posted by: Rainsford
Am I the only one who's a little nervous about training armed forces in the Middle East? We don't exactly have what I would call a good record of doing that without regretting it later over there.

Understood, but we've never taken this sort of stance in the region before. This time the U.S. is in the Middle East for however long it takes to truly stabilize and autonomize the country. And of course America will have various bases in it for decades to come.

Aren't you Canadian? With that "we" you sound like one of those creepy family friends that comes for Thanksgiving and then just won't leave... and then starts opening your mail... I jest, I jest.

AFAIK, the second-in-command of coalition forces in Iraq is a Canadian general, and there are a number of our troops in the country attached to British and American units. In general, I was disappointed by our Prime Minister's decision not to officially send troops to Iraq.

What stopping you from running south to enlist and I?m sure that they would sign you up in a heart beat because there is a shortage of warm bodies that are volunteering at the moment?

I'm sure that US air support has to do something with the success. However, I'm skeptical of how long will this success will continue, because the US people is losing faith in its government & the financial burden is spiraling out of control.

It seems as if it is a repeat of Vietnam once again, because the illegitimate Iraqi govern body is control by the US. Every decisions in Iraq are made by Rumsfeld, and the US is footing the bills.

 

[OffTopic1]

Originally posted by: ahurtt

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex

Originally posted by: Genx87
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/03/23/iraq.main/index.html

They made it wound like the U.S. forces were primarily air support. Does anybody else have any information on this battle? If it is true the ground forces were primarily Iraqi this is very good news.

I was just reading that article. THe part I think is funny is that no Americans were killed in the battle but 7 Iraqi's were and 6 were wounded. It struck me as funny because of the picture included with the article, because a thought occurred to me: Could it be no Americans were killed because they're wearing desert camo colored HELMETS, whereas the Iraq's are wearing BRIGHT RED beret's? 🙂 Why not paint a big, friggin' bullseye over the left side of their chests, for chrissakes 🙂

Jason

Or maybe it is a possibility that we are trying to send a loud and clear message that these are NOT US TROOPS! If you dress them like our guys, they will be perceived more as "collaborators with the imperialists' because they wear the same uniforms as us. It needs to be crystal clear to the bad guys and the rest of the world that these are in fact IRAQI soldiers fighting for their OWN country.

I maybe cynical on your view, however history has showed that it didn?t work in Vietnam.

It might be a good idea talking/interviewing a few South Vietnamese (Cong Hoa) Vets, and ask them what they think concluded the war in Vietnam. You might be surprise to hear that many feel that they didn?t have a clear mandate, their leaders were corrupts, they don't have the will to fight/kill their brothers, but the most important thing were money?.the leaders siphoned too much aid money out of the system therefore the wages that they get weren?t enough of an incentive to leave their love ones or die for a very vague cause.

 

[ahurtt]

Originally posted by: OffTopic

Originally posted by: ahurtt

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex

Originally posted by: Genx87
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/03/23/iraq.main/index.html

They made it wound like the U.S. forces were primarily air support. Does anybody else have any information on this battle? If it is true the ground forces were primarily Iraqi this is very good news.

I was just reading that article. THe part I think is funny is that no Americans were killed in the battle but 7 Iraqi's were and 6 were wounded. It struck me as funny because of the picture included with the article, because a thought occurred to me: Could it be no Americans were killed because they're wearing desert camo colored HELMETS, whereas the Iraq's are wearing BRIGHT RED beret's? 🙂 Why not paint a big, friggin' bullseye over the left side of their chests, for chrissakes 🙂

Jason

Or maybe it is a possibility that we are trying to send a loud and clear message that these are NOT US TROOPS! If you dress them like our guys, they will be perceived more as "collaborators with the imperialists' because they wear the same uniforms as us. It needs to be crystal clear to the bad guys and the rest of the world that these are in fact IRAQI soldiers fighting for their OWN country.

I maybe cynical on your view, however history has showed that it didn?t work in Vietnam.

It might be a good idea talking/interviewing a few South Vietnamese (Cong Hoa) Vets, and ask them what they think concluded the war in Vietnam. You might be surprise to hear that many feel that they didn?t have a clear mandate, their leaders were corrupts, they don't have the will to fight/kill their brothers, but the most important thing were money?.the leaders siphoned too much aid money out of the system therefore the wages that they get weren?t enough of an incentive to leave their love ones or die for a very vague cause.

haha well, I didn't say it was working. I was just speculating as to the reason why they might not be giving these guys desert camo gear that looks like the stuff the US soldiers wear. Whether or not the tactic works worth a dang is another matter altogether.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Infohawk
Interesting the article mentions US and Iraqis, but Genx only mentions Iraqis in his title.

Is the title not factually correct?

CsG

It's a half-truth.

 

[Proletariat]

Originally posted by: ahurtt

Originally posted by: Proletariat

Originally posted by: ahurtt

Originally posted by: Proletariat
Wow GJ. *Golf clap* I'm sorry but I'm not all that impressed by air bombardment on people without any weapons that can shoot back and hit.

Oh, so you would rather send in ground troops to do ALL the work and get how many more of our guys killed by the enemy in the process? Fortunately for the rest of us and all the soldiers from around the world and their families, the war in Iraq is not happening just to impress YOU. Way to miss the big picture. . .douche-bag.

No I didn't say that. Way to go on the neo-con-family-argghhh-soldiers-are-the-best train of logic. I just simply don't care. Wow we just dropped a huge bomb on them and then cleaned up the 5 or 6 invalids left crawling on the ground after being half-incinerated. BRING EM' ON. HOO YA.

I'm sorry I've probably just encroached on the only Political Correctness conservatives accept.

SUPPORT THE TROOPS.

YELLOW RIBBON.

LIBERALS ARE <insert negative attribute here>.

No, you obviously do care or you wouldn't have posted in the first place. Nor would you have replied to my comment. Obviously something touched a nerve in you enough to make you post. I just think that maybe what you care about is the possibility that this development could be looked upon as a positive and favorable one for the US and you just can't accept that.

[EDIT] And I take back and appologize for calling you a "douche-bag." That was inappropriate.

Since we are psycho-analyzing here, let me be the one to do it for myself.

I didn't care because it is not a big deal. I was a bit interested in the fact that many of the conservatives who seem to know more about war-type things were impressed at all that is why I posted. Think logically here: heavily armed US Helicopters against some rag-wearing AK-47 dudes. WOW, GJ. Pop on night vision and start hammering away from outside of their range. Its a shooting gallery.

 

[Genx87]

It's a half-truth.

Since when do you care about half-truths? Oh I know, because this didnt paint the United States in a bad fashion.

Think logically here: heavily armed US Helicopters against some rag-wearing AK-47 dudes. WOW, GJ. Pop on night vision and start hammering away from outside of their range. Its a shooting gallery

What do you suggest they do? This is war and we will do whatever it takes to defeat them on the battlefiled. Sorry if you werent impressed or felt it wasnt a fair fight. Grow up.

 

[Proletariat]

Originally posted by: Genx87

It's a half-truth.

Since when do you care about half-truths? Oh I know, because this didnt paint the United States in a bad fashion.

Think logically here: heavily armed US Helicopters against some rag-wearing AK-47 dudes. WOW, GJ. Pop on night vision and start hammering away from outside of their range. Its a shooting gallery

What do you suggest they do? This is war and we will do whatever it takes to defeat them on the battlefiled. Sorry if you werent impressed or felt it wasnt a fair fight. Grow up.

Sorry. I was out of line.

US TROOPS ARE TEH BRAVE!!!

A+ A+ A+.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Infohawk
Interesting the article mentions US and Iraqis, but Genx only mentions Iraqis in his title.

Is the title not factually correct?

CsG

It's a half-truth.

No, it is truth. Iraqi units did overrun a terrorist camp. There were US helicopters involved, but that doesn't change the fact that Iraqi forces overran it.

CsG

 

[Alistar7]

US helicoptors probably easily reduced the camp to dust and (previously animated) organic bits and pieces, then the Iraqi molly maid forces came in with brooms to clean up and proclaim success.

Now we gotta give up some of those coptors to the Iraqi army and teach them how to lay waste while we sit on our butts in the US and eat pot pies.....

 

[ahurtt]

Originally posted by: Proletariat

Originally posted by: ahurtt

Originally posted by: Proletariat

Originally posted by: ahurtt

Originally posted by: Proletariat
Wow GJ. *Golf clap* I'm sorry but I'm not all that impressed by air bombardment on people without any weapons that can shoot back and hit.

Oh, so you would rather send in ground troops to do ALL the work and get how many more of our guys killed by the enemy in the process? Fortunately for the rest of us and all the soldiers from around the world and their families, the war in Iraq is not happening just to impress YOU. Way to miss the big picture. . .douche-bag.

No I didn't say that. Way to go on the neo-con-family-argghhh-soldiers-are-the-best train of logic. I just simply don't care. Wow we just dropped a huge bomb on them and then cleaned up the 5 or 6 invalids left crawling on the ground after being half-incinerated. BRING EM' ON. HOO YA.

I'm sorry I've probably just encroached on the only Political Correctness conservatives accept.

SUPPORT THE TROOPS.

YELLOW RIBBON.

LIBERALS ARE <insert negative attribute here>.

No, you obviously do care or you wouldn't have posted in the first place. Nor would you have replied to my comment. Obviously something touched a nerve in you enough to make you post. I just think that maybe what you care about is the possibility that this development could be looked upon as a positive and favorable one for the US and you just can't accept that.

[EDIT] And I take back and appologize for calling you a "douche-bag." That was inappropriate.

Since we are psycho-analyzing here, let me be the one to do it for myself.

I didn't care because it is not a big deal. I was a bit interested in the fact that many of the conservatives who seem to know more about war-type things were impressed at all that is why I posted. Think logically here: heavily armed US Helicopters against some rag-wearing AK-47 dudes. WOW, GJ. Pop on night vision and start hammering away from outside of their range. Its a shooting gallery.

Yep and hopefully it sent a loud and clear message to future would-be targets in the shooting gallery that they have no hope of winning. How would you have preferred it to unfold? Everybody throw down their guns and Kevlar and go mano-a-mano? Knives only? WTF man, we are trying erradicate these vermin, not make buddies with them. They don't fight fair so why should we? You do whatever you can to minimize your casualties and I just don't feel sorry for these fvcktards who are stupid enough to join the insurgency and take up Ak-47's against Apache attack helicopters.

[EDIT] and in light of the following little patronization you posted above:

"Sorry. I was out of line.

US TROOPS ARE TEH BRAVE!!!

A+ A+ A+. "

I retract my apology for calling you a douche-bag. I wasn't sure at first but now I am, you ARE a douche-bag.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: Proletariat Think logically here: heavily armed US Helicopters against some rag-wearing AK-47 dudes. WOW, GJ. Pop on night vision and start hammering away from outside of their range. Its a shooting gallery.

It is completely stupid to go into battle and allow your oppenent a chance to even the odds against them. Setting your side up for casualities.

When in battle, strike hard and fast and give no quarter until the enemy is out of commission.

You use what ever firepower you have to back you up.

Rmember that it only took a few "ragheads" with box cutters to trigger the deaths of 3K+ people and multi-millions $$ of direct damage, let alone the billiions of economic damage.

And an AK-47 is more powerful than a box cutter both in range and damage capability.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper

Originally posted by: Proletariat Think logically here: heavily armed US Helicopters against some rag-wearing AK-47 dudes. WOW, GJ. Pop on night vision and start hammering away from outside of their range. Its a shooting gallery.

It is completely stupid to go into battle and allow your oppenent a chance to even the odds against them. Setting your side up for casualities.

When in battle, strike hard and fast and give no quarter until the enemy is out of commission.

You use what ever firepower you have to back you up.

Rmember that it only took a few "ragheads" with box cutters to trigger the deaths of 3K+ people and multi-millions $$ of direct damage, let alone the billiions of economic damage.

And an AK-47 is more powerful than a box cutter both in range and damage capability.

The point isn't that they SHOULD go into battle without helicopters, the point is that it's not much of an Iraqi victory.