Iraqi Insurgents

[cwjerome]

Insurgents in Fallujah issued a warning and threatened attacks against the US and Iraqi forces "with weapons and military tactics they have not experienced before," if American forces try to storm the militant stronghold.

What does that mean, exactly?

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: cwjerome
Insurgents in Fallujah issued a warning and threatened attacks against the US and Iraqi forces "with weapons and military tactics they have not experienced before," if American forces try to storm the militant stronghold.

What does that mean, exactly?

It means Baghdad Bob is probably their spokesman.

 

[Todd33]

Ya, they are just talking.

 

[dahunan]

Chemical or Biological?

 

[assemblage]

Probably grab hostages and use them as sheilds. Oh wait they've done that. Also the correct term is murderous terrorists.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Tough to know. To me it certainly implies WMDs, and may or may not just be a hollow threat.

Actually it reminds me of the veiled (and perfectly justified, IMO) threat that GHWB made during the first Gulf War, that we would retaliate with nuclear weapons if the Iraqis attacked us with chemical or biological weapons.

 

[cwjerome]

Bluffing out of desperation I figure. I tend to think they're at their limits of effectiveness already, trying everything possible to derail elections and create instability.

Just thought it was an interesting thing for them to say.

 

[dahunan]

Originally posted by: DonVito
Tough to know. To me it certainly implies WMDs, and may or may not just be a hollow threat.

Actually it reminds me of the veiled (and perfectly justified, IMO) threat that GWB made during the first Gulf War, that we would retaliate with nuclear weapons if the Iraqis attacked us with chemical or biological weapons.

That would certainly be enough to delay the presidential election

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: dahunan

That would certainly be enough to delay the presidential election

True that.

They had some interesting commentary on NPR this morning about the elections in Iraq. It sounds as though they are a long way from being logistically ready to hold elections in January, but one commentator observed that, although security would be a major problem with a January election, the situation there is just getting worse over time, and so from that perspective it would probably be more desirable to hold elections next week than in January, much less later next year.

 

[Grunt03]

That they will fight the American forces useing un-conventional tactics.
Such as cutting off the heads of people, killing normal people that have nonething to do
with what is going on. Useing airplanes and crashing them into buildings. Get the point,
they will do anything to get their point across.

 

[Grunt03]

That they will fight the American forces useing un-conventional tactics.
Such as cutting off the heads of people, killing normal people that have nonething to do
with what is going on. Useing airplanes and crashing them into buildings. Get the point,
they will do anything to get their point across.

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: DonVito
Tough to know. To me it certainly implies WMDs, and may or may not just be a hollow threat.

Actually it reminds me of the veiled (and perfectly justified, IMO) threat that GWB made during the first Gulf War, that we would retaliate with nuclear weapons if the Iraqis attacked us with chemical or biological weapons.

George W. Bush made that threat during the gulf war? I thought he was the general manager of the Rangers then, not the President. *shrug*

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: ntdz

George W. Bush made that threat during the gulf war? I thought he was the general manager of the Rangers then, not the President. *shrug*

Typo. Meant GHWB, as you obviously know. Your post seems a little juvenile to me, but to each his own.