**OFFICIAL WAR THREAD** 7th Calvary fights off Iraqi attack; Bush seeks 75 billion for war

[LeeTJ]

Originally posted by: datalink7

apparently you can't read. the word i used was "perhaps". i didn't claim it as fact.

Oh really? Well, let us look at what you wrote:

that is a cultural bias. perhaps for them and with their religion they find it acceptable to do so. you can't apply your rules to them.

You start out with "that is a cultural bias." Where, exactly, is the word "perhaps" in here? I don't see it.

OH! There it is, in the next sentence. But wait, you already established, by way of the first premise, that it is my "cultural bias." So therefore the "perhaps" must apply, not to that first sentence, but to the second. So it is perhaps "their religion" that makes it acceptable for them to use these tactics.

You didn't say it was "perhaps" my cultural bias. You said it IS my cultural bias. Then you say "perhaps" it is "their religion." But all this means is that is that it might be their religion, or some other reason, but no matter what my view "is a cultural bias."

You then conclude that one "can't apply your rules to them."

Pretty clear cut to me. You straight up told me that I am "culturally biased" and can't "apply my rules to them."

Maybe it is YOU who can't read what you wrote down? Or perhaps you just need a lesson in English?

your right. i can't argue with someone that takes everything i type sooo personally as i never addressed it to you nor did i have any intention to do so.

and yes, the perhaps DID apply to the culture as to the religion. get over it.

 

[Ime]

Check out CNN's front webpage. It has a picture of a Javelin missle in mid-flight.

That is one brave photographer!

 

[Kenazo]

man, I guess now I can somewhat sympathize w/ the Israeli's when they attack ambulances and other civilians. You have no way of knowing if those civilians are goina pull out an AK-47 and shoot you in the back, or blow you up.

 

[Ime]

Originally posted by: Kenazo
man, I guess now I can somewhat sympathize w/ the Israeli's when they attack ambulances and other civilians. You have no way of knowing if those civilians are goina pull out an AK-47 and shoot you in the back, or blow you up.

I sympathize with the Israeli's as well. I also feel deeply sorry for the Palestinians. They are both locked in a battle that neither side can truly win. Hopefully someday both sides will learn to live together in peace.

However, this is off-topic. This is a War thread.

 

[Bluga]

Originally posted by: Tripleshot
>>>The honorable thing for the Iraqis to do is to realize that Saddam's regime is not worth giving up their lives for and to surrender peacefully. For people in power within the regime, it is true that it is a desparate time for them. They have everything to lose, so they will resort to desparate measures.<<<

Hmmm. I wonder, (just wondering) would that way of thinking be aplicable to us if China or USSR was on our soil trying to "liberate "us?

After watching some Al jazzer TV today, I can see that some very motivated people in Iraq would defend t othe death the only thing they know. Certainly their news sources have not conveyed to them the "joy" of living like americans,with freedom and democracy. Thay have scant little, and see us as taking even that from them. They may have no concept of our way of life.

So what?

Leave them along, not evryone wants to be American.

 

[Kenazo]

the unfortunate thing is our marines will have to start shooting civilians, and if they do their rep is even more tarnished. A no-win situation if the Iraqi's continue to masquarade as civ's.

 

[Tripleshot]

Originally posted by: LeeTJ

thank you.

for them it's a choice of evil they know vs evil they do not know. what do you think they will choose?? what would you choose if you had the choice between the evil you know vs one you don't??

you say we aren't evil, and i agree, but how can they possibly know that??

They will only know when we, by our actions, show them. That will be the most difficult and probably the most impossible part of this entire campaign, and I fear that it has taken second stage to the ultimate goal of killing Saddam and his sons, and the rest of his regime. When there is a power vacuum in Iraq government, the last thing we need is our "generals" running the show. Very quickly, when this is over ans we have victory, a local, charismatic leader will have to take over and we hope that leader will be able to convey to the people we are not the evil enemy. We are liberators and favor peace and happiness over war and death. Say that while you have a gun pointed at your audience. Believable, huh?

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: THELAIR
what is this about an attack or bomb or explosion outside CENTCOM Qutar HQ?
hmm that can't be good

more disgruntled muslim troops?

No, it turns out to have been an Industrial accident. There is a auto wreckage yard nearby that crushed a car with a full tank of gas, so it has been reported. I would have posted this info earlier(approx 20 minutes after the first post of this event), but my internet went down.

 

[Krk3561]

Originally posted by: tikwanleap

Originally posted by: Ime
Basically I look at it this way.

We are the good guys. We don't use underhanded tactics. We don't intentionally target civilians. We are trying to minimize colatoral damage on the Iraqi side. This means we are exposing our forces to MUCH greater risk than we could if we just leveled the country. Most people don't understand we could level every city and military unit in Iraq, but we don't because of the extreme level of colatoral damage it would cause. So instead we are exposing our boys and girls to much greater physical danger. It's the price we pay for following the rules, obeying the Geneva Convention, and being compassionate to our enemy.

The folks we are fighting are the bad guys, they don't follow the rules and never have. We wouldn't be fighting a war with Iraq right now if they had followed the rules.

Such is the way of the world. I actually expected much higher friendly casualties than we've seen.

Personally I think the rest of the world is stunned at our abilities right now.

Great post! I totally agree. Just compare the news briefings of the central command with the Iraq's "Information Ministry".

Or watch the video of soldiers shooting into the water and bushes looking for a supposed downed pilot.

 

[Mookow]

Originally posted by: Ylen13

Originally posted by: Mookow

Originally posted by: Jmman
I wonder if these journalists that are "embedded" are armed or not? There is no way I would be in their shoes without my own personal weapon just in case it really hits the fan.....

I wouldnt want a journalist in my unit to be armed... god knows who they'd start shooting at in the dark

some of them are ex solders

"Some", maybe, but not all

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: sandorski

No, it turns out to have been an Industrial accident. There is a auto wreckage yard nearby that crushed a car with a full tank of gas, so it has been reported. I would have posted this info earlier(approx 20 minutes after the first post of this event), but my internet went down.

You have your own internet?

Thanks for the update.

 

[Antoneo]

From one of CNN's frontpage articles:

Iraq claims it has found an Israeli missile in Baghdad and accuses Israel of "taking part in this aggression against Iraq," Iraqi Foreign Minister Naji Sabri said Sunday. The Israeli government denied the claim, government spokesman Daniel Seaman saying, "Israel is not engaged in this war in any way."

Ugh, more BS from Iraq.

 

[jaeger66]

Originally posted by: tikwanleap


Great post! I totally agree. Just compare the news briefings of the central command with the Iraq's "Information Ministry".

Why? Is our officers' "victory is certain" line really so different from theirs? We laugh because victory seems so utterly certain, but this is war. If Iraq does have WMD, which is the whole premise of this operation, what if they use them? What if Saddam fires one into Jerusalem? Or waits until our troops enter Baghdad and then pushes the button, taking Iraqi civilians, a good chunk or our soldiers, and half the city along with him? Would that be a victory?

 

[Ylen13]

Originally posted by: Mookow

Originally posted by: Ylen13

Originally posted by: Mookow

Originally posted by: Jmman
I wonder if these journalists that are "embedded" are armed or not? There is no way I would be in their shoes without my own personal weapon just in case it really hits the fan.....

I wouldnt want a journalist in my unit to be armed... god knows who they'd start shooting at in the dark

some of them are ex solders

"Some", maybe, but not all

shouldn?t those "some" have some kind of weapon on them in case they are ambushed and are in need of being able to self defend them, plus I don't think a journalist will start shooting in the middle of the night unless every single solder around him is dead or he is in the middle of the desert alone without any us solders and is taking enemy fire.

 

[Ylen13]

Originally posted by: jaeger66

Originally posted by: tikwanleap


Great post! I totally agree. Just compare the news briefings of the central command with the Iraq's "Information Ministry".

Why? Is our officers' "victory is certain" line really so different from theirs? We laugh because victory seems so utterly certain, but this is war. If Iraq does have WMD, which is the whole premise of this operation, what if they use them? What if Saddam fires one into Jerusalem? Or waits until our troops enter Baghdad and then pushes the button, taking Iraqi civilians, a good chunk or our soldiers, and half the city along with him? Would that be a victory?

Maybe not but our solders would retrieve and we would drop nukes, yes allot of civilians would die but I promised all of the Iraq military would be dead.

 

[tikwanleap]

Originally posted by: jaeger66

Originally posted by: tikwanleap


Great post! I totally agree. Just compare the news briefings of the central command with the Iraq's "Information Ministry".

Why? Is our officers' "victory is certain" line really so different from theirs? We laugh because victory seems so utterly certain, but this is war. If Iraq does have WMD, which is the whole premise of this operation, what if they use them? What if Saddam fires one into Jerusalem? Or waits until our troops enter Baghdad and then pushes the button, taking Iraqi civilians, a good chunk or our soldiers, and half the city along with him? Would that be a victory?

True, they are both using the "victory is certain" line. But that was not my point. I was refering to the BS that the "Information Ministry" was trying to pass of as truth.

 

[Ylen13]

Originally posted by: tikwanleap

Originally posted by: jaeger66

Originally posted by: tikwanleap


Great post! I totally agree. Just compare the news briefings of the central command with the Iraq's "Information Ministry".

Why? Is our officers' "victory is certain" line really so different from theirs? We laugh because victory seems so utterly certain, but this is war. If Iraq does have WMD, which is the whole premise of this operation, what if they use them? What if Saddam fires one into Jerusalem? Or waits until our troops enter Baghdad and then pushes the button, taking Iraqi civilians, a good chunk or our soldiers, and half the city along with him? Would that be a victory?

True, they are both using the "victory is certain" line. But that was not my point. I was refering to the BS that the "Information Ministry" was trying to pass of as truth.

that information was intended solly for iraq people

 

[Mookow]

Originally posted by: Ylen13

Originally posted by: Mookow

Originally posted by: Ylen13

Originally posted by: Mookow

Originally posted by: Jmman
I wonder if these journalists that are "embedded" are armed or not? There is no way I would be in their shoes without my own personal weapon just in case it really hits the fan.....

I wouldnt want a journalist in my unit to be armed... god knows who they'd start shooting at in the dark

some of them are ex solders

"Some", maybe, but not all

shouldn?t those "some" have some kind of weapon on them in case they are ambushed and are in need of being able to self defend them, plus I don't think a journalist will start shooting in the middle of the night unless every single solder around him is dead or he is in the middle of the desert alone without any us solders and is taking enemy fire.

The US military didnt issue ammo to the soldiers and marines until just before we invaded. This was done to cut down on the number of blue-on-blue accidents. Even then, some did occur (the Marine who got shot in the neck as the result of one of the officers cleaning his pistol in the tent the marine was walking past). Lets look at your two scenarios there:
1.) Every soldier around him is dead: Then the reporter has more than enough weapons laying all around him. Once a soldier dies, he no longer needs his rifle, so take it and do something with it.
2.) Got seperated, under fire: You want to give a rifle to a civilian that was dumb enough to do this? Lets say it was night time, blah blah, and he did get seperated. Walking around with a rifle is probably bad for him, since all the US soldiers are going to see if they see him is a guy walking around with a rifle... which means he is a legit target

 

[BunLengthHotDog]

that information was intended solly for iraq people

The mis-information Minister is on a world stage, its certainly intended for the entire world...not just the people of Iraq

 

[tikwanleap]

Originally posted by: Ylen13

Originally posted by: tikwanleap

Originally posted by: jaeger66

Originally posted by: tikwanleap


Great post! I totally agree. Just compare the news briefings of the central command with the Iraq's "Information Ministry".

Why? Is our officers' "victory is certain" line really so different from theirs? We laugh because victory seems so utterly certain, but this is war. If Iraq does have WMD, which is the whole premise of this operation, what if they use them? What if Saddam fires one into Jerusalem? Or waits until our troops enter Baghdad and then pushes the button, taking Iraqi civilians, a good chunk or our soldiers, and half the city along with him? Would that be a victory?

True, they are both using the "victory is certain" line. But that was not my point. I was refering to the BS that the "Information Ministry" was trying to pass of as truth.

that information was intended solly for iraq people

Huh? does that make a difference?

I was just agreeing that the current Iraqi government has no qualms about lying. Whether it's to it's own people or to the whole world doesn't matter.

 

[Jmman]

Originally posted by: Mookow

Originally posted by: Ylen13

Originally posted by: Mookow

Originally posted by: Ylen13

Originally posted by: Mookow

Originally posted by: Jmman
I wonder if these journalists that are "embedded" are armed or not? There is no way I would be in their shoes without my own personal weapon just in case it really hits the fan.....

I wouldnt want a journalist in my unit to be armed... god knows who they'd start shooting at in the dark

some of them are ex solders

"Some", maybe, but not all

shouldn?t those "some" have some kind of weapon on them in case they are ambushed and are in need of being able to self defend them, plus I don't think a journalist will start shooting in the middle of the night unless every single solder around him is dead or he is in the middle of the desert alone without any us solders and is taking enemy fire.

The US military didnt issue ammo to the soldiers and marines until just before we invaded. This was done to cut down on the number of blue-on-blue accidents. Even then, some did occur (the Marine who got shot in the neck as the result of one of the officers cleaning his pistol in the tent the marine was walking past). Lets look at your two scenarios there:
1.) Every soldier around him is dead: Then the reporter has more than enough weapons laying all around him. Once a soldier dies, he no longer needs his rifle, so take it and do something with it.
2.) Got seperated, under fire: You want to give a rifle to a civilian that was dumb enough to do this? Lets say it was night time, blah blah, and he did get seperated. Walking around with a rifle is probably bad for him, since all the US soldiers are going to see if they see him is a guy walking around with a rifle... which means he is a legit target

Well, if I was in their shoes, there is no way in hell I would be there without a pistol at least. These guys are right on the front lines. Maybe we should have given them at least rudimentary weapons training. I would not be surprised in the least to see one of the embedded guys get killed.....

Look at that footage from Umm Qsar. That journalist was right in the middle of a firefight. He was basically a grunt with a camera instead of a gun.

 

[Pigasus]

This may be a repost. If so, I'm sorry. I don't have time to read everything that's been posted already, and I thought this might be of interest.

Uncensored footage of the American P.O.W.s, apparently from a Dutch news source:

http://www.vtm.be/asx/vtmnieuws19uur.asx

 

[Tripleshot]

Originally posted by: Pigasus
This may be a repost. If so, I'm sorry. I don't have time to read everything that's been posted already, and I thought this might be of interest.

Uncensored footage of the American P.O.W.s, apparently from a Dutch news source:

http://www.vtm.be/asx/vtmnieuws19uur.asx

learn to link


Thanks. That is the first time I haveseen that much footage. And if I can see it, so can the CIA and any other outfit with the capability of matching faces to people and dealing out retribution. That asshole that went over to expose the soldiers head is guilty of a war crime. No court for him, let the Army and Marines meat out vigilante justice, Iraqi style.

Of note, the VP of Iraq was the super mouth in the news briefing. I can see that a new target should be on the radar of the military screens, the damn propoganda TV stations.

Watch for further developments. I would wager I'm right. They blew them up in 91 when this crap went on.

 

[Wolfie]

Anyone have this video saved? I can't get connected to it. I have seen the first 10 sec of the video about 30 times but because of the distance, I can't get a STREAMING video. Any other links out there?

 

[burnedout]

Originally posted by: LocutusX
I'm not a tactician or anything but apparently former general Wesley Clark says the strategy that Franks is using, is making sure one of the armored units (7th cav) can get to Baghdad ASAP... I dont know whether they want to lay siege to the city asap or what. also the MEU is in "a hurry" to get to baghdad, even to the extent of skirting around Basra, etc. So for whatever reason, it looks like they aren't totally securing the towns along the way.

The current 7 CAV drive is extremely bold, brilliant, yet very risky.

From what I can gather from news reports, 7 CAV currently operates under a modified version of Lidell-Hart's "man in the dark" concept. A man gropes blindly around a darkened room, seeking out some form of substance relative to his immediate situation. Obviously, because of more refined observation techniques such as satellites, aviation assets, etc., our "man in the dark" can see, with restrictions, some substance around him.

According to one of the retired Generals-now-turned-military-talking-head, there may be two Republican Guard divisions situated in a gap anywhere from 20-60 km NE of 7 CAV axis of advance. If this is indeed the case, the intent is that 7 CAV lures these divisions out. If the RG divisions come out, the outcome will probably be written into history; as there should be enough close air support on station to kill 'em.