• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Pentagon officials: 22 killed in attack on U.S. base in Iraq

BBond

Diamond Member
Pentagon officials: 22 killed in attack on U.S. base in Iraq

Tuesday, December 21, 2004 Posted: 9:28 AM EST (1428 GMT)

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Multiple rounds hit a dining hall at a U.S. military base near Mosul on Tuesday, killing 22 people, including U.S. troops, members of the Iraqi national guard, and Iraqi civilians, Pentagon officials said.

Fifty-one people were wounded in the incident -- which occurred at noon (4 a.m. ET), the officials said.

No other details on the attack were immediately available.

Tuesday's attack came shortly after British Prime Minister Tony Blair arrived in Baghdad on a surprise visit to Iraq.

During a news conference with Iraqi interim Prime Minister Ayad Allawi, Blair called the insurgency "a battle between democracy and terror," in advance of Iraqi elections set for January 30.

"On the one side you have people who desperately want to make the democratic process work ... and on the other side, people who are killing and intimidating and trying to destroy a better future for Iraq." (Full story)

On Sunday, Iraqi officials reported 52 deaths resulting from a car bomb attack in the Shiite Muslim holy city of Najaf and 16 deaths from another car bombing about 50 miles (80 kilometers) away in the Shiite holy city of Karbala. (Full story)

During a Monday news conference in Washington, President Bush said "terrorists will attempt to delay the elections, to intimidate people in their country, to disrupt the democratic process in any way they can."

Still, he added, "I'm confident that terrorists will fail, the elections will go forward and Iraq will be a democracy that reflects the values and traditions of its people." (Full story)

Meanwhile, the U.S. Air Force early Tuesday launched airstrikes on insurgents fighting American troops west of Baghdad in the town of Hit, a U.S. military spokesman said.

"At approximately 2 a.m. this morning [6 p.m. ET Monday], a U.S. Air Force aircraft, in support of troops in contact, engaged an enemy fighting position with precision weapons," said 1st Sgt. Steve Valley with the Combined Press Information Center.

No other information was immediately available.

Near Baiji, Iraq, on Tuesday, oil pipelines were reported on fire, sources from Northern Oil Company said. The cause of the fire was unknown, the sources said. The fires are near portions of pipelines that were damaged by saboteurs two days ago.

The burning pipelines intersect the Ceyhan export line and a domestic line and carry oil from the Kirkuk oil fields.

CNN's Karl Penhaul in Baghdad and Elaine Quijano at the Pentagon contributed to this report.

 
rose.gif



To Mr. Bush...I guess the bombs are having an effect.
 
Get out of Iraq now. Pay the $5.8 billion per month to put Iraqis to work rebuilding their country. Keep paying until they finish. We broke it, we bought it. At least our troops, many of whom have been over there for more than one tour with less than a year out, will stop dying. This road we're on is a dead end. Let's get off it before it's too late to turn around.


 
It's already too late to turn around.

Once Dubya decided to launch on Iraq,
we had crossed the bridge of no return.

Mosul USED to be the most stable area in Iraq for the U.S.
with unquestioned support from the Kurdish population.
 
raytheon supposedly has a laser tank that can destroy mortar rouns moving at super-sonic speeds with 100% accuracy. even a prototype has to to better than nothing. why don't they have these tanks?

is it the same scenario as with the armored humvees? donald

or atleast a set or predator drones to patrol the area. i mean during the war they were all saying how awesome it was and could take out the enemy silently from over a mile away. a set of 4 could patrol N/S/E/West indefinetly, find where the mortars are being fired relatively quick, and return fire
 
Originally posted by: CaptnKirk

Mosul USED to be the most stable area in Iraq for the U.S.
with unquestioned support from the Kurdish population.

we flushed them out of fallujah and sent them packing to mosul. every attack emboldens them to do more attacks. and they'll do the same to the "new" government in Jan

suppose the Suuni's win, are attacked, they crack down, civil war erupts.
 
Originally posted by: ReiAyanami
raytheon supposedly has a laser tank that can destroy mortar rouns moving at super-sonic speeds with 100% accuracy. even a prototype has to to better than nothing. why don't they have these tanks?
Money.
is it the same scenario as with the armored humvees? donald
I've come to realize this is an overblown issue. Humvees are not tanks, and were never intended to be used in situations where tanks were. We never heard about the jeeps in vietnam not being armoured.
or atleast a set or predator drones to patrol the area. i mean during the war they were all saying how awesome it was and could take out the enemy silently from over a mile away. a set of 4 could patrol N/S/E/West indefinetly, find where the mortars are being fired relatively quick, and return fire
There are so many people that a predator drone can't simply fly around forever and somehow pick out these tiny pockets of rocket launchers out of dozens of square miles.

This is a military base in a hot area. It knew what it was doing, and definitely took extensive measures to protect itself. Nonetheless, people die, because it's a war, and you can't protect everyone always.

 
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Nonetheless, people die, because it's a war, and you can't protect everyone always.

This used to be the reason we only went to war when it was absolutely necessary. Only as a last resort.

 
Come on Skoorb - the jeeps in Nam weren't driven throught the fighting zones like the humvees in Iraq are..how many soldiers died in jeeps in Nam?
 
Originally posted by: BBond
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Nonetheless, people die, because it's a war, and you can't protect everyone always.

This used to be the reason we only went to war when it was absolutely necessary. Only as a last resort.
One's necessity is another's option. The Bush admin saw it as a necessity, so they went. There are always people who disagree with the necessity for a war, and others who think it's never needed.

 
Originally posted by: NeoV
Come on Skoorb - the jeeps in Nam weren't driven throught the fighting zones like the humvees in Iraq are..how many soldiers died in jeeps in Nam?
Not many because they were getting cut up in the jungles :Q
 
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Originally posted by: BBond
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Nonetheless, people die, because it's a war, and you can't protect everyone always.

This used to be the reason we only went to war when it was absolutely necessary. Only as a last resort.
One's necessity is another's option. The Bush admin saw it as a necessity, so they went. There are always people who disagree with the necessity for a war, and others who think it's never needed.

Based on the reasons given by the Bush administration there is no doubt this war was not needed. Now we are stuck in Iraq rotating the same troops in and out while the situation deteriorates. We are stuck there bleeding 5.8 billion per month. Anyone with the capacity to be truthful with themself cannot characterize this aggression as a necessary war.



 
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Originally posted by: BBond
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Nonetheless, people die, because it's a war, and you can't protect everyone always.
This used to be the reason we only went to war when it was absolutely necessary. Only as a last resort.
One's necessity is another's option. The Bush admin saw it as a necessity, so they went. There are always people who disagree with the necessity for a war, and others who think it's never needed.
The "necessity" was conjured up by the PNAC neocons and bolstered with falsified and exaggerated intelligence.

Some "necessity".
 
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Originally posted by: feralkid
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Originally posted by: feralkid
Originally posted by: Skoorb
I think this is what's called getting a bit off topic 😉




Yeah, we were talking about the war in Iraq here.....
Sarcasm is not becoming!

Not becoming what?
Just not...becoming.





I don't know what the heck you mean.

The topic was the war in Iraq.

You got off on references to the war in Vietnam.

Now you're asking others to stay on topic.

I reminded you that the topic was the war in Iraq.

Now you're making cryptic remarks about "sarcasm not becoming"

I reiterate: "What the heck are you talking about?



 
Originally posted by: feralkidI don't know what the heck you mean.

The topic was the war in Iraq.

You got off on references to the war in Vietnam.

Now you're asking others to stay on topic.

I reminded you that the topic was the war in Iraq.

Now you're making cryptic remarks about "sarcasm not becoming"

I reiterate: "What the heck are you talking about?
The topic was not the war in Iraq; it was a bunch of soldiers dying. If you start a thread about a new sports car I can't come in with a spiel about DUI, simply because it pertains to automobiles. People used this topic as an excuse to get in points against the war. Jeeps in vietnam was a direct reference to soldiers dying in combat due to equipment shortages, which was a direct reference to another post that directly talked about lack of adequate defense for the soldiers here who died.

I didn't start the thread, but the intent I think was drilling down to the specifics of the troop deaths and combat in Iraq, not a general nebulous conversation starter intended to attract pro/con comments about the war.

"Sarcasm not becoming" made use of a fairly inspecific phrase that you'll find throughout the English language. For instance "That behaviour is not becoming of an officer in the Navy."
 
Bush had a plan go get (stay) out of Vietnam....

he has no plan to get out of Iraq. Probably doesn't want too....need to establish bases there to take over the rest of the middle east.

FVCK Iraq....shouldn't have been there.....now we're all paying for it...especially our troops. :|
 
Originally posted by: NeoV
Come on Skoorb - the jeeps in Nam weren't driven throught the fighting zones like the humvees in Iraq are..how many soldiers died in jeeps in Nam?


Actually quite a few. There were ambushes all the time on motor convoys.
In Vietnam the entire country - and those adjacent to them (Laos & Cambodia)
were, in fact, War Zones.


 
Back
Top