"There is really on one source of reliable information on this war"

[ub4me]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,931084,00.html


www.iraqwar.ru

 

[conjur]

hokaaaayyyy...

 

[NightTrain]

I guess we kill two birds with one stone here.

 

[junkyardDawg]

that site is interesting reading but to use it as the "one source of reliable information" is idiotic

I don't believe anything about this war until it is confirmed by several sources

 

[beatniks3]

i thought you were talking about this site, the new war forum on anandtech!

 

[DBL]

according to www.aeronautics.ru , which is an english translation of the site www.iraqwar.ru you mentioned;


"All the claims made by aviation commander of the coalition, general Michael Mosley, about ??Iraqi army, as an organized structure consisting of large units, exists no longer?? are contrary to fact and, according to analytics, are probably connected with severe pressure put on the military command by American financial groups that desperately needed good news from the US-Iraqi front by the end of the financial week. In fact, the Republican Guards defending Baghdad have not lost even 5% of their numerical strength and military equipment. Most of those losses were due to bombardments and not land combats. The total losses of Iraqi army since the beginning of the war have not exceeded 5-8% of their defensive potential. This means the main battles are still to be seen. "

This site seems to have a lot more in common with the Iraqi Minister of Information. IOW, the facts presented are bogus and run contrary to anything I've seen reported by any other news organization. There is an obvious anti-US agenda being presented at that site.

 

[steell]

Originally posted by: ub4me
http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,931084,00.html


www.iraqwar.ru

That made me laugh so hard that I fell out of my chair!!!!

 

[rudder]

Is that the place that picked up Peter Arnett?

 

[ConclamoLudus]

Only the minister of information from Iraq is a valid source. Why would he lie?

 

[Marshallj]

Originally posted by: DBL
according to www.aeronautics.ru , which is an english translation of the site www.iraqwar.ru you mentioned;


" In fact, the Republican Guards defending Baghdad have not lost even 5% of their numerical strength and military equipment. Most of those losses were due to bombardments and not land combats. The total losses of Iraqi army since the beginning of the war have not exceeded 5-8% of their defensive potential. This means the main battles are still to be seen. "

.

Hahaha, what crap. I guess the Republican Guard that was charged with defending Baghdad just was in a good mood the other day, and graciously let our tanks roll in and out of the city at will.

 

[BaDaBooM]

I suppose all that video from the embeds is all staged. They're not really even in Iraq, they're in southern california on a set stage.

Unbelievable

 

[bjc112]

Originally posted by: conjur
hokaaaayyyy...

 

[Tab]

The Author does have a point, however it is too a extreme. Many of the reports coming out from Iraq are inaccurrate.