Headline: Fallujah fighting kills 4 U.S. Marines

I would hazard a guess of to late March or early April 2005 (maybe 2004).

I believe the four deaths was the major reason for attacking the city with a large number of troops than what was previous station in the area.

If I recall there was only a battalion in the area before the four deaths.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Noise:
Which invasion are you talking about I get the feeling theres a tricky unionist at play making reference to operation Desert Storm

---

All right, all right, I can't take the pressure. Noise is correct, I'm being tricky. But not that tricky.

The news item is from yesterday:

quote:

---

In other developments across Iraq:

* A US air strike killed 13 suspected insurgents near Amiriya, west of Baghdad, the US military said

* Four Iraqi policemen and a civilian were killed during an attack on a patrol in Baquba, north of Baghdad

* Four US marines died from wounds sustained during fighting in Falluja on Wednesday, the US military said.

---

quote:

---

Four U.S. Marines were killed in fighting in Anbar province, the military said Thursday. The Marines, who were assigned to Multi-National Force — West, died Wednesday from wounds sustained due to enemy action in two separate incidents in the insurgent stronghold west of Baghdad, according to a statement. The deaths raised to at least 3,114 members of the U.S. military who have died since the Iraq war started in March 2003, according to an Associated Press count.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Frustrated Mess:
Is it the same four being reported today?

---

Probably - your link says they were killed "Wednesday", which was yesterday.

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:

I'm very happy personally to see that the U.S. attempts at "pacification" are seeing the same success as in Viet Nam. Every dead G.I. brings their demise nearer.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Papal Bull:

You know what? You're one depraved individual.

---

I'm sorry, I expressed myself badly. I guess I should have said:

"I hope and pray that the U.S. occupation carries on without bloodshed, loss of life, or suffering to any of God's creatures, or to the environment."

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:
Less depraved?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Papal Bull:

I don't know what else to say.

---

You know, that's an excellent situation in which to stop talking. As Wittgenstein pointed out:

Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muß man schweigen.

As for your liberal sensitivites, you can shove them. I oppose capital punishment. But on the battlefield, where Iraqis face Americans, or Afghans face Canadians, or Nazis face Allies, I know well that one must live and one must die - and I know where I stand. Don't like it? See Wittgenstein's quote above.

quote:

---

Wishing for death is pretty much as anti-ethical as someone can be.

---

Killing of 16 children sparks war in Fallujah City

quote:

---

The killing of hundreds of people in Fallujah was sparked off when children below the age of 16 demonstrated in the streets of the city protesting against the American occupation of their school and the invasion of Iraq, a war crime victim told a war conference, here Wednesday.

Abbas Abid, 43, said when the demonstrators reached the school, the American troops shot at these children and killed 16 of them, one of whom was his nephew.

"After the shooting, some relatives of the murdered children, decided to fight the American troops for killing their children. This occurred at a time when resistance fighters throughout Iraq began their fight against the US occupation," he said.

---

This is from Perdana Global Peace Forum conference on war crimes, which concluded yesterday in Kuala Lumpur. Guest speakers included Michel Chossudovsky, Gwynne Dyer, Hans von Sponeck, Greg Palast. More information here.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Frustrated Mess:

Really? I thought delivering mass death and suffering and calling it "liberty" would have been way worse.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Papal Bull:
I had no idea that by saying that wishing for death was unethical was equated to being pro-war.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:
Would someone please get the caulking for the woodwork? They're starting to come out again.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by pogge:

You better caulk it up good 'cos I'm with Papal Bull on this one.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:

How so? What is your stand on the U.S. troops in Iraq? You want them out with no further casualties (how nice!)? Or you want them to stay until the Iraqis can learn to behave? Talk straight.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by pogge:

I want them out. I didn't want them in to begin with. It doesn't mean I want to see any more death on either side.

---

The attack made was exceedingly brazen... Well planned and exceedingly well executed. A convey with troops wearing American military gear made it through 3 checkstops (that are manned by Iraqi guards, not Americans). When they reached the first American post, they revealed themselves as insurgents (yet they spoke near perfect english and were capable as passing as American) opened fire killing several American soldiers (note, they could not confirm a number... only 'several'). The group then made an escape and ditched some of the american gear they were wearing. Soon after this attack, an American patrol was found ambushed and the soldiers were executed without their gear on.

This really leads to the suggestion that Iraqi military fighting side by side with American soldiers are atleast partially infiltrated by insurgents from several factions... Though the disguise is good, they did make it by 3 Iraqi guard stations... Did they have any help in doing this? CNN once again had this discussion going:

Iraq : Nightmare scenario

The Nightmare Scenario that had CNN all riled up? US and US supported Iraqi soldiers are fighting side by side... The Iraqi's are being trained by Americans and being equipped with top of the line american gear (ok, maybe 2nd rate equipment, the top of the line cluster bombs goto Israel instead ^^). So what happens when the Us trained Iraqi Shi'a align with the Shi'a insurgency?

I think this is why the surge was chosen as well... The Americans have a failing grasp on the interm gov't (Nouri Al-Maliki either unable or unwilling to bring change as the American media states it), and are begining to fear they are losing their grasp on the army that they are training (and equipment).

CNN actually did a decent job bringing up historical events where a foriegn power trained an army that turned on them.

[ 08 February 2007: Message edited by: Noise ]

Quiz #2

Headline:

quote:

---

U.S. kills 8, wounds 6

---

Questions (for 20 points):

1. Where did it happen? (10 points)

2. Whom did they kill? (10 points)

[ 09 February 2007: Message edited by: unionist ]

Real answer:

U.S. air strike killed 8 Kurdish Iraqi soldiers and wounded 6 today in Mosul.

Another blow for liberty! Well done, George W.! There's no fire like a friendly fire.

ETA: Here's the story:

U.S. air strike kills Iraqi troops

[ 09 February 2007: Message edited by: unionist ]

quote:

---

I want them out. I didn't want them in to begin with. It doesn't mean I want to see any more death on either side.

---

Exactly.

Unionist, your original post welcoming the death of more GIs and collectively labelling them (rather than their political masters) brutal murderers was over the line.

Instead of acknowledging this, you imply babblers who called you on it are pro-war.

quote:

---

Originally posted by John K:

...and collectively labelling them (rather than their political masters) brutal murderers was over the line.

---

Er...ok then!

quote:

---

Er...ok then!

So...who DID kill those >300,000 Iraqis?

---

quote:

---

So...who DID kill those >300,000 Iraqis?

---

Some died at the hands of American soldiers, no question. Others died due to sectarian violence, suicide bombings or getting caught-up in the fog of war.

Regardless, each needless death - due in large part to the Bush's administration's invasion and ongoing occupation - is a tragedy which should be mourned, not welcomed.

Every US soldier in Iraq knows exactly what they are doing. They've had since spring 2003 to figure it out. If they still sign up and volunteer to go, if they obey their embarkation orders, they deserve whatever horrible fate they get. They can refuse, they choose instead to join in the slaughter. Fuck them.

Don't forget that what the US is so afraid to call a civil war was instigated by the US. If you don't understand the significance of John Negroponte's posting to Iraq just when the sectarian violence really started to rock, then you are ignoring a huge flashing neon warning sign. The "Salvadore Option" was implimented there just like everywhere else those murdering cocksuckers go.

1.1 According to UN reports, how many Iraqis have died prematurely since 1991 ?.

1.2 And how many of those were children ?.

quote:

---

Originally posted by John K:

Unionist, your original post welcoming the death of more GIs and collectively labelling them (rather than their political masters) brutal murderers was over the line.

---

Your horse is too high. Do you think I excuse their political masters? No, of course you don't, because you've read my many posts.

Life is brutal. The U.S. soldiers in Iraq are aggressors and war criminals. When an armed G.I. faces an Iraqi (ANY Iraqi), I hope that the G.I. will fall, not the Iraqi. My attitude was the same transposed to Viet Nam, or to the Allies vs. the Axis for that matter.

That may not be to your taste. But to say I am "over the line" is a bit odd, in my view. Which line is that? The sanctity of human life, even when human invaders are butchering hundreds of thousands of non-aggressive innocents in their own land?