Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
D
DcupSheepNipples
Guest
Yes, great news!
But I hate to think what they did to her!
War: Latest News
- Thread starter manny78
- Start date
Yes, great news!
But I hate to think what they did to her!not news but, the usual arab propaganda...probably photo-shopped...
interesting quotes too
http://www.marchforjustice.com/id191.htm
this one was interesting in particular:
http://www.marchforjustice.com/237dc440.jpg
interesting quotes too
http://www.marchforjustice.com/id191.htm
this one was interesting in particular:
http://www.marchforjustice.com/237dc440.jpg
D
DcupSheepNipples
Guest
Not the most recent one!
Army Black Hawk Shot Down; Seven Killed
The Associated Press
Wednesday, April 2, 2003; 9:18 PM
A U.S. Army Black Hawk helicopter was shot down in southern Iraq Wednesday, killing seven of the 11 soldiers aboard, Pentagon officials said.
The helicopter was downed by small-arms fire near Karbala, the site of fierce fighting between the Army's 3rd Infantry Division and Iraqi troops, including Republican Guard forces.
The other four soldiers on board the Black Hawk were wounded, officials said.
They were rescued by American troops, the officials said.
The Black Hawk was the second U.S. helicopter to go down in combat. An Army Apache assault helicopter went down March 24 during an assault on Republican Guard forces; its two pilots were captured by Iraqis.
The UH-60 Black Hawk is one of the Army's main utility and troop transport helicopters. Each one is flown by a crew of four and can carry up to 11 soldiers.
The helicopters are equipped with advanced avionics and electronics, such as global positioning systems.
A Black Hawk crashed in a remote, wooded area of Fort Drum, N.Y., during a training exercise last month, killing 11 of the 13 soldiers aboard.
In February, a Black Hawk crashed during night training in the Kuwaiti desert, killing all four crew members. The Kuwaiti military said sandstorms were reported in the area at the time the chopper went down.
In January, an MH-60, an adapted version of the Black Hawk, crashed during training near Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan, killing four members of an elite aviation regiment.
D
DcupSheepNipples
Guest
U.S. Infantry Vanguard 6 Miles from S. Baghdad
Thu April 3, 2003 03:51 AM ET
NEAR BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Advance armored units of the U.S. 3rd Infantry Division were just six miles from the southern edge of Baghdad on Thursday, U.S. military sources in the area told Reuters correspondent Luke Baker.
In the center of the Iraqi capital, Reuters correspondent Samia Nakhoul said she heard an intense and sustained anti-aircraft barrage coming from the southern outskirts where U.S.-led forces have been bombarding the city's defenders
Thu April 3, 2003 03:51 AM ET
NEAR BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Advance armored units of the U.S. 3rd Infantry Division were just six miles from the southern edge of Baghdad on Thursday, U.S. military sources in the area told Reuters correspondent Luke Baker.
In the center of the Iraqi capital, Reuters correspondent Samia Nakhoul said she heard an intense and sustained anti-aircraft barrage coming from the southern outskirts where U.S.-led forces have been bombarding the city's defenders
D
DcupSheepNipples
Guest
I was discussing this in the civilian checkpoint deaths thread! Looks like thngs are going to change regarding Tear Gas on the battlefield!
Bush approves use of tear gas in battlefield
Only to save civilian lives, military says
Weapons experts fear violation of law
NICHOLAS WADE AND ERIC SCHMITT
NEW YORK TIMES
Apr. 2, 2003
President George W. Bush has authorized American military forces to use tear gas in Iraq, the Pentagon says, a development that some weapons experts said could set up a conflict between American and international law.
The U.S. Defence Department said that tear gas, which has been issued to American troops but not used by them, would be used only to save civilian lives and in accordance with the Chemical Weapons Convention, ratified by the United States in 1997. Critics say any battlefield use of tear gas would violate the convention, offend crucial allies including Britain, and hand Saddam Hussein a legal basis for using chemical weapons against the United States.
"Riot-control agents, such as C.S., better known as tear gas, are non-lethal and may be used by U.S. forces only when authorized by the president and only under specific, well-defined circumstances, to protect non-combatants," a Pentagon spokesperson, Lt. Col. Dave Lapan, said in response to questions Friday. Use of the agents for defensive purposes to save lives "would be consistent with the Chemical Weapons Convention, which prohibits the use of riot control agents as a method of warfare," he said.
Some experts disagreed. Elisa Harris, of the Centre for International and Security Studies at the University of Maryland, said a violation could arise if riot control agents were used against Iraqi soldiers using civilians as a screen. This battlefield use would contravene the Chemical Weapons Convention, she said, but is explicitly permitted by an Executive Order of 1975.
The Pentagon was citing the language of this Executive Order in saying Bush had authorized use of riot control agents in Iraq, she said. Harris worked on chemical weapons policy for the National Security Council during the Clinton administration.
Riot-control agents may be used behind battlefield lines, to quell riots or control prisoners being transported, but the chemical weapons convention says riot-control agents may not be used as a "method of warfare." Signatories feared their deployment might escalate to the use of lethal chemicals and had done so in the past.
In four major uses of chemical weapons in the past — by combatants in World War I; by the Italians in Ethiopia; by the Egyptians in Yemen; and in the Iran-Iraq war — deployment was preceded by use of non-lethal agents, Harris said. The framers of the convention therefore sought to draw a clear line against use of all chemical agents on the battlefield. This is the position of signatories including Britain. The British defence minister, Geoff Hoon, said last week that non-lethal chemical agents "would not be used by the United Kingdom in any military operation or on any battlefield."
The U.S. Senate, in a convention-ratifying resolution, wrote in a condition allowing battlefield use of riot-control agents with presidential approval.
Bush approves use of tear gas in battlefield
Only to save civilian lives, military says
Weapons experts fear violation of law
NICHOLAS WADE AND ERIC SCHMITT
NEW YORK TIMES
Apr. 2, 2003
President George W. Bush has authorized American military forces to use tear gas in Iraq, the Pentagon says, a development that some weapons experts said could set up a conflict between American and international law.
The U.S. Defence Department said that tear gas, which has been issued to American troops but not used by them, would be used only to save civilian lives and in accordance with the Chemical Weapons Convention, ratified by the United States in 1997. Critics say any battlefield use of tear gas would violate the convention, offend crucial allies including Britain, and hand Saddam Hussein a legal basis for using chemical weapons against the United States.
"Riot-control agents, such as C.S., better known as tear gas, are non-lethal and may be used by U.S. forces only when authorized by the president and only under specific, well-defined circumstances, to protect non-combatants," a Pentagon spokesperson, Lt. Col. Dave Lapan, said in response to questions Friday. Use of the agents for defensive purposes to save lives "would be consistent with the Chemical Weapons Convention, which prohibits the use of riot control agents as a method of warfare," he said.
Some experts disagreed. Elisa Harris, of the Centre for International and Security Studies at the University of Maryland, said a violation could arise if riot control agents were used against Iraqi soldiers using civilians as a screen. This battlefield use would contravene the Chemical Weapons Convention, she said, but is explicitly permitted by an Executive Order of 1975.
The Pentagon was citing the language of this Executive Order in saying Bush had authorized use of riot control agents in Iraq, she said. Harris worked on chemical weapons policy for the National Security Council during the Clinton administration.
Riot-control agents may be used behind battlefield lines, to quell riots or control prisoners being transported, but the chemical weapons convention says riot-control agents may not be used as a "method of warfare." Signatories feared their deployment might escalate to the use of lethal chemicals and had done so in the past.
In four major uses of chemical weapons in the past — by combatants in World War I; by the Italians in Ethiopia; by the Egyptians in Yemen; and in the Iran-Iraq war — deployment was preceded by use of non-lethal agents, Harris said. The framers of the convention therefore sought to draw a clear line against use of all chemical agents on the battlefield. This is the position of signatories including Britain. The British defence minister, Geoff Hoon, said last week that non-lethal chemical agents "would not be used by the United Kingdom in any military operation or on any battlefield."
The U.S. Senate, in a convention-ratifying resolution, wrote in a condition allowing battlefield use of riot-control agents with presidential approval.
D
DcupSheepNipples
Guest
U.S. actively sows doubts about whether Saddam is alive
David E. Sanger and James Risen The New York Times Thursday, April 3, 2003
WASHINGTON The Bush administration has embarked on a campaign — using radio broadcasts and other communications with Iraqi military leaders — to sow doubts about whether Saddam Hussein is still alive and in control of the country, senior administration and military officials said. American officials say they have still reached no conclusions about whether Saddam survived an attack two weeks ago. But they are trying to turn that uncertainty to battlefield advantage, attempting to raise questions in the minds of Iraqi military commanders defending Baghdad about whether they should stand and fight for a leader who may have been killed or incapacitated. ‘‘From what our intelligence is picking up, some of the Iraqi commanders themselves have not heard from him,’’ said one senior official. ‘‘And we don’t know ourselves. So you could call this psychological warfare, or you could call it exploitation of the biggest mystery out there.’’ The administration’s effort to raise doubts about Saddam comes after American military officials have reported that the majority of the Iraqi people encountered by American forces believe that Saddam is still alive, although there is no hard evidence either way. President George W. Bush himself has discussed the issue in at least one meeting this week and is ‘‘deeply intrigued’’ about Saddam’s fate, according to a participant. ‘‘The consensus was that the mystery about Saddam is growing, and that could be useful to us as we head into Baghdad,’’ said one participant in the meeting. If Saddam is alive, officials said, the administration’s decision to publicly question why he has not appeared in public may help flush him out — and perhaps give clues to his whereabouts. In briefings here in Washington, officials ranging from the White House spokesman, Ari Fleischer, to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld have repeatedly noted that Saddam has not appeared in public since before the start of the war two weeks ago. They have questioned whether tapes of Saddam, shown on Iraqi television, were prerecorded. Now those briefings, translated into Arabic, are being broadcast through Commando Solo, airborne radio broadcasts beamed into Iraq by American forces on a number of different frequencies. The same doubts are being raised in private cell phone and e-mail traffic. One senior administration official said Wednesday night that ‘‘a big morale blow’’ to the Iraqi troops has been the rumor that Saddam’s family is flee ing, and that Saddam himself, if alive, may not be far behind. Some captured Iraqi POWs have told American forces that such rumors are spreading fast — and the Untied States is doing everything it can to encourage them. Other American officials, however, have expressed concern that until recent days many ordinary Iraqis have had little reason to question whether Saddam re mains in power. Until a few days ago, the regional Ba‘ath Party offices remained largely untouched. Both the Fedayeen Saddam and the Special Security Organization have conducted a reign of terror against Iraqi civilians, leaving many convinced that his government is still intact, U.S. intelligence officials said. Now, the American bombing campaign is beginning to target the destruction of offices and other facilities used by the Ba‘ath Party in cities across the south. Local Ba‘ath Party headquarters buildings are often seen by the Iraqi public as the most important symbols of the regime, and the fact that they survived the first days of the war was a powerful sign of Saddam’s continued control. One official noted, for instance, that when local Shia Muslims rose up against the regime in Basra at the end of the first Gulf War, one of their first targets was the Ba‘ath Party headquarters there. ‘‘It has only been recently that we have been targeting party apparatus,’’ one intelligence official said. ‘‘If we underestimated anything, it was Saddam’s ability to project the perception that he is still in charge,’’ the intelligence official said. ‘‘We haven’t seen a massive uprising, and we think that is because most of the people are still convinced he is alive.’’ American intelligence officials said Wednesday that they were still uncertain about Saddam’s fate and had not yet heard Saddam or either of his two sons issuing orders since the initial raid on his bunker. U.S. intelligence is convinced that he was in the bunker at the time of the raid, but they say they have not yet obtained intelligence about whether he survived. The United States has also not been able to identify by name any other members of Saddam’s inner circle who are trying to coordinate Iraqi military forces in the field. The ability of the Iraqi leadership to communicate with the forces has been damaged, but not completely destroyed, officials said. While the National Security Agency has intercepted some orders from Bagdhad to forces in the field, the United States is not yet certain who is in overall command of military forces. The questions about why no one has heard directly from Saddam since before the start of the war were fueled again Wednesday when the Iraqi government issued another statement in Saddam’s name. But U.S. intelligence officials said that was not proof that Saddam is dead. They cautioned that while Al Jazeera, the Qatar-based Arab news network, had said that Saddam was supposed to appear on television, it is not clear that Iraqi state television ever made that claim. The Iraqi leader has also been seen on Iraqi television since the war’s start, but the broadcasts have not shown clear evidence of when the taped messages were made. Nor have any of them referred to Saddam’s whereabouts or status. So far, American intelligence officials have received a number of conflicting reports about Saddam, but no definitive information. American analysts remain convinced that several people were killed and wounded in the raid, but they have not been able to assemble an authoritative list of casualties. Saddam’s absence is not a complete surprise. During the 1991 Gulf War, he dropped from sight, and it is possible that a leader who has long been preoccupied with his personal security could be reverting to a survival strategy that worked then. Some officials said that they have detected a continuing drop in the pattern of communications traffic from the Baghdad leadership to the country’s four regional military commands. Neverthess, they believe that some form of central control remains intact, even if Mr. Hussein has been wounded or is dead.
.
If he survived the attack, Mr. Hussein may have decided to isolate himself from his ruling circle, some analysts said, fearing that some of his lieutenants may be considering defecting as coalition forces thurst closer to the Iraqi capital.
.
David E. Sanger and James Risen The New York Times Thursday, April 3, 2003
WASHINGTON The Bush administration has embarked on a campaign — using radio broadcasts and other communications with Iraqi military leaders — to sow doubts about whether Saddam Hussein is still alive and in control of the country, senior administration and military officials said. American officials say they have still reached no conclusions about whether Saddam survived an attack two weeks ago. But they are trying to turn that uncertainty to battlefield advantage, attempting to raise questions in the minds of Iraqi military commanders defending Baghdad about whether they should stand and fight for a leader who may have been killed or incapacitated. ‘‘From what our intelligence is picking up, some of the Iraqi commanders themselves have not heard from him,’’ said one senior official. ‘‘And we don’t know ourselves. So you could call this psychological warfare, or you could call it exploitation of the biggest mystery out there.’’ The administration’s effort to raise doubts about Saddam comes after American military officials have reported that the majority of the Iraqi people encountered by American forces believe that Saddam is still alive, although there is no hard evidence either way. President George W. Bush himself has discussed the issue in at least one meeting this week and is ‘‘deeply intrigued’’ about Saddam’s fate, according to a participant. ‘‘The consensus was that the mystery about Saddam is growing, and that could be useful to us as we head into Baghdad,’’ said one participant in the meeting. If Saddam is alive, officials said, the administration’s decision to publicly question why he has not appeared in public may help flush him out — and perhaps give clues to his whereabouts. In briefings here in Washington, officials ranging from the White House spokesman, Ari Fleischer, to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld have repeatedly noted that Saddam has not appeared in public since before the start of the war two weeks ago. They have questioned whether tapes of Saddam, shown on Iraqi television, were prerecorded. Now those briefings, translated into Arabic, are being broadcast through Commando Solo, airborne radio broadcasts beamed into Iraq by American forces on a number of different frequencies. The same doubts are being raised in private cell phone and e-mail traffic. One senior administration official said Wednesday night that ‘‘a big morale blow’’ to the Iraqi troops has been the rumor that Saddam’s family is flee ing, and that Saddam himself, if alive, may not be far behind. Some captured Iraqi POWs have told American forces that such rumors are spreading fast — and the Untied States is doing everything it can to encourage them. Other American officials, however, have expressed concern that until recent days many ordinary Iraqis have had little reason to question whether Saddam re mains in power. Until a few days ago, the regional Ba‘ath Party offices remained largely untouched. Both the Fedayeen Saddam and the Special Security Organization have conducted a reign of terror against Iraqi civilians, leaving many convinced that his government is still intact, U.S. intelligence officials said. Now, the American bombing campaign is beginning to target the destruction of offices and other facilities used by the Ba‘ath Party in cities across the south. Local Ba‘ath Party headquarters buildings are often seen by the Iraqi public as the most important symbols of the regime, and the fact that they survived the first days of the war was a powerful sign of Saddam’s continued control. One official noted, for instance, that when local Shia Muslims rose up against the regime in Basra at the end of the first Gulf War, one of their first targets was the Ba‘ath Party headquarters there. ‘‘It has only been recently that we have been targeting party apparatus,’’ one intelligence official said. ‘‘If we underestimated anything, it was Saddam’s ability to project the perception that he is still in charge,’’ the intelligence official said. ‘‘We haven’t seen a massive uprising, and we think that is because most of the people are still convinced he is alive.’’ American intelligence officials said Wednesday that they were still uncertain about Saddam’s fate and had not yet heard Saddam or either of his two sons issuing orders since the initial raid on his bunker. U.S. intelligence is convinced that he was in the bunker at the time of the raid, but they say they have not yet obtained intelligence about whether he survived. The United States has also not been able to identify by name any other members of Saddam’s inner circle who are trying to coordinate Iraqi military forces in the field. The ability of the Iraqi leadership to communicate with the forces has been damaged, but not completely destroyed, officials said. While the National Security Agency has intercepted some orders from Bagdhad to forces in the field, the United States is not yet certain who is in overall command of military forces. The questions about why no one has heard directly from Saddam since before the start of the war were fueled again Wednesday when the Iraqi government issued another statement in Saddam’s name. But U.S. intelligence officials said that was not proof that Saddam is dead. They cautioned that while Al Jazeera, the Qatar-based Arab news network, had said that Saddam was supposed to appear on television, it is not clear that Iraqi state television ever made that claim. The Iraqi leader has also been seen on Iraqi television since the war’s start, but the broadcasts have not shown clear evidence of when the taped messages were made. Nor have any of them referred to Saddam’s whereabouts or status. So far, American intelligence officials have received a number of conflicting reports about Saddam, but no definitive information. American analysts remain convinced that several people were killed and wounded in the raid, but they have not been able to assemble an authoritative list of casualties. Saddam’s absence is not a complete surprise. During the 1991 Gulf War, he dropped from sight, and it is possible that a leader who has long been preoccupied with his personal security could be reverting to a survival strategy that worked then. Some officials said that they have detected a continuing drop in the pattern of communications traffic from the Baghdad leadership to the country’s four regional military commands. Neverthess, they believe that some form of central control remains intact, even if Mr. Hussein has been wounded or is dead.
.
If he survived the attack, Mr. Hussein may have decided to isolate himself from his ruling circle, some analysts said, fearing that some of his lieutenants may be considering defecting as coalition forces thurst closer to the Iraqi capital.
.
Baby Gorilla
New member
Nukes should fly any day now....
Let's see how much worse it can get....
Syria had a load of suicide bombers intercepted going into Iraq all with Syrian passports.
If Pakistan and India getting hot over Cashmire isn't bad enough, China's signed a defensive pact with Pakistan (no surprise as China hates India).
The wolves are lurking about Iraq waiting to see what happens when we try to take Baghdad. I US ground forces take heavy losses, will other nations jump on on Iraq's side?
King of Jordan is calling Iraqi civilians killed maryters.
All of this was predicted, but we decided to go in anyway. Going to stock up on sunblock
Let's see how much worse it can get....
Syria had a load of suicide bombers intercepted going into Iraq all with Syrian passports.
If Pakistan and India getting hot over Cashmire isn't bad enough, China's signed a defensive pact with Pakistan (no surprise as China hates India).
The wolves are lurking about Iraq waiting to see what happens when we try to take Baghdad. I US ground forces take heavy losses, will other nations jump on on Iraq's side?
King of Jordan is calling Iraqi civilians killed maryters.
All of this was predicted, but we decided to go in anyway. Going to stock up on sunblock
Similar threads
