View Poll Results: Will the war be

Voters
10. You may not vote on this poll
  • long and drawn out

    1 10.00%
  • quick and soon over

    6 60.00%
  • not sure.

    3 30.00%
Page 33 of 68 FirstFirst ... 23313233343543 ... LastLast
Results 481 to 495 of 1020

Thread: ALL IRAQ topics here.

  1. #481
    Christopher M,

    I think you got your wish. I think this might very well be my last post on this thread. Been nice to know you and others regardless of our opinions. "Old soldier never dies, they just fade away..."

    Even the Iraqis can't deny who has the upper hand
    By John Keegan, Defence Editor
    (Filed: 05/04/2003)


    The contrast between what official Iraqi announcements tell the population and the reality of war as related by Western situation reports grows ever greater.

    Yesterday the Iraqi information minister, Mohammed Saeed al Sahhaf, was busy not only denying that Baghdad airport had fallen to the Americans but claiming that the Americans had suffered a serious defeat trying to capture it.

    "We surrounded their forces with our Special Republican Guard and we are finishing them off," he said. "These cowards have no morals. They have no shame about lying."

    That despite photographic and film evidence that the airport had been largely abandoned by the Iraqis and that the Americans had seized sizeable footholds inside. Sahhaf seems to have fallen into the mode of denying everything as his means of coping with bad news.

    There is now very little of public Iraq that remains outside the hands of the invaders. The oilfields have been secured, before large scale fires could be started. Umm Qasr, the country's only deepwater port, was captured intact. So were all the major bridges over the Tigris and Euphrates.

    The airport has now gone, threatening the regime with the prospect of the American forces flying reinforcements and supplies direct to the front line. True, the coalition has not yet risked sending major units into either Basra or Baghdad; but it hovers on the outskirts.

    Does Iraq have the capability to repel attack on the cities? Sahhaf warned that it would resort to "unconventional warfare" to hold Baghdad. By that he apparently meant "martyrdom".

    The distinction between the tactics of martyrdom and the costly engagements in which the Iraqis have engaged so far, when they have fought, may be difficult to establish. If, however, Sahhaf is predicting that Iraqis will become suicide bombers, he does so with precious little evidence that they will.

    Three US soldiers and two civilians were killed on Thursday in the second apparent suicide bombing in a week, but there is no history of suicide tactics among Iraqis. They are not noted for religious fanaticism.

    On the other hand, the city environment does confer advantages on determined defenders not available outside. In the open countryside ambush places readily reveal themselves and the energy from explosive charges disperses readily. In the city there are ambush points everywhere and walls and buildings confine and funnel detonations.

    The key question is whether what are now the remnants of the Iraqi military structure retain enough effective fighters to maximise the military advantages that the city environment offers.

    In Basra the British have not pressed into the centre, but there have been good reasons for that. The high command has not wished to offer the Iraqis a public relations success in the event of an all-out offensive failing or incurring heavy casualties.

    That is an unlikely outcome. The defenders of Basra seem to be for the most part Ba'athist militiamen, not trained soldiers. Formations of the regular army at Basra have melted away and there were never any Republican Guard in the south.

    Despite the Republican Guard's heavy losses under air attack and in the ground fighting outside Baghdad, it must still retain some strength near and inside the capital. There will also be Ba'ath militiamen.

    Can such people be expected to be a match for the American attackers if a battle for the city begins? They will certainly be able to inflict casualties and perhaps to delay the American advance.

    A match they are not.

    Whenever it is decided that the drive to take Baghdad will begin, it will soon succeed.

  2. #482
    Originally posted by PaulH
    Christopher M,

    I think you got your wish.

  3. #483
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Upstate NY
    Posts
    1,647

    Smile

    Hi all.
    I'm curious: has it occurred to anyone that this may in fact evolve into a good thing, **if the Iraqis choose to let it be so**? [it isn't now- but that can change]

    Follow this:
    this is the first time in US history that we're going into an Arab land and intending to stay for a time. Guaranteed that is a much-needed opportunity to present the Arab POV as a balance to the overwhelming Israeli POV that we're fed all the time. Guaranteed that some soldiers will convert to Islam, develop a taste & appreciation for that culture- and be vocal proponents here at home. This factor may prevent the future wars we speculate on...

    DS- it's been said alot already, but I *believe* that the numbers of civilian dead speak volumes for the *accuracy* of our munitions- 15 days of war and ONLY 800+/- ?? Who in the WORLD can match that, with all the bombs dropped? I know that in my city, that would be in thousands by now- not hundreds. I wish war could be made antiseptic... & this is the closest so far... lets hope it gets better if it must happen again.

    ALSO- never thanked you for sharing the Red Cross/Humanitarian info! Thanks!
    Last edited by ZIM; 04-05-2003 at 07:50 PM.
    -Thos. Zinn

    "Children, never fuss or fret
    Nor let unreason'd tempers rise
    Your little hands were never meant
    To pluck out one anothers eyes"
    -McGuffey's Reader

    “We are at a crossroads. One path leads to despair and the other to total extinction. I pray I have the wisdom to choose wisely.”


    ستّة أيّام يا كلب

  4. #484
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Manchester, Britain.
    Posts
    251

    Ooops...Yanks killed any more Brits recently?

    I have been away and not followed the war, has there been any more repeats of the friendly fire - depleted uranium bombs dropped on our lads recently??

    Out of interest was anything reported like this in the US press about this incident and the ones back in the Gulf War of 91.

  5. #485
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    3,959

    Unhappy

    think a bomber just blew up a convoy of kurds and special forces... check yahoo news. know one of our reporters was injured by shrapnel and stuff.

    dawood
    Peace is not the product of terror or fear.
    Peace is not the silence of cemeteries.
    Peace is not the silent result of violent repression.
    Peace is the generous, tranquil contribution of all to the good of all.
    Peace is dynamism. Peace is generosity.
    It is right and it is duty.

  6. #486
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Worthington, OH, USA
    Posts
    1,808
    Yeah, the US press has reported most all our friendly fire incidents(as far as I know). We almost got some Russians recently too(wounded, no kills this time ), though no one's 100% sure it was us this time.

  7. #487

    Iraqi civilian Body count today:

    Min:
    877

    Max:
    1050


    busy weekend...

  8. #488
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Warrenville Il
    Posts
    1,912
    As I mentioned before, consider the source where those numbers are coming from. I am not buying it as a solid source of reporting. Even if so, it is a testament to how humane this military effort is.

    gtho- I am sure that will be skipped right over.
    Regards

  9. #489

    ZIM:

    Guaranteed that is a much-needed opportunity to present the Arab POV as a balance to the overwhelming Israeli POV that we're fed all the time.
    Not sure what you mean by this... Are you implying that the US's occupation of Iraq will some how balance out the Israeli occupation of Palistine?

    or are you saying the US will turn Iraq into a power on par with Israel and thus creat a balance of power in the middle east?

    Please elaborate:

    I understand the US just purchased some Israeli made armored bulldozers for urban combat. I've also been hearing alot on how much "support" Israel recieves from the US as it is.

    I don't imagine the US with set up Iraq to function as a check for Israel. Besides the set up of backing up 2 appariently opposing factions would be another breeding ground for Blowback of the nature of our pal Osama...

    Have any of you heard about the Israeli "retaining wall." From what I've found out it'll make the berlin wall pale... cutting off all access to water, roads etc... dreadful. but I'm totally rambling now & so I'll wait for further clarification...

    As for civilian body count:
    <sarcastic>Hurray the US can accurately bomb a market or a hospital...</sarcastic> If they're so accurate (which I have my doubts about) why are these places being hit in the first place?
    Yeah I'm certain if China where invading things would be messier. But does that makethe fact that the US is doing so "just?"
    If accuracy & mercy were such a priority then why introduce cluster bombs into the field of combat when their reputation is so....er, messy
    Am I being too idealistic in thinking the US should demonstraite their military superiority with restraint? You know, like a martial artist fight a punk with one hand?


    ahhhh... life in the movies....

  10. #490
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Warrenville Il
    Posts
    1,912
    Yes you are being to idealistic.

    I would not fight a punk one handed, I would use my Cyclops style chi blast to rupture his soul, then tie him to my family jewels and use my secret asian iron sack training to drag him to the world of Morrowwind and transport his essence into a petty soul gem from where I would make a hearty amount of gold in Vivec.
    Regards

  11. #491
    yes... that sounds very much like the adventures of BlackJack...

  12. #492
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Upstate NY
    Posts
    1,647

    Smile DS

    "Not sure what you mean by this... Are you implying that the US's occupation of Iraq will some how balance out the Israeli occupation of Palistine?

    or are you saying the US will turn Iraq into a power on par with Israel and thus creat a balance of power in the middle east?"
    ------------------------------------
    Neither actually. I'm saying that Israel tends to have US sympathies and funding, and the Arab POV is woefully absent. Maybe I overstated my optimism, but I tend to think that exposure is good- and I'm confident that the Iraqis are good ppl, in general, like most.

    WRT civilian body counts- nobody wants to see civilians killed and there is no possible way to make anything foolproof- and you know that... WRT cluster bombs- I don't know. Do you know why SH decided to hide out amongst his own ppl, rather than to meet the US out in the desert, thereby avoiding ANY civilian casualties? Maybe nobody cares that much... thats the sad part.
    -Thos. Zinn

    "Children, never fuss or fret
    Nor let unreason'd tempers rise
    Your little hands were never meant
    To pluck out one anothers eyes"
    -McGuffey's Reader

    “We are at a crossroads. One path leads to despair and the other to total extinction. I pray I have the wisdom to choose wisely.”


    ستّة أيّام يا كلب

  13. #493

    ZIM

    Do you know why SH decided to hide out amongst his own ppl, rather than to meet the US out in the desert, thereby avoiding ANY civilian casualties? Maybe nobody cares that much... thats the sad part.
    no really...

    but let me use a comicbook to er... illustrait my point.

    Villians:
    All a villian has to do to establish their villianny is to do something mean. Steal a kids lollypop or in the case of SH use civilians as human shileds etc.

    Heroes:
    For a hero to define themselves it's a trickier affair. It's not just about stopping the villian, it's also about demonstrating moral superiority.

    now weither this whole conflict is cornered on the US's Moral superiority is debatable. However, the US/UK is certainly tring hard to establish such an appearance. With that in mind, then don't you think it falls to the US/UK to demonstrait said moral superiority?
    Yeah bringing bottle water is a nice step, but well... the hypocracy becomes apparant in light of the use of ClusterBombs as well as Depleted Uranium

    But I'm digressing. It seems ludicrus to think SH would meet us out in the field to protect his civilians when:[list=a][*]The US/UK is the agressing/invading force[*]The Iraqi army is obviously outclassed[*]It's established that Saddam is "evil"[/list=a]

    but you know all that yeah?

  14. #494
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    2,614
    Some say that the Iraq war is NOT about oil.
    But than I guess nobody knows what is driving Shrub really.

    Below is an article from todays newpaper, that shows an interesting scenario of what Postwar Iraq might be able to do to OPEC.

    Postwar Iraq may kill OPEC

    Privatized oil industry may ramp up global output

    Vienna (AFP-Jiji) A postwar Iraq could kill off the Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) if it were to leave the Cartel in a bid to produce as much oil as it can outside its quota system, analysts warn.
    " If the Iraqi oil industry is privatized, forget about OPEC, it is dead" said LEo Drollas of London's center for Global Energy Studies (CGES).
    He said postware Iraq was likely to demand to be allowed to export the same amount of oil as neighbouring iraq, like it did before it was kicked out of the cartel in 1990 for invading Kuwait.
    Iran currently produces 3.59 million barrels per day.
    "Iraq will want to produce as much as it can as quickly as it can to finance its reconstruction costs. Iraq will say: "We want at least parity with Iran," Drollas said.
    He added that OPEC would resist, as this would mean scaling down its other 10 member's quotas, and at this point "Iraq will have to strike a decision wether to stay or to leave".

    Neil Patrick, a researcher for The Economist weekly, sait it was "very unlikely in the short term" that Iraq, a founding member would break away from OPEC.
    "Iraq's production will not exceed 3 million barrels per day for a couple of years" giving the dilapitated state of its infrastructure, he said.
    "But on the longer term there is a potential for disputes with OPEC on output.
    "When Iraq has enhanced its production capacities, it might want to compete with Saudi Arabia (the world's biggest oil exporter). The question will be what quota constraints will be imposed by OPEC and IRaq might than choose to opt out."
    "Iraq might well become a Trojan horse for the United States," he said hinting that Washington could encourage the oil makret to be flooded to help achieve its foreign policy objectives.
    Hawks in the U.S. administration believe that certain OPEC member countries use their oil revenues to finance terrorism.
    If Iraq were to rapidly increase its oil production it could flood the world market and push the price of oil below $18 a barrel, while it hovered around $30 a barrel before the start of the war.
    The hawks are counting on such a drop in oil price to stimulate growth in the United States and the rest of the West and to devastate the economis of Iran & Libiya, two OPEC members considered rogue states by Washington, and to create conditions that will help topple their regimes.

    Mehdi Varzi, from the British bank Dresdner-Kleinwort-Wasserstein, said however that Iraq was unlikely to leave the OPEC fold.
    He argued that OPEC should review its quotas as "some countries want a bigger market share. Algeria, which produces way over its quots and Nigeria for instance. Sauid Arabia will have to step back."

    An PEC source , who did not want o be named, said the Vienna based cartel was heading for a quota rethink.
    "The ministers are aware that OPEC needs a new ststem of quotas. Our experts will met in June in Vienna and make certain recommendations to the next ministerial meeting in September. The new system should reflect the reality of the market."
    OPEC produces about 35% of the world emand for oil and is loosing market share to non-members, particularly Russia.
    The source said OPEC "might consider lowering the price band" which currently stands at between $22 and $28 a barrel, to right down to $18 and $20 a barrel.

    A mechanism adopted in March 2000 allows the cartel to bring its production below half a million barrels per day if the price of crude were to stay below the $22 barrier for 10 consecutive days.
    Similarly it could push up production if the price were higher than $28 per barrel for 28 days.

    As it embarks on these reforms, OPEC wil "try to convicne Iraq to continue with us. We have no illusions about the problems OPEC will have to face if Iraq leaves the organization," the source said.
    Form your own opinions about the scenario and any relevance it might have to the current war.

    Cheers.
    Witty signature under construction.

  15. #495
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Upstate NY
    Posts
    1,647

    Talking DS

    That was kinda funny.

    I mean, you're still voicing it as a black/white situation when you and I both know its not. What a hoot. Or at least it better be- if you're expecting me to defend weaponry use, you got another think coming.

    Hey, did you know that the sand in Iraq is too powdery for sandbags? The US had to import sand to the desert! HAHAHA
    -Thos. Zinn

    "Children, never fuss or fret
    Nor let unreason'd tempers rise
    Your little hands were never meant
    To pluck out one anothers eyes"
    -McGuffey's Reader

    “We are at a crossroads. One path leads to despair and the other to total extinction. I pray I have the wisdom to choose wisely.”


    ستّة أيّام يا كلب

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •