US downplays Iraqi rebel attack on US-Iraqi base (3 US troops die) but

[rodeodance]

heard on cnn a bit ago it was 4.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20051201/wl_afp/iraq;_ylt=AvTlmqyWjxyYc_DtSrW0saSs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3b2NibDltBHNlYwM3MTY-


US downplays Iraqi rebel attack on US-Iraqi base

Thu Dec 1, 1:52 PM ET

BAGHDAD (AFP) - Rebels attacked a US-Iraqi base in the restive western city of Ramadi, hours after the US president outlined his strategy for winning the war in Iraq but refused to set a timeline for withdrawal.

The attack also came as Washington demanded the immediate release of American hostage Thomas Fox, abducted with three other Westerners over the weekend, reiterating that it does not negotiate with kidnappers..........

Meanwhile, the US military reported that three more troops had died in Iraq on Wednesday, bringing to more than 2,100 the number of service personnel who have died in Iraq since the March 2003 invasion.........

[endarkenment]

1. 2100 Mr. Bush. What Noble Cause?

Blood on your hands. Explain yourself or resign.

Also noted:
"Washington demanded the immediate release of American hostage Thomas Fox ... reiterating that it does not negotiate with kidnappers".

How can you demand anything of someone with whom you will not negotiate? What foolish arrogance is that? What sort of criminal incompetents have seized power in our republic?

2100 Mr. Bush.

[long_green]

2. "reiterating that it (US gov.) does not negotiate...

with kidnappers."

like hell we don't. How else did Reagan get elected in 1980?

[Chicago Democrat]

3. They ATTACKED one of our 'bases'?!!!

Holy crap...

[pokercat999]

4. One word...Vietnam

[louis c]

9. Actually, Viet Nam is two words

but who's counting?

[VegasWolf]

11. Us old hippies like the original spelling Vietnam. It will be burnt into

our brains forever! Vietnam is how we lived it, how our brothers died it, and that's how we remember it.

[louis c]

12. OK

I actually looked it up on "google" and it can be spelled either way.

And I'm one of those old hippies.

[MasonJar]

5. If Bush were a true leader, he'd offer to take Fox's place.

[Up2Late]

6. US downplays Iraqi rebel attack on US-Iraqi base (AFP)

(I think this is the "New Stratagy," denigh that anything bad is happening in Iraq, and act like it's the finally time to pull out the troups, just in time for the 2006 Elections.)

US downplays Iraqi rebel attack on US-Iraqi base

01/12/2005 18h50

BAGHDAD (AFP) - Rebels attacked a US-Iraqi base in the restive western city of Ramadi, hours after the US president outlined his strategy for winning the war in Iraq but refused to set a timeline for withdrawal. The attack also came as Washington demanded the immediate release of American hostage Thomas Fox, abducted with three other Westerners over the weekend, reiterating that it does not negotiate with kidnappers.

Residents of Ramadi said that rebels fired mortars and rockets at the base and then roamed briefly through the streets, posting al-Qaeda leaflets. Al-Qaeda issued an unverifiable Internet statement saying its fighters "were able to control a big part of the city of Ramadi after launching a new blessed conquest."

US military officials in Baghdad dismissed such reports as "spurious," maintaining that there was little more than a single rocket attack on a checkpoint at 9:30 am local time. "So the idea that there is this massive uprising in insurgents in Ramadi to have retaken control of the town is incorrect," said coalition forces spokesman Major General Rick Lynch.

According to Lynch, Ramadi is becoming more secure due to a set of joint US-Iraqi operations against the insurgents, the latest called Operation Tigers, "designed to ensure that the people of Ramadi can participate in the democratic process," he told reporters. The main Sunni political coalition, however, said that it would be easier for people to vote in these towns if the US forces pulled out during the election.

<http://www.afp.com/english/news/stories/051201185052.ok8nfnwe.html>

(more at link above)

[EFerrari]

7. Wait -- isn't that the old strategy?

I want our people HOME NOW. NOW.

:nuke:

[Joe for Clark]

8. Load of shit comes to mind.

I know one thing - these same "rebels" couldn't fire a mortar straight for their lives 14 months ago - but they sure blew up that tent in Mosul, didn't they??

They used to take pot shots on the run, now they seem to be pretty damn accurate.

This is not our fight. It is the Iraqis fight. Please tell me how it is that it takes two and a half years to train a half million man standing army in 2005?? Took less than that to land an invasion force in Normandy.

All BS.

Where is the beef B*sh???

This is not our fight, and it shouldn't be our fight.

Joe

[hatrack]

14. They're not stupid, and they're learning quickly

The first big battle in Vietnam was Ia Drang, in November of 1965, about three months after the first large numbers of US troops went in.

In four days, the US lost about 155 KIA and 121 WIA, and the NVA forces they faced lost 634 KIA (according to the body count) and an estimated 1215 wounded.

http://www.lzxray.com/documents/aar-xray.pdf

The NVA were willing to take high casualties for a number of reasons, among them the need to learn how to fight the Americans. They were willing to pay the price in lives they did because they had to know how our forces operated in combat.

Similarly, the insurgents in Iraq - Baathists, terrorists, guerillas, whatever they are - are willing to take high casualties to learn how we fight and how best to counter our tactics.

They're not stupid, and they're learning quickly.

[bpilgrim]

10. sticking to the script

peace

[DoYouEverWonder]

13. The attack that went down yesterday is major bad news

for the US military. The opposition launched an organized major offensive. We have not seen this level of organization before. Also, they directly attacked a US base. This is another major step up for the insurgency. Bush & Rummie think they can reduce casualties by retreating back to our bases and letting the Iraqis fend for themselves. Well sorry, the war just came back to them.