10,000 troops kill 22 insurgents

Bush made a decision. At least he hasn't waffled or changed position over the war years. I think he had terrorism in mind fully when starting the war. He also wanted to finish what his father started by basically killing Saddam. Now he is in a political mess. For the same reason Bush Senior did not take over Iraq in 1991, Bush Jr. should have seen it, and done the same. 911 took the US by surprise. We over reacted some might say. I say that Islamic nations and the US were bound to butt heads at some point, regardless.

 

:lol:

 

Dont worry, it's in the beginning stage. Wont be long before the numbers are way up.

3528 is the present number of U.S. deaths, how many iraq's?, do the math .

 

:lol:

 

I don't tell lies - i just disagree with you and your version of the truth sometimes.
How many times i've asked you to point out a ''lie'' and all you do is say your same old cliches ''Blur /Distract'' etc. Then fuck off for a few days and then come back with some other bullshit. Well to be fair not always - but you just have a prejudice that colours your point imho.



I don't think you are ''joking'' in this thread - just useing this story in the wrong way.

So what if only 22 insurgents where killed in ONE day - this is a ongoing mission - you can appreciate it is a mission it seems..
Lets take a view of the success or failure of this mission in a few weeks time.
I don't think the ''body count'' bares a huge relevance if ''at the end of the day'' the overall ''mission'' has created stability and a sense of peace in the area.

If that mission fails then sure i'll be with you in wondering what the fuck they are doing and why it has not garnered more success.
Just to point out 22 [out of date figure now] insurgents have been killed in ONE day and wonder why that draws in a little contempt from people - IS you not thinking this through.

Are all these troops running around with guns looking for insurgents - Are some supporting field troops - are some awaiting rotaion ?. What are they all doing ?
Do these little details matter to you ? i doubt it.

If you want a large proportion of insurgents to be killed in one day - why not email strategic command and tell them: Please flier the area and tell the innocent locals to fuck off - then drop a large proportiion of napalm on the area.

That should bump up the body count for you.

Well a little kudos for you in admitting you have a ulterior motive for starting this thread.

 

.
:lol:

 

Are you suggesting everything you have ever posted here has been factualy accurate and not sometimes based on your opinion ?.

I was being sarcastic - I must have got your premise wrong then - I presumed you wanted more insurgents dead with the amount of people on the ground.
It seemed you were questioning why there were so few dead.

''I'm suggesting that we're beating our heads against the wall, if it takes 10,000 troops to kill or capture 22 insurgents somethings Goddam wrong....''

That is why I said IF -

Maybe that was not your initial intent but that seems to be your point -
''The point is....''.

It is not fair when your words get manipulated is it - you get mis-represented - your true intent is ignored. Welcome to my club.
[To be fair] I was not intentionaly doing that - this is how I was reading / interpreting your post in all honesty.



So no - I doubt you do want loads of people dead - I do not think or wish to make you into some kind of blood thirsty terrorist [again aint misrepresentation a bitch] .
You posted something about the inefectualness of this mission based on the body count and are now upset cuz people have seemingly mis-represented your thoughts - aint life a bitch.

 

Baqouba, the capital of volatile and extremely dangerous Diyala province, is less than an hour's drive northeast of Baghdad. U.S. and Iraqi forces are fighting to take back the province — part of a series of offensives targeting militants in districts flanking the capital.

Brig. Gen. Mick Bednarek, assistant commander for operations with the 25th Infantry Division, estimated several hundred al-Qaida fighters remain in the western half of the city.

"They're clearly in hiding, no question about it. But they're a hardline group of fighters who have no intention of leaving, and they want to kill as many coalition and Iraqi security forces as they possibly can," he said in an interview with The Associated Press and another news agency.

"It's 24-7 for us here, and it's probably the same for our adversary as well," he said. "It's house-to-house, block to block, street to street, sewer to sewer — and it's also cars, vans — we're searching every one of them."

U.S. commanders have acknowledged, however, that al-Qaida's sophisticated intelligence gathering meant top militant leaders knew the attack, which began Monday, was imminent.
More than three-quarters of the senior al-Qaida leaders holed up escaped as American soldiers launched an offensive earlier this week, Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno, the U.S. ground forces commander said on Thursday during a one day trip to the battlefield.

"We believe 80 percent of the upper level (al-Qaida) leaders fled, but we'll find them," Odierno said after meeting with battalion commanders in a bombed-out hospital in downtown Baqouba. "Eighty percent of the lower level leaders are still here."

Two more units moved in to flank the north and east to block the militants' escape. But by then, Odierno said, many were already gone.

"It's like jelly in a sandwich — it squirts when you squeeze it," Parke said. "We're fooling ourselves if we think we can hold them in."

Four days into the offensive, about 15 percent of western Baqouba has been cleared, and a vehicle ban is in place, Parke said. The entire operation was expected to last 30 to 60 days, he added.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070622/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_offensive

 

American attack helicopters fired on al-Qaida militants trying to slip past an Iraqi checkpoint on Friday, killing 17 of them in the fourth day of an offensive to oust the fighters entrenched in this city an hour's drive north of Baghdad.



More than three-quarters of the city's al-Qaida leadership fled before the Americans moved in to Baqouba this week, U.S. officials said Friday, but not before drone planes spotted fighters planting dozens of roadside bombs on the main highway into the city, capital of volatile and extremely dangerous Diyala province.

Brig. Gen. Mick Bednarek, assistant commander for operations with the 25th Infantry Division, estimated that several hundred low-level al-Qaida fighters remain.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070622/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq

 

My big question would be who actually are the Al-quaida, I am beginning to think it's a made up boogeyman, that justifies any action. The US invaded Iraq, the Al-quaida were not present at the time, who allowed them to infiltrate the area and escalate the violence? And why was it allowed to happen when some of the most powerful nations of the world controlled the area? Why wasn't one the priorities of our invasion security of the borders to prevent just this sort of escalation? Perhaps because it works towards the current agenda?

 

Yes that is right they are a CIA front black flag secret op - go check out the CIA thread I just posted.

No they were no where near the area - they were holidaying in Ibiza for quite some time with their CIA handlers.
Ofcourse it was the USA who allow the violence to escelate to ''blur /Destract'' so the US and big business can get all the oil.

OIL

Ofcourse.

If you want a less sarcastic response then feel free to ask - but this line of reasoning is getting a little old imho.

 

Was that sarcastic, I thought it was accurate.

 

hahahahaha hence me posting it I thought you might.
You were not really wanting to be illuminated just validated .

 

:lol:

 

:lol:

 

No you plonker 10,000 were not attacking 22 insurgents that is how many [ON DAY ONE] were killed - to be a bit more accurate the figure rose in later reporting even on that day - a fact you fail to mention in every post.
The figure has risen again over the course of a few days of the mission - another fact you will fail to include in any further posts you make.

I stayed away from that thread because you are merely repeating yourself to a certain degree - like you seemed to have done here.

If the ''senior militant commanders'' had fled BEFORE the troops had even come close to starting the mission - then obviously surrounding the area [a pretty much impossible job in the first place] would not contain the ''senior militant commanders'' in the area - they would be gone anyway.
Did you not think of that ?.

If you notice I have added much of what you posted in that thread here - plus a little bit of what has been occuring since the start of the mission.
I even highlighted the point about 80% [a little bit more than 3/4s ] have fled already - leaving a few hundred low level insurgents to be flushed out [hopefuly].

Sure - what it has to do with me can only be explained by you - so feel free to explain what you are talking about - is it supposed to be provocation ?.
Do you want some posts from people in this thread in your other - so you can call us all liars and say we are blurring and distracting - well I think we have a democracy here.
I know I for one am voting to not bother to respond to your other thread.
I've responded to both your points now - so there is no need.

 

:lol:

 

Someone sure likes to get defensive.


What a pointless thread.

 

:lol:

 

There's only one other person in this thread that isn't a wacko liberal.... so.... don't know from where you get "buddies"


This is pointless because you simply stated a single news clip... and when anybody tries to correct you, you flip out like a spoiled brat. When someone agrees with you, you suck their dick. Its really quite pointless as you don't know how to debate or take responsibility for anything you type.