14 Italians killed in Iraq

[mikkey 0]

From the BBC web site:

Quote

Fourteen Italians are reported to have been killed in a bomb attack on their base in the southern Iraqi city of Nasiriya.
Eleven of the dead are said to be paramilitary police officers, while the other three were soldiers.

Local hospital officials quoted by Reuters news agency say eight Iraqis have also been killed.

Very depressing. So Mr. Bush could you please repeat the "bring it on" and "everything is going well" stuff.
I hope that even the right wing club starts understanding that the whole strategy, from intelligence to post war planning has been a total disaster. Unfortunately I do not think the current US administration is capable of turning this around. They are too stuck in their over simplified ideology and "good guys vs. bad guys" thinking. They went in with no understanding what a hornets nest Iraq is. The French told them by the way, but no - they had to be vilified for it....
This is getting really ugly....

---------------------------------------------------------
When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

[mikkey 0]

Relating to the escalating body count have a read of this and get even more depressed:

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/11/11/sprj.irq.cia/index.html

Quote

CIA: Iraq security to get worse
Bremer meets with White House advisers to discuss situation

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A recent CIA assessment of Iraq warns the security situation will worsen across the country, not just in Baghdad but in the north and south as well, a senior administration source told CNN Tuesday.

The report is a much more dire and ominous assessment of the situation than has previously been forwarded through official channels, this source said. It was sent to Washington Monday by the CIA station chief in Iraq.

It was not immediately clear if the assessment was what prompted the hastily arranged trip to Washington by Iraq civilian administrator L. Paul Bremer, who met Tuesday at the White House with President Bush and senior national security officials.

The report was discussed during the high-level meetings, sources said.

The senior administration source, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said Bremer agreed with the CIA assessment and added his personal comments to the station chief's memo.

In his Veterans Day speech Tuesday, Bush referred to "recent reporting" of cooperation between Saddam loyalists and terrorist elements from outside Iraq.

"Saddam loyalists and foreign terrorists may have different long-term goals, but they share a near-term strategy: to terrorize Iraqis and to intimidate America and our allies," Bush told the conservative Heritage Foundation.

"In the last few months, the adversary has changed its composition and method, and our coalition is adapting accordingly."

Another senior administration official said those points in the speech were based on a U.S. intelligence report about the security situation.

A third U.S. official said the intelligence report was from the CIA and that it highlights what the official conceded are several "major ongoing security issues."

That official refused to characterize the report in further detail. But the senior administration source who did discuss the report said it essentially says things are "gonna get worse" across Iraq.

The source said the memo notes that:

• More Iraqis are "flooding to the ranks of the guerrillas." Many of these Iraqis are Sunnis who had previously been "on the sidelines" but now believe they can "inflict bodily harm" on the Americans.

• Ammunition is "readily available," making it much easier to mount attacks.

The assessment also notes that organization and coordination are getting "tighter" among foreign insurgents -- extremists including but not limited to al Qaeda and Hezbollah -- and those "displaced people" who lost power. (Full story)

On a related matter, this source said Bremer sent out his own separate two-page memo Monday in which he provided alternatives to the current seven-step U.S. plan for the transition of power from the Coalition Provisional Authority to the Iraqi people.

U.S. officials in Washington and military commanders in Iraq have voiced concern about the recent increase of attacks against coalition and other targets in Iraq. Bush has urged his national security team to accelerate the training and deployment of Iraqi security forces.

A large explosion Wednesday apparently shattered the Italian police headquarters in the southern Iraqi city of Nasiriyah. Initial reports indicated that six people were killed. (Full story)

Thirty-eight U.S. troops have died this month, bringing the number of U.S. troops killed in the Iraq war to 398. Since President Bush declared an end to major combat May 1, 259 U.S. servicemen and women have been killed.

There is no reliable source for Iraqi civilian or combatant casualty figures, either during the period of major combat or after May 1.

The Associated Press reported an estimated 3,240 civilian Iraqi deaths between March 20 and April 20, but the AP said that the figure was based on records of only half of Iraq's hospitals, and the actual number was thought to be significantly higher.

So how many more killed before Bush gets it and changes policies? I.e. really get the UN involved and get Iraqis in charge (even if it cost some his campaign contributors a few contracts.....)

---------------------------------------------------------
When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

[b1jercat 0]

Dubya too busy collecting campane funds to worry about Iraq. Also there's plenty more targets on the way, particulary from states he didn't win.

blues

jerry

[SkydiverRick 0]

The death toll among US soldiers in Iraq has been significantly lower than the original estimates.

never pull low......unless you are

[jraf 0]

Remeber that statistically the Death Toll is about 25% of all casualties.

Besides, am I supposed to be happy? This war

a) Should not have happened
b) According to the government it is over
c) In reality is rapidly escalating
d) Has nothing to do with the so called "War on Terror"

BTW when was the last terrorist attack in the US? I ask war on what?

jraf

Me Jungleman! Me have large Babalui.
Muff #3275

[SkydiverRick 0]

Quote

Remeber that statistically the Death Toll is about 25% of all casualties.

What does this tie in to what I said?

Besides, am I supposed to be happy? This war

a) Should not have happened

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

The death toll among US soldiers in Iraq has been significantly lower than the original estimates.

That must be comforting to the relatives of the dead.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[SkydiverRick 0]

Quote

Quote

The death toll among US soldiers in Iraq has been significantly lower than the original estimates.

That must be comforting to the relatives of the dead.

Probably more comforting to the ones who aren't dead.

never pull low......unless you are

[rehmwa 2]

Does Mikkey think that the Italians were killed by the American forces?

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[SkydiverRick 0]

Quote

Does Mikkey think that the Italians were killed by the American forces?

He'll find a way to make it Bush's fault. He always forgets that the Austrailians are there too. I think that he secretly wishes that he was an American.

never pull low......unless you are

[jraf 0]

Conflict escalation does not require an immediate increase in troop numbers. It does however ingage larger numbers in combat operations - I definitely see an escalation there, and the growing number of casualties shows it.

You are very naive if you think that the terrorists are busy fighting us in Iraq, so they don't strike American soil. I wish the world was ruled by such simple rules.

In Iraq US troops are not fighting terrorist. They are ingaged in urban guerilla warfare with elements of Iraqui resistance. Don't you think that we would be informed with lightning speed if some outside "terrorist" were apprehended in Iraq?

jraf

Me Jungleman! Me have large Babalui.
Muff #3275

[kiltboy 0]

Quote

You are very naive if you think that the terrorists are busy fighting us in Iraq, so they don't strike American soil. I wish the world was ruled by such simple rules.

I'll agree with you here. THe terrorists of 9/11 made a massive impact and that is what terrorists like. I would presume that they are planning another event in the US to terrorise the american people. Events in Iraq do not have the same effect.

David

[Skyrad 0]

It make a change if they wern't!

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[billvon 3,120]

>I agree, too bad there are people in the world that force us to take
> such drastic measures

We were not forced to invade Iraq. It was a decision made of people's own free will. We will reap the benefits or pay the price eventually, and they will be our own doing.

>Not true. They have repeatedly told us that it would be a long, hard road.

New York Times, May 3, 2003:

The Bush administration is planning to withdraw most United States combat forces from Iraq over the next several months and wants to shrink the American military presence to less than two divisions by the fall, senior allied officials said today.
--snip--

If the administration plan is carried out, the effect would be to reduce the number of American troops in Iraq from over 130,000 soldiers and marines at present to 30,000 troops or fewer by the fall.

>We haven't sent any more troops.

We're sure asking for more now.

International Herald Tribune
8/25/03

WASHINGTON Senior senators of both parties on Sunday urged the Bush administration to send thousands more American troops to Iraq and said that many billions more dollars were needed to stabilize and rebuild that country and Afghanistan.
------------------------------------------------
U.S. commander in Iraq calls for more international troops
Associated Press report
9/04/03

DRESDEN, Germany - The leaders of Germany and France criticized a U.S. draft resolution seeking international troops and money for Iraq, saying it falls short by not granting responsibility to Iraqis or a large enough role to the United Nations.

>Why are terrorists flocking to Iraq to fight us?

Because it's a place where terrorists can easily kill US military personnel.

>Exactly. They are too busy fighting over there.

Ah, the flypaper theory - the idea that our troops are sacrificial targets to keep the terrorists happy killing the expendable kind of americans. I don't share that view of the purpose of our troops myself.

Do you really think that there are only, say, twelve terrorists in the world, and as long as they're all in Iraq we're safe here? Terrorism breeds terrorism; today there are thousands of former Iraqis learning how to be terrorists to oust what they percieve as invaders. They have been learning their lessons well. Think they'll avoid the US when the war is over? Or you think they'll join Al Qaeda to continue the fight?

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

They went in with no understanding what a hornets nest Iraq is. The French told them by the way, but no - they had to be vilified for it....
This is getting really ugly....

There is always a resistance in an occupied country. The French undoubtedly remember this from the 1940s. The Germans too, will remember from the opposite perspective.

Yugoslavian resistance fighters caused a three week delay in Barbarossa in 1941 that was a decisive event in the European war. No doubt the Russians remember this.

And the French, Germans and Russians all warned Bush and Blair.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[mikkey 0]

Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Reply To
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Does Mikkey think that the Italians were killed by the American forces?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


He'll find a way to make it Bush's fault. He always forgets that the Austrailians are there too. I think that he secretly wishes that he was an American.

If that is the best you guys can come up with.... what a load of rubbish.
Firstly the Italians are dead and you should show some more respect. They are dead because of bad strategy and politics and yes I am blaming the US administration. Acting on bad intelligence, with no understanding of the real conditions, no post-war strategy and too much focus on "commercial issues" and in the process pissing a lot of allies off.
And I am very concerned about the safety of the Australian troops and more and more people here are talking about getting them home before they are killed. And BTW what in any post does indicate that I forget they are there?
And why would I wish secretly to be an American? Unfortunately I and most people around the world are affected by US policies and that is why we are concerned. I have a lot of American friends and I always been a strong supporter of the US - and as mentioned we are very much affected by the actions of the US - but I am finding that one of the strategies of the right wing seems to be to "piss of your real friends".
The attitude of people like you is contributing to the growing ant-american sentiment around the world.

BTW - the death toll from this attack has risen to 18 Italians and 10 Iraqis. Also AFAIK 2 more US soldiers have been killed in the past 12 hours. My thoughts are with their friends and family. I hope that people in the US will start to "wake up" and force a change in policies. Not only for the sake of the US soldiers and Iraqis killed everyday, but also for the sake of the allied troops in Iraq and the sake of maintaining the important alliances between the US and its friends. But reading your post I am sure you have no idea what I am talking about.

---------------------------------------------------------
When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

[mikkey 0]

Quote

There is always a resistance in an occupied country. The French undoubtedly remember this from the 1940s. The Germans too, will remember from the opposite perspective.

Yugoslavian resistance fighters caused a three week delay in Barbarossa in 1941 that was a decisive event in the European war. No doubt the Russians remember this.

I do not think you can compare the occupation of Europe by the Germans (and what they were doing in these countries) and the resistance with the situation in Iraq. My late Father who fought against the Germans in the resistance would be greatly upset if he had read a statement like this.
I know that you are talking about the principle of local resistance being difficult to combat for occupying forces, but it reads "wrong" to draw any parallels between WW2 and Iraq.

---------------------------------------------------------
When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

[billvon 3,120]

>BTW - the death toll from this attack has risen to 18 Italians and 10
> Iraqis. Also AFAIK 2 more US soldiers have been killed in the past
> 12 hours. My thoughts are with their friends and family. I hope that
> people in the US will start to "wake up" and force a change in policies.

While I agree the war was poorly planned - after people "wake up" how would they solve the problem? The situation we're in now is that we are occupying a hostile country, one that terrorists from the surrounding area are pouring into to fight us. What are our options now? I can see a few:

-Increase our presence there and try to impose order. Some serious problems with that.

-Try to get the Iraqi government running as quickly as possible and get out. I think this is close to what we're trying to do.

-Leave now. Result is that warlords take over and we have Afghanistan circa 2000 in under a year, and Al Qaeda has a new home.

-Try to get the UN to take over control of Iraq, then get out. Little to no chance of that now, given the death toll and how much we've pissed off the member nations by going around them.

So what's the solution?

[jraf 0]

Let's sell Iraq to the North Koreans. In about six weeks there will be a shortage of sand, camels and oil there.

jraf

Me Jungleman! Me have large Babalui.
Muff #3275

[mikkey 0]

Quote

So what's the solution?

Quote

-Try to get the Iraqi government running as quickly as possible and get out. I think this is close to what we're trying to do.

Correct. However you need to give real control to the people the Iraqis want - not the VP's buddies who will ensure contracts to certain US companies.

Quote

-Try to get the UN to take over control of Iraq, then get out. Little to no chance of that now, given the death toll and how much we've pissed off the member nations by going around them.

Not easy - but the only way! The UN has shown in Bosnia in East Timor etc. that they are much better at "Nation building" and civilian administration then the US. However the "payment" is:

1) You need to eat humble pie in order to get the "we told you so - now clean up your own mess" countries to participate.
2) UN run involvement will still mean that the US military has to provide the majority of "power" for quite some time and has to accept being under UN command.
3) UN role means that the US will have to stop giving all the contracts to US companies. In order to get other countries in e.g. Europe involved you will have to give some commercial incentives too.

Even with all this it won't be easy. Much of the damage has been done. The earlier the policy is changed the better. More heavy handed US response (e.g. bombing Tikrit) will only have the opposite effect.

---------------------------------------------------------
When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

[billvon 3,120]

>However you need to give real control to the people the Iraqis want -
> not the VP's buddies who will ensure contracts to certain US
> companies.

I think you have to be careful there, though. Power corrupts, and the power in Iraq has to reside in a consitution that people respect before people's rights will truly be protected. But they won't respect one that we create, so we have to walk the line between creating one for them and just letting them do whatever they want (which will result in the most powerful warlord running things.)

>Not easy - but the only way! The UN has shown in Bosnia in East
> Timor etc. that they are much better at "Nation building" and civilian
> administration then the US.

Probably true, but I don't think that even admitting wrongdoing would be sufficient to sway the UN at this point. I mean, if you were France, would you trust the US to abide by UN decisions, even if they apologized profusely?

[usedtajump 1]

[***
The French told them by the way, but no - they had to be vilified for it....
This is getting really ugly....

[mikkey 0]

Quote

so we have to walk the line between creating one for them and just letting them do whatever they want (which will result in the most powerful warlord running things.)

Totally agree...

Quote

Probably true, but I don't think that even admitting wrongdoing would be sufficient to sway the UN at this point. I mean, if you were France, would you trust the US to abide by UN decisions, even if they apologized profusely?

Well, I do not think the relationships are that bad yet. The donor conference in Spain showed a lot of support. I read on European web sites that France and Germany do not want a new Vietnam/Afghanistan and are willing to help. However they want to be treated ncer by the US first. Those guys are not lilly white themselves anyway. Part of their resistance to the US was also selfish commercial issues. So if you bait them with the chance to make a buck in Iraq they will come to the party. Politicians are the same all over the world....

---------------------------------------------------------
When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

[skydyvr 0]

Quote

Try to get the Iraqi government running as quickly as possible and get out. I think this is close to what we're trying to do.

Ya know, even if we do this, there will be no peace in Iraq. Whatever govt we set up and support there will be nipped away at Gaza Strip style until the Baaths or Talibans or whatever takes over. The citizens there just don't understand "democracy" like we do and aren't likely to get it anytime soon.

And what a pisser.

. . =(_8^(1)

[SkydiverRick 0]

2) UN run involvement will still mean that the US military has to provide the majority of "power" for quite some time and has to accept being under UN command.