Fierce gun battles have been taking place between US forces and Iraqi militants in Fallujah.
An American AC-130 gunship fired multiple cannon rounds on two suspected rebel positions and arms depots in the northwest part of the city.
The fighting occurred in the Jolan neighbourhood, considered the stronghold of the insurgents in the Sunni Muslim bastion. The rest of the city was quiet.
Live television pictures showed two large fires some 150 metres apart.
The fighting came hours after a US deadline for insurgents in the city of 300,000 to hand over their weapons, and followed heavy fighting with insurgents in the same area that saw one US marine killed and at least nine wounded.
Marines have beseiged Fallujah since April 5.
Hundreds of people have been killed in the siege on the town, long a hotbed of insurgency against the US-led occupation of Iraq
new id, same style, wonder who this could be...hmmm
anyways, the situation in Iraq is a dodgy one, the place can not be allowed to go into turmoil, US and Un need to figure out how to help the country stand on its own feet, sort law and order situation and give Iraqis the means to elect a govt.
current state is nto good for anyone..but atthis time just letting them be would create post soviet afghanistan part 2
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Stu: *
is it being attacked by the invaders, or invaded by the attackers? Get your biased facts straight will you!
Any halfway intelligent civilians would've gotten a long way from there by now.
[/QUOTE]
As far as I know it was the Americans who attacked Iraq, not the other way round. Get your facts right and look beyond the USof A. There is a whole world out there.
Yes, we will hear about the collateral damage tomorrow by Rumsfeld, not innocent civilians, not women and children but collateral damage.
Where can the civilians get away to. Where are they safe from the American bullets in Iraq. care to explain?
Stu, although I do not agree with what is going on in Fallujah..but just a thought, it is very easy for you to say that "decent civilians" will have left. Where do you propose they go and How? Please explain.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Kaleem: *
Stu, although I do not agree with what is going on in Fallujah..but just a thought, it is very easy for you to say that "decent civilians" will have left. Where do you propose they go and How? Please explain.
[/QUOTE]
Dear Stu and Kaleem,
I've been thinking about that also. One would think that most civilians would have left the area.
I do think that the marines sinse surrounding the city should have made some type of announcement geared toward civilians indicating a single security checkpoint to exit the city and should have set up shelters for those civilians exiting the city. Doing this might salvage the bad press given toward the coalition. Makes more sense to me than the present way of announcing how careful the must be to avoid harming civilians.
Also if insurgency occurs in the designated civilian shelter area..gives indication that the insurgents are using their own civilian population as shields and would look very ugly for them.
This way one could assume that those remaining inside the city want to be involved in the battle. Though..is possible that the civilians choosing to exit might be targeted by the insurgents.
It is not the Iraqi fighters who are bombing the area from gunship helicopters, it is the occupiers who are doing it.
[/QUOTE]
Agree.
This wasn't the point I was making mawarid.
I do think that the marines sinse surrounding the city should have made some type of announcement geared toward civilians indicating a single security checkpoint to exit the city and should have set up shelters for those civilians exiting the city.......
Though..is possible that the civilians choosing to exit might be targeted by the insurgents.
The civilians were allowed to leave a while back.. BUT since we wouldn't allow men of fighting age to leave quite a few families stayed with their fathers/husbands.. so no, the civilians didn't leave and it's silly to think that we could purify an urban battleground.
Another thing, on this condescension towards marines... Marines are fighters, they simply do what they're told. If you got beef with how things are being fought in Iraq you gotta take it up with the people above them.. generals and politicians.
The Americans are showing there true intentions in Iraq now. Al the BS about liberations and people being happy they are free, LOL
I don't see too many celebrating kids waving American flags in Fallujah or Najaf now.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by spoon: *
The civilians were allowed to leave a while back.. BUT since we wouldn't allow men of fighting age to leave quite a few families stayed with their fathers/husbands.. so no, the civilians didn't leave and it's silly to think that we could purify an urban battleground.
Another thing, on this condescension towards marines... Marines are fighters, they simply do what they're told. If you got beef with how things are being fought in Iraq you gotta take it up with the people above them.. generals and politicians.
[/QUOTE]
I don't mean to dis marines.
Were civilians encouraged to leave the area?
I have no pretex on being urban war planner.
I just had thought that if encouraged to leave and given provisions..
I'm not a guy or a soldier.
As a women thinking about being in such a situation..
I'm pretty sure I would make every effort to protect my loved ones.
Every effort possible to make sure my loved ones were away from the danger of explosives.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by spoon: *
The civilians were allowed to leave a while back.. BUT since we wouldn't allow men of fighting age to leave quite a few families stayed with their fathers/husbands.. so no, the civilians didn't leave and it's silly to think that we could purify an urban battleground.
Another thing, on this condescension towards marines... Marines are fighters, they simply do what they're told. If you got beef with how things are being fought in Iraq you gotta take it up with the people above them.. generals and politicians.
[/QUOTE]
Probobly is silly thinking to purify a battlefield. But I still think offering shelter to people in danger is good idea.
Darnit...if I was someones dad in that situation... I'd make darn sure my wife and kids were not anywhere nearby.
And reading your BUT...
if we wouldn't allow men of fighting age to leave... even if civilians..shame on us.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by AvgAmericanGirl: *
I don't mean to dis marines.
[/QUOTE]
No worries, that part was for someone else.
[QUOTE]
But I still think offering shelter to people in danger is good idea.
[/QUOTE]
It is a good idea, Article 15 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, in fact:
Art. 15. Any Party to the conflict may, either direct or through a neutral State or some humanitarian organization, propose to the adverse Party to establish, in the regions where fighting is taking place, neutralized zones intended to shelter from the effects of war the following persons, without distinction:
(a) wounded and sick combatants or non-combatants;
(b) civilian persons who take no part in hostilities, and who, while they reside in the zones, perform no work of a military character.
When the Parties concerned have agreed upon the geographical position, administration, food supply and supervision of the proposed neutralized zone, a written agreement shall be concluded and signed by the representatives of the Parties to the conflict. The agreement shall fix the beginning and the duration of the neutralization of the zone.
Problem is, these aren't uniformed Krauts we're fighting. It's guerrilla warfare. Because of that the military leadership is overly cautious. They are afraid of combatants infiltrating their ranks.. taking advantage of the civilian evacuation, or any possible civilian relocation. I can't say if that's wise or not.. but I will say that it's because of a bunch of unwise moves we've made that we even have to fight in Falluja right now.
Saddam is long gone, his Baath party is dismantled apart from those members who have been co-opted into the Iraqi security services, and the official Iraqi army was pushed aside over a year ago.
The 'liberation' of Iraq claims look pretty absurd right now. How is this going to end? When every male in the country has been exterminated? It's looking more like Palestine and Beirut of the 80's by the day.
you are more blood thristy than your masters....
[/QUOTE]
I am blood thirsty? Who targets innocent Iraqis in suicide bomb attacks? The US is fighting a war. The enemies will die. They should have thought about the consequences of fighting america before they took up guns. I know all the sideline cheerleaders will be whining that the US is attacking back, after trying to use only minimal force. These same cheerleaders were cheering the deaths of US forces. So tell me who is blood thirsty?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Imdad Ali: *
I am blood thirsty? Who targets innocent Iraqis in suicide bomb attacks? The US is fighting a war. The enemies will die. They should have thought about the consequences of fighting america before they took up guns. I know all the sideline cheerleaders will be whining that the US is attacking back, after trying to use only minimal force. These same cheerleaders were cheering the deaths of US forces. So tell me who is blood thirsty?
[/QUOTE]
It was America who attacked Iraq, not the other way round. It is the right of Iraqis to resist the illegal occupation of their country by America. As for cheering the death of American soldiers, no one invited them to Iraq, they came and attacked a soverign nation first under the excuse of WMD's and then changed it to war of liberation. The only thing they are now liberating is poor civilians of their lives. The blood thirsty are the marines.