Iraqi security forces financed by US money refuse to fight Iraqi fighters. LOL… Now what… any new spin?.. We already know the gals asking for ceasefire and negotiations… what!!! ceasefire and negotiaotions with terrorist, I don’t believe this!! shocking! absolutely shocking… But wait, that is nothing out of the ordinary! It has happened several times in the past. http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A2680-2004Apr10?language=printer
BAGHDAD, April 10 – A battalion of the new Iraqi army refused to go to Fallujah earlier this week to support U.S. Marines battling for control of the city, senior U.S. Army officers here said, disclosing an incident that is casting new doubt on U.S. plans to transfer security matters to Iraqi forces.
It was the first time U.S. commanders had sought to involve the postwar Iraqi army in major combat operations, and the battalion’s refusal came as large parts of Iraqi security forces have stopped carrying out their duties.
The 620-man 2nd Battalion of the Iraqi Armed Forces refused to fight Monday after members of the unit were shot at in a Shiite Muslim neighborhood in Baghdad while en route to Fallujah, a Sunni Muslim stronghold, said U.S. Army Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton, the official overseeing the development of Iraqi security forces. The convoy then turned around and returned to the battalion’s home on a former Republican Guard base in Taji, a town north of the capital.
The refusal of the battalion to perform as U.S. officials had hoped poses a significant problem. The cornerstone of the United States’ strategy in Iraq is to draw down its military presence and turn over security functions to Iraqis.
A battalion of the new Iraqi army refused to go to Fallujah earlier this week to support U.S. Marines battling for control of the city, senior U.S. Army officers here said, disclosing an incident that is casting new doubt on U.S. plans to transfer security matters to Iraqi forces.
One by one, all of America's attempts to create stooges is failing.
The Iraqi police abandoning their stations, and joining the resistance.
The IGC members resigning and blasting the US military.
Now the US-appointed Iraqi army rebelling!
No wonder the yanks are begging for a ceasefire, ceasefire!!
Over the past two weeks, that approach has suffered a severe setback as Iraqi security forces have crumbled in some parts of the country. In recent days perhaps 20 percent to 25 percent of the Iraqi army, civil defense, police and other security forces have quit, changed sides, or otherwise failed to perform their duties, the rest refuse to fight :k:
Some news.....they got more trouble than they asked for....and that after the arrest and fall of Saddam, the killing of his two kids....it's really the uprising of the people.
So, are you saying america should have withdrawn after the fall of saddam without providing any alternate government to the iraqs? If that had been done, you all would be the ones whinning the loudest.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by confettiguy: *
Some news.....they got more trouble than they asked for....and that after the arrest and fall of Saddam, the killing of his two kids....it's really the uprising of the people.
[/QUOTE]
No less than 220 US/"Coalition" soldiers have been killed since Saddam was captured nearly four months ago, when the American's predicted that the resistance would finish. Instead it has vastly increased, and now all their predictions and excuses are wearing rather thin.
I wonder what their excuse or spin is about the mass desertions in the US-trained Iraqi army?
No less than 220 US/"Coalition" soldiers have been killed since Saddam was captured nearly four months ago, when the American's predicted that the resistance would finish. Instead it has vastly increased, and now all their predictions and excuses are wearing rather thin.
I wonder what their excuse or spin is about the mass desertions in the US-trained Iraqi army?
[/QUOTE]
Excuse me it's actually no less than 228 US/"Coalition" soldiers have been killed since Saddam was captured nearly four months ago, when the American's predicted that the resistance would finish.
The number of occupation terrorists being killed is going up every hour. :)
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Imdad Ali: *
So, are you saying america should have withdrawn after the fall of saddam without providing any alternate government to the iraqs? If that had been done, you all would be the ones whinning the loudest.
[/QUOTE]
One shouldn't be naive enough to presume that the Coalation has sympathies with the Iraqi populace - the 'alternate government's' function is NOT to be a voice for the Iraqi people - it's going to be a proxy-regime and we all know why they are so interested in having long term hold over Iraq and the middle east region in general.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by confettiguy: *
One shouldn't be naive enough to presume that the Coalation has sympathies with the Iraqi populace - the 'alternate government's' function is NOT to be a voice for the Iraqi people - it's going to be a proxy-regime and we all know why they are so interested in having long term hold over Iraq and the middle east region in general.
[/QUOTE]
So who has sympathy with the iraqi people? Certianly not Saddam, or the muslims of the world who were sitting around with bangles on their hands while saddam killed of the kurds, marsh arabs and shias. Without any govnt authority after sadddam, iraq would be worse off.
Excuse me it's actually no less than 228 US/"Coalition" soldiers have been killed since Saddam was captured nearly four months ago, when the American's predicted that the resistance would finish.
The number of occupation terrorists being killed is going up every hour. :)
[/QUOTE]
Three more foreign terrorists killed in the last few hours, so it's actually no less than 236 US/"Coalition" soldiers have been killed since Saddam was captured nearly four months ago, when the American's predicted that the resistance would finish. :)
No wonder the American’s are begging for a ceasefire, when no one will fight with them, anf their own soldiers are being massacred in the dozens.