Iraq war still going

[Chemical Ollie]

According to BBC, Swedish news and others, an average of one American soldier per day has been KIA in Iraq over the last six weeks. The last two days, a US counter-offensive to an Iraqi resistance attack, plus major mop-up operations in "Saddam-land" by US troops, has left about 100 Iraqi resistors dead. The war is still going on for sure.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2986810.stm

Where are the embedded reporters? I want to know more about it!

[Dinner]

CNN has some good stuff on it. Something like 100 Ba'athists have been shot. They have guts (or did anyway) but to bad they don't fight any better then the Iraqi army. On a more serious note CNN's live broadcast has been reporting many Saudi Arabian extremists are going to Iraq and joining up with the Ba'athists to fight.

All the more reason to dump more napel on the lot of them.

[Dr Kellogg]

Re: Iraq war still going

Originally posted by Olaf Hårfagre
Where are the embedded reporters? I want to know more about it!

Where are they in Afghanistan? The war against the Taliban is also still going on..

[Whaleboy]

Saddan loyalists is a term that is rapidly looking at being applied to the majority of the nation. I've said it before, and I'll say it again, Iraq will be a monumental c0ck-up for the US, it's already making the Bay of Pigs look like Bush falling off a motorised kiddie-scooter.

[DinoDoc]

How are things going in the British portion of the country anyway?

[Dinner]

Mostly it's Karzai fighting it out against warlords. The Taliban are now a distant third place in the power game behind the warlords and Karzai. Though I have heard that both the Warlords and the Taliban have been opporating out of Iran & Pakistan and then raiding across the border.

[GePap]

This is not combat

This is policing, with tanks!

And obviouslu it is all Saddam's fault! He is cleary running things! The tyranny of Saddam continues!
Only when we Liberate Iraq will violence end1

[Giancarlo]

An update:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=3&u=/ap/20030613/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_fighting

"The battles marked day four of a U.S. sweep to hunt down supporters of Saddam Hussein (news - web sites)'s fallen regime. About 100 anti-American fighters have been killed in the sweep, the biggest U.S. military operation since Saddam's regime fell. "

"Most of the opposition casualties happened Thursday, when U.S. aircraft and ground forces launched a coordinated attack on what U.S. authorities called a terrorist training camp northeast of Baghdad, killing 70 fighters. One American soldier was wounded. "

Pretty interesting stuff...

[Chemical Ollie]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
How are things going in the British portion of the country anyway?

The Brits are doing pretty well. This has mainly 2 reasons:

1st, the Brits are mainly in the south, where people really hated Saddam in the first place. This is the main reason for their success.

2nd, the Brits have experience from Northern Ireland, where they couldn't just hose their rifles blindly like the Yanks do. When the going gets rough, they know when to shoot and when not to shoot. While the Yanks shoot anyone on site just to make sure, the Brits are better at picking the right targets.

These two factors combined helps the Brits getting along better with the civilians. Correct me if I'm wrong.

[Dr Kellogg]

@Olaf Hårfagre
I absolutely agree.

3rd Although beeing the former Colonial Power of Iraq, the Brits have a much better Reputation than the Americans

[Cruddy]

Originally posted by Olaf Hårfagre


The Brits are doing pretty well. This has mainly 2 reasons:

1st, the Brits are mainly in the south, where people really hated Saddam in the first place. This is the main reason for their success.

True. Also the area is bordered by Iran, not high on Saddam's list of friends - so it's not easy to stage hit and run raids (nowhere to run to).

Originally posted by Olaf Hårfagre
2nd, the Brits have experience from Northern Ireland, where they couldn't just hose their rifles blindly like the Yanks do.

Actually a lot of the NI experience was done with non-auto weapons (the SLR, self loading rifle).

Bear in mind the current standard rifle - the SA80 - in an unreliable piece of garbage nicknamed "the civil servant" by the troops. ("It doesn't work and you can't fire it").

Originally posted by Olaf Hårfagre
When the going gets rough, they know when to shoot and when not to shoot. While the Yanks shoot anyone on site just to make sure, the Brits are better at picking the right targets.

In the sense we don't call an airstrike when feeling nervous, I suppose you are right - but the US Army has been training for this sort of operation for years so I wouldn't put them down too much.

Originally posted by Olaf Hårfagre
These two factors combined helps the Brits getting along better with the civilians. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Another factor is that it's a lot easier to get food into the south at present. Starving people tend to be more desperate.

[Giancarlo]

It looks pretty cool..

http://world.guns.ru/assault/as22-e.htm

[Chemical Ollie]

Perfect for kneecapping at long distances...

[Imran Siddiqui]

nicknamed "the civil servant" by the troops. ("It doesn't work and you can't fire it").

[Lonestar]

Originally posted by Cruddy




Bear in mind the current standard rifle - the SA80 - in an unreliable piece of garbage nicknamed "the civil servant" by the troops. ("It doesn't work and you can't fire it").