U.S., Iraqi Forces Capture 50 Insurgents in Gunbattle

www.foxnews.com ^ | March 22, 2006 | AP

[Btrp113Cav]

U.S., Iraqi Forces Capture 50 Insurgents in Gunbattle

Wednesday, March 22, 2006

BAGHDAD, Iraq — U.S. and Iraqi forces responded to an insurgent attack on a police station Wednesday, fighting a two-hour gunbattle that ended with the capture and detention of 50 of the gunmen.

[Btrp113Cav]

said one or a couple of the suspects was from syria... when is assad going to get a MOAB dropped on his head?

[Jeff Chandler]

when is assad going to get a MOAB dropped on his head?

Now THAT would get his attention.

[Alas Babylon!]

While I don't mind us capturing some important insurgents in order to get intelligence from them, I can't see the need to capture so many, as opposed to just reporting them dead.

[DTogo]

Hoo-RAH!!

[Dont_Tread_On_Me_888]

I don't get it either. Why the tally isn't the dead versus "captured" stuns me. This is no way to win this thing. $400 billion dollars and we can't find a way to kill these thugs?

[Mcirrus]

I'm waiting to find the MSM report on this.

So far we have more Abu Ghraib stories, coyote caught in centeral park, gm paying workers to resign.

Nothing yet about the 50 terrorists detained by our servicemen and the Iraqi military.

Must mean none of our boys were killed. Good news for us, bad (unreportable) news to the MSM.

[Steve_Seattle]

I've come to dislike the word "capture" in these stories. We don't capture cockroaches, we eliminate them.

[stylin19a]

If you read the rest of the article, it will make you puke

[Supernatural]

"Catch and release".

[Steve_Seattle]

The other day, there was a letter-to-the-editor in my local paper claiming that 79% of the civilian casualties in Iraq - claimed by some anti-war group as about 95,000 - have been caused by US/Coalition forces. That figure strikes me as intuitively false; does anyone have any info on this?

[CygnusXI]

"U.S., Iraqi Forces Capture 50 Insurgents in Gunbattle"

Hmmm.. Never been to Gunbattle.. Hows the weather there?

[RexBeach]

Great news! Are they gonna shoot the bad guys?

[eeevil conservative]

let the "QUESTIONING" BEGIN!

[auto power]

well, well, well...someone alert Helen Thomas and the MSM.

[A Balrog of Morgoth]

claimed by some anti-war group as about 95,000 - have been caused by US/Coalition forces.

Information? Heck, I'd just dismiss that crap as the crap that it is.

[GeorgefromGeorgia]

This morning on the news coming to work, I heard that another police station had been attacked, and they made it sound like a repeat of the attack the previous day (another Civil War panic attack by the media). Then on Drudge, I saw that yes there was an attack, but we captured 50 of the attackers. Half the news is not right.

[Owen]

People, a huge development is quietly taking place that will redefine this debate in a matter of months, probably before the election.

US casualties are plummetting.

The March count is sharply lower than previous months. A month like this happened before in Feb 2004, but what is different now is there is a trend. US casualties have been sinking steadily since Oct 2005.

It is US casualties that matter. Not very much else. The Iraqis are taking over their own security and bleeding for themselves.

Bush is winning. The inevitable, inexorable reality is simply that. Bush is winning.

Here's a link for the numbers:

http://icasualties.org/oif/

[GeorgefromGeorgia]

You are right. What I hear from the Marines and Soldiers that come back from Iraq is that the people volunteer telling them please stay we want you to stay.

[RHINO369]

I understand in war you need to take prisoners, especially if these insurgents are in a uniform, and not attacking civilians, but I hope we aren't going out of our way to minimize insurgent deaths, because we should try to maximize them within the rules of war.