Skip to comments.
7 U.S. Soldiers killed in Iraq (April 4th)
fox news ^
| Now
| fox news
Posted on 04/04/2004 2:06:10 PM PDT by Gringo1
Edited on 04/22/2004 12:39:26 AM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
TOPICS: Breaking News; Foreign Affairs; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: baghdad; deaths; fallen; firefight; iraq; muslims; soldiers; ussoldiers
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 221-230 next last
To: JackRyanCIA
"Saddam had the same problem. He used gunships"
Bingo
To: Admin Moderator
That was my fault. I thought it was the same report that yonif posted earlier. The "Fog of War".
42
posted on
04/04/2004 2:49:40 PM PDT
by
steve86
To: Gringo1
Protestor deaths leave Iraq in chaos
BAGHDAD, Iraq, April 4 (UPI) -- A demonstration in the southern city of Najaf turned deadly as Salvadoran soldiers -- under Spanish command -- exchanged fire with supporters of radical cleric Moqtada al-Sadr in the city of Najaf. Reports from the scene indicate that at least 19 protesters and 4 coalition troops were killed.
The violent clash has left much of the Shiite sections of Iraq in near chaos.
This represents the most serious clashes between coalition forces and the Shiite population. Previous large scale fighting has usually occurred between coalition forces and Sunni population, from which more militant members and former Baath Party members had led a year long resistance to the U.S.-led presence.
But the Shiites -- which had suffered terrible oppression under Saddam's rule -- have been reluctant to resort to violence, preferring demonstrations and political maneuvering to confrontation.
If full scale fighting breaks out, which Sunday night it appeared as very possible -- between U.S. forces and the Shiite followers of Sadr, it would represent the largest setback for the U.S. occupation of Iraq so far, as Iraq's 60 percent Shiite population, which has rarely fought the coalition -- could be forced to choose sides. That would set the stage for a bloody civil war, or more widespread opposition to the U.S.-led presence from a population that has arguably benefited the most from the U.S. invasion.
Tensions increased earlier this week between the U.S. and the Shiites, as Sadr's followers have been protesting the suspension of his weekly newspaper, al-Hawza by the Coalition Provisional Authority. The recent arrest by coalition forces of a Sadr deputy, Mustafa al-Yacoubi, has further inflamed tensions. While Sadr is a very junior cleric and commands far less respect than other top religious leaders, his charismatic blend of Islamic fundamentalism and gadfly criticism of the CPA has built him a significant and dedicated following in parts of Iraq.
After the estimated 5,000 demonstrators traded gunfire with the troops in Najaf, crowds turned out in Baghdad, Kerbala, and Sadr's home village of Kufa to "declare war on the American occupation," said one supporter.
The vast Shiite slum of Sadr City -- named for Moqtada's cleric father who was killed by the Baath regime in 1999 -- went into near chaos Sunday afternoon after the news of the fighting in Najaf.
After a demonstration by hundred of people protesting Yacoubi's arrest demonstrated in a Baghdad square -- where sporadic gunfire was heard but casualties witnessed by UPI -- the members of Sadr's banned militia, the Mehdi Army, were seen arming themselves and preparing for combat outside Sadr's offices in Sadr City.
Trucks and minibuses with license tags from all over the predominantly Shiite south of Iraq were seen streaming in to Sadr City and unloading waves of young men in the black t-shirts of the Mehdi Army, which has previously never openly displayed weapons banned by the occupation forces.
In front of Sadr's headquarters, they were seen arming themselves with AK-47 assault rifles and rocket propelled grenade launchers and organizing in military formations before deploying throughout the neighborhood in cars and pickup trucks.
The men were also seen forming roadblocks to prevent entry into the neighborhood, which has upwards of 3 million people living in one of the most densely populated urban settings east of the Gaza Strip.
As night fell, U.S. military vehicles, tanks and troops could be seen setting up roadblocks around the neighborhood themselves and reports of widespread fighting in the area have been reported by sources in the neighborhood.
One resident told UPI by phone that Sadr's militia had seized all five of Sadr City's police stations are were declaring their own form of martial law. There are also reports that U.S. infantry backed by helicopters and tanks have entered the neighborhood to reclaim the police facilities from the militia.
These developments come even as all of Iraq has been waiting for the U.S. response to the horrific attack and mutilation of four government security contractors in Fallujah, a Sunni city 35 miles west of Baghdad.
Fallujah has been the scene of repeated attacks against American troops and is widely thought to be a stronghold of anti-U.S. forces in Iraq. U.S. coalition and military officials had vowed a major response to the killings of the four -- who were burned and hung from a local bridge. At the same time, protesters had been striking in central Baghdad all week in response to the closure of the Hawza newspaper, but each day had seen only peaceful protests until Sunday. Whereas the U.S. military still has most of Fallujah cordoned off and that city of 500,00 continues to await a response.
http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20040404-125026-9116r
43
posted on
04/04/2004 2:49:50 PM PDT
by
Rams82
To: Alberta's Child
If we stick to time-tables and don't effect a solid government before we leave, this will all have been for nought. The government will topple and the worst demon seed will take it's place. And yes that demon seed will work with Al Qaeda and the Taliban.
To: BJClinton
If the Iraqi populace' ability to disrupt governance is not brought under control, the new Iraqi leadership hasn't a chance of being successful. When that new government is toppled, those that replace it will most certainly work with terrorists hell bent on destroying the United States and it's interests.
I know that you want the Iraqi populace to be able to defend themselves from the likes of the next Hussein. So do I. But you'll have to acknowledge that these same guns and explosives in the hands of the populace a year and one half ago, did not protect them one iota.
The best hope for the Iraqi people is a stable viable government. That will NEVER happen with the old members of the Republican Guard armed to the teeth.
To: DoughtyOne
"Folks, peace is impossible without it. Hasn't that become clear enough? City by city, sector by sector, foot by foot, the Iraqi land must be freed of arms and explosives. In the interum, isn't there a way to use satellite technology to study who planted explosive devices, and where they escaped to? " With all due respect, I dont think you understand the ease of hiding guns, the difficulty of destroying millions of ponds of ordinance, or the limitations of satellite imaging.
46
posted on
04/04/2004 2:59:52 PM PDT
by
elfman2
To: Owen
Why cant we just make gasoline out of water? :-)
To: DoughtyOne
I tend to agree. But disarming all, or even most, Iraqis would lead to a blood-bath I doubt Americans could stomach. I think Bush is on the right track, we need to get a majority of Iraqis behind their new government and then leave. Without "the Great Satan" to rally his people around, this young fire-brand (Sadr) will have much less clout. Besides, I'm pretty sure he's an Iranian ally and as they fall so shall he.
48
posted on
04/04/2004 3:00:25 PM PDT
by
BJClinton
(France has elevated their threat level from "run" to "hide".)
To: squidly
"... things may be heating up in a way that we did not foresee..." If our leaders did not forsee the local Islamic clerics, Iran, Syria or Saudi Arabia sicking their filthy noses and hands into the stew of Iraq - to insure that a democracy was NOT implemented - then our leaders did not have a "plan"...
If our plan does not include destroying large numbers of avowed enemies that "engage" us - then we will earn no respect (fear of power) and we will fail... That is not a plan...
If our "plan" was to win the "hearts and minds" of the meek Iraqis and they in turn will overcome the objections of the lunatic Islamists in Iraq -- that is not a plan.. that is someone smoking funny cigarretes...
Semper Fi
49
posted on
04/04/2004 3:01:14 PM PDT
by
river rat
(You may turn the other cheek -- but I prefer to look into my enemy's vacant dead eyes.)
Comment #50 Removed by Moderator
To: DoughtyOne
If we stick to time-tables and don't effect a solid government before we leave, this will all have been for nought. 1. Yes, we are going to stick to time-tables.
2. And yes, this was all for nought.
51
posted on
04/04/2004 3:02:52 PM PDT
by
Alberta's Child
(Alberta -- the TRUE north strong and free.)
To: mr.pink
Outstanding post.
If I had my druthers, every one of those bastards would be driving Humvees around Fallujah for 12 hours a day until the last U.S. soldier returns home.
52
posted on
04/04/2004 3:04:26 PM PDT
by
Alberta's Child
(Alberta -- the TRUE north strong and free.)
To: BJClinton
In MIDDLE EAST IT'S EYE FOR AN EYE,
US needs to get with the program or leave .
53
posted on
04/04/2004 3:05:06 PM PDT
by
KQQL
(@)
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Lugar is calling for more troops.
the U.N
To: elfman2
There are three choices, as I see it.
Neutralize the ability of the populace to kill our troops.
Allow the populace to kill our troops.
Bring our troops home.
I'm not trying to fault Bush here. This is simply reality.
What do you think will happen to any government we set up, the very moment we leave Iraq, unless we almost completely destroy the ability of the old Republican Guard members to intervene?
To: KQQL
US needs to get with the program or leave .
I believe we are with the program. Didn't we, with the coalition, kill about 20 of Sadr's guys yesterday? Who knows how many today.
56
posted on
04/04/2004 3:06:49 PM PDT
by
BJClinton
(France has elevated their threat level from "run" to "hide".)
To: mr.pink; Alberta's Child
I think it's about time some of the arrogant neocons at the DOD OSP who architected this war, hard sold this war under knowingly false pretenses, and confidently assured the American people that the Iraqi people would cheer us as liberators....start resigning or perhaps even hanging themselves.Gather your wits. You're going wobbly. This is a war, still.
57
posted on
04/04/2004 3:09:23 PM PDT
by
Glenn
(The two keys to character: 1) Learn how to keep a secret. 2) ...)
To: Alberta's Child
Well for your sake and the sake of the future of the United States, I hope you are wrong. If the United States does not install a viable government in Iraq, then the war on terrorism is lost. There will be no eradication of terrorists. There will be no peace in the middle-east or outside of it. And that means your local neighborhood will become a terrorist zone, with restaurants, theaters, grocery stores and the like experincing the same bombings that Israel has experienced for decades.
This is for keeps.
To: BJClinton
"... would lead to a blood-bath I doubt Americans could stomach...." Will Americans more easily stomach a blood bath that involves only Americans?
President Bush initiated a preemptive war to prevent large numbers of Americas being killed...
I have yet to see large number of Arab lunatics killed...
How does THAT work?
Americans stomachs held together when we slaughtered entire cities of Germans and Japanese...
I suspect that most Americans would do as well at the sight of large numbers of lunatic Islamic militants being whacked...
Those with weak stomachs, will simply have to curl into the fetal position - while others do their fighting for them -- AGAIN!
Semper Fi
59
posted on
04/04/2004 3:10:36 PM PDT
by
river rat
(You may turn the other cheek -- but I prefer to look into my enemy's vacant dead eyes.)
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach; marron
The Iranians are making their play thru their agents! Yep. this Sadr guy is now on the payroll, since the majority shiite leaders dumped Iran. Jihadi minions risk their lives for the crook. why Iran doing this now? Playing cards over atomic inspections? Sadr/Iran Qaeda/Saudi now to coordinate the so-called "insurgency?"
60
posted on
04/04/2004 3:11:34 PM PDT
by
Shermy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 221-230 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson