Warplanes attack Basra column

BBC ^ | 3/26/2003 18:24 GMT | Clive Myrie

[piasa]

He doesn't know, of course.

And we weren't targetting anything in that area according to the Pentagon spokeswoman so we don't know what hit it yet, either.

Funny how no reporter has asked what sort of targets the Iraqis were trying to hit with their scuds in Kuwait City. Can those reporters spell "civilian?"

Or for that matter, in Israel during GW Part One. Israel was neutral and Iraq sure wasn't even aiming at military targets!

[Theophilus]

Does this make you feel more American?

No, it makes him feel more laissez fair. You know, he cares in a Libertarian sort of way - like he couldn't give a crap about his fellow man just so long as he (the virtuous and noble Iraqi civilian) trembles in his boots when a terrorist tries to strike us again instead of dancing in the streets.

[azhenfud]

Tape released of the Iraqi RG Commander's latest radio transmission here.

http://users.1st.net/pjs/tobekild.wav

[Lee'sGhost]

Wart Hogs. And to think, a few years back they were talking about putting 'em in moth balls.

[bvw]

I'd love to hear from the folks in the field if they'd prefer Apaches or A-10's giving them cover.

[Darksheare]

They were also talking about replacing them with F-16's under the thinking that "The A-10 is built to take hits while the F-16 is built to avoid them*"

*Said with eyes crossed, hat cockeyed and General Shinseki-like idiotic sneer.

[Gasshog]

Helen Thomas on her broom,

[Coop]

The attack (911) on the Pentagon was an act of war rather than terrorism (as was Pearl Harbor.)

The Hell it was. Tell that to the 60 people, including very young children, on board the airliner. Do not in any way put the Pentagon attack on the same level as Pearl Harbor.

[Destro]

I don't buy that propoganda. This is genuine (if misguided and fool hardy) resistance to an "invader" (how they see us). If they are able to and motivated ebough to launch counter attacks against overwhelming "coalition" forces then we mis-judged the Iraqi "regime's" situation.

[js1138]

Fake-pacifist kraut alert...

Yoy ARE an a$$hole. Nothing is more unAmerican than laughing at innocent civilian casulties. It is one thing to admit that it is inevitable, or speculate it might have been done by Saddam's goons -- it is quite another thing to put Americans, and this site on record as not caring.

[Paul Ross]

2. The Iraqis believe our forces around Basra are not very stout and are launching a coordinated assault at the same time as the columns coming down from Bagdhad to break the British encirclement and spread our air power thin. If this is the case, it could be Saddam's blowing his whole load on a coordinated counter- attack gamble.

Bingo. None of the timing of these events is likely coincidental. It is a go-for-broke strategy. Which raises a red flag. The real threat is that they may be attempting to get close enough to coalition forces to use their chemical weapons before they are annhilated by A-10s.

[Gasshog]

Ultimate Double-Ugly weapon!

This will have have them on their knees begging for mercy!Allah help US!!

^___^

[legman]

And 14 civilians dead, IF it was our bomb, is no big deal. We have more dead soldiers than that, so I couldn't care less.

Some Iraqis must also pay the ultimate cost of freedom. Freedom is never free.

[piasa]

Or

4. The coalition left a deliberate weak spot in their "encirclement" of the city, so as to avoid cornering the enemy in the city among the very civilians we are trying to aid. Cornering a wild animal guarantees a fight on the spot. In this case, the battlefield was not one we consider desirable, so we opened a door for them to exit. Once they arrive at the place of our choosing, they will be assisted in exiting the world permanently.

[Treebeard]

What's your problem anyway? Personally, I'd like to see about a million Iraqis (soldiers or civilians, makes no diff. to me) as shadow silhouettes against the ruins of Baghdad like the aftermath of Hiroshima. Kill them all. Little scorpions grow up to be big scorpions.

[GoldMan]

I'd guess one of the following:

1. The Iraqi units in Basra are in dire straights--boxed in and taking sniper casualties from the Shi'ites in the city and are attempting a breakout because they realize they are dead no matter what they do and they may as well go out guns blazing. I favor this option.

2. The Iraqis believe our forces around Basra are not very stout and are launching a coordinated assault at the same time as the columns coming down from Bagdhad to break the British encirclement and spread our air power thin. If this is the case, it could be Saddam's blowing his whole load on a coordinated counter-attack gamble.

3. The intel is faulty and they're actually moving north to retreat out of Basra.

Other options?

They are driving in reverse in an attempt to fool
satellite photos.

[piasa]

And those not wearing uniforms so as to pass themselves off as civilians are terrorists, not soldiers.

[bert]

....The intel is faulty and they're actually moving north to retreat out of Basra.....

Good point. I'm wondering why they would retreat south onto a penninsula where they could be cut off.

[Treebeard]

Well, when I post, I'm not speaking for the site, but you can put me "on record" as not caring re. civilian casualties in Iraq.

[Quix]

GET THAT COLUMN OF IRAQI FORCES!!! OBLITERATE THE EQUIPMENT FOR SURE!!!

What an opportunity!