WAR: Iraqi, U.S. Forces Take Insurgent Base, Kill 85

Iraqi and U.S. forces stormed a rebel insurgent base north of Baghdad, killing 85 militants in a two-hour battle. The attack killed the most insurgents in one battle since the U.S. Marines operation in Fallujah last November. Seven Iraqi commandos died in the fighting and six were injured. U.S. military officials say no American troops were lost.



This is excellent news. The Iraqi forces must be getting better to be able to participate meaningfully in such an attack, and that is necessary for the long-term withdrawal plans of the U.S. and other coalition members. Hopefully it is only a matter of time before the terrorist militants are totally defeated.

Related News Links:
www.foxnews.com

[edit on 3/23/2005 by djohnsto77]

It seems that it was not just Iraqi insurgents training at this site. Among the dead were other arabs. This was not just a place for Iraqi fighters, this was a base for jihadists who had come to Iraq with the sole purpose of fighting the Americans.

msnbc.msn.com
"Among the dead are Arab and foreign fighters, including Sudanese, Algerians and Moroccans, as well as other nationalities," Interior Ministry spokesman Sabah Kadhim told Reuters.

"An early assessment of the site indicates a facility for training anti-Iraqi forces," said Major Richard Goldenberg of the U.S. 42nd Infantry Division, using the U.S. military’s term for insurgents. "Documentation at the facility indicates that some members of the AIF were foreign fighters."

Taking this place out is a good thing, IMO. However the mere fact that it existed is a bad thing. Seems as if even though the US has gone into Iraq, it has not been very successful in preventing it from becoming a training ground for terrorists.

Anytime you have a kill ratio of 7:85 its a huge success.
0:85 concerning the US soldiers is simply staggering.

The greatest part i hear so far, is that there were no innocent people killed. However the Iraqi commandos killed should be honored and deserve our highest respects.

Carburetor

As some of us have been saying all along. This is not a war against Iraqi's.
Read the list of countries who were repesented by the dead militants. Iraq has become a battle ground against world terrorism. Some will probably say that they were freedom fighters that came to Iraqs aid.
The spin can get knee deep on ATS.

Originally posted by Yorga
As some of us have been saying all along. This is not a war against Iraqi's.
Read the list of countries who were repesented by the dead militants. Iraq has become a battle ground against world terrorism. Some will probably say that they were freedom fighters that came to Iraqs aid.

The spin can get knee deep on ATS.

And some would have said that it never would have turned out that way if the invasion never happened

Originally posted by djohnsto77
Iraqi and U.S. forces stormed a rebel insurgent base north of Baghdad, killing 85 militants in a two-hour battle. The attack killed the most insurgents in one battle since the U.S. Marines operation in Fallujah last November. Seven Iraqi commandos died in the fighting and six were injured. U.S. military officials say no American troops were lost.

I do know for sure about no US casualties. Another report stated seven commandos were dead, but they did not specifically state US commandos.

news.yahoo.com.../ap/20050323/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq&sid=84439559

Originally posted by sardion2000

Originally posted by Yorga
As some of us have been saying all along. This is not a war against Iraqi's.
Read the list of countries who were repesented by the dead militants. Iraq has become a battle ground against world terrorism. Some will probably say that they were freedom fighters that came to Iraqs aid.

The spin can get knee deep on ATS.

And some would have said that it never would have turned out that way if the invasion never happened

And just think, if Columbus had been a better sailor. There wouldn't be an America and my ancestors would still own the land. Since I am an American and part Native American then it is a win, win situation for me.

as posted by sardion2000
And some would have said that it never would have turned out that way if the invasion never happened

A valid point, sardion2000.
But since we are dealing with the 'here and now', insurgency and acts of terrorism in Iraq continue to be combated. Even the Iraqi people grow weary of the meddling of the insurgents and are, and have been, taking actions on their own to address this persistant problem.
Ordinary Iraqis Wage a Successful Battle Against Insurgents

(Just in case it shows up as requiring registration to the NYT, I found this article listed here.)





seekerof

[edit on 23-3-2005 by Seekerof]

Originally posted by Seekerof
Even the Iraqi people grow weary of the meddling of the insurgents and are, and have been, taking actions on their own to address this persistant problem.

For the purposes of clarity - for some time I have been looking to see if there is some consensus at ATS as to the meaning and sense of the terms "terrorists", "insurgents", "freedom fighters" etc etc.

It is well established that both the organizers of attacks on civilians in the form of suicide bombings, etc, are terrorists, and that the organizers of propaganda and fearmongering about imminent (but unspecifiable) attacks on US soil (including the Bush administration) are terrorists.

But the association of "insurgents" with the tendency to "meddle" clarifies another aspect. If "insurgents" can be defined as organized and armed "meddlesome" foreigners on a mission to change the way of life in Iraq, then clearly they include both the fanatics/militant "towelheads" that many in the western world develops stereotypes about, AND foreign soldiers fighting in a so-called "war on terror" representing a shrinking "coalition of the willing" and instituting the process of "democracy".

These clarifications are always worthwhile - it is important to realize that to "insurge" is to "meddle".

Your play on words to relay your intelligentsia status is always intriguing.

As for this:

as posted by MaskedAvatar
For the purposes of clarity - for some time I have been looking to see if there is some consensus at ATS as to the meaning and sense of the terms "terrorists", "insurgents", "freedom fighters" etc etc.

Two things:
Either you have not taken any of your valued time to research the differences yourself or you simply missed this fairly recent topic thread, from which your added valued imput was non-existent?
Insurgent vs Freedom Fighter



seekerof

Makes ya think. Many respects to the families of the dead Iraqi soldiers. This is an enormous morale booster for both Iraqis and US soldiers. Seems like some commanders over there have finally decided to get even. Boy did they. Look for strong insurgent response though. Maybe theyll keep it going and take out another insurgent base? I may hate W with a passion, but long live the free Iraq!

Originally posted by Seekerof
Two things:
Either you have not taken any of your valued time to research the differences yourself or you simply missed this fairly recent topic thread, from which your added valued imput was non-existent?
Insurgent vs Freedom Fighter

You are correct, I never saw that topic till just now, but it seems to peter out in attempts to uphold or rebut Lancet's death toll estimate for the whole Iraq effort.

What was the other thing?

They're doubting this actually happened, now. Maybe it was P-R-O-P-A-G-A-N-D-A!

They're backtracking and saying it wasn't even a "major incident".


www.sfgate.com.../c/a/2005/03/25/MNGMPBUNP41.DTL

New details from an intense battle between insurgents and Iraqi police commandos supported by U.S. forces cast doubt Thursday on Iraqi government claims that 85 insurgents had been killed at what was described as a clandestine training camp.

Accounts of the fighting continued to suggest that a major battle involving dozens of insurgents had occurred Tuesday on the eastern shore of Lake Tharthar, about 50 miles northwest of Baghdad. But two U.S. military officials said Thursday that no bodies had been found by American troops who arrived later at the scene. A spokesman for the Iraqi Interior Ministry, meanwhile, said he presumed the death toll was accurate, but he played down the scope of the fighting.

"I wouldn't call it a major incident," said the spokesman, Sabar Kadhim. Its significance, he said, was that it was "the first major operation" to be conceived and executed by the nascent Iraqi security forces with U.S. soldiers in a supporting role.

Hmm.