It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

WAR: 40 Dead in Disputed US Attack in Iraq

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 19 2004 @ 07:33 PM
link   
Looks like the original story was propaganda. All the talk about children being killed & so far I've only read one credible report that one body of a child was seen amongst the 40 bodies. No matter which story is true any deaths of children are a direct result of parents who cared more for their cause then their children. In fact it wouldn't suprise me if everytime a few terrorist get popped they kill a kid & throw em in the mix just to get more support for their cause.




posted on May, 19 2004 @ 07:45 PM
link   
So what kind of aircraft was it? I read reports saying it was a "Helicopter" or a AC-130 Spectre.

If it was the Spectre, how would it ever drop bombs?!?


Spectre is equipped with cannons and howitzers... did it call in for apache/cobra support?

This is important because the Spectre might have had trouble seeing the enemy, but the choppers would get quite a good look.



posted on May, 19 2004 @ 08:11 PM
link   
Thats horrible man .. you and yer misses getting gunned down at yer wedding??? THATS LIKE KILL BILL ALL OVER AGAIN



posted on May, 19 2004 @ 10:05 PM
link   
I can tell you that "IF" these were USMC units (and therefore RECON) that these were actual hostiles. They are professionals and NOT monsters. Our air to ground communication is 1st rate and the USMC pioneered the FAC' concept way,way back when (40's-50's). If there were innocents killed it truly is tragic though, and I sincerely hope these were hostiles. Lot of action on the Syrian border besides this guys,we just don't hear alot about it. And hey, I'm not wearing cammies (no fear- vans, ya know?) and I'm having surgery tommorow so be cool man!!



posted on May, 20 2004 @ 12:34 AM
link   
man if youre having surgery be careful? are you getting put under???? WOAH BE CAREFUL MAN THE GOVERNMENT WILL GET YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!


Q

posted on May, 20 2004 @ 01:30 AM
link   
Yup...a wedding party...that just happened to be in the same location on the Syrian border where we just happened to be raiding a safehouse...and just happened to be firing in the air at the same time as all of this was happening...in a purely celebratory fashion, of course...and all that highly suspicious contraband there was purely coincidental...I'm sure everyone pitched in so the "bride and groom" could have that SATCOM to keep in touch...

Come on, people. The reason they make propaganda like this is because there's always gonna be people who'll jump on it. If you don't believe this, please review this thread.

Whether it was a chopper or an AC-130 makes no difference. Our FLIR is so good those guys could've made out whether the "guests" at this "wedding party" were dancing a two-step or a tango from a considerable distance. They knew what they were firing on, and that is their job.

Personally, I would be inclined to favor the AC-130. Of course, the claim of "they dropped 100 bombs on us" is ludicrous. However, to a person on the ground, the full onslaught of an AC-130 that's been ordered to level your position could certainly be mistaken as such. Gotta love that aircraft, it gets the job done right!

As for the collateral damage...I wouldn't be surprised in the slightest if they killed the women and kids after the fact just to show for the propaganda. Not to say that it's impossible that they were caught in the wrong place at the wrong time either, I'm just saying it's a distinct possibility.

Look at "their" reports for what they are: a feeble attempt to turn a resounding military defeat into a psyop victory. Nothing better than convincing your enemy that they were doing something wrong by winning.



posted on May, 20 2004 @ 03:12 AM
link   
Early in the Iraq conflict, small-arms fire damaged every one of the three dozen Apache attack helicopters flying a "deep-strike" raid on March 24. Aviators were surprised by a fusillade of arms, RPG and antiaircraft fire. One Apache was downed and the two-man crew was taken captive and later released.

Excerpt from The Washington Post November 16, 2003. "Helicopter-related deaths rising in Iraq." by Al Kamen and Thomas E. Ricks.

In a highly coordinated and largely unprecedented attack, legions of Iraqis fired small arms into the air as US Helicopters were passing over otherwise harmless cities. The cumulative effect across large distances was devastating, and if I remember correctly resulted in this mission being aborted before the helicopters reached their target.

After such an event, I imagine anyone (or any group especially) firing small arms into the air while US craft are in the same airspace will be be regarded with "extreme prejudice."



posted on May, 20 2004 @ 06:06 AM
link   
so they were gunned down what people dont see is that it was no accident... someone on the brides or grooms guest list must have been of some concern. The fact of the matter is we know what and who were shooting at 24-7 there is just a hidden motive. I THINK: Maybe one of those "guests" was a threat... the raid went wrong and a mass ex-termination took place POSSIBLY because there was probly more than one Threat maybe 5 or 6 unknown attenders...Just a theory ---Let me know what you guys think quote me if u like...



posted on May, 20 2004 @ 06:35 AM
link   
Hey look! A US helicopter. Quick let's have a wedding so we can shoot at it!



posted on May, 20 2004 @ 07:19 AM
link   
If they are ignorant enough to fire weapons in a war zone... enough said..



posted on May, 20 2004 @ 07:39 AM
link   
if they are ignorant enough to fire weapons in a war zone, they got what they deserved, they shouldn't have been on the border, who cares they're only Iraqi's blah blah blah racist vitriol from the pro war lobby at its finest, bunch of tools.

Here's the story:

news.bbc.co.uk...

We bombed a wedding party before by mistake, chances are we bombed one this time. Did we do it on purpose ? probably not.

Did we do it, yes we probably did.

Once again. This is a war. Terrible things happen to innocent people in wars.

I don't like innocent people being blown up, tortured, killed, raped, that's why I'm against this war.

If you support this war then you have to do so knowing that we will kill innocent people, stop hiding that fact behind bull**** justification and just say "I am for this war even though I know thousands of innocent people will die and our troops will behave in a manner far from civilised"

[Edited on 20-5-2004 by Simon]



posted on May, 20 2004 @ 08:03 AM
link   
I think it would make a difference as to what kind of aircraft was used. I bet it was the AC-130 since it's higher caliber weapons can look like bombs when they explode, therfore veryifying the man's claim of over 100 bombs exploding.

Nothing has the capacity to drop 100 bombs except for a heavy bomber(B-52, B-2, B-1, and even than the amount of bombs varies depending on the bomb type) unless he saw cluster bombs explode, which could be dropped from almost anything and do alot of damage to soft targets.

I know the Apaches have advanced night vision built right into their helmets that has a camera on the outside which follows the pilot's head. Under normal weather conditions, and being stationary and hovering while firing , it should be easy to tell enemy infantry from civilian shouldn't it?

With the Spectre it may have been more difficult to see the targets as it would be flying higher and faster. Does the Spectre have clear enough night vision technology to tell the difference between civilians and enemy soldiers at night, possibly under adverse weather conditions?

All in all the pilots acted probably how they should have, engaged an enemy that fired at them first. But nobody here really has the facts or expertise to label them as killers...



posted on May, 20 2004 @ 08:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
As tragic as this reads, this smells.
A 2:45am wedding....nada', not buying it, BS meter is pegged.

As you can notice in the Reuters article, they mysteriously leave the time of the so-called wedding out, it taking place in a remote desert area, but happened in a town bordering the Syrian border....interesting.


Three cheers for sanity! Here's a thought, let's wait to pass judgement until we know a little more. I don't know 'bout you all, but I've noticed that breaking news (really, really hot breaking news) hardly ever gets the story right. They don't have the time. In their rush to put something out (and scoop the other guys), they often cannot accurately research a story. Instead, they throw whatever garbage they have onto the airwaves or into the papers so that you, the audience will tune in. Once they have you, they can slow down and bring you a more accurate, slightly less yellow story. Trust me on this, I do this for a living, and nobody likes getting scooped. Most would rather print nonsense and correct later than get scooped.

And ohwhatashocker!!!! We already have new reports saying that the initial wedding story is likely a crock. SATCOM radios? At a wedding? WAKE UP!! What wedding have you ever been to...no, scratch that...ever even heard of that had a SATCOM radio? What's that you say? None? Yeah, me either. And the money is a gift. Wow! 2 million dinars for a gift? How do I get into that family? Granted the dinar has lost a lot of value in recent years, but it's not like were talking about pesos here. It is still way too much cash for a wedding gift.

I know what your thinking, the big, bad USA just planted a bunch of bloody gloves so that we can blame this on someone else or say we were justified. HORSESH!T!!!! Maybe we should just ask Kato if he heard any strange noises last night. Like we have the time or the inclination to go around shooting up every wedding party we find at two in the morning with machine guns and SATCOMs and tons o' cash.

My advice...

Be patient, then use your brains.

If we did it, if they were innocent victims, we'll know for sure soon enough. But my guess is, it won't be for a day or three.



posted on May, 20 2004 @ 09:21 AM
link   
Well even terrorists get married (well I assume they do) the people fighting in Iraq against the coalition have every reason to get married. You can't have sex until your married over there, the chances of dieing fighting the Americans is very HIGH. So, if I was a person actively engaged in fighting against Americans I would want to find the nearest hooded female and get hitched so I could get laid ASAP.
May sound funny (it is) but, there has to be some truth in it. Also, just because it was a wedding does not automatically mean they were all innocent people, nor were they somehow immune to military action because of this alleged wedding, at almost 3 am.


Variable



posted on May, 20 2004 @ 09:40 AM
link   
from what I've been reading all over the net from various sources...it does seem like there was a wedding at the same location of the bombing.

the wedding was over, these were probably some drunks, saw planes overhead and fired off a few a shots.

right now the issue seems to Iraqi officials words against American Officials words, as as we all know, we have to take both sides of the story with a few grains of salt. The truth is in between.


Mourners Say Musicians Among Dead at Iraqi Wedding
A cousin of Hussein al-Ali, a well-known singer from Baghdad, and of his musician brother Mohaned told Reuters they had been killed while sleeping after the wedding, at which they had performed.

"America is the enemy of God," mourners chanted as they carried the two men's coffins in their funeral procession in the capital. Some fired guns into the air and others hoisted the Saddam Hussein-era Iraqi flag above their heads.

The brothers' bodies had first been brought from the site of the incident near Qaim to the regional capital Ramadi, in the desert 110 km (70 miles) west of Baghdad.

At Ramadi, a man named Sabri Mukhlis said he had driven the bodies of eight people killed and had seen 35 other corpses at the site of what he said was a U.S. air strike.

"They hit them after the wedding party," he said.

Sohan Ibrahim, the musicians' cousin, also said in Ramadi that they had been killed in a U.S. strike


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


did anyone else noticed from that article, even after the fact, Iraqis still continued to fired guns into the air.



posted on May, 20 2004 @ 09:54 AM
link   
Muslims don't drink alcohol.



posted on May, 20 2004 @ 09:57 AM
link   
Muslims don't drink alcohol.


variable....extremist muslims don't drink alcohol. But the majority of moderate muslims do partake in alcohol. I need to start taking pictures of my family gatherings


I wanted to add, that with every religion some parts of the holy writings are interpreted in different ways. Remember the koran talks of rivers of wine in paradise. It is men and religious rulers who determine which doctrines should be practiced and when. In the bible, it also preaches the dangers of alcohol, but yet, wine is served at the last supper and at communions. everything is open for interpretation.

[Edited on 5-20-2004 by worldwatcher]



posted on May, 20 2004 @ 10:39 AM
link   
Three in the morning. Desert border town near the Syrian border. Lot's of cash and weapons. Wedding party. Uhhhh - I don't think so!



posted on May, 20 2004 @ 11:32 AM
link   
I have never been to a wedding in which a stash of automatic weapons, 2 million bucks, and a satellite communicator were part of the wedding party. As soon as someone can explain those away I'll consider it being a wedding. Until then it was an insurgent attack on helicopters using a known working method of damaging them.



posted on May, 20 2004 @ 11:36 AM
link   
we're capable of sodomizing prisoners, keeping slimeballs like chalabi on our payroll till recently and no one thinks that we are not capable of planting evidence to cover up a possible major mistake?

come on...use your common sense, this would be horrific to our claims of liberation and cause at this time, like i said earlier in the thread, the US never took accountability for bombing the Afghani wedding, they won't be doing it now.

it's hard to believe either side's word for word account of the events, like i said, the truth is somewhere in between.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join