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.

 

Revealed: Iraq Terrorists' Deadly New Tactic

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 11:51 AM
link   
I have heard of the explosions but this is the first time I have read about this specific new tactic. Just goes to show the extent to which they are willing to go to make a point and take a human life. As if our troops and the citizens weren't challenged enough with the other forms of IED's.


Al Qaeda in Iraq is renting residential buildings and rigging them with explosives in a cunning new tactic which has killed dozens of civilians, officials say.

Buildings blown up in Baghdad on March 7

Bomb blasts devastated buildings on election day

The ploy has defied thousands of security forces in Baghdad by getting around the mass of checkpoints used to deter car bombings.

The new tactic has forced the police and army to change their own operations to counter the terrorists.

America's military has even come up with a new term - HBIED (house-borne improvised explosive device) for the attacks.

The attacks have also left hundreds of people injured in the past month in the Iraqi capital.

The HBIED phrase follows the IED (improvised-explosive device - homemade bomb) and VBIED (vehicle-borne improvised-explosive device - car bomb) into a terrorism vocabulary started in Iraq and then taken to Afghanistan.

Some 25 people were killed on election day, March 7, when explosives destroyed two buildings in north-east Baghdad.

The US military, which pointed the finger at al Qaeda, said the properties had been rented and deliberately blown up.

Another 35 people died on April 6, when explosives were planted in houses and shops in mostly Shi'ite neighbourhoods.

A number of those properties had been rented days earlier, security officials said.

Major General Qassim Atta, a Baghdad security forces spokesman, said: "Our forces are focusing on the renting of apartments and buildings."

Insurgents were continually looking to exploit gaps in the city's defences, he said.

"They change their methods periodically because most of their plans and tactics have been discovered. I believe they are already searching for another method of attack, maybe churches or bridges."

news.sky.com...

What's next schools? hospitals?




posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 11:58 AM
link   
Probably the english SAS at work again. Not as if they have not done it before in documented accounts , Kenya and the Yemen at least.



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 12:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Drexl
 


Why the SAS? we don't have any interest in Iraq any more, why cant it be down to some American or Israeli special forces? who do have a vested interest in Iraq.

We did our job and left like we promised.



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 12:30 PM
link   
I wouldn't really call it new. It was used in the Battle of Fallujah, but not to a great effect. The insurgents knew that we liked to take houses and secure them, so they wired a few with bombs to brings the entire thing down on the Soldiers' heads. From what I know it didn't work, but something to consider.

While this may sound scary, it would take hundreds of pounds of explosives to do a whole heck of a lot. They aren't able to wire the entire building, maybe just a room. Yes, it will kill a few people, maybe condem the structure, but not as scary.

Seems like the Iraqis are going to need to do some good background checks.



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 12:35 PM
link   
If no armed forces are in iraq who are they gonna target then,
seems like a no brainer to me but i can fly so i have no need for oil

GOD



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 12:46 PM
link   
A good tactic in Afghanistan would be to place hundreds of bits of metal along roads, so they'd glint and are visible. This compels the occupation forces to get out of vehicles to inspect for ied's, making them vulnerable to real ied's or snipers at the very least it would reduce movement along the road to a snails pace.

I wonder how many of the "accidentally" killed civilians bombed by drones and such would have been regarded as reprisal killings when the Nazi's did it to Poles and Russians.

[edit on 19-4-2010 by Thepreye]



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 01:01 PM
link   
Wait a minute....I thought Iraq was meant to be secure now?

Oh no.....obviously not, it's still a total mess.

The American military have to come up with another silly acronym for what is essentially a bomb in a building, just as an I.E.D is just basically a bomb.



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Awory
 


If they blew up a building with soldiers in it, then obviously it worked.

It can't be that unsuccessful as these so-called Al-Qaeda in Iraq are now using it.



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thepreye
I wonder how many of the "accidentally" killed civilians bombed by drones and such would have been regarded as reprisal killings when the Nazi's did it to Poles and Russians.


Not entirely clear what are trying to say, but looks like you consider drone operations as some kind of equivalent to Nazis in WWII?

Sheesh.

There has been collateral damage in Europe when the Allies were fighting Nazis and accidentally killed civilians. If you want to paint everybody around as a Nazi, go right ahead but it's just seems immature to point of absurdity.



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 01:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kram09

The American military have to come up with another silly acronym for what is essentially a bomb in a building, just as an I.E.D is just basically a bomb.


It's all part of the NLP fear programing, a handy punchy label in the style of Mil Tech speak, newspeak in reality.



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 01:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem


There has been collateral damage in Europe when the Allies were fighting Nazis and accidentally killed civilians. If you want to paint everybody around as a Nazi, go right ahead but it's just seems immature to point of absurdity.


That's just it I don't believe the "collateral damage", another example of new speak, is always accidental, 4 NATO soldiers get blown up 2 wedding parties get bombed.



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 02:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Thepreye
 



A good tactic in Afghanistan would be to place hundreds of bits of metal along roads, so they'd glint and are visible. This compels the occupation forces to get out of vehicles to inspect for ied's, making them vulnerable to real ied's or snipers at the very least it would reduce movement along the road to a snails pace.


Just what are you getting at with a statement like this??

These are terrorist tactics that are being used. Plain and simple. Hell, another suicide bomber just wiped out 40 innocent people in Baghdad. No special forces at work here. Just your everyday terrorists.



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 02:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by azzllin
reply to post by Drexl
 


Why the SAS? we don't have any interest in Iraq any more, why cant it be down to some American or Israeli special forces? who do have a vested interest in Iraq.

We did our job and left like we promised.


They have a history of this kind of activity. Perhaps you believe the activities of these kind of agencies cease when their government officially declares their non interest in further participation to the general public?



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 02:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thepreye
That's just it I don't believe the "collateral damage", another example of new speak, is always accidental, 4 NATO soldiers get blown up 2 wedding parties
get bombed.


Have you followed the news at all in the past 10 years? Tragically, wedding parties have been blown to bits in the past, and many times, and so have NATO solders. It's like finding a conspiracy in the fact that a subway train arrives a few minutes after you enter the station -- suspicious, isn't it?



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 05:21 PM
link   
reply to post by azzllin
 


I also said 'probably'. That does not rule out the Americans or israelis. The point is it could be either of them, it was just a reminder not to read too much into who is apparently to blame .



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 06:05 PM
link   
You think they would stop blowing away troops and civilians if we said "sorry, we were wrong" and left? I think so...then they could get back to blowing each other up in peace...over silly sunni-shia "not islamic enough" differences.

We have zero business being there, it is a waste of money and if they want to fight, let them.



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 06:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by Thepreye
That's just it I don't believe the "collateral damage", another example of new speak, is always accidental, 4 NATO soldiers get blown up 2 wedding parties
get bombed.


Have you followed the news at all in the past 10 years? Tragically, wedding parties have been blown to bits in the past, and many times, and so have NATO solders. It's like finding a conspiracy in the fact that a subway train arrives a few minutes after you enter the station -- suspicious, isn't it?


Why call it tragic? It is completely avoidable...a devastating hurricane or tornado is tragic, not the wars. A million Iraqis and untold Afghanis have been killed and the old "war is hell" garbage doesn't fly (not saying that is what you imply or anything, just ranting).



posted on Apr, 20 2010 @ 12:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by jibeho
I have heard of the explosions but this is the first time I have read about this specific new tactic. Just goes to show the extent to which they are willing to go to make a point and take a human life. As if our troops and the citizens weren't challenged enough with the other forms of IED's.


Al Qaeda in Iraq is renting residential buildings and rigging them with explosives in a cunning new tactic which has killed dozens of civilians, officials say.

Buildings blown up in Baghdad on March 7

Bomb blasts devastated buildings on election day

The ploy has defied thousands of security forces in Baghdad by getting around the mass of checkpoints used to deter car bombings.

The new tactic has forced the police and army to change their own operations to counter the terrorists.

America's military has even come up with a new term - HBIED (house-borne improvised explosive device) for the attacks.

The attacks have also left hundreds of people injured in the past month in the Iraqi capital.

The HBIED phrase follows the IED (improvised-explosive device - homemade bomb) and VBIED (vehicle-borne improvised-explosive device - car bomb) into a terrorism vocabulary started in Iraq and then taken to Afghanistan.

Some 25 people were killed on election day, March 7, when explosives destroyed two buildings in north-east Baghdad.

The US military, which pointed the finger at al Qaeda, said the properties had been rented and deliberately blown up.

Another 35 people died on April 6, when explosives were planted in houses and shops in mostly Shi'ite neighbourhoods.

A number of those properties had been rented days earlier, security officials said.

Major General Qassim Atta, a Baghdad security forces spokesman, said: "Our forces are focusing on the renting of apartments and buildings."

Insurgents were continually looking to exploit gaps in the city's defences, he said.

"They change their methods periodically because most of their plans and tactics have been discovered. I believe they are already searching for another method of attack, maybe churches or bridges."

news.sky.com...

What's next schools? hospitals?

This is not new, look at what they did on 911 (AlCIAda, lol).



posted on Apr, 20 2010 @ 07:35 AM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 



That's my point I'm not saying all civilian deaths are deliberate, some of them are accidents some are an acknowledged cost of a mission that was deemed worthy enough to accept that civilians will die as a result of the attack and some are deliberate attacks on non combatants to teach them not to resist.

If Helmand province is going to be used as a point of attack on Iran the supply lines that run through it have to be secure and in this case the best security is deterring an attack through fear.

If the proposed pipeline from the Caspian basin is going to succeed a long wide corridor through Afghanistan and Pakistan is going to have to be completely "pacified", that means tough tribal angry Afghan men have to be persuaded that it's not worth sneaking up to the pipe and blowing a bit of it up.

These wars were lobbied for by big oil and money in preparation for when the price of oil really rises in a few years, our societies bear the cost while the corporations take the profit. If Asia ends up with more wealth we won't even get to use the energy we won't be able to afford it and the corps will sell to the highest bidder.


[edit on 20-4-2010 by Thepreye]



posted on Apr, 20 2010 @ 08:10 AM
link   
Not really a new tactic. I was there in 2003-2004 and they would rig buildings with explosives and then tell spread rumors to the locals about it being a IED manufacturing place, or weapons storage.
The word would get to coalition forces by word of mouth, and when we would do a raid, they blow up the house.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join