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: Four U.S Marines Killed in Ramadi. Bodies Photographed.

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 21 2004 @ 06:02 AM
link   
Four U.S Marines have been shot and killed in Ramadi,Iraq.

They appear to have been taken by surprise.One was shot through the forehead while still seated.So it looks like an ambush.

After the incident took place.The press were alerted by the insurgents and many photographs were taken.

Some of these pictures are believed to be the most graphic to come out of Iraq yet and are thought to be potentially the most demoralising images to come out of Iraq since the images of coffins on air transports were published.
 





Four American troops have been killed in an attack near Baghdad, witnesses in the Iraqi capital said.

It was unclear when the soldiers, found in a building site in the town of Ramadi, had been killed. Their bloodied bodies were sprawled on the ground, surrounded by scattered equipment.


The US military had no immediate comment.

Sky News

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Thanks Asala.


Reuters

[edit on 21-6-2004 by John bull 1]

[edit on 21-6-2004 by Banshee]

[edit on 22-6-2004 by John bull 1]

[edit on 6-22-2004 by Valhall]




posted on Jun, 21 2004 @ 06:06 AM
link   
Heres a link from sky news,

www.sky.com...


---------------


The US military had no immediate comment.

Insurgents took witnesses to the scene where the bodies were lying. They were not wearing the helmets or armour normally worn by US troops.

The latest deaths bring the total number of American soldiers killed since the start of the Iraq war last year to 619.

Ramadi is part of the so-called Sunni triangle and insurgents, many of them Saddam Hussein loyalists, foreign militants and Sunni nationalists, have brought havoc to the area during the last few months.


>>Also im heariing that there is camera footage of this but its to graphic to be shown,



posted on Jun, 21 2004 @ 06:14 AM
link   



posted on Jun, 21 2004 @ 07:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by asala
The latest deaths bring the total number of American soldiers killed since the start of the Iraq war last year to 619.
[edit on 21-6-2004 by asala]

Isn't this number a bit low? I thought the number was around 800, but I'd gladly be wrong on this one.



posted on Jun, 21 2004 @ 07:58 AM
link   
The number are higher than that, another sad day for american families, and still we have to endure all this tragedy in the name of liberation and war on terror.

And I still ask, if this is all worth it, the families, suffering, the death of the inocent that their olny sin is to believe that they are dying for a good cause.

Darn!!!!!!!!!this president stupidity.

(I appolozied for any bad feelings this post may cause.)

This is only an oppinion.



posted on Jun, 21 2004 @ 08:47 AM
link   
I don't know where 619 comes from but I remember seeing the number 837 on a CNN ticker at some point over the weekend...

Insane...



posted on Jun, 21 2004 @ 12:59 PM
link   
Judging by what I see and hear, the only people that have the stomach (or cajones) for war anymore are the radical Muslims and terrorist groups that we are fighting. Judging by previous posts, the American people CERTAINLY do not.
800+ coalition soldiers have died in a little over a year during the Iraq war. 2000 to 5000 soldiers died IN ONE DAY (D-Day) during World War II, so it MUST have been a colossal failure, right? RIGHT?



posted on Jun, 21 2004 @ 01:41 PM
link   
Any causalties inflicted on the insurgents?



posted on Jun, 21 2004 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Homer Jay
Judging by what I see and hear, the only people that have the stomach (or cajones) for war anymore are the radical Muslims and terrorist groups that we are fighting. Judging by previous posts, the American people CERTAINLY do not.
800+ coalition soldiers have died in a little over a year during the Iraq war. 2000 to 5000 soldiers died IN ONE DAY (D-Day) during World War II, so it MUST have been a colossal failure, right? RIGHT?

I can't speak for everyone, but I'm for escalation. But I think that Bush is starting to do the PC thing because of the upcoming election. IMO, he'd get back a lot of lost respect by saying to the American people, straight from the Oval Office, "I don't care if I am a one-term president. I am going to do whatever is necessary to put an end to this bullcrap...yada yada yada." And then follow through on it. Stop holding back, as we did in Fallujah.




posted on Jun, 21 2004 @ 03:29 PM
link   
How do you think we're "holding back"? Problem is, when you can't tell an enemy from a citizen, until he lobs a grenade at you...it becomes rather difficult to stabilize a region....especially when such people go to their deaths not reluctantly, but with enthusiasm...

For those balking at the casualties....compared to almost any other engagement in warfare history...these numbers are absolutely AMAZINGLY LOW....especially considering what was done, and the casualties on the OTHER side...



posted on Jun, 21 2004 @ 03:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok
How do you think we're "holding back"? Problem is, when you can't tell an enemy from a citizen, until he lobs a grenade at you...it becomes rather difficult to stabilize a region....especially when such people go to their deaths not reluctantly, but with enthusiasm...

For those balking at the casualties....compared to almost any other engagement in warfare history...these numbers are absolutely AMAZINGLY LOW....especially considering what was done, and the casualties on the OTHER side...


Amen. This is exactly the point I was trying to make. The American people need to realize and accept (like past generations did) that the freedom and safety we enjoy has come as a direct result of SACRIFICE. Yes, death sucks. Yes, war is hell.
People question whether or not Saddam & al Qaida were credible enough threats to go to war. If given the opportunity and the means, Saddam would have gone out of his way to destry us and everything we stand for. How much more credibility do you need?



posted on Jun, 21 2004 @ 09:10 PM
link   
I believe they were ambushed and didn't have a chance to fight back. They weren't even wearing flak jackets, which are required for US army personnel in this part of Iraq.



posted on Jun, 21 2004 @ 09:14 PM
link   
I'll have to say that these photos are disturbing, but they are nothing compared to the beheading pics of hostages. Desensitization by the media has taken its toll.



posted on Jun, 21 2004 @ 09:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Homer Jay
The American people need to realize and accept (like past generations did) that the freedom and safety we enjoy has come as a direct result of SACRIFICE.

That is certainly true. It should also be added though that the prosperity, wealth and cheap oil the American people enjoy also come as a result of sacrifice, usually of other people. Yes, sometimes war is justified. A response to terrorism is justified. But to extend that into a regime of global oppression and military intimidation, which is the path the US is taking right now, is not. It can only lead untold death and suffering.


People question whether or not Saddam & al Qaida were credible enough threats to go to war. If given the opportunity and the means, Saddam would have gone out of his way to destry us and everything we stand for. How much more credibility do you need?

The only reason anyone in the middle east is interested in the destruction of America is her unwanted and exploitative interventions there over the last few decades. If it wasn't for that they'd hold no more animosity against you than they do the Canadians. In fact you'd be more popular.. you have more movie stars.



posted on Jun, 21 2004 @ 09:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok

For those balking at the casualties....compared to almost any other engagement in warfare history...these numbers are absolutely AMAZINGLY LOW....especially considering what was done, and the casualties on the OTHER side...


In warfare history? I contend that if we invaded Iraq in 1860 or 1960, or whatever war you are thinking of, the casualties would be far greater. Our efficiency on the battlefield has a direct correlation with advances in battlefield medicine and weaponry. As for the other side, who is counting the deaths on the 'other side' and can we trust their numbers? Also, this invasion was sold to us on the false ideas of a quick victory and a welcoming of open arms by the populace.



posted on Jun, 21 2004 @ 10:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok
How do you think we're "holding back"? Problem is, when you can't tell an enemy from a citizen, until he lobs a grenade at you...it becomes rather difficult to stabilize a region....especially when such people go to their deaths not reluctantly, but with enthusiasm...

For those balking at the casualties....compared to almost any other engagement in warfare history...these numbers are absolutely AMAZINGLY LOW....especially considering what was done, and the casualties on the OTHER side...

I say we're holding back because we were trying negotiation with al Sadr in Fallujah. News reports from there stated that he walked, untouched, in midday, from one mosque to another, on a daily basis. Our troops had orders to let him pass.

This is a guy who has outstanding warrants for murder. This guy organized dissidents to attack coalition troops, and then hid in a mosque, where he was untouchable. He was probably involved in the mutilation of those civilian contractors.

He is now jockeying for a position in the new Iraqi government.

As for casualty numbers, ours are relatively low. Call me morbid, but I'd like to see the death toll on the other side reported more often.




posted on Jun, 21 2004 @ 10:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by jwk7443
I believe they were ambushed and didn't have a chance to fight back. They weren't even wearing flak jackets, which are required for US army personnel in this part of Iraq.

News reports stated that they were stripped of their armor and weaponry. Which is horrible; now their killers have 'costumes' to allow them to get close to our troops.

They must have been ambushed, These guys were marines, not reservists (no disrespect meant to the reservists).




posted on Jun, 21 2004 @ 10:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky

As for casualty numbers, ours are relatively low. Call me morbid, but I'd like to see the death toll on the other side reported more often.



On our side, our numbers include combat and non-combat fatalities. If we had solid numbers on the Iraqi side, would non-combatants outnumber the combatants? Say, we killed more of them than they us. Cool. But say we also killed more innocents, collateral damage, than the enemy? How cool would that be? The other side does report their numbers, but they are not numbers the media like to hear. Are they telling the truth? Are we telling the truth?



posted on Jun, 22 2004 @ 07:48 AM
link   
I can believe that we as a modern society are sold like this,

some of you are, oh well this is war take or shut up, we had done this in the past so people die all the time.

No, this is wrong and you may be a conformist on this government but is people like me that see the wrong doings of this president agenda and have the cojones to say something about it.

This war was and invasion nothing more and nothing else and people, do not have to die, and they are not just people or casualties their are our neighbors, friends, husband, lovers, sisters, brothers, mothers, fathers and children, what kind of human being accept this war in such detach manner and lightness like some people do is beyond not being human, if you can not feel the sadness and the tears of the people of this country then you may be as disrespectful as this president is toward humanity.

This pictures have been parade in the news while the families were been notify that is horrible, and the president will not comment, because he is waiting for somebody to make his speech of damage control first, all this is disgusting and wrong.

I am a mother and a wife if I see a body in the news as a mother I will know if that body is my son, you can call this mother intuition.



posted on Jun, 22 2004 @ 08:49 AM
link   
This is not a war like any other war, there was no reason for us to invade Iraq, Saddam was contained, so now we have made iraq the center of terrorist activity. Saddam's weapons were nothing compared to our forces, geez he didn't even have a plane that could get off the ground, but now we're there an we have no choice, but to stay, and try to fix this mess.I say try because it's not going to be easy, it's not going to be cheap, an It's going to take years.Middle east culture is not geared to democracy.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join