the BREAKING NEWS debate thread

[Vympel]

You're an apologist for terrorists -- I'll not waste further time on you.

Seeing as how you've utterly failed to answer my questions, you can kiss my arse. Everyone's a terrorist people! It's purely a matter of how the US feels about you! Move along, nothing to see here.

[Ted C]

... shouldn't be too hard to find a dead Fedayeen- fuck that sounds like it's from Dune).

Not surprising. Frank Herbert used incorporated a lot of Muslim terminology into the Fremen culture of Dune.

[Vympel]

Not surprising. Frank Herbert used incorporated a lot of Muslim terminology into the Fremen culture of Dune.

I guess Coalition forces would be in trouble if they came under attack from Fedyakin with Wierding Modules ....

(why did Frank Herbert agree to something that was totally absent from his book for the Lynch movie)

Also- Shai Hulud ... I saw a Marine with that on his helmet. Is that a real Arabic word, or was he just a Dune fan?

[Axis Kast]

You think Iraq can't import Western weapons? Hell, Palestinain terrorists display M16s with alarming frequency.

In the dark, amidst a firefight, do you think anyone really has time to tell whether a blacked-up face is that of an Iraq? Whether the man next to you is sporting a suspicious-looking weapon?

And do you think the average Iraqi knows what an American soldiers looks like? Do you think they'd distinguish betwee an FN FAL rifle or an M16?

[jegs2]

Comments from terrorist apologists and those who support murderous tyrants aside (brushes lint from shoulder), I believe this war is going well. Unfortunately, the American people seem to have been sold on the idea that it would be very short and with few casualties. Saddam's tactics come as no surprise to me or most in the US intelligence community -- he's basically fighing the COE we designed. He is fighting for political points, since he is militarily doomed. It makes sense, since he is incapable of coming out of this victorious, but it will cause many of his officers and officials to be tried as war criminals. Oh well, a bunch of Saddamites dangling from ropes will do the world some good. Our victory is as certain as the sun rising and setting. Hopefully, we will minimize our casualitis and civilian losses while marching to victory, but time will tell.

[Vympel]

You think Iraq can't import Western weapons? Hell, Palestinain terrorists display M16s with alarming frequency.

That's different, considering that's Israel's standard rifle.

In the dark, amidst a firefight, do you think anyone really has time to tell whether a blacked-up face is that of an Iraq? Whether the man next to you is sporting a suspicious-looking weapon?

Who says it has to be at night- and even so, if you were going to surrender in the middle of a firefight, how would you go about approaching these fake Americans? What are the Fedayeen doing? Sitting in between the positions of the real Americans and the Iraqis, accepting surrenders and then shooting people? So far, these reports smacks of propaganda-some may scoff but I remember the babies in incubators story from GW2 very well.

And do you think the average Iraqi knows what an American soldiers looks like? Do you think they'd distinguish betwee an FN FAL rifle or an M16?

The average Iraqi soldier would certainly know the difference- they're not morons.

[Axis Kast]

That's different, considering that's Israel's standard rifle.

You think Iraqi agents can’t purchase them by the cartloads?

Who says it has to be at night- and even so, if you were going to surrender in the middle of a firefight, how would you go about approaching these fake Americans? What are the Fedayeen doing? Sitting in between the positions of the real Americans and the Iraqis, accepting surrenders and then shooting people? So far, these reports smacks of propaganda-some may scoff but I remember the babies in incubators story from GW2 very well.

Imagine this. It’s the middle of a firefight in the city. Suddenly, your position is interspersed by soldiers who appear to be just like you, shouting things like: “Help!” or “Cease fire! Cease fire!” When you suddenly hold up for a moment, they open up with what looked like Western equipment and mow down your troops. It’s a major concern.

The average Iraqi soldier would certainly know the difference- they're not morons.

If, in the middle of the Basra siege and on the outskirts of the city, troops that appeared to be very different than the Iraqi norm appeared at your trench, at night, with their faces blackened, shouting things you’ve never heard before – ie, in a different language -, wouldn’t you be tempted to surrender?

This could cause significant problems. Especially if they go door-to-door and drag men away for “questioning” or take them as prisoners.

[Vympel]

You think Iraqi agents can’t purchase them by the cartloads?

If they have, then where are they?

Imagine this. It’s the middle of a firefight in the city. Suddenly, your position is interspersed by soldiers who appear to be just like you, shouting things like: “Help!” or “Cease fire! Cease fire!” When you suddenly hold up for a moment, they open up with what looked like Western equipment and mow down your troops. It’s a major concern.

Ah- but now you're talking about the Fedayeen using their uniforms to attack US troops- that's not terrorism. It's dirty fighting, but it's not terrorism. And to borrow a US axiom: "if it's a fair fight, you haven't done your job".

If, in the middle of the Basra siege and on the outskirts of the city, troops that appeared to be very different than the Iraqi norm appeared at your trench, at night, with their faces blackened, shouting things you’ve never heard before – ie, in a different language -, wouldn’t you be tempted to surrender?

This could cause significant problems. Especially if they go door-to-door and drag men away for “questioning” or take them as prisoners.

As for being tempted to surrender, that would depend on whether I have the courage to fight or not- but if you were to go towards them- how do you, the Fedayeen soldier, know that you're not going to be shot by your own men? It's just too far-fetched for me. I need evidence.

[Ted]

In this war, no Iraqi can be a terrrorist.

If an Iraqi hijacked a plane and hit the White House or Pentagon, he would not be committing a terrorist act.

[Axis Kast]

Vympel: goddamit, accidentally pushed edit instead of quote.

Waiting for the Feyaheen Saddam.

You'd figure with all the Fedayeen getting killed, we would've found some?

The question isn’t whether it’s terrorism. WTF?

Re: argument with jegs2.

There are already reports that this is happening. They were circulating on Monday. Some are posted on the BREAKING NEWS thread.

Where (ran a search under uniforms of the most current 10 pages). Regardless, unconfirmed reports are not evidence, it's testimony- and it still sounds like bodgy propaganda designed to demonize the enemy (not to beat a dead horse- but babies in incubators). I'm supposed to believe without evidence that Iraqi soldiers are running about in shoddy reproductions of uniforms of the enemy, accepting surrenders from their own men (risking fratricide!), and then executing them? What are they, battlefield ninjas? This 'fedayeen' crap is like the 'Republican Guard' fetish of 1991. They eat thunder and crap lightning! It's the new SS! Run away!!!

[Vympel]

Goddamit- it's late, 4:00am, starting to make my embarassing edit button mistakes.

[Axis Kast]

There are reports that Iraqis trying to surrender outside Basra have been gunned down.

The Special Republican Guard (not Fedayeen; my mistake) not yet tried to use American uniforms to trick us. They might once we hit Baghdad.

My point is that this is possible, not that it's terrorism.

[Vympel]

My point is that this is possible, not that it's terrorism.

Sure it's possible, of course.

[BoredShirtless]

Exercise that right. I'm arguing you won't get an accurate picture, that's all. It's usually fanatics or the weak who refuse to listen to different opinions.

At this point in time, CNN and FOX are providing both more and better coverage than both the French and Russians.

The fuck they are, you consider retracted stories of captured cities better coverage?

The French sources often give the same information – albeit on a much smaller and less-comprehensive scale – as American networks but do so with a pessimistic and gloating view rather than optimism. There is no real difference between the two other than that the American, British, and Australian sources to which I have access provide more news. And because the French merely repeat what I have already heard but in a less welcome tone, why should I want to keep from flipping the channel?

Idiot, you earlier claimed you don't trust foreign news. If the French are just repeating what's said on CNN, you don't trust CNN either.

You're so insecure to want no exposure to media which is on the other side of the war. Why, afraid you'll change your mind? Too scared to read some negatives on the US invasion of Iraq? Grow a pair.

You don't need to appreciate different opinions, but you should listen to them.

I already know the French and Russian opinions. Listening to their coverage of the war does nothing but expose me to propaganda.

And news from pro-war countires doesn't?

Your backpeddling duly noted.

“Backpedaling?” The French and CNN gave similar coverage of the prisoners-of-war but for the fact that the French called it “a taste of their own medicine” and the Americans “a terrible loss.” And whatsmore is that while the French channel went on to cover the infirmities of the European Union’s new members, CNN continued to provide coverage of the prisoners.

Focus Axis! The backpeddle was in your claim "they were executed" to "fears they were executed".

Red herring.

Not at all. You ask me why I mistrust the sources. I am telling you it is because the Russian site appears to be unique in its claims that intelligence agents are providing analysis. I seriously doubt whether the GRU is actually feeding information to media sources.

Yeah it's a red herring. Being unique does not prove something is wrong. What are your reasons for doubting the GRE would release anylses of the war. Why wouldn't they?

Huh? How is this an example of emotive langauge changing information?

It doesn’t change information, but when it’s the only difference, why not chose the opinion I like best?

Concession accepted. And it is NOT the only difference, CNN does NOT report everything Al Jazeera reports, and vice versa. Stop being such an insecure little chicken.

Stop being retarded, comparing the timing of 91 Gulf War Syndrome stories is a stupid fucking argument for being "late" in releasing stories of todays war. As to your claims of inadequacy, can you put an argument up?

The French gave a fifteen-minute blurb of some guy in the United States with Gulf War syndrome. My local paper had four pages on the topic coupled with interviews on FOX with former veterans. Not only did the French break the story late – as an obvious argument against the war -, but they offered less complete coverage as compared to the Americans.

I’m comparing them because I want to point out the disparity in the quality of reporting.

Argh you imbecile! Judge a news sources coverage of the war on its coverage of the war ! Jeeeeeeeeeesuuuuuusssss!!!

[Crazy_Vasey]

Newspapers over here were printing stories about Hussein's purchase of BDUs and other Western equipment in weeks prior to the war.

Got links? How does Iraq buy Western equipment? Especially American uniforms?

I can back that up. There was a couple of articles in UK newspapers saying that Iraq had been buying up replicas of British army uniforms for exactly the purpose that has been described here of executing surrendering troops.

[jegs2]

I can back that up. There was a couple of articles in UK newspapers saying that Iraq had been buying up replicas of British army uniforms for exactly the purpose that has been described here of executing surrendering troops.

I heard the same thing on Fox News.

[Axis Kast]

The fuck they are, you consider retracted stories of captured cities better coverage?

More than I want to listen to shit entitled, “War in Iraq: War on the People” that discusses everything in terms of a massive Coalition blunder. It’s nothing more than a comprehensive denial of everything on CNN.

Idiot, you earlier claimed you don't trust foreign news. If the French are just repeating what's said on CNN, you don't trust CNN either.

No. I don’t trust the Russian news. So what news should I watch or trust? You’re asking me to pick and choose.

You're so insecure to want no exposure to media which is on the other side of the war. Why, afraid you'll change your mind? Too scared to read some negatives on the US invasion of Iraq? Grow a pair.

The fact that I’ve watched French coverage dispels this little fallacy.

Not wanting to listen to Russian negation doesn’t mean I lack objectivity. I’ve got plenty of exposure to the “other side” via editorials and opinions on this board. If I want news I know is going to take an utterly different and preordained slant, I jump around to the sites Vympel posts from. But more often than not, they host disappointing claptrap.

There’s a difference between being “held up” and “entirely repulsed” or an invasion that’s “going well despite snags” and one that has been “utterly turned on its head.” That’s the difference between CNN and the GRE’s supposedly truthful “analysis.”

And news from pro-war countires doesn't?

Oh, it does. But it’s a case of choose your poison. And the American sources are less volatile.

Focus Axis! The backpeddle was in your claim "they were executed" to "fears they were executed".

FOX just confirmed it. They are being executed.

Yeah it's a red herring. Being unique does not prove something is wrong. What are your reasons for doubting the GRE would release anylses of the war. Why wouldn't they?

Being unique in this case puts up red flags on what is already a very suspicious site. Why do I doubt the GRE? Because I’ve not seen any French or German sources claim to be taking analysis from their own experts. And because the Russian site seems dedicated only to bashing CNN’s coverage.

Concession accepted. And it is NOT the only difference, CNN does NOT report everything Al Jazeera reports, and vice versa. Stop being such an insecure little chicken.

I don’t get Al-Jazeera you fucking idiot. I am telling you straight up that the French discuss nothing new. And if you think Al-Jazeera is any more “clean” than CNN, we’ve got a problem.

Argh you imbecile! Judge a news sources coverage of the war on its coverage of the war ! Jeeeeeeeeeesuuuuuusssss!!!

Coverage of the war includes coverage of the consequences. The French are all-around less fucking comprehensive. Stop trying to make me out as some kind of jingoist freak for one minute. I’m embarrassed for you. You can’t see past your own bias.

[Colonel Olrik]

British Saddam-supporter surrenders to Desert Rats:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2889703.stm

Fighting the Coalition was apparently a real drag, so he wants to go back to his family in Manchester.

Unfortunately for that particular individual, I don't think he'll be able to go home to his family in Manchester for some time. However, surrendering likely assured he won't soon be transformed into a corpse.

Bloody fucking traitor. Deserves to have his back against a wall.

[RadiO]

Bloody fucking traitor. Deserves to have his back against a wall.

I wonder what charges he'll face when (I assume) he's brought home? Will he be tried for Treason? Or if the government doesn't want to do that for political reasons, would a charge of Attempted Murder cover his crimes?

[GUTB]

At this time, it is safe to call the Coalition assault completely, utterly, and without expcetion FUBAR.

You are bombarded hourly about "pockets" of resistence, and how this or that group of Fedayeen are tryign to trick Coalition forces, and about militia ambushes. You are given a picture of Coalition forces rolling inexonerably towards Bagdhad, casually crushing minor resistence where it happens to flare up. But let's engage our heads for just a moment, shall we?

What ELSE are we hearing about CONSTANTLY? Basra, Nasirya, Jafar, Fao, and Umm Qasr. We have been told again and again how Coalition forces are in control, etc, but it is just plainly a lie. Look at a map; the Iraqis made their first stand at the Euphrates, and have rebuffed ALL attempts of Coalition to take it. THAT is the hard, unflattering truth not being proclaimed at the press briefings. And now we have a division's worth of Iraqi armor leaving Basra and heading south, not one but TWO large Iraqi convoys heading out of Bagdhad, presumably to stiffen up their line at the Euphrates. The weak, lightly-armed 3 or 4 divisions the Coalition has in Iraq is suffering from logistics and morale issues -- they have become completely mired down, and generally not doing anything productive for the time being. The US 3rd ID ran up against the Iraqi 3rd Army Corps and decided that their run was over until re-inforcments arrive. The 4th ID is AWOL. The Marines are doing their level best to pretend they are an armor division and not pulling off. The Northern front is making noises and weak flailing motions and promises to start up -- eventually. And now as of couple of days ago the White House is warning everybody that it wasn't going to be an easy or short war, etc etc.

So yes, it is FUBAR.

[Stravo]

At this time, it is safe to call the Coalition assault completely, utterly, and without expcetion FUBAR.

You are bombarded hourly about "pockets" of resistence, and how this or that group of Fedayeen are tryign to trick Coalition forces, and about militia ambushes. You are given a picture of Coalition forces rolling inexonerably towards Bagdhad, casually crushing minor resistence where it happens to flare up. But let's engage our heads for just a moment, shall we?

What ELSE are we hearing about CONSTANTLY? Basra, Nasirya, Jafar, Fao, and Umm Qasr. We have been told again and again how Coalition forces are in control, etc, but it is just plainly a lie. Look at a map; the Iraqis made their first stand at the Euphrates, and have rebuffed ALL attempts of Coalition to take it. THAT is the hard, unflattering truth not being proclaimed at the press briefings. And now we have a division's worth of Iraqi armor leaving Basra and heading south, not one but TWO large Iraqi convoys heading out of Bagdhad, presumably to stiffen up their line at the Euphrates. The weak, lightly-armed 3 or 4 divisions the Coalition has in Iraq is suffering from logistics and morale issues -- they have become completely mired down, and generally not doing anything productive for the time being. The US 3rd ID ran up against the Iraqi 3rd Army Corps and decided that their run was over until re-inforcments arrive. The 4th ID is AWOL. The Marines are doing their level best to pretend they are an armor division and not pulling off. The Northern front is making noises and weak flailing motions and promises to start up -- eventually. And now as of couple of days ago the White House is warning everybody that it wasn't going to be an easy or short war, etc etc.

So yes, it is FUBAR.

And the truth shall set you free.....what's the matter you're subscription to Al-Jizaeera about to run out ass??

[jegs2]

*SNIP* of pro-Iraqi drivel

Surely you don't believe that garbage? waits for punch-line

[GUTB]

Wake up. The Coalition attack is done for, and Iraqi forces move in force on the East of the Euphrates with near impunity, thus the authorization of another 30,000 US troops today by Bush.

[jegs2]

Wake up. The Coalition attack is done for, and Iraqi forces move in force on the East of the Euphrates with near impunity, thus the authorization of another 30,000 US troops today by Bush.

Ah, there's the punch-line...

[Admiral Valdemar]

GUTB: Here's another, "it'll all be over by Christmas."