U.S., Iraqi forces kill 250 militants in Najaf (US copter down)

[rodeodance]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070128/ts_nm/iraq_dc;_ylt=AuV4Qb2H11kks9uJK_247NrMWM0F;_ylu=X3oDMTA3b2NibDltBHNlYwM3MTY-


U.S., Iraqi forces kill 250 militants in Najaf

13 minutes ago

NAJAF, Iraq (Reuters) - U.S. and Iraqi forces killed 250 gunmen in a fierce battle involving U.S. tanks and helicopters on the outskirts of the Shi'ite holy city of Najaf on Sunday, a senior Iraqi police officer said.


The day-long battle was continuing after nightfall, Colonel Ali Nomas told Reuters, as tens of thousands of pilgrims converged on the nearby city of Kerbala for the climax of the Ashura commemorations.

A U.S. helicopter was shot down in the fighting,
Iraq security sources said. The U.S. military declined comment. A Reuters reporter saw a helicopter come down trailing smoke.

..........

A Reuters reporter about 1.5 km (1 mile) from the fighting said he heard intense gunfire and saw U.S. helicopters rocket groves sheltering militants. He saw smoke trailing from one helicopter before it came down in the midst of the fighting...........

.....
Reuters Photo: Two boys walk past a pool of blood and scattered books at the entrance floor...

* Slideshow: Iraq

[ScottGregory]

1. yes, 250...ha! how many were really "militants" and how many were just in the way....

It's back to U.S. body counts...again...seems I've heard this before.....let's see, Khe San?? The Tet offensive?? ....

[sutz12]

3. Exactly what I was thinking....

But of course this is nothing like Vietnam. :sarcasm:

[rodeodance]

4. body counts of the 'enemy' are suddendly so so important.

[IndianaGreen]

10. We have seen these body counts before, only to find out later

that most, if not all, of the "insurgents" were women and children.

Americans' lack of concern about civilian casualties in Iraq is on a par with bin Laden's concern about civilian casualties on 9-11.

[sanskritwarrior]

16. I dispute the fact

that most are women and children. In my two years (2 tours)in Iraq I have been in my fair share of firefights. Did we kill innocents in the crossfire? Sure and it is gut wrenching, did we kill armed insurgents trying to kill us? Sure and it was gut wrenching then too. Killing is not fun, it is not easy, but if you are shooting at me or my men, I am going to do everything in my power, including calling in airstrikes, arty strikes, Abrams fire, and apaches to kill you and save my guys. I've seen a lot of dead bodies and the memories will never go away but there were far more dead insurgets than women and children. You insult me and my men by claiming we killed women and children moreso than insurgents.

[0007]

20. Namaste sanskritwarrior..

675,000 Iraqi women and children didn't just disappear.

You insult me by making such a stupid statement.

[brentspeak]

28. Wait a minute...sanskritwarrior was there, but I don't think you were

So you have zero credibility on anything said about this issue.

Also, no one but the authors of dubious medical article -- and the people who believe the dubious medical article -- believe that "675,000" Iraqi "women and children" have been killed/disappeared. You're also slandering our military by implying that that the majority of Iraqi casualties are due to the U.S. troops.

[Zhade]

34. Um, surely you're not dense enough to not realize he could be lying.

NT!

[Nihil]

37. Never underestimate the stupidity of a "patriot" ...

(And that's not even going into the "hey, of course I'm a general, that's what it says in my profile"
area of the argument.)

[Zhade]

39. To me, blind denial of the military's crimes isn't patriotism, it's idiocy.

I'm guessing you agree. :)

[Nihil]

40. Strange that ...

... you're right!
:hi:

[sanskritwarrior]

45. I could post pictures of me in Iraq, then of course

you'll say it's not me in the pictures......

I've been down this road before, I know you don't believe me, probably due to the fact that I'm disagreeing with a disparaging comment about the troops. That's fine.....DU is a democratic community, I can eschew anyone I deem offensive to me, so like the three other people that disparage the military I say welcome to my ignore list.

[wtmusic]

46. Assuming you are who you say you are

where do you draw the line? You claim that "...under those conditions disobeying an order is a betrayal of our oath." What if the order is to kill civilians who your CO has just raped (by all appearances, that has happened)-- what would you do?

Of course no "federal court" has deemed the war illegal (defendants typically aren't allowed to judge their own trial) but the international community has resoundingly and repeatedly maintained that the war is illegal under international law. It is a de facto violation of the UN Charter to which the US is signatory (Article 47 - member nations may not engage in hostilities unless they themselves are under "armed attack"). At that point you have *no* legal weapons at your disposal -- you are in a foreign country killing those who are defending themselves against a foreign invasion, just as you would if the US were invaded.

[sanskritwarrior]

48. Cmon now

There are legal and illegal orders. As of today Jan 28th the Iraq war is a legal endeavor according to our Congress and our courts. Look at my post history, I have said this about 10 times now. The war is legal, just because you or others think it is illegal does not make it so. There is no legal precedent for a soldier to actively say the war is illegal and refuse to go. I and others have our own opinions about the war, but our oath is to uphold and defend the Constitution as well as follow the orders of the President and the officers appointed over us in accordance with UCMJ. It is not to use our opinions as a basis to decide what orders we like or don't like. As of today following LEGAL orders issued by Bush or General Petraeus is upholding that oath. I and other military members do not get to decide what orders we want to follow and which ones we don't. That is anarchy, that is betrayal of our oath and that sets the stage for military coups. A military that refuses to follow LEGAL orders is a dangerous entity that does not have the best interests of the country it serves at heart. Why is this such a hard concept for non-military people to get.... I don't mean you per se, but this is really easy. Saying the Iraq war is illegal with no Judicial, Legislative, or Executive weight behind it doesn't make it so. As long as Congress funds this war and does not revoke the resolution sending us to war, the war is legal. Me or my guys refusing orders to deploy are in violation of our oath. And the oath is everything it defines who we are.

As for the scenario you laid out, if my CO did that me and my men would arrest him and relieve him of command. BTW where is the story where a Commanding officer raped someone. So far I have seen some 101st enlisted guys and maybe an 82nd Airborne enlisted guy or two. I have yet to see an officer brought up on these charges. Did you add that for dramatic effect? Or do you have a link? If you do have a link, I would like to read it to see for myself what I think happened.

Again I am an American enlisted man, I will not apologize for pulling the trigger on people that were trying to kill me. I feel bad for the loss of life, but if the choice was my men getting shot while I decided to follow Article 47 or us engaging the enemy and we live to get one day closer to going home, forgive me if I take the self preservation route.

[wtmusic]

54. On the issue of legality

If Ted Bundy, in his own mind, decides it's "legal" to rape women then crack their heads open with a baseball bat, he's making a determination in a matter which is completely outside his jurisdiction.

The US government is making a determination that its own war is legal completely outside the jurisdiction of the only recognized international body of law, which is that of the United Nations. The US has no right whatsoever to determine law outside its own boundaries, nor should it (does North Korea have the right to determine law in the US?)

For a soldier like Lt. Watada to refuse to go to war and be court martialed is analogous for an American citizen to break a law, when the law itself is illegal. When US law works the way it's supposed to, that citizen appeals to a higher court, and the law is overturned.

When international law works the way it's supposed to, leaders who break the law are charged with crimes in an international court like the Hague, tried, and sentenced/released accordingly. At this point it would be best for everyone on the planet for George Bush to be tried for war crimes, so we can get on with the business of establishing a truly international system of justice where no one, even those with the most powerful weapons, are exempt from the law.

A soldier's oath is to uphold and defend the Constitution. Ironically enough, Article IV of the Constitution upholds international law, and makes treaties like the UN Charter the "supreme law of the land". I don't fault any soldier for following orders, but here's the thing: invading the sovereign nation of Iraq is just as illegal in the eyes of international law as raping and murdering Iraqi kids (the CO part is irrelevant). So here is the conundrum we have placed brave and devoted people like yourself in: obeying your military oath itself involves breaking the law. Can we expect every soldier to know international law and make the judgement themselves? Of course not. But more importantly, can servicemembers expect their leaders to know international law and make the right choices in the first place? They certainly should be able to -- and therein lies the most egregious crime -- the abuse of trust which hundreds of thousands of young people have placed in a government they are willing to die to defend.

Thank you for your rationed response, and your service to our country.

[Igel]

42. This is the second Lancet study you're

referring to? The one that said over 600k Iraqis ... not 'Iraqi women and children', unless they have really, really weird demographics, so that all Iraqis are women and children.

There was an additional uptick in child mortality rates in the last 6-12 months of the time the study covered. The authors didn't even venture a guess for what was responsible for that. Otherwise, the child mortality rate basically tracked adult mortality rates.

As for 'disappearing', they know what happened to the people. Some were killed in violence, but most of the deaths simply constituted an increase in mortality rates. The accumulated toll of worse water, poorer food, more difficulty getting to hospitals when you have a heart attack or a car crash. The estimated death toll from violence wasn't sharply out of line with US DOD and US newspaper numbers.

Now, I suspect the numbers weren't entirely reliable, in predictable directions, but that's the risks you take asking loaded questions about the deaths of relatives.

[Trajan]

22. As much as I believe your story ....

I also recognize that your wonderfully humane and just unit were not in all places and at all times .... Perhaps you somehow missed the other dead innocents because you werent in those places at those times ? .... Perhaps it was 'insurgents' who killed the innocents ? ...

Perhaps .....

In any case: over a half million Iraqis ARE dead .. FAR more than the killings by Saddam Hussein, and SOMEBODY killed them ....

SOMEBODY killed the innocents ....

I now know it wasnt you or your guys, because you said so, but you cannot say with absolute certainty that NO US Military personnel were involved to a large degree with the deaths of those innocent Iraqis .... You cannot have seen everything there is to see hunkered down in a camp or on a daily mission on some dusty track ....

I am no hater of a defensive military ... and I certainly respect your service and the sacrifice of your fellow unit members : But THOSE people died somehow ..... I greatly doubt the 'insurgents', who are primarily lying in wait for ambush, are targetting civilians ....

It is also clear that those Iraqis and others who are using car bombs and the like in marketplaces have taken MANY innocent lives, and that could account for much of the innocent carnage .... And it is also clear that many have died through the low level process of ethnic cleansing that has been unleashed by this occupation .... But that cannot account for all the numbers ....

There is a REAL number that exists in reality .... I think it is greater than you think, and lesser than they think ....

[me b zola]

23. There have been incidents of women & children taking the brunt of the killing

...like the bombing of the wedding in Northern Iraq. Of course this does not mean every, or even most of the firefights that occur, but it does happen.

You are reporting on your experiences in Iraq, but you are not every man in every battle.

I would think that you would be more insulted by *'s policies that are using the military as canon fodder than you are by a poster who works their ass off to bring our military home and end the killing.

[IndianaGreen]

26. Spare me the gung ho shit, I am not impressed at all!

You drop a 500-pound bomb on a building in a densely populated city, you are going to kill a lot of innocent people. The same argument can be made about firing a 155-mm shell into a village. It will kill innocent people.

You shouldn't have been in Iraq in the first place! It was a war of aggression, clearly condemned by international law. Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11, and somehow convincing yourself that you and your men were fighting for "our freedoms" in Iraq, still does not make the war right.

While you were in Iraq, our freedoms were under assault at home.

I am sorry that you got such a shitty deal out of this war. Many of us tried to stop it before it began, but we failed. For that alone, I apologize! I hope we can all work together to prevent other men and women from finding themselves in Iraq, or in another war of choice in Iran.

[sanskritwarrior]

30. How was I gung ho

I don't think you understand the term you used. I am not apologizing for anyone that has committed a warcrime. I am stating that in my Brigade AO one time in Diyala, one time in Al anbar with other stops in between I was involved in a lot of shit. In that time I did see us kill innocents, I'm not denying that, I saw us kill a lot more people that were threats to me or my men. Irregardless of why we were there or who sent us we want to come home to our loved ones. If that means we have to kill others if we feel threatened so be it. I do not apologize for safeguarding my life, I will never apologize for that.

Also irregardless of what we think of the war we are oath bound to follow our orders. So far no one has overridden Bush's order to send us there. Congress has not yanked support for the initial resolution and no federal court has deemed the war illegal. Under those conditions disobeying an order is a betrayal of our oath. This is why Lt watada will go to jail. It is honorable that he spoke his heart, but at the heart of the matter is the rigid military rules that state one can question your orders but in lieu of an overriding federal authority one is oath bound to carry out those orders.

Finally I will use whatever LEGAL weapons at my disposal on the battlefield. I sincerely apologize if that offends you, but if I am taking fire from a mosque and the choice is the mosque or my men, I will choose my men every time. If that disgusts you again I apologize. I have a duty to bring them home if I can. I have failed both times to bring them all home, but I brought most of them home. Did I do things that I am not proud of? You bet, however I would do them again and do them ten fold if I could replace the 5 names, the 5 dog tags I keep in a pouch in my pocket. If you haven't been there I again find it insulting that you would allude to the fact that the US has killed mostly innocents or mainly innocents. As for the Lancet study, well that's one number count, not the one I subscribe to but you are free to do so.........

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[junior college]

47. What

What makes your "men" any more important than the women and children you kill trying to save them?

[sanskritwarrior]

49. It's called self preservation.

It's biological.

I'm sorry, I don't think I am breaking any rules by being pro self preservation. One can feel terrible towards mistakes that are made in war, but still feel happy that you got most of your people back home.......Most combat guys know this is true. You never want to take an innocent life and you do your damndest to not do so, but in war there are mistakes made. Innocents die, sometimes by your own hand, sometimes by the enemy's hand. Sometimes the mistakes haunt people forever, sometimes they don't. I'm not on trial here, nor do I feel bad for doing what was neccessary to get my guys home. Again I apologize if I offend you by placing more value on American men that I have lived trained and fought with. I'm not ashamed of that and I think anyone that has been in combat would feel the same. I would hope you would refrain from making a personal attack or a slander on the military. If you've been there, you know what I mean. If you haven't it's all theoretical.........

Edit: If I offend anyone I am truly sorry. If the value I place on my guys over others offends you, again I apologize. I am not being sarcastic, I am being serious I mean no offense, but I will not apoligze for doing what was needed to get those young men home.

[Bonobo]

51. I have 2 questions: Do you care if we support you & What does that mean?

I am serious. Do you care if the American people "support" you. and two, what does it mean to you to be "supported"?

[Zhade]

33. You can't dispute the fact. It's a fact.

NT!

[saigon68]

53. You need to go back and "win" the war

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[newyawker99]

27. Hi ScottGregory!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[joemurphy]

2. Multiply 250 by 10 and you get the number of new "militants"

this carnage has created.

[rodeodance]

5. Iraqi authorities: 250 extremists killed (new headline)

Iraqi authorities: 250 extremists killed



Iraqi soldiers take up positions at Zarqa, 20 kilometers (12 miles) northeast of Najaf, Iraq, Sunday Jan. 28, 2007. Iraqi troops backed by U.S. helicopters battled insurgents Sunday northeast of the Shiite holy city of Najaf, Iraqi officials said. Provincial Gov. Assad Sultan Abu Klil said the operation was launched after reports that insurgents planned to assassinate Shiite clerics and pilgrims during the Ashoura festival, which reaches its climax Tuesday. (AP Photo/Alaa Al-Marjani)
Enlarge PhotoAP


AP - 8 minutes ago

BAGHDAD, Iraq - U.S.-backed Iraqi forces killed about 250 militants in a daylong battle near Najaf aimed at preventing attacks on religious pilgrims during major Shiite rituals, Iraqi authorities said.

* Slideshow: Iraq
* Video: Bloody day in Iraq; school girls killed AP
* Full Coverage: Iraq

[rodeodance]

6. .....the two crew members were killed..........:-(

Iraqi officials said a U.S. helicopter crashed during the battle, which began early Sunday when Iraqi forces attacked militants about 12 miles northeast of Najaf. The U.S. military confirmed the report, and that the two crew members were killed.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070128/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq;_ylt=AvaPz2g3oDUrgNXwHs1vt6Cs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA2Z2szazkxBHNlYwN0bQ--

[FightingIrish]

7. The media really doesn't help us understand who

our troops are fighting. Terms like "militants", "gunmen", "extremists" and "insurgents" are pretty meaningless. These 250 were apparently both Shia and Sunni which would rule out Al Quaeda, Baathists and foreign fighters. It sounds like we are now fighting Iraqi nationalists who want the U.S. out of their country.

[Eugene]

12. Would you believe "an apocalyptic Muslim cult?"

(Reuters)

U.S., Iraqi forces kill 250 militants in Najaf
28 Jan 2007 20:27:40 GMT
Source: Reuters

NAJAF, Iraq, Jan 28 (Reuters) - U.S. and Iraqi forces killed some 250 gunmen from an
apocalyptic Muslim cult on Sunday in a battle involving U.S. tanks and aircraft near
the Shi'ite holy city of Najaf, Iraqi police, army and political sources said.

Two Americans were killed, the U.S. military said, when an attack helicopter went down
during the day-long battle in what was one of the strangest incidents of the four-year
conflict. Iraqi officials said the helicopter seemed to be shot down.

According to one Iraqi political source, hundreds of fighters drawn from both Sunni and
Shi'ite communities were still fighting. A Reuters reporter at the scene, 160 km (100
miles) south of Baghdad, saw U.S. tanks and heard blasts after dark and an Iraqi officer
said F-16 jets were bombing the area.

Details of the day's fighting were sketchy and the origins of the fighters unclear.
An Iraqi army source said some of the dead wore headbands declaring themselves a
"Soldier of Heaven".

-snip-

Full article: http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L2828035.htm

Upto a short time ago, Reuters said the fighters were Sunni.

[54anickel]

21. A counter Messiah to *. Like *'s messiah complex wasn't bad enough.

from your link:

But political and security sources said they were followers of Ahmed Hassani al-Yemeni and described him as an apocalyptic cult leader claiming to be the vanguard of the Mahdi -- a messiah-like figure in Islam whose coming heralds the start of perfect world justice. He had been operating from an office in Najaf until it was raided and closed down about 10 days ago.

CULTS

Similar violent cults have been a feature of Islamic history. They have declared temporal Muslim leaders illegitimate infidels and have drawn followers from both Sunni and Shi'ite believers, proclaiming a unity of inspiration from Mohammad.

[Zhade]

36. It's easier to lie about them that way.

How many wedding parties have we bombed, KNOWING they weren't "miliguntremisurgents"?

Dehumanization: the first step in indiscriminate slaughter.

[still_one]

8. This is the same bullshit they did during Nam, making people think that body counts

were all that mattered to winning the war

Hell, no one even asks them what they mean by "winning"

[Jacobin]

11. Oh man. If they're starting body counts, that's the official end

Only 24 million left to go.

Viet Nam Redux, and there is no mistake about it.

[dipsydoodle]

9. I never believe

tidy numbers like 250.

[Warren Stupidity]

13. Reloading the shit fan.

This is Najaf, a shiite stronghold, and this means that we have decided to pull the trigger on the shiite militias. Oh yes and exactly which Iraqi army units would that be? The Kurdish units have already declined to participate, there are no Sunni units, and I rather doubt that the Shiite units were killing themselves.

[wtmusic]

14. I'll give you ten insurgents for a militant...my final offer

remember "paramilitary fighters"? They're very rare now...

[wtmusic]

15. Isn't Najaf Moqtada's home?

Are we setting up a hit?

[leftchick]

17. and al-Sistani

pretty scary stuff. Whose side are we on again?

[me b zola]

24. Correct me if I am wrong...

...but wasn't it al-Sistani who was holding the bulk of the Shia off from picking up arms against the US?

[leftchick]

25. yes at one time

I have read where he seems to have lost a lot of influence over the last few years with the continued US occupation. While al-Sadr's popularity has continued to rise. I believe the more the US pushes back against al-Sadr the more followers he gets and the more moderate Shiites disappear. It is way past the time to get the US the hell out of there.

:(

[antiimperialist]

44. Al Sadr had nothing to do with this incident

according to NY Times and other sources, both Sunni and Shia, but not belonging to the Al Sadr Mehdi army, were involved in this attack.

[gulliver]

18. "a senior Iraqi police officer said."

A single source, interested party says something and it not only makes it into the article, it is stated as fact in the headline.

[alfredo]

19. yeah right.

I wouldn't put money on the veracity of this PR release.

Militants or villagers hiding from the battle in the town? Who's to know?

[daleo]

31. Generally, if a U.S. helicopter is shot down

The claimed body count of "insurgents" goes up correspondingly.

Three helicopters in a week (the Air Force one, the Blackwater one, now this) seems like a bad trend. I wonder whether the opposition doesn't have some new weaponry or tactics. Or maybe exhaustion is setting in on the U.S. side.

[Zhade]

38. One thing is certain: headlines can lie, but our impending loss cannot.

It doesn't matter how many swallow the lies about every single intentional killing being of a "militant" - the Iraqi people know the truth, and they're still going to fight against the invaders occupying their country.

No amount of "waaaaaaaah, you hate the trooooooooops!" whining will make a difference.

[daleo]

41. Yep, facts are facts.

Spin can't change facts - just disguise them for a while. But facts are stubborn.

[Dover]

32. Reuters: Iraqi forces clash with militants in Najaf

Jan 28, 2007 — NAJAF, Iraq (Reuters) - Iraqi security forces were fighting a group of Sunni insurgents holed up in orchards in the Shi'ite holy city of Najaf on Sunday, the provincial governor said, and a witness reported seeing a helicopter come down.

A Reuters reporter at an army checkpoint about 1.5 km (one mile) from the fighting said he heard a burst of machinegun fire and saw smoke coming from a U.S. attack helicopter circling above the battle.

He said the helicopter, which had been rocketing the militants, came down and smoke was rising from the site. It was not immediately clear whether it had crashed, he said.

Police in Najaf, seat of Iraq's most powerful Shi'ite clerics, refused comment on the fighting and the U.S. military said they did not issue statements on ongoing operations.

An officer in the Iraqi Army's 8th Division in Najaf, who declined to be named, said he had also heard a report of a downed helicopter. ..cont'd

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=2829671

[antiimperialist]

43. At least 59 killed in sectarian violence today

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L28647855.htm

[Eugene]

50. Latest toll: 300 militants, 8 Iraqi soldiers and police, 6 missing

(Reuters)

FACTBOX-Security developments in Iraq, Jan 29
29 Jan 2007 09:09:39 GMT
Source: Reuters

Jan 29 (Reuters) - Following are security developments in Iraq
at 0900 GMT on Monday:

-snip-

NAJAF - The number of gunmen killed in a battle with U.S. and Iraqi troops in Najaf
that started early on Sunday rose to at least 300, police colonel Ali Nomas said.
He said three Iraqi soldiers were killed and six more missing, and five policemen
were killed. Another 40 Iraqi police and soldiers were wounded.

-snip-

Full article: http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/PAR926903.htm

Also: Iraq: 300 militants killed in battle - AP

[Bonobo]

52. Killed 2 million in Vietnam and they could have killed 2 million more...

Wouldn't have made a difference.

If they don't want you, sooner or later, you gotta go.