U.S. Forces Kill 46 Iraqis Trying to Ambush Them

Sun November 30, 2003 03:43 PM ET

TIKRIT, Iraq (Reuters) - U.S. soldiers killed 46 Iraqis and captured eight in a series of attempted ambushes on U.S. convoys in the central Iraqi city of Samarra on Sunday, a US military spokesman said.

<snip>

Not much more info but go to the link below.

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=3912264

what was going on? was this an ambush or a raid by us?

I'm still waiting to get more details. Its awful tho.

Jazzgirl

a foiled series of ambushes. 46 Killed 8 captured. Generals on FOX bragging. Vietnam flashbacks....
Scott

This sounds like it might be a spin saying we're "winning" again.

I wouldn't doubt they may have totalled up all the "suspected" ambushers they killed today.

To me these news tidbits with NO details are always somewhat questionable because consistantly the later real stories that come out are so different from the original breaking news.

from the link....
<At least 18 attackers, five U.S. soldiers and a civilian traveling with the troops were wounded during the ambushes.

"The attacks were coordinated in locations very close to each other," he said, adding that the ambushes were made on separate U.S. convoys using mortars, grenades and small arms fire. Three buildings, from whose roofs the attackers fired, were destroyed.

Some of the attackers wore the attire of Fedayeen, a militia formed by Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) before U.S.-led forces toppled him earlier this year.

The Fedayeen are among the former regime loyalists whom Washington has said are coordinating a rising insurgency against the U.S. occupation of Iraq (news - web sites).

"This is the largest (ambush) for our task force since we've been in the area," MacDonald said.

He declined to say whether the coordinated ambushes were linked to attacks on civilian foreign nationals in the Tikrit-Samarra area in the last two days.
>

How many of us did they kill?

Walter Rodgers reporting this from Baghdad...

We killed 46 of them. They all jumped out at once.

I think Billy Bob over there got grazed on his arm.


Why doesn't this sound believable to me?

nt

That sure is a large group of "malcontents and dead-enders". Consider also that most of them undoubtedly got away. This is about a company-level operation by the resistance. Not a good sign.

At least...that's what they're saying. Why they keep saying it's Sadaam loyalists and Sunni "insurgents" is self-explanatory. They don't want people to know the average Iraqi is fed up with occupation!

Wow... I wonder how many civies we killed....

The attackers got away.

I bet 2/3 were civilians that had nothing to do with it, just in the wrong place at the wrong time.

because of course they walk around dressed like the Fedayeen all the time...

?!?!?! MSNBC has gotten as bad as Faux.

.

Just saw that a couple of nights ago.

then we knew he was a Viet Cong. That was the litmus test........ It's the body count, stupid!

That helicopter gunner in that movie who says if someone on the ground runs, they're VC. If they stand still, they're well-trained VC!

recognize.

Unfortunately, everybody else wore balck pajamas too.

Sounds more like a massacre than a battle to me.

"Frightened witnesses in Samarra told a correspondent for the French news agency AFP who managed to enter the city that US forces had repeatedly come under attack on Sunday.

However, they added that, in the aftermath of one attack at about 1255 (0955 GMT), an American tank had opened fire on workers leaving a factory at the end of their shift, killing two and wounding "many"."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/low/middle_east/3251690.stm

Here's a quote from it.

A coalition spokesman said Iraqi insurgents "are trying to break the coalition's will."

"The overwhelming majority of the Iraqi people are grateful for the liberation, and they don't want us to leave," Coalition Provisional Authority spokesman Dan Senyor said.

<snip>

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/11/30/sprj.irq.main/index.html

What "overwhelming majority" are they talking about? The puppet government??

Let's think this one through.

46 iraqi's dressed in military uniform decide to pop out of a hole all at once like the wack-a-mole game and begin a fire fight with a well armed convoy?

Doesn't make sense, especially when rockets on donkeys, rockets disguised as generators and remote controlled road side bombs and other improvised methods are so effective.

And why would 46 resistance fighters decide to gather together in the first place?

Smells like a big 'ol stinky fish to me!! Look for the real story on the BBC or some other non-U.S. media outlet.

I agree with you, there have been so many attacks today and since the chimpass "guess the turkey" dinner. I suspect this is a little bit of false news for the US to think we are winning. Did this happen during the Vietnam War?

Welcome to DU ethimtemp!

:toast:

My father was in 'nam and he said it was a nothing but lies and obsfucation day in and day out. They had no idea why there were there.

He stepped on a land mine and was able to get out during his second tour, be was still f'ed up in the head for close to a decade.

Same crap, different decade/war

(and thanks for the welcome) :)

Welcome!

Oh yes. All the time.

(forgive me for the spelling in the last post. My attention is split between football and DU)

Yes. The propaganda and misinformation.

He was a paratrooper (101st airborne) and they just "made up crap" about success of operations, number of vietnamese killed, etc. etc.

That's why to this day we still here about the atrocities that happened there.

He got busted down a rank and reprimanded for evacuating a sole NVA survivor of an American ambush.

My dad HATES what is going on in Iraq to the point that he just won't even tune into the news. He say's it don't make no difference what they try to tell us, they're lying anyways so why bother.

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

Just because these guys were dressed in black in the middle of the night, to FOX it means that they were Fedayen fighters. Which is ludicrous but convenient for the propaganda machine to divert attentionaway from the fact that these were plain iraqi's.

For those not old enough to remember, "inflated" body counts were the order of the day during Vietnam.

"In heavy fighting today, US troops killed 450 Viet Cong, while injuring 700. Three US soldiers were injured, none seriously."

Same thing happening here - sadly, same results as well.

...is not true, were they counting body parts to reach a total of 46, or were they including women and children, or both?

I don't trust this story as far as I could throw the Pentagon.

First--How do we know they are not civilians?

Second--How does this jibe with "we don't count enemy dead"? I thought the bad Nam bodycount was gone?

Third--Why would so many Iraqi resistance be in one place, and why wouldn't they be able to do anything significant (five wounded) in return?

according to Aljazeera.....<But local residents said US troops killed innocent bystanders when they opened fire on anything that moved around midday.

Workers at a nearby pharmaceutical plant said at least two colleagues were killed and many wounded as they walked out of the factory gates at the end of their shift, downed by a US tank shooting randomly in all directions.

At 13:45 (10:45 GMT), just as staff at the State Enterprise for the Manufacture of Drugs and medical Equipment finished their shift, a second tank arrived and opened up with machine guns, employees said.

One French journalist also reports seeing blood spattered on the ground and bullet holes in the sentry box to the left of the white factory gates.>

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/E56B8E35-2484-40C5-935E-B452A2C74769.htm

about how this story is a big stinky fish.

Seems the soldiers fired at any and everything that moved.........including a guy leaving from a hard days work at the pharmaceutical factory.

it's amazing how "workers" morphed into "Uniformed Fedayeen"

Good progress!

Innocents killed in Samarra bloodbath
Monday 01 December 2003

US troops in the Iraqi town of Samarra have admitted to perpetrating a bloodbath, with one occupation spokesman confirming nearly four dozen people were killed.

Lieutenant Colonel Bill MacDonald told journalists on Sunday that all the 46 were killed when troops fought off multiple attacks on military convoys.

But local residents said US troops killed innocent bystanders when they opened fire on anything that moved around midday.

Workers at a nearby pharmaceutical plant said at least two colleagues were killed and many wounded as they walked out of the factory gates at the end of their shift, downed by a US tank shooting randomly in all directions.

At 13:45 (10:45 GMT), just as staff at the State Enterprise for the Manufacture of Drugs and medical Equipment finished their shift, a second tank arrived and opened up with machine guns, employees said.

One French journalist also reports seeing blood spattered on the ground and bullet holes in the sentry box to the left of the white factory gates.

--snip--

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/E56B8E35-2484-40C5-935E-B452A2C74769.htm

:puke:

US troops in the Iraqi town of Samarra have admitted to perpetrating a bloodbath, with one occupation spokesman confirming nearly four dozen people were killed.

The way that is phrased, it appears that the spokesman actually confirmed whatever occured as being a 'bloodbath'. That never happens with military PR/spokesmen.

But local residents said US troops killed innocent bystanders when they opened fire on anything that moved around midday.

I see. So residents said it, and therefore it's true. I mean, after all, it was a bloodbath.

Workers at a nearby pharmaceutical plant said at least two colleagues were killed and many wounded as they walked out of the factory gates at the end of their shift, downed by a US tank shooting randomly in all directions.

I don't think so.

Certainly, we should not fall over wildly at the report of Al Jazeera (and you do a nice job of highlighting the rhetorical chicanery in the first line), anymore than we should fall over wildly at the report of US media. Both parties mentioned by the reports (residents, CENTCOM) have an obvious interest in skewing this incident in one way or the other.

However, I would like to point out a few curious facts from this story. If the US media accounts - delivered by CENTCOM - are to be believed, the insurgents in Samarra were lying in wait with damn near two full platoons (46 dead + 18 wounded). We have not heard of ambushes of this size since the war ended. In August, the accounts of ambushes included several that spoke of 4-5 people. The reports from the early part of Operation Iron Hammer had 6-12 people pulling mortar operations in Baghdad. Even if the US reports are accurate, in other words, this level of organization seems astounding, and - if it is not a new development - at least belies the stories we have been hearing to date. The stories, that is, from the same US media that we are to believe this time around.

Now, we have insurgents at double platoon strength, lying in wait, and - by some means or other - the US forces catch wind of it and, I presume, ambush the enemy instead. Have we heard reports of gunships being used? Or does all this happen in ground combat? If it's the latter, we have 64 casualties on one side, and 5 (minor) on the other. This is an astounding rate, given the circumstances.

Let's posit a scenario. This is the first time the insurgents attempted a large-scale ambush. Because of its size, they were unable to maintain the secrecy they needed to pull it off. Some informant learns of the ambush and informs US troops. Remember that there was a soldier "seriously wounded" in Samarra on Friday. Folks are pissed. So, the US forces with tactical advantage and surprise manage to turn the ambush around. That sounds plausible to me.

I'm still, however, a bit iffy on the size of the ambush force. If it's true, then it is quite a turn for the US forces. At the same time, it's troubling in the scope of organization. I'm leaning a bit more to the other side. US forces caught wind of a platoon-strength ambush, and things got a bit out of hand. Several of the killed were bystanders. To me, this is just as plausible as the previous scenario. 70 guys lying in ambush, and nearly all of them casualties - against 5 minorly wounded on the US side. Nope. I don't buy that anymore than you buy the tank firing in all directions.

It won't be over until the returning soldiers are spat upon when they retun.

What matters is that they are the CNN of the Arab world. What they say is believed by millions of people in the Middle East just as strongly as what Faux News reports is believed by Republicans over here. Even if, by some miracle, no civilians were killed here and they really were all enemy soldiers, it won't matter because the myth of what happened will travel far more widely than the truth (just as myths of found WMD's are still believed by millions of Faux watchers). And as it does, it will turn even more people in the region against us and give them cause to aid the resistance.

No matter what we do, we are screwed simply by being there in the first place.

To hell with aljazeera. Quote a reputable source

BBC story posted in this same thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=246137#246612

Snuffed a whole buncha wogs, we MUST be winning now.

Could it happen here?

Take your anger to the brass or the president's administration--they are responsible for this mess.

It reads like our troops are just shooting anything that moves.

Again, the blame falls squarely on the commanders and the politicians--they are ultimately responsible if soldiers don't have the tools and support they need. I remember hearing many times that the peacekeeping training of many of these soldiers consisted of a scant few days, and urban combat perhaps even less. If the troops are killing randomly, they are in a bad situation or have not been trained or equipped to meet the situation. Don't spit on them--that is not something anyone on this site wants to be associated with.

and without merit.

If you have an argument or a scenario, then make it. Simply repeating "When are you folks gonna start spitting on soldiers?" is juvenile, nasty, and probably beneath you.

There have been MANY credible reports of US troops blasting the hell out of cars and vans of civilians at road checkpoints, or shooting randomly immediately following a roadside bombing. There is no debate that many civilians have been killed in this manner. Having said that, I don't blame the troops for this, nor would I spit on them when they return. They are reacting to the situation our current administration put them in. They are shot at and bombed every day, and are SCARED OUT OF THEIR #@%$#%#@ MINDS!!! I'd be shooting anything that moves were I in the same situation purely for self-preservation. I don't care how good your training is, when the shit hits the fan a lot of that training means jack.

If you mean my initial post when you smugly chirp "see above" then it's either inability to process simple information or deliberate rabble-rousing on your part. There's nothing in my statement that claims wrongdoing, sloppiness or any immorality on the part of our troops; all I'm stating is that the HQ spin is now trying to "prove" victory by showing how many combat casualties it's inflicted.

While we're intercoursing here, howzabout explaining your handle; is it a cute counting of coup that you've been a newcomer before and met with some questionable fate?

It's very easy to slag anyone who opposes the war as soldier haters, and it's a sign of ethical or circuitry deficiencies. If the "see above" doesn't refer to my post, then you're either being deliberately cryptic or need to figure out how to express yourself better.

Hey, and remember: if you're not a fundamentalist or a multimillionaire, the Republicans are laughing at you.

...when they returned?

I don't know anyone that was spat on, and I knew quite a few people that returned from there.

killed by an American tank as their shift ended.

More progress being made...

Last Updated: Sunday, 30 November, 2003, 23:14 GMT
Many dead in Iraqi city firefight

Five US soldiers and a civilian were wounded in the fighting which raged as militants made a series of attacks on convoys in the city on Sunday.

But witnesses said a US tank had fired indiscriminately during the fighting, killing at least two factory-workers.

<snip>

Frightened witnesses in Samarra told a correspondent for the French news agency AFP who managed to enter the city that US forces had repeatedly come under attack on Sunday.

However, they added that, in the aftermath of one attack at about 1255 (0955 GMT), an American tank had opened fire on workers leaving a factory at the end of their shift, killing two and wounding "many".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3251690.stm

Can we really believe they'd have 40 or 50 "ambushers" hanging out all in one group all dressed up in their former govt's Fedayeen black uniforms?
Why would they do that?

From what I've read, the ambushers in the past usually hit and run in groups of 3 or 4 max.

Why didn't they just dress in Redcoats and beat on some drums too?

Maybe I'm wrong, maybe it happened the just way the BBCreports this. ---but maybe the martians just landed too.

Could happen if you just "believe".
Tap your heals 3 times and say...


(?)

Remember that the Shrub just went over to Iraq to tell military folks how to spin the news in the right way. It was a well-placed ambush with insurgents picking up place and time of the fighting, detonating several charges and opening surprise fire on unsuspecting soldiers with everything they've had.
I bet the losses are more than just 5 wounded only the chimpmaster and his whore media are not willing to tell us the truth. In a few days we will hear a real story from real witnesses. So just wait and see.

(snip)
US troops fear revenge after killing 46
By Colin Freeman in Baghdad, Evening Standard
1 December 2003
US troops in Iraq were bracing themselves for possible retaliation today after killing nearly 50 Iraqi militants in the biggest single gun battle since the war ended.

Soldiers killed 46 resistance fighters and injured at least another 19 as they fended off what commanders called a "massive and well co-ordinated" attack on two military convoys.

The scale of yesterday's clash in Samarra, north of Baghdad, marked an escalation in what has previously been a low-intensity struggle.(snip)

(snip) Frightened locals also claimed that one American tank opened fire on workers leaving a factory, killing two and wounding "many". (snip/...)

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/articles/7947095?source=Evening

(Incidently, I have heard that the current total of Iraqii people killed in this attack is -> 54 <-.)