IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Major attack on Abu Ghraib
[link|http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7366857|MSNBC]
A group of 40 to 60 insurgents attacked the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq late Saturday in a well-coordinated assault that inflicted 18 American casualties, U.S. military officials told NBC News.

No details yet, but if the report of 18 casualties is correct, then this was a deadly and huge attack. I think it will be the worst single attack against americans during both the invasion and the occupation to date.

Jay
New Note that "casualty" can mean injured under fire...
New Re: Note that "casualty" can mean injured under fire...
The last time there was a coordinated attack like this, there was a large number of US wounded but only one or two deaths, and it was a huge loss for the insurgents who lost about twenty-five men. There was a high casualty count but fortunately a low death toll for the US. The fact that the insurgents could even muster the attack was a problem of deep concern, and is here.

This time, since there's no word on insurgent deaths, it's possible they were smart enough to retreat when they noticed they weren't winning. These are early reports so they're not going to have much information, but in general, when the guerillas can carry away their dead and heavy weapons, it's a stalemate, not a victory. It was pretty gutsy to attack US forces after dark and there's no way they could have taken the prison with 60 men. Looks from here like this was a harassment attack, or maybe they had more balls than brains and figured it out later. [link|http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200504/s1336981.htm|This report lends credibility to it being planned harrassment]: "The attacks were intermittent. They would fire RPGs and then stop, then they would attack again."

It also looks like they hit the prison and hurt a bunch of prisoners. Oops.

West Baghdad is said to be unsafe to travel in. It wouldn't surprise me if many of the insurgents were locals.


New Re: Note that "casualty" can mean injured under fire...
I think it Has To Be 'under' fire -

Just happened to hear a discussion of 'casualty' on air, en passant = no names. It isn't counted as a casualty, if you die running your Hummer into a pole, get a disease, lose your mind from the daily doubletalk and cardboard armor - it has to be an 'under fire' event.

These other deaths, maimings are Not counted in those whispered casualty figures. We have to look those up elsewhere.


Ashton
     Major attack on Abu Ghraib - (JayMehaffey) - (3)
         Note that "casualty" can mean injured under fire... -NT - (Another Scott) - (2)
             Re: Note that "casualty" can mean injured under fire... - (tangaroa)
             Re: Note that "casualty" can mean injured under fire... - (Ashton)

Has anyone seen the bridge?
118 ms