NationStates Jolt Archive

US, Iraqi Rebels Begin Talks on Pullout
22 February 2005

American officials are talking to negotiators from the anti-US resistance in Iraq, whom they have denounced in the past as foreign fighters and remnants of Saddam Hussein's regime.

Insurgent leaders and Pentagon officials have confirmed to ime magazine that talks have taken place for the first time in the heavily fortified Green Zone in Baghdad.

The Sunni guerrillas want a timetable for a US withdrawal, first from Iraqi cities and then from the country as a whole. American officials aim to see if they can drive a wedge between nationalist guerrillas and fanatical Islamist groups.

Abu Marwan, a resistance commander, is quoted as saying that the insurgents want to "fight and negotiate". They are modelling their strategy on that of the IRA and Sinn Fein in Northern Ireland. This means creating a united political organisation with a programme opposed to the US occupation.

US military commanders are now dubious about the chances of winning an outright military victory over the Sunni rebels who have a firm core of supporters among the five million-strong Sunni Muslim community. The US military has lost 1,479 dead and 10,740 wounded in Iraq since the invasion began in March 2003.
AlJazeeraNEWS
(...could have been)
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=613492

Unfortunately, I don't see al-Jazeera as a credible news source.

How many sunni insurgents have died or been crippled? I'd wager many more than the Americans. Plus the sunni still need to deal with the majority Shia government which will draft the constitution, reap the oil wealth, and control the police and armed forces.

Unfortunately, I don't see al-Jazeera as a credible news source.
what about democracynow.org?

When I see it on BBC, I'll believe it.

Unfortunately, I don't see al-Jazeera as a credible news source.
what about some "Independent" European Newspaper?

Talk is cheap.

We have been talking to North Korea for 50 years.....

Ocean, look at this from a practical perspective:

1. The insurgency is now politically isolated. They made the mistake of not participating in elections, and kept their own supporters from participating in elections. The elections took place anyway, and now they are screwed politically.
2. They have no ability to stop US troops from occupying the country. They cannot win a propaganda battle over US troops losses. They can't inflict enough losses. They can't kill US troops without killing ten times as many innocent Iraqi bystanders. They can't capture a US soldier and hold him hostage. They can't engage the US in battle (something the successful Viet Cong could do on demand) without having that group wiped off the face of the earth.
3. The Iraqi Army is in training. It will be under Kurdish and Shiite control. Bad time to be a Sunni insurgent. The new Iraqi Army will have US weapons and US body armor (which is rifle proof). Want to see who wins a street fight between the two in a year?
4. The US Marines are currently clearing the western neighborhoods of Baghdad in another operation much like the one in Fallujah. The insurgents can't stop it, and any attempt to do so will result in death. That is their last, largest stronghold.

Of course they want to negotiate. Of course they want the world to think they are. But why would the US negotiate at this point? Anything but their unconditional surrender would be pointless.

If the insurgency continues, it will only mean the death of insurgents at a rate which they cannot sustain.

Ocean, look at this from a practical perspective:

1. The insurgency is now politically isolated. They made the mistake of not participating in elections, and kept their own supporters from participating in elections. The elections took place anyway, and now they are screwed politically.
2. They have no ability to stop US troops from occupying the country. They cannot win a propaganda battle over US troops losses. They can't inflict enough losses. They can't kill US troops without killing ten times as many innocent Iraqi bystanders. They can't capture a US soldier and hold him hostage. They can't engage the US in battle (something the successful Viet Cong could do on demand) without having that group wiped off the face of the earth.
3. The Iraqi Army is in training. It will be under Kurdish and Shiite control. Bad time to be a Sunni insurgent. The new Iraqi Army will have US weapons and US body armor (which is rifle proof). Want to see who wins a street fight between the two in a year?
4. The US Marines are currently clearing the western neighborhoods of Baghdad in another operation much like the one in Fallujah. The insurgents can't stop it, and any attempt to do so will result in death. That is their last, largest stronghold.

Of course they want to negotiate. Of course they want the world to think they are. But why would the US negotiate at this point? Anything but their unconditional surrender would be pointless.

If the insurgency continues, it will only mean the death of insurgents at a rate which they cannot sustain.


body armour is rifle proof? hmm maybe a .22

body armour is rifle proof? hmm maybe a .22

The current body armor, IBA, or Interceptor Body Armor, which is issued to all troops in country, has plates in the front and back.

This is proof against the AK-47 at a few feet. The rounds will not penetrate.

That's why the number of deaths are low.

Imagine the consternation of insurgents. They are fighting house to house in Fallujah, and despite getting into firefights inside rooms, the insurgents keep getting cleaned out.

Because the US troops are far more resistant to being killed than a soft-bodied unarmored insurgent.

body armour is rifle proof? hmm maybe a .22
The ceramic plates in front and back of the US Army's body armor will stop an AK 47 or AK 74 round.

The ceramic plates in front and back of the US Army's body armor will stop an AK 47 or AK 74 round.

I think a lot of people like Jayastan have been quietly wondering why we're taking eight times less casualties than we did in Vietnam, even though we're fighting an insurgency in urban terrain.

And they're wondering why the combat results in close combat are so lopsided (fighting at ranges where you have to use rifles and pistols).

It's not even funny - I know exactly why the insurgents don't dare engage US troops in a firefight anymore. It's fatal. And you probably won't kill any Americans - nowhere near as many as you will lose.

2. They have no ability to stop US troops from occupying the country....They can't inflict enough losses. They can't kill US troops without killing ten times as many innocent Iraqi bystanders. They can't capture a US soldier and hold him hostage. They can't engage the US in battle (something the successful Viet Cong could do on demand) without having that group wiped off the face of the earth.
"Everything is going according t' Plan" --Rumsfield. :rolleyes:

"Everything is going according t' Plan" --Rumsfield. :rolleyes:

Ok, name one US soldier taken hostage by the insurgents.

Or, name one open battle taken (in Viet Cong style) by the insurgents where they inflicted more casualties than they took.

Or, we could count incidents of explosives set off, and compare total Iraqi civilian casualties to US troops killed or injured.

You're saying the insurgency is winning? Or can win?

Do you think that the Shiites and Kurds, who outnumber the Sunnis who are running the insurgency, would just let that happen?

:rolleyes:

I think a lot of people like Jayastan have been quietly wondering why we're taking eight times less casualties than we did in Vietnam, even though we're fighting an insurgency in urban terrain.

And they're wondering why the combat results in close combat are so lopsided (fighting at ranges where you have to use rifles and pistols).

It's not even funny - I know exactly why the insurgents don't dare engage US troops in a firefight anymore. It's fatal. And you probably won't kill any Americans - nowhere near as many as you will lose.


Wha? I used to have a SKS, well before the gun laws here in canada anyways. And you guys are telling me simple body armour could stop a AK bullet from a few feet? :eek: I have seen those bullets go a far way into engine blocks...

Hmmmm maybe the body armour is made of mithril? :p

Sounds like they are fighting bandit scum who cant shoot straight imo

The ceramic plates in front and back of the US Army's body armor will stop an AK 47 or AK 74 round.

21/02/2005 - 19:04:51

Four US soldiers were killed in Iraq, three of them today when a roadside bomb detonated as they were evacuating a a colleague.

Eight soldiers were also wounded when the bomb exploded. The soldiers were evacuating a soldier who’d been injured when his convoy collided with a civilian vehicle, the US command said.

The location of the accident was not given.

Meanwhile, a fourth US soldier was killed by small arms fire in the northern Iraqi city of Mosul on Saturday, the military said, giving no other details.

"Everything is going according t' Plan" --Rumsfield. :rolleyes:
Do you want Iraq to become a failed state like Afghanistan after the Soviets left? I was against going into Iraq to begin with, but now there is no option other than getting the Iraqi people back on their feet and running their own government. It seems like some people hate the US so much that they are hoping for the new Iraqi government to fail, for the insurgency to win, just to spite us. It seems these people don't give a crap about the Iraqis. They are just a useful weapon against America.

21/02/2005 - 19:04:51

Four US soldiers were killed in Iraq, three of them today when a roadside bomb detonated as they were evacuating a a colleague.

Eight soldiers were also wounded when the bomb exploded. The soldiers were evacuating a soldier who’d been injured when his convoy collided with a civilian vehicle, the US command said.

The location of the accident was not given.

Meanwhile, a fourth US soldier was killed by small arms fire in the northern Iraqi city of Mosul on Saturday, the military said, giving no other details.


He could have been hit in the face im thinking. :rolleyes:

If someone can actually post a link with decent proof, that the USA body armour can stop a direct decent sized bullet fired from a AK weapon plz?

He could have been hit in the face im thinking. :rolleyes:

If someone can actually post a link with decent proof, that the USA body armour can stop a direct decent sized bullet fired from a AK weapon plz?
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/interceptor.htm

I've personally fired a more powerful round, a 7.62x51mm round, at a range of about 3 feet at someone wearing the SAPI plates during a demonstration of the armor.

It doesn't even stagger the wearer.

Imagine being an unarmored insurgent knowing the US troops are coming in their armor. If you don't get a face hit, you won't kill them. But they can shoot you just about anywhere and put you down.

Not fair, eh?

Do you want Iraq to become a failed state like Afghanistan after the Soviets left? No I want Iraq to Become a succesful state...a good Place to live...just Like Afghanistan..after the Amerikans took over [/massive Sarcasm]

No I want Iraq to Become a good Place to live...just Like Afghanistan..after the Amerikans took over [/massive Sarcasm]

So you think Afghanistan was a better place to live - where women were shot in the head for listening to taped music?

That's great, Ocean.

21/02/2005 - 19:04:51

Four US soldiers were killed in Iraq, three of them today when a roadside bomb detonated as they were evacuating a a colleague.

Eight soldiers were also wounded when the bomb exploded. The soldiers were evacuating a soldier who’d been injured when his convoy collided with a civilian vehicle, the US command said.

The location of the accident was not given.

Meanwhile, a fourth US soldier was killed by small arms fire in the northern Iraqi city of Mosul on Saturday, the military said, giving no other details.
Gee, maybe he was shot in the head. Maybe the bullet hit his leg and cut the femoral artery. The body armor used by the USA reduces casualties significantly, but it doesn't cover the whole body.
http://strategypage.com/gallery/articles/military_photos_200521223.asp

Unfortunately, I don't see al-Jazeera as a credible news source.
Me either! :rolleyes:

So you think Afghanistan was a better place to live - where women were shot in the head for listening to taped music?

That's great, Ocean.oh suuure...they are better now...and so are the Iraqis

Ive seen the Line-ups ate the Afghan and Iraqui Consulate...thousands of refugees want to come back there.. [/uber massive Sarcasm]

Gee, maybe he was shot in the head. Maybe the bullet hit his leg and cut the femoral artery. The body armor used by the USA reduces casualties significantly, but it doesn't cover the whole body.
http://strategypage.com/gallery/articles/military_photos_200521223.asp

If you figure that the majority of fatal wounds are from penetrations of the torso, any armor that largely protects the torso from penetration is going to radically alter casualty figures.

Add to this the fact that if you survive an immediate injury, you have a good chance of recovering in hospital.

These advantages do not incur to any insurgent. No body armor at all.

There has to be a definite morale effect on people who are unarmored, especially if they have heard from experienced fighters that you have to shoot Americans in the head or legs.

The recent Marine sergeant who is up for a Medal of Honor was wearing the armor. You can see his serious leg wounds - but despite being wounded in the legs, he managed to kill several AK-47 wielding insurgents at close range - using a 9mm pistol. Shooting people in the legs does not stop them the way getting shot through the center of the chest does.

The disparity in killing ability gets really skewed when you have that armor on.

Me either! :rolleyes:
welcome to the club Eutrusca, what took you so long?

oh suuure...they are better now...and so are the Iraqis

Ive seen the Line-ups ate the Afghan and Iraqui Consulate...thousands of refugees want to come back there.. [/uber massive Sarcasm]

So you think it's a good idea to shoot women in the head at the former soccer stadium, just because they listen to music on tape?

No I want Iraq to Become a succesful state...a good Place to live...just Like Afghanistan..after the Amerikans took over [/massive Sarcasm]
You really are ignorant. The taliban weren't exactly a model of enlightened governance. I only wish that someday you might live under such a regime and see what it's like.

oh suuure...they are better now...and so are the Iraqis

Ive seen the Line-ups ate the Afghan and Iraqui Consulate...thousands of refugees want to come back there.. [/uber massive Sarcasm]
You are to liberals what Jesussaves is to christians. An embarassment.

These advantages do not incur to any insurgent. No body armor at all.
You need more Courage to fight on the Rebels side...than to Figth for Uncle Sam..

The US pay and Benefits are way better too.

welcome to the club Eutrusca, what took you so long?
Huh? "Club?" What club??? [ Looks around. ]

You are to liberals what Jesussaves is to christians. An embarassment.Who says Im a Liberal?

You need more Courage to fight on the Rebels side...than to Figth for Uncle Sam..

The US pay and Benefits are way better too.
Courage doesn't make you right. The SS troops that fought for the nazis were courageous, but not right.

You need more Courage to fight on the Rebels side...than to Figth for Uncle Sam..

The US pay and Benefits are way better too.

It's not courage if you end up dead. Over 2000 insurgents in Fallujah found out that you can't fight against men with body armor and better gunsights.

Try fighting at night with no night vision, and no night sights on your weapon.

Against men who have Trijicon night sights that work day or night without batteries. Who have night vision goggles. Who have flash grenades designed to blind a whole roomful of people before they come in shooting.

Oh, and you're still unarmored. It's not called courage - it's called suicide.

Who says Im a Liberal?
That was my impression from things you've posted in the past. What are you then? A troll?

When I see it on BBC, I'll believe it.

That's a little more credible, but I'll wait for FOX News thank you. :D

That was my impression from things you've posted in the past. What are you then? A troll?
ROFLMAO!!! :D

US military commanders are now dubious about the chances of winning an outright military victory over the Sunni rebels who have a firm core of supporters among the five million-strong Sunni Muslim community. The US military has lost 1,479 dead and 10,740 wounded in Iraq since the invasion began in March 2003.
Up to here was plausible. This is just pure propaganda.

You really are ignorant. The taliban weren't exactly a model of enlightened governance.And that is why Afghanistan is today such a great place to live...Just look at the Afghanistan Consulate line ups...they are 3 blocks long !!! [/more sarcasm]

Up to here was plausible. This is just pure propaganda.
so that means what?

That I made it up?

dude I cant Write that good...my Gramatic skills are brutal.

so that means what?

That I made it up?

dude I cant Write that good...my Gramatic skills are brutal.
No, it was a comment on AJ's reporting.

It's not courage if you end up dead. Over 2000 insurgents in Fallujah found out that you can't fight against men with body armor and better gunsights.

Try fighting at night with no night vision, and no night sights on your weapon.

Against men who have Trijicon night sights that work day or night without batteries. Who have night vision goggles. Who have flash grenades designed to blind a whole roomful of people before they come in shooting.

Oh, and you're still unarmored. It's not called courage - it's called suicide.
The Brits were better equiped than the US Founding Fathers too...
The Germans vs the Resistance.
The US vs the Vietnamese
The North vs the South

Remember the Alamo?

If you are afraid to die...then just Surrender....But If you dont figth to defend your Family, Your People...You are just not courageous.

And that is why Afghanistan is today such a great place to live...Just look at the Afghanistan Consulate line ups...they are 3 blocks long !!! [/more sarcasm]
Well, let's see. Women are going to school and to work, that's an improvement
Religious minorities aren't being executed by the government, that's good too.
Gays aren't being executed by the government, thanks to the good old USofA.
Music, TV, and movies are legal.

The only downside? Opium production is up. That can be solved by building up their industrial infrastructure and giving people another option for making a profit.

so that means what?

That I made it up?

dude I cant Write that good...my Gramatic skills are brutal.

Kind of hard for AJ to report from Iraq, since they don't have any offices there anymore.

Seems the Iraqis don't like them either.

No, it was a comment on AJ's reporting.
It is not from AJ.
Its from some "Independent" EU newspaper.

Huh? "Club?" What club??? [ Looks around. ]
The "If its not from Allied Media...It cant be true" Club.

BTW I am not a member.

The Brits were better equiped than the US Founding Fathers too...
The Germans vs the Resistance.
The US vs the Vietnamese
The North vs the South

Remember the Alamo?

If you are afraid to die...then just Surrender....But If you dont figth to defend your Family, Your People...You are just not courageous.
The difference in technology between the US and insurgents dwarfs the technological difference between any of those examples you gave.
Also, US troops are as brave as anybody.

Well, let's see. Women are going to school and to work, that's an improvement
Religious minorities aren't being executed by the government, that's good too.
Gays aren't being executed by the government, thanks to the good old USofA.
Music, TV, and movies are legal.

The only downside? Opium production is up. That can be solved by building up their industrial infrastructure and giving people another option for making a profit.

If only it were so rosy.....

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20050221/wl_sthasia_afp/afghanistandevelopment_050221173629


KABUL (AFP) - Afghanistan (news - web sites) remains one of the world's poorest places three years after the ousting of the Taliban and could fall back into chaos if people's grievances are not addressed, the UN warned in its first ever development survey of the war-ravaged country.

There had been "remarkable" progress since US-led forces toppled the Islamic regime, but without help the country that once sheltered Osama bin Laden (news - web sites) could again pose a international threat, according to the report which ranked Afghanistan 173 out of 178 countries.

Only Burundi, Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger and Sierra Leone in Africa are more impoverished, the United Nations (news - web sites) Afghanistan Human Development Index report said.


Afghans' life expectancy is only 44.5 years, at least 20 years lower than neighbouring Central Asian nations.

Officials have never before been able to carry out a proper assessment of Afghanistan's economy, society and education because decades of warfare made it unsafe for them.

President Hamid Karzai conceded in the report's foreword that it painted "a gloomy picture of the status of human development after two decades of war and destruction."

The report said there was room for cautious optimism about Afghanistan's future but concluded that "without mincing words, the fragile nation could easily tumble back into chaos."

More effort was needed from both the Afghan government and the outside world or else "Afghanistan will collapse into an insecure state, a threat to its own people as well as to the international community," it said.

"The basic human needs and the genuine grievances of people -- the lack of jobs, health, education, income, dignity and opportunities for participation for the Afghan people -- must be met, and international aid must be tightly controlled," it said.

Although Afghanistan's legal economy has grown by 25 to 30 percent since the fall of the Taliban, there has been little trickle-down to the poorest echelons of society, according to the UN.

The report -- titled "Security With A Human Face" -- found that the poorest 30 percent of the population receive only nine percent of the national income, while the upper third receive 55 percent.

"Our team found the overwhelming majority of people hold a sense of pessimism and fear that reconstruction is bypassing them," said Daud Saba, one the authors of the report.

Half of the population are desperately poor and their poverty is compounded by a lack of social services, poor health, education and nutrition as well as a yawning gap in rights between men and women.

Although three million children have gone back to school since the Taliban collapsed, Afghanistan "has the worst education system in the world" and one of the lowest adult literacy rates at only 28.7 percent, the report found.


Most economic activity is fuelled by illicit drugs and Afghanistan is now the world's leading producer of opium, which has underpinned a culture of violence and boosted the strength of private armies.

"Physical violence by armed militias continues, as does torture by security forces, deadly attacks by Taliban, hostage-taking, street gangs and domestic violence against women and children," the report said.

The Taliban continue to launch attacks against US forces, who invaded Afghanistan after the fundamentalist regime refused to hand over bin Laden following the September 11, 2001 attacks.

Years of discrimination and poverty have also relegated Afghan women to a life hemmed in by poverty, malnutrition, exclusion from public life, rape, violence, poor health care, illiteracy, and forced marriage.

One woman dies from pregnancy-related causes approximately every 30 minutes, and maternal mortality rates are 60 times higher than in developed countries.

Of 300 children surveyed, 72 percent experienced the death of a relative and nearly all witnessed acts of violence.

Millions of dollars of foreign aid are flowing into the country but the report warned of the need for measures to limit corruption and ensure the fair flow of aid to prevent an increase in conflict and competition.



There is hope, but it is still a looooooooong way from being any sort of place you or I would want to raise a family.

That was my impression from things you've posted in the past. What are you then? A troll?
Im no partisan...Im not sold to the Repubs, or the Dems...

They both have issues I do not like.

The Brits were better equiped than the US Founding Fathers too...
The Germans vs the Resistance.
The US vs the Vietnamese
The North vs the South
Remember the Alamo?
If you are afraid to die...then just Surrender....But If you dont figth to defend your Family, Your People...You are just not courageous.

The US forces and British forces during the Revolutionary War were comparably equipped. Where there were major differences, it showed.

The Resistance did not defeat the Germans. They were an annoyance.

The Vietnamese accomplished what the Iraqi insurgents cannot - they could get close to US troops to avoid the US heavy weaponry, and inflict casualties on US infantry. But now the infantry are well armored. So when you get close to US troops in an attempt to avoid the bombs, the US troops just gun you down.

The North was far better equipped than the South - and they won.

We're not talking about a simple advantage. We're talking about something that has made a revolution in close combat possible - the defeat of massed insurgents in hostile terrain at close range using infantry.

If only it were so rosy.....

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20050221/wl_sthasia_afp/afghanistandevelopment_050221173629



There is hope, but it is still a looooooooong way from being any sort of place you or I would want to raise a family.
Better than under the Taliban. Who gave them that hope? NATO and the USA.

Well, let's see. Women are going to school and to work, that's an improvement
Religious minorities aren't being executed by the government, that's good too.
Gays aren't being executed by the government, thanks to the good old USofA.
Music, TV, and movies are legal.

The only downside? Opium production is up. That can be solved by building up their industrial infrastructure and giving people another option for making a profit.


Well don't be kidding yourself about it being Rosy. A co-worker is from Kabul and he has a large family there and in Kandahar(sp?).

They report there are good things happening(ie paved roads between major cities) but it's far from being a safe place.

Im no partisan...Im not sold to the Repubs, or the Dems...

They both have issues I do not like.
I didn't call you a republican or a democrat. I called you an embarassment to liberals.

Well don't be kidding yourself about it being Rosy. A co-worker is from Kabul and he has a large family there and in Kandahar(sp?).

They report there are good things happening(ie paved roads between major cities) but it's far from being a safe place.

It could have been worse.

In the aftermath of 9-11, the US could have used nuclear weapons and depopulated Afghanistan.

Also, US troops are as brave as anybody.My brains tells me that it takes more courage to be an Iraqui Insurgent.

what does your Brain tells you?

I didn't call you a republican or a democrat. I called you an embarassment to liberals.
Are you a Liberal DrunkeCommi ?

My brains tells me that it takes more courage to be an Iraqui Insurgent.

what does your Brain tells you?

Is it bravery, or is that they use meth to give them "courage"?

My brains tells me that it takes more courage to be an Iraqui Insurgent.

what does your Brain tells you?
That it takes a tremendous ammount of stupidity to be an Iraqi insurgent. Stupid enough to try to fight the USA, stupid enough to think killing your own people will win you respect and love at home, stupid enough to think you will be rewarded by 72 virgins in paradise for blowing up a car bomb outside a shia mosque. That's pretty damn stupid.

So when are you joining the insurgency, Ocean?

My brains tells me that it takes more courage to be an Iraqui Insurgent.

what does your Brain tells you?

Who cares? If you're courageous and dead, you're just dead. If you're less courageous and wearing a lot of body armor, standing on the dead body of some really brave guy, you win.

Didn't Patton teach you anything?

"No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country.
He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country."

Are you a Liberal DrunkeCommi ?
Yes, I'm a liberal.

Is it bravery, or is that they use meth to give them "courage"?
Hey Jonny...I was expenting you..what took you so long?

Yes, I'm a liberal.then You can say...I am an embarrasement to you.

now...why dont you ask me if I care? :D

Hey Jonny...I was expenting you..what took you so long?

I had pt this morning. I'm wear my artificial limbs as we speak. And trying to type with my hands now.

Seriously, you can't be brave when you are high on meth, you just get stupid. I've seen video of these "brave" fighters in action. If you ask me they are highly untrained people, who don't know what the word "discipline" is. Like the one video where a guy with an rpg was ready to fire (out in the open of course), he got hit like 4 times in the body, then one shot went through his head. Meanwhile all of his buddies were screaming "Allah akbar" or some such nonsense.

then You can say...I am an embarrasement to you.

now...why dont you ask me if I care? :D
The reason you should care, liberals like you undermine efforts to achieve reforms in society, government, and international politics.

The reason you don't care, you are probably not even 23 yet and don't know a damn thing about the real world.

The "If its not from Allied Media...It cant be true" Club.

BTW I am not a member.
WTF??? :confused:

... to think you will be rewarded by 72 virgins in paradise for blowing up a car bomb outside a shia mosque. That's pretty damn stupid.

So when are you joining the insurgency, Ocean?The minute you give me solid Proof about the 72 Virgins waiting for me @ Paradise. :D

http://www.hotels-bangkok-thailand.net/phuket-hotel-reservation/royal-paradise-hotel/royal-paradise-hotel.jpg
Paradise Hotel

WTF??? :confused:I took some article from some Indpendent EU Newspaper...and added AlJazeeraNEWS...

And waited for Whisprlegs and others to say AlJazeera is BS.

I always do that...and it always pay.

I took some article from some Indpendent EU Newspaper...and added AlJazeeraNEWS...

And waited for Whisprlegs and others to say AlJazeera is BS.

I always do that...and it always pay.

Just because two sources say it's true doesn't mean it is.

I still think it's BS. The insurgency is losing.

Just because two sources say it's true doesn't mean it is.True.

Just think of all those news and weather sites that keep giving us news of Santa sightings during Christmas night.

Even NORAD gets into the act.

Should we believe then, that because 40 news sites reported seeing Santa, that he really exists?

Up to here was plausible. This is just pure propaganda.
here is the full article...

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=613492

how it is propaganda?

I still don't believe it.

Just think of all those news and weather sites that keep giving us news of Santa sightings during Christmas night.

Even NORAD gets into the act.

Should we believe then, that because 40 news sites reported seeing Santa, that he really exists?
Depends...was BBC one of the 40? :D

seriously...I agree...40 news sites is not final Proof.

I still don't believe it.
Its your God given Rigth.

Wow pretty impressive, that USA body armour, if they can work it to get protection for limbs + face, it will take alot to stop a US soldier.

Hopefully the canuck army will get this stuff in the future, well heres to hoping....

Wow pretty impressive, that USA body armour, if they can work it to get protection for limbs + face, it will take alot to stop a US soldier.

Hopefully the canuck army will get this stuff in the future, well heres to hoping....

The problem for an insurgent is that it already skews the balance.

You can still injure a US soldier, and possibly kill one - but it's gotten harder.

Add fighting at night, and it becomes really unfair.

Wow pretty impressive, that USA body armour, if they can work it to get protection for limbs + face, it will take alot to stop a US soldier.

Hopefully the canuck army will get this stuff in the future, well heres to hoping....
The problem with that is that the best part, the ceramic plates, aren't flexible, therefore not too good for covering the limbs while keeping them useable, and isn't transparent, so if you cover the face, you can't see.

Wow pretty impressive, that USA body armour, if they can work it to get protection for limbs + face, it will take alot to stop a US soldier...
Impressive indeed...props to whoever invented this...

I assume the SWAT vests are not this good.

Impressive indeed...props to whoever invented this...

I assume the SWAT vests are not this good.

In the US, they are.

Interceptor Body Armor (Level IV) is standard SWAT armor in most major cities.

In the US, they are.

Interceptor Body Armor (Level IV) is standard SWAT armor in most major cities.
as far as Police is concerned....I always tough "Body Armor" was just a catchy Phrase...and that thay could only protect vs standard guns...

Looks like the sufix "Armor" is well deserved.

I always tough "Body Armor" was just a catchy Phrase...and that thay could only protect vs standard guns...

Looks like the sufix "Armor" is well deserved.

As long as you have the ceramic inserts... otherwise, it's only good against pistol rounds and shrapnel.

It's also the thing that everyone was so upset about at the start of the Iraq war. In short supply, only certain units got it (usually infantry), but since everyone was everywhere in Iraq, everyone was at risk. It wasn't until this past April when there was enough to issue it to everyone.

And then they started in on complaining about enough armor on vehicles that weren't previously armored.

Wha? I used to have a SKS, well before the gun laws here in canada anyways. And you guys are telling me simple body armour could stop a AK bullet from a few feet? :eek: I have seen those bullets go a far way into engine blocks...

Hmmmm maybe the body armour is made of mithril? :p

Sounds like they are fighting bandit scum who cant shoot straight imo
Of course rifle rounds can pentrate "soft" body armour. The armour we're talking about includes boron carbide inserts.

He could have been hit in the face im thinking. :rolleyes:

If someone can actually post a link with decent proof, that the USA body armour can stop a direct decent sized bullet fired from a AK weapon plz?
I could post a link where you can BUY body armour that will stop .30 rifle rounds.

When I see it on BBC, I'll believe it.

heh heh ehe heh, oh God. . .can't breath. . .heh heh heh.

How many sunni insurgents have died or been crippled? I'd wager many more than the Americans. Plus the sunni still need to deal with the majority Shia government which will draft the constitution, reap the oil wealth, and control the police and armed forces.

Untrue. The Sunnis will be involved in the drafting of the constitution, and they have the right to veto the constitution, and they probably will.

I could post a link where you can BUY body armour that will stop .30 rifle rounds.
WOW, you mean Civileans can buy this military armors,

I guess if I can buy a Hummer...I should be allowed to buy armor too :)

WOW, you mean Civileans can buy this military armors,

And why not? Armour is armour. Stuff [Kevlar, that is] was invented by the private sector [DuPont Corporation, in fact].

And why not? Armour is armour. Stuff [Kevlar, that is] was invented by the private sector [DuPont Corporation, in fact].
good.

Its Kevlar or Ceramic?

They said Ceramic earlier...

good.

Its Kevlar or Ceramic?

They said Ceramic earlier...

The underlying vest is another fiber (Spectra?) but the solid plates are ceramic.

This will probably come off as being racist, and it isn't my intent. But so be it. There is too much of an issue being made of this miracle armor that US troops wear. I think the key thing here is one simple fact-the insurgents in Iraq are completely and utterly incompetent. It's been seen since the 1960's and 70's that Arab forces don't really make the best soldiers. They were a disgrace to the Soviet weapons systems they used then, and they continue to misuse these weapons today. There is a sidearm, although it is not the most common issue, that I've used before, called the Samozaryadniy Pistolet Serdyukova. At close quarters combat, I find it likely that it could pierce the armor that US troops wear. This handgun was originally designed for scenarios such as shooting a target that was in a car, or in heavy armor. At a range of 100 meters, it has near 100% penetration of 30 layers of kevlar in addition to a 2.8mm titanium plate. This firearm was also under the designation SR-1 Vektor by the FSB when it was adopted in 1996. The current rifle that is being phased in to standard service, the AN94, is also a very powerful rifle, probably capable of piercing this armor. I find that the difference here may not be how well equipped US troops are, because they are certainly extremely well equipped, but the sheer inability of the foe that they face in combat. Although combat is and always will be dangerous, I would much rather have to fight an ill-trained, poorly disciplined, incompetent force rather than a motivated, experienced, semi-disciplined opponent. I would honestly rank Chechen bandits as a far more competent fighting force than the insurgents in Iraq, who are little more than terrorists.

Untrue. The Sunnis will be involved in the drafting of the constitution, and they have the right to veto the constitution, and they probably will.
Really? I was under the impression that only those who were elected would have a hand in drafting the constitution. Personally, I say screw the sunnis. They've been trying to maintain their rule over the majority Shia through terrorism and intimidation. They deserve nothing.

I read that article, it only says that Saddam loyalists and nationalists are talking with the Americans. It still means maniacs like Abu Musab al-Zarqawi will be running around blowing shit up.