Saddam's Sons Likely Killed in Firefight!

[minusthejihad]

Saddam's Sons Likely Killed in Firefight, U.S. Officials Say

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,92591,00.html

MOSUL, Iraq — Saddam Hussein's sons Udai and Qusai (search) were likely killed Tuesday when U.S. soldiers stormed a house in the northern Iraqi city of Mosul, U.S. military sources told Fox News.

Officials earlier confirmed that four key allies of the former Iraqi dictator had been killed inside the house, a large villa that belonged to one of Saddam's cousins.

The house was burned to the ground after a loud, four-hour gunbattle between the people inside and soldiers from the 101st Airborne Division.

Residents of the city, 280 miles north of Baghdad, said the American soldiers were searching for Saddam's sons, who have been reported in the area.

"Individuals of very high interest to the coalition forces were hiding out in the building," Lt. Col. William Bishop of the 101st Airborne Division (search) told Reuters.

"This morning we went to the building and surrounded it."

According to the Reuters report, U.S. soldiers were fired at by people inside the house as they approached, and the Americans called in helicopters and an unmanned vehicle for assistance before storming the house.

The United States has offered a $25 million reward for information leading to Saddam's capture, and $15 million for his sons.

Fox News military analyst Col. Bill Cowan said he hoped Saddam's sons had been captured and not killed.

"I think in this case, it'd be great to have them alive," he said.

"I think for the [Iraqi] population to see these two guys shackled, incarcerated and really given some harsh treatment … will have a most profound and long-term psychological advantage."

Cowan added that Saddam's sons might provide good intelligence on their father's whereabouts.

Hmmm. Let's hope they were captured, so then they could be hung upside down and tortured, good old fashioned Pal Collaborator style. Woops, the US wouldn't allow that of course.

[cerulean]

I hope this article is correct. It was disheartening to get all those contradictory reports earlier on. Strange that they were both hanging out together - I would have thought they would have split up for greater safety and to be less obvious.

[MichaelC]

It would be good to capture them alive as the Iraqis need to know that such people are not lingering "in the wings" waiting for a chance to reemerge and continue their reign of terror. I do not actually consider that a real possibility but uncertainty in the mind of the Iraqi people as to the status of saddam and his sons is part of the ongoing problem.

If they have indeed been killed, I certainly hope that the bodies are clearly identifiable and that no uncertainty remains in the heart of any Iraqi that they are indeed dead. There have discussions on the board lately concerning the propensity of the arab mind to believe whatever it wishes to believe regardless of facts to the contrary, so convincing evidence is essential, at least for those who don't insist on living in the fantasy world of the arab media.

In watching reports of this event, I am reminded of the ancient custom of placing the heads of defeated enemies on pikes outside the city walls so that all who entered the city could plainly see who was "in" and who was "out" among the powers that be. A convincing display for the general population as to who is still shuffling around on this mortal coil, and who has moved along.

I'm not suggesting that I think such things should be done, and of course it's not going to happen, but I do want Iraqis to see those bodies and know their tormentors are being hunted down and dealt with.

[L@mplighterM]

Originally posted by cerulean
I hope this article is correct. It was disheartening to get all those contradictory reports earlier on. Strange that they were both hanging out together - I would have thought they would have split up for greater safety and to be less obvious.

Apparently it’s all but certain that they died in the firefight. What is lacking is that last .01%; the cooked remains have to be subjected to DNA analysis.

Yummy cooked Hussein!

[L@mplighterM]

This from freerepublic.com


Mahmud al Tikriti, an "ACE" previously captured and Presidential assistant, has identified bodies on the scene.

I think the who of that report is pretty big news: if they're carting him around to identify bodies, it means he's probably cooperating in other areas as well.


END


There’s celebrative gunfire on the streets of Iraq (at least ½ an hour).

Source CNN NEWS

Ryan Brahimi (undercover) live from Iraq.

[Mediocrates]

It's a shame really. Most royal families get publically executed in order to create closure for the miserables who were subject to them. Plus it's a handy warning to the others to see those monkeys dragged around in their show trial cages before hanging, electrocution or firing squad. Put their heads on pikes like in the days of Cromwell.

[danholo]

The thread's name should be changed. The US reportedly confirms the deaths of both Uday and Qusay, sons of Saddam Hussein. Now all that's needed is Saddam's head on a silver platter. I love it when bad people get what they deserve.

... What an unusually crude post by me but I'm actually satisfied by the deaths of these two, who don't deserve to live.

[yehudi]

one (or rather two, thank you michael) less !


the big problem is I'm not sure killing even Saddam would solve the problem of the guerrilla war: there is no central control of the guerrilla. If anything it is more driven by anti imperialist, anti US ideology. So "cutting the head off" is nice but there is no real head. A trial would improve the effect, though.

and of course it's limited to the sunnis that supported saddam. In many regards the shiites are more frightening.


anyway it's an excellent news [deleted]

[L@mplighterM]

Snip:

Saddam Hussein's sons Qusay and Uday were killed in a firefight with U.S. troops in Mosul, the commander of U.S. ground forces in Iraq says.

"We're certain that Uday and Qusay were killed," Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez adds. "We've used multiple sources to identify the individuals."

http://edition.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/07/22/sprj.irq.sons/index.html

[MichaelC]

Originally posted by yehudi
one less !
Actully, that's "Two" less.

the big problem is I'm not sure killing even Saddam would solve the problem of the guerrilla war: there is no central control of the guerrilla. If anything it is more driven by anti imperialist, anti US ideology. So "cutting the head off" is nice but there is no real head. and of course it's limited to the sunnis that supported saddam. In many regards the shiites are more frightening.
Do you just make this stuff up as you go along? Your "opinion" about who is or isn't running things is meaningless.. You are dealing with fairly well informed people on this board despite your disdain for our views, and your spouting off whatever pops into your head as though it was undisputed truth is yet another hole in whatever credibility you might still possess. Actually, around here I don't think you have any left.

anyway it's an excellent news
Well, let us all hope for more excellent news. Like the demise of saddam, the end of terror waged by his followers and their foreign henchmen, and the rebuilding of Iraq for the benefit of the people.

[Gilgamesh]

Good Job task force 20 !!! Long live the screaming eagles!

Congratulations to all of us!

May all the enemies of the people of Israel shell be lost, like that, soon!

Check on Debka-file, for more information:Debka file (http://www.debka.com)

[L@mplighterM]

Originally posted by yehudi

Or do you find you are invested in some kind of a mission. Like the ones who repeatedly censor out my posts deciding what can be read and what cannot?

Does whining come naturally to Frenchmen or is it just you that has a perpetual case of PMS?

[MichaelC]

Originally posted by yehudi
If you really think that my opinion is meaningless, at least be consistent and do not answer my posts. There is a specialized function on this forum, very handy, called 'ignore'

Or do you find you are invested in some kind of a mission. Like the ones who repeatedly censor out my posts deciding what can be read and what cannot?
"My opinion" is that your hollow posts should be challenged, especially those with no substance whatever. You have chosen to post antagonistically at this board. Why should I just let it go by?

[L@mplighterM]

Originally posted by Mediocrates
It's a shame really. Most royal families get publically executed in order to create closure for the miserables who were subject to them. Plus it's a handy warning to the others to see those monkeys dragged around in their show trial cages before hanging, electrocution or firing squad. Put their heads on pikes like in the days of Cromwell.

I don’t know how recognizable these two sons are at this point. I read that their corpses look like burnt Swiss cheese(blackened and full of bullet holes).

[cerulean]

I know we've probably all heard and read such things, but here is one more account of the vicious nature of these two men:

http://www.time.com/time/archive/preview/from_redirect/0,10987,1101030602-454453,00.html

I was pleased to read that Tony Blair lauded their deaths. At least one Congressman has decried the events, though.

[wellofvow]

I sincerely apologize for butting in here, but I have a couple of general questions, which this thread brings up.

The first quote is from a post by "Yehudi". Some portion of it was marked IN RED as "deleted".

"the big problem is I'm not sure killing even Saddam would solve the problem of the guerrilla war: there is no central control of the guerrilla. If anything it is more driven by anti imperialist, anti US ideology. So "cutting the head off" is nice but there is no real head. A trial would improve the effect, though...

anyway it's an excellent news [deleted]"

Next is a post from "Yehudi" in which he says that others "repeatedly censor my posts"

"Originally posted by yehudi
Or do you find you are invested in some kind of a mission. Like the ones who repeatedly censor out my posts deciding what can be read and what cannot?"

Would someone please explain to me if there is a monitor who can and does "censor" portions of people's posts? What are the criteria for a "deletion"?

I am asking because it is totally unclear to me why "Pharaoh" is tolerated in this forum. All he does is harangue us with very long posts which are 100% Arab propaganda. Pharaoh has intimated that HE has zero tolerance for historical reports that run counter to what he claims as "sources", and that OTHERS should stop posting with "lies". Pharaoh and only Pharaoh knows the Truth.

As for anyone who challenges him in a futile attempt at "debate", they are subjected to Pharaoh's branding THEM as "liars" and "brainwashed".

Pharaoh's CONSTANT use of the pronouns "you" and "your" in his posts is a clear sign that his deep-rooted belief is that anyone who opposes his twisted revision of history PERSONALLY kills innocent Palestinian civilians, started the 1948, 1967, 1973 and 1982 wars, "drove out" Palestinians from "their land", and so forth.

I know that this question is not directly related to this thread, and I apologize, but I saw here for the first time a "deletion" and someone complained about being "censored". So I am left to wonder why just about all and every of "Pharaoh's" posts are not deleted.

Others have said that his "viewpoint" is "important" to stimulate debate. Only problem is that Pharaoh does not engage in debate, he just deluges us with propaganda and calls his "debating partner" a liar.

Thanks in advance for answer. I have been wondering about where the boundaries, if any, are.

***N.B.!! I am NOT being sarcastic, as somebody recently accused me. I honestly want to know!

[Salim]

Pharaoh is the kind of arab that the majority of this forum wants to believe in, thats why he is allowed to stay so everybody can be verified in his opinion.

Yehudi, however, is somebody who has become quite unintimate.
Add the personal little harassing between him and Mediocrates (moderator) and you got the reason. :)

I guess everybody gets the kind of democracy he deserves.

[Salim]

See, I have given up to be treated like the majority of this forum.
Gilgamesh threatened to kill me, and praised the day when whole Germany would be eridicated from this world.

Just imagine I would praise the eridicating of Israel/Usa (*insert assertion of not doing so)
I guess I'd be instantly banned from this forum.

but heck, what can you do? :)

[Communication]

Originally posted by Salim
See, I have given up to be treated like the majority of this forum.
Gilgamesh threatened to kill me, and praised the day when whole Germany would be eridicated from this world.

Just imagine I would praise the eridicating of Israel/Usa (*insert assertion of not doing so)
I guess I'd be instantly banned from this forum.

but heck, what can you do? :)

Don't take what Gil says too personally. He calls me a stupid, self-hating Jew.

[Mediocrates]

the new rules of the road are fairly clear and if they're not you can ask a moderator what they mean and/or why. other than that, arguing about the board on the board probably isn't going to gain anyone anything. suffice it to say that most grown ups should understand the difference between free speech and screaming 'fire' in a movie theater.

[yehudi]

It appears the two sons were given up by the house owner (who probably wanted to get the bounty).

I wonder why they were not taken alive. I'm sure it was possible with gas or at night, whatever.

[wellofvow]

Originally posted by Mediocrates
the new rules of the road are fairly clear and if they're not you can ask a moderator what they mean and/or why. other than that, arguing about the board on the board probably isn't going to gain anyone anything. suffice it to say that most grown ups should understand the difference between free speech and screaming 'fire' in a movie theater.

Sorry, I would not have asked what the rules (I called them boundaries) are if they are "fairly clear" as you said.

How do I ask a moderator what they are?

I was not arguing about the board on the board, I was asking what the etiquette is for this forum. I belong to a "professional" discussion group which regularly sends its members the group's etiquette via email.

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by yehudi
It appears the two sons were given up by the house owner (who probably wanted to get the bounty).

I wonder why they were not taken alive. I'm sure it was possible with gas or at night, whatever.

How can you be "sure" about this when you do not have all of the facts?

Please tell us how an armed group determined to fight to the death can be taken alive. You seem to be suggesting that the US Army should have risked the lives of its own soldiers in order to protect the lives of Saddam's sons, both of whom are well known for their brutality.

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by wellofvow
I know that this question is not directly related to this thread, and I apologize, but I saw here for the first time a "deletion" and someone complained about being "censored". So I am left to wonder why just about all and every of "Pharaoh's" posts are not deleted.


It's very simple. Everyone has the right to express their opinions as long as they don't violate the Rules of the Road.

Complaints about posts should be sent via the "Report this post to a moderator" link. Complaints posted to the forum are subject to deletion.

[Salim]

Originally posted by ibrodsky
It's very simple. Everyone has the right to express their opinions as long as they don't violate the Rules of the Road.

Complaints about posts should be sent via the "Report this post to a moderator" link. Complaints posted to the forum are subject to deletion.

And what is to be done when the moderator ignores a report?
What is to be done when the only action he takes is to completely ignore it?

(This was the case when I reported Gilgamesh for being extremely! rude towards me, if one can call the intention of commiting a murder rudeness)

[minusthejihad]

Originally posted by yehudi
this is exactly the problem.

What do to when moderators do not respect the rules...?

Maybe..... Find a new forum where you will get more attention and respect, since this is what you are after. And considering the millions of other anti-Israel forums which are much more in line with your views, you should actually get some idiot somewhere to like you.

[Mediocrates]

Salim check you PM

[andak01]

Originally posted by MichaelC
Well, let us all hope for more excellent news. Like the demise of saddam, the end of terror waged by his followers and their foreign henchmen, and the rebuilding of Iraq for the benefit of the people.

I couldn't have said it better myself. We still have a very long road ahead. Although I was against the war, I am very happy for anything that bodes well for the future stability of Iraq and very happy to see Saddam or any of his helpers bite the dust. I'm still waiting for Saddam's head on a platter. I don't expect to see it soon.

[Evgeny]

Originally posted by Salim
See, I have given up to be treated like the majority of this forum.
Gilgamesh threatened to kill me, and praised the day when whole Germany would be eridicated from this world.

Just imagine I would praise the eridicating of Israel/Usa (*insert assertion of not doing so)
I guess I'd be instantly banned from this forum.

but heck, what can you do? :)

welcome to the club, Gilgamesh calls me pagan and says he hopes i die of alcohol poisining. which is a racist statement because he thinks that i am Russian so i am a drunk.it is odd that he calls me pagan since the name Gilgamesh is pagan Baboylian. Its odd that he such a detecated Zionist chooses a name of a hero whos people enslaved the jews and destroyed their temple.

[Gilgamesh]

Originally posted by Evgeny
it is odd that he calls me pagan since the name Gilgamesh is pagan Baboylian. Its odd that he such a detecated Zionist chooses a name of a hero whos people enslaved the jews and destroyed their temple.

Gilgamesh myth was created by people far more anciant then the Babylonians. The myth was created by the Sumerians. Gilgamesh was the very first written work of litrature.

One of the majore city states of Sumer, was Ur. A very famous jew came from Ur, Avraham!!!

Pagen is not idole whorshiper, but rather a person of little culture, a basic and primitive civilization. You can call the Sumerians what ever names you'd like, but pagen is a wrong one. Idole whorshipers would be just as good discription.

Modern archeology suggest that the origional Hebrew fleed Ur as part of a civil-religious war.

It is a fact, that even modern Judaism borrowed some basic customs from our parent Sumerian civilization, giving them brand new Jewish explainations. Some of jewish most anciant mythology had borrowed quite a few ideas from our parent civilization as well.

The mighty Sumerians and Akkadians, were all vanished, like any other origional nation of the anciant ME... with only one single exception: US JEWS!

[yehudi]

Originally posted by ibrodsky
You seem to be suggesting that the US Army should have risked the lives of its own soldiers in order to protect the lives of Saddam's sons, both of whom are well known for their brutality. 1/ let's cool down a bit.
2/ I think your "not risking americans lives" reasonning is not up to date anymore. Arguably the zero-death (zero-american death I mean) concept has ended, either 9/11 or on the day Bagdhad fell.

- Americans are dying daily. The priority is to reduce that deadly toll. OK?

- A trial would have a highly favourable impact on the iraqi population, exposing how terrible the Saddam regime was. It would restore a sense of national unity amidst the centrifugal forces that disintegrate Iraq.
It's a bit complicted to find the words, but a trial is not just for punishing, it is for justice, it remains in history...



Anyway a trial would have been extremely useful even to try to improve America's image as a 'justice bringer' instead of 'invader'. It would focus media opinion out of the difficulties of the occupation.

Why did the americans not do everything to take them alive. Judging by the state of the bodies they overdid it a bit isn't it?



But americans are not stupid, or at least not in this kind of matters. So why did they kill them, bombarding the house violentely etc... ? Any hostage taking shows it is possible to discuss, get a surrender, use gas.... or at least to try.


Now what ?
Well one rumor says americans tried to make a deal with Qusay, making him promises before the war and he would have told all about it at the trial
Right or wrong who cares .. you'll get score of rumors like this soon especially in arab opinion.



Big chance wasted, it's likely saddam will commit suicide when cornered. All the rest is underdogs, not hated by the population as Uday was.


Anyway
- Bush got his $46m press conference, calling for the world to come to help in Iraq
- we'll probably learn more in the coming hours or days.

[deleted]

[L@mplighterM]

Originally posted by yehudi
Anyway a trial would have been extremely useful even to try to improve America's image as a 'justice bringer' instead of 'invader'. It would focus media opinion out of the difficulties of the occupation.

Why did the americans not do everything to take them alive. Judging by the state of the bodies they overdid it a bit isn't it?





Both of Sadam's sons had the option to surrender and I know that Iraqis are specialists in that field. They made the choice to fight and they lost. I too would have liked to have seen them staked alive on metal spears in Baghdad, it would have made a pretty picture.

Trial?

They already tried themselves with their actions and there’s no question that they were guilty. You know very well that France operates under Napoleonic Law where you’re guilty until you prove that you are innocent. They were guilty of horrendous crimes and they paid the price.

[danholo]

- A trial would have a highly favourable impact on the iraqi population, exposing how terrible the Saddam regime was. It would restore a sense of national unity amidst the centrifugal forces that disintegrate Iraq.
It's a bit complicted to find the words, but a trial is not just for punishing, it is for justice, it remains in history...

I'm a bad mood and an ignorant and idiotic post like this just fuels my anger!

It's easy to bring a person to trial who is shooting at you with a machine-gun. I betcha our genius here would bring to trial a person who's shooting at you with a bazooka, throwing grenades and using an AK. Sure - do that. Oh yeah, I forgot. You'd die and this guy would escape.

[Evgeny]

Originally posted by danholo
- A trial would have a highly favourable impact on the iraqi population, exposing how terrible the Saddam regime was. It would restore a sense of national unity amidst the centrifugal forces that disintegrate Iraq.
It's a bit complicted to find the words, but a trial is not just for punishing, it is for justice, it remains in history...

I'm a bad mood and an ignorant and idiotic post like this just fuels my anger!

It's easy to bring a person to trial who is shooting at you with a machine-gun. I betcha our genius here would bring to trial a person who's shooting at you with a bazooka, throwing grenades and using an AK. Sure - do that. Oh yeah, I forgot. You'd die and this guy would escape.

You think that matters to Rumsfeld and franks if they loose a couple of Blacks or Hispanics. They are a expendable unlimited resource. Its either sell crack or go serve uncle sam. Anyway if they already knew there location then they should not have sent an exacution squad to gun them down but gas the house. and pick up the bodys.

P.S. Comrade Politcal officer Brodsky you could have at least givin us a reason why you decided to butcher his post.

[L@mplighterM]

Snip:


A military official who has seen photographs of the bodies of Saddam's sons said that Odai appears to have a self-inflicted gunshot wound in the head.

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/world/WorldNewsTonight/iraq030723_sons.html

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by yehudi
1/ let's cool down a bit.
2/ I think your "not risking americans lives" reasonning is not up to date anymore. Arguably the zero-death (zero-american death I mean) concept has ended, either 9/11 or on the day Bagdhad fell.

- Americans are dying daily. The priority is to reduce that deadly toll. OK?

No, I didn't say the U.S. should not risk the lives of its soldiers fighting terrorists and the Axis of Evil. I said our military was under no obligation to risk the lives of those taking part in this operation to satisfy your demand that Saddam's brutal sons be taken alive.

Clearly, other Iraqis on the Most Wanted list have surrendered and have been taken into custody alive. Saddam's sons chose to fight to the death. Tough luck.


- A trial would have a highly favourable impact on the iraqi population, exposing how terrible the Saddam regime was. It would restore a sense of national unity amidst the centrifugal forces that disintegrate Iraq.
It's a bit complicted to find the words, but a trial is not just for punishing, it is for justice, it remains in history...

The Iraqi people are very familar with how brutal Saddam's regime was. They have the mass graves to prove it.

It's people like you that need convincing.

However, we know from experience that had they been captured using gas some people would have accused the U.S. of using chemical weapons. Had they been put on trial, some people would charge that the trial was unfair.


Anyway a trial would have been extremely useful even to try to improve America's image as a 'justice bringer' instead of 'invader'. It would focus media opinion out of the difficulties of the occupation.

Why did the americans not do everything to take them alive. Judging by the state of the bodies they overdid it a bit isn't it?

Oh I get it, you are just trying to help America improve its image. LOL.

Face it, you just don't like to see third world despots go down in flames at the hands of the US military. After all, France did everything it could to try to save the Butcher of Baghdad's neck. Now that the US has deposed the Iraqi mass murderer, you are an expert on 'the right way' to do what your leaders opposed from the start.

Justice has been served. And that's precisely what bothers you.


But americans are not stupid, or at least not in this kind of matters. So why did they kill them, bombarding the house violentely etc... ? Any hostage taking shows it is possible to discuss, get a surrender, use gas.... or at least to try.

How do you know they didn't give the occupants a chance to surrender? How do you know they didn't respond to demands to come out with their hands up with an intense volley of fire?


Big chance wasted, it's likely saddam will commit suicide when cornered. All the rest is underdogs, not hated by the population as Uday was.

Our goal is to capture him dead or alive. I'm sure in the end he and his sons would have been put to death by someone... probably the Iraqis.

You may not know it, but his sons knew it, which is why they chose to die fighting. Saddam knows it, which is why he will probably commit suicide if cornered.

[L@mplighterM]

Originally posted by ibrodsky


How do you know they didn't give the occupants a chance to surrender? How do you know they didn't respond to demands to come out with their hands up with an intense volley of fire?



Our goal is to capture him dead or alive. I'm sure in the end he and his sons would have been put to death by someone... probably the Iraqis.



They were given a chance to surrender, I heard that they then moved to a fortified section of the house and that it took a missile to blow a hole in the hardened concrete.

Another thing that should be considered is that the house could have had an escape route such as underground tunnels.

[L@mplighterM]

Snip:

By Alastair Macdonald and Charles Aldinger

BAGHDAD/WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States will release photographs of Saddam Hussein (news - web sites)'s sons taken after they were killed by American missiles as they resisted arrest in an effort to convince Iraqis they are truly dead.


Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said in Washington on Wednesday the pictures would be made public "soon" but did not say how explicitly they would show Uday's and Qusay's fatal injuries. U.S. troops killed them in a raid in the city of Mosul Tuesday.


"There will be pictures released," Rumsfeld told reporters after meeting with lawmakers.


Another U.S. official told Reuters that he had seen photographs in which the men were recognizable despite wounds.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=578&u=/nm/20030724/ts_nm/iraq_dc_382


Great!

[L@mplighterM]

Both his sons died in the bathroom, along with the bodyguard. A fitting end! I’m itching to see the pictures that will be released of their corpses.

[yehudi]

BAGHDAD (AP) — By killing Uday and Qusay Hussein instead of capturing them, U.S. forces lost a chance to expose the inner workings of Saddam's regime, provide clues to the dictator's whereabouts and yield intelligence on anti-American guerrilla operations. But troops faced a barrage of gunfire from the holdouts and may have feared that sympathetic crowds would rally to defend the besieged sons.

Beyond that, the brothers' deaths removed a chance to learn where they had hidden hundreds of millions of dollars and where their stashed billions during his 23-year rule.

Yet, Lt.-Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, coalition commander in Iraq, rejected criticism of the raid.

"I would never consider this a failure. Our mission is to find, kill or capture.

"In this case, we had an enemy that was defending, it was barricaded and we had to take the measures that were necessary to neutralize the target."

Sanchez said the four men in a suburban villa in the northern city of Mosul — the two brothers, an unidentified man believed to be a bodyguard and a teenager reported to be a son of Qusay — held out in a fortified section of the house, repelling the U.S. attack with AK-47 automatic rifles.

By his account, the confrontation began when a U.S. interpreter used a bullhorn to demand they surrender. A hail of gunfire answered. Troops rushed the building, four were wounded racing to the second floor. They withdrew and the wounded were evacuated by helicopter.

But with the villa now sealed on every side by 200 troops, Sanchez said, the forces pulled back to wait while Kiowa attack helicopters were in place overhead. There was no fear the brothers would escape, and the Americans reassembled deliberately.

So why not wait longer, use tear gas, set up a siege, Sanchez was asked. He responded with visible irritation. Waiting the brothers out had been considered, he said, "but we chose the course of action that we took." He refused to take a follow-up question from the reporter.

L. Paul Bremer, Washington's top official in Iraq, suggested he didn't care whether Saddam, his sons or others on the American most-wanted list were taken dead or alive.

"The sooner we can either kill him or capture him, the better," Bremer said when asked during a Meet the Press appearance Sunday.

Experts disagreed.

"If the Americans captured Uday and Qusay, they would have known all about the old regime, all about the weapons of mass destruction and resistance groups," said Fouad Allam, an Egyptian terrorism expert. "Above all, they would have answered the question: Where is Saddam?"

Qusay — groomed to succeed his father — ran the Special Republican Guard and his father's personal protection service. Uday headed the Saddam Fedayeen, the militia that fought U.S.-led forces as they advanced on and took Baghdad on April 9.

The U.S. military says former members of the Fedayeen, the Special Republican Guard and intelligence services are behind the guerrilla-war style ambushes that have picked off American forces one by one since U.S. President George W. Bush declared major fighting over May 1.

On the other hand, said Jonathan Stevenson, a senior counter-terrorism fellow at London's International Institute of Strategic Studies, Saddam's sons may have known very little. On balance, he suggested, killing them may have provided the Americans more propaganda gain than information loss.

"The value of keeping alive the two sons was probably rated low, while the value of killing them, with its potential power to galvanize the larger population's confidence in the Americans to furnish security, was probably rated as high," said Stevenson, an American.

That does not take into account the White House's need for good news on the Iraq front, of which there had been little since Baghdad fell more than three months ago.

Iraq's 25-member Governing Council, however, said the brothers should have been captured, not killed. The council, hand-picked by Bremer, couched its opinion, however, in diplomatic language, saying the interim Iraqi authority "would have liked for them to be arrested" to stand trial and confess their crimes.

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1058954590731&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968705899037

[L@mplighterM]

Lets have a similar picture of Arafat!

[Mediocrates]

After being wrong about nearly everything they uttered this year about what would absolutely happen in Iraq from millions of dead to nuclear war to terrorism in the streets of America to an Israeli invasion of Yesha to dozens of other things I'm not inclined to believe thing one they have to say about will happen in Iraq as a result of Husseins-On-A-Stick. Not thing one.

[andak01]

This morning a commentator was suggesting that the Shiites have been reserved about rebelling against the Americans for fear that the Baathists would come back to power. For certain, there are other powerful factions in addition to the Fedeyeen. But with 800 border guards, they've got things sealed tight. Right.

[MichaelC]

Originally posted by andak01
This morning a commentator was suggesting that the Shiites have been reserved about rebelling against the Americans for fear that the Baathists would come back to power. For certain, there are other powerful factions in addition to the Fedeyeen. But with 800 border guards, they've got things sealed tight. Right.
What the hell is there to rebel against? They want to harm the very ones who took out the savage killer the shiites were powerless to deal with? A simple "thank you" would suffice and little more would be asked.

[andak01]

Originally posted by MichaelC
What the hell is there to rebel against? They want to harm the very ones who took out the savage killer the shiites were powerless to deal with? A simple "thank you" would suffice and little more would be asked.

Why don't you poll these Shiites about what their vision of a democratically elected government would look like? Then see if we are still willing to accept a democracy of the people in Iraq. This will be a democracy where no elections are held and the majority vote is never counted.

[MichaelC]

Originally posted by andak01
Why don't you poll these Shiites about what their vision of a democratically elected government would look like? Then see if we are still willing to accept a democracy of the people in Iraq. This will be a democracy where no elections are held and the majority vote is never counted.
My vision of muslim government is thugs bossing people around. Left to their own devices, this is usually what they come up with.

[yehudi]

about the realease of the picture of the


one thing I read on that : http://edition.cnn.com/2003/US/07/24/sprj.irq.photos.ethics/index.html

Shepperd said the U.S. government stressed that the U.S. military was not releasing the photos -- the coalition provisional authority was making them public. "What we don't want to do is... set up a situation where every time we have a military operation, we end up with pictures of dead Americans, or us releasing photos of people from a military standpoint," he said.

Laws of war established in the Geneva Convention prohibit showing the bodies of dead or living prisoners of war. The Hussein brothers were not in that category, and human rights group Amnesty International says disseminating the pictures was not a Geneva violation.
personnally I don't like the idea of broadcasting pictures of dead people.

And paradoxically I think it was too nice for them: one of the pictures looked like Christ, he did not even look mean. Doh




btw brodsky you used this "Axis of evil" Bush concept. Were is the "axis"?

[L@mplighterM]

Originally posted by yehudi
about the realease of the picture of the


one thing I read on that : http://edition.cnn.com/2003/US/07/24/sprj.irq.photos.ethics/index.html

personnally I don't like the idea of broadcasting pictures of dead people.



They were beautiful pictures I really enjoyed looking at them. I’m considering using them as wallpaper for my desktop for a while. I hope Arafat is next that would make a pretty picture. I love it!

By the way I don’t give a damn if Arabs/Muslims kill each other until the cows come home, the more the better.

I’d feed the corpses to pig!

[L@mplighterM]

Snip:

Gen. Franks predicts Saddam capture within 60 days

July 24, 2003, 11:57 AM EDT


GROTON, Conn. -- Gen. Tommy Franks, who commanded U.S. forces in the war with Iraq, predicts Saddam Hussein will be found within 60 days, and says the U.S. military will be in Iraq for the long haul.

Speaking Wednesday at a conference on children in military families, Franks said Iraqi hatred of Saddam led to tips about where his two sons were hiding. The sons, Odai and Qusai, were killed Tuesday in a shootout with American forces.

"If Saddam is alive, they will turn him in as well," said Franks. "I'll even put a timeline on it. I suspect within 60 days Saddam will be confirmed dead or he'll be in custody."


http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/ny-bc-ct--franksspeech0724jul24,0,7541425.story?coll=ny-ap-regional-wire


I hope so!!!!!!

[yehudi]

Originally posted by L@mplighterM
GROTON, Conn. -- Gen. Tommy Franks, who commanded U.S. forces in the war with Iraq, predicts Saddam Hussein will be found within 60 days, and says the U.S. military will be in Iraq for the long haul. less than that I bet...


L@mplighterM is gonna be happy, nicer pictures for his desktop wallpaper ..

The United States authorities in Iraq were last night wrestling with the thorny problem of how to dispose of the bullet-riddled bodies of Uday and Qusay Hussein after their "touched up" corpses were shown off to the world yesterday.

In stark contrast to the grisly pictures released by the US military on Thursday, the bodies shown to a small group of journalists in a makeshift morgue at Baghdad airport yesterday had been shaved and their faces reconstructed in an attempt to persuade a sceptical Iraqi public two of the most feared men in the country were really dead.

(..)

A group of mainly Arab journalists were taken to view the bodies of Uday, 39, and Qusay, 37. The brothers were lying side by side on metal trolleys, their bruised bodies, riddled with bullets and shrapnel, naked apart from a cloth covering their genitals.

US officials said the brothers were made to look as lifelike as possible, but denied there was any intention to deceive the Iraqi public, many of whom had been sceptical that the pictures of the bloodied, faces released on Thursday were those of the brothers. The officials claimed the touching up was standard military procedure, although it is almost unheard of in the Arab world.

The faces appeared waxy and heavily made up, according to one reporter. Morticians disguised a gaping wound across Uday's face, but a hole in the top of his head was still visible. US officials said both brothers had been hit by more than 20 bullets during the shootout, and both torsos bore large Y-shaped incisions.

Uday was believed to have died from a head injury caused by a blunt object, while Qusay had two bullet wounds to his head, in and just behind his right ear, medical officials said. This ruled out earlier speculation that the wounds might have been self-inflicted in an attempt to avoid capture. (..) http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1006375,00.html

btw I still have a look at the "where is read blog" from time to time. Still a good account of the state of mind in Bagdhad. His comments on the event is interesting.

[Mediocrates]

what? no dire predictions? so far you've been nearly 100% wrong about all of your baghdad bob predictions regarding Iraq.

[yehudi]

Originally posted by Mediocrates
so far you've been nearly 100% wrong about all of your (..)predictions regarding Iraq. Anything to support that, Links? (It's more a bet than a prediction anyway)

[minusthejihad]

Why would we need links? Maybe some of the passers-by, but not the general readers of this forum. Most of us remember. And you look about as accurate as Deon Warwick's Psychic Friends Network!

And riddle me this Yehudite:

If Deon Warwick could predict the future, then how come she couldn't see herself going out of business?

[danholo]

I have nothing against yehudi, except that he presents himself as what he is not: a Jew. Liar!

[yehudi]

Originally posted by danholo
I have nothing against yehudi, except that he presents himself as what he is not: a Jew. Liar! http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php3?s=&threadid=2801

... and the bad news is I choose to keep my nickname as it is.

Having said what had to be said, don't hesitate to get back to the thread subject (and let the reader judge by himself).

[Mediocrates]

Yes of course I can support that. Read what you wrote: predictions of tens or hundreds of thousands of casulaties, predictions about the destruction or in your words the hopeful destruction of huge numbers of US troops, predictions of ethnic cleansing, genocide and 'unconventional warfare.

[L@mplighterM]

Snip:

July 27, 2003

Saddam’s son fed his love rivals to the lions
Hala Jaber, Baghdad



A CHIEF executioner to one of Saddam’s sons has revealed how he helped drag two victims into a cage to be devoured by lions.
The executioner said that he was ordered to seize two 19-year-old students and take them to a farm of Uday Hussein, Saddam’s oldest son who was killed by American forces last week.

As soon as they arrived the students were dragged to a cage containing the lions and forced inside. “I saw the head of the first student literally come off his body with the first bite,” he said. He then had to stand and watch the animals devour the two young men: “By the time they were finished there was little left but for the bones and bits and pieces of unwanted flesh.”

He was told later that the two young men “had competed with Uday where some young ladies were concerned”.

The 36-year-old executioner, who used the pseudonym of Abu Ahmad, also took part in mass beheadings on the orders of the sadistic Uday. In a single afternoon he supervised the decapitation of 36 people, including a pregnant woman.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-758394,00.html

I think it would be poetic justice if they removed the putty and metal from Hussein’s son’s bodies and fed them to the lions.

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by Salim
And what is to be done when the moderator ignores a report?
What is to be done when the only action he takes is to completely ignore it?

(This was the case when I reported Gilgamesh for being extremely! rude towards me, if one can call the intention of commiting a murder rudeness)

For the record, the report was not ignored. I deleted those remarks in early May in response to the original complaint.