Re: Evidence Mounts That U.S. Military is LYING About "Victory At Samarra"

"Winston Smith, American Patriot" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:<[EMAIL 
PROTECTED]>...
> Logic-Defying "Fact" #1:  U.S. suffers not one death, but kills 54 Iraqis 
> ("Saddam fedayeen") who have some or even extensive military training.....?  
> And it takes fewer Iraqis to kill 2-3 U.S. troops in other "ambushes."

You are either an Islamist loving Muslim or you are a Saddam
loving liberal Bush hating Democrat. As a seditious,
America-hating mother fucking liberal you are part of the
problem and I am more convinced as I read your anti-American
screeds on this NG that the only good liberal is a dead
liberal.

> --------------------------------------------------------
> Iraqis dispute Samarra battle casualties 
> Monday December 1, 2003 
> 
> The aftermath of the weekend battle in Samarra, which the US has claimed 
> was the deadliest since the war ended, today appeared murkier than first 
> reports suggested, as residents of the central Iraqi city accused 
> Washington of exaggerating its death toll.
> 
> Initial US statements put the number of Iraqi dead at 46, with five 
> American soldiers injured, but the US today put its figure up to 54 Iraqi 
> fatalities.
> 
> It also said that many of the dead Iraqis were wearing the uniform of the 
> Fedayeen, the militia most closely associated with Saddam Hussein and most 
> loyal to him
> 
> But the Associated Press reported that some in Samarra believed fatalities 
> were much lower than the US's figures and that most of the dead were armed 
> civilians.
> 
> It quoted one of the city residents claiming that civilians had grabbed 
> their guns when the US soldiers fired on insurgents who had attempted to 
> ambush their convoy.
> 
> "Civilians shot back at the Americans," said 30-year-old Ali Hassan, who 
> was wounded by shrapnel in the battle. "They claim we are terrorists. So 
> OK, we are terrorists."
> 
> The battle, fought by the US with tanks and machine gun-equipped Bradley 
> fighting vehicles, followed simultaneous ambushes on a US convoy travelling 
> through Samarra on the main road from Baghdad to Tikrit.
> 
> Lieutentant Colonel William MacDonald of the 4th Infantry Division said the 
> response had sent a "clear message" that US would use its firepower to stop 
> such attacks.
> 
> The US has been stepping up the scale of its response to the insurgents in 
> recent weeks.
> 
> The scale of the attack and its apparent coordination has, however, shown 
> that rebels retain the ability to conduct synchronised operations despite 
> the offensive.
> 
> At least 104 coalition troops, including 79 from the US, have died in Iraq 
> in November, the deadliest month since the war ended. 
> 
> Samarra is within the so-called Sunni triangle north of Baghdad, the 
> heartland of Saddam Hussein loyalists.
> 
> The scars of the battle were today evident in Samarra. About a dozen cars 
> lay destroyed in the streets, many apparently crushed by tanks, and 
> buildings were strewn with bullet holes. 
> 
> Six destroyed vehicles sat in front of the hospital, where witnesses said 
> US tanks shelled people dropping off the injured. A kindergarten was 
> damaged, apparently by tank shells. No children were hurt.
> 
> "Luckily we evacuated the children five minutes before we came under 
> attack," said Ibrahim Jassim, a 40-year-old guard at the kindergarten. "Why 
> did they attack randomly? Why did they shoot a kindergarten with tank 
> shells?"
> 
> The weekend also saw seven Spanish intelligence agents, two Japanese 
> diplomats, a Colombian oil worker and two South Korean engineers killed in 
> Iraq.
> 
> US officials said insurgents were targeting citizens of nations that 
> support the occupation of Iraq in an effort to undermine public support for 
> the operation.
> 
> Both Tokyo and Seoul said that the attacks would not deter them from 
> sending troops to Iraq.
> 
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1097338,00.html