PDA

View Full Version : What's going on in Iraq & Afghanistan?


banyon
11-10-2007, 11:20 AM
What's going on in Iraq? (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=171330&highlight=iraq+good+news)
I assume that with the absence of updates here in DC, the news must be fairly good.

:hmmm:


2007 Deadliest for US in Afghanistan

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5i8dGftYb0s4XWdUMRdIVs3vh1CKAD8SQO7TG0
By JASON STRAZIUSO – 8 hours ago

KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) — Six U.S. troops were killed when insurgents ambushed their foot patrol in the high mountains of eastern Afghanistan, officials said Saturday. The attack, the most lethal against American forces this year, made 2007 the deadliest for U.S. troops in Afghanistan since the 2001 invasion.
The troops were returning from a meeting with village elders late Friday afternoon in Nuristan province when militants attacked them with rocket propelled grenades and gunfire, Lt. Col. David Accetta told The Associated Press.

"They were attacked from several enemy positions at the same time," said Accetta, a spokesman for NATO's International Security Assistance Force and the U.S. military. "It was a complex ambush."

The six deaths brings the total number of U.S. troops killed in Afghanistan this year to at least 101, according to a count by the AP. That makes this year the deadliest for Americans here since the 2001 invasion, a war initially launched to oust Taliban and al-Qaida fighters after the terror attacks of Sept. 11, but one that has evolved into an increasingly bloody counterinsurgency campaign.

The death toll mirrors the situation in Iraq, where U.S. military deaths this month surpassed 850, a record high since the 2003 invasion there.
Three Afghan soldiers were also killed in Friday's ambush, while eight Americans and 11 Afghans were wounded. The 14 total U.S. casualties was the highest number of wounded and killed from a battle in Afghanistan this year, Accetta said.

"With Sunday being Veterans Day, this is a reminder of the sacrifices that our troops and our Afghan partners make for the peace and stability of the Afghan people," Accetta said.

Overall violence in Afghanistan this year has been the deadliest since the Taliban's ouster. More than 5,800 people, mostly militants, have died in insurgency-related violence, according to an AP count based on figures from Afghan and Western officials.

In Friday's fight, aircraft and troops using artillery or mortars at nearby outposts fired on the militants' positions, Accetta said. It wasn't immediately clear how many militants were involved in the ambush, he said.

Mohammad Daoud Nadim, Nuristan deputy police chief, said the ambush happened in the remote province's Waygal district, about 40 miles from the border with Pakistan, which militants are known to use as a sanctuary. Nadim said he had no information on any casualties among the militants.

Arabs and other foreign fighters from Chechnya and Uzbekistan are known to operate in the Nuristan region, but the region's governor, Tamin Nuristani, blamed the attack on Taliban militants. Nuristani said the combined troops searched two houses after the meeting with village elders and were ambushed after while walking to their base afterward.

Nuristan province has seen heavy fighting in recent months. Two U.S. soldiers were killed and 13 wounded by a militant ambush in July, while militants disguised in Afghan army uniforms wounded 11 U.S. troops and killed two Afghan soldiers in August.

The attack on Friday was the deadliest incident for U.S. troops in Afghanistan since a Chinook crashed in February in Zabul province, killing eight Americans. Officials ruled out enemy fire as the cause of that crash.

Associated Press reporter Amir Shah contributed to this report.

a1na2
11-10-2007, 10:12 PM
Any lawyers here? Can you record phone calls and conversations between warring husband and wives?

BucEyedPea
11-11-2007, 07:43 AM
Any lawyers here? Can you record phone calls and conversations between warring husband and wives?
Interesting question. I'd like to know the answer to this myself.
I think you have let the person know.

a1na2
11-11-2007, 07:44 AM
Interesting question. I'd like to know the answer to this myself.
I think you have let the person know.

That is what I believe to be true as well, you have to inform the person calling or talking to you that the conversation is being recorded.

banyon
11-11-2007, 08:18 AM
As restaurants say, "We reserve the right to refuse service."

a1na2
11-11-2007, 10:59 PM
As restaurants say, "We reserve the right to refuse service."

I expected no less from you. I was asking for someone that is a real lawyer.

Radar Chief
11-12-2007, 08:07 AM
The death toll mirrors the situation in Iraq, where U.S. military deaths this month surpassed 850, a record high since the 2003 invasion there.


Where, exactly, are they getting their numbers? (http://icasualties.org/oif/)

Radar Chief
11-12-2007, 08:22 AM
Where, exactly, are they getting their numbers? (http://icasualties.org/oif/)

Ok, I see it now. Total deaths for the year have surpassed 850, not for the month as article implies. There were actually 38 deaths for the month of Oct. and 16 for the first 12 days of Nov.

patteeu
11-12-2007, 08:37 AM
:hmmm:

It sure is an amazing turnaround over a short period of time, isn't it? It makes me wonder where all those people who thought we had no chance to turn things around and who belittled the surge as recently as a couple of months ago came by their confidence.

banyon
11-12-2007, 09:28 AM
It sure is an amazing turnaround over a short period of time, isn't it? It makes me wonder where all those people who thought we had no chance to turn things around and who belittled the surge as recently as a couple of months ago came by their confidence.

I guess my point is that the absence of updates isn't really due to the situation being much improved as you implied in your thread.

I think it really doesn't matter whether we are doing slightly better or slightly worse, because people are just sick of this mess either way and don't really care to hear much more regardless. We have long since reached the saturation point with Iraq info.

patteeu
11-12-2007, 10:00 AM
I guess my point is that the absence of updates isn't really due to the situation being much improved as you implied in your thread.

I think it really doesn't matter whether we are doing slightly better or slightly worse, because people are just sick of this mess either way and don't really care to hear much more regardless. We have long since reached the saturation point with Iraq info.

I don't know where you come up with the idea that the situation isn't much improved.

patteeu
11-12-2007, 02:18 PM
More good news from Iraq. The number of rocket and mortar attacks have dropped dramatically in recent months:

Iraq rocket fire 'falls sharply'

Rocket and mortar attacks in Iraq are reported to have fallen to their lowest levels for nearly two years.

The US military said such attacks in October fell to 369, half the level during October 2006. This is the third month running of reduced rocket fire.

Mortar and rocket attacks in Baghdad showed a similar pattern, falling to 53 in October from more than 200 in June.

more... (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7090535.stm)

go bowe
11-12-2007, 06:40 PM
that is indeed good news for our troops...

fewer attacks now suggests (to those who don't fully support our troops) that the insurgents ad aqii are either biding their time or have decided to stand down and regroup and re-arm (like sadder's mahdi army has done)...

of course the more encouraging inference is that we are kicking serious butt and have disrupted aq in Baghdad and in the countryside...

either way, i'm glad our troops are not being attacked as often...

if i had my druthers i'd have them all back home tommorrow...

even if i had t0 rent a battlestar to get them all out at once (with all their equipment), i'd do it in a heartbeat (rhetorically speaking of course)...

Adept Havelock
11-12-2007, 06:57 PM
that is indeed good news for our troops...

fewer attacks now suggests (to those who don't fully support our troops) that the insurgents ad aqii are either biding their time or have decided to stand down and regroup and re-arm (like sadder's mahdi army has done)...

of course the more encouraging inference is that we are kicking serious butt and have disrupted aq in Baghdad and in the countryside...

either way, i'm glad our troops are not being attacked as often...

if i had my druthers i'd have them all back home tommorrow...


Good news, indeed.



even if i had t0 rent a battlestar to get them all out at once (with all their equipment), i'd do it in a heartbeat (rhetorically speaking of course)...

[Twitch, Twitch]

Adama:Brace for contact, my friend.

Tigh:Haven't heard that in a while...

banyon
11-12-2007, 07:08 PM
I don't know where you come up with the idea that the situation isn't much improved.

The bolded parts of my opening post?

StcChief
11-12-2007, 08:22 PM
they are just waiting for new supplies from Iran.

patteeu
11-13-2007, 07:45 AM
The bolded parts of my opening post?

I saw that. I just don't understand why anyone would choose those metrics to trump the incredibly positive trends that have been developing over the past several months. I'll take them one at a time:

1) An attack in Afghanistan that kills 6 US soldiers is the worst of the year. One reason why it's the worst of the year is because of the incredible success we've had there despite the promise of a "spring offense" made by the Taliban at the beginning of 2007. In three previous ambushes by Taliban forces against us, we've killed 265 Taliban and lost only 1 coalition soldier (not a US soldier). That's a tough standard to maintain. And I don't think I'd consider taking 6 casualties to be an indicator that the momentum has shifted in any significant way.

2. The situation in Iraq is the reverse. After some relatively bad months at the end of last year and the beginning of this year, coalition forces have made striking progress in Iraq. Today's situation might not seem as positive if it weren't compared to the negativity that preceded it, but unlike Afghanistan, what has occurred in Iraq *is* a significant change in the course of the conflict. It's certainly possible the course could be reversed again, but at the moment it's a pretty strong trend toward the positive, IMO.

banyon
11-13-2007, 08:04 AM
I saw that. I just don't understand why anyone would choose those metrics to trump the incredibly positive trends that have been developing over the past several months. I'll take them one at a time:

1) An attack in Afghanistan that kills 6 US soldiers is the worst of the year. One reason why it's the worst of the year is because of the incredible success we've had there despite the promise of a "spring offense" made by the Taliban at the beginning of 2007. In three previous ambushes by Taliban forces against us, we've killed 265 Taliban and lost only 1 coalition soldier (not a US soldier). That's a tough standard to maintain. And I don't think I'd consider taking 6 casualties to be an indicator that the momentum has shifted in any significant way.

2. The situation in Iraq is the reverse. After some relatively bad months at the end of last year and the beginning of this year, coalition forces have made striking progress in Iraq. Today's situation might not seem as positive if it weren't compared to the negativity that preceded it, but unlike Afghanistan, what has occurred in Iraq *is* a significant change in the course of the conflict. It's certainly possible the course could be reversed again, but at the moment it's a pretty strong trend toward the positive, IMO.

#1) Although the bolded part does refer to the attack being the most lethal (and I agree that 6 people is not a trend), the more important part comes next about making it the deadliest year (i.e., total) since 2001. Maybe I should have super-bolded the second part?

#2) the waxing and waning seems to continue perpetually, like a lava lamp. I'm not too thrilled about Turkey interjecting itself into the fray either.

patteeu
11-13-2007, 08:37 AM
#1) Although the bolded part does refer to the attack being the most lethal (and I agree that 6 people is not a trend), the more important part comes next about making it the deadliest year (i.e., total) since 2001. Maybe I should have super-bolded the second part?

I guess that's what it would have taken. My bad. :)

I agree that Afghanistan doesn't show the sharp positive trend that Iraq does at the moment, but it also hasn't seen the promised turn for the worse we were told to expect at the beginning of this year either. While US casualties reached their highest level this year, those casualty numbers have been relatively flat for the past 3 years. Personally, I think Afghanistan is a more difficult challenge over the long run than Iraq because I don't expect to get as much cooperation from the natives.