What some troops screwed up and killed the wrong people?  The simple explanation remains "the fog of war."  In the language of the Pentagon, the troops felt threatened so
they shot first and asked questions later. The result is the dead are just "collateral damage."  Not all that different from the recent killing of some of al Maliki's  relatives in another case of the "fog of war."  Or maybe like the Marines in the infamous occasion at Haditha? Civilians die in wars would be the answer provided, more than typically by
the same people, who have no personal investment in the continued occupations.  No doubt they'll be some sort of investigation by those in charge at the Pentagon to asuage
the anger of those who lost family members.  So two more, "ragheads," "hajis" or whatever the term of the day is for "the enemy" are dead. Except for their relatives or loved
ones, it is a one day story.  Not to forget al Qaeda doesn't wear uniforms so any Iraq, could be a member of al Qaeda.  Troops in the field, make errors.  Ask the Italians about
those who were shot, wounded and killed in their official capacity on the road to the Baghdad airport years ago. No "hajis" there, but the end result was losing one more so-called "coalition" partner.

There is a long list of such errors in judgment in a combat zone, but there are those who will defend even those who committed what was a massacre in Haditha, as just more fog of war.  Pardon my cynicism  Fredledingue, but such actions are so common place, it appears those, unlike me a person who has no combat experience, haven't bothered to respond for what to me is the obvious reason, the "fog of war."

Fredledingue, while one of the best excuses when there is a casualty which may cause a political or foreign policy issue, the easiest answer is the "fog of war."  As to the question regarding the teens that were killed, sometimes the same story is told differently by different sources. Since I've never experienced combat, I can only share a comment from my spouse that may be no different in Iraq than it was in Vietnam. While the terms used to describe the enemy may be different, he would tell you in Nam there were "body counts" and if "they" were dead then they must have been "Charlie" or "Cong" even at times when the dead included women and children. Very possibly a similar explanation in Iraq.  If they're dead then they must have been al Qaeda, insurgents or terrorists.  Since neither of us were there we have no way to actually know.

Then this report from a Kuwaiti publication tells a different story than the one provided by the U.S. military.  Whether the killings were necessity in a circumstance of self
defense, may not matter in the long run as the result has turned a person who had previously agreed to cooperate with the U.S. military, quite possibly into one who instead
will not and quite possibly made an enemy of a friend. I don't know and neither do you.  Guess in the end it depends on how much you choose to trust the information provided by which source.

US forces kill two boys, including Iraqi governor''s son
Military and Security    7/20/2008 2:14:00 PM
 
BAGHDAD, July 20 (KUNA) -- US soldiers killed Sunday the son and nephew of an Iraqi governor during an operation in Tikrit, an official said.
Deputy Governor of Salahiddin Abdullah Jebara told KUNA US forces broke into the home of the sister of Governor Hamad Al-Kashti and killed the two teenagers.
He added that the two boys, who died of direct gunfire, did not have any weapons on them.
The names of the owner of the house was similar to the name of a wanted person, he pointed out.
Jebara said US forces called the governorate, admitted and apologized for the mistake, and stressed that they would investigate the incident.
The bodies of the two boys are now at the US base north of Tikrit and a delegation headed there to receive them, he noted.
Jebara condemned the incident as an example of use of excessive force by US troops in Iraq.
He stressed proper procedures will be taken soon, pointing out that such incidents during operations became frequent and that US forces usually kill wanted people, rather than arrest them.(end) mhg

http://www.kuna.net.kw/NewsAgenciesPublicSite/ArticleDetails.aspx?id=1926175&Language=en

Fredledingue, because it appears the U.S. military often uses Iraqi sources for intelligence purposes, it could well be nothing, but  related to inter-tribal conflict between groups vying for power, even different groups of Sunni and not even between Sunni and Shia.  Neither article, yours nor mine, explains how and where the intelligence came from or was obtained that led to the action.  Iraq like Afghanistan remains very much a tribal culture. 

I suspect the troops who are sent on the mission are often caught between the orders, then when attacked or feel threatened take the immediate action that quite realistically is one of self defense.  Unfortunately, only too often, rather than admitting the error by those who made the decisions, higher in the chain of command, the action is to not admit error nor culpability.  Over and over again, it appears to be the posture taken by those in command in the U.S. military. Certainly, it was the case in Haditha.  The public, loses interest, the attitude of far too many remains all in Iraq, civilians, women, children and then even those who present no real danger are determined to be the enemy.  Nothing new in warfare regardless of the location.  Nam was not all jungle warfare and much of the warfare in Iraq is urban.

I'm not alone among those in the U.S., perhaps because of the obvious lies that are common knowledge related to Iraq, who have become very skeptical related to most any and all claims by those in the Pentagon. 

I suspect in this case there is some elements of truth in both reports, but from Afghanistan the case of Pat Tillman and the circumstances of his death along with other exaggerations of positive news and hiding the negative news for PR purposes, never fail to make me suspicious when the reports from different sources are in conflict with those emanating from the Pentagon.

Apparently, the "accidental?" deaths of others who may only be innocent Iraqis in the wrong place at the wrong time continue. I understand why Fred you would choose to highlight the earlier article.  Can all of these deaths be accidental?  Or have troops become "trigger happy" out of fear or maybe the lives of any and all Iraqis don't mean much to some as they are all considered the "enemy" regardless of age, sex or circumstances?

Son of Iraq journalist shot dead by US forces
Thu Jul 24, 7:30 AM ET
The son of journalist at a popular weekly newspaper in northern Iraq was shot dead by US troops when his car appeared to veer wildly, police said on Thursday.

American soldiers shot dead Arkan Ali al-Nuaimi, 19, on Wednesday evening as he approached a checkpoint in his car in the oil city of Kirkuk, a police official told AFP.

He said the son of Ali Taha al-Nuaimi, editor of the US financed "The Voice of the Villages," was raked with American bullets when he lost control of his vehicle.

"He lost control near the Bahrain bakery in southern Kirkuk... then they fired on him, killing him instantly," the police official said.

A friend riding next to Nuaimi survived.

A US military spokesman said he had no details that could confirm the incident.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080724/wl_mideast_afp/iraqunrestusmedia_080724113027&printer=1;_ylt=ArOFNoOLC0rxJefSk3GCtgObOrgF

And today from the NY Times there is this:

July 28, 2008
U.S. Military Says Soldiers Fired on Civilians

By RICHARD A. OPPEL JR
BAGHDAD — The American military admitted Sunday night that a platoon of soldiers raked a car of innocent Iraqi civilians with hundreds of rounds of gunfire and that the military then issued a news release larded with misstatements, asserting that the victims were criminals who had fired on the troops.

The attack on June 25 killed three people, a man and two women, as they drove to work at a bank at Baghdad’s airport. The attack infuriated Iraqi officials and even prompted the Iraqi armed forces general command to call the shooting cold-blooded murder.

It also bolstered calls from Iraqi politicians to pressure the American military to leave Iraq after this year, when a United Nations mandate expires, unless the United States agrees to permit its soldiers to be subject to criminal prosecution under Iraqi law for attacks on civilians.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/28/world/middleeast/28iraq.html?_r=1&hp=&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print

What can I say Terry?  OT here or maybe not?  From AP today in ever peaceful Iraq. This one says the al Qaeda they are after are NE of
Baghdad.

US-Iraq forces begin new offensive in Diyala
July 29, 2008 3:37 PM EST
BAGHDAD - U.S.-backed Iraqi troops sealed off Baqouba and staged house-to-house searches Tuesday as they began a new offensive in Diyala province in the latest bid to clear al-Qaida in Iraq from its last major belt near the capital.

Iraqi security forces hope to build on recent security successes elsewhere in a new test of the country's readiness to take over its own security and enable American troops to withdraw eventually.

The U.S. military said the improved abilities of the Iraqi troops have enabled the Americans to play a less high-profile role in operations, helping to lower the number of U.S. casualties so far this year.

Only nine American troop deaths have been recorded in Iraq in July with only two days left, according to an Associated Press tally based on military figures. The July figures also include the recovery of the bodies of two U.S. soldiers, kidnapped last year, raising the official monthly toll to 11 as of Tuesday.

So far, the lowest monthly death toll for American troops in Iraq was 19 in May. From January to July 2007, there were 655 U.S. military deaths. This year, there have been 219 deaths until now.

"We're more of either enablers or overwatch and providing support as the Iraqis go out in front and conduct these operations," said U.S. military spokesman Lt. Patrick Evans. He said that has helped "reduce many of the numbers across the board."

Sunnis in Diyala and elsewhere often have complained of discrimination at the hands of the Shiite-led government, saying it was ignoring them by focusing on security in Shiite areas. A Sunni decision to join forces with the Americans against al-Qaida in Iraq has been slower to take hold in the province.

Despite numerous military operations, al-Qaida in Iraq has found sanctuary for years in Baqouba, 35 miles northeast of Baghdad, and more remote areas of surrounding Diyala province. The terror group's notorious leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was killed in a U.S. airstrike in the province in June 2006.

The religiously mixed area contains key supply routes to Baghdad and northern cities. It has been plagued not only by attacks against U.S. and Iraqi forces, but also by the kidnappings and sectarian killings.

"The goal of the operation is to seek out and destroy criminal elements and terrorist threats in Diyala and eliminate smuggling corridors in the surrounding area," the U.S. military said in a statement, stressing it was an Iraqi-led operation.

Baqouba, the provincial capital, has enjoyed recent security improvements but continues to see horrific attacks, such as twin suicide bombings that killed at least 28 people on July 15 and a number of suicide attacks carried out by women.

The new Diyala operation - dubbed "Omens of Prosperity" - follows recent gains against Sunni insurgents in the northern city of Mosul and Shiite militiamen in Baghdad and the southern cities of Basra and Amarah.

Critics said previous operations in Diyala failed in large part because the advance publicity tipped off insurgents, who left the area only to return when the offensive was over. But this time, there is far less friendly territory to which they can flee because of the Sunni revolt against al-Qaida.

On Tuesday, U.S. soldiers took up posts at checkpoints on roads leading to Baqouba but stayed on the outskirts as Iraqi soldiers and police searched buildings inside, meeting little resistance, according to witnesses.

Streets were largely deserted as the operation got under way in the morning. Residents said they were afraid to leave their houses, though some later emerged to buy food at nearby stores.

The normally bustling central market - once the site of public execution-style killings by al-Qaida but more recently touted as a military success story - was closed. Troops armed with a wanted list sought al-Qaida remnants in the network's former strongholds.

Many in Baqouba welcomed the effort despite the inconvenience.

Taxi driver Sadiq Hamid, who said he was out of work for the day because of a curfew, said women and children were waving at the Iraqi troops patrolling in the streets.

"I am stuck at home and the children are playing soccer in the streets," he said, expressing hope some of his neighbors who had fled to Baghdad would return. "The residents of Diyala have been waiting this moment for a long time."

But Ahmed Kadim, a 35-year-old businessman in the city, criticized the decision to announce the operation in advance, saying it had "allowed armed groups to flee outside the province."

---

Associated Press writer Saad Abdul-Kadir in Baghdad, employees in Diyala, and the AP News Research Center in New York contributed to this report.

And then there is this:

General Details Security Improvements in Iraq’s Northern Provinces   
Monday, 28 July 2008
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

An Iraqi Soldier flashes the peace sign as he passes the Ballad Ruze city hall in Diyala, Iraq. Photo by Petty Officer 2nd Class Paul Seeber.
BAGHDAD — The security situation in Iraq’s northern provinces has improved, but Iraqi and coalition troops will continue to pursue al-Qaida in Iraq and other criminal groups, the U.S. commander in the region said during a briefing July 27.

Army Maj. Gen. Mark P. Hertling, the commander of Multinational Division – North, told reporters that the number of security incidents in his area of operations has dropped from more than 2,600 in June 2007 to 650 in June 2008. The numbers for July 2008 continue to show a reduction.

Hertling said Iraqi commanders will launch a major offensive against al-Qaida and criminal gangs in Diyala province next month. U.S. forces will launch a concurrent offensive – Operation Iron Pursuit – against al-Qaida in Iraq terrorists who are seeking sanctuary in the desert.

The success of the surge in Baghdad forced al-Qaida in Iraq to move out of the city mostly to the northern provinces of Diyala, Ninewah and Salah ad Din. These areas became the main battlefield as Coalition, and increasingly, Iraqi forces hunted down the terrorists and killed or captured them. The cities are now “reasonably secure,” Hertling said, and the Iraqi and Coalition forces can shift focus to hunting down al-Qaida and its allies outside the cities.

Other indicators also point to progress, Hertling said. The number of roadside bombs declined by 50 percent since February 2008 from 950 to 430.

“That’s not to say we still don’t have threats,” the general said. Suicide vest attacks and car bombs remain a problem in Diyala and the city of Mosul. On July 24, a woman wearing a suicide vest killed eight Iraqis and wounded 30 others in Baquba. Last month another suicide bomber killed Iraqi police and recruits in the city.

The number of Iraqis killed by terrorists wearing suicide vests has been about 250. Car bombs killed a further 1,500.

“These are random, violent acts conducted by these violent terrorists and that’s why we are not only continuing to go after those who do these things, but the networks that support them,” he said.

Hertling said much remains to be done in the region. “There will be continued operations as long as the Iraqi people are threatened,” he said.

Please note the source. Who ya gonna believe?

http://www.mnf-iraq.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=21497&Itemid=1





 

I think we agree Terry, the troops in such circumstances react out of fear for life and limb. I don't think I suggested, but maybe it appeared so, the troops were the cause of the unnecessary and inappropriately explained deaths.  The unfortunately reality remains the conflict between the official reports by the DOD and the MSM and the reasons for such regularly conflicting information.  What is news? What is propaganda? When such
incidents occur, why does it the DOD appears to deny reality? Surely, it isn't merely the cost of paying reparations?   

There remains additionally, the question of who determines and chooses to create the orders the various unfortunate incidents and actions, the troops attempt to carry out?  Who is supplying the intelligence that precipitates the choices?

Could it be that much too often, particularly related to "insurgent" and "urban" combat circumstances, military
intelligence is often the oxymoron it is often suggested to be, particularly, in tribal conflicts as occur in Iraq, where inter-tribal warfare continues even between members of the same sectarian groups?

The unfortunate end appears to not only put troops lives at risk unnecessarily, but in their reactions to fear of life
and limb, create highly negative circumstances for the ultimate goals of reconciliation of the various groups in Iraq as well as greater resistance against the occupiers.   

Terry, while you may have had, perhaps, the advantage of combat experience, that I don't have, I believe that
fear of the loss of ones life, or the loss of the person who throughout that training process, is the prime motivator
for the immediate reaction, but that is really beside the point.  Put that opinion down to my training related to
human behavior and what motivates it.

I never saw any legitimate basis for the invasion and occupation of Iraq to begin with, much less an occupation that continues with no realistic abatement other than the arguments about the success of the surge.

But from Jessica Lynch to the daily posting of the official of the Iraqi Freedom website and other sites such as the news articles included on this site where the casualty information is provided by the DOD, and this site http://icasualties.org/oif/,  I continue to wonder about the differences in the reports of the DOD and the MSM.What and where is the truth? It is obvious to me someone is lying.

In addition, is it the job of the DOD to provide little, but "good news" to justify the occupations based on the orders of the POTUS as a method of justification of the continuation of the occupation which has no end it sight.

That brings to the political reality of the current election season and the conflicting views of the two presumptive
candidates.  OT for this thread, but one I have no doubt we would find absolute agreement on.

BTW, you know I read a lot.  The advantage of an ancient retiree.  I found this recent article published in Foreign
Affairs a long, but very worthwhile read related to some of the current discussion related to Iraq, past, present
and possibly future.  I'll include the link.  Quite long, but I suspect if and when you might find the time to read,
you might find it as interesting as I did.  There is far more included than the title alone and intro.

The Price of the Surge

By Steven Simon
From Foreign Affairs , May/June 2008

Summary: The Bush administration's new strategy in Iraq has helped reduce violence. But the surge is not linked to any sustainable plan for building a viable Iraqi state and may even have made such an outcome less likely -- by stoking the revanchist fantasies of Sunni tribes and pitting them against the central government. The recent short-term gains have thus come at the expense of the long-term goal of a stable, unitary Iraq.

STEVEN SIMON is Hasib J. Sabbagh Senior Fellow for Middle Eastern Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations. From 1994 to 1999, he served on the National Security Council in positions including Senior Director for Transnational Threats.

http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20080501faessay87305/steven-simon/the-price-of-the-surge.html?mode=print

Cheers, Terry. Hope you're enjoying a great Autumn day.