Actual Associated Press Headline - U.S. Troops Battle Resistance Fighters

[NNN0LHI]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=540&ncid=716&e=4&u=/ap/20030929/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq

<snip>Americans began withdrawing at about 5:30 p.m. from the al-Qurtan neighborhood on the north side of Khaldiyah, scene of several previous firefights between the U.S. military and guerrilla fighters. Angry residents cursed at reporters who entered the fire zone after the battle. Swisher said 14 people were detained.

At midafternoon, six U.S. armored personnel carriers — two of them ambulances — arrived as reinforcements. As the fight continued, eight Humvees carrying U.S. troops also could be seen heading toward the battle.

A U.S. armored personnel carrier left the area carrying six blindfolded Iraqi prisoners. In the distance, civilians, including women and children, could be seen fleeing on foot. An American recovery vehicle towed away two Humvees, one of which had a bullet hole in the windshield.

An Iraqi man, fleeing on foot with his wife, three other women, a nephew and five children, said at least 10 houses had been destroyed. He refused to give his name.

"Is this the freedom that we were promised?" he asked. "I had to get my family out. ... The helicopters were firing almost nonstop. My 7-year-old is too young to hate but how can he not hate them (the Americans) after this?"

more

[gratuitous]

1. Uh oh . . .

The "dead-enders" and "terrorists" are being called "resistance fighters"? In the American media? That's surely not good for this corrupt administration. Why would Iraqis "resist" their "liberators"? Unless, of course, they thought they were really "conquerors" or "occupiers."

Double plus ungood.

[w13rd0]

2. Even if they were "terrorists" and "dead enders" before...

...they are quickly morphing, growing into occupation resistance. Bush is a lying criminal fraud.

[Beetwasher]

3. Ha! I've been calling them resistance fighters for some time now!

I guess I'm just ahead of the curve...

[sistersofmercy]

4. Well, well, well...

What have we here, some journalist telling it like it is? What was it that another article stated? The Iraqis have a common saying pertaining to their "liberators", "Out with the apprentice, in comes the master." Something like that.

[DuctapeFatwa]

5. Surely phone calls have been made, and the reporter will be punished

Any opposition to the bush regime is by definition terrorism.

[Ratty]

6. About time

It's always sickened me how Bush portrayed the attacks on US Troops in Iraq as "terrorist attacks." I'm not quite sure "resistance fighters" is appropriate but "guerrillas" seem to be on the money. The attacks on US troops are tragic, I mourn the deaths and I mourn for their families (yes, I SUPPORT OUR TROOPS!). But I especially mourn that they were sent there in the first place.

Imagine if it was Iraq that had the superior technology and military. Imagine Iraq invading and occupying the US, ousting George Bush in the process. I imagine we'd manage to dig up a few "terrorists" of our own to fight them. I imagine it might involve more than a few bombs placed covertly among the enemy, more than a few enemy troops ambushed and killed in a 'cowardly' terrorist manner.

Yes, Saddam was an evil man. Yes, his supporters and guerrillas are pretty evil too. But equating them with terrorists demeans the memory of those 3,000 people slaughtered on Sept. 11, victims of true terrorists.

[bobthedrummer]

7. There IT is.

n/t

[NNN0LHI]

8. I don't remember the Vietcong or the North Vietnamese regular army...

...ever referred to as resistance fighters by any news services. All I can remember being used was "enemy". I was young though. Maybe someone remembers better?

Don

[Brian Sweat]

12. It would not have been correct to call the NVA, resistance fighters.

They were from a different country that the one in which they were fighting and they were the ones who invaded.

Even the Viet Cong cannot becalled resistance fighters. They were fighting to aid te invaders.

[DealsGapRider]

9. I am not aware of any...

...attacks being carried out against US troops by forces other than 1) Saddam loyalists or 2) non-Iraqi Islamic terrorists who have entered Iraq to do battle against the US. In other words, I have seen no evidence (and have a hard time believing) that any of these attacks are being carried out by anti-Saddam forces who are simply "patriotic" Iraqis fighting the US occupation. I don't think there is any reason to use non-perjorative terms to describe them. "Resistance fighters" seems to carry with it an almost noble connotation, and they are anything but. And "freedom fighters" is inapplicable as well.

(On edit: they are not fighting for freedom because if they're either Saddamites or Islamic fundamentalists, they are fighting for either a return to dictatorship or for a Muslim theocracy that does not give women freedom.)

You don't have to be a Bushie or a war supporter to want to classify these people -- who are engaging in bombings and shootings -- as terrorists. That's what they are.

[htuttle]

10. Thank you Mr. Rove

And could you tell us, please, WHERE do you get this intelligence information about WHO it is attacking US troops? Even the people on the ground in Iraq have said it's very confusing, that don't know who they are.

[DealsGapRider]

14. Please grow up.

Jesus Christ this board is full of children. Say one thing that that deviates from the Bush-is-Hitler talking points and all the sudden you're Karl Rover.

To all the adults reading...

I have seen no evidence that these attacks are being conducted by anyone other than Saddam loyalists and Islamic militants from outside Iraq. That doesn't mean they aren't, but I have seen zero evidence to support that assertion.

We know for a fact that many Saddam loyalists have been committing the attacks because we’ve arrested many of them. We know for a fact that Islamic militants have entered Iraq to conduct attacks on US troops because we’ve arrested many of them. To my knowledge we have not found any evidence that any attacks are being conducted by people who are decent, patriotic, anti-Saddam Iraqis who oppose both the Ba’athists and the US occupation. But many people here seem to leap to call them resistance fighters as if there is something virtuous about attacking occupying American troops without any understanding of the motivation behinds these attacks. SAD.

[thebigidea]

20. what evidence is this?

"many Saddam loyalists have been committing the attacks because"

THE attacks, you're willing to say? Not SOME of the attacks?

"But many people here seem to leap to call them resistance fighters as if there is something virtuous about attacking occupying American troops without any understanding of the motivation behinds these attacks. SAD."

They are fighting an occupying force intent on privatizing everything and draining every last drop of oil from their country. Pretty good motivation for the average angry Iraqi who probably has had a family member or two killed/wounded/etc in this ordeal.

[Devils Advocate NZ]

23. I have seen the evidence that you overlook...

I have seen interviews with resistance fighters (that is what they are, they are resisting the US occupation) whoe tell how they became fighters becasue their family members were killed by US troops AFTER the war was supposedly over.

I have yet to see a SINGLE interview with a resistance fighter where they claimed to be fighting to reinstall Saddam Hussein as ruler of Iraq.

[Cocoa]

24. doesn't it seem likely to you...

What about people who are angry about civilians that got killed, or are angry about the destruction and continued security and infrastructure problems, or people who are ideologically opposed to the U.S., or are simply opposed to being occupied by a non-Arab force?

Don't you think it's highly unlikely that ALL resistance falls into your convenient categories, that just happen to coincide with the Bush administration's view?

[DealsGapRider]

25. I think it's possible that there are some people...

...engaging in attacks against US forces for personal reasons such as revenge for a family member killed by a US bomb (although I have not seen any such evidence and I think such people are in the minority). But I think the majority of these attacks are being carried out by either Saddam supporters or foreign Islamic terrorists. Either way, I am not prepared to just cavalierly assign them the comparatively noble title "resistance fighters" because that would surely include pro-Saddam forces who I think are despicable murderers.

Finally, can you please, please, please spare me the lurking freeper taunts and whatnot? I opposed the fucking war vociferously. I'm just not one of those who seem to regard any Iraqi who picks up a gun as some noble freedom fighter defending his sacred soil from jack-booted corporate American thugs. A lot of these people are bloody murderers from Saddam's old regime, and you risk looking fucking ridiculous by not acknowledging that there are some extremely vile people attacking our forces.

[thebigidea]

26. "resistance fighter" is noble? Just seems like an accurate description

even if they are utterly vile, aren't they... uh... fighting? Resisting? Thus "resistance fighters"?

[Aidoneus]

29. why bother "opposing the war"

if you just turned around to support the occupation and the arguments of the war propagandists to a T (never did understand that phrase, but you're sounding exactly like pasting from CENTCOM all the same) afterwards? seems a bit insincere or hypocritical to me.

What were your reasons for opposing the war, by the way? It strikes me as strange that you'd oppose the murderous & criminal aggressions of the professional liars behind this, then suddenly do a 180 and parrot their bullshit verbatim to justify maintaining the failing adventure. Maybe I'm wrong, I never mind being proven wrong if such is the case.

[DealsGapRider]

31. Reasons

"What were your reasons for opposing the war, by the way?"

I felt it was a violation of international law to initiate hostilities against another country 1) without being attacked first and 2) without UN authorization. Also because I think the same result could have been achieved without invasion -- ie, with "coercive inspections" as advocated by Jessica Matthews of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

That having been said, I think we now have a funamental responsibility to succeed in reconstructing Iraq, which we cannot do while our soldiers are being attacked daily by the "resistance fighters" that so many on this board seem to adore.

[Cocoa]

30. it wasn't a taunt

I just think that it's worth thinking about when you believe something that defies common sense and at the same time agrees with the Bushies, especially since you believe it so strongly. Not suggesting you're a lurking freeper, just raising the possiblity that you've been influenced by propaganda.

Most of the attackers get away, don't they? So how can we possibly know who they are, and to pretend to be so sure they're one thing or the other doesn't seem too smart to me.

[Beam Me Up]

35. Would you LIKE to see such evidence?

You will NOT see it if you do not look. Moreover, you will NOT see it in the US media (at least, not yet).

However, you CAN see it from the BBC. Download the following report (Windows Media Player):

Web page:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/pilger_breaking_the_silence_35mb.htm

Or download for later viewing (right-click, save as source).
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/video1/35_mb_pilger_breaking_the_silence.wmv

[Brian Sweat]

13. No, you just have to be dishonest.

They are not terrorists. The act of engaging in bombings and shootings does not make you a terrorists unless you consider American soldiers to be terrorists.

For it to be terrorism, it has to be directed at soft targets. Attacting soldiers is not terrorism.

[DealsGapRider]

15. How about blowing up...

...the shrine that killed the Shiite cleric, as well as the UN building? Those attacks were carried out by terrorists. Do you agree or not?

[Brian Sweat]

16. No.

The UN is not a soft target.

The cleric was killed by an opposing faction. This type of stuff goes on around the world every day and no one calls it terrorism.

Also, the is smoke and mirrors on your part. We are specifically talking about guerrillas attacking soldiers.

[DealsGapRider]

19. If you think...

...bombing a UN building full of peace-loving internationalists who are in Iraq to help the Iraqi people is the act of anyone BUT a terrorist, you have a truly warped definition of the word.

And how do you know who killed the Shiite cleric? Given the fact that he was a relatively moderate, relatively pro-US figure, it at least stands to reason that the bomb was planted to Saddam loyalists interested in disrupting the US occupation.

[thebigidea]

21. or by a certain Chalabi, interested in knocking out rivals

[Brian Sweat]

27. The UN is not a soft target.

Who authorized the first Gulf war.


As for the Cleric, the most likely suspects would be an opposition faction. Even if it was pro-saddam guerrilas, he is not a soft target either since he would have likely been part of the occupation government.

[Aidoneus]

28. how do you know who martyred Sayyid Hakim?

Ayatallah Sayyid Mohammed Baqir al-Hakim was neither "moderate" or "pro-US", which tells me that there's a lot you don't know. No motive really makes sense about that in particular, except maybe the MKO or Kuwaiti/Saudi royal puppets..either way, the only people to benefit for the long term from his martyrdom are the American occupiers, the quisling dictator-wannabe Chalabi, and the Saudi/Kuwaiti/Gulf/Jordanian Western-client regimes who got the hairs on their ass burnt by the first "Islamic Revolution" and probably weren't too keen on a repeat performance. That they all benefitted is a given whether they had any hand in it at all, though I haven't seen anything that suggests anyone aside from guesses taken from the Usual Suspects shitlist of any "expert" with a bone to pick--in other words, 105% No Clue is the most exact and proveable answer available right now.

peace-loving internationalists who legitimized and enforced genocidal sanctions for a decade at the prodding of US/UK..

seeing as how the US/UK invaders are responsible for killing thousands of Iraqi civilians and you don't vent a peep about that, your words about "terrorism" ring hollow.

[sistersofmercy]

38. Go to the Amnesty International Iraq report 2002

in Iraq Kurdistan a UN office was bombed in 2001.

[sistersofmercy]

37. Perhaps, you should read past Amnesty International reports

on Iraq, of particular interest 2002 & 2001. Read the entire report especially Iraqi Kurdistan section.
Women are already victims in Iraq because of this war. Two women in Baghdad who worked at a school, one was a principal, were threatened by Shia to not go to work. The women defied the threat and went to work. Guess what? They were assasinated. Do you not think women such as these have family members willing to fight the Shia?
Christians have become targets of the Shia extremist. Under Saddam only Christians could sale alcohol, so all liquor stores were owned by them. The Christian owners were warned since the war by the Shia to close or face the consequences. Many liquor store owners defied the threats. Guess what? They have been either assasinated or had their stores blown up or both. Do you not think these Christians have family willing to fight the Shia?
The raids occuring daily in Iraqi homes have resulted in many innocent civilian deaths, some women and children. Iraqis have been killed in the middle of the night because they have pulled out guns thinking they are defending their homes against looters. Kidnapping and looting is prevalent. Do you not think these Iraqis have family willing to fight against a coalition who they not only view as perpetrators but also as occupiers not able to provide security?
The Iraqis have a new common saying as a result of this war, "Out with the apprentice, in with the master." Do you think perhaps the Iraqis have come to view the US occupying forces as being to them as the Israelis are to the Palestinians? I do. Guess what? I completely disagree with you!

[Ms. Clio]

39. So when the Continental troops attacked British soldiers

were they resistance fighters, or terrorists?

And how do you know what kind of "freedom" the Iraqi resistance fighters are fighting for? Sounds like you think democracy and free and fair elections in that country would automatically result in a Muslim theocracy--so what exactly do they get to have instead of democracy, eh?

You can push RW talking points till the cows come home, but the fact is that the Iraqis are fighting foreign occupiers of their country, and they will continue to do so until those occupiers leave.

Bloody attack and shot at martyrdom
http://stacks.msnbc.com/news/969506.asp?0cv=ca00&cp1=1

“The young people are waking up. I saw it with my brother and cousin,” he said. “They’re not Baathists, they’re not party members. They did it for God. When they saw the Americans come, raid the houses, steal from the people, they didn’t accept it.”

Fear and anger in the Sunni triangle
http://atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EI30Ak01.html

The mood in the heart of the Sunni triangle all the way to Ramadi is replicated in the very poor, working-class neighborhood called Fourth Police, almost in the outskirts of Baghdad. Most people in this area did support Saddam's regime and were Ba'ath Party members - and many abandoned their weapons and did not fight during the last war. They swear the resistance is composed of ordinary Iraqis. Practically everybody is armed. "Islam tells us we have to resist occupation. We will get rid of the Americans," says a local carpenter. Nobody has detected any suspicious behavior by potential Arab fedayeen.


Lots of information out there, for those who are willing to look for it and able to deal with the implications, not just spout propaganda.

[Brian Sweat]

11. Screw Robert Novak, here is the real treason!

Referring to those Iraqi terrorists as resistance fighters. They should be hanged.

[NNN0LHI]

32. These people are no more terrorists than I would be if America was invaded

Let another country invade the USA so they can steal our natural resources and I will show you what a terrorist is. Any patiotic American would would do the same as me. Here is a story about how we are now reinstating the same people back into power in Iraq that we supposidly just "liberated" these people from.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030930/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_baath_party&cid=540&ncid=1480

Iraq Council May Reinstate Baath Members

BAGHDAD, Iraq - The U.S.-appointed Iraqi Governing Council said Tuesday it would study the reinstatement of members of Saddam Hussein's Baath Party to their jobs.

The council said ministries would form committees to examine whether employees who once belonged to the now-outlawed party should be reinstated to their civil service jobs.

However, on Monday, Charles Heatley, spokesman for the American-led Coalition Provisional Authority, said there would not be an appeals mechanism for individuals who lost their jobs because they were members in the Baath Party.

Heatley said that while there was a "procedure for exemptions which could be considered on the basis of whether people are both essential to their jobs, and whether they did not, in fact, commit any crimes in their previous employment ... there've been very few cases of those exemptions granted."

more

Here are your Iraqi terrorists:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20030930/ts_nm/iraq_frustration_dc&cid=564&ncid=1480

Resentful Iraqis Find U.S. Optimism Hard to Share

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - The Bush administration says Iraq is a better place to live than before the war. Try telling that to Baghdad citizens, whose frustrations are growing daily.

Months after Saddam Hussein's fall, frequent power cuts and water shortages disrupt the city's rhythms, unemployment and crime loom large, and anger is rising against a U.S.-led occupation that shows few signs of ending soon.

Makeshift checkpoints are becoming permanent, webs of razor wire and concrete slabs divert traffic, frisking and demands for identity cards humiliate a nation renowned for its pride.

Iraqis feel their destiny has been taken out of their hands. The Governing Council was handpicked by Washington, the police force trained by foreigners. Iraqis are impatient to take back the reins.

"When they first came, people were more or less happy because they were fed up of dictators," Abdallah Suhail, an engineer now working as a security guard, said.

"Then we started to feel occupied. The word occupation is a strong word. And often their behavior is aggressive and people are starting to hate them. We feel like hostages."

more

[Brian Sweat]

34. I hope you realize that I was being sarcastic?

I was joking that the journalists were committing treason by calling the Iraqi insurgents resistance fighters instead of terrorists and that these journalists should be hanged.

[NNN0LHI]

36. You were too good for me. My ignorance. Sorry.

[patdem]

17. I hear ya..I read on LBN 'Insurgents'...not 'terrorists' or 'Sadaam backer

This is even MORE revealing. I guess Rummy could not intimidate All the press All the time?

Plan to win hearts and minds? Ya mean like bush* has won the hearts and minds across the planet...they are using THAT plan?

[Devils Advocate NZ]

18. I guess those early reports were wrong...

It seems the early reports of between 5 and 10 US casualties were mistaken? Those Iraqis musn't have seen 5 or 6 inert bodies being loaded into helicopters, even though more than one of them said it...

Has anyone else noted that this attack is probably the most coordinated and hard-fought yet? The Iraqi resistance IS getting bolder...

[NNN0LHI]

22. I noticed. This seems like a big operation

The reporter or reporters who wrote this story did a great job too.

Don

[Seneca]

33. but Bush said Mission Accomplished!

So stop saying that!

</boudelang off