http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE67G0SL20100817
Wounded 123 of them as well.
I think the US needs to delay its withdrawl a bit. This shows a severe lack of Iraq's ability to defend itself properly against extremists.
This topic is locked from further discussion.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE67G0SL20100817
Wounded 123 of them as well.
I think the US needs to delay its withdrawl a bit. This shows a severe lack of Iraq's ability to defend itself properly against extremists.
I wouldn't call them soldiers. They were looking to become soldiers, but they were just people applying for the job. Not quite the same thing.
jetpower3
The link says it was a mixture of both soldiers and recruits.
[QUOTE="jetpower3"]
I wouldn't call them soldiers. They were looking to become soldiers, but they were just people applying for the job. Not quite the same thing.
argetlam00
The link says it was a mixture of both soldiers and recruits.
It was around 3 soldiers and the rest were recruits. I follow this conflict very closely, and there has not been a single day death toll involving dozens of Iraqi soldiers killed in a long time.
Although this is tragic and something to be concerned about, at least we haven't seen the re-emergence of the ISI and its Al Qaeda affiliate car bomb attacks on government building hard points, on the scale that we have seen last year. Those attacks killed almost 400 people and leveled several important ministries to the ground. Soft point targets like these, as tragic as they are, are inevitable in this kind of a war.
I don't understand why Muslim extremists kill other Muslims.
By the way, I don't see how US soldiers could have stopped a suicide bomber, other than forcing him to blow them up instead of the recruits.F1_2004
Yeah, basically. I you have someone who's determined to trade his own life for yours (or people on your side), there's not a whole lot you can do about that.
The Iraqi Army needs to learn how to deal with these kinds of attacks on its own. The Iraqi Army will be defending the Iraqi Government in the future not the US Army.
[QUOTE="TheMightyHoov"]so the solution is to occupy those two countries for the rest of eternity?I can guaruntee when the we pull out Iraq and Aphganistan will fall back into its old ways.
F1_2004
No. Im just saying as it stands both countries will be unable to defend themselves. We would have to stay much longer to make it more stable but that wont happen.
This is so ridiculous. I can't imagine what amount of brainwashing is required to get a person to take his life and that of many innocent civilians. By the way, I don't see how US soldiers could have stopped a suicide bomber, other than forcing him to blow them up instead of the recruits.F1_2004
For minimizing the risk against suicide bombers, it's important to not have crowds like this develop, where they cannot be secured, and where someone can walk up to them all unsecured and blow up like so. There's a reason Baghdad is riddled with so many checkpoints and fortified with blast walls. For awhile, I thought the ISF was having recruits remove their shirts to make sure they didn't have any bombs attached to their chest. Apparently that was not the case today, or from what I know, the suicide bomber had the bomb strapped on his legs or something.
Another countermeasure is checking out for suspicious behavior in said crowds. Although that is not too effective, especially when you had over 1,000 people gathered like in this case. There's no substitute I feel for having strong intelligence though, when you might just be able to intercept these kind of attacks and neutralize the bomber.
Stories like this are always disappointing to hear, but kudos to the Iraqis for fighting hard through the threats. They still went out and voted when they had to, even though there were suicide bombers and other threats to areas where people voted.
Hopefully soon enough, the army and the defense will be stable enough for the country to protect all threats.
Dang :o thats terrible,the terroist could atleast target soilders.Not new people.
austi722
They go when people are in a large group and not prepared (which is why they attacked voters during voting season, long lines of innocent civilans).
Pretty pathetic, but sadly, there is very little you can do to prevent it.
[QUOTE="argetlam00"]
http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE67G0SL20100817
Wounded 123 of them as well.
I think the US needs to delay its withdrawl a bit. This shows a severe lack of Iraq's ability to defend itself properly against extremists.
Vader993
reminds me of the vietnam war
In what way?
[QUOTE="argetlam00"]
http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE67G0SL20100817
Wounded 123 of them as well.
I think the US needs to delay its withdrawl a bit. This shows a severe lack of Iraq's ability to defend itself properly against extremists.
Vader993
reminds me of the vietnam war
No war, not even more intense wars like Vietnam, ever had this amount of lethality in terms of terrorist bomb and/or suicide attacks.
[QUOTE="Vader993"]
[QUOTE="argetlam00"]
http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE67G0SL20100817
Wounded 123 of them as well.
I think the US needs to delay its withdrawl a bit. This shows a severe lack of Iraq's ability to defend itself properly against extremists.
taj7575
reminds me of the vietnam war
In what way?
we pull out then saigon fell
[QUOTE="Vader993"]
[QUOTE="argetlam00"]
http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE67G0SL20100817
Wounded 123 of them as well.
I think the US needs to delay its withdrawl a bit. This shows a severe lack of Iraq's ability to defend itself properly against extremists.
jetpower3
reminds me of the vietnam war
No war, not even more intense wars like Vietnam, ever had this amount of lethality in terms of terrorist bomb and/or suicide attacks.
little war called world war 2
[QUOTE="taj7575"]
[QUOTE="Vader993"]
reminds me of the vietnam war
Vader993
In what way?
we pull out then saigon fell
You're missing the vast amount of differences in opposition strength, political situation, and the far more conventional nature of the Vietnam War.
[QUOTE="taj7575"]
[QUOTE="Vader993"]
reminds me of the vietnam war
Vader993
In what way?
we pull out then saigon fell
Umm, no. There is no Guerrilla and military force we are fighting there.
I can talk about the Vietnam war all night to be honest, but I'd rather not, so I'll just say it's not comparible to the Vietnam war at all.
[QUOTE="jetpower3"]
[QUOTE="Vader993"]
reminds me of the vietnam war
Vader993
No war, not even more intense wars like Vietnam, ever had this amount of lethality in terms of terrorist bomb and/or suicide attacks.
little war called world war 2
WWII was a conventional war. States and empires did all the killing. Nothing like this.
Funny how you talk about Iraqis. They are not pampered and coddled, they are not hippies. They know they know situation and they are repaired to kil or be killed. They don't fear anyone. The threat of a suicide bomber will not deter them.
My onlyinput would be giving a band of amateurs andwannabes guns and calling them soldiers is... basically a death sentence. Wanning to be a soldier is one thing, but being a soldier is another thing. They don't train to use heavy weapons for **** & giggles. You're being paid kill and other people are going to try to kill you. The business deals in death.
[QUOTE="Vader993"]
[QUOTE="jetpower3"]
No war, not even more intense wars like Vietnam, ever had this amount of lethality in terms of terrorist bomb and/or suicide attacks.
jetpower3
little war called world war 2
WWII was a conventional war. States and empires did all the killing. Nothing like this.
Off topic, but I love the sig.
only way Islamic extremism will be dealt with, will be when the poison is directed back at them..
my mind usually works in a zero-sum thinking. In order for good things to happen for society, society must go through something horrible. A sort of rebirth and new identity.
In a sense this might be a good thing in the long run in the political sense (of course, its a horrible tragedy for the recruits and their family members). What I mean is that Iraqis do not obviously approve of people killing their own. In the past few years, these suicide bombings were targeted at American soldiers, and this was generally supported by those who opposed the US occupation. But if the radicals start targeting Iraqis over American targets, then the radical's support may start to wane. Since the US is starting to withdraw, any form of violence against Iraqis might be looked down upon, because they might fear the US coming back to "re-stabilise" the situation. And, of course, the families of those killed are definitely going to be less supportive of the radicals.Dtnoip28
They'll just claim theypunished them for theirtreachery, mix it with some propaganda and the majority will buy it no qiestions asked as if they arewesterners storming their retailers for the latestApple i-gadget.
so the solution is to occupy those two countries for the rest of eternity?[QUOTE="F1_2004"][QUOTE="TheMightyHoov"]
I can guaruntee when the we pull out Iraq and Aphganistan will fall back into its old ways.
TheMightyHoov
No. Im just saying as it stands both countries will be unable to defend themselves. We would have to stay much longer to make it more stable but that wont happen.
They are NEVER going to be able to defend themselves from these kinds of attacks, because there is no defense. Intelligence works best, because the only chance you have of STOPPING a suicide bomber is to gain intelligence on them before they actually get to the "bombing" stage. But even that has its limits...you can't collect perfect intelligence on everyone, and it is surprisingly easy to construct a home-made device capable of blowing up a hell of a lot of people.
Gathering intelligence works to some degree, but it's highly flawed and not a sufficient defense against suicide attacks. The only other alternative is to get people to not WANT to kill you in a suicide attack. And I'm sure you can figure out for yourself why that's not a reliable defense.
Bottom line is that there IS NO DEFENSE. You want to keep US armed forces in Iraq and Afghanistan until those countries can defend against those kinds of attacks? That IS a statement that we should be there forever, because there is no defense against these kinds of suicide attacks. WE can't defend against that kind of crap. Has there been a string of terrorists blowing themselves up at US malls, markets, college campuses, and job fairs? No. But not because we've defended ourselves from such attacks. Are you a bartender at a popular bar? There are locations like that all across the USA, and it's an easy target because it's a lot of people packed together like sardines in a can. Minimal, if any, security.
Think about it...we see reports from Iraq about a market being the target of a suicide bombing. Or a job fair, etc. We have done NOTHING to stop that from being able to happen here, and we CAN'T stop it from happening here in the USA. There is simply NO defense for that kind of thing. If you're advocating that we occupy foreign countries until THEY can defend against such attacks, then you ARE suggesting that we stay there forever.
Funny how you talk about Iraqis. They are not pampered and coddled, they are not hippies. They know they know situation and they are repaired to kil or be killed. They don't fear anyone. The threat of a suicide bomber will not deter them.
My onlyinput would be giving a band of amateurs andwannabes guns and calling them soldiers is... basically a death sentence. Wanning to be a soldier is one thing, but being a soldier is another thing. They don't train to use heavy weapons for **** & giggles. You're being paid kill and other people are going to try to kill you. The business deals in death.
MagnumPI
are you taking to me
[QUOTE="MagnumPI"]
Funny how you talk about Iraqis. They are not pampered and coddled, they are not hippies. They know they know situation and they are repaired to kil or be killed. They don't fear anyone. The threat of a suicide bomber will not deter them.
My onlyinput would be giving a band of amateurs andwannabes guns and calling them soldiers is... basically a death sentence. Wanning to be a soldier is one thing, but being a soldier is another thing. They don't train to use heavy weapons for **** & giggles. You're being paid kill and other people are going to try to kill you. The business deals in death.
Vader993
are you taking to me
No one in particular.
[QUOTE="TheMightyHoov"]
[QUOTE="F1_2004"] so the solution is to occupy those two countries for the rest of eternity?MrGeezer
No. Im just saying as it stands both countries will be unable to defend themselves. We would have to stay much longer to make it more stable but that wont happen.
They are NEVER going to be able to defend themselves from these kinds of attacks, because there is no defense. Intelligence works best, because the only chance you have of STOPPING a suicide bomber is to gain intelligence on them before they actually get to the "bombing" stage. But even that has its limits...you can't collect perfect intelligence on everyone, and it is surprisingly easy to construct a home-made device capable of blowing up a hell of a lot of people.
Gathering intelligence works to some degree, but it's highly flawed and not a sufficient defense against suicide attacks. The only other alternative is to get people to not WANT to kill you in a suicide attack. And I'm sure you can figure out for yourself why that's not a reliable defense.
Bottom line is that there IS NO DEFENSE. You want to keep US armed forces in Iraq and Afghanistan until those countries can defend against those kinds of attacks? That IS a statement that we should be there forever, because there is no defense against these kinds of suicide attacks. WE can't defend against that kind of crap. Has there been a string of terrorists blowing themselves up at US malls, markets, college campuses, and job fairs? No. But not because we've defended ourselves from such attacks. Are you a bartender at a popular bar? There are locations like that all across the USA, and it's an easy target because it's a lot of people packed together like sardines in a can. Minimal, if any, security.
Think about it...we see reports from Iraq about a market being the target of a suicide bombing. Or a job fair, etc. We have done NOTHING to stop that from being able to happen here, and we CAN'T stop it from happening here in the USA. There is simply NO defense for that kind of thing. If you're advocating that we occupy foreign countries until THEY can defend against such attacks, then you ARE suggesting that we stay there forever.
It's either that, or simplydissuadepeople from blowing themselves up. This kind of environment in Iraq was never around before the invasion, and many familiar with the region's history are surprised it is as bad as it's gotten. There are many reasons why people elect to be suicide bombers. It could be because they believe in the "cause" (religious, political, or both), that they don't know any better or are otherwise threatened and indoctrinated, because they are given monetary incentives by insurgents to do so (for their families) or a mixture of them all. It may be true that such a physical defense against suicide bombers is impossible, but a social, political, and economic "defense" that simply prevents people from attempting to in the first place is feasible. It's the main reason it does not happen in developed countries in the U.S. and why security in the traditional sense for the most part is not necessary. Also known as stability.
Iraq has a long way to go if it is going to stand on its feet in all of those categories. It certainly has the potential economic wise, but political and social wise is a lot more difficult. It's a corrupt country, often divided among sectarian and tribal lines, and flare-ups among the various groups are for a large part the reason we are still in this mess. I can't think of many other countries that would have no new government after over 5 months since elections, which has as much to do with the Sunni-Shiite Arab-Kurd etc divide as it does with politicians trying to hold onto their own positions of power.
Despite the bleak situation, I don't know if it's just me, but I have confidence that Iraq will have a good, and maybe even great future. Maybe not for awhile yet, (they are certainly still experiencing relatively dark days and what exactly the future holds for this country is still anyone's guess), but they've come this far and history has shown they have more than enough capability to stand on their own feet when they are able to, for better or for worse.
[QUOTE="MrGeezer"]
[QUOTE="TheMightyHoov"]
No. Im just saying as it stands both countries will be unable to defend themselves. We would have to stay much longer to make it more stable but that wont happen.
jetpower3
They are NEVER going to be able to defend themselves from these kinds of attacks, because there is no defense. Intelligence works best, because the only chance you have of STOPPING a suicide bomber is to gain intelligence on them before they actually get to the "bombing" stage. But even that has its limits...you can't collect perfect intelligence on everyone, and it is surprisingly easy to construct a home-made device capable of blowing up a hell of a lot of people.
Gathering intelligence works to some degree, but it's highly flawed and not a sufficient defense against suicide attacks. The only other alternative is to get people to not WANT to kill you in a suicide attack. And I'm sure you can figure out for yourself why that's not a reliable defense.
Bottom line is that there IS NO DEFENSE. You want to keep US armed forces in Iraq and Afghanistan until those countries can defend against those kinds of attacks? That IS a statement that we should be there forever, because there is no defense against these kinds of suicide attacks. WE can't defend against that kind of crap. Has there been a string of terrorists blowing themselves up at US malls, markets, college campuses, and job fairs? No. But not because we've defended ourselves from such attacks. Are you a bartender at a popular bar? There are locations like that all across the USA, and it's an easy target because it's a lot of people packed together like sardines in a can. Minimal, if any, security.
Think about it...we see reports from Iraq about a market being the target of a suicide bombing. Or a job fair, etc. We have done NOTHING to stop that from being able to happen here, and we CAN'T stop it from happening here in the USA. There is simply NO defense for that kind of thing. If you're advocating that we occupy foreign countries until THEY can defend against such attacks, then you ARE suggesting that we stay there forever.
It's either that, or simplydissuadepeople from blowing themselves up. This kind of environment in Iraq was never around before the invasion, and many familiar with the region's history are surprised it is as bad as it's gotten. There are many reasons why people elect to be suicide bombers. It could be because they believe in the "cause" (religious, political, or both), that they don't know any better or are otherwise threatened and indoctrinated, because they are given monetary incentives by insurgents to do so (for their families) or a mixture of them all. It may be true that such a physical defense against suicide bombers is impossible, but a social, political, and economic "defense" that simply prevents people from attempting to in the first place is feasible. It's the main reason it does not happen in developed countries in the U.S. and why security in the traditional sense for the most part is not necessary. Also known as stability.
Iraq has a long way to go if it is going to stand on its feet in all of those categories. It certainly has the potential economic wise, but political and social wise is a lot more difficult. It's a corrupt country, often divided among sectarian and tribal lines, and flare-ups among the various groups are for a large part the reason we are still in this mess. I can't think of many other countries that would have no new government after over 5 months since elections, which has as much to do with the Sunni-Shiite Arab-Kurd etc divide as it does with politicians trying to hold onto their own positions of power.
Despite the bleak situation, I don't know if it's just me, but I have confidence that Iraq will have a good, and maybe even great future. Maybe not for awhile yet, (they are certainly still experiencing relatively dark days and what exactly the future holds for this country is still anyone's guess), but they've come this far and history has shown they have more than enough capability to stand on their own feet when they are able to, for better or for worse.
reminds me of my native iran
[QUOTE="MrGeezer"]
[QUOTE="TheMightyHoov"]
No. Im just saying as it stands both countries will be unable to defend themselves. We would have to stay much longer to make it more stable but that wont happen.
jetpower3
They are NEVER going to be able to defend themselves from these kinds of attacks, because there is no defense. Intelligence works best, because the only chance you have of STOPPING a suicide bomber is to gain intelligence on them before they actually get to the "bombing" stage. But even that has its limits...you can't collect perfect intelligence on everyone, and it is surprisingly easy to construct a home-made device capable of blowing up a hell of a lot of people.
Gathering intelligence works to some degree, but it's highly flawed and not a sufficient defense against suicide attacks. The only other alternative is to get people to not WANT to kill you in a suicide attack. And I'm sure you can figure out for yourself why that's not a reliable defense.
Bottom line is that there IS NO DEFENSE. You want to keep US armed forces in Iraq and Afghanistan until those countries can defend against those kinds of attacks? That IS a statement that we should be there forever, because there is no defense against these kinds of suicide attacks. WE can't defend against that kind of crap. Has there been a string of terrorists blowing themselves up at US malls, markets, college campuses, and job fairs? No. But not because we've defended ourselves from such attacks. Are you a bartender at a popular bar? There are locations like that all across the USA, and it's an easy target because it's a lot of people packed together like sardines in a can. Minimal, if any, security.
Think about it...we see reports from Iraq about a market being the target of a suicide bombing. Or a job fair, etc. We have done NOTHING to stop that from being able to happen here, and we CAN'T stop it from happening here in the USA. There is simply NO defense for that kind of thing. If you're advocating that we occupy foreign countries until THEY can defend against such attacks, then you ARE suggesting that we stay there forever.
It's either that, or simplydissuadepeople from blowing themselves up. This kind of environment in Iraq was never around before the invasion, and many familiar with the region's history are surprised it is as bad as it's gotten. There are many reasons why people elect to be suicide bombers. It could be because they believe in the "cause" (religious, political, or both), that they don't know any better or are otherwise threatened and indoctrinated, because they are given monetary incentives by insurgents to do so (for their families) or a mixture of them all. It may be true that such a physical defense against suicide bombers is impossible, but a social, political, and economic "defense" that simply prevents people from attempting to in the first place is feasible. It's the main reason it does not happen in developed countries in the U.S. and why security in the traditional sense for the most part is not necessary. Also known as stability.
Iraq has a long way to go if it is going to stand on its feet in all of those categories. It certainly has the potential economic wise, but political and social wise is a lot more difficult. It's a corrupt country, often divided among sectarian and tribal lines, and flare-ups among the various groups are for a large part the reason we are still in this mess. I can't think of many other countries that would have no new government after over 5 months since elections, which has as much to do with the Sunni-Shiite Arab-Kurd etc divide as it does with politicians trying to hold onto their own positions of power.
Despite the bleak situation, I don't know if it's just me, but I have confidence that Iraq will have a good, and maybe even great future. Maybe not for awhile yet, (they are certainly still experiencing relatively dark days and what exactly the future holds for this country is still anyone's guess), but they've come this far and history has shown they have more than enough capability to stand on their own feet when they are able to, for better or for worse.
Exactly. Intelligence on potential suicide bombers can't stop against attacks, at most it can catch a few attckers before they strike. The ONLY way to stop this kind of thing from happening, is to make it so that people do not WANT to carry out these kinds of attacks. That's the only way. Because if they still DO want to carry out these kinds of attacks, then no amount of intelligence or military might can stop them.
That's also the least easy path to take. It's EASY to have an occupying force present in order to stop some terrorists, a lot harder to stabilize the region and eliminate the urge to carry out these kinds of acts in the first place.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment