Skip to main content

Cross-posted at BoomanTribune.

Los Angeles Times now reports -- in the latest from its Baghdad correspondent on the "audacious" attack on Abu Ghraib prison by "40 and 60 heavily armed men [who] swarmed the prison, detonating two car bombs and peppering the facility with rocket-propelled grenades and small-arms and mortar fire" -- that "44 U.S. troops and 13 Iraqi detainees" were wounded.

The number of those seriously wounded and evacuated has risen: "Six U.S. soldiers [up from three] and one Iraqi detainee [none reported earlier]."  Also new:

One of the car bombs was detonated as rescuers attempted to treat the wounded, a witness told Reuters.

Al Qaeda said the gunbattle lasted most of the night -- rather than the 40 minutes the U.S. military claims -- and promises more such attacks "across the land of Mesopotamia" along with a film of yesterday's attack. (See "Al Qaeda Claims Raid on Iraq's Abu Ghraib Prison" below.)

Adds The New York Times:

The assault was so intense that the American troops at the prison called in three Apache attack helicopters  and a Marine infantry company ...

What? Me Worry?

Image Hosted by

CAPTION: In this photo released by the U.S. Army Sunday, April 3, 2005, U.S. Army Gen. George W. Casey Jr., the U.S. commander in Iraq, spends time with paperwork at Camp Victory, near Baghdad, Iraq, Saturday April 2, 2005. Dozens of insurgents attacked the Abu Ghraib prison in western Baghdad Sunday, with car bombs, gunfire, and rocket propelled grenades. The 40-minute clash killed one insurgent and injured 44 U.S. forces and 13 prisoners, U.S. military officials said.(AP Photo/U.S. Army, Spc. Mary Rose) (Yahoo News/AP)

From Reuters/Yahoo:

Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.usPHOTO CREDIT & CAPTION: "Wounded U.S. soldiers taken to hospital following the attack on Abu Ghraib prison Saturday." (Al-Jazeera, 4/3/2005 9:00:00 AM GMT)

Al Qaeda Claims Raid on Iraq's Abu Ghraib Prison

59 minutes ago

DUBAI (Reuters) - Al Qaeda's wing in Iraq Sunday claimed responsibility for a brazen overnight raid on Abu Ghraib prison that wounded 44 U.S. soldiers, according to an Internet statement, and said more attacks would follow. ...

"Your brothers in the al Qaeda Organization (for Holy War) in Iraq launched a well-planned attack on Abu Ghraib prison, where Muslim women and men are held," said the statement posted on a Web site used by Islamists.

It said suicide car bombs and missile strikes on U.S. forces preceded a gunbattle that lasted most of the night.

"Columns of smoke were seen rising from the crusaders' bases," the statement said. "This battle is part of a series of raids ... which began yesterday across the land of Mesopotamia."

The group said it would provide a film of the attack soon. ...

Update [2005-4-2 22:9:50 by susanhbu]: From the LA Times, by Edmund Sanders in Baghdad:

The large-scale attack represented a rare direct assault against a well-fortified U.S. position in Iraq. It was also one of the more sophisticated strikes against American troops. . .

Between 40 and 60 heavily armed men swarmed the prison, detonating two car bombs and peppering the facility with rocket-propelled grenades and small arms and mortar fire.

"First they attacked at one corner to make us think that's where they were coming from, then they attacked at another corner," said Lt. Col. Guy Rudisill, military spokesman for detainee affairs. "This was a well-coordinated attack. This is something that we have not seen before."

At least one insurgent was killed ... Three U.S. soldiers suffered serious wounds and were evacuated for treatment ... Prisoners inside the facility suffered mostly shrapnel and bullet wounds in the attack, which occurred at about 7 p.m.

[I]nsurgents frequently have lobbed mortar rounds inside but not engaged in the type of head-on assault that took place Saturday. Insurgents typically have preferred to remain hidden, working in small groups or on suicide missions, and attacking from afar with mortar rounds and rockets.

The attack Saturday was one of the largest against U.S. forces anywhere in Iraq since the Jan. 30 Iraqi national elections.

It was unclear whether attackers hoped to free detainees, but, "No prisoners were compromised," said Lt. Col. Steven Boylon, a military spokesman in Baghdad.

Update [2005-4-2 15:36:35 by susanhbu]: From The New York Times's Edward Wong:

At Least 20 U.S. Troops Wounded in Attack on Iraqi Prison

BAGHDAD, Iraq, April 3 - Using suicide car bombs and an array of weapons, scores of insurgents made the biggest assault yet on the American-controlled Abu Ghraib prison on Saturday evening, American military officials said. At least 20 American soldiers and marines were wounded.

Forty to 60 insurgents attacked the prison from opposite directions, but were repelled by the Americans in a pitched battle that lasted for 30 to 40 minutes, the officials said. They added that they knew of only one insurgent who had been killed, but said it was almost certain the guerrillas suffered additional casualties.

The assault appeared to be an attempt to break prisoners out of a part of the center that is controlled by Iraqi security forces, said Lt. Col. Guy Rudisill, a spokesman for the American detainee system in Iraq.

The assault was so intense that the American troops at the prison called in three Apache attack helicopters and a Marine infantry company, the colonel said. The marines quickly secured the area around the prison. Of the 20 Americans hurt, 18 had only minor wounds, Colonel Rudisill said.

The attack was the latest in a recent pattern of large, well-organized bands of guerrillas battling American forces.

On March 23, American troops helped Iraqi forces overrun a lakeside training camp of scores of insurgents northwest of Baghdad. Four days earlier, an American convoy fended off an ambush by 40 to 50 insurgents southeast of the capital.

The Americans are holding 3,446 detainees in Abu Ghraib, where eight American soldiers were charged last year with prisoner abuse. Iraqi security forces are also holding prisoners there, though Colonel Rudisill said that he did not know how many the Iraqis had in custody.

The attack began after 7 p.m., when a suicide car bomber tried ramming into the northeast corner of the prison, the colonel said. Insurgents there then opened up with small arms and mortar fire. At the southwest corner, another suicide car bomber exploded, followed by more guerrilla fire.

On Saturday morning, a car bomb exploded at a police station in the town of Khan Bani Saad, 10 miles north of Baghdad, killing four policemen and one civilian ...

Also on Saturday, the American military said a marine was killed the previous day by small-arms fire in Ramadi.

Update [2005-4-2 15:45:44 by susanhbu]: AP story:

Iraq's Abu Ghraib Prison Attacked; 32 Hurt
9 minutes ago
By MARIAM FAM, Associated Press Writer

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Insurgents attacked the Abu Ghraib prison west of Baghdad, injuring 20 U.S. forces and 12 prisoners on Saturday while six people were killed elsewhere in Iraq following a period of declining attacks that had raised hopes the insurgency might be weakening.

At least 40 militants fired rocket-propelled grenades and set off two car bombs at the infamous prison as darkness fell, 1st Lt. Adam Rondeau said. Soldiers and Marines stationed at the detention facility responded, and the resulting clash and gunfight lasted about 40 minutes.

"This was obviously a very well-organized attack and a very big attack," Rondeau said. ...

It wasn't immediately known if any of the insurgents carrying out the attack were arrested or suffered casualties. Plumes of smoke were seen rising from the area. ...


Image Hosted by

Iraqis hold a small demonstration in Ramadi, Iraq Sunday, April 3, 2005, to protest against a raid on the al-Aziz al-Hakim mosque by U.S. forces Saturday night, according to witnesses. Four men detained by the U.S. troops were security and cleaning workers at the mosque, witnesses said. (AP Photo/Bilal Hussein)

Image Hosted by

Iraqis gather inside the al-Aziz al-Hakim mosque in Ramadi, Iraq Sunday, April 3, 2005, after a raid by U.S. forces Saturday night, according to witnesses. Local residents held a demonstration to protest against the raid and the detention of four men inside, who they say were security and cleaning workers at the mosque. (AP Photo/Bilal Hussein)

Originally posted to SusanHu on Sun Apr 03, 2005 at 09:28 AM PDT.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Bring em on! (4.00)
    Bush spoke these words and has yet to face accountability for them. When will that come? How long will we keep having to report about these attacks andn watch more of our children die?
    •  I just added a few photos ... (3.93)
      from events this weekend that, I'd assume (!), inflame Iraqis.

      And I added a photo of the general in charge, just below the fold.

      ALSO:  I wonder if we'll find out the extent of the injuries of the U.S. troops and Iraqi prisoners.

      Susan in Port Angeles (my cat)

      by SusanHu on Sun Apr 03, 2005 at 09:39:22 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I should add (4.00)
        that my inclusion of the photo of Gen. Casey and my comment above wasn't meant so much to ridicule the general but to question why on earth the Army PR people would release THAT photo today.

        Susan in Port Angeles (my cat)

        by SusanHu on Sun Apr 03, 2005 at 10:28:53 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Why? (4.00)
          The same reason that they picked Josh Rushing to be a military spokesperson because he read Iraq For Dummies before shipping out and he was the ONLY ONE IN THE ROOM that knew anything about Iraqi culture and history*.

          The same reason, I guess, they didn't think that the torturing of prisoners would backfire on them.

          They don't really "do" public relations.

          * NOTE: Rushing told this to Terri Gross on Fresh Air (note2: I believe it was this show, lest anyone listens and he doesn't say it. He may have been on another time).

  •  My two cents re the escalation of violence (4.00)
    • the NUMBER of Iraqis in U.S.-run prisons in Iraq has DOUBLED since last October.  
    • the largest prison in Iraq now is Camp Bucca -- which holds approx. 6,800 prisoners, far surpassing Abu Ghraib.  (You may have read my diary on Camp Bucca?  It's in the archives + at Kos.)
    • there are all sorts of "secret" U.S.-run prisons within prisons, including at Abu Ghraib and Camp Bucca ... so, even if the U.S. says it's pulling out of the operation, it can just DUMP prisoners somewhere else
    • the Iraqis now have their OWN prison within a prison at Abu Ghraib and elsewhere, and their treatment of prisoners is as bad, or surely, worse than the U.S.'s.  (Some things never change?)

    P.S. The vast majority held are innocent - either picked up in carpet-sweeping raids or turned in by other Iraqis for money.  The U.S. used to give money only to Iraqi civilians for turning in another Iraqi.  NOW the Iraqi police ALSO get money for turning in their fellow citizens.  It's a money-making enterprise.  Capitalism at work.

    Susan in Port Angeles (my cat)

    by SusanHu on Sun Apr 03, 2005 at 09:46:23 AM PDT

    •  Necessity is the mother of torture (none)
      (Some things never change?)

      predicting the torture was the easiest aspect of foreseeing what would happen in Iraq for me

      Saddam tortured people to maintain power, so we would have to torture people to assume power, that was a "10" on the DUH meter.

      then the reports of torture appeared in the news, and suddenly people I know began to wonder about the other predictions I made

      for the record, there were only two possible outcomes: either a US installed strongman stabalizes Iraq, or it escalates into Beruit or Palastine on the Gulf

      George Bush's incompetence has made choice one impossible, so get ready for hell

      It's like Vietnam all over again, except this is much worse

    •  Diego Garcia and "Camp Justice" (none)
      Great diary, Susan.  Have you by any chance culled anything substantive on the existence of "Camp Justice" at the U.S. naval base on Diego Garcia in the British-held Chagos Islands?  

      It's rather commonly reported -- but unsourced -- that "high value" al Qaida and Taliban prisoners are being held there, the guestimates being in the 100s, not the 1000s.  

      The Blair government, after being challenged by an MP, has denied that the camp exists.  And I've come across a partial denial by the U.S. Navy:  the spokesperson said no such camp exists at the naval facility but could not comment on what did or did not exist on the rest of the island.

      Though mentions of the camp don't stop, most of them are eliptical and probably trace back to a couple of Washington Post articles and a couple of BBC stories.  Amnesty International and the International Committee of the Red Cross have been denied access to the island as have journalists.

      What keeps me searching is a line in "The Usual Suspects":  "A rumor isn't a rumor that doesn't die."  

      (Droll sidelight: Halliburton's Brown & Root did much of the construction on the huge communications and military base when it was built a couple of decades ago.)

      "Injustice wears ever the same harsh face wherever it shows itself." - Ralph Ellison

      by KateCrashes on Sun Apr 03, 2005 at 04:59:58 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  So nice to know (4.00)
    "No prisoners were compromised," said Lt. Col. Steven Boylon, a military spokesman in Baghdad.

    that no Iraqis were harmed in making this commercial for the prowess of the American military juggernaut since they're being cared for so well at Abu Ghraib.

    Like you, Susan, I wonder if/when we'll ever find out the true numbers. If they're now admitting to 44 injured, my guess is that the real number is much higher.

    And why, we may ask, is not the mainstream media asking about this on its Sunday yap shows, instead of allpopeandterri? Silly question, I know.

    There's a nice-ninny priest/at tea in everyone,/all cozy and chatty as auntie,/but a saint comes/and throws rocks through the window. -- John Ciardi

    by Mnemosyne on Sun Apr 03, 2005 at 09:55:26 AM PDT

  •  thanks Susan, once again (4.00)
    I wish diaries about the Iraq war would get 700+ comments these days.

    "I have lived with several Zen masters -- all of them cats." - Eckhart Tolle

    by catnip on Sun Apr 03, 2005 at 10:11:50 AM PDT

  •  It's just a matter (4.00)
    of time before another Tet.

    Bush's presidency is now inextricably yoked to the policies of aggression and subjugation. Mike Whitney

    by dfarrah on Sun Apr 03, 2005 at 10:15:14 AM PDT

    •  I think it already happened (none)
      and we just didn't see it reprted as such.

      "Tell no lies. Claim no easy victories." -- Amilcar Cabral

      by Christopher Day on Sun Apr 03, 2005 at 10:23:57 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Explain. (none)
        I'm interested.

        Susan in Port Angeles (my cat)

        by SusanHu on Sun Apr 03, 2005 at 10:27:16 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  reported as such *yet* (none)
        That old hindsight 20/20 thing...
      •  No - it's not happened. (4.00)
        The thing about Tet wasn't that it was a huge, nationwide offensive (it was that). The main impact of Tet came because it came after a very intense year of U.S. casualties (more than 11,000 in 1967 alone, the worst yet of the war), combined with (and this is crucial) the hyper-optimistic statements of Westmoreland ("light at the end of the tunnel") and the seemingly ironclad assurances of LBJ that the war was winding down and would soon be over.

        It was that stark contrast of expectation versus reality that caused the shock. Nothing like that has happened in Iraq, and nothing short of a near- or complete collapse of the country (combined with - and this is crucial - massive American casualties) would be able to shake our media out of their current starry-eyed complacency.

        •  Tet next year? (none)

          "Too many policemen, no liberty; Too many soldiers, no peace; Too many lawyers, no justice." Lin Yutang (1895-1976)

          by ogre on Sun Apr 03, 2005 at 12:00:07 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  After the attack on Iran (none)
            That is when the Iraqi Shias rebel and with the assistance of Iranian special forces start overrunning occupation forces.

            There is no man alive who is sufficiently good to rule the life of the man next door to him. Sir Rhys Hopkin Morris, M.P.

            by Gary J on Sun Apr 03, 2005 at 12:08:37 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  Or worse (none)
      another Dien Bien Phu. I struggle with mental health issues (we're all friends here, I can say that right?) but I think a lot of what I've been experiencing the last year or so is akin to a mild state of shock over what I see happening.

      God I hope it's not another Dien Bien Phu but my guts are telling me this is going to get worse before it gets better.

  •  It's very depressing (4.00)
    to see another lie turn into a self-fulfilling prophecy: the presence of Al Qaeda in Iraq.

    Alterius non sit qui suus esse potest. - Paracelsus

    by asterlil on Sun Apr 03, 2005 at 10:28:33 AM PDT

  •  This never should have happened (4.00)
    because Abu Ghraib prison should have been razed by us after the horrors we committed there were revealed. It would have at least been a symbolic gesture of deep regret.
    (instead we razed Fallujah.)

    I am sorry for the soldiers who were injured...they are somebody's family or loved on and they could be really good people doing their best. But if I were an Iraqi I would be so enraged by what it stood for and I can understand the action.

  •  Riverbend has a good analysis of the MSM (none)
    A little off topic, but the recent diary at Baghdad Burning -- American Media -- will make you question even more the accurancy of the news coming out of Iraq.  Mostly Riverbend writes about the incredible PSYOPS being loaded on the Iraqis now in the news and media, but it applies to us too.

    One line:  "I've always sensed from the various websites that American mainstream news is far-removed from reality, I just didn't know how far."

    So who knows exactly what happened at the Abu Garaib assualt, or how many soldiers were really killed.  I bet Bush&Co. are happy it's around-the-clock news about the Pope now, and are hoping that any news of this assualt disappears from the headlines soon.  And unfortunately, it probably will.

  •  Didn't We Promise to Tear This Place Down? (none)
    As someone who believes that the war on Iraq was -- and remains -- fundamentally illegal and immoral, and that we should bring our troops home immediately, I've always been wary of getting into debates about how poorly the Bush administration has waged this war. Even a well-waged war on Iraq would have been an abomination.

    Nevertheless, there are times when I can't help asking the obvious question: doesn't anyone in the Pentagon have a clue?  Even before news of American torture at Abu Ghraib became public, the very idea of using one of Saddam's most notorious prisons as a prison was idiotic, and an unnecessary irritant.

    Since it became apparent that we were actually using Saddam's torture chamber for our own torturing, Abu Ghraib became the most potent symbol of everything wrong with U.S. policy in Iraq. Such a symbol could, of course, easily be exploited by our actual enemies, including Al Qaeda.  Any idiot could have seen that.

    Tearing it down would have served a whole lot of purposes at once, and would not have interfered with the administration's dogged pursuit of its policies.  That they did not do so is yet another example of the extraordinary combination of laziness, arrogance, and stupidity that defines everything the Bush administration does, at home and abroad.    

    Start doing the things you think should be done, and start being what you think society should become. -Adam Michnik.

    by GreenSooner on Sun Apr 03, 2005 at 10:43:17 AM PDT

    •  Bush said he was going to raze the place (none)
      But since it was/is a crime scene, the military judge heading the trials said it could not be destroyed.

      The place should probably become an Iraqi memorial.

      It should never be torn down.

      it could be renamed,

      The House of Democracy Don and George built.

      •  The Iraqis should have been allowed to (none)
        tear it down when we first got there. End of story. Take out all their aggressions on it, dismantle it brick by brick. No outside assistance needed. Fury in action.

        An "invasion/occupation/liberation" with smarts would have had that in the plan from the beginning.

        But with these nutjobs, who could RESIST a nice little jail? Kinda like beach-front property, such a tantalizing prospect, to own it, to control it, to use it, to fill it with people, with "terrible people". (90% of whom are guilty of nothing except being caught in a sweep).  Geez.

        Reframing the news and people's views of our world:, free subscriptions.

        by AllisonInSeattle on Sun Apr 03, 2005 at 10:28:02 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  "Camp Victory" (4.00)
    Oh, the irony.

    Worst of all, we STILL -- 3 1/2 years from 9/11 -- have no real intel on what's going on there. And we've taken NO real action to make our country safer.

    The Times today reports that the daily PDB's are, to paraphrase, completely useless:

    The small group of top government officials who read the President's Daily Brief, a summary of the most timely and critical intelligence on threats to the United States, told a presidential commission on intelligence that they find the highly classified document of little value, according to the commission's co-chairmen....snip...The comments suggest that the grave shortcomings of the daily briefs before the Iraq war, detailed as part of the commission's sweeping 601-page indictment of the nation's intelligence agencies, have not been remedied despite efforts in recent months by the Central Intelligence Agency to improve them.

    It's appalling, isn't it? How are the people in this country not rising up in anger at this?

    I am truly afraid another attack will happen one day. And even then, people may respond with an even more militant reaction, instead of just firing the incompetents now running the show.


    •  August 6, 2001 PDB proves they're worthless (none)
      George doesn't read them, couldn't understand them if he did, and would not change his robber baron policies if hedid read or could understand the PDBs

      so the report is right, the PDBs are worthless

      there is one aspect that the report doesn't tell you, it has nothing to do with the information, the problem lies in WHO is being briefed

      •  The article says: (none)
        Contrary to his image in some circles as a man with little appetite for detailed study, Mr. Bush asked early in his presidency that the brief be expanded and delivered in a loose-leaf notebook to include more than just the 10 to 15 pages of finished intelligence analyses on current topics.

        But that doesn't mean he actually reads them... heh.

        •  PDB Made Worthless (none)
          The PDB will only be worthwhile when they take action on the PDB information.  Rice's continued moan that they contained no actionable intelligence was a sure indication that SHE didn't have the intelligence to know what to do with the information.  One can infer that there was less intelligence providing direction above her.  This is where ignoring the information because it doesn't match your preconceived answer will really bite you in the ass.
          •  It's more than that... (none)
            I'll caveat my comments by saying I know next to nothing about the CIA, other than the book I'm reading now (Ghost Wars) and what I read in the news.

            That said, I think it's more than just taking action. I think the heart of the problem now, especially re: Al Qaeda, is that they just HAVE NO CLUE. No idea.

            With no spies on the ground getting info, our "best bet" at breaking through al-Qaeda at the intel level has been.....torturing people.

            And we know how well that works.

            (Frontline recently did a great piece on al-Qaeda, how they've evolved since 9/11 and how Europe is really at the front lines of tackling terrorism.)

            Until we treat terrorism as a Law Enforcement problem and not a Military problem, the PDB will not ever have the info in it they need to actually take action.

            I definitely agree with your comment re: "preconceived" answers. That also adds a lot to the problem.

            So, summing up, we're screwed.

            •  Contrast Clinton and Bush Response To Warnings (4.00)
              It would be interesting to get more detailed contrast on exactly how the Clinton Whitehouse and the Bush Whitehouse responded to the PDB messages.

              By now everyone understands the legal barriers which normally keep the internal and external intelligence investigations seperated.  Without clear direction to coordinate investigations FROM THE VERY TOP of the Executive branch, walls will remain up between the FBI and the CIA.  This is because the top on the executive branch (Ms. Rice specifically as the former NSA) has access to ALL of the information.

              My impression was that the Clinton Whitehouse went onto overdrive when PDB warnings spiked around 1999 for a Y2K event.  He yanked all the intel heads into a meeting where he hammered the table and pretty much told then to drop everything else. This was the MESSAGE sent to the agencies.  This was where the interagency information sharing started.

              Contrast that with Bush.  According to Clarke, Tenant couldn't have ratched the message urgency up any higher than he had, yet there's a clear sense that it was no big deal to the Bush Whitehouse.  By then (late summer) it was real clear that OBL was not a significant issue for the Bush Whitehouse (and would not be until it became a way to leverage into Iraq).  The clear call to action never came from the Bush Whitehouse.  No interagency sharing would result from this.  Nor could there be a significant shift of the FBIs or CIAs manpower/assets to deal with the issue.

              Now, everyones quick to point out that the was a large element of luck in the 1999 catch of the terrorists, but like I keep pointing out to my wife, buying a lottery ticket significantly increases your chances to win.  The Bush Whitehouse NEVER BOUGHT THE TICKET, and significantly decreased their odds of success.  Even then, both the FBI and CIA were very close.

              There were doubts even on the Clinton Whitehouse if the Law Enforcement approach would yield the required results (Berger was concerned that we would loose in court if OBL was captured), but it's clear that the current approach (The War on Terrorism) has SIGNIFICANT issues.  Frontline made it clear we are not cooporating with our allies.  I can only speculate as to weather we continue to share intelligence with our allies (and if they return the favor), but we have historically relied on other intelligence agencies for our on-the-ground (HUMINT) inteligence in this region of the world.  If we have truly pissed off our allies enough, we could be only be adversely affecting our own intel efforts.

  •  Does anyone else agree (none)
    That Ed Wong is the best reported in Iraq right now.  I know The Times has had its shortcomings, but one of its true reporters is Ed Wong.

    You all have to admit, if all the crazies were not around life would have less purpose

    by genethefiend on Sun Apr 03, 2005 at 11:20:21 AM PDT

  •  Incompetence, or going according to plan? (none)
    And now Al Qaeda will be seen as "heroes" to the Iraqi people because they did this. My mind at first simply could not fathom the immense incompetence of those leading all of this. At first look, it seems as if these people are totally inept and incompetent... Then, I found myself wondering if this is all being planned by the Bush administration in an attempt to have an excuse to keep our presence there. What is this "Al Qaeda" anyway?

    Face it, without Iraq in perpetual violence, there will be no reason to stay there. They keep saying they will leave once it is secure, then things like this happen. This is really too coincidental to me, and I really believe it is now time for the American people to take to the streets enmasse like what was done during the Vietnam War to demand an end to this.

    The corporate/military complex is playing us all, and our children are dying in the process. They wanted terrorists in Iraq to keep this going (because they are getting rich off of the blood spilled), which was why the borders were not secured. This is not all happening by happenstance. I am beginning to believe this was planned by our own military leaders with our children as the sacrificial lambs. 150,000 of our children are over there, and we can't secure a country the size of California after being there for over two years? Please.

    •  to what point ??? (none)
      if this is all being planned by the Bush administration in an attempt to have an excuse to keep our presence there

      Uh, how does pissing off the entire Arab population, as well as a large portion of the world's Muslims, serve the purpose ???

      If we want to stay in Iraq, we should be trying to STOP pissing these people off, not creating chaos where there was stability

      I have studied and rejected the designed incompetence theory that you prepose, for one simple reason, It Aint Working

      for all of the feel-good-pebntagon-papers reports about America's invasion of Iraq, one FACT can not be ignored

      Soldiers are dying

      at some point, the American public will ask HOW MANY DEAD ???

      and the Iraqis are bound to hate us for thousands of years

      Either way, it is incompetence

    •  Incompetence (none)
      I think you're mistaking "incompetence" for "evil genius."


  •  Black Hawk Down II in the making? n/t (none)

    When the fox preaches The Passion, farmer watch your geese.

    by reform dem on Sun Apr 03, 2005 at 01:22:56 PM PDT

  •  Attacking a fortified position (none)
    is extremely difficult, especially, when you have limited resources and the other guy does not.  The losses on the other side are unclear, but they can always temper the pace of their attacks to match their recruiting rates.  

    With respect to all the other camps, the difficulty is what is being done in them.  Some number of war supporters, asked
    How many people would Jesus torture?

    would answer 'not enough, but I'll do better.'

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site