Interpreting the Fallujah doublespeak

If your adept about Government duplicity then you will recognize this for what it really is . When the authorities start to clamp down on the media in a crisis that is a tell tale sign that events are not unfolding as the authorities would like . In other words it must really be going to hell over there in Fallujah .

Rebels attack elsewhere ? This is a clue that American soldiers are deliberately avoiding having to confront the Iraqi resistance head on . By attacking weaker segments of Fallujah they wish to appear to observers that they are making progress .In fact truth is the US military has been blunted by plucky resistance and are allowing the airforce to bomb resistance hardpoints to rubble thereby avoiding a costly encounter .

Ah yes the US has LOST control of another city. Or more accurately the resistance of Fallujah has inspired many other brave Iraqis to resist .

Panick stricken American soldiers ? shooting at shadows no less What exactly has got them so scared that they are shooting at friendly allied soldiers ?

This here is final proof that the fierce level of organised resistance from the Rebels of Fallujah is not one of half hearted terrorists or foreign insurgents . This is a war fought of patriotic fervour from dedicated Iraqi men liberating their nation from an unjust occupier . These out gunned , out manned dedicated rebels are fighting for their Families , their homes , their nations honour and most importantly their freedom .

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

In all honesty though, don't you think it would be best if they would just stop fighting? Not that they will, but do you really think that the government that would result from cooperating would really be that bad?

There is no longer a question of a second term. The political cost of American casualties isn't of paramount concern to the Bush administration now that the election has been secured . And you know they don't give a damn about Iraqi casualties, since they can convince the public that they were insurgents just about no matter what. So things can really go downhill, and policy towards Iraq still won't change.

I see nothing positive coming from the Iraqi resistance. Just prolonging the death and destruction. I think those in charge of the U.S. right now see the stakes as being higher than they were in Vietnam, or than the Soviets saw them in Afghanistan.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Honestly it has become almost dreamlike this on going occupation it is costing American families many lives and there is no end in sight . There is no solution evolving , the American public seem to be dazed and confused and lack any will to resist there goverments policies . Americas meandering leadership is at fault here they are not providing any remedies for this festering sore . This crisis lurches from one uprising to the next , bomb blast to kidnap and assasination and the resistance is becoming more bold and sophisticated as time wears on . The American people must demand their goverment state clearly what the aims are of Iraq policy , provide timetables on projected acheivements on social reconstruction in Iraq , the retention and demobilization of US troops .

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Looks to me like...

...the Iraqi government is simply asking news outlets, such as al Jazeera, I suspect, to not continue calling every insurgent killed a civilian.

Is that why the military just rushed a light armored brigade out of Fallujah to Mosul? To 'avoid' the resistance?

And why not? Use what you got. As Patton said, the object is not to die for your country, but to make the other guy die for his.

Panic stricken? Those were the reporters words. According to one British officer in that article though:

Moving at night. And without communication between the British and Americans, the US unit didn't know there were other friendlies around them. Unfortunate, but as the article further noted, this is one of the worst instances of friendly fire since May '03, and the worst that happened was the soldier got a minor leg wound.

 

The Bush administration has done this from the very beginning in Iraq, that's part of why some Iraqis are so mad.

It means that it would be stupid for Iraqis to confront overwhelming force directly. The US could clear Fallujah of all insurgents, and they would just come right back later. Small groups of insurgents have decided to resist, while others retreat to other cities. Street fighting of this kind is notoriously difficult. Also, of course US troops would rather use airpower to avoid a costly encounter, wouldn't you? Mostly the rebels are fighting out of nationalistic pride, wouldn't you?

 

well since i checked >>TODAY MORNING<< on GOOGLE NEWS since the assualt began (and the deployment of the Blackwatch:

- 22 US soldiers killed 170 injured including over 100 being evacuated to Germany becasue of serious injuries and 40 treated and returned to combat.
- 5 Iraqi soldiers killed and 40 wounded
- 4 British troops killed 2 seriously wounded (near Fallujah)
- 3 US Tanks engulfed in flames, 3 US helicopters forced down, 1 British helicopter forced down

attacks outside of Fallujah have increased including the taking of a police station in borad daylight, the looting of weapons, various car bombing kiling dozens and Iyad Allawis cousin, cousins wife and cousins daughter in law being kidnapped. Also Campdogwood ahas been attacked by mortars several times. on easch occassion the mortatrs were very narrowly off target. 1 US soldier was killed in nearby city Mosul. also moments after America claimed to of pushed back rebels to the south of Fallujah a fierce gun battle errupted in the north.

not a bad job by the insurgents at all.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

serves America right for listening to those bastard Israelis and attacking Iraq.

 

You forgot one important figure:
Approximately 600 insurgents dead in Fallujah.

Server them right for following Zarqawi.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

@John_angry
Yeah and look at which country the Israelis are pushing America to attack next Iran .literally drowning in your own blood .

 

vakemp: "Serve them right for following Zarqawi."

What is your basis for asserting that these 600 dead fighters were followers of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi? You seem to have far more information about them than I, so I'd much appreciate more background, with reference to your sources.

Information is truly scarce, and the USA has never in my memory been so brazenly involved in suppressing and distorting information. We know very little about the organization of the fighters resisting US occupation in Iraq. What I do know rarely comes from monitoring major media.

It is presently forbidden by the US government for the media, or anyone, to reveal anything about civilian casualties in Fallujah. Primary objectives like Fallujah Hospital have been openly selected from the outset of the siege in order to control information about civilian casualties. The press in "free" Iraq is being openly threatened by the US-installed green-zone government to not deviate from officially-sanctioned descriptions of the resistance.

Of course much more of the truth will emerge with time. On the ground in Iraq, the information clampdowns serve to reinforce the growing opinion that the American overlords are the same as the Old Boss. Deliberately operating in the media shadows, and dealing in media darkness does not inspire confidence in American intentions. Because we are considered foreign aggressors, our killing, maiming, and destroying will be more likely exagerrated than downplayed during news blackouts punctuated by rumors.

Back in the bucolic USA, political analysts of all stripes are examining American tolerance for information control. Gradually as more truth emerges about the destruction in Fallujah, Ramadi, Mosul, Baghdad, and in countless other multiplying hotspots of the Iraqi intifadeh, there will be a growing disparity, impossible to ignore without effort, between what Americans are told by their leaders, and what are the troubling realities of this misbegotten war.

Those who would not hesitate to install greater controls on our American information diet will be watching closely. No governmental propaganda machinery is perfect, and in the information age it is increasingly shot through with reality. But with sufficient public desire to be deceived there is immense power in controlling news and information.

We don't need to speculate on some sinister Orwellian future to see this happening. It is happening right now, before our attention-deficit-challenged eyes. We are surpassing Saddam Hussein not only in our rate of killing of innocent Iraqi civilians, but also in our control of foreign and domestic media in Iraq. We are surpassing Saddam Hussein, and many other of the villains we promote- in our own hypocrisy.

It's uncomfortable, ugly, gory, monstrous. And if we do not confront this evil that rises not from without but from within us, that seeks to hide itself in our desperate need to be righteous- if we do not attack this rapacious sociopolitical virus, then it will destroy the USA, beginning with our proudest and most patriotically-bandied principles. Regarding our information diet as a nation, we are what we eat, and we are increasingly being fed with lies.

 

It's interesting to see the spin coming out of both sides of this battle today on the net. Al-Jazeera is trying to paint the impression that the insurgents have regrouped and are pushing the allies back out of the city. The U.S. is telling reporters that they are merely clearing out pockets of resistance and the battle is all but over.

My guess is the truth is somewhere in the middle. There is simply no way I could see the allies being driven backward considering the mismatch of hardware. However, they could certainly be harassed enough by RPG's and small arms fire that they could get a bit bogged down in the push to the South.

Should be an interesting next few days to see the stories continue to be shaped and spun to paint whatever picture the particular news outlet is aiming for.

Death toll at 12:33 pm on Sat. = 1,200

 

Fallujah has always been defiant toward Saddam Hussein. Now its civilian population has been reduced to a bunch of "insurgents". No one puts in context why Fallujah has become the symbol of the Iraqi resistance: it's because on April 2003, marines opened fire on a peaceful demonstration, killing at least 18 people and wounding hundreds. Now, reports from family and friends about the deadly devastation inflicted by AC-130 gunships, F-16s, 2,000-pound bombs, cluster bombs and the most lethal snipers in the world against what is essentially a collection of slums should be telling the real story - but they will never make it to embedded CNN or BBC. Al-Jazeera's office in Baghdad was closed by Allawi's "government" in August. Even the al-Arabiya network is being criticized by Iraqi bloggers such as Raed for "doing its best to be as Bushy-friendly as they can; just some fragments of news that don't mean anything. No one is covering what the hell is happening in Iraq."

According to official Pentagon spin, "hundreds and hundreds" of "terrorists" have already been killed in Fallujah. There's no proof - and there's no way to independently confirm it. Also because of the news blackout, nobody knows how many Fallujah civilians are dead. Sat-phone calls to Baghdad by trapped Fallujah civilians tell of rows of decomposing bodies littering the streets. Firdoos al-Abadi, the lady who is the head of the Iraqi Red Crescent's emergency committee, sums it all up: "It is a disaster inside Fallujah. There is no water, no electricity, no food. They [the Americans] are forbidding doctors from helping the people." The Red Crescent sent a convoy of four trucks to the city on Thursday with some first aid kits, food, blankets and tents. But a makeshift hospital set up in a mosque is helpless because the doctors are severely under-equipped.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/FK13Ak04.html

 

yes but this coul be either a success or a complete failure for America. if America kills 600 and thats it then thats good for the US but if they kill 600 and this leads to another 600 being created aswell as more becasue of US action then that makes this mission not only a failure but a complete and total fuck up.

if this kills 600 aswell as deters other Iraqi Freedom fighters then yes it is a succes but if it recruits more and adpats the freedom fighter tactics and teaches them something then it is a failure.

time will tell but until then we'll see.

 

pretty much waht preacherX said, if you kill one iraqi, for any reason, his friends and relatives will fight you for revenge, then their friends and relatives, and so on

 

falluhja/propoganda

An Australian news channel reported 1600 Iraqis dead (the ones who are fighting against America) and 25 American casualties (im aware that this doesnt include the casualties of Iraqis on America's side)

who here believes them?
who here has acces to more believable stats (ie listening to both Algezerra and a western channel and averaging the numbers, or actually talking to a solider who was there)

 

The Iraqi Red Crescent relief convoy with emergency supplies for residents of Falluja has not been allowed to enter the city by US forces despite repeated requests, prompting it to appeal to the United Nations.





Entire Article:


http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/443C3B4E-C2D2-4B18-9C5C-7C9B657A8DCF.htm

 

From what I have seen Al Jazeera likes to contradict themselves. In one article, they mention that U.S. troops are keeping the Red Crescent from reacing civilians...

http://www.aljazeera.com/cgi-bin/news_service/middle_east_full_story.asp?service_id=5612

And the next mentions they have reached the city, but made no mention of American soldiers stopping them from doing their jobs....

http://www.aljazeera.com/cgi-bin/news_service/middle_east_full_story.asp?service_id=5596

Seems like Al Jazeera needs to get it reporters together to produce the same lies.... The truth is that the U.S. has closed off the city to prevent insurgents from leaving, and the Red Crescent would be under severe security risk if allowed in. More than likely the supplies would simply fall into insurgents hands.

 

Well in that case Towards lets let everyone starve, just as long as the insurgents don't get the supplies. I mean lets not send medical aid to the residents who have had their houses bombed to the dark ages, just in case some of the insurgents get their hands on it. Its people like you who contridict themselves by saying "lets give the iraq's freedom and democracy... And if they don't like it, we will bomb them till they do."

 

well, the US has made a statementh that they now control al-falluja, official stats, 34 US terrorists dead, 270 wounded. approx 1200 freedom fighters dead

well now that the terrorists have control of al-falluja, its not long until the war is over and they move onto either iran or N. korea, that means nuclear war. the only way to stop this is to keep them busy at home until we can shut down the govt completely.

i urge anyone with the resources, make any type of bomb you can, go on a shooting spree, hijack a plane, whatever you can do to keep them occupied lang enough to shut them down, if you dont then you can pretty much declare the world fucked right now. just keep them busy, if they are busy defending themselves from the inside they wnot have the resources to attack outward

 

Uh huh....somebody is lying all right

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

:



http://www.news.com.au/common/printpage/0,6093,11389249,00.html




guess the US needs plenty of time to clean up their "mess" before they let reporters and media in

 

"Its people like you who contradict themselves by saying "lets give the iraq's freedom and democracy... And if they don't like it, we will bomb them till they do." , Pak-Man

Ok then, lets invision the insurgents getting supplied, and now the battle lasts WEEKS longer, how many innocents will die then? The Red Crescents ability to supply the people with help will be miminal anyway, considering the security situation in the city. You do this to end the situation as soon as possible, so that you can deal with the humanitarian issue as quickly as possible. You are trying to simplify the situation to much, and do not consider other factors that determine the army's thinking, since you are automatically looking to villify their every action.