Did the Iraqi's stop a bombing?

October 13, 2005 10:16 AM

POP goes the weasel? "A number of Iraqis apprehended two Americans disguised in Arab dress as they tried to blow up a booby-trapped car in the middle of a residential area in western Baghdad on Tuesday. Residents of western Baghdad’s al-Ghazaliyah district told Quds Press that the people had apprehended the Americans as they left their Caprice car near a residential neighborhood in al-Ghazaliyah on Tuesday afternoon (11 October 2005). Local people found they looked suspicious so they detained the men before they could get away. That was when they discovered that they were Americans and called the Iraqi puppet police. Five minutes after the arrival of the Iraqi puppet police on the scene a large force of US troops showed up and surrounded the area. They put the two Americans in one of their Humvees and drove away at high speed to the astonishment of the residents of the area. Quds Press spoke by telephone with a member of the al-Ghazaliyah puppet police who confirmed the incident, saying that the two men were non-Arab foreigners but declined to be more precise about their nationality.
posted by rough ashlar (120 comments total)

Looks like a job for Team America.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 10:23 AM on October 13, 2005

I'd be a lot more comfortable reading this if it weren't for all the editorializing using the word "puppet".

Unless of course by "puppet police" he means this little guy.
posted by clevershark at 10:27 AM on October 13, 2005

I hear that Israel sprays a poisonous gas that aborts arab babies too.
posted by loquax at 10:28 AM on October 13, 2005

America caused the earthquake in Pakistan.
posted by billysumday at 10:29 AM on October 13, 2005

Brevity, please!
posted by rolypolyman at 10:29 AM on October 13, 2005

Yeah, the "puppet" thing really makes you look like a whack-job.
posted by bshort at 10:29 AM on October 13, 2005

This wins some award for longest editorialized FPP without a y2karl small script
posted by Peter H at 10:30 AM on October 13, 2005

Not much (English) info from the links ... just *one sentence* I guess.

Where'd you get your info? (Or translated quote.)
posted by mrgrimm at 10:32 AM on October 13, 2005

Puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet puppet.
posted by basicchannel at 10:32 AM on October 13, 2005

Not much (English) info from the links

Scroll down, then again most of it was quoted in the FPP.
posted by Pollomacho at 10:32 AM on October 13, 2005

For more information on British/American terrorism in Iraq and elsewhere, read this thread starting at this comment by rough aslar.
posted by loquax at 10:36 AM on October 13, 2005

It fits with your worldview, therefore it's true.
posted by BrandonAbell at 10:38 AM on October 13, 2005

I hear that Israel sprays a poisonous gas that aborts arab babies too.

I hear that Iraq sends soliders into hospitals to take babies out of their incubators.
posted by Armitage Shanks at 10:41 AM on October 13, 2005

I like to think that puppets mean us no harm, even though we stick our hands up their asses when we feel we need them for something.
posted by Pecinpah at 10:41 AM on October 13, 2005

Do I need a puppet to know about this?
posted by notmydesk at 10:42 AM on October 13, 2005

Wakka wakka!

posted by furtive at 10:42 AM on October 13, 2005

I hear that Iraq sends soliders into hospitals to take babies out of their incubators.

I heard that too!
posted by loquax at 10:42 AM on October 13, 2005

Excuse me folks, but I'm afraid that both photo's posted have been Muppet police.
posted by Pollomacho at 10:44 AM on October 13, 2005

This is more like it!
posted by Pollomacho at 10:45 AM on October 13, 2005

I'd be a lot more comfortable reading this if it weren't for all the editorializing using the word "puppet".

Yea...not like it might be biased reporting eh?

This would be the 2nd charge of 'The Americans are behind some of the bombings' I've seen. I'd like to believe that such a bad idea isn't the case....but many bad ideas HAVE actually been the case, I'm not willing to disreguard it as 'not possible'
posted by rough ashlar at 10:46 AM on October 13, 2005

it doesn't matter whether we believe it ... do the iraqis believe it?

appearances are everything these days
posted by pyramid termite at 10:46 AM on October 13, 2005

Please pretend that I'm an idiot, and explain to me why Americans would want to set off a bomb in a residential area of Baghdad.
posted by Eyebeams at 10:47 AM on October 13, 2005

I can't parse the Bader Meinhof press release style to get to any real point here, BUT (seriously) are there not enough bombings in Iraq as it is? Why make rain? Fucking coals to Newcastle. Acid washed jean jackets to a Twisted Sister show.

I will certainly entertain the possibility that states do weird counterproductive factional covert stuff all the time, but how about a little analysis or explanation with the big ass chunk of gibberish?
posted by Divine_Wino at 10:47 AM on October 13, 2005

Maybe it was two foreigners employed by the insurgency to look like Americans and get caught on purpose... or maybe... oh never mind.
posted by mania at 10:47 AM on October 13, 2005

Puppet is such a nice way of saying I've got my hand up your ass and can make you say any damned thing I want. Which is kind of not what the essay on the front page was saying.

If these really were puppet cops then they'd not have done a damned thing with the disguised bombers. So yeah, the puppet thing detracts from the rest of the FPP's impact.

But, on that front, HOLY EFFIN' SHIT! This is very, very bad and extraordinarily ugly. Worse than Abu Ghraib in my estimation, if its true, of course.

By the way, you could have mentioned that you cut and pasted the entirety of the article in the FPP.
posted by fenriq at 10:49 AM on October 13, 2005

Please pretend that I'm an idiot, and explain to me why Americans would want to set off a bomb in a residential area of Baghdad.

Well, off the top of my head:

To kill someone.
To destabilize a situation.
To affect the outcome of a referendum.
To cause a group of people to go to the polls.
To cause a group of people not to go to the polls...

Can keep going like this.
posted by Pollomacho at 10:50 AM on October 13, 2005

Please pretend that I'm not an idiot.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 10:53 AM on October 13, 2005

The first source looks like some sort of Bathist propoganda rag. Did Baghdad Bob get his old job back?
posted by caddis at 10:54 AM on October 13, 2005

But, on that front, HOLY EFFIN' SHIT! This is very, very bad and extraordinarily ugly. Worse than Abu Ghraib in my estimation, if its true, of course.

Even if 100% not true, if accepted AS true by the Iraqi people, such an idea existing for a 2nd time isn't going to help the American position. At least no jails were knocked over by tanks....
posted by rough ashlar at 10:56 AM on October 13, 2005

Isn't this the type of sloppy post that gets removed?
posted by parallax7d at 10:57 AM on October 13, 2005

Who says it is accepted as true by Iraqi people?
posted by caddis at 10:58 AM on October 13, 2005

The first source looks like some sort of Bathist propoganda rag.

In Russia? Rag, maybe, Baathist, doubtful. Pravda is Russian for Weekly World News by the way.

As for the other link, Al Quds is Arabic for Jerusalem.
posted by Pollomacho at 10:58 AM on October 13, 2005

Actually, Pollomacho, this is what you want. Funny enough the second result is about Iraq. About two Iraqi kids who are Metallica fans. But the word puppet is not in the article. Hmmm.
posted by funambulist at 10:59 AM on October 13, 2005

Eyebeams writes "Please pretend that I'm an idiot, and explain to me why Americans would want to set off a bomb in a residential area of Baghdad"

Go to your favorite video rental facility and get The Quiet American DVD. The movie should answer your question.
posted by nkyad at 10:59 AM on October 13, 2005

I won't believe it until someone can blame Halliburton, or failing that, the Elders of Zion.
posted by aramaic at 11:01 AM on October 13, 2005

answering to mania, not that I believe this article is stating the truth, but hypothetically speaking:
the sunnis aren't going to be warm and fuzzy about the iraqi constitution soon. by reinforcing the sense of them being the "evil guys" who blow up people during elections (not that "someone" isn't anyway), the stance of the temporary government as "the good guys" would be enhanced. that would make people vote from an emotional perspective, rather then them being informed about what they are actually voting on.
just as a foot note: the aspects of the Iraqi constitution concerning copyrights and property laws were written by American lawyers during Paul Bremer's reign at the CPA long before there were any elections in Iraq.
posted by threehundredandsixty at 11:03 AM on October 13, 2005

I have no idea what we're fucking talking about.
posted by Peter H at 11:03 AM on October 13, 2005

The biggest mistake any government ever made was allowing one corporation to make a dime in the business of war. I can think of a half dozen defense contractors off the top of my head that are enjoying the most lucrative years of their existence due to this war. What is their incentive in seeing it's end?
posted by any major dude at 11:17 AM on October 13, 2005

What is their incentive in seeing it's end?

That the longer it goes on, the more of them won't be left to collect their paychecks?
posted by gwint at 11:20 AM on October 13, 2005

any major dude writes "The biggest mistake any government ever made"

You understand that anything you write after this words will be a severe underestimation of any government's mistake making capacity and will only serve as an incentive for government officials that happen to read it to try for bigger, better mistakes, right?
posted by nkyad at 11:21 AM on October 13, 2005

360 that makes zero sense. The more unstable the situation around this constitution the LESS legitimate it is and the MORE likely all out civil war breaks out thus exposing all the US efforts as complete bullshit AND with the side benefit of forcing Bush to keep troops there longer weakening the Republicans in the mid-term even further. This article is bullshit.
posted by tkchrist at 11:22 AM on October 13, 2005

The biggest mistake any government ever made was allowing one corporation to make a dime in the business of war.

Oh, so it was Haliburton on the grassy knoll who tried to bomb the Iraqis?
posted by caddis at 11:25 AM on October 13, 2005

"It doesn't matter what the truth is. It matters what idiots think the truth is."

Yet no one would ever use that logic to defend Intelligent Design.
posted by smackfu at 11:35 AM on October 13, 2005

this post is gay (not in the 'loves dick and has good taste' way)
posted by Jeremy at 11:36 AM on October 13, 2005

It's just a rumor, but man, is it a juicy one.
posted by fungible at 11:37 AM on October 13, 2005

I have no idea what we're fucking talking about.


Apparently puppets have done something bad and now they all have to be Iraqi. Or something.
posted by ob at 11:40 AM on October 13, 2005

I have a much higher standard of journalistic integrity. I won't believe it until I read it on Drudge.
**Rolls eyes**
posted by spock at 11:45 AM on October 13, 2005

guint wrote:

That the longer it goes on, the more of them won't be left to collect their paychecks?

I don't see too many CEO's on that list. The world's most abundant resource is desperate and greedy men.

Hey Caddis, instead of posting your snarky remark why don't you answer my question. What is the incentive for Halliburton to see the war's end? They were a struggling company facing bankruptcy before this war started and now their stock price has doubled in the past year. Why would they want this revenue stream to end?
posted by any major dude at 11:48 AM on October 13, 2005

There's a difference between bias and opinion. This post was biased from the beginning.
posted by bshort at 11:52 AM on October 13, 2005

This article is bullshit

Agreed. When in doubt, the simplest explanation is usually true, no?

So, America has little to gain by continuing to foment an unstable Iraq. They want to see a democratic miracle (and brother, what a miracle it would have to be).

The US haters, Al Queda-lites and Saddamites has much to gain from that same path.

And Pravda is a hyperactive rag with regular Anti-US propoganda - some of it interesting, some of it clearly contrived.
posted by CynicalKnight at 11:54 AM on October 13, 2005

So dude, you think Haliburton did it?
posted by caddis at 11:56 AM on October 13, 2005

Did I say Halliburtion did it? What does it matter if I do think they did it? I have no more information about the truth than you do. What I'm asking you is what is their incentive forending the war? Can you answer that question?
posted by any major dude at 12:00 PM on October 13, 2005

... because there are so many more larger mistakes, such as entering the war in the first place, putting inept cronies in charge on both the US and Iraqi side, failing to secure weapons depots, etc., etc. Don't blame Haliburton, blame the lamer in charge, GW.
posted by caddis at 12:02 PM on October 13, 2005

You still didn't answer my question. What is the incentive for a defense contractor - any of them - to end this war?
posted by any major dude at 12:05 PM on October 13, 2005

Do defense contractors end wars?
posted by caddis at 12:14 PM on October 13, 2005

From the home page of the first link:

The MIRROR-WORLD.ru web-project is issued Non-Commercial Fund for Informational Resistance to the Threat of Wars and Hostilities in the Modern World "MIRROR OF THE WORLD".

Not saying anything, just providing that as food for thought.
posted by Pollomacho at 12:19 PM on October 13, 2005

What is the incentive for a defense contractor - any of them - to end this war?

Considering that the war is being kept alive by real car bombings, why would a defense contractor need to exert any effort at all to keep the war going? What logical reason do you have for believing that the war wouldn't keep going anyway regardless of conspiracy? There is no rational reason for a defense contractor to interfere. The war is going to continue long enough on its own, without any supposed interference.
posted by unreason at 12:20 PM on October 13, 2005

Some people just irrationally fear corporations.
posted by caddis at 12:21 PM on October 13, 2005

You are being evasive. I'll assume you have no answer for me.
posted by any major dude at 12:24 PM on October 13, 2005

What is the incentive for a defense contractor - any of them - to end this war?
One possibility: You're a defense contractor whose products are no longer being purchased because of the nature of this war (e.g., fighter aircraft). A young nation convinced it needs protection from its neighbors would be a better customer than your current ones. End this war, then sell your product to the new Iraq to prepare them for the next war.

Not saying that's the case, but you asked for an incentive.
posted by forrest at 12:24 PM on October 13, 2005

Because your question is silly.
posted by caddis at 12:25 PM on October 13, 2005

WHY IS THIS POST STILL HERE?
WHERE IS MY CAPS LOCK KEY?
posted by dios at 12:30 PM on October 13, 2005

posted by caddis at 12:33 PM on October 13, 2005

You are being evasive. I'll assume you have no answer for me.
posted by any major dude at 3:24 PM EST on October 13 [!]

See my previous post. There is no logical reason for a defense contractor to do this. Believe otherwise if you like, but there is no rational reason for your idea.
posted by unreason at 12:35 PM on October 13, 2005

You're a defense contractor whose products are no longer being purchased because of the nature of this war

Reality is far too simple and stupid to ape something as complex and sophisticated as a James Bond movie.
posted by CynicalKnight at 12:36 PM on October 13, 2005

i'm sorry, i can't comment right now...i'm still laughing at the Fozzy Bear.
posted by aether1 at 12:36 PM on October 13, 2005

OH, I FOUND IT, DIOS. IT'S OVER HERE.
posted by cleverusername at 12:40 PM on October 13, 2005

Ok, let me rephrase my question. What is the incentive for a regular enlisted army private to end the war?
posted by any major dude at 12:42 PM on October 13, 2005

What man directly benefited the most from Jack Kennedy's assassination? What government official in 1963 had the most connections in the state of Texas?

Show of hands, how many here actually think LBJ was responsible for the assassination of JFK?

It doesn't matter what we think we know. It doesn't matter what the most logical answer is. sometimes we just believe things or not.

What is the point of this post? I haven't got a clue, but I can assume from your reading thus far and confusion that you obviously think think Castro ordered the killing and that the tin foil manufacturers of America are responsible for 9/11.
posted by Pollomacho at 12:43 PM on October 13, 2005

Obviously there's little incentive for war merchant corporations to stop the war. But it isn't up to the corporations to stop it. It's the military, under direction of the government that started the war, and it's up to the government to stop it.

Government != Corporations.

At least, that's what we're meant to believe.
posted by raedyn at 12:49 PM on October 13, 2005

Ok, let me rephrase my question. What is the incentive for a regular enlisted army private to end the war?
posted by any major dude at 3:42 PM EST on October 13 [!]

So they can go home and not get shot at or blown up while living in a hot, miserable, vermin infested barracks in a foreign country.
posted by unreason at 12:50 PM on October 13, 2005

raedyn writes "Government != Corporations."

Evidence? As you must have read in the hundreds of FPPs discussing this or that new creationism fantasy, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence...
posted by nkyad at 12:51 PM on October 13, 2005

Why does Fozzy hate America?
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 12:52 PM on October 13, 2005

The biggest mistake any government ever made was allowing one corporation to make a dime in the business of war. I can think of a half dozen defense contractors off the top of my head that are enjoying the most lucrative years of their existence due to this war. What is their incentive in seeing it's end?

I dissagree. I think profit can be a powerful motive to be productive, and thats what you need in a War.

The worst mistake was letting military contractors run for office
posted by delmoi at 1:06 PM on October 13, 2005

The worst mistake was letting military contractors run for office - delmoi

I think you're getting at a good point, there. But I wouldn't choose to block anyone from running for office. I just think we should be able to see the risks involved with electing them and maybe... umm... don't.
posted by raedyn at 1:19 PM on October 13, 2005

I think profit can be a powerful motive to be productive, and thats what you need in a War.


Yea, them cost plus 5% contracts.

WASHINGTON - Iraq needed fuel. Halliburton Co. was ordered to get it there — quick. So the Houston-based contractor charged the Pentagon $27.5 million to ship $82,100 worth of cooking and heating fuel.

posted by rough ashlar at 1:21 PM on October 13, 2005

Show of hands, how many here actually think LBJ was responsible for the assassination of JFK?

Everyone knows it was Ladybird.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 1:22 PM on October 13, 2005

Assuming that this is true -- and it might well not be, but assuming -- I wonder if it could be related to the story of the two British soldiers who were arrested in Basra and had to be rescued from the police with an all-out tank assault.

They were also travelling in plain clothes, arrested by the "puppet police" after travelling in an area said to be rife with insurgents, and with weapons...
posted by clevershark at 1:34 PM on October 13, 2005

The biggest mistake any government ever made was allowing one corporation to make a dime in the business of war.

What classical general said, "war is won by money rather than weapons." or something to that effect?
posted by Pollomacho at 1:43 PM on October 13, 2005

Oh and it was Socrates that said, "All wars are fought for money."
posted by Pollomacho at 1:45 PM on October 13, 2005

The worst mistake was letting military contractors run for office

or at least electing them:


posted by caddis at 2:18 PM on October 13, 2005

BREAKING NEWS: The Weekly World News is reporting that the two "men" are confirmed agents from a secret Nazi base on planet Venus.
posted by StarForce5 at 2:56 PM on October 13, 2005

Did the American puppet in Islamic garb look like this?


posted by hipnerd at 3:02 PM on October 13, 2005

ARE DEMONS TALKING TO YOU?
Useful things you can learn from them!

ARCHAEOLOGIST FINDS LEPRECHAUN COLONY!
HISTORIC PRESS CONFERENCE ENDS IN DISASTER

SECONDHAND FAT KILLS!
. . . It's more deadly than smoke
posted by caddis at 3:09 PM on October 13, 2005

This is validity neutral.
Until there is some evidence I don’t believe this particular incident took place.
That said, why wouldn’t any government that has historically engaged in agitation do so as a matter of course to achieve whatever ends?

No tinfoil hat required. Perhaps you need a couple guys to covertly kill some schmuck. Perhaps it’s something else.
So?

There are ongoing operations none of us are privvy to. For good or ill.

The obvious intent of the story is to sully the USA’s rep, true or not. Not that our rep isn’t already in the toilet. And not that we haven't already done some very bad things.

But I have a hard time drawing conclusions on this particular bit of info. So I won’t
posted by Smedleyman at 3:12 PM on October 13, 2005

Until there is some evidence

Of course it did not take place. Only a complete fool would put any stock whatsoever into this piece of uttter garbage. However, this is a good thread in which to poke some fun.
posted by caddis at 3:17 PM on October 13, 2005

I think most of you are off-base.

Imagine there is a war, an unstable situation. In this war, you need to kill people. Sometimes you can kill them the regular way, other times you need to kill them in different ways, for a multitude of reasons.

One of the factors in this particular war is that car bombs are going off left and right. So, if you did need to kill someone in a way that couldn't be done through normal channels...

As Holmes said, where do you hide a body? Answer: on a battlefield.
posted by cell divide at 3:30 PM on October 13, 2005

Oh, and of course that's all on the assumption that this even happened... I don't doubt it does happen, in some form, but I don't have much stock in any particular article, especialy not this one.
posted by cell divide at 3:32 PM on October 13, 2005

"Only a complete fool would put any stock whatsoever into this piece of uttter garbage. "

Yet there continues to be propaganda.
And pro-wrasslin is still popular.

What makes it seductive is that there is no reason not to believe it. One can’t say “Not the Americans! They wouldn’t do that!”

I mean why not believe it? Simply because it isn’t true?
What does that have to do with reality?
Consider the O.J. verdict - two mass perspectives reacted in completely different ways to that.
Did it matter whether O.J. truly was guilty or innocent?

Same forces at work here. That it’s an obvious fabrication doesn’t enter in to the realities of the situation.
posted by Smedleyman at 3:32 PM on October 13, 2005

Obfuscation, its all about just throwing so much shit in the air that no one can tell what's real and what's just flung poop.

This administration didn't invent the process but they have certainly kicked it up (down) to a whole new level (the gutter).
posted by fenriq at 4:16 PM on October 13, 2005

Is there a reason this hasn't been deleted yet?
posted by Krrrlson at 5:45 PM on October 13, 2005

True. Usually unsupported, single link to nut job source, stories like this disappear rapidly. Matt must be away. Nevertheless, time to party in this thread.
posted by caddis at 5:49 PM on October 13, 2005

Here is the source for this story.
posted by caddis at 5:52 PM on October 13, 2005

Only a complete fool would put any stock whatsoever into this piece of uttter garbage. However, this is a good thread in which to poke some fun.

You're being about as level headed as those who firmly believe that it must absolutely have happened.

But since you're so well-informed about what's going on over there, what *were* those two British soldiers doing in plainclothes rapping with insurgents? It's not like the facts are in dispute about their story.
posted by clevershark at 5:56 PM on October 13, 2005

Party, you say?

FLORIDIAN APPREHENDED IN IRAQI OIL WELL EXPLOSION


posted by Krrrlson at 6:05 PM on October 13, 2005

I can't say I don't like that huge manatee.
posted by sonofsamiam at 6:22 PM on October 13, 2005

Classic disinformation. This story is released, hooted down, and from now on, all references to the Bara incident with the two SAS guys dressed as Iraqis in a car loaded to the gunwales with munitions (same basic story, details not disputed) will be confused with this.
posted by telstar at 7:01 PM on October 13, 2005

telstar: Very, very sharp comment.

That incident was really bizaare, has there been any recent information about it?
posted by sien at 8:11 PM on October 13, 2005

However, this is a good thread in which to poke some fun.

Yup. I see the peels of laughter when you said
I think profit can be a powerful motive to be productive, and thats what you need in a War. And how I pointed out the 27.5 million. Like this.
WASHINGTON - Iraq needed fuel. Halliburton Co. was ordered to get it there — quick. So the Houston-based contractor charged the Pentagon $27.5 million to ship $82,100 worth of cooking and heating fuel.

Mighty funny. Good to see you find such a profit motive a laugh!
posted by rough ashlar at 8:12 PM on October 13, 2005

Classic disinformation. the Bara incident will be confused with this.

Ya know, THAT idea makes sense. Good call.

(Such might fit in with the claim of a number of months ago where an Iraqi citizen claimed the US Army put explosives in his car....but I don't remember what other events might need similar cover)
posted by rough ashlar at 8:18 PM on October 13, 2005

As Holmes said, where do you hide a body? Answer: on a battlefield.

I pondered that as a possible motive (if the event actually happened) - but WHY would you need a car bomb to assasinate someone in Iraq these days, what with all the bullets a-flying?
posted by rough ashlar at 8:27 PM on October 13, 2005

More paranoia
posted by PHINC at 8:58 PM on October 13, 2005

This is the muppet thread of the year.
posted by Peter H at 9:00 PM on October 13, 2005

That incident was really bizaare, has there been any recent information about it?

Like claims of prisoner torture and rape were made after the statement "Iraq is free of rape rooms and torture chambers.", Videos of dancing Palastanians on 9/11/2001, dancing Isralies filming the collapsing towers in NYC on 9/11/2001, keyboard loggers on dell computers by the DHS, or trading pics of mutulated dead for porn access - the claims will be looked into by others.

A date is given, a location, and the local police have allegedly made a statement. That is a starting point for some reporters who are willing to venture out and look into the story a bit more. More to go on than the 1st claim I saw of 'Americans putting bombs in cars' a few months ago.
posted by rough ashlar at 9:03 PM on October 13, 2005

Wow... just, wow. And to think people were rough on troutfishing for his election conspiracy posts. You're a psychiatrist's wet dream, buddy.
posted by Krrrlson at 9:12 PM on October 13, 2005

what rough said. anyone who gives anyone connected with this whole Iraq debacle any benefit of the doubt anymore is a fool and a sucker. There are plenty of "opposition" Iraqis with influence who many would love to see dead.

i'm betting it was one of those "security" firms, operating under no laws or oversight.
posted by amberglow at 9:39 PM on October 13, 2005

It’s crystal clear that the “Powers That Be” don’t want us “sharing” such highly valued military level combat skills with ordinary civilians. But we are going to do it anyway!

Maybe it was these guys.
posted by loquax at 9:41 PM on October 13, 2005

It had been long known to the Iraqis, to the Arabs, and to all Moslems in countries bordering Iraq that the majority of the terrorist attacks in Iraq, especially car bombing, are perpetrated by covert British, American, and Israeli operatives. ...The arrest of two undercover British SAS operatives last week, disguised as Arabs trying to plant a car bomb in the middle of Basra during the Karbala Festival, which draws as many as 3 million pilgrims to the city, is just the latest of such revelations. ...
posted by amberglow at 9:46 PM on October 13, 2005

... The Iraqi police arrested the two British disguised in Arab garments riding a civilian car and carrying explosives. ...
posted by amberglow at 9:50 PM on October 13, 2005

"There is a battle between dead nations and living nations. The Jews are now active. They have occupied the entire world, and they are using their power worldwide to annihilate us and humiliate us, from inside and out. Their control stems entirely from the weakness of the Westerners. Even democracy is in decline in the West, because everything has its ups and downs."
posted by loquax at 9:54 PM on October 13, 2005

... They had disguised themselves as Arabs to check out a building in Basra, thought to be a hideout for the al-Mahdi militia. ...
posted by amberglow at 9:57 PM on October 13, 2005

Not to play devils advocate on both sides here (amberglow, et.al) but again - that's just one nuance of how the war is being fought.
Disagree with the premise and the whole show is bogus anyway.
Disagreeing with this as a tactic to achieve whatever greater strategy is as silly as classifying the use of certain tactics as beyond the pale and fighting a war to stop them.

So do we go back to marching in formation and standing in the open to fire? Chivalry?

It's a dirty business. If the war itself were somehow legitimate I wouldn't blink at the use of these tactics.
As it is we're currently - supposedly - fighting a war against a form of guerrilla warfare to influence political policy.

Unless your point is that these terrorist attacks are being stage managed to provide a puppet resistance.
Which I doubt, but concede as a possiblity.
(If that's true we are in "Brazil" or "1984" or what have you)
posted by Smedleyman at 10:57 PM on October 13, 2005

folks, folks, folks ... there are people in iraq who will believe this because they want to believe it ... just as there are people in american who believe saddam had something to do with 9/11 because they want to believe it ... welcome to the postmodern world ... where you can believe anything you want to as long as you have the mental fortitude to deny any facts others have inconveniently cited for you ...

it sucks ... but it's very common these days ... i wonder what it would take to convince people they've been deluding themselves
posted by pyramid termite at 12:45 AM on October 14, 2005

If the war itself were somehow legitimate I wouldn't blink at the use of these tactics.

When has a war ever been 'legitimate'?

Use of such tactics is to not occupy the moral high ground. I'd rather be occupying the moral high ground, if I have to pick ground in a war.
posted by rough ashlar at 3:58 AM on October 14, 2005

there are people in iraq this thread who will believe this because they want to believe it [editing added]

I doubt this is gaining traction in Iraq. It hasn't even been reported on al Jazeera. What amazes me is how with no corroboration or substantiation some people here are willing to believe this as probable or even fact. At least thousands of people have reported seeing space aliens, even having been abducted by space aliens for anal probing. It is far more likely that space aliens are randomly selecting human subjects and abducting them for a good anal probing than it is that the US is setting off car bombs in Iraq, at least given the weight of the evidence.
posted by caddis at 7:28 AM on October 14, 2005

I'd rather be occupying the moral high ground, if I have to pick ground in a war.

Then the ground you pick is a burial plot.

Legitimate as in declared by congress, manifestly a danger to us etc. WWII comes to mind. A war of resistance to invasion, etc. Let's not play the word games. Take my meaning, please.
I'm not defending war as a practice. To my ears your statement sounds like: "If I'm going to be in a streetfight I will fight like a butler"

The streetfight started when someone busted a bottle and came at you with it.
There is only one objective: win (survive).
Everything else is secondary.

Which is why war is hell and I oppose it on general principles unless there are solid reasons to go to war. I wouldn't send anyone out to fight for anything I wouldn't pick up a weapon for myself.

Once your in it though do whatever it takes - whatever works.
(My views on how well the current engagement in Iraq is being conducted have been expressed amply.)
posted by Smedleyman at 2:05 PM on October 14, 2005

Once your in it though do whatever it takes - whatever works.

Like leaving? Ending the hostilities?
posted by rough ashlar at 6:51 AM on October 16, 2005

:::rummages around for his copy of Soldier of Fortune::::
posted by Muirwylde at 11:24 PM on October 17, 2005

huh... American mercenary professionals for hire? Whodda thunk it...freelance soldiers... willing to work for who ever pays the most? Capitalist pigs...
posted by Muirwylde at 11:35 PM on October 17, 2005

I'd rather be a capitalist pig than a commie rat!
posted by loquax at 8:36 AM on October 18, 2005