US military says video not of deadly Iraq ambush

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - The U.S. military said on Sunday that a video which Iraqi militants claimed showed an attack that killed 10 Marines near Falluja was not the same incident.
"The circumstances of the IED (improvised explosive device) attack near Falluja do not match those shown on the video," the Marines said in a statement.

"While we are unable to discern whether the video shown is authentic, the statement that the video shows the December 1 IED attack near Falluja is false."

Thursday's attack also wounded 11 Marines and was the largest loss suffered by U.S. forces since August. Insurgents wired several artillery shells together, hid them and then detonated this so-called daisy-chain as a foot patrol passed by.

In the video, pictures show a Humvee, flanked by what look like U.S. troops, traveling slowly down a street when it is engulfed in an explosion, sending clouds of dust into the air and bystanders fleeing. An off-camera voice was heard saying "Allah is Great" repeatedly. The vehicle rolls through the dust but it is not clear what happens to the troops on foot.

more:http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051204/ts_nm/iraq_falluja_dc_1

So if it's not this incident, do they know which one it is?

"While we are unable to discern whether the video shown is authentic, the statement that the video shows the December 1 IED attack near Falluja is false."

Wait a few days. Then they'll admit it was a real attack.

This is so pathetic.

Besides, who's going to believe Pentagon story planters anymore?

The Iraqis also hired a Goebbels.

either way, our soldiers are still dead. My bet is always on the contractors, the mischief makers. I'm still waiting to wake up like the old series "Dallas" - and find out, it's all been a bad dream.

Just like "The helicopter was not shot down" stories...:eyes:

2 made emergency landings in Afghanistan today

they LIE by MANDATE.

Then what video is it? How many died in it?

These clips below are not bloody but they are brutal.

The al-Jazeera video IS ONLINE - the one that the Pentagon is denying is the correct version of the event.

http://media.putfile.com/Bareknucklepoliticscom-IED-Kills-10-US-Soldiers-In-Fallujah

And below... Is this another deadly video which has 'not' been talked about by the Pentagon either?

http://www.flurl.com/uploaded/IED2_9422.html

How much are they covering up?

Watch as these videos get 'dissappeared' off the net. I doubt they will last long.

that the Marines were clearing.

That's why my eyebrows perked up when I heard about this "besides a tank" thing.

...Do guerillas have such a thing as stock footage of IED bombings?

BAGHDAD, Iraq, Dec. 2 - A year after marines led an American assault force in recapturing Falluja, 10 marines conducting a foot patrol on the edge of the city were killed at dusk Thursday by a bomb fashioned from several large artillery shells.

Eleven other marines were wounded in the blast, the worst in a drumbeat of insurgent attacks on American troops in and around Falluja that never ceased after the Nov. 2004 offensive there that cost 60 American marines and soldiers their lives.

Details of the Falluja bombing were sparse, with the Marine Corps' command officially holding to a policy of releasing few facts about the circumstances of combat deaths in their statement on Friday.

But an American official in Falluja said Friday that the attack that killed the 10 marines occurred at or near an abandoned factory on a peninsula that juts into the Euphrates River on the city's western edge, an area that was the target of the first Marine attack in the eight-day offensive last November that reduced much of Falluja to rubble.

more:http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/03/international/middleeast/03iraq.html

What kind of defense is there against this sort of attack ?

Edit**

I just got to the end of the second video. They had a second bomb set to kill the wounded and the people who went to help them. Freedom Fighters my ass.

...labels used by opposing sides to cast their opponents in the worst light possible. It's all part of the propaganda war.

If another country had invaded the U. S., how would we label those fighting the invaders by any means available? Wouldn't we refer to those people as "Patriots", "Heroes", and/or "Freedom Fighters"? What terms do you think the invaders would apply to those same resistance fighters? How about "Terrorists", "Insurgents", or "Dead-Enders"?

Indiscriminate use of incindiary phosphorus weapons on civilians?

Ethical?

You better start reading about the war crimes being committed with your tax dollars - here's a good place to start. There are seven or eight videos on that page.

www.chris-floyd.com/fallujah/

Arty is indiscriminate by nature. Its CEP is god knows how many meters.
How would you rather die?

High Explosive
DPICM, like a cluster bomb in an shell.

All of these were used. WP was used. So are themobaric weapons.

Dead is dead. Being pulled apart or burned alive is just semantics.

Until those soldiers are removed from a warzone there is no way to stop civilian deaths. Every war has civilian deaths.

They need to leave, the damage is done.

Yes.

But the buck needs to stop somewhere. Someone needs to pay. And let's hope that Rummy, Cheney or one of them will one day.

Personally, I don't have much. After all, no one 'paid' for Vietnam, Iran Contra, Pinochet, etc, etc, etc...

http://www.flurl.com/featured/Iraqi_Kids_12849.html

Video

Echoes of Palestinians.

Time to get out.

Why don't you read up on that.

Somewhere people are saying the "Indiscriminate use of incindiary phosphorus weapons on civilians" is OK because the "freedom fighters" kill wounded Americans.

One does not justify the other. I'd be very careful about even hinting that i thought the opposite was the case.
I don't support the US troops being there and using ANY weapons, and I sure as hell don't approve or think justified the "freedom fighters" methods, motives, actions or results of same.

All over the world do that.

Palestinians, chechens even kill school children, etc. I guess killing first responders and onlookers is ok?

I have a serious problem with this war and its purpose.

However after spending time in the service, the other guys are the enemy. The marines did not put themselves there. They get buried here.

There is no defense against an ambush like that.

3 attacks shown in AL-Jazeera TV yesterday (video)

These 3 attacks al jazeera showed on their news program yesterday

The 1st is about the 10 marines in fallujah by IAI

The 2nd is a logoless group there name is Mujahedeen of Tal'far

The 3rd is very strong attack against hummer in Ramadi it shows IED then the hummer. This was by the insurgent group known as the 1920's battalions, who are shiites modelling themselves after the uprising against the British troops in the 1920's.

These links come from intelligence analysis forums.

http://www.flurl.com/uploaded/al_Jazeera_TV_13286.html

They're fighting against a foreign occupation-- an illegal and immoral occupation. The U.S. presence has created this insurgency-- our military is reaping what it sowed.

Our military, a term you use, is made up of people. Young people who have to follow orders.

It, the us military, did not order its self to iraq. That would fall to the president and congress who continue to support the war with tax dollars.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

For every American killed at least ten are killed by the "freedom fighters".

I don't see how targeting them is any different than targeting other military personnel, unless there had been a truce declared. Certainly, the U.S. military kills insurgents who attempt to render assistance to other insurgents who have been injured or killed.

Recall how the U.S. troops in Afghanistan attempted to lure opposition fighters out by burning bodies and calling the comrades of the dead "girly men". Had the opposing side took the bait, the U.S. troops weren't planning to award them good conduct medals.

Personnel is against the geneva convention. The insurgent does not obey those rules.

Killing a person picking up the weapon of a dead or disabled soldier is not.

Setting secondary explosives to kill medical personnel in questionable at best. This war has different rules than ww2, so I am not surprised they would do this.

In reality they do not care, they will employ any and all means to kill our soldiers at their disposal.

I recall, the enemy would have been killed.

The whole thing is a fuck up, the only one who will win here eventually is Iran.

So, that would be the justification they would use for killing U.S. soldiers in this manner, and it would be the justification the Pentagon would use when they did the same thing.

I agree that every horror spins directly out of Bush's original decision, and Iran is looking like the net beneficiary so far (maybe Halliburton too).

is it in WMP form?

something about the uniforms and helmets doesn't look GI. The patrol looks lackadaisical also, not like troops on high alert in hostile territory.

If they aren't US GI's, that can only mean that the Iraqi insurgency made the film themselves. So, the insurgency was able to get a hold of a US military Humvee complete with weaponry, outfit a dozen of their fellow Iraqis with US military gear and US-looking uniforms, and then let them sacrifice themselves all for a propaganda video?

I have no idea if this is the Dec 1 attack or not, but it is most definitely US troops being killed at some time in Iraq.

That video could be of ING, taken at some other time.

Also, remember that the Marines incident killed 10 and wounded 11. I don't see 21 Marines / ING in that video.

In fact i see 8 on foot, so for that to be authentic, all those 8 would have had to be killed, plus 2 others not seen (in the Humvee ?) plus another 11 somewhere else. Bit of a stretch imo.

I can't get your video linked to work for me. :(

That is one photo that should be splashed across Every Front Page in the US!

The one that the US is no denying is the 10 marine incident:

http://www.ogrish.com/archives/10_marines_die_in_explosion_video_Dec_03_2005.html

The second one, which is even more deadly...perhaps the real 10 marines one:

http://www.flurl.com/uploaded/IED2_9422.html

So no, i don't think thats from the same incident.

because monkey boy king doesn't like bad news.

Is that what the Pentagon is letting us know? That this sort of attack is more common than we're led to believe?

What next? An explosion which kills 20 soldiers? 30? 40? It sure looks like the insurgents are staying their own course, too.

The reason the factory explosion did so much damage is because you need to stuff more people in there to 'clear' it. The bad guys could know that in advance and prepare. You can't get that high a body count on a patrol unless you're super lucky and/or put disproportionate effort into it.

That said...! Like I said, it's like the bad guys have stock footage of IED attacks, just like CNN has stock footage of laser guided bombings, and released such a video to the media and said 'See!' for propaganda purposes.

Any time you have Marines going in to "clear a factory" or whatever, if there is advance knowledge on the other side, which seems to be happening more often, who wants to be the sacrifice? Who wants to be the Marine who goes in first?

This is nuts. This is all crazy. We can't "win."

I wonder what the style guide says on this. If you translate one section of the sentence, why not translate it all. The translation of Allahu-akbar is "God is great," not "Allah is great."

I suppose they want us to forget that Allah is the same God of Abraham of the Jews and Christians. TRhey retain the funny name to divorce this simple fact from people's perception.