Khamenei's man
Also, rumblings from Tehran. From AP, with thanks to JJP Mackie:
BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - Fighters loyal to radical cleric Muqtada al-Sadr drove Italian forces from a base in the southern city of Nasiriyah on Sunday and attacked coalition headquarters there with grenade and mortar fire as tensions in the Shiite region escalated.Two U.S. soldiers died elsewhere, and gunmen killed three Iraqi women working for the U.S. led-coalition. Amid the ongoing violence, the United States is looking to move some of its 37,000 U.S. troops stationed in South Korea to bolster forces in Iraq, South Korean and U.S. officials said.
Two Iraqi fighters were killed and 20 were wounded in battles in Nasiriyah, mostly at two bridges across the Euphrates, residents said.
The Italian troops evacuated their base as it came under repeated attack. Portuguese police were called out to support the Italians, their first action since the force of 128 deployed to Nasiriyah in November, a Portuguese duty officer said, speaking on condition of anonymity.
At least 10 Italians were wounded, one critically, contingent spokesman Lt. Col. Giuseppe Perrone told The Associated Press by phone. He said the Italians relocated to the nearby Tallil air base.
Also in Nasiriyah, a convoy transporting the Italian official in charge of the city, Barbara Contini, came under attack as it neared the headquarters of the U.S.-led Coalition Provisional Authority, Perrone said. Two Italian paramilitary police were wounded. ...
Apparent gunfire slightly damaged one of Shia Islam's holiest shrines in Najaf on Friday, prompting calls for revenge against the Americans and even suicide attacks against the coalition.
The U.S. military has said al-Sadr's al-Mahdi Army was probably responsible, but Iran's supreme leader on Sunday accused the United States of damaging the shrine through "shameless" and "foolish" actions.
"Muslims can't tolerate the shameless incursion of American forces into sacred places," Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was quoted as saying by the official Islamic Republic News Agency.
Two U.S. tanks were stationed Sunday in a main square in Najaf, while militiamen held positions in the cemetery and other areas.
Several mosque imams from Fallujah, a Sunni stronghold west of Baghdad that was the site of heavy fighting last month, visited al-Sadr in Najaf to show solidarity. The siege of Fallujah by U.S. Marines ended when the coalition allowed an Iraqi force led by former officers in Saddam Hussein's army to take over security in the city.
Muslims can't tolerate.... is what this guys says. If they don't want Americans in and around their holy sites, why do they HIDE within those sites?
It would seem to me that their actions indicate they themselves do not hold their holy sites in any esteem.
you have to understand that by being a substantially weaker military force it means they have to play dirty the only ones who can afford to fight clean are the americans because we have air superiority have tanks and drones and what not and can strike when ever we want. sadr's boys know that the americans wont strike mosques because of fear or making large segments of the iraqi public insanely angry if say they hit the imam ali mosque with a abrams. Its hypocritical but what do you exspect the underdog to do...
Joseph:
You're right about underdog tactics. You're wrong about using mosques as part of underground tactics. Mosques, churches, synagogues are generally 'off-limits' because they are spiritual centers. RAdical muslims use mosques as ammo dumps and organizational centers. Why don't they open up ATM machines and 7-11 convernience stores in the mosques while they're at it. How about a jail facility?
Their notion of 'sacred' does not exclude the presence of arms and weapons in mosques because 'jihad' is a spiritual activity. They have one set of rules, we have another.
The same goes for mosques in the West; e.g. the Finley Park mosque in London, a center of radical islam. Places such as this lose their religious nature and are fair game. Frankly, in the event of another 9-11 all mosques in the West will have to come under 24/7 active monitoring. These people do not differentiate between prayer and violent intentions in the name of jihad. Why should we tolerate that?
Mike H
It seems to me that the tax exempt status of a religious institution here in the US is meant to be dependent of that institution being solely a SPIRITUAL one.
Since Islam is by definition a politico-'religious' thing, revoke its exempt status, and tax it.
I know this sounds quaint, but it fits with Hugh's suggestion in his 'Islam for the Perplexed' that we should make Muslims uncomfortable being here, and get them to leave.
Remember Mt. Casino?
Part of the American Trib God Bless the USA and her fighting forces and all who fight with her give them strength and courage to stay the course to victory Amen
I can't believe the level of idolatry and Baal worshipping,when a Mosque is empty it's only a building,when it's full of weapons it becomes a military headquarters.
Over the last year I have seen violence and murder that has been the norm for Islam,leaders in Muslim communities fear condemning those commiting the acts,but do aver to the death by terrorism being un-Islamic and then add the Palestinian issue or American foreign policy.
KNOW ISLAM - NO PEACE
Looking for clarification:
The Abbey at Monte Cassino is a good example of why you shouldn't bomb a target. Is that what you were trying to say Catherine?
From Phoenix Press:
"The initial attack between 29 January and 4 February failed and the decision was taken to bomb the Abbey. This was a tactical error as the Germans could see it was an obvious bombtrap and the hill itself provided sufficient observation positions. Nonetheless, two massive air and artillery assaults were launched on 15 February and 15 March. Each time the following infantry assault broke down, the ruins of the Abbey providing better cover for the Germans than the original building. This error was to be repeated later in the war."
So, are you saying we shouldn't bomb mosques, becuase the rubble provides better cover for insurgents than the whole building?
Interesting concept.
If I understand the situation correctly, the Italians pulled back to an airbase because their position was being repeatedly targetted by fire from a hospital and their operational rules would not allow them to return fire on such a place.
I believe Colin Powell and military commanders in Iraq have said that when a Mosque is used for military purposes it becomes a military target.
Anyone who fires a weapon from a Mosque will be fired upon. If Muslims don't want Mosques shot up they should stop firing from them and using them to store weapons.
Lily,
I'd advance the theory that the insurgents are trying to bait us into firing on Mosques, on the hope that if we target enoug of them, or target an important enough mosques, that the average Iraqi will join their insurgency.
Fortunately for us, our commanders are intelligent enough to realize this ploy, and will resort to firing on them only when absolutely necessary.
Bob,
I watched coverage on FOX of insurgents firing on Marines with machines guns from a Mosque. Marines returned fire on that Mosque and the insurgents. The message being sent is that a mosque is not a safe place in which to conduct military operations.
Under the laws of war houses of worhip, hospitals and ambulances are not to be fired upon.But when they are used for military purposes they become legitimate targets. Sort of like when palestinians use ambulances to transport terrorists and weapons. Then whine when Isrealis stop palestinian ambulances from evacuating the wounded. The enemy continues to violates the laws of war then complains when they suffer due to their own violations.
Thus the old saw I've always heard about Palestinians. "Give them two options, and they will invariably choose the one that hurts them the most."
I once took that as merely a racist comment. Now that I pay more attention to their actions, the comment rings true more often than not.
Firing upon Mosques does seem a bit wrong to me. But, if they are starting the rounds then oh well. I would never want us to open fire on a place of worship ever BUT these places should not be used as areas to store weapons and men to fire at their will. Again of course people will say that no matter what, Islam does not respect nor honor terrorists. Well, if that is the case, why then do they condone their house of worship to be used as fronts in order to attack and kill? The people should raise up against this but they simply can't. Reason being, they will be killed as Radical Muslims don't care who they kill, it's all in the name of their God.
LOL, Bob, love analogy about the "palestinians" and options...certainly seems the case while Ara-rat is the leader anyway!
As for Mosques, I'd have to agree with several points; 1) Their religion allows violence as a part of their duty, ours does too, as anyone who's ever escorted women to clinics past slavering right-to-lifers can attest, but not generally to the same level, and not as widespread as Islam, certainly. 2) Saddam used to regularly put AA batteries on top of hospitals and whatnot to deter coalition counter-battery fire, etc. If it's used as cover for those shooting at you, I'd have to agree it's a target. If you don't want us shooting up your holy places, stop using them as ammo dumps.
3) Even the palestinian ambulances have been used to ferry fighters, bomb belts, and whatnot to skirmish areas in Gaza, etc..whay should a mosque be any more sacred to these clowns?
YES, absolutely, if Muslims use their Mosques for anything but SPIRITUAL activities, they should DEFINATELY at least be taxed.
Did anyone catch that bald faced LIAR "Arafat" lying during the Arab League meeting? He must be insanse as well as the people who applauded him. Maybe there's some sort of insane gene some Arabs have...and yes, I know not all Muslims are Arabs before I get flamed.
Muslims have a lot of nerve calling anyone else "imperialists", "hedgemonists" or "extremists" because, in world history no one has done these things like the Muslims have.
The Arabs though are who infiltrated ALL these places and turned them into religious fanatics with nothing but Jew hatred on their minds. If Christians fall for their garbage, they WILL be next on the list.
And, for the last time Christians and Jews did NOT enjoy being dhimmis!
whoops are NOT Muslims. It is true that Muslims are the ones causing the most trouble around the world, but Communists, Intl drug dealing big boss mafiosos, anarchists and the ignorant left are not far behind. They are the LAWLESS ones. For them the only standards they want are their own and almost anything goes.
The COWARDLY terrorists shoot at our military from behind the skirts of the women and their own youth and then complain to the world, "The big, bad US and coalition troops fire at "civilians". Damnable liars-may they all rot in hell.
As to the Abbey, the Germans DELIBERATELY stood less than 300 yards from the "sacred" place raining down fire upon our troops. As the "holy" allowed it, they should not have expected in that day and age without the accuracy we know have available, at times, to so ignorantly expect they wouldn't be attacked. It actually ended up only being a "tactical error" because the Natzis were then able to entrench themselves in the rubble. It was a miracle no "religious" were hurt. Nowadays the good Lord might let the place be blown up with the involvement of SOME in the kirsh being involved in intl drugs and other crimes.
As to the Abbey, the Germans DELIBERATELY stood less than 300 yards from the "sacred" place raining down fire upon our troops. As the "holy" allowed it, they should not have expected in that day and age without the accuracy we know have available, at times, to so ignorantly expect they wouldn't be attacked. It actually ended up only being a "tactical error" because the Natzis were then able to entrench themselves in the rubble. It was a miracle no "religious" were hurt.
"My name is Legion and we are many". Some so called religious today are nothing more than RE-legion and exactly what, I wonder, was the Pope (turn that p upside down) trying to protect anyway. Did he think the Iraqis deserved to have to continue being under the murderous Hussains (Hussayns)?
Arafat talks about the "peace of the courageous"; the only problem is that he thinks the courageous ones are the ones that kill little Jewish children, women and men.
Israel is protected because it is the only democracy in the Middle East. Jews have just as much right to be "Zionists" as the Muslims have to be "Islamic". If the Jews are "natzis" because they want a land for themselves what does that make the Islamics...sons of shaitan?
I, for one, am sick to death of their hypocrisy. Their must be something wrong with their minds if they think their "prophet" (I think it's more profit) ascended from an Israelite temple. Even today Abraham, Issac and Jacob would NOT qualify to be Muslims.