| Submit your comments on this article | ||
| Iraq-Jordan | ||
| Zarqawi targets female soldiers | ||
| 2004-07-01 | ||
| Terrorists in the Abu Musab Zarqawi network in Iraq are specifically trying to kidnap an American female service member to further Are the men proving a little tough for ya Nancy? Two senior defense sources said the word is being passed within the network on the importance of taking one or more women hostage. "We have heard through intelligence channels that several extremist organizations are attempting to capture coalition servicemen and women," said a senior military officer in Iraq. "We have instituted additional force protection methods to thwart these attempts." Another defense source said there is an "edict, either on paper or as an order," within terrorist networks to capture an American female service member. I’m suprised it took them so long to get around to this. Of the 140,000 U.S. troops in Iraq, about 11,000 are women. They perform a variety of jobs, serving as drivers, medics, aviators, police and clerks. By law, they are banned from land combat, but they can still come into close contact with the enemy. Zarqawi is the most wanted man in Iraq, with a Wish I knew where he was, I’d kill him for free. The Jordanian-born international terrorist has made killing Americans and their allies his chief goal as a way to prevent Iraq from moving to a moderate democratic state. He beheaded American Nicholas Berg, and his network released the video for the world to see. Militants are holding an Army soldier and a Marine, and have kidnapped many aid workers and contractors from coalition countries. Some have been killed. The defense source said Zarqawi’s network apparently wants to further shock the Western world by kidnapping servicewomen and displaying them on videotape. Part of the terrorists’ strategy is to cause so much bloodshed that President Bush loses public support for the war and is forced politically to bring the troops home. That tactic might work better if Kerry were CIC. Besides Bush takes a pretty steady pounding already, but there isn’t any marching in the streets except by a few loons.
These guys have more issues than National Geographic. The Arab world has seen a series of photos of the abuse, so what? including Army Pfc. Lynndie England holding an Iraqi inmate by a leash attached to his neck. The Army has filed criminal charges against her.
If they snag an American female and harm her in anyway, it will only reinforce perception of those animals as fanatic savages. The Kumbaya crowd (including the media) will beat us about the head and shoulders for weeks on end about how a flawed policy has cost this young woman her life, and convienantly ignore the fact that it was a delusional Islamist wack job listening to the moongod that was the real cause. | ||
| Posted by:JerseyMike |
| #28 oops, link thing didn't work, will type in manually: http://www.datalounge.com/datalounge/news/record.html?record=5093 |
| Posted by: rhodesiafever 2004-07-02 6:03:35 AM |
| #27 #25, Super, try this: |
| Posted by: rhodesiafever 2004-07-02 6:00:50 AM |
| #26 The jihadists better find a new public relations man, since murdering female hostages on international TV does not increase ratings, it serves only to awaken those still asleep concerning the truth beast like nature of the Islamic terrorist enemy. |
| Posted by: Mark Espinola 2004-07-02 3:15:17 AM |
| #25 Someone could certainly make a convincing argument against my current view (I try to be open to being convinced.) Here are some reasons why I am for women in combat, currently: 1. Once they started beheading people on camera for the benefit of Qatari sweeps week, I am pegged my outrage meter. I consider a sexual assault more survivable for a male or female than some other non-lethal possibilities. For instance, jihadis own car battery and some seem to have and interest in checking the electrical resistance of a captive's genitalia. 2. I supervised a fine group of Operations Specialists on a destroyer tender who had been herded like 2nd class citizens onto a ship where their specialty was irrelevant. It is my opinion once everyone wearing the uniform of the USN adopts a warrior mentality, we will have the best navy possible. This cannot be achieved when a class of non-warriors is mandated. This belief became more important to me when I looked at the results of an ambush of an army maintenance company. Note: For implementation it might be better to take the Dentists out of their officer monkey suits and put them in civilian clothes. 3. I see some problems in our society that would be improved by a cadre of tough, smart disciplined and self-assured women. 4. The strong negative reaction that the idea of women soldiers gets from Arab males is a sign to me that the idea must be good. Culturally, I understand the concept of the head covering reserving a woman's beauty for the family, but I'm not buying the polygamy, honor-killings, total lack of female property rights.... in the whole Arabist exported version of Islam. A good dose of Pershmerga women with guns should be healthy for Iraq. I hope that one of them catches Zarqawi and has an SUV handy - with jumper cables - if you know what I mean. BTW I open doors for men and women, but I have not figured out what to do in the case fo a transvestite. Any advice? |
| Posted by: Super Hose 2004-07-02 3:00:42 AM |
| #24 Frank - Ah there's that The Islamic Irony™! again! Lol! You're definitely onto something! SH - I have incredibly mixed feeling about wymyn in combat - and I'm not talking about their ability to fight or spirit, I've known several that could wipe us all out - and barely break a sweat. But I'll admit that to have one taken would make me feel far more offended and insanely vengeful. And I don't think I'm alone in that line of thought. |
| Posted by: .com 2004-07-01 11:53:04 PM |
| #23 please let it be an ISM tool in Palestine if anybody ... |
| Posted by: Frank G 2004-07-01 11:47:59 PM |
| #22 I appreciate that the "rape" issue is a sensitive one for many Americans, but I don't see it as a reason to keep women out of combat. While these guys are allowed to run free, armed women within a military unit are safer than civilian women. When dealing with AQ, I would expect that they would target American women servicemen in Bahrain, Qatar, or Turkey before they tried to kidnap one in an Iraq where the ROE favors the American forces. Philosophically, the whole point of having soldiers in combat, at all, is to protect helpless civilians. Mandating that all women should be forced to remain helpless until the fight comes to them in the states is not the way to go. If a woman feels called to the military than teach her to kill. Regardless, the jihadis are very unlikely to capture anyone in combat, as they are cowards not warriors. Jeffery Dahmer was never noted for his courage, yet he might have been a cut above these guys as he stalked alone. Like hyenas these dogs hunt in packs. Realistically, I find it unlikely that they will seriously attempt to kidnap women in uniform, as the attempt would mean taking on an operation against an American military unit. Women in uniform - anywhere overseas - need to be armed, proficient and cognizant of the hazard. For all Americans abroad, I recommend sobriety for the near term, and immature kids should vacation in CONUS. I predict that a woman, careless or ignorant of security, from a Western NGO will be grabbed. |
| Posted by: Super Hose 2004-07-01 11:46:31 PM |
| #21 LOL - you guys are sick bastards. I love ya! |
| Posted by: Frank G 2004-07-01 11:42:53 PM |
| #20 More humane and humiliating version of this would be a high altitude drop of 40 - 50 tons of pig feces on Fallujah. Accompanied by a leaflet drop explaining in great detail what the earlier drop was. Rinse and repeat until message is understood. |
| Posted by: RWV 2004-07-01 11:41:46 PM |
| #19 Even if they don't freak at the mere sight of pig blood, I'm pretty sure Rain of Pig would freak anyone out when it happens at 4am. It also tells them that we could have used bombs instead and while looking at impacted piggy might be nasty, if it'd been a bomb, it'd be them sprayed on the walls instead. |
| Posted by: Silentbrick 2004-07-01 11:39:44 PM |
| #18 BTW, I'm talking about pre-impact. Stuka sirens would barely touch the sort of sound in my memory... |
| Posted by: .com 2004-07-01 11:39:43 PM |
| #17 Ever heard frightened pigs? I used to play golf very very early on weekends (ahead of the crush) on a cheap but nice public course. About 3-4 miles away was an Owens Sausage slaughtering facility. Wafting over the still moist morning air this sound arrived in faint waves. Fucking stand you hair on end, bro. Lol! |
| Posted by: .com 2004-07-01 11:37:38 PM |
| #16 So, we are back to this piggery again, Rantburgers... Now really HOW freaked out are Islamist terrorists of pig parts if confronted with them? I mean, can you hold some intestines around and walk down the street and the terrorists run like scared chickens? Can you shoot a pig blood artillery round and spray everyone with pig blood and have instant chaos? What is the real scoop here on Pigs and the Islamists? Inquiring minds want to know. **going down to the store for a pork chop run** |
| Posted by: Alaska Paul 2004-07-01 11:35:50 PM |
| #15 PD- think wet bags of cement |
| Posted by: Frank G 2004-07-01 11:32:58 PM |
| #14 On the bonus side, I wonder what the koran says the fate of a jihadi struck down by a fast moving pig is? |
| Posted by: Silentbrick 2004-07-01 11:31:24 PM |
| #13 Silent(ha!)Brick - Silent would not be part of the equation... Can you imagine the sound they would make? Holy Shit, indeed! Lol! |
| Posted by: .com 2004-07-01 11:31:09 PM |
| #12 sounds like the "Turkey-Drop" episode on WKRP In Cincinatti |
| Posted by: Frank G 2004-07-01 11:30:22 PM |
| #11 Maybe we can spook Zarqawi and his womenfolk into a mistake in Fallujah by carpet bombing it. But not with bombs. Do it at night, with the B-52's up high enough you can't hear them and let the rain of pigs begin. I'd imagine the most militant muslim might freak out when a pig falling from 40,000 feet plunges through his roof. |
| Posted by: Silentbrick 2004-07-01 11:22:07 PM |
| #10 That's the only argument I have ever heard put forward re: not having females in combat zones Just as an aside, the Israelis found that Arab forces who would normally have surrendered or withdrew, actually fought harder (and to the point of being wiped out)when the IDF had women in front-line combat units. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2004-07-01 8:06:46 PM |
| #9 Rex, you are right that these 'people' would bugger a man just as easily as a women. However they would like NOTHING else than to take a western woman and do with as hey please. Many times the Paleos tried to capture female Jewish soldiers, but like our they are kept close at hand. Since they rape their own sisters and daughters I can't imagine them NOT raping a U.S. or UK woman if the oppurtunity arose. If you ever get a chance to read the story about Maj. Cornum do so. |
| Posted by: Cyber Sarge (VRWC CA Chapter) 2004-07-01 3:51:49 PM |
| #8 What Zarqawi is counting on here is the way Western and American culture respect women, either as equals or even worse, as "delicate flowers" that must be protected by chivalrous men. Aha, a red letter day, we have finally reached agreement on something, Jen! You are absolutely right. The greatest risk to our troops vis-a-vis the rumor that Zarqawi wants to kidnap a service woman is that male GI's will put their lives at greater risk trying to prevent danger to females. That's the only argument I have ever heard put forward re: not having females in combat zones ie. that it would put our male troops at greater risk due to their Western upbringing that impressed upon them that females are the fairer sex who must be protected at all cost. With regards to lacking "warrior" mentality and upper body strength, those arguments never held any water to my mind. |
| Posted by: rex 2004-07-01 3:32:16 PM |
| #7 rex, I believe the Koran says that if Muslims capture the infidel's women, they can do with them "as they wish" and make them (sex) slaves. I haven't heard from our male soldiers in Iraqi custody being as sexually abused as the lady GIs although I wouldn't put it past the horny scum to screw anything. It's clear that Muslims (and Arabs) treat women only a little better than dogs. What Zarqawi is counting on here is the way Western and American culture respect women, either as equals or even worse, as "delicate flowers" that must be protected by chivalrous men. One of the visuals I can't get out of my head are the stewardesses whose throats were cut on the hijacked planes on 9/11--I know this is how the killers got the pilots to leave the controls and come out of the cabin to rescue them. God rest their souls. |
| Posted by: Jen 2004-07-01 2:47:46 PM |
| #6 They perform a variety of jobs, serving as drivers, medics, aviators, police and clerks. Though I thank you for your daughter serving in the military,#3, I think the risk of service women being captured by terrorists is 10 times less than one of our male GI's being captured and brutalized, quite frankly. That's probably why Zarqawi did not try capture of a female earlier, as one of the posters questioned - ie. reduced opportunity. Also, the Arab culture puts less value on women than men, so what they view as a trophy is a male hostage. But it's good that service women are well armed nonetheless and that they stay alert and aware of their surroundings. As for our great concern about "rape" of women, as I've said before, men are at equal risk to "rape" in the hands of Muslim extremists...just ask the Russian former POW's in the Afghan War. It's our Western deep seated fear about females being raped that is in play now and of course, Zarqawi appears to have figured out that fear and is threatening to capitalize on it. That 2 American women were raped at the hands of Iraqis in the 2 Gulf Wars does not exactly demonstrate that these extremists are hell bent to brutalize American women. I have the impression that Arabs don't have much use for Western women, they just view them as hookers. Given the choice, I would guess that Zarqawi's guys would still love to brutalize a male GI more-anal rape, beheading, genital mutilation-there is where their fun lies. Once again, ask former Russian PoW's. Postscript: I'm not trying to diminish the fear females hold about rape or the anguish of rape victims. I'm just trying to add some realism to the discussion about who is at greater risk for being "brutalized" by Muslim terrorist wackos. |
| Posted by: rex 2004-07-01 2:36:41 PM |
| #5 The source also said that the terrorists might be planning "payback" for a U.S. female soldier seen taking part in the abuse of Iraqi inmates at Abu Ghraib prison near Baghdad. That's assuming a lot-like proportionality being one of their considerations. Why do I get the feeling that tit for tat isn't their way? Whatever we "did" (still not sure how much torture, rather than humiliation, has been substantiated), they will set the bar for 20 twenty times worse. If our abuse involved intimidation and humiliation through leashes and dogs, theirs would involve physical injuries/death and sex with dogs. |
| Posted by: jules 187 2004-07-01 2:13:17 PM |
| #4 Thank her for her service, Sgt. Mom! We're praying extra hard for she and all our other ladies serving over there, as well as all of our troops regardless of sex. Zarqawi is scum and if they do capture a lady GI and do something to her (God forbid it's beheading), the outrage will be unreal. Come and get some, Islamoslumbags! |
| Posted by: Jen 2004-07-01 1:46:49 PM |
| #3 I remember reading an article last year by--- I think Ralph Peters, although it may have been another analyst with a military/tactical background-- speculating on what tactics Osama Bin Laden (or a Bin Laden type) could use to destroy an American will to fight, and to isolate America, internationally. The rape and mutilation of servicewomen was suggested, as was nuking their own city and blaming us. I thought at the time that deliberatly targeting servicewomen would be more liable to outrage than demoralize Americans, especially those with a Jacksonian inclination. And I was talking to my daughter, who is currently serving as a Marine (she was in Kuwait and Iraq last year) about the Marine currently being held hostage in Iraq. From a remark which she made about how they all knew it was best to not be captured alive, I assume that the servicewomen over there have already been briefed on this possibility. Zarqawi's thugs may find actually following through on this plan to be something else. While she was in-country, my daughter had her M-16 within reach and a number of knives on her person at all times, not to mention some interesting martial arts qualifications. I am assured this was not atypical for WMs. |
| Posted by: Sgt. Mom 2004-07-01 12:01:54 PM |
| #2 I believe there's also a video of her getting pregnant why do I visualize her smoking a cig during sex? |
| Posted by: Frank G 2004-07-01 10:38:26 AM |
| #1 I wouldn't do that if I were they. NOW is sure to stage a significant protest. On the Mall. Maybe three or four hundred womyn will show up. Wonder if the protest will be against the kidnappers or the usual list of NOW targets. |
| Posted by: Highlander 2004-07-01 10:20:32 AM |