You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Iraq
Iraqi Mosul al Qaeda leader killed
2007-08-02
BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- The Mosul leader of al Qaeda in Iraq was shot to death by Iraqi soldiers during a combat operation in the northern Iraqi city Wednesday, a U.S. military statement said.

Iraqi soldiers spotted al Qaeda's emir of Mosul -- known as Safi -- riding in a pickup truck in northeastern Mosul and began chasing his vehicle, the military said in a statement released Thursday. After pulling over, Safi and two bodyguards emerged from the truck and whipped out rods opened fire on the soldiers, but they were blown away shot dead, the military said.

"The death of Safi will further disrupt senior AQI leadership in Mosul, which has been unstable since May, due to the combined efforts of Coalition Forces and ISF (Iraqi security forces) offensive operations," said U.S. Army Col. Stephen Twitty, commander of 4th Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division.
But now, onto the CNN gloom and doom...
Meanwhile, a suicide bombing targeting a police station in Iraq's volatile Diyala province on Thursday has killed five people and wounded seven others, the Interior Ministry told CNN. Police and civilians were among the victims in the incident, which took place in the town of Hibhib.

On Tuesday, six U.S. soldiers were killed in Iraq, bringing the total death toll for July to 79, the lowest figure since November. However, the figure is nearly twice as high as the July 2006 troop death toll -- 43 fatalities -- a sign of the persistent violence in the long conflict.

Two Task Force Marne soldiers were killed and 10 were wounded in an indirect fire attack Tuesday, the military said on Thursday. Three U.S. soldiers were killed and six wounded when a bomb exploded near their combat patrol in eastern Baghdad, the military said on Wednesday. The bomb was the type known as an explosively formed penetrator, which the military said is a more powerful and sophisticated version of a roadside bomb.
Posted by:tu3031

#15  It strikes me that as more and more 'emirs' get removed from the board and presumably replaced from below, that the ability to 'vet the replacements, and their replacements (& so on) is getting severely degraded.

Absolutely spot on, Glenmore. This is an aspect of high context cultures we've yet to even begin exploiting capitalizing upon. Due to how these corrupt and graft driven cultures are so reliant upon individual contact networks and the opacity of secretive cabals, the ongoing ability to successfully 'vet future operatives is significantly downgraded.

While there is a modicum of satisfaction that even our current kid-glove ROE attrits numerous of these players and thereby disrupts the terrorist command food chain; Imagine how severely we could compromise their operations if we began a campaign of targeted assassinations against the top tiers of Islam's clerical aristocracy and terrorism's elite. A truly concerted effort could topple the whole Islamist house of cards within months, if not mere weeks.
Posted by: Zenster   2007-08-02 20:38  

#14  It strikes me that as more and more 'emirs' get removed from the board and presumably replaced from below, that the ability to 'vet the replacements, and their replacements (& so on) is getting severely degraded. One does hope we are willing and able to take advantage of such opportunities to infiltrate their organization. (And if not, then at least leading them to think we are doing so!)
Posted by: Glenmore   2007-08-02 19:28  

#13  Curiously, in other news, Iraqi deaths are reaching all time highs while our own troop casualties are quite low. What this tells me is that the surge is working and forcing the terrorists to revert to their usual modus operendi of killing innocent people who don't fight back. I can only hope the Iraqis will learn their lesson soon and begin sandbagging the terrorists whenever they show up.
Posted by: Zenster   2007-08-02 15:19  

#12  MSM edits it to look bad for the republicans and Bush and look good for the dhimocrats.

Nothing new here.
Posted by: DarthVader   2007-08-02 14:48  

#11  "does anybody edit this stuff?"

Short answer: not really.

Verlaine: With all due respect they really do edit but to fit an agenda. Whatever their motivation - leftwing views, increasing readership via the yellow-pen or plain stupidity - they edit to fit the cause. The cause for the MSM, in which CNN is the cable major, its man -bites -dog or being as negative as you can get but still "support the troops".
Posted by: Jack is Back!   2007-08-02 14:43  

#10  why does CNN not want too give out enemy body counts but sure as hell don't mind giving out US death notices on a regular basis, May be they should change their name too al jizz
Posted by: sinse   2007-08-02 14:28  

#9  However, the figure is nearly twice as high as the July 2006 troop death toll -- 43 fatalities -- a sign of the persistent violence in the long conflict.

They just couldn't let it go, could they? Comparing last July's "body count" to this year's is an apples n' oranges thingy. First, like has already been pointed out, we're now on the offensive, which by design, brings more "risk" and thus, more casualties. Second, we did this with 30k more troops in theater (read: more "targets" for AQiI to hit). Third, if you subtract out the very last day of the month, you get down to 73 KIA (those bombs could've just as easily gone off on Wed., and thus been "counted" in August). Finally, this year's July is almost whole-heartedly driven by cleaning up the heart of the beast in Baghdad proper. We've mopped up (virtually) Anbar province, and us (and the IA and IPolice) are kicking arse and taking names. I actually see the decrease in deaths as a good thing, and a sign that maybe these are just the last (desparate) throes of an enemy that's facing certain doom. The violence is always the worst right before the enemy surrenders, correct?
Posted by: BA   2007-08-02 13:48  

#8  #5. The title "emir" usually means a prince, chieftain, or governor, but it also can mean commander or leader. As the article says, Safi was al Qaeda's leader in Mosul. Don't know if the title applies at squad or precinct level.:)
Posted by: GK   2007-08-02 13:38  

#7  And behold how much distortion, or tendentious insinuation, or outright error, can be embedded in just a few words or phrases. As I always tell normal folks who ask about war coverage, it's not so much the outright inaccuracies that matter, it's the critical but subtle framework and tone that are usually perverse, and 100% slanted against the US, our war efforts, etc.

A great paragraph. Well put!
Posted by: KBK   2007-08-02 13:26  

#6  What is an 'emir'? Contexts indicate some sort of Islamic leadership position, but I have no idea how far up the chain it is. Judging by the way we've been killing/catching them, they must be about as common as Corporals, or political Ward heelers.
Posted by: Glenmore   2007-08-02 13:16  

#5  "43 fatalities -- a sign of the persistent violence in the long conflict."

OK, let's take out our editor's red pen for a second - just on this one phrase.

Uh, no, a given casualty figure, all by itself, is not a sign of ANYTHING in particular. Such figures fluctuate for any number of reasons. In this case, the most obvious change from July '06 is that the Coalition is on the offensive - which, DUH, almost always leads to more casualties.

And how is this conflict "long"? By what standard? Compared to major combat ops in '03? Compared to the Malayan insurgency campaign? Compared to the Eritrean war for independence? This usage is either misleading or purely subjective and a bit mysterious, by definition.

As a friend and fellow recovered journalist started to say back when things got really bad in the 90s, "does anybody edit this stuff?"

Short answer: not really.

And behold how much distortion, or tendentious insinuation, or outright error, can be embedded in just a few words or phrases. As I always tell normal folks who ask about war coverage, it's not so much the outright inaccuracies that matter, it's the critical but subtle framework and tone that are usually perverse, and 100% slanted against the US, our war efforts, etc.

I recall way back, in the mists of time, when I was a reporter in DC, and the stock phrase in all major print media about El Salvador was "the civil war that started in 1979." I had several occasions to confront MSM types and point out that the civil war was much, much longer in duration and more complicated than that sentence implied - and received in response blank stares, of course. It's only gotten worse.
Posted by: Verlaine   2007-08-02 13:10  

#4  I intend to suffer a non-hostile death myself.
Something warm and fuzzy like death while being hugged by pet koalas.
Posted by: wxjames   2007-08-02 13:09  

#3  Ded lik I lik em!
Posted by: Red Dawg   2007-08-02 12:51  

#2  14 of the deaths were non-hostile
Posted by: Chuck Simmins   2007-08-02 11:23  

#1  For a moment I thought they had killed Raffi. Thank goodness.

Posted by: Captain Lewis   2007-08-02 10:26  

00:00