Thursday February 16, 2012

37 killed as U.S. troops battle militants in Baghdad

BAGHDAD —

At least 37 people were killed in Baghdad’s Shiite militia bastion of Sadr City on Tuesday, as gunmen clashed with U.S. soldiers under cover of a severe sandstorm.

Several rockets or mortar rounds also struck the Iraqi capital’s heavily fortified government compound, as militants took advantage of the absence of U.S. air cover during the storm, witnesses said.

In one of the most intense firefights in weeks, the American soldiers killed 28 militants in Sadr City, stronghold of anti-American cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, the military said.

Four U.S. soldiers were also wounded in the fighting that began at around 9:30 a.m.

The fighting erupted when a U.S. patrol was targeted with small-arms fire that wounded one soldier, Lieutenant Colonel Steven Stover said.

As the soldier was being evacuated, a U.S. vehicle was struck by two roadside bombs, small-arms fire and rocket-propelled grenades.

The “complex” attack damaged the vehicle and wounded three other soldiers, Stover said, adding that another U.S. vehicle was later damaged by a third roadside bomb.

The U.S. military said its soldiers defended themselves and “killed 28 militants in a four-hour” battle.

Residents said U.S. forces also launched two air strikes in the area which heavily damaged four houses.

But Stover denied that aircraft had been used. The sandstorm had largely grounded U.S. helicopters. Instead, he said U.S. troops used heavy rockets against the militants.

“It was these militants who initiated the engagement by attacking U.S. soldiers,” he said.

Iraqi officials said nine people, including three women and a child, were also killed in the clashes.

“We continually show great restraint and professionalism when attacked and clearly identify the enemy before engaging their positions,” said U.S. commander Colonel Allen Batschelet in a statement.

“The enemy continues to show little regard for innocent civilians, as they fire their weapons from within houses, alleyways and rooftops upon our soldiers.

Iraqi and U.S. forces have been fighting Shiite militiamen in Sadr City since March 25, with some 480 militants and civilians killed to date, according to U.S. and Iraqi figures.

At least 18 U.S. soldiers have been killed in Baghdad since the fighting erupted.

The U.S. military says its troops are deployed only in the southern section of Sadr City in a bid to prevent rocket or mortar fire against the Green Zone, the seat of the U.S. embassy as well as the Iraqi government.

Militants fired several rockets or mortar rounds into the compound on Tuesday, a witness said.

The U.S. military says that those fighting its troops are not loyal to Sadr who has frozen the activities of his Mahdi Army militia since last August.

On Friday, Sadr called for a halt to the fighting against Iraqi government troops, saying that a recent threat he had made to launch an all-out war was directed only at U.S. forces.

Sadr’s spokesman Saleh al-Obeidi said the new fighting was “defeating any chance of a solution to the crisis in a peaceful way.”

“What is going on in Sadr City is a crime against humanity. Nobody can accept it. We condemn this crime committed by the occupier,” he said.

North of Baghdad, in the town of Mukhisa in Diyala province, a female suicide bomber killed two members of a local anti-Qaeda group, the U.S. military said.

Further north, around the oil city of Kirkuk four people were killed and 15 wounded in two bomb attacks, Police Captain Abdullah Hussein said.

A bomb in a shop in the city center selling Iraqi military equipment killed three civilians and wounded seven, he said.

A second bomb north of the city killed a civilian and wounded eight people, three of them soldiers from a passing patrol that was the target of the attack.

AFP

  • 0

    rjd_jr

    I am at loss of words, just so disgusted by this nonsense.

  • 0

    Sarge

    What is going on in Sadr City is a crime against humanity. Nobody can accept it. We condemn this crime committed by the occupier.

    • Sadr's spokesman

    The crime is being committed by Sadr's group. Heck, if not for the "occupier," Sadr and his ungrateful group would still be under Saddam's boot.

  • 0

    jambon

    So now the MSM is categorizing terrorists as "people." (Now?)

  • 0

    adaydream

    He's just defending his Iraq against an occuping force.

    But Sarge says, "Oh Sadr, just surrender."

    I guess if we were being occupied, Sarge would just give up.

  • 0

    Sarge

    adaydream - "He's just defending his Iraq"

    Last time I checked, Sadr's group didn't win any elections, though Maliki's group did. So it's not his Iraq, though I'm sure he would like it to be.

    "against an ( occupying ) force"

    Funny how most Iraqis want the "occupying" forces to stay until the Iraqi security forces are capable of taking over.

  • 0

    rjd_jr

    Not quite, seems like many Iraqi's want American forces to leave immediately:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/26/AR2006092601721.html

    http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/pollindex.htm

  • 0

    redacted

    rjd - the WaPo article is from Sept 2006.

    Anything more recent?

  • 0

    Sarge

    rjd - That poll is BS.

  • 0

    SushiSake3

    Sarge - "That poll is BS."

    That's exactly what you would think if your read and believe White House press releases.

  • 0

    SushiSake3

    Sarge, sensible Americans didn't vote for the continual slaughter of their sons and daughters 5 long years after the President declared 'Mission Accomplished!' way back in those hazy near forgotton days of May 2003.

    My question for you is: Why do you continue to support your future Social Security payments being burnt up in Iraq, a war that is doing squat all to benefit Americans?

  • 0

    grsmaz

    I think most people get the picture. US is not doing very well if their plan is to bring stability. I do not think it is in the interests of the White House to have stability as stability means less weapons needed and less hi security contractor jobs, stable oil prizes. This war is a success for Bush and his friends who are cashing in the profits of the war. However for the average American they are not cashing in the profits and their country is heading towards bankrrupcy.

    Other winners of this war is

    1. Iran
    2. Moqtada al-Sadr
    3. Al-Qaeda
    4. Samuel Huntington (for his "clash of civilizations" thesis)
    5. China
    6. Arab Dictators
    7. The Price of Oil (and not from a western consumer standpoint)
    8. The United Nations
    9. Old Europe
    10. Israel

    http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=220

  • 0

    Sarge

    "Other winners of this war... Arab dictators"

    Yeah? How many Arab dictators are better off since the liberation of Iraq?

  • 0

    redacted

    "This war is a success for Bush and his friends who are cashing in the profits of the war."

    Who? Who is cashing in? Halliburton? It's publicly traded. If Lefties and "pacifists" are so clever how come they can never back up the vague and changeable accusations that they make into slogans?

    " No Blood for Oil !"

    Still wear the cheesy t-shirt emblazoned with that one?

  • 0

    redacted

    The Mahdi Army is getting routed. More disappointment for the anti-liberation crowd.

    "Mahdi Army Fades Away"

    "April 28 , 2008: After a month of fighting, the Mahdi Army has disappeared from the streets of Basra, the largest city in the south. The army and police are everywhere, and people are providing information on where Mahdi Army personnel are hiding out, and the locations of their weapons caches. Up north, in the Sadr City section of east Baghdad, the Mahdi Army is still fighting hard. But the army and police have the upper hand, and are pushing the Shia militiamen back block by block. Mahdi Army leader Muqtada al Sadr has responded by threatening to order his men to go after American troops if the government does not back off. That's won't work, because the Mahdi Army is not particularly skillful, and not very united either. He recently ordered his troops to stop fighting Iraqi soldiers and police, and concentrate on the Americans. The Iraqi security forces have not reciprocated, and continue coming after the Mahdi Army.

    "The dozen or so factions of the Mahdi Army vary in their loyalty to Sadr, or to political solutions. Several of the Mahdi Army factions are basically criminal gangs masquerading as religious zealots. Sadr denies he is a pawn of Iran, but as Mahdi Army houses are captured, more Iranian weapons and equipment show up, as well as religious propaganda from Iran. "

    http://www.strategypage.com/qnd/iraq/articles/20080428.aspx

  • 0

    adaydream

    They will submit. Sooner or later the Sadr Militia will either submit or die.

    The Iraqi government, bolstered by the US, will kill every damn person who does not submit to the US.

    More deaths.

  • 0

    Madverts

    Hundreds, maybe thousands more dead in the latest escalation in violence, and some fools on JT are still braying about some imaginary "liberation"?

    The only bad thing about the upcoming and let´s face it, desperately needed enema in the Whitehouse is that dubya won´t be taking the few remaining, heart-broken and estrogenized members still amazingly loyal to the sect with him when he bogs of back to Texus with his uhm, heh, "legacy"!

  • 0

    Madverts

    redacted;

    If you´re reduced to the level of having a cut´n paste war with lunch using his own sources, heh, then I´d suggest your flailing cause is in serious Barney Rubble.

  • 0

    Madverts

    Uhm, heh, jambon,

    You were calling for the Iraqi resistance to "Bring.It.On", what, only a few days ago...?

    Looks like your hollow, armchair bravado cost the lives of more American troops. With "patriots" like you guys, heh, al-Qaida can take early retirement claiming "Mission Accomplished"!

Login to leave a comment

OR

Follow us

More in World

View all

View all