Revealed: SAS mission to kill a Baghdad suicide squad

[sabra]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/11/20/nsas20.xml&sSheet=/portal/2005/11/20/ixportal.html

Revealed: SAS mission to kill a Baghdad suicide squad

The SAS killed three suicide bombers in Baghdad as part of an undercover, shoot-to-kill operation in Iraq, it can be revealed.


The three terrorists were all killed by SAS snipers armed with specialist rifles. Each terrorist was wearing a suicide vest laden with commercial explosives. It is understood that they were intending to target cafes and restaurants frequented by members of the Iraqi security forces.

A 16-man unit of the SAS, acting on intelligence obtained by an Iraqi agent working for the Secret Intelligence Service (MI6), shot dead the would-be bombers in a combined SAS and American operation in July this year.

Details of the mission codenamed Operation Marlborough have remained secret until now - primarily because it was launched in the same week that a Metropolitan Police firearms unit in London shot dead Jean Charles de Menezes, a 27-year-old Brazilian electrician, in the mistaken belief that he was a suicide bomber.

It marked one of the most successful counter-insurgency operations undertaken by British forces since the start of the Iraq conflict. It is the first time it has become clear that the SAS is working with American special forces on a permanent basis in Iraq.

[pretzel4gore]

1. hogwash. the victims were toddlers in a sandbox...

who dreams these lies up? iraq is the iraqi people's country, the terrorists are the invaders

[Charlie Brown]

2. Can you back that up? n/t

[pretzel4gore]

8. the brits have attacked iraq dozens of times

since the colonial era, though the iraqis have never attacked britain. the usa dropped a million bombs on vietnam, but vietnam has never dropped a single bomb on usa.....
you can glorify the antics of jackbooted boors with big bang bang shootem ups all you want, but there were no suicide bombers in iraq before despair and rage at the western occupation created them....don't you think many germans weren't gratified by news about otto skorzeny and his thugs' extrordinary actions during war 2? there are websites devoted to the 'holy cow' actions of the rambo snipers and the rhodesians and the joburg merc etc...what good has any of that ever done? those sas guys would be braver if they stood up to the lying political criminals who created the mess in the first place, but such courage is rare, and it's usual brutally punished. what courage or skill does it take to kill a moose from 1/2 mile away?

[barb162]

22. But the suiciders are there now killing innocent Iraqis

Unless you have some better idea on how to get rid of these scum suicide bombers.... And please don't say well if we get out it will all magically stop. The Sunnis and Shiites are going at it and I think after we leave they still will be doing the same thing as they jockey for who controls the country.

Killing an innocent moose isn't courageous or of any value. The moose doesn't kill/bomb 100 innocent civilians in a village square or a bus station or a mosque, does it? If SAS kills some if these damned suicide bombers , that's fine with me. Just think, the bombers can get to heaven faster and in one piece with their 72 virgins and a hundred other people get to live out their lives as they want.

[NeoConsSuck]

32. Self Delete

[Charlie Brown]

26. so, no, you can't back that up

"toddlers in a sandbox," indeed.

[stillcool]

9. remember this?

British Attack Basra Jail to Free Two
Sep 19, 3:49 PM (ET)
By ABBAS FAYADH
BASRA, Iraq (AP) - British forces using tanks broke down the walls of the central jail in the southern city of Basra late Monday and freed two Britons, allegedly undercover commandos, who had been arrested on charges of shooting two Iraqi policemen.
Witnesses said about 150 Iraqi prisoners also fled the jail

[barb162]

17. Why do you make the assumption this is a lie?

And what's this about: toddlers in a sandbox

[pretzel4gore]

27. i don't think it matters

i mad as hell at the busheviks for opening this can of worms....the suicide bombers will keep coming (and if the 'war' goes on long enough, some sb's are playing in sandboxes right now) as long as the irritant remains, which is 'western' occupation forces which create the vicious dynamic...that our guys only want to do well, and that such stories as this one are good within certain contexts, the fact remains WE went into a apiary being run with firmness by beekeeper saddam and ran around knocking everything over and mixing up the various enmities and creating chaos! why? so that bush and co. don't have to face the music of what they've done in the USA political arena....therefore, even if the sas 'takes out' suicide bombers, the men in charge should at least have the decency to shut the fukk up about the tragedy- the only ones impressed are people who probably like bush in the first place

[oppositionmember]

3. This was a good operation.

Remember they were probably on their way to take out a few dozen or few score of their fellow Iraqis. Let's not be saps.

Of course we shouldn't be there, but what they were intending to do was not honorable either.

[rooboy]

10. How the hell would you know that?

Governments lie. And these particular governments lie more than most.

[barb162]

18. Governments don't lie all the time What if this is true and they

saved a few hundred innocent people by killing these suicide bombers?

[pretzel4gore]

29. personally, i will concede that

:dilemma:

[Yupster]

12. I would think Iraq would be

a perfect battlefield for snipers. Haven't heard much about what they're doing though.

[Rick Myers]

4. The SAS are a very professional unit

This was a clean and proper operation, considering the situation. Much more efficient than a pair of Mk. 82 freefall bombs. In the end, this is a war zone.

I do not believe SAS would even risk killing innocents.

[TheBaldyMan]

11. erm... you mean like the iranian embassy siege?

iirc
There were a couple of civilians shot dead by the SAS during the storming of the embassy.
The rationale was that rather than have a terrorist running around loose they should 'neutralise' any suspect on the premises.
The SAS do seem to have a shoot in the head twice at very close range policy.

[sleipnir]

13. Actually, you remember wrong.

There were no civilian casualties that day. It was a clean operation, all 19 were saved. The "controversy" was regarding the alleged execution of two terrorists who had surrendered and were in partial custody of the SAS. An inquest was launched and the SAS soldiers were found innocent of the charges brought against them. They had the two gunmen pushed up against a wall, and thought they had grenades on them, shooting both in the head. Many eyewitness hostages thought that the actions of the SAS were completely out of line, but they were also certainly under the influence of Helsinki Syndrome, so the whole incident is questionable.

[JohnLocke]

15. Stockholm syndrome, not Helsinki syndrome.

Wrong Scandinavian capital. ;)

[Briar]

30. Operations that kill people

are not "clean" - they are bloody. I do not share "hard-man" assumptions that the ruthless slaughter of "the enemy" are cause for triumphalist rejoicing, whether or not the operation was necessary. In this case we cannot be sure.

This sounds like an extra-judicial assassination of men who may, or may not, have been planning a violent act. For all we know, we became hit men in a feud between hostile parties one of which came up with the clever idea of concocting evidence which framed the victims. (Come to think of it, this also describes the occupation of Iraq.)

We have no evidence other than statements from a deceitful government in dire need of "good" news from the battlefront that the people shot dead were terrorists. This country does not have the death penalty, thank goodness, and for our agents to be killing people out of hand merely on the grounds of suspicion damages the very basis of our judicial system.

Asd for the clearing of the SAS men nineteen years ago, I have no doubt that the executioners of Jean Charles de Menezes will be similarly "cleared".

[muriel_volestrangler]

33. 2 hostages were killed - one by the hostage takers

and one during the storming of the embassy - I'm not sure by whom. Another 2 hostages were injured.

Inside the building they took 26 hostages.
...
(5 hostages were released alive; 1 killed and pushed out of the door)
(BBC lists 19 hostages freed, including 2 injured)
The siege ended with two hostages dead and one of the gunmen left alive.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/uk/2000/iranian_embassy_siege/703016.stm

The SAS is prone to using "we thought they were about to explode a bomb" argument. They used it to justify killing 3 obviously unarmed IRA members on the streets of Gibraltar. Dismissing the testimony of hostages as biased towards their captors means you're giving people like the SAS the go-ahead to murder who they like, since there won't be any other witnesses (in Gibraltar, there was an extended smear campaign against the main witness who showed that the SAS didn't have any reason to suspect the IRA people were dangerous at that moment). In practice, the SAS is made up of people for whom "an eye for an eye" is perfectly acceptable, and who like their opponents to fear them, so they are quite happy to kill people who are no longer a threat, especially when the takers have already killed someone.

[PeebZ]

50. well said

i also believe that the SAS wouldnt risk killing civilians as it would attract bad press for the unit

[Kagemusha]

5. Let's not get too seduced. Drop in the bucket, that's all.

And info about it may go back to the terrorists themselves.

[daleo]

6. This would be more believable if:

- it wasn't the Telegraph, the neo-cons favored vector for propaganda.
and
- the torrent of lies we had to wade through after the shooting of the Brazilian electrician in London.

Given those two factors, why should we believe this story?

On edit - The story doesn't really have any details that can be used to verify, to speak of. If this occured, they could have been taking out anybody for all we know. The strange thing is that it is being released at all - I wonder what that really means.

[pocket]

7. the same SAS that was busted out of jail after false-flag bombings ?

Suuuure, and abu graib was a fraternity prank as well.

[StrafingMoose]

21. exactly my thought. nt

[ThePopulist]

14. Britain is the reason we're in this big mess in the 1st place!!

If they hadn't carved up Iraq without any regard for ethnic, tribal, or religious factors we wouldn't be in that miserable shithole right now cleaning up the huge mess they made. As good as these snipers are it doesn't change the fact that this whole situation was preventable had these imperialist fascists not imposed their government style on a foreign people.

[NYC]

37. I agree with you.

Welcome to DU.

[Nihil]

38. Damn! That kettle is *so* black isn't it?!

> Britain is the reason we're in this big mess in the 1st place!!
> If they hadn't carved up Iraq without any regard for ethnic, tribal,
> or religious factors we wouldn't be in that miserable shithole right
> now cleaning up the huge mess they made.

If you look into the facts, I think you'll find that your glorious
leader and his oil-powered cronies had a little more to do with getting
you into the mess than anything Britain has done in the past couple of
centuries. The "huge mess" was caused by an illegal invasion of a
sovereign country for the pursuit of oil. Oops?

The Iraq "carve-up" was just another phase in the regions tribal fights
that have been going on from long before the British Empire was born.

(Or did you mean that Britain should have been harsher on those
"insurgent" colonials two centuries or so ago? :evilgrin:)

[ThePopulist]

39. regarding Britain's imperialism over Iraq:

http://archives.econ.utah.edu/archives/a-list/2003w08/msg00017.htm

Excerpt(*emphasis added by me*):

-----------
Games With Frontiers

With a red pencil and an empty map of Arabia, an exasperated Sir Percy Cox
drew some lines and produced the new Middle East borders. The West was after
oil and said it knew best but nobody was happy ... sound familiar?
By Trevor Royle
The Sunday Herald, 23 February 2003

(....)

It was late November 1922 and the map of the Middle East was about to be
redrawn by a middle-aged British colonial servant who was determined to put
an end to the impasse. Otherwise, he told his aide, Major Harold Dickson,
*'at the rate they were going, nothing would be settled for a year'.*

(....)

Sabih Beg declared that Iraqi authority ran south to a point 12 miles south
of the city of Riyadh and that the southern frontier should be drawn from
Yanbu on the Red Sea to Qatar on the Persian Gulf. Ibn Saud replied by
claiming that his kingdom should have the Euphrates as its northern border,
deep in Iraqi territory. What followed next was captured by Dickson, who kep
t a record of this astonishing moment in Arab affairs.

Fearing that neither side would give ground, an exasperated Cox produced a
red pencil and an empty map of what was known as Arabia. *Telling the
delegates 'gentlemen, there are your borders,' Cox drew the angular lines
which are today's frontiers of Iraq, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia.* Nobody got
what they wanted: Ibn Saud felt cheated of his desert inheritance, Iraq was
denied access to the Gulf, its outlet being almost blocked by two adjoining
Kuwaiti islands, Warba and Bubiyan, and Kuwait was sandwiched between two
potential enemies."
-----------


All this fucking bullshit over a few strokes of a red pencil and a few happy fat racist elitist white imperialist aristocrats and a few Western-educated Arab elitst assholes acting as if this whole "nation-carving" was nothing and would lead to no problems in the future.

This *entire* mess is their fault as far as I'm concerned since it's their child so to speak since they drew the borders with the sole intention of raping the land for their own selfish financial gain.





Now, my reply to your post:

-----------
(me:)> Britain is the reason we're in this big mess in the 1st place!!
> If they hadn't carved up Iraq without any regard for ethnic, tribal,
> or religious factors we wouldn't be in that miserable shithole right
> now cleaning up the huge mess they made.

If you look into the facts, I think you'll find that your glorious
leader and his oil-powered cronies had a little more to do with getting you into the mess than anything Britain has done in the past couple of centuries.
-----------

Bullshit. As shown above in the article, they were the ones who drew the map without the input of anybody except themselves and with no critics except a few rich Saudi sheiks attempting to further the expanse of their own imperialist ambitions and not speaking for the people who were being affected but for themselves. The "Iraqi" people had no represenatives for their side. They were completely cut out by foreign powers - be they British or Arab.

The border was carved up without regard *BY THE BRITISH EMPIRE* of any ethnic, tribal, or religious sensitivities for the sole sake of maximizing the raping of the oil fields in Iraq for the benefit of the crown.

As for "my glorious leader" I assume you're speaking about Bush?? Or Wilson?? Or Harding?? Harding was president when the border was carved up in 1922. I fucking hate Woodrow Wilson. He was arguably the worst president we've ever had and a racist imperialist bigot himself who suppressed socialist activists and revolutionaries in the United States(includ. Eugene Debbs) - but that's another issue for another day. I'm sorry but I don't know which president you're talking about. We didn't control that land when the good old fellows in Parliment were carving up another peoples' land with the sole intention of stealing all their resources. So I don't see how you can blame America. F. Roosevelt did suck up to the Saudi royalty - but that was to secure oil against Nazi attacks on shipments. Again, I don't know which president you're talking about. It can't be Bush - he wasn't even born when the country was carved up by British "Royal" officers. Please specify which leader you mean.


You wrote:
------------
The "huge mess" was caused by an illegal invasion of a sovereign country for the pursuit of oil. Oops?

The Iraq "carve-up" was just another phase in the regions tribal fights that have been going on from long before the British Empire was born.
------------

No it wasn't just another "phase" for the tribal fights of the various groups who lived in the region. You had a Western power invading a poor 3rd world shithole full of nomadic camel herders and farmers. Wasn't exactly a fair fight was it?

The British knew the region had oil and other resources. And their first several years in Iraq they made sure that their own oil corporations sucked as much out as possible to fill the greedy coffers of the crown.

I'm sorry, but with all due respect, to justify a racist imperialist incursion onto another peoples' land and just call it a 'phase' in their development is a little condescending towards all those millions of natives over there don't you think?? We have no right to impose our government type onto another people without their consent - especially when our sole goal is to imperialize and rape that country of everything we can get out of it in the short time we control it.(which is what Bush and Co. is doing now in Iraq, but I digress)

Besides, do you know how many "Iraqis" were killed by the British in various "revolts" and "keeping the peace operations??" I've heard up into the tens of thousands!! That's a lot of blood for oil wouldn't you say? And to invade an area full of farmers, fisherman, and small-time barterers and traders with tanks and the full force of the Imperial British Army doesn't sound exactly nice and fair does it?


You wrote:
-------------
(Or did you mean that Britain should have been harsher on those
"insurgent" colonials two centuries or so ago? :evilgrin:)
-------------

Uh, how's about we treat them with dignity and give them their independence like good decent people and not treat them like slaves to exploit and pillage?? And yes, I am keenly aware of my own country's evil imperialist past so please do not bring that up.

The point I'm making is this: I love England. I wouldn't mind living on the English countryside myself. The problem I have is with the government of the UK. Especially the government of 80 years ago that raped and violated so many nations around the world it isn't even funny. Same thing goes for our actions in places like Iran, Vietnam, Chile, etc. I oppose all imperialism - no matter where it might come from. And the British have been the greatest profiteers of human suffering in the history of the world. They controlled and ruled a quarter to a third of the globe at any one point or time. I think that's pretty degrading and elitist.

[guruoo]

44. You nailed it....

next issue.....
:patriot:

[secretmouse]

40. Say What?

I beg to differ! The reason we're in Iraq right now is because GWB wants to prove that he has a bigger pecker than his daddy, and to guarantee that his oil baron buddies have the opportunity to drain the ME of every last drop of crude.

The British Empire is long gone, and today it's government is built on a Socialist model. The current Bush administration. enmeshed as it is with Corporate America, is a better example of Fascism

[ThePopulist]

41. You miss the point

"I beg to differ! The reason we're in Iraq right now is because GWB wants to prove that he has a bigger pecker than his daddy,"

I agree to a point. But also keep in mind the area would be much more stable in the first place had the imperialist forces of the crown not drawn a dipshit border solely for the benefit of the greed of the crown. Had they given the natives of the area freedom to choose their own style of government and form their own country it would have been MUCH better.

"and to guarantee that his oil baron buddies have the opportunity to drain the ME of every last drop of crude."

Again, true to a point. But your ignoring the past and the full picture.

"The British Empire is long gone, and today it's government is built on a Socialist model."

I'm not blaming the current British government for these problems.(by that I mean Blair's government or even the British people) I'm blaming the racist regime that existed in the early part of the century and the whole idea of an elitist government ruled for the sole benefit of the power of the crown.

"The current Bush administration. enmeshed as it is with Corporate America, is a better example of Fascism."

More corporate fascist in the modern sense. But the Imperial British government was much worse. They killed tens of thousands of people and raped the Iraqi nation much more than we have.(when adjusted for inflation) Again, this war wouldn't even be going on right now had it not been for imperialist ambitions of the British Empire.

[secretmouse]

42. Did I?

I'm not trying to defend the British Raj..they were a diabolical lot and got their comeuppance in the end, didn't they...and yes, they did make a "Mess-o-Potamia" (big Daily Show fan, sorry!), but the current situation in Iraq is down to Georgie-boy...the poor suffering Iraqis were just sitting there, quietly oppressed and minding their own business, when along comes you-know-who and makes it worse!

I try not to think of how many innocent Iraqis have been killed...we're beginning to make ol' Saddam look like a damn amateur!

[Name removed]

43. Deleted message

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

[Nihil]

46. Bit of a giveaway when you repeat Pentagon statements

> And actually most of the people killed aren't killed by us but by
> al-Zarqawi and the other assholes.

Fine. Nothing to do with the USAF, Army & Marines ... just those
mythical "al-BadGuys" who keep flying over with their bombs, firing
their artillery and rolling in with their tanks ...

OK, you keep parrotting the "it was the Brits fault back in the 1920s".
:eyes:

[ThePopulist]

48. Well

Uh, last time I checked they were the bastards who drew up the border and created the entire political situation over there in the first place because of their elitism....

[PeebZ]

51. indeed we are

gwb does in fact want to prove his dick is bigger than his dads and wants to finish off the "job" his old man started and suck all the oil from the ME so he can own more.

[JohnLocke]

16. If the U.S. used SAS strategies and tactics we'd be twice as effective.

[barb162]

19. I read somewhere or other that we do have snipers

shooting some of these militants

[daleo]

23. And they are sniping back at U.S. troops.

One is supposed to have killed dozens. Nice Hell Bush got going.

[barb162]

25. I think I read the same story...trying to get that sniper.

Yeah it is a hell Bush started...but if some outfit can kill some of these damned bombers who are doing nothing but killing totally innocent civilians, I say do it.

[StrafingMoose]

24. that's the point, they don't want to be effective

Dragging a war in a country that has 10% of the world's known oil reserve is profiting alot of people, not just in the USA.

[StrafingMoose]

20. IMO, this is hogwash

Trying to make it 'normal' when SAS soldiers are caught dressed up as Arabs shooting local police in Basrah, for example (in an attempt to fuel ethnic war to further the occupation).

While I have some friends in the army that couldn't think of doing such things, if you see all these atrocities in Iraq that's because some are up for the job -- whatever it may be.

[Stella_Artois]

31. Thats one version of that story.

Another is that the "police" were militia based in a police station.

An American Journo was murdered by people who were wearing police uniforms a few days earlier. Its not entirely impsossible that these people were the same.

I wasn't there, and neither were you. Neither of us will never know for sure what version of this story is the true one.

[LiberalFighter]

28. They made the graphic of how it happened look like it is easy to do

[daleo]

35. I remember Powell's pretty line drawings at the U.N.

So, I have a certain distrust of the technique too.

[AngryAmish]

34. Freedom fighter killed for their country

We all can learn a lesson.

[hack89]

36. As they departed to kill their own countrymen.... nt

[guruoo]

45. Yeah, like....

[0007]

47. HELLO, anybody HOME! The time is going on December. HELLO!

A 16-man unit of the SAS, acting on intelligence obtained by an Iraqi agent working for the Secret Intelligence Service (MI6), shot dead the would-be bombers in a combined SAS and American operation in July this year.

[madmark]

49. This really the only thing would should be doing there; small

asymetrical operations directed at al quada specific targes. Get the whole damn conventional/contractor force out of there to the periphery just like Murtha says.