BRIAN ROSS REPORTS
Stray Guns in Baghdad
For McCain, Another Problem FundraiserTOP BLOTTER CATEGORIES
- Abramoff Lobbying Scandal
- American Al Qaeda
- Avian Flu
- Beirut Hospital Out of Gas
- CIA
- CIA Secret Prisons
- D.C. Madam Affair
- FBI
- Federal Air Marshal Service
- Homeland Security
- Hurricane Katrina
- Mark Foley Internet Scandal
- Millionaire Sex Scandal
- Nigerian E-mail Scams
- Norman Hsu, Clinton Fundraiser
- NSA: Wiretapping
- Osama bin Laden
- Payola
- Pharmacy Investigation
- Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert
- Terror
- U.K. Airline Terror Plot
- U.K. Bombing Attempts
- Wen Ho Lee
- William Jefferson
- Zarqawi
Insurgents in Iraq Claim They Can Beat U.S. Anti-IED Technology
Email
Print
ShareMarch 06, 2007 12:18 PM
A new insurgent video mocks U.S. attempts to fight the attacks and claims insurgents managed to beat advanced technology used by the U.S. to detect the deadly explosives.
A series of fierce and gruesome IED attacks against U.S. armored vehicles in Iraq is shown on the 25-minute video.
The new video, issued by a coalition of insurgent groups known as "The Islamic State of Iraq," is subtitled "The Fall and Decline of the U.S. Technology." The underlying message is that U.S. efforts to counter IED attacks are futile because the group claims its "engineers" managed to invent ways to face the newly developed techniques and devices by U.S. forces.
Click Here to Watch Excerpts of the Insurgent Video.
It begins by showing a masked man identified as a field commander talking about U.S. counter IED efforts before listing different types of U.S. vehicles, including the Buffalo, Cougar and RG-31 Nayala.
The video contains footage of alleged attacks against U.S. vehicles that are seen being blown up. In some instances, bodies are seen flying in the air amidst fire and smoke.
IEDs are responsible for 65 percent of American casualties in Iraq, according to retired Gen. Montgomery Meigs, who heads the counter-IED efforts in Iraq.
Meigs, who briefed reporters about the fight against IEDs yesterday, argued, however, that IED lethality has dropped, pointing out that the level of American casualties resulting from IED attacks has remained constant since 2004. To show the progress being made, Meigs said insurgents have to put four to five times as many IEDs as in June 2003 to cause one American casualty. The drop in lethality is due to the timely discovery of an IED leading to detonation or IEDs that just aren't as lethal.
Click Here for Full Blotter Coverage.
The video ends by showing an old statement by al Qaeda's No. 2 man Ayman al Zawahri in which he challenges President Bush to send more U.S. troops to Iraq and claims the insurgents will win.
Gen. Meigs, whose Joint IED Defeat Organization has a budget of almost $6 billion in the last three years, admits the attacker always has the upper hand in this fight. There is no uparmor or body armor that can totally defeat an offensive weapon like the IED, he said. He added, however, that in the last six months the number of tips about IEDs has more than doubled.
March 6, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (11)
It takes $10 to make an IED. And $10 million to stop them.
do the math
Posted by: JelloBiafra | Mar 6, 2007 1:07:48 PM
Why are American media outlets giving these guys a forum. Why does ABC News insist on showing and reporting every insurgent video. WHO CARES!! The military i'm sure is aware of what the insurgents capabilities are.
Posted by: Jaws | Mar 6, 2007 2:09:10 PM
it doesnt matter how long we stay in iraq, things arent gonna change.. we got rid of saddam hussein and helped them build a diplomatic government(hopefully), we have done our job, time for us to come home, and for them to handle their own country !!!!
Posted by: usa4nra | Mar 7, 2007 2:42:46 AM
Stop giving them a forum.
Posted by: Dan Lentz | Mar 7, 2007 7:33:08 AM
Usa4nra is exactly right, the US has done the job. We got rid of Saddam. We cannot force democracy on people who do not want it. And continuing to try and do so will be forever fruitless.
Posted by: Jaws | Mar 7, 2007 11:52:23 AM
I thought ABC News has reported that Iran was providing "more lethal" IEDs.
Now this guy says they are "not as lethal" as they used to be.
Which story are we to believe?
Aside from human casualties how many of our armored vehicles are being destroyed by these things?
We never get any numbers on
expensive military equipment destroyed by cheap IEDs.
Posted by: rex | Mar 7, 2007 2:42:21 PM
6 billion!?! With a "b"?!!
Add to that the cost of all the damage IEDs have done, and we could probably have offered $100,000 per IED to buy 'em all up.
Posted by: mark | Mar 8, 2007 4:53:57 PM
To usa4nra:
You cannot destroy a country under the guise of "helping" them, and then leave while it crumbles.
We now own Iraq. As Colin Powell said "if you break it, you bought it".
Besides, if we do leave then Iraq will become the new terrorist training and ops center.
We cannot leave for at least the next 10 years or more.
Posted by: mark | Mar 8, 2007 4:58:49 PM
to Rex:
It's whichever way the government needs it to be at the moment.
Stop trying to peek behind the current.
Posted by: mark | Mar 8, 2007 5:02:42 PM
They are only trying to increase people's fears of what's going on and to distract us from the fact their losing. The milatary already knows the "technology war" game. No contest.
Moreover, win the war soon and get out. Stop prolonging this for money.
Posted by: Michael | Mar 15, 2007 7:30:21 AM
The use of IEDs is effective because the US military has not changed it's tactics. Patrolling in vehicles in an urban environments is inneffective. Patrolling as a means of defeating the enemty is ignorant of what warfare is. So is setting up firebases or patrol bases in enemy controlled terrority.
The theory of limited engagments and surgical warfare is proven dead. If your enemy and your enemys family does not suffer from war then they have no reason to stop fighting. It is a terrible fact.
We dont own the battlefield because our leadership stopped fighting wars the traditional way.
The infantry is taught to close with and destroy the enemy. That is it's job and has been for centuries of warfare. Everything else from airpower to armor is there to support the infantry. When you restrict the infantry's mission to daily patrols outside the wire into enemy areas you never gain control of there is no suprise when your force is knocked off peice meal and there is no end of hostilities.
Posted by: Napolean | Mar 15, 2007 11:25:11 AM
Post a comment
