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
Iraq
Explosions rock Baghdad; Politician killed in Sadr City
2003-11-11
EFL - usual mortar activity - read at the link, more importantly, a politician was killed in a confrontation with US troops in Sadr City
At least 10 explosions were heard Tuesday night in Baghdad, and smoke was rising from within the coalition’s heavily secured Green Zone, which includes most of the Coalition Provisional Authority’s activities. A CNN security adviser at a Baghdad hotel saw two impacts in the zone and smoke rise from them.

U.S. military officials said Tuesday that U.S. soldiers shot to death the chairman of Sadr City’s governing council during a heated argument this week. Sadr City is a largely Shiite neighborhood in the Iraqi capital, formerly known as Saddam City. Officials said the quarrel got under way Monday when the chairman, Mohannad Ghazi al-Kaabi, tried to park his car near the District Advisory Council building in an area closed to traffic. When U.S. troops tried to stop him, military officials said, he became agitated, got out of his car and began arguing with a soldier guarding the offices. Al Kaabi wrestled the soldier to the ground and grabbed his gun, according to the officials. Another soldier shot al Kaabi in the upper thigh, they said. A medic administered first aid to al Kaabi and transported him to a military medical facility, where he was pronounced dead.
Blew his femoral artery, I guess...
The death is under investigation, military officials said. About 200 to 300 demonstrators walked to the Sadr City council afterward to protest the killing and began chanting the predictable anti-American slogans. Carrying Shiite banners mourning the death, demonstrators called for a thorough investigation. They demanded that American troops leave Sadr City and give security duties to Iraqi police.
Arguing with armed troops? Took himself a little too seriously? Moqtada message here?
Posted by:Frank G

#9  Snellenr - roger that brother. thanx.

OP - copy your last. thanx. Yeah, staying alive is the bottom line. Take prisoners if you can, kill if you must, but always keep you and your buddy alive.

We still teach "center of mass then work up" but that's usually for bayonet & knife training we call it "stitching up" or doing a "singer" (like the sewing machine.) First thrust goes to the solar plexus, follow-on thrusts work up to the adam's apple.
Posted by: Jarhead   2003-11-11 11:19:03 PM  

#8  Jarhead,
"Non-combattant" here - at least, that was the basic idea. Those of us with special training weren't supposed to 'risk being killed'. Stupidity cubed, but typical mass-land-warfare planning. I had the rare good fortune to have some friends that were Marines, and some others that were Army - including a few Rangers and SF. One SF MSgt told us, when we were discussing self-defense for our compound against terrorists, that standard procedure was to "start at center-of-mass and work up" if you wanted to kill, but shoot the knees or shoulders if you wanted prisoners to question. First priority, however, was ALWAYS staying alive. That meant taking prisoners was a third- or fourth-order priority.
Posted by: Old Patriot   2003-11-11 10:37:33 PM  

#7  I've never been trained that way...

JH, don't change -- we like ya just like ya are...
Posted by: snellenr   2003-11-11 9:58:14 PM  

#6  I don't know what these particular guys are taught. Unless they're SWAT Trained for incapacitation shots. I've never been trained that way, my training's always been aim center of mass, repeat if necessary, or, when in doubt -double tap your opponent's head. Maybe some of you guys on here w/USAF Security Police or HRT knowledge know something different.
Posted by: Jarhead   2003-11-11 9:23:50 PM  

#5  Aim in between the legs and the chest to prevent heirs.
Posted by: Charles   2003-11-11 4:22:01 PM  

#4  Aim at the legs to disable. Aim for the chest to dispose.
Posted by: Fred   2003-11-11 3:10:14 PM  

#3  Out of curiousity, is there a reason to aim for the upper thigh? I know there are major arteries there, are soldiers trained to aim there to incapacitate but not kill? Or, just happy circumstance?
Posted by: mjh   2003-11-11 3:08:26 PM  

#2  BBC reported on this in a way that gave the impression that US soldiers blew him away as he tried to drive into the compound, which emcouraged an image of trigger-happy soldiers...

Biased bastards.
Posted by: Carl in N.H.   2003-11-11 2:59:48 PM  

#1  "Al Kaabi wrestled the soldier to the ground and grabbed his gun"

Somebody give that boy a Darwin Award.
Posted by: BH   2003-11-11 2:41:23 PM  

00:00