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
More than 200 dead as battle rages in Baghdad
2008-04-13
THE toll from fierce fighting in BaghdadÂ’s Sadr City has risen to at least 200 dead and more than 1,000 injured, according to doctors in the besieged suburb.

US and Iraqi troops killed at least 13 gunmen in heavy fighting there yesterday against the Mahdi Army loyal to the radical Shi’ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr. The reports from Sadr City hospitals suggest far higher casualty figures than previously reported, although they cannot be independently verified. Dr Qassem Mudalal, the director of the Imam Ali hospital, said: “There are 230 killed, I can confirm, in the hospitals of Sadr City. I’ve been living in the hospital for two weeks. I can’t leave because of the siege and it’s too dangerous to be on the streets because of snipers and bombs.” He said most had died from shrapnel wounds. Other doctors claimed only a minority of the dead appeared to be militants.

The Iraqi government yesterday briefly lifted a blockade of the suburb, and allowed about 20 lorries loaded with food, blankets and medical supplies to enter the area. An American convoy was struck by at least 10 roadside bombs while moving in to support Iraqi soldiers setting up a checkpoint in the west of the city, the US military reported.

There was no sign of a cessation of hostilities between al-Sadr and Nouri al-Maliki, the Iraqi prime minister. “Children, women and old men have been injured and killed and there are no ambulances,” said Um Ali, a housewife, by telephone from her home in Sadr City. “The hospitals have no first-aid supplies and there are so few doctors.”
Posted by:Fred

#8  An American convoy was struck by at least 10 roadside bombs while moving in to support Iraqi soldiers setting up a checkpoint in the west of the city, the US military reported.

Am I reading that right? One convoy getting struck by at least 10 roadside bombs. Assuming this was NOT that big a convoy, this might be good news. The mighty-Mahdi is now down to burying Black Cats and M80s as roadside bombs, tee-hee!
Posted by: BA   2008-04-13 21:48  

#7  from interviewing the officially-prepped/designated-"victims" denizens of Sadr City...
Posted by: Frank G   2008-04-13 21:26  

#6  Yes, I'm sure the Times will get a real objective viewpoint from interviewing the denizens of Sadr City...
Posted by: tu3031   2008-04-13 21:18  

#5  It's possible. Reports I got last week say the IA was somewhat lax in its fire discipline.

Then again, considering it was their first solo effort, in an environment (congested slum, militia embedded among civilians, etc.) that makes it real easy to have these kind of casualties, it's understandable. Too bad The Times doesn't.
Posted by: Pappy   2008-04-13 14:26  

#4  I think it is because arab doctors know that an arab who tells the truth is at risk to die of spontaneous combustion...
Posted by: M. Murcek   2008-04-13 13:53  

#3  We have seen far too many of those "muslim doctors" spreading propaganda. Remeber the Palestinian boys hit in the heart? (Ie by snipers and on purpose?). The tens of thousands civilans piling in the Iraki hospitals during OIF?
Posted by: JFM   2008-04-13 11:10  

#2  Sounds like some investigation of Dr. Muldalal is in order, to see if his claim of 230 victimes, mostly of shrapnel wounds, is correct. If not, why is he saying it (propaganda, or just self-importance) If so, then somebody besides the US is using a lot of heavy weapons: Is the IA employing mortars and its T-72s in this campaign? They would certainly be less accurate than US fire, and substantial collateral damage would be expected. And "only a minority appeared to be militants" still leaves the collateral damage at an acceptable level ('minority' could be 110 of the 230 as militants, and 'appeared' could mean a number of the other 120 were just not obviously recognizable as militants.)
Posted by: Glenmore   2008-04-13 08:56  

#1  So 13 bad guyz killed and at least 187 innocents, according to the unnamed sources. Since all the innocents are hiding in their houses, the US must be bombing random dwellings for sport? Is that what The Times is suggesting?
Posted by: Bobby   2008-04-13 06:53  

00:00