Tribal chiefs clash with Qaeda in Anbar killing 50 terrorists

[ECH1969]

Tribal chiefs and Coalition forces clashed with Al-Qaeda insurgents in Al-Anbar province killing 50 terrorists, it was annouced here Sunday.

Al Qaeda terrorists attacked the Abu Soda tribe in Sofia yesterday and in response, Coalition Forces provided support to the Abu Sodas fight against Al Qaeda, a US Army statement said.

"The Americans have come to the aide of the Abu Soda tribe. They have understood the dire situation that the Abu Soda are currently battling the Al Qaeda, because the Americans see it as a fight against a common enemy," said Sheikh Ahmed, Sheikh of Abu Resha.

After establishing positive identification, Coalition Forces conducted air strikes and fired artillery at Al Qaeda forces attacking the Abu Soda Tribe. Al Qaeda forces attacked through a tribal area check point and engaged the Abu Soda in Sofia. Al Qaeda burned homes, and killed members of the tribe using small arms fire and mortars.

http://www.kuna.net.kw/home/Story.aspx?Language=en&DSNO=926302

[Dhalgren]

1. Juan Cole discussed this over the weekend.

He said he didn't buy the story as told. If these were really Al Quaeda fighters, then the numbers are wrong or the situation was different than the one released. Juan's opinion was that the "tribal" forces were not capable of this kind of attack on guerrilla forces, or that they must have been some sort of ambush or sneak attack of some sort and he said that that didn't sound much like what the tribes were capable of. We have to be very careful over the next few weeks or months about stories like this one...

[ECH1969]

3. Cole didn't quite get his facts right

The tribal fighters didn't ambush or sneak attack the insurgents. What seems to have happened is the tribe got attacked and called the US for help and the US bombed using warplanes and artillery the attacking force. Thus, it was the US that did most of the killing not the tribal fighters. As for what type of insurgents the bombs killed, dead men tell no tales.

[Dhalgren]

4. He didn't get his facts wrong. The report over the weekend left

out the part about the US bombing, so that may be the "not as told" part that he didn't buy. It is the presentation of this fight as being between the "tribes" and Al Qaeda that is bogus. If a street gang attacks my house and I call the cops and the cops come and arrest the gang, I don't then tell everyone that I beat a street gang. That is what Juan was having the problem with - the tribes are just no cohesive enough nor powerful enough to have this kind of fight and outcome with any of the insurgents, Al Qaeda or not...

[mike_c]

2. the most important words in this whole report are...

..."it was annouced here Sunday." This means a couple of things. First, and most directly, it means that the reporting was mostly stenography, simply passing along the announce made by the U.S. military press liason.

More important, it means that the entire story was prefiltered through the military truth and perception filter before it was reported. The firefight might have just as easily have been sectarian or tribal in nature, but the American military always reports that Iraq is awash with "al-Qaeda terrorists," despite overwhelming evidence that most violence in Iraq is not international terrorism at all.

The fact that this information originated in the military press room makes it automatically suspect, IMO.