I have no doubt that one of SPC Wilson's superiors told him to go through a scrap yard to get more vehicle armor. There's nothing wrong with this- resourceful soldiers are always looking to improve on their equipment, weapons, fighting positions, etc. What SPC Wilson might not be aware of(at his level)- is that all vehicles that drive north into Iraq are required to have "level 3" armor protection. If a vehicle does not meet this standard, it will not be driven up north- it will be carried on a flatbed truck. Once in Iraq, armored vehicles are used for driving off post, and unarmored vehicles are used for driving around on post. This policy is put out to each unit's commanders well before the unit even arrives to Kuwait.
Rumsfeld gave no indication that the soldier would face any kind of disciplinary action for speaking up. Indeed, the defense secretary said he found it healthy for soldiers to feel free to express their views.
He also said military vehicles that go into Iraq without full armor are used only inside U.S. compounds, rather than used on street patrols where they are vulnerable to roadside bombs. And he said those vehicles without full armor are moved into Iraq on transport vehicles rather than being driven.
Yea, and the Secretary of defense and the troops. Unless you have other info feel free to pass it on.
By the way... how many of our Troops have died "Inside" of the GREENzone? That, is only 1 of the "safe zones" where our troops have died in those things, isn't it?
That's P.O.ed Virginians that they get to meet, not virgins.
Thanks for the warning Luv. I made sure that my son wasn't in the room, but you cannot see much more than a puff of smoke. What was the shooting fire at the end? Did they have a flame thrower there also?
[Edited 2 times. Most recently by on Dec 13, 2004 at 02:07pm.]
My guess would be a secondary from something nearby could be a propane tank or somnething near him that the blast set off.  Or he had some explosives on him that went but given the way the flame is shooting from a stable looking source i'd say propane or gas from a car etc.
I love the sound! And I think it was safe to use what they did since they were a little off from their target anyway unless they were trying to get anyone else that was inside that tin shelter too.
The agitated woman began honking, swerving and flicking her lights. "I look in the rear view, and she's flipping me the bird, hard," Wright says. "I thought I cut her off, because I'm a really bad driver."
When the woman finally pulled up next to Wright and motioned for her to roll down her window, she gave the artist an earful of opinions about the war in Iraq.
"Your war is wrong," Wright remembers the woman screaming at her. "You're a baby killer."
I dobut anything. Why people worry about what someone else puts on their car is amazing. Yea what horrible people and what a horrible sentiment. You do of course realize that in most cases the money made goes to military support organizations don't you?
You and Bill have been ragging on them for a while. Why so concerned with what someone else chooses to put on their vehicle?
(For the record I don't have one. I've bought some but I don't put anything on my vehicles)
P.S I saw a mercedes in the Target parking lot yesterday. The car's vanity plate was my moniker. If any of you see it, it's not me. I'll own a mrecedes if I win the lotto or live in Germany.
Â
[Edited 2 times. Most recently by on Dec 15, 2004 at 06:33am.]
I had some natural curiosity as to whether the message was one of actual support or whether it was command directed at a specific group of, I guess, fellow drivers of the highways.
I had some natural curiosity as to whether the message was one of actual support or whether it was directed at a specific group of, I guess, fellow drivers of the highways.
I bought some from a guy I know who was selling them for a fundraiser for USO's operation care. I bought some but didn't put it in on my cars. I don't think anyone buying them do so with other drivers or political tones in mind. I saw plenty yellow ribbions with Bush and Kerry stickers on them as well so I don't think it's that or anything malicious or political. That's why I don't understand some people ragging on them. Maybe people are just trying to make others aware. I just don't see why someone would care what's on someones car especially when it's not offensive.
[Edited 2 times. Most recently by on Dec 15, 2004 at 07:08am.]
"How about rooting for our side for a change, you liberal moron."
While I can see the humor in that (I suppose), you must admit that it's done to make a point, right Rob? Looks like the military if generous with its coffee.
"I don't think anyone buying them do so with other drivers or political tones in mind."
Probably not the vast majority. But I'd hesitate to say that no one does it for that reason.
My point is, this is how messages get mixed. In a heated political year I understand it.
That's cool. All I'm saying is that I've heard quite a few on the left deride them. I don't think the majority put them on for nefarious reasons or to make some political statement. I think most just do it as a reminder, as during election season I saw both candidates stickers in conjunction with the ribbon magnets. Now are they simplistic? Sure but it's hard to fit much on a ribbon. I think people want to avoid Vietnam syndrom where we don't seperate the warriors from the war and to remind people of their sacrifice is all.
This email is a thank you from a Marine Gunnery Sergeant in Iraq. It was sent two days ago [December 14]:
Just wanted to write to you and tell you another story about an experience we had over here.
As you know, I asked for toys for the Iraqi children over here and several people (Americans that support us) sent them over by the box. On each patrol we take through the city, we take as many toys as will fit in our pockets and hand them out as we can. The kids take the toys and run to show them off as if they were worth a million bucks. We are as friendly as we can be to everyone we see, but especially so with the kids. Most of them don't have any idea what is going on and are completely innocent in all of this.
On one such patrol, our lead security vehicle stopped in the middle of the street. This is not normal and is very unsafe, so the following vehicles began to inquire over the radio. The lead vehicle reported a little girl sitting in the road and said she just would not budge. The command vehicle told the lead to simply go around her and to be kind as they did. The street was wide enough to allow this maneuver and so they waved to her as they drove around.
As the vehicles went around her, I soon saw her sitting there and in her arms she was clutching a little bear that we had handed her a few patrols back. Feeling an immediate connection to the girl, I radioed that we were going to stop. The rest of the convoy paused and I got out the make sure she was OK. The little girl looked scared and concerned, but there was a warmth in her eyes toward me. As I knelt down to talk to her, she moved over and pointed to a mine in the road.
Immediately a cordon was set as the Marine convoy assumed a defensive posture around the site. The mine was destroyed in place.
It was the heart of an American that sent that toy. It was the heart of an American that gave that toy to that little girl. It was the heart of an American that protected that convoy from that mine. Sure, she was a little Iraqi girl and she had no knowledge of purple mountain's majesty or fruited plains. It was a heart of acceptance, of tolerance, of peace and grace, even through the inconveniences of conflict that saved that convoy from hitting that mine. Those attributes are what keep Americans hearts beating. She may have no affiliation at all with the United States, but she knows what it is to be brave and if we can continue to support her and her new government, she will know what it is to be free. Isn't that what Americans are, the free and the brave?
If you sent over a toy or a Marine (US Service member) you took part in this. You are a reason that Iraq has to believe in a better future. Thank you so much for supporting us and for supporting our cause over here.
Thank you. I was wondering if we should be thinking about the difference between soldiers who are going to be headed into Iraq and Soldiers who are already there. A lot of the concerns about who did and didn't have were from soldiers who were going in, and I didn't -- I personally didn't get a sense of what the people who are already there are using and what their needs and gaps are.
GEN. SPEAKES: Very, very good question. The first point is that you'll recollect that one of the questions was the status of the 278 ACR; in other words, the date that we had the visit by the secretary of Defense, we had a question about their up-armoring status. When the question was asked, 20 vehicles remained to be up-armored at that point. We completed those 20 vehicles in the next day. And so over 800 vehicles from the 278 ACR were up-armored, and they are a part now of their total force that is operating up in Iraq.
QÂ Â Â Â When you say they're 100 percent up-armored, does that mean 100 percent of their requirement or 100 percent of their vehicles?
GEN. SPEAKES: Yes, what we did is there was a total of 804 vehicles that were identified as part of our up-armoring strategy. That's the wheeled vehicles that they brought north with them or drew when they got up in country. And so at this point the vehicles that they're operating, that they're driving, are all up-armored. There were a few vehicles that were put on heavy equipment transporters and moved up. The example would be, for example, the shop van, which is a large, essentially static vehicle. And it was taken up by a truck and dropped in position, but it was not operated on the way up there. So at this point, if you're in Kuwait and you're headed north up into Iraq, General Schoomaker's guidance is real clear: you're not going north of the berm, which means north of the border, in a non-up- armored vehicle, and that's our requirement. And so what you now have is an accountability process during the reception, staging and onward movement where every vehicle's accounted for and it gets up-armored or it doesn't go north.
And then the other question was, where are we with people who are operating up in sector right now? What we've been able to do is get enough up-armoring of humvees where, as I mentioned, our telephonic check yesterday with the theater said that when they need an up- armored humvee, they're using it. The estimate, frankly, just to give you an idea of the op tempo, is on any given day, about 50 percent of their humvees are in use. And so by that standard, you could see that we've got plenty of up- armored humvees -- either add-on armor or up-armored humvees -- to be able to operate to meet daily requirements. We're not satisfied with that, and that's why the guarantee is that essentially we're going to go ahead and replace every un-armored vehicle with an add-on armor or up-armored piece of equipment.
QÂ Â Â Â Are there soldiers who are in the sector right now who are scrounging around looking for extra things who aren't comfortable with what's been provided?
GEN. SPEAKES:Â Ma'am, I don't know the answer to that question. What I think that ought to be clear to every Soldier, is the Army's commitment to make sure that we provide them everything we can.Â
Q    On the 278th, can you repeat this? At the time the question was asked, the planted question , the unit had 784 of its 804 vehicles armored?
GEN. SPEAKES: Here is the overall solution that you see. And what we've had to do is -- the theater had to take care of 830 total vehicles. So this shows you the calculus that was used. Up north in Iraq, they drew 119 up-armored humvees from what we call stay-behind equipment. That is equipment from a force that was already up there. We went ahead and applied 38 add-on armor kits to piece of equipment they deployed over on a ship. They also had down in Kuwait 214 stay- behind equipment pieces that were add-on armor kits. And then over here they had 459 pieces of equipment that were given level-three protection. And so when you put all this together, that comes up with 830.Â
QÂ Â Â Â At the time of the question -- summarize this, now -- that unit that the kid was complaining about was mostly armored?
GEN. SPEAKES: Yes. In other words, we completed all the armoring within 24 hours of the time the question was asked.
let's see, they could get a unit armored up within 24 hours of someone asking about it... and they have been over there for how long now? If only someone had asked earlier!
They were only 20 vehicles short. If you would have checked the link, you would have saw this also:
QÂ Â Â Â If he hadn't asked that question, would the up-armoring have been accomplished within 24 hours?
GEN. SPEAKES: Yes. This was already an existing program. Remember that when I began this presentation we talked about General Schoomaker in his testimony in front of the HASC in November -- made it real clear. He said all vehicles operating north of the berm will be up-armored, and what that meant in common-sense language is you don't leave Kuwait without either an up-armor or an add-on armor solution. And we understood that, and most importantly the theater did. And so we were in constant dialogue, ensuring that we provided everything that was required to make this happen. And this didn't happen just for the 278th. In other words, the 256th, which was the Army Guard brigade directly in front of it, had the same identical solution; and although different numbers of vehicles, approximately the same solution in terms of percentage of fill.
When did the manufacturer get that armor to them? It was 20 vehicles out of over 800 and you still have to question it? Were those 20 used during the waiting time? I doubt it.
"I'm not the one manipulating people."
You sure don't give the Guardsmen much credit.
"That's true sociopathic behavior."
Where do you hang you shingle?
[Edited 2 times. Most recently by on Dec 9, 2004 at 05:58pm.]
Can't be that big a secret. They're fired upon regularly.
I hope he's next to get kidnapped and lose his head
Damn. Tough crowd
[Edited by on Dec 9, 2004 at 06:02pm.]
Is that how you guys get if it's been too long since the last Medallion Hunt?
Uh-oh, a low blow. I'm ducking.
OH and, how many of those 15,000 Hummers did the TROOPS themselves upgrade, with trash and metal-scrap, from junkyards?
Don't know Bill. Do you ? The ones that aren't armored are used on post.
Â
That's false. I'd never claim to know what someone else is thinking. I go by what I hear from people I know and those in the know.
it's SOP that that the non armored ones are used on post only or FOB's.
[Edited by on Dec 10, 2004 at 05:46am.]
What was that Bill ?
I have no doubt that one of SPC Wilson's superiors told him to go through a scrap yard to get more vehicle armor. There's nothing wrong with this- resourceful soldiers are always looking to improve on their equipment, weapons, fighting positions, etc. What SPC Wilson might not be
aware of(at his level)- is that all vehicles that drive north into Iraq are required to have "level 3" armor protection. If a vehicle does not meet this standard, it will not be driven up north- it will be carried on a flatbed truck. Once in Iraq, armored vehicles are used for driving off post, and unarmored vehicles are used for driving around on post. This policy is put out to each unit's commanders well before the unit even arrives to Kuwait.
http://2slick.blogspot.com/2004/12/rumsfelds-visit.html
Rumsfeld gave no indication that the soldier would face any kind of disciplinary action for speaking up. Indeed, the defense secretary said he found it healthy for soldiers to feel free to express their views.
He also said military vehicles that go into Iraq without full armor are used only inside U.S. compounds, rather than used on street patrols where they are vulnerable to roadside bombs. And he said those vehicles without full armor are moved into Iraq on transport vehicles rather than being driven.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/ap/20041209/ap_on_re_mi_ea/rumsfeld
Yea it's entertaining.
What was that you were saying Bill ?
[Edited 3 times. Most recently by on Dec 10, 2004 at 06:37am.]
I said "As Far As YOUKnow".
Yea, and the Secretary of defense and the troops. Unless you have other info feel free to pass it on.
By the way... how many of our Troops have died "Inside" of the GREENzone? That, is only 1 of the "safe zones" where our troops have died in those things, isn't it?
From mortar rounds.
[Edited by on Dec 10, 2004 at 06:48am.]
so, if all these vehicles are used in safe zones, why are they having to reinforce them with scavaged material?
Because they are arriving from places like Korea, Germany etc. that have not been fitted.
uh, they are talking about vehicles that we used during the initial invasion.
that doesn't answer the question. if they are "safe" zones, why do they need to be armored?
uh, they are talking about vehicles that we used during the initial invasion.
Who is. 15,000 out of the 19,000 have been fitted with armor.
that doesn't answer the question. if they are "safe" zones, why do they need to be armored?
Thanks for all the facts you posted Bill.
[Edited by on Dec 10, 2004 at 07:06am.]
LOL
Â
No matter what, "They" wouldn't be happy.
WARNING: VIDO CAN BE CONSIDERED GRAPHIC.
http://www.murdoconline.net/archives/Misc/Dontbringarifletoatankbattleshortversion.mpeg
72 virgins coming up.
Don't bring a rifle to a tank fight. AMF
[Edited by on Dec 13, 2004 at 10:23am.]
Luv2Fly 12/13/04 10:21am
That was a wasted shell. Don't they have 50 cals on tanks.
No it wasn't wasted, they hit their target.
Luv2Fly 12/13/04 1:15pm
Yea, but I couldn't see the fucker die. At least with the 50, we'd get to see him flop around a bit on his way to his big dance with 72 virgins.
That's P.O.ed Virginians that they get to meet, not virgins.
Thanks for the warning Luv. I made sure that my son wasn't in the room, but you cannot see much more than a puff of smoke. What was the shooting fire at the end? Did they have a flame thrower there also?
[Edited 2 times. Most recently by on Dec 13, 2004 at 02:07pm.]
Von Johnson 12/13/04 1:58pm
No point in taking a chance he'd duck around the corner and escape.
Â
Grandpa Dan Zachary 12/13/04 2:04pm
Â
My guess would be a secondary from something nearby could be a propane tank or somnething near him that the blast set off.  Or he had some explosives on him that went but given the way the flame is shooting from a stable looking source i'd say propane or gas from a car etc.
[Edited by on Dec 13, 2004 at 02:16pm.]
Luv2Fly 12/13/04 2:13pm
No point in taking a chance he'd duck around the corner and escape.
Yea, you have a point...plus, speaking of corner...he might have had a buddy near-by that took a hit from that shell too.
I love the sound! And I think it was safe to use what they did since they were a little off from their target anyway unless they were trying to get anyone else that was inside that tin shelter too.
[Edited by on Dec 13, 2004 at 02:28pm.]
If you go frame by frame on that explosion, you can see the poor bastard looking right at it when it goes off about ten feet from him.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/SHOWBIZ/Music/12/14/music.wright.reut/index.html
The agitated woman began honking, swerving and flicking her lights. "I look in the rear view, and she's flipping me the bird, hard," Wright says. "I thought I cut her off, because I'm a really bad driver."
When the woman finally pulled up next to Wright and motioned for her to roll down her window, she gave the artist an earful of opinions about the war in Iraq.
"Your war is wrong," Wright remembers the woman screaming at her. "You're a baby killer."
I dobut anything. Why people worry about what someone else puts on their car is amazing. Yea what horrible people and what a horrible sentiment. You do of course realize that in most cases the money made goes to military support organizations don't you?
[Edited by on Dec 15, 2004 at 06:23am.]
Who said they were horrible, Rob?
You're so defensive.
You and Bill have been ragging on them for a while. Why so concerned with what someone else chooses to put on their vehicle?
(For the record I don't have one. I've bought some but I don't put anything on my vehicles)
P.S I saw a mercedes in the Target parking lot yesterday. The car's vanity plate was my moniker. If any of you see it, it's not me. I'll own a mrecedes if I win the lotto or live in Germany.
Â
[Edited 2 times. Most recently by on Dec 15, 2004 at 06:33am.]
I had some natural curiosity as to whether the message was one of actual support or whether it was command directed at a specific group of, I guess, fellow drivers of the highways.
Concern? -- I guess that's your interpretation.
[Edited by on Dec 15, 2004 at 06:38am.]
I had some natural curiosity as to whether the message was one of actual support or whether it was directed at a specific group of, I guess, fellow drivers of the highways.
I bought some from a guy I know who was selling them for a fundraiser for USO's operation care. I bought some but didn't put it in on my cars. I don't think anyone buying them do so with other drivers or political tones in mind. I saw plenty yellow ribbions with Bush and Kerry stickers on them as well so I don't think it's that or anything malicious or political. That's why I don't understand some people ragging on them. Maybe people are just trying to make others aware. I just don't see why someone would care what's on someones car especially when it's not offensive.
[Edited 2 times. Most recently by on Dec 15, 2004 at 07:08am.]
"How about rooting for our side for a change, you liberal moron."
While I can see the humor in that (I suppose), you must admit that it's done to make a point, right Rob? Looks like the military if generous with its coffee.
"I don't think anyone buying them do so with other drivers or political tones in mind."
Probably not the vast majority. But I'd hesitate to say that no one does it for that reason.
My point is, this is how messages get mixed. In a heated political year I understand it.
That's cool. All I'm saying is that I've heard quite a few on the left deride them. I don't think the majority put them on for nefarious reasons or to make some political statement. I think most just do it as a reminder, as during election season I saw both candidates stickers in conjunction with the ribbon magnets. Now are they simplistic? Sure but it's hard to fit much on a ribbon. I think people want to avoid Vietnam syndrom where we don't seperate the warriors from the war and to remind people of their sacrifice is all.
To the men and women who keep us free:
http://www.soldierworks.com/191/untilthen.swf
This email is a thank you from a Marine Gunnery Sergeant in Iraq. It was sent two days ago [December 14]:
It was a fear of American invaders that caused that mine to be there in the first place.
No fear by the mine planter. They just wanted to kill anyone who happend by.
If the victim happend to be a G.I., crabhole would approve.
"Quit talking to me crabgrass" - Torpedo-8
The only one that fears the "American Invaders" are the terrorists, most of which aren't even Iraqi.
I'd fear living in a war zone, regardless of who the combatants were.
A bomb from a good guy and a bomb from a bad guy could both kill me just as dead.
[Edited by on Dec 19, 2004 at 07:59am.]
Revisiting the armored vehicle question:
Thank you. I was wondering if we should be thinking about the
difference between soldiers who are going to be headed into Iraq and Soldiers
who are already there. A lot of the concerns about who did and didn't have
were from soldiers who were going in, and I didn't -- I personally didn't get a
sense of what the people who are already there are using and what their needs
and gaps are.
GEN. SPEAKES: Very, very good question. The first point is that
you'll recollect that one of the questions was the status of the 278 ACR; in
other words, the date that we had the visit by the secretary of Defense, we had
a question about their up-armoring status. When the question was
asked, 20 vehicles remained to be up-armored at that point. We completed
those 20 vehicles in the next day. And so over 800 vehicles from
the 278 ACR were up-armored, and they are a part now of their total force that
is operating up in Iraq.
QÂ Â Â Â When you say they're 100 percent up-armored, does
that mean 100 percent of their requirement or 100 percent of their vehicles?
GEN. SPEAKES:Â Yes, what we did is there was a total of 804 vehicles
that were identified as part of our up-armoring strategy. That's the wheeled
vehicles that they brought north with them or drew when they got up in
country. And so at this point the vehicles that they're operating, that
they're driving, are all up-armored. There were a few
vehicles that were put on heavy equipment transporters and moved up. The
example would be, for example, the shop van, which is a large, essentially
static vehicle. And it was taken up by a truck and dropped in position,
but it was not operated on the way up there. So at this point, if you're
in Kuwait and you're headed north up into Iraq, General Schoomaker's guidance is
real clear:Â you're not going north of the berm, which means north of the
border, in a non-up- armored vehicle, and that's our requirement. And so
what you now have is an accountability process during the reception, staging and
onward movement where every vehicle's accounted for and it gets
up-armored or it doesn't go north.
And then the other question was, where are we with people who are operating
up in sector right now? What we've been able to do is get enough
up-armoring of humvees where, as I mentioned, our telephonic check
yesterday with the theater said that when they need an up- armored humvee,
they're using it. The estimate, frankly, just to give you an idea of the
op tempo, is on any given day, about 50 percent of their humvees are in
use. And so by that standard, you could see that we've got plenty of up-
armored humvees -- either add-on armor or up-armored humvees -- to be able to
operate to meet daily requirements. We're not satisfied with that, and
that's why the guarantee is that essentially we're going to go ahead and replace
every un-armored vehicle with an add-on armor or up-armored piece of equipment.
QÂ Â Â Â Are there soldiers who are in the sector right now
who are scrounging around looking for extra things who aren't comfortable with
what's been provided?
GEN. SPEAKES:Â Ma'am, I don't know the answer to that question. What I
think that ought to be clear to every Soldier, is the Army's commitment to make
sure that we provide them everything we can.Â
Q    On the 278th, can you repeat this? At
the time the question was asked,
the planted question
, the unit
had 784 of its 804 vehicles armored?
GEN. SPEAKES: Here is the overall solution that you see. And what
we've had to do is -- the theater had to take care of 830 total vehicles.Â
So this shows you the calculus that was used. Up north in Iraq, they drew
119 up-armored humvees from what we call stay-behind equipment. That is
equipment from a force that was already up there. We went ahead and applied 38
add-on armor kits to piece of equipment they deployed over on a ship. They
also had down in Kuwait 214 stay- behind equipment pieces that were add-on armor
kits. And then over here they had 459 pieces of equipment that were given
level-three protection. And so when you put all this together, that comes
up with 830.Â
QÂ Â Â Â At the time of the question -- summarize
this, now -- that unit that the kid was complaining about was mostly
armored?
GEN. SPEAKES: Yes. In other words, we completed
all the armoring within 24 hours of the time the question was asked.
link
[Edited 5 times. Most recently by on Dec 19, 2004 at 12:12pm.]
let's see, they could get a unit armored up within 24 hours of someone asking about it... and they have been over there for how long now? If only someone had asked earlier!
They were only 20 vehicles short. If you would have checked the link, you would have saw this also:
QÂ Â Â Â If he hadn't asked that question, would the up-armoring have been accomplished within 24 hours?
GEN. SPEAKES: Yes. This was already an existing program. Remember that when I began this presentation we talked about General Schoomaker in his testimony in front of the HASC in November -- made it real clear. He said all vehicles operating north of the berm will be up-armored, and what that meant in common-sense language is you don't leave Kuwait without either an up-armor or an add-on armor solution. And we understood that, and most importantly the theater did. And so we were in constant dialogue, ensuring that we provided everything that was required to make this happen. And this didn't happen just for the 278th. In other words, the 256th, which was the Army Guard brigade directly in front of it, had the same identical solution; and although different numbers of vehicles, approximately the same solution in terms of percentage of fill.
[Edited by on Dec 19, 2004 at 12:20pm.]
20 vehicles in 24 hours?
and how long have we been there?
When did the manufacturer get that armor to them? It was 20 vehicles out of over 800 and you still have to question it? Were those 20 used during the waiting time? I doubt it.
[Edited by on Dec 19, 2004 at 12:51pm.]
Believe me, that wouldn't have happend under Gen. Crabgrass!
It is only another attempt to make President Bush look bad. If he really was a general, nothing would be different.
Yes it would. His own troops would have wacked him by now.
I'd fear living in a war zone, regardless of who the combatants were.
A bomb from a good guy and a bomb from a bad guy could both kill me just as dead.
I don't doubt there's fear, however, I'd say the average Iraqi is glad we're over there.
I'd fear living in a war zone, regardless of who the combatants were.
If you had lived under Saddam you would have lived in fear, too.