Support Our Troops

Muslim-American soldier
detained in Kuwait attack
15 troops injured, 1 dead, in grenade assault Pentagon calls 'inside job'


© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com

A U.S. soldier being described as a Muslim is now in custody for alleged complicity in the grenade and small-arms attack on members of the U.S. Army's 101st Airborne Division encamped in Northern Kuwait, which injured 16 soldiers, one of whom has died.

Several others were injured seriously, and three are in surgery.

In addition, two Kuwaitis who had served a translators are being held for questioning, according to CBS News correspondent Mark Strassmann, who is imbedded with the 101st.

Strassmann reported that the grenades were rolled into two commanders' tents. When officers ran from their tents, they were hit by small arms fire, he said.

In an initial statement, George Heath, 101st spokesman at home base Fort Campbell, said: "From our reports it appears that a terrorist penetrated Camp Pennsylvania, one or more terrorists threw two hand grenades into a tent."

But soon it became apparent that the attack was, as the Pentagon now says, an "inside job." After a roll call revealed that one soldier was missing on base, he was eventially found hiding. The soldier implicated was reportedly in charge of grenades, according to MSNBC.

Time reporter Jim Lacey told ABC News that he talked to an eyewitness at the rear base camp who said that grenades were rolled into a tents that housed the leaders of the brigadier unit. A "terrorist," the witness told Lacey, shot the first two people who exited the tent. Sky News reports that a third grendade was rolled into a third tent housing officers, but that it did not explode.

Camp Pennsylvania was named to honor of the victims of plane that crashed in Pennsylvania during the Sept. 11 attacks. The camp, located approximately 20-30 miles south of the Iraqi border, is surrounded by large berms and guarded by armed soldiers, with others in observation posts watching the desert. The camp is also home to Patriot missile batteries.

The U.S. soldier implicated is currently being questioned, and U.S. authorities are tight-lipped about characterizing his possible involvement.

Stuart Ramsay, a reporter with Sky News, says the Muslim soldier had become a concern to his commanding officers.

"In recent days they were concerned about his behavior and were not going to send him up to the front when the soldiers were going to be deployed," Ramsay said.

It is not clear whether the soldier, who Ramsay said would have been in the Gulf for some weeks, had planned the attack before being deployed.

"Talking to other soldiers, it could be that he was disgruntled," Ramsay said. "They said he had been acting 'weird' for days."

Lacey, the Time magazine reporter imbedded with the 101st, was in the tent next to the two tents that were the object of the grenade attack. In a phone interview, he told Fox News that the soldier responsible has an "Arabic-sounding" last name. Asked what his explanation of the perpetrator's motives, he said he believed "it was part of his misguided interpretation of his Muslim faith."

 

mate, you do it again. Coalition troops means US, UK and Australian troops. I for one don't work hard risking my life for America.

I do it for my mates, my country and my Queen.

 

mate, you do it again. Coalition troops means US, UK and Australian troops. I for one don't work hard risking my life for America.

I do it for my mates, my country and my Queen. </font>[/QUOTE]You do it for your country and I do for mine

 

As for America as the best military, best equipped, but probably the best at friendly fire. seriously, there not only killing their own they are killing British-Canadian soildiers. How do you mistake a Tornado for a scud. SERIOUSLY!
For your french bashing, I do lots- the French and French Canadians. But You attempt at calling the French (and Belgians)cowards, having no balls, but if you look in history, especially WW1, those nations lost most of their men in that war, french somthing like 7 million, America like 40,000. Not bagging America, but don't go after other nations on these forums, keep it well.

Good one Bish, Stefan. But really I don't see this V-Slav guy getting the picture.

 

Indeed, Vyacheslav, how you DARE to call these men cowards!







The French Chasseurs teaching an American how to use a machine gun...



Americans in French uniform, in the Légion, willing to die for France.



Again, training the American rookies.



The Belgians.



The Belgians firing on the Germans.



The 'coward' Belgians...

 

Georges Guynemer, certainly a coward. He only could shoot 53 Germans down...



Scadrille 'Lafayette'. What more to say?



Don't forget that these French 'cowards' built the BEST tank of the war...



Certainly, these 'few' Germans at Béthune were killed by cowards...

 

In June 1917 the American Expeditionary Force, led by General John J. Pershing, began to arrive in France. By March 1918, when Germany began a massive offensive, much of the American force was in place. Reluctantly, the United States allowed American troops to be integrated into Allied units under British and French commanders. These reinforcements bolstered a much-weakened defense, and the Allies stopped the German assault. In September 1918 American troops participated in a counteroffensive in the area around Verdun. The Saint-Mihiel campaign succeeded, as did the Allied Meuse-Argonne offensive, where both the Allies and the Germans suffered heavy casualties. Facing what seemed to be a limitless influx of American troops, Germany was forced to consider ending the war. The Central Powers surrendered, signing an armistice on November 11, 1918. Only the challenge of a peace treaty remained.

American manpower tipped the scales in the Allies’ favor. At war for only 19 months, the United States suffered relatively light casualties. The United States lost about 112,000 people, many to disease, including a treacherous influenza epidemic in 1918 that claimed 20 million lives worldwide. European losses were far higher. According to some estimates, World War I killed close to 10 million military personnel.

 

Friedrich - The first picture you posted was from a movie

I think we should stop this argument and pray that the members of the US, UK and Australian (plus others) get home safely.

 

Ironically, the worst danger for the British soldier is, like in the first Gulf war, friendly fire from the U.S. Army and Air Force.

Cheers,

 

Who stopped the Germans in front of Paris and the canal?

The French, Belgians and the English.
By 1917 Germany could hardly win the war. The force that defeated the German army was just bigger with the Americans on our side than without them.

 

Sorry, that sounds like a major contradiction to me, 'our plan is not rubbish, it opens up our men to attack from the rear and allows the enemy to kill the troops in our supply column but since this is easy they dont count', is that not what you are saying? The reason I say the plan is rubbish is because it opens support troops to attacks, it is happening now, that is the major fault of the plan, either prove me wrong or agree but dont come up with tortologica arguments that make no sense please. As for the March offensive, I think you will find that the US troops got into place in April 1918, by which time the Kaiserschlact was over nearly. The British and French troops who fought for every inch of ground, who held the Germans up and had to 'stand with [their] backs to the wall, every man will stand and fight and fall, no more retreating' (Gen Haig March 1918). Like I said, dont go slagging off other nations when its men fought and died because you couldent get off your arses and help sooner.

 

Once the US committed itself to WWII, it took almost an entire year before they saw any major combat. With the troops in France, People shamelessly stalled their mobilization with endless bickering with French and British leaders over who exactly would be commanding them. Much time was also wasted by claiming that the American soldiers "weren't quite ready" yet to fight the Germans.
People delayed American involvement until they were absolutely sure that the Germans were defeated.

[ 28. March 2003, 11:27 PM: Message edited by: Knight Templar ]

 

Well, i think he is getting the picture, he just can't come up with anything to counter what we have said. So he switchers to attacking the French.

 

Here I tend too agree. Fighting secondary forces equipped with obsolete weaponry and killing people from 20,000+ feet above or out of 7,000 feet distance is really easy.

And what's more right than defending your homeland against an outside military aggression?

Cheers,

[ 24. March 2003, 03:58 PM: Message edited by: AndyW ]

 

Strange--those Poilus --pronounced pwaloo-- look more like Belgians to me

Some funny digs at the frainch:

Quote by Adolf Hitler:

"I place a low value on the Frainch Army's will to fight. Every Army is a mirror of its people....After the first setbacks it will swiftly crack up. Hitler: November 1939."

Quote by Gerd von Rundstedt:

"We Germans do not indulge in the tired Maginot spirit."

And yes--back by popular demand--some jokes:

1) Anybody want some slightly used Frainch Rifles?.....ONLY dropped once.

2) Why are there so many shade trees in Paris? German Soldiers dont like marching in the sun.

3) Why are there so many shade trees in Paris? German Soldiers like resting in the shade.

 

Really? Which one?

Viacheslav: That posting contains very bad information, or at least, it's not complete. There's not any mention that the troops from the AEF when arrived to France had to be supplied with steel helmets, gas masks, adequate trench-warfare uniform and equipment, machine guns, hand grenades, etcera. Because they didn't know how to fight in that war! All they could do in 1917 was marching in an elegant way in Paris raising the French morale. But actually, many French officers, war veterans and French and British equipment were diverted from the front to supply and train these rookies. And by the time of the German 'Kaiserschlacht' they were not ready for combat yet. They saw very little of combat then. And even if they saw combat, their numbers was so small compared to the numbers of the French and British Armies that it is idiotic to believe that it was the Americans who stopped 'Ludendorff's offensive'. And you must know that by 1918, Germany had very few posibilities of winning the war, even against the weakened British and French.

 

Hi "F", the first pic you posted was from the 1930 version of: "All Quiet On The Western Front." I recognixe this scene as it is at the point just before the Poilus is slaughtered at the barbedwire fence by the German Machinegunners. It was shortly after Paul and his mates reached the front lines.

 

OK. Now I must watch that film!

By the way, Carl! Let's help us here and stop mocking the French! There was no popular demand for the jokes (which I, personally do not like). Precisely what we are trying to do here it to show that those jokes are as false as Godzilla.

 

We're trying to proof that if were the French, the Brittish and the Belgian who saved the western front. (Also some minor allies fro mthe first hours like the Canadians helped us by defeating the Germans.)

And that the Americans came to the front when the war was almost lost for Germany.

 

Since we are on the World War One Forums now, I don't think the French were too crazy about that war either. They had a mutiny I think in 1917 over their generals sending them out to get slaughtered on the front while the generals stayed in Paris and had a good time.