Time mag: U.S. troops killed Iranian soldier in firefight last year

posted at 7:22 pm on March 30, 2007 by Allahpundit

U.S. News & World Report had this same story a week ago, identical in all respects (probably because they come from the same Army report) save for one critical detail — apparently, we killed one of their guys while he was in the act of firing an RPG. Yowza.

A short Army press release issued on the day of the skirmish offered the following information: U.S. soldiers from the 5th Squadron 73rd Cavalry 82nd Airborne were accompanying Iraqi forces on a routine joint patrol along the border with Iran, about 75 miles east of Baghdad, when they spotted two Iranian soldiers retreating from Iraqi territory back into Iran. A moment later, U.S. and Iraqi forces came upon a third Iranian soldier on the Iraqi side of the border, who stood his ground. As U.S. and Iraqi soldiers approached the Iranian officer and began speaking with him, a platoon of Iranian soldiers appeared and moved to surround the coalition patrol, taking up positions on high ground. At that point, according to the Army’s statement, the Iranian captain told the U.S. and Iraqi soldiers that if they tried to leave they would be fired on. Fearing abduction by the Iranians, U.S. troops moved to go anyway, and fighting broke out. Army officials say the Iranian troops fired first with small arms and rocket-propelled grenades, and that U.S. troops fell further back into Iraqi territory, while four Iraqi army soldiers, one interpreter and one Iraqi border guard remained in the hands of the Iranians.

The official release says there were no casualties among the Americans, and makes no mention of any on the Iranian side. U.S. soldiers present at the firefight, however, tell TIME that American forces killed at least one Iranian soldier who had been aiming a rocket-propelled grenade at their convoy of Humvees.

Verrry curious that U.S. News found out about this only last week, within 24 hours or so of the British sailors being kidnapped.

Speaking of which, are you sitting down? Because the Associated Press is about to rock. your. world.

The letters released by the Iranian government and attributed to the captive sailor have been increasingly strident and oddly written for a 26-year-old from southwest England, an indication that they were produced under duress, linguistics experts and psychologists said Friday….

“I would bet my house on the fact that this is basically Persian speakers who have written this,” Holes said. “This is very, very mannered English. … It’s stilted. It’s not natural.”

Holes also took issue with a passage from the third letter in which Turney describes her captors as “caring, compassionate, hospitable and friendly.”

“The same adjectives are used more or less in the other two letters, which leads me to believe they’ve been dictated,” he said.

Coming soon from the AP: a frame by frame analysis of today’s hostage tape that suggests there might have been another man in the room telling the sailor what to say.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Can we go kill the Mad Mullahs now?

steveegg on March 30, 2007 at 7:24 PM

Has anybody blamed this whole thing on Frank Miller yet?

Jim Treacher on March 30, 2007 at 7:28 PM

“I would bet my house on the fact that this is basically Persian speakers who have written this,” Holes said. “This is very, very mannered English. … It’s stilted. It’s not natural.”

So Zack Snyder is vindicated!

Slublog on March 30, 2007 at 7:29 PM

Oh, hell. Treacher beat me.

Slublog on March 30, 2007 at 7:29 PM

Verrry curious that U.S. News found out about this only last week, within 24 hours or so of the British sailors being kidnapped.

They wanted American hostages who they could claim had “crossed the boarder illegally” but found out quickly they wouldn’t get them without a big fight so they decided to settle on British marines.

TheBigOldDog on March 30, 2007 at 7:33 PM

Well, I listened to the AP radio news this AM, and the reader there was NOT convinced he was under duress…it was only POSSIBLY under duress.

F the media.

benrand on March 30, 2007 at 7:41 PM

(in my best Captain Renault voice): I’m shocked, shocked to find that these letters were coerced and not written of the soldiers’ free will!

Mallard T. Drake on March 30, 2007 at 7:41 PM

Funny how Americans put up a fight…and Brits just give up. The west is weak, and we are the only light left shining.

msipes on March 30, 2007 at 7:41 PM

The Road to Victory is Through Tehran.

And Paved with The Bodies of The Mullahs.

And Other Capitalized Slogans.

Didn’t we all know that on 9/12? Jeebus.

HerrMorgenholz on March 30, 2007 at 7:42 PM

Will the AP figure out that water is wet next? Shocking discoveries!

lorien1973 on March 30, 2007 at 7:50 PM

I wish the AP hadn’t mentioned that about the letters being “stilted”. The service member involved could be doing that on purpose to get across the message that they are doing it under duress. AP’s exposure of this might result in additional stress on the service member as punishment by the captors. I wish the news media would report what the government says on this but PLEASE stop with the analysis because the Iranians are reading it too. AP could well get someone hurt, or worse.

Report what the government releases but please refrain from speculation and analysis for fundamental humanitarian reasons. PLEASE.

crosspatch on March 30, 2007 at 7:55 PM

Oh, hell. Treacher beat me.

Slublog on March 30, 2007 at 7:29 PM

Heheh!

PRCalDude on March 30, 2007 at 8:02 PM

NARRATOR: But what really caused the Twin Towers to collapse? Was their failure inevitable? Or could they have stood longer, giving occupants and emergency crews a better chance for escape?

-snip-

NARRATOR: When a blue ribbon team of forensic engineers was asked by the government to determine exactly what triggered the Towers’ collapse, NOVA was there from the beginning, following their quest for answers

-snip-

NARRATOR: From their detailed examination of the Towers’ innovative design to the search for forensic evidence in the molecules of collapsed steel, the investigation team has studied every possible scenario. Could one tower have collapsed for different reasons than the other? Was there something about the Towers—built to maximize rental space—that traded safety for economy?

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/transcripts/2907_wtc.html

TheBigOldDog on March 30, 2007 at 8:26 PM

Woops – wrong window sorry

TheBigOldDog on March 30, 2007 at 8:26 PM

“The same adjectives are used more or less in the other two letters, which leads me to believe they’ve been dictated,” he said.

D’ya think so, Sherlock? I mean, you can’t be saying that the Iranians have turned the captured British sailors and Marines into meat puppets. That would so out of character for a regime that came into the world with a massive hostage-taking.

Bryan on March 30, 2007 at 8:47 PM

Oh, and by AP I meant Associated Press, not Allah Pundit.

crosspatch on March 30, 2007 at 8:48 PM

Coming soon from the AP: a frame by frame analysis of today’s hostage tape that suggests there might have been another man in the room telling the sailor what to say.

Breaking on the AP wires right now: The Iranians have taken British hostages

RightWinged on March 30, 2007 at 9:04 PM

Oh, hell. Treacher beat me.

Slublog on March 30, 2007 at 7:29 PM

Heh, pwn3d!

I’m not surprised that we’ve found and killed Iranian troops in Iraq. I’ll bet we’ve killed and captured more that we know nothing about yet for intel reasons.

Bad Candy on March 30, 2007 at 9:08 PM

I agree that the news orgs should absolutely not analyze the letters or tapes to look for signs of subversion by the sailor. That could absolutely put peoples’ lives in danger.

RW Wacko on March 30, 2007 at 9:08 PM

Looks like the EU is talking a little tougher than the UN. Still no signs yet of any unscheduled NATO meetings.

crosspatch on March 30, 2007 at 9:17 PM

This is all “payback” for the movie “300″!

PinkyBigglesworth on March 30, 2007 at 9:37 PM

Where’s the outrage from people about them displaying POWs for the world to see?

“But they’re not POWs, really”

Ah, displaying hostages is alright with ‘the world community’, then.

Reaps on March 30, 2007 at 9:53 PM

Looks like the EU is talking a little tougher than the UN. Still no signs yet of any unscheduled NATO meetings.

crosspatch on March 30, 2007 at 9:17 PM

Hope they don’t weasle out.

Texyank on March 30, 2007 at 9:57 PM

Oh, well, that explains everything then… they were told what to write and say.

o.O

To that I respond, “No $hit Sherlock!”

What I still fail to see, along with all the so-called experts (experts at stating the obvious but refusing to go the distance with their supreme observations), is even the slightest hint of resistance whether by word of mouth or hand or body language. Sure, the Iranians are probably telling the captives what horrible things might happen to them if they don’t capitulate willingly, but that doesn’t mean they actually willingly capitulate. The Iranians wouldn’t dare physically harm or kill any of them over such a benign event. They may be stupid savages reminiscent of some bizarro world backasswards Star Trek race of aliens, as evidenced by their entire history and the mere fact this event occured as it did, but I don’t believe the Iranians are even that stupid over something like allegedly straying a very short distance over an imaginary line in the water.

Catching foreign soldiers on dry land or dressed like uber-stealth spies carrying high explosives or laser-sighting equipment in the dead of night well within the Iranian waters might cause them to cross that line, but not this. We haven’t even seen the usual Iranian faux display of high tech weaponry and/or supplies accompanied by accusations of a sinister plot by the Brits to carry out some top secret mission in Iranian territory. Even so, by this time after so many letters and video bytes there should be some form of clandestine communication of some sort… and there’s diddly squat… zero… zip… na-da!

Yeah, okay, they’ll tell us their sordid story upon their repatriation, but they’re doing one hell of a job of telling us nothing given so many opportunities have presented themselves for them to do so thus far in so short a time. And to me, that’s a direct contradiction to all kinds of soldier training and standing orders.

SilverStar830 on March 30, 2007 at 10:41 PM

One down, many, many more to go.

csdeven on March 31, 2007 at 8:01 AM

We all need to face the fact that, sooner or later, we’re going to have to go bomb Iran back to the middle ages and change their regime. It’s not going to be pleasant, but clearly it’s going to have to be done.

I can’t wait to hear the crap that the Democrats are going to spew about why we shouldn’t, though. Sheesh.

flutejpl on March 31, 2007 at 8:28 AM

“If Israel is left alone and the point of no return [in Iran's nuclear weapons program] arrives, then Israel will have to do the job. But most probably we will not be able to do it with conventional warheads. And this is something the world should know.”
-snip-

“Once we reach the eve of destruction of a new Holocaust [from Iran], we will not think of anything else. We will be ready to destroy the nuclear infrastructure of Iran at whatever cost it takes. That means we will be ready to use unconventional weapons,” he said.

Israel Will be at War by Summer, Politician Says

TheBigOldDog on March 31, 2007 at 10:34 AM

Why are there no questions about how Iran is [or isn't] following the Geneva Conventions?

Lousy %&*@! liberal [once] MSM!

DannoJyd on March 31, 2007 at 2:25 PM

Ahahaha.

Seixon on April 1, 2007 at 2:48 PM

The Iranians want nukes.

Can’t we offer Mahmoud and the mullahs 15 nukes in return for the 15 Brits.

Delivered if they do not release the hostages by noon tomorrow?

The hard way.

profitsbeard on April 1, 2007 at 10:21 PM