Talk:Battle of Baghdad (2003)

message: References on force sizes? I have doubts that there were 45,000 Republican Guard and 30,000 Americans. Stinger503 (talk) 23:32, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled comments 

message: U.S. media repeatedly showed images of crowds of Iraqi civilians cheering as the statue was toppled. The presentation implied that hundreds or thousands of people were involved, though wide shots of the plaza showed no more than about a hundred.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.100.215.4 (talk • contribs) 20:36, 4 February 2005.
:That information happened to be correct  and was later confirmed by the Los Angeles Times.  --GD 07:08, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Information incorrect and removed

message: and other information....
http://right-thinking.com/index.php/weblog/comments/4097/
:Those aren't even wide-angle shots. They prove nothing. --GD 07:08, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Linked is a photo proving informationclearinghouse incorrect

message: From the article: "A 20-foot tall statue of Saddam in Firdus Square was toppled by a group of Iraqi exiles brought from London by the U.S. forces"
Could someone cite sources? Xen0phile 00:22, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Found another Wikipedia page on the statue toppling controversy: 2003 invasion of Iraq media coverage. Xen0phile 01:21, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hussein statue toppling was staged? 

message: This article is written in extremely biased manner, almost entirely told from the point of view of the American military. It should be edited to be less obviously pro-American.
:Allied forces were the victors in this??, you mean someone actually did something besides the US and England???, while in the media the term "coalition forces" is used, here in wikipedia there is no trouble in stating that these were "allies".
Since no one other than US forces were involved in the battle, it is 'not an allied victory but a US victory, so go to hell.--Aj4444 (talk) 02:17, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I have problem with the pic... If this is really Avenger 64 (Unsure of actual call-sign)(Cojone Eh?) it was hit by a Strela-7 compound warhead, and was 'killed' by American tanks to deny the Iraqi forces a 'war prize'...See 'Thunder Run' for details. Why does it then become iconic for the invasion of Baghdad?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Foamking (talk • contribs) 06:12, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: American Bias

message: I am a US soldier that was in Iraq and I was in the Battle of Baghdad and I dammn well know a few British Tanks and Troops were involved here. My partner Will is a British soldier who fought in the Battle of Baghdad.
I agree My father is with the Royal Army and He fought there to in the Battle of Baghdad.
I doubt you are a real "US soldier", but yes, the British Military was involved. USS Noob Hunter (talk) 14:21, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: UK was involved

message: The flag icon next to the Iraqi Army and Republican Guard is the flag of the new Iraq. Shouldn't it be the old Iraqi flag? USS Noob Hunter (talk) 14:20, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Flag Icon

message: The projected losses by a US General in Feb 2003, on the BBC to take Baghdad was 3,000 if the Iraqis put up moderate resistance.  Afterall, Baghdad is a city the size of L.A.  We know according to embedded reporters that the Iraqis put up 'savage' resistance (Quoting David Zuchino with 3id).  Yet the death toll according to the U.S. State is 34.  Anglo-Americans are unbelievably gullible.  They don't realise that their propaganda is as bare-faced as the Soviet Union.  34 dead.  Whatever.  They lost several hundred in the underground complexes of the Airport alone before they decided to unleash willie pete. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.163.74.106 (talk • contribs) 
:Thanks!  I'd wondered where Muhammed Saeed al-Sahaf had gotten to.  He had some real career opportunities with Madison Avenue.  For a time, he was quite a celebrity.  Rklawton (talk) 00:26, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: 34 Dead, Laughable

message: The article is about the battle of Baghdad which saw Baghdad fall to coalition forces, yet the lead photo is of a burned out American tank.  By placing the image here, one would think that the American's lost this particular battle.  While the image might make sense under the casualties section, it's not very appropriate in the lead.  The fall of Baghdad is generally symbolized by the destruction of Saddam's statue as it represents the end of Saddam's rule.  Thoughts?  Rklawton (talk) 00:19, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Lead photo

message: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/2004/onpoint/ch-5.htm
According to US Army history of the Invasion Iraq by 5th Corp. This does not include the fighting at Objective Peach which was 18 miles South of Baghdad but should be considered part of the battle. 
Vehicle losses as follows: US 1 Bradely IFV damaged, 1 M-1 MBT destroyed, 1 M-113 Damaged, 2 Ammo trucks destroyed, 1 Fuller truck destroyed, 4 Humvees lost, 1 A-10 shot down, and another 22 vehicles damaged or destroyed. The later is unknown because the was article was vauge. The article states 34 Americans were killed in the battle. The VFW magazine stated American loses around Baghdad to be 58 dead. Five less then were lost in the Battle of Fallujah in 2004. Wounded unkown. It was in the March 2012 Magazine titled story Iraq: A U.S. Combat Chronology 2003-2011 . 
Iraqi Equipment losses: 36 Tanks (mostly T-72s), 8 IFV, 29 tech vehicles, 1 suicide bus, 2 suicide cars, 18 BM-21 Rocket launchers, 19 Air defense vehicles or guns, 12 artillery pieces, 19 Anti Tank weapons (non RPG), and at least 80 other armored or wheeled vehicles (unkown from article). Equipment loses were probably even higher but the accounts in the report did not specify types of all Iraqi vehicles destroyed and were once again vauge. Iraqi military loses were probably even higher than 2,300 reported. Iraqi military personel wounded is also unkown. Civilian deaths from what I have read were around 1,700 and 2,700 civilians killed in Baghdad.
http://www.jackmiles.com/Home/other-works/on-terrorism-war-and-public-policy/how-many-iraqis-have-we-killed 
Making it the bloodiest battle during the GWOT. Those were just a sampling from Iraqi 60/124 Hospitals in the Baghdad Iraqi. How many of those were civilians or Iraqi defense forces dressed in civilian attire may also never be known.
  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.213.119.180 (talk) 18:30, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updated equipment loses  

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Battle of Baghdad (2003). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090422232025/http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/08/international/worldspecial/08CND-CAMERAMAN.html to http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/08/international/worldspecial/08CND-CAMERAMAN.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:37, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Battle of Baghdad (2003). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20141028114048/http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/03/international/worldspecial/03MILI.html?pagewanted=all to http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/03/international/worldspecial/03MILI.html?pagewanted=all
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:32, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 8 external links on Battle of Baghdad (2003). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100609232054/http://merln.ndu.edu/archive/DigitalCollections/IraqiPerspectivesProject.pdf to http://merln.ndu.edu/archive/DigitalCollections/IraqiPerspectivesProject.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130618173716/http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/1111-10.htm to http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/1111-10.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100326034327/http://www.icasualties.org/Iraq/Fatalities.aspx to http://icasualties.org/Iraq/Fatalities.aspx
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141015205541/https://asuwebdevilarchive.asu.edu/issues/2003/04/10/sports/413823 to https://asuwebdevilarchive.asu.edu/issues/2003/04/10/sports/413823
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141016032951/http://gawker.com/5993525/a-stupid-death-in-a-stupid-war-remembering-michael-kelly to http://gawker.com/5993525/a-stupid-death-in-a-stupid-war-remembering-michael-kelly
*Added archive https://archive.is/20030421142619/http://asia.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=2518342 to http://asia.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=2518342
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20030824121301/http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=1503&ncid=1503&e=1&u=%2Fafp%2F20030408%2Fts_afp%2Firaq_war_baghdad_media_030408165654 to http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=1503&ncid=1503&e=1&u=%2Fafp%2F20030408%2Fts_afp%2Firaq_war_baghdad_media_030408165654
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090326061752/http://www.jfcom.mil/newslink/storyarchive/2006/ipp.pdf to http://www.jfcom.mil/newslink/storyarchive/2006/ipp.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:04, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Evangelicals were responsible for George Walker Bush winning the 2000 Presidential Election. Evangelical leaders including Jerry Falwell Sr. met with him in the Oval Office after 9/11 2001 and encouraged him to attack Saddam Hussein and Iraq. They felt this would satisfy the prophecy of the "Destruction of Babylon" - Revelation Chapters 14, 16-18. CBS 60 Minutes did an episode on this featuring Falwell, "Now all the prophecies have been fulfilled - Christ will return." The prophecy of the 2nd Beast/Antichrist refers to "And he performed great signs, even causing fire to come down from the heavens in full view of everyone." - Rev 13:13. The missile attack on Baghdad was seen live worldwide on CNN and Al Jazeera. 73.85.200.138 (talk) 15:06, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: 'The Destruction of Babylon'

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:55, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion