Wikipedia

Talk:2008 Nineveh campaign

Latest comment: 8 years ago by Cyberbot II in topic External links modified
Learn more about this page

Ninewa Province Campaign

edit
Latest comment: 16 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I think the title Ninewa Province Campaign is more appropriate here, as the fighting in the northern encompasses more than just Mosul and "offensive" doesn't immediately indicate which side is attacking. Both sides seem to be conducting their own offensives in the north. See for comparison Diyala province campaign. Lawrencema (talk) 12:12, 9 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

support. However, it's no province but governorate, so it's better not to have either of the two. I'm moving it --TheFEARgod (Ч) 12:35, 10 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

battle ResultsI

edit
Latest comment: 16 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I change it from indecisive to a decisive victory on the grounds that AQI on this [[1]] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.229.12.186 (talk) 09:35, 5 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

It's just an opinion article, from an investment magazine. Nothing there to say that the Iraqis won a decisive victory. Lawrencema (talk) 10:25, 5 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

Ninawa campaign

edit
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I was the Platoon Sergeant of the patrol that lost five great Soldiers in the IED blast the 28th of Jan. 2008. It states in the article that IA entered the mosque we took fire from and that the gunmen had fled. That is not entirely true. We took fire from 360 degrees all around us not just the mosque and the IA only entered the court yard of the mosque. They didn't enter the mosque itself they only looked through the door. We were not allowed to enter the mosque due to the ROE in Iraq. However no insurgents left the mosque after or during the firefight, of that we are sure. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wrathone11 (talk • contribs) 17:14, 3 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

"Defeat" of al-Qaeda in Iraq

edit
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This statement from this article is truly idiotic:: "On July 7 the Investor's Business Daily posted an editorial lamenting the failure of U.S. news media to report the defeat of al-Qaeda in Iraq." Who (apart from the nutcase extreme Far-Right) is claiming that al-Qaeda in Iraq "is defeated"? And if it is indeed defeated, then why are horrific mass bombings still occurring, killing hundreds of Iraqis? Maybe the reason the media hasn't reported AQ in Iraq's defeat is that it hasn't happened. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.190.65.102 (talk) 23:52, 1 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Insurgents Entrenched between 2004-2006?

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I understand what the article is saying in this regard, but stating that the insurgents were entrenched during a stalemate with IA between 2004 and 2006 is misleading. This implies that the insurgents "owned ground" within Mosul. I am not arguing that there were no insurgents in Mosul, as I was shot at by a few of them, but the insurgents were unable to keep USF and IA from moving effectively throughout the city and no area was strictly barred to coalition forces by the insurgents. They were there, without a doubt, but they were not entrenched. If "entrenched" is meant in the figurative sense then the article should say so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 214.13.196.186 (talk) 10:24, 8 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV

edit
Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:

This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
  1. There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
  2. It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
  3. In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 15:08, 26 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 20 external links on Ninawa campaign. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:18, 26 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2008_Nineveh_campaign&oldid=1196521216"