http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7337873.stm
Early in March, the coalition says an insurgent bomb-making team moved from Baghdad to a heavily Sunni area outside the capital.
It seemed, said one US officer I spoke to, that the whole neighbourhood knew they were there.
This represented a huge failure for the coalition, since the neighbourhood included the city's Iraqi police chief, who lived opposite the house, the commander of the local Iraqi Swat team, who was just as close, and a judge.
Coalition forces, including the SAS, surrounded the house, a little before 0200 local time on 26 March.
An interpreter called over a tannoy for the men - there were two "targets" - to surrender, or at least to let the women and children come out. There was no reply from inside the house.
At one stage the coalition forces also threw "flash bangs" - percussion grenades - through the front portico to ensure there was no confusion about which house was being targeted.
After a short wait, the SAS men stormed in. They ran into a withering crossfire. Four troopers were injured. One was killed.
A US officer involved in the investigation the Americans carried out afterwards told me: "They ran into an ambush. I mean the guys got it from both sides.
"When they were pulling themselves out of the house, these guys were throwing grenades out of the window at them and shooting at them and ended up killing one and injuring four."
He went on: "There were only two bad guys, but we could not get them [our soldiers] out without some type of suppressing fire so then we had to use aircraft to shoot at the house.
"Then some other fire came from another house right next door so the aircraft [using] precision firing was able to isolate those two houses and just pummel them."
The aircraft fired 40mm cannon rounds at the two houses, finally dropping a bomb on one of them. It collapsed. The other house was set on fire.
The two insurgents in the house were buried but so were a number of women and children.
"After the airstrike, coalition forces continued to receive heavy enemy fire as armed terrorists ran from the target and attempted to hide in neighbouring homes, using the occupants as shields."
In fact, two men and a number of women ran out of the back of the house. It seems that a four-year-old baby girl was given by her mother to another woman. This woman, and the baby, were both shot as they ran.
The American officer told me that had happened because the men were using them as cover: "When they came out of the house, the men were in amongst the women, shielding themselves.
"You don't do that; we would never shield ourselves with women and kids. It is not acceptable but they'll do it, the insurgents will do it, especially the bad ones."
The senior US officer I spoke to wasn't sure if weapons were found next to the bodies of the two men who ran out of the house with the women and children - in other words, if they were insurgents or civilians.
"The Multi-national Force-Iraq sincerely regrets when civilians are wounded or killed and their families have our heartfelt condolences."
By the coalition's count, seven female civilians were killed, including three children. One was the baby.
Two men identified as bombmakers, the target of the operation, were dead inside the house, their bodies later recovered by the Iraqi police.
There were angry and emotional scenes outside. The unanimous opinion was that an innocent family had been slaughtered.
People spoke of 100 soldiers surrounding the two houses, of tanks firing shells, of rockets from helicopters.
The "flash-bangs" thrown by the SAS to warn the family to get out were seen by the people we interviewed as the beginnings of an unprovoked attack.
One of the neighbours said: "The coalition forces put two grenades inside the house.
"They are lying [if they say there was reason to attack] because this family didn't shoot at all. There was nothing - no fire - coming out of the house.
"But the coalition just threw grenades in and raided the place. They did this for nothing. There were 16 dead. There were women, a baby and a little kid.
"There were no terrorists. The coalition calls us Iraqis insurgents, terrorists, but it is the coalition who are the terrorists, not us."
The street's residents said a total of 16 civilians had been killed. The Iraqi police count was eight killed, seven injured. Photos taken by the Iraqi police at the scene show two small children among the bodies.
Another man arrived to make an angry speech. He said he was a neighbour and had also seen the whole thing.
"We could hear the women and children screaming but the coalition just kept shooting,"
People nodded. The raid had caused a lot of anger throughout the area.
For days afterwards, American troops out on patrol were the target of sniper fire. One soldier was shot through the arm.
His commander told me: "We were getting shot at after that because of that. Aggressiveness meets aggressiveness, as I tell my soldiers.
"The attack, where we went in and basically levelled two houses, caused a lot of people out there to be pretty mad at us. If we were in their shoes, we would do the same thing."
The officer, who is familiar with all the details of the SAS assault, went on: "With hindsight, yeah, we could have waited five or 10 minutes [and] maybe we could have got the women and children out.
"In hindsight, we could have done things differently, but you always would have. Hindsight is easy. They [the British special forces] did everything right. They did everything that they should have."
This officer added that the coalition forces acted with far more restraint than the Iraqi police and army: "I tell you the Iraqi military would have taken out that whole place. They would have killed everybody.'
I've edited this heavily as its so long.
There are two conflicting accounts of what happened, if you assume the truth is somewhere in the middle do you think in the long term this kind of operation is likely to be productive?
Early in March, the coalition says an insurgent bomb-making team moved from Baghdad to a heavily Sunni area outside the capital.
It seemed, said one US officer I spoke to, that the whole neighbourhood knew they were there.
This represented a huge failure for the coalition, since the neighbourhood included the city's Iraqi police chief, who lived opposite the house, the commander of the local Iraqi Swat team, who was just as close, and a judge.
Coalition forces, including the SAS, surrounded the house, a little before 0200 local time on 26 March.
An interpreter called over a tannoy for the men - there were two "targets" - to surrender, or at least to let the women and children come out. There was no reply from inside the house.
At one stage the coalition forces also threw "flash bangs" - percussion grenades - through the front portico to ensure there was no confusion about which house was being targeted.
After a short wait, the SAS men stormed in. They ran into a withering crossfire. Four troopers were injured. One was killed.
A US officer involved in the investigation the Americans carried out afterwards told me: "They ran into an ambush. I mean the guys got it from both sides.
"When they were pulling themselves out of the house, these guys were throwing grenades out of the window at them and shooting at them and ended up killing one and injuring four."
He went on: "There were only two bad guys, but we could not get them [our soldiers] out without some type of suppressing fire so then we had to use aircraft to shoot at the house.
"Then some other fire came from another house right next door so the aircraft [using] precision firing was able to isolate those two houses and just pummel them."
The aircraft fired 40mm cannon rounds at the two houses, finally dropping a bomb on one of them. It collapsed. The other house was set on fire.
The two insurgents in the house were buried but so were a number of women and children.
"After the airstrike, coalition forces continued to receive heavy enemy fire as armed terrorists ran from the target and attempted to hide in neighbouring homes, using the occupants as shields."
In fact, two men and a number of women ran out of the back of the house. It seems that a four-year-old baby girl was given by her mother to another woman. This woman, and the baby, were both shot as they ran.
The American officer told me that had happened because the men were using them as cover: "When they came out of the house, the men were in amongst the women, shielding themselves.
"You don't do that; we would never shield ourselves with women and kids. It is not acceptable but they'll do it, the insurgents will do it, especially the bad ones."
The senior US officer I spoke to wasn't sure if weapons were found next to the bodies of the two men who ran out of the house with the women and children - in other words, if they were insurgents or civilians.
"The Multi-national Force-Iraq sincerely regrets when civilians are wounded or killed and their families have our heartfelt condolences."
By the coalition's count, seven female civilians were killed, including three children. One was the baby.
Two men identified as bombmakers, the target of the operation, were dead inside the house, their bodies later recovered by the Iraqi police.
There were angry and emotional scenes outside. The unanimous opinion was that an innocent family had been slaughtered.
People spoke of 100 soldiers surrounding the two houses, of tanks firing shells, of rockets from helicopters.
The "flash-bangs" thrown by the SAS to warn the family to get out were seen by the people we interviewed as the beginnings of an unprovoked attack.
One of the neighbours said: "The coalition forces put two grenades inside the house.
"They are lying [if they say there was reason to attack] because this family didn't shoot at all. There was nothing - no fire - coming out of the house.
"But the coalition just threw grenades in and raided the place. They did this for nothing. There were 16 dead. There were women, a baby and a little kid.
"There were no terrorists. The coalition calls us Iraqis insurgents, terrorists, but it is the coalition who are the terrorists, not us."
The street's residents said a total of 16 civilians had been killed. The Iraqi police count was eight killed, seven injured. Photos taken by the Iraqi police at the scene show two small children among the bodies.
Another man arrived to make an angry speech. He said he was a neighbour and had also seen the whole thing.
"We could hear the women and children screaming but the coalition just kept shooting,"
People nodded. The raid had caused a lot of anger throughout the area.
For days afterwards, American troops out on patrol were the target of sniper fire. One soldier was shot through the arm.
His commander told me: "We were getting shot at after that because of that. Aggressiveness meets aggressiveness, as I tell my soldiers.
"The attack, where we went in and basically levelled two houses, caused a lot of people out there to be pretty mad at us. If we were in their shoes, we would do the same thing."
The officer, who is familiar with all the details of the SAS assault, went on: "With hindsight, yeah, we could have waited five or 10 minutes [and] maybe we could have got the women and children out.
"In hindsight, we could have done things differently, but you always would have. Hindsight is easy. They [the British special forces] did everything right. They did everything that they should have."
This officer added that the coalition forces acted with far more restraint than the Iraqi police and army: "I tell you the Iraqi military would have taken out that whole place. They would have killed everybody.'
I've edited this heavily as its so long.
There are two conflicting accounts of what happened, if you assume the truth is somewhere in the middle do you think in the long term this kind of operation is likely to be productive?
Fuck Israel