91 Dead in 2 Baghdad Blasts
Two women set off separate suicide bombs in two markets in Baghdad on Friday, killing at least 91 persons and wounding a similar number. Contrary to what this AP squib implies, the bombings suggest neither that "al-Qaeda" is running out of men nor that it is desperate. Women were used because they would be less likely to be closely searched, in a society where gender segregation and female honor and chastity are important values. The story that the women had Downs syndrome seems unlikely to be true; you wouldn't trust a sensitive terror plot to someone without their full faculties. Rather, the bombings show that the Sunni Arab guerrillas seeking to destabilize Iraq have not been defeated and are still capable of making a big strike right under the noses of the surge troops. And that is how guerrilla war is-- large conventional forces find it difficult to curb it.
McClatchy reports from the scene and observes, "Friday's death toll also seemed to cement a recent steady increase in the monthly toll of Baghdad bombing deaths. In September, 164 people died from bombings, according to McClatchy statistics. That number reached a low of 76 in November, but rose to 87 in December and 100 in January. With 65 deaths on the first day of the month, February seems likely to witness another increase."
Reuters adds other political violence on Friday:
' TIKRIT - A U.S. soldier was killed by indirect fire in Tikrit, 175 km (110 miles) north of Baghdad on Thursday, the U.S. military said without giving further details. Another soldier was wounded in the attack.
* KUT - Gunmen killed two policemen and wounded four civilians when they stormed a bus terminal and opened fire in Kut, 170 km (100 miles) southeast of Baghdad, police said.
SAMARRA - A sniper killed one Iraqi soldier while on patrol in central Samarra, 100 km (68 miles) north of Baghdad, an Iraqi army source said.
MOSUL - U.S. forces arrested seven gunmen during operations in Mosul, 390 km (240 miles) north of Baghdad, the U.S. military said.'
Labels: Iraq
posted by Juan Cole @ 2/02/2008 12:30:00 AM
|
Facebook
12 Comments:
Since the surge was such a success (if one counts the most violent and devastating year of the occupation a success), why not do ANOTHER surge? That would be the obvious logic to follow at this point, if the surge was so successful. It might be difficult to accomplish logistically, but if it would bring peace and stability to Iraq, it would surely be worth it.
The administration knows perfectly well that the surge was a disaster, not a success, or else it would fully realize the logic of such a policy, of increasing the surge. We seem to be passing out from the eye of the storm, horribly, a moment that could have been seized, by starting the removal of US soldiers and mercenaries and by making it abundantly clear that there will be no permanent or long term bases and no sticky fingers on Iraq's oil.
What did Bush do? He put off what little drawdown had been planned, and carved out a deal with the Iraqi puppet government ensuring US corporations sweet oil deals and ensuring long term US presence - what McCain called the 100 year occupation.
So now the storm seems to be building up fury again (of course it never really stopped). Just as ocean heat drives a hurricane, the storm in Iraq seems to be driven by resentment of the occupation. Go figure. I mean, if China occupied us to stop our various ongoing nuclear weapons programs, does anyone think we would be happy about it, and welcome them with candy and flowers and ask them to stay forever?
Why must our soldiers continue to stay where they don't want to be, where we don't want them to be, and where they are not wanted?
And to read today that Gates had the utter hubris, if that's the right word, to send a letter to Germany and others, chastising them for not sending more troops to Afganistan, a letter backed up by similar comments from Bush - when it was OUR CHOICE (that is, Bush's choice) to leave Afganistan unfinished while we went off adventuring in Iraq!!!!!!! Just incredible!!
Naturally, the Europeans are pissed at such effrontery - except for our new poodle-in-chief, Sarkozy.
I too found the govt. allegation that the bombers were retarded or something somewhat absurd, and there are apparently some eyewitnesses that contradict that notion. Not that that would prevent the media from reporting it with a straight face.
"The story that the women had Downs syndrome seems unlikely to be true;"
I don't belive that any of the story is true.... except for 91+ dead innocents. Mostly because the media kept upping the details of the crime.
It reeks of disinformation intended to cause 'horror that would prevent effective analysis'.
Did you know one of the bombers was blonde?
Abbie Hoffman, in his seminal book, Revolution for the Hell of It (1967, Dial), recounted seeing a newspaper story with the LARGE headline 'blonde stabbed in Central Park', and below it, a story about an earthquake (in Iran of all places)and how the paper had put it below the stabbing story in lower case.
"10,000 Iranian Killed In Earthquake"
He quipped: "I wonder what color hair they had?".
Disinformation by diverting attention...
In this case, a story that makes you say: "Look at what those ANIMALS do to each other"
The whole "al Qaeda in Iraq" story reeks of that tactic.
Depersonalize, dehumanize, destroy.
Followed by Oh, those poor poor Iraqis... Must defend them from that EVIL AQ!
It's just an excuse for Western presence in the region.
AQ STILL works in the interest of US hegemony. Don't doubt that for a second, no matter their stated goals, or so-called religious fundamentalism. Whether they know it or not is irrelevant.
Didn't Seymour Hersh state recently that the the US government is STILL associating with AQ? It NEVER STOPPED.
The CIA MAY not be 'running them' anymore, as they did in Afghanistan (along with the drug lords of the Northern Alliance) and Kosovo, but they know most of the players, personally.
...or someone who knows them. Personally.
Maybe the selfsame oil company interests who were willing to give those Iraqi MPs $5 million dollars each to vote for an oil law that would profit them billions if not trillions of dollars found another place to spend their money.
I'm calling it, and many other tragic incidents just like this, as I see it, false flag operations.
The US government and the oil companies are desperate.... have been desperate (the reason we deposed Saddam Hussein, their "Boy in Baghdad" , indicate desperation, don't you think?).
...and they, if it isn't obvious by now, will kill anyone who gets in their way. Destabilize any government and society which impedes them. Depose, neutralize, scandalize... pin down any government leader who prevents these 'vicious greedheads' from achieving their goal.
Leigh
.
seems I'd recently read about a surfeit of widows in Iraq.
Who needs mentally retarded women that have to be tricked and manipulated,
when you've got women whose lives have been turned to misery by the status quo occupation and collaboration ?
The surprise isn't that widows are fighting back against those who took their lives,
and meaning,
and husbands from them.
The surprise is that it isn't more widespread,
with a wider variety of weapons and techniques.
your Avid Student
Bush turns a country into a slaughterhouse and he calls it freedom.
"And that is how guerrilla war is-- large conventional forces find it difficult to curb it."
Isn't this why the Administration keeps trying to portray Iraq and Afghanistan as conventional wars in which we can prevail with military might? We aren't up against an enemy with tanks, bombers, heavy artillery, and ships. They have no industrial infrastructure we can bomb into oblivion. There are no entrenched fronts. It's not WW2; it's a guerilla war. They are "on the run" because that's what guerillas do. They don't have to take and hold territory. They only have to destabilise the territory that we control.
All that Iraq has proven to "radical Islam" is that a couple of thousand expendable jihadis can tie up a superpower for years in a hugely expensive quagmire. I'll bet they'll never try that tactic again now that they've learned they can't actually control the quagmire country...right?
Prof Juan Cole,
What do you mean exactly by "Sunni Arab guerillas"? Are you trying to say that AlQaeda in Iraq and the native Iraqi resistance follow the same tactics? I am quite sure that you know better than anyone else that the native Iraqi resistance broke up with AQ mainly for such attacks. Here are two statements by one these Iraqi resistance groups condemning the recent bombing in Baghdad and the Bombing in Mosul. (Sorry for not providing a translation):
http://jaami.info/makala-307.html
http://jaami.info/makala-306.html
I have to say, Prof. Cole, that I am most disappointed in you. You are trying to smear the name of people who are trying to defend their homeland just because you happened to be on the aggressor's side.
I find it difficult to believe the "handicapped people" where used here. Even if there was a wheelchaired person involved, how can anyone ever know if that was just a clever bomber using a wheelchair to carry his bomb? This is flagrant propaganda of the mess in Iraq, again like others have said to make us all believe they are animals.
All we an do is exactly the opposite: Show how PERSONAL it is to each one of us to have our soldiers killed in Iraq. Tell every single county and city that one of their own is now dead and buried. That eventually will end this.
I don't know what to believe anymore. It could be staged by intelligence operatives to fuel the violence and keep the myth of Al Qaeda in Iraq going and justify a continued presence.
By bringing women into the equation they set the stage to seed distrust of women and encourage security procedures that will anger the civilian population and get them fighting each other again. These are Divide and Rule tactics typical of occupation forces.
After a suicide bombing, if thats what it was, I would think there would not be much left of the body, and while sex identification may be possible, identifying the person as a mongloid seems a stretch.
Is this something they might be wanting to do for the purpose of justifying the elimination or detention of mentally disabled people?
The story as presented may be true. But we have been lied to so many times that when they say to look up you look down as well.
Man, you nailed it Buffalo. And we Americans are off to the polls to vote for McCain-Clinton-Obama. More of the same.
Gravel-Paul. Spit out the Kool Aid.
Although if you wouldn't trust a suicide plot to someone who doesn't have their full faculties how do you explain Husam Abdo ?
Juan - I'm impressed with the ability of some of your commenters to discern whether or not the female bombers were willing, duped, and/or suffering from a mental or psychiatric disability. That they are able to do so from thousands of miles away is even more impressive. Perhaps the Pentagon could use their help.
Post a Comment
<< Home