|
|
|
Reply
| | From: Noserose (Original Message) | Sent: 12/2/2008 12:40 PM |
Scores Dead In String Of Iraq Blasts Double-Bombing In Baghdad Targeted Police Recruits; Car Bomb In Mosul Kills At Least 16 Multiple bombs that hit Iraqi security forces in Baghdad and Mosul have killed at least 33 people and wounded dozens more.
Four U.S. soldiers and an Iraqi general were among the wounded.
The bloodiest attack in the capital began when a suicide bomber detonated an explosives vest packed with ball-bearings in a line of recruits at the entrance to Baghdad's police academy. Minutes later, the U.S. military says a car parked 150 yards away exploded, apparently aimed at those responding to the first blast. At least 16 people were killed and nearly 50 wounded.
In Mosul, police say a suicide car bomber detonated his explosives as a joint U.S.-Iraqi convoy drove by in a crowded commercial area. At least 15 people were killed and 30 wounded in that attack, officials said. Bloodied police uniforms and a military boot left by victims were scattered with the crumpled metal hulk of the car bomb on the charred street in the aftermath of the bombing, according to Associated Press Television News footage.
The attacker apparently was a teenage boy whose head was taken to a local hospital, a police officer said. An AP photographer saw the head and confirmed it appeared to be a teenage boy.
Those killed included five policemen and 11 recruits, while the wounded included 11 policemen and 35 recruits, according to police and hospital officials In Mosul, a suicide car bomber detonated his explosives as a joint U.S.-Iraqi convoy drove by in a crowded commercial area, a police officer said. The officer also declined to be identified for the same reason.
At least 15 people - most civilians - were killed and 30 wounded in that attack, the officer said. An official at the morgue where the bodies were taken confirmed the death toll.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/12/01/iraq/main4639587.shtml?tag=topHome;topStories >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> {There has been a marked increase in these sorts of bombings as of late. Whether Bush's exit agreement with Iraq is followed or Obama's plan for a quicker departure is implemented these terrorists and insurgents will follow us right out the door. Once we are gone the true "war for Iraq" will begin. The first victim will be the Maliki government and any hope of democracy. War lords, Islamic fundamentalists, al-Qaeda, Iran, Kurds, Sunnies and Shiites and many other groups will fight it out for their chunks of the oil rich nation. The country will splinter and areas will be absorbed or be ruled by war lords and ethnic and religious groups. Little of what we now know as "Iraq" will survive our departure. This is the Bush legacy. Chaos. Nothing would change even if we stayed for another 5 years. We won the war in no time flat but had lost the peace even before the shooting had stopped. No plans, no intelligence, no idea what to do after we took Baghdad. We continue to reap the rewards of such ignorance and the sad story of this period in our history is already written on the battle scarred walls of Iraq. We just couldn't read the writings on the wall. We broke it and we own it......now we are going to throw it in the garbage. Meanwhile the neocons who are responsible for this disaster are mostly in hiding, trying to seem invisible while the suffering goes on. There will be much blood shed between now and when the last American soldier or Marine leaves but nothing like we will see after. The real bloodletting of Iraq is yet to begin.} |
|
First
Previous
2-15 of 15
Next
Last
|
Reply
| |
This is exactly why Sen McCain correctly pointed out that we may have to have a presence in Iraq for a very long time........nope..... you libs want out....the bloodshed that follows is all on you.....NOT on anything that was done prior to the departure of troops....... so get ready Libs......... we broke it....now you won't let us fix it.......And you will take responsibility for you actions....just as we Repuibs need to own up to what we did............. |
|
Reply
| |
How can you blame liberals for a deal struck between Iraq and the Bush administration? Iraq wants us out....not only liberals! |
|
Reply
| |
It doesn't matter if we pull out of Iraq one or ten years from now... the country's just waiting to self-implode and will do so whichever date we leave. We never should have invaded to begin with.. but most know that by now :( |
|
Reply
| |
That's easy Rose..............Bush is going to be out in a little over a month.....it is hussein and his crew that are going to be expiditing the removal of our troops....not Bush......So whatever happens after that fact will fall on the hussein administration, and no one but hussein and his crew can take the blame........ yeah Bush broke it.... McCain said it would take years to fix and to do it properly would take years of American involvment...........hussein and you idiots want the troops out.....you will bear the responsibility for what happens when thousands of Iraqis are killed in the violence that is sure to come..........I believe we need to stay until the Gov't can sustain itself......you do not.....so the blood is on you........... |
|
Reply
| |
Rb: If that's the basis of your logic you neocons would have drowned in innocent blood by now. |
|
Reply
| |
those are the facts Rose......What hussein and co. do when they are in power they and only they are responsible for..... If you and your ilk want the troops out that badly when clearly there is still much work that needs done.... than you and your ilk will bear the responsibility for what happens..........Bush has borne the ire of the left for getting us into this mess... and for the most part rightly so.....now when hussein screws up an already bad situation.... he will bear the ire of us that do not believe that leaving Iraq right now is the right thing to do........ |
|
Reply
| |
Pass the buck neocons! You're all the same. Thugs and bullies! |
|
Reply
| |
That isn't a "pass the buck" if he had one lick of sense, hussein would know that you can't simply pull out on a timetable like has been proposed, and I don't think that he will.... Libs are gonna be a little bit upset with good ole hussein come summertime.......... |
|
Reply
| |
I'm no fan of Obama, but the Iraq fiasco is all the Bush administration's. Bush and Co. lied us into Iraq in the first place. Bush and Co. took their collective eye off the ball in Afghanistan/Pakistan. The needless war on Iraq was the best recruiting tool Al Qaeda ever had, according nto our own intelligence agencies. Bush and Co. installed an Iraqi government that ratified a constitution that changed a secular government into a government that is constitutionaly required to hold Sharia law above all else. Bush and Co. have signed off on the agreement to withdraw all our troops by December 31st, 2011. No matter what happens in Iraq, it is on the Bush administration. They broke it and they did nothing really, to fix it before leaving power. They made a huge mess and left it for the next administration. Mission accomplished? Not freakin' hardly! I am opposed to the democratic agenda. That in no way obligates me to defend or support the disaterous policies of Bush and Co's neoconservative nightmare administration. Obama won the election. I doubt that that is because of any wonderful thing he has done or proposed. He won, IMO, because the American people have rejected the failed ideology of neoconservatism. All these die hard Bush supporters would do well to examine what he has really stood for. He is no conservative. The GOP needs to wash it's hands of neoconservatism and rediscover good conservative principles like non-intervention, smaller, less intrusive government, states' rights, fiscal conservatism, strict constructionist interpretation of the constitution, you know, all those good conservative values that they abandoned in exchange for the bad liberal ones that are part and parcel of the neocon ideology. |
|
Reply
| |
Don't blame the modern neocons on us AF. All the founding fathers of this version of neoconism are conservatives. |
|
Reply
| |
Rose, I never blamed the neoconservative ideology on anybody. Now that you mention it though, neoconservatism does have it's roots in liberalism. Ever hear of Leo Strauss? How about Irving Kristol? Neoconservatism has it's roots in liberalism. That is just a fact wether you want to believe it or not. Neoconservatives are all for big, intrusive government. Conservatives oppose them. Neoconservatives are all about big deficit spending. Conservatives are opposed to that. Neoconservatives are all about big centralized government. Conservatives are opposed to it. Neoconservatives are all for governement interventionism, foreign, domestic, economic and military. Conservatives are opposed to interventionism. Neoconservatives do not mind treating the constitution as an impediment to be overcome or simply an inconvenient nuisance to be ignored. Conservatives believe in a strict constructionist interpretation of the constitution. |
|
Reply
| |
I think there is plenty of hope for Iraq. The fact that there were so many people standing in a recruiting line outside a Baghdad police acedemy in the first place means there is plenty of hope. I wonder, do these murder bombings at police stations deter other potential recruits from joing, or motivate more to join? Anyway, at some point, hopefully soon, the Iraqis will have to pick up the weapons and fight Al Qaeda themselves, in mass, and that will put an end to the terrorists soon afterwards. Of course you have to dig like mad to find recruiting statistics, if they can be found at all. Most of the US and international press will not print anything that might make it look like things are coming together over there, at least not until Bush is out of office. Then I suspect we'll start seeing good news, and credit given to Obama - but at least we'll see good news, I hope. In fact I'm almost startled to hear anything about Iraq - we've heard nothing about Iraq since the Chosen One was - well - officially chosen - by the Democrats. It was as if Iraq no longer existed, and instead we should be worried about Sarah Palin's shopping sprees. For the record, I believe Bush is to blame for the current mess, and trying to blame anyone else is ridiculous. Once the initial invasion was successfully completed, the occupation was botched by Rumsfeld & Company, and it went downhill from there. However, arguing about that, or claiming Bush lied about the reasons to invade, are pointless in terms of solving the current problem. We made a mess, and we have to clean it up. And I suspect that Obama will back away from a quick withdrawl, or stated another way, I think a lot of mad libs are going to be mad at Obama for not pulling the troops out quickly. The very fact that he kept Gates on as SecDef tells me that much. |
|
Reply
| |
Right......and Bush and his neocons are liberals? Pleeeese!! That's like saying you "libertarians" are a bunch of pissed off conservatives. Actually....that's exactly what you are! |
|
Reply
| |
Rose, LMAO! You really don't look deep enough to discern any but the most glaring differences, do you? Look, I certainly do not blame liberal democrats for the GOP embracing neoconservatism and it's ugly combination of big, centralized government, big spending liberal ways, social conservatism and military hawkishness and a foreign policy based on belligerence. That is all on the GOP. Your description of libertarians as pissed off conservatives is not at all accurate either. It does have some merit when applied to folks like former Congressman Bob Barr, but he is but one pissed off republican that abandoned the GOP like a rat abandoning a sinking ship. It would also apply to LINO's like Neal Boortz, as well. These folks are just posers hiding under the "Big Tent" of libertarianism. Those of us that have been libertarians since the 70's are the real libertarians. We are neither liberal nor conservative. We are more likely to be "Classical Liberals" (Look it up.). We are socially liberal and small government fiscally conservative. We cannot be accurately described as liberal nor conservative. |
|
First
Previous
2-15 of 15
Next
Last
|
|
|