Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Iraqi sacrifices himself to save the lives of U.S. troops

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    This is a dumb argument. If you want to ignore coverage of successful American/Iraqi operations, that's what you'll get. Here's a CNN article chiefly about the same matter for the following day. Let's see the "other developments":

    BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Clashes between Shiite militias left dozens of people dead and hundreds wounded in Karbala and Baghdad, prompting Shiite Muslim cleric Muqtada al-Sadr on Tuesday to call for calm, his spokesman said.

    Iraqi special forces patrol Karbala on Monday as thousands of Shiite pilgrims stream into the holy city.

    A curfew and weapons ban were in effect and Shiite pilgrims were evacuated from the southern Iraqi city of Karbala, where fighting has killed up to 50 people and wounded 247 others, the Iraqi Interior Ministry said.

    The Iraqi Army had taken control of the city by early Wednesday, Iraq's national security adviser said.

    "The situation is quiet now, but nervous and tense," Mowaffaq al-Rubaie said in a phone call from Karbala.

    Referring to the clashes in Karbala and Baghdad, he said, "They are potentially dangerous and can develop into something more serious."

    The violence erupted Monday night in Karbala, where hundreds of thousands of pilgrims were attending a Shiite religious festival. The fighting spread to Baghdad on Tuesday. Watch how the fighting began »

    Five people were killed in Baghdad, where al-Sadr's followers torched six offices belonging to the Supreme Islamic Council of Iraq, authorities said.

    Al-Sadr has called for calm, banned further fighting and urged members of the Mehdi Army militia to guard the Islamic Council offices and officials, according to Sheikh Ahmed al-Shibani, a senior al-Sadr aide in Najaf. Al-Sadr also called for an investigation into the clashes and for those behind the attacks to be punished, his spokesman said.

    The attacks were accompanied by fighting between the Badr Organization and the Mehdi Army. The Badr Organization, part of the Supreme Islamic Council of Iraq, has been incorporated into Iraqi security forces throughout the country. The Mehdi Army is the militia of al-Sadr.

    In Sadr City, where two of the political offices were burned, the Iraqi army called in reinforcements and air support while battling the Mehdi Army, an Interior Ministry official said.

    The Mehdi Army also set fire to the Dawa Party's office in Kadhimiya, an Interior Ministry official said. Prime Minister Nuri Al-Maliki is a member of the Dawa Party.

    Shiite pilgrims in Karbala were celebrating Sha'abaniya, the birthday of Imam al-Mehdi, the 12th Imam, whom Shiites revere. The celebrations were to peak Tuesday and Wednesday.

    The pilgrims in Karbala were evacuated from the city center, and a full curfew was imposed, said Brig. Gen. Abdul Kareem Khalaf, an Interior Ministry spokesman.

    There is also a ban on bicycles, motorbikes and pushcarts.

    A curfew also was in effect in nearby Najaf, a Shiite holy city to which many pilgrims fled after the Karbala fighting began, Najaf police said.

    The fighting was apparently spurred by a security measure that banned people from carrying weapons into Karbala, an Interior Ministry official said. The al-Sadr loyalists refused to give up their guns, leading to clashes between the Sadrist fighters and security forces protecting the shrines, an Interior Ministry official said.

    The Mehdi fighters have accused the security forces of being members of the Badr Organization.

    Pilgrims and members of the security forces are among the casualties. Local officials convened Tuesday to discuss how to defuse the situation.

    Tensions have been high between the armed wings of the major Shiite political movements. Targeted assassinations and battles between the Badr Organization and Mehdi Army have been prevalent in recent months.

    Other developments:

    • A deputy oil minister and four other kidnapped employees of the Iraqi Oil Ministry were freed Tuesday after two weeks in captivity, the oil ministry said. The deputy oil minister, Abdul Jabber al-Wagga, and the four general managers are in good health and have returned home, the ministry said.

    • Several hundred U.S. and Iraqi troops converged on Iraq's Diyala province, killing 33 insurgents and restoring a city's water service, the U.S. military said. The troops carried out an air assault Monday in the Gobia community to restore water in nearby Khalis. The military said "water is currently flowing unimpeded."


    • A suicide bomber detonated an explosive vest Monday in the courtyard of a mosque in Falluja, killing 12 people, including an imam known for speaking out against Iraqi militants, an Interior Ministry official said. Two of his sons also were killed in the blast, according to the official.

    • Coalition forces "killed eight terrorists and detained 11 suspected terrorists" during raids targeting al Qaeda in Iraq leaders, the military said Tuesday. The raids, spanning two provinces northeast of Tikrit, targeted a senior-level adviser with links to international terrorist Khalid al-Turki, the military said. Al-Turki was killed during a June 23 operation.

    • A "highly sought weapons facilitator" was arrested Tuesday in Baghdad, the military said. The individual is suspected of distributing bombs and smuggling weapons from Iran to Iraq, the military said.



    I repeat, a really, really dumb argument.
    "Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
    -Bokonon

    Comment


    • #77
      BTW, an update on the article I posted:
      Barely a week goes by in Iraq without a new example of why talking about national reconciliation is far easier than actually accomplishing it.

      Late on Sunday five Iraqi politicians, representing the country's Sunni, Shi'ite and Kurdish constituencies, announced a deal to allow some former members of Saddam Hussein's Ba'ath Party to return to government jobs, which has been a key demand of Iraq's Sunni Arabs. U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker called the announcement a "positive and encouraging message."

      But a day after signing the deal the country's Sunni vice president, Tariq al-Hashemi, announced that the Sunni bloc that walked out of the government August 1 still had no plans to return. "Our previous experience with the government has not been encouraging," he explained, "and we will not go back just because of promises, unless there are real and tangible reforms."

      Hashemi's skepticism highlights a fundamental problem of mistrust at the highest levels of government. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki came into office promising to break the power of Shi'ite militias, but as his fragile government teeters on the edge of collapse, those same militias are stronger than ever. The government's credibility is so low that none of its promises can be taken at face value.

      And Sunday's deal was more notable for who wasn't involved than who was. The agreement didn't include representatives from the bloc loyal to Shi'ite politician and militia chieftain Moqtada al-Sadr. A senior Western diplomat earlier this month praised Maliki for distancing himself from Sadr, widely viewed as the Shi'ite leader most responsible for sectarian violence, but American officials are well aware that Sadr and his followers cannot simply be marginalized.

      The Sadrists are a powerful presence in parliament and in several key government ministries. Their Mahdi Army militia has infiltrated the Iraqi Security Forces. As a practical matter, an agreement to reconcile with former Ba'athists is next to meaningless without Sadr's acquiescence. And the Sadrists weren't absent simply from Sunday's deal. At the moment they are not even part of the government; like their Sunni adversaries they are engaged in a boycott.

      Sunni political leaders have a similar problem. As the same Western diplomat put it, there is "the question of the connection between national politics and what's happening on the local level." With the U.S. military cutting deals with Sunni tribes and ex-insurgents to help battle al-Qaeda in Iraq, the influence of the Sunnis' national political leadership becomes more and more questionable. "The Sunni community is a bit up for grabs right now," the diplomat said.

      So once again, even if the politicians were acting in good faith, it's not at all clear that they speak for the armed men who can veto any high-level compromise. The agreement may give Ambassador Crocker some rare and much-needed good news to highlight when he delivers his surge status report to Congress next month. But, as a senior American military official said earlier this month, "it is going to require some sustained effort and inspired political leadership to overcome the hostility and hate and mistrust that's grown up around the political structure here in Iraq."

      By that standard true reconciliation is as far off as ever.


      The deal sounded too good to be true. Looks like simply PR intended to give Crocker something to tell Congress. Even Hashemi (who desperately needs something to show his constituents the merits of working with Da'wa/SIIC) doesn't seem to believe that this agreement is worth anything more than the paper it was written on.
      Last edited by Ramo; August 30, 2007, 11:45.
      "Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
      -Bokonon

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by Arrian
        Incidently, this:



        Is also inaccurate, like most of shrapnel's arguments.

        There are, I figure, three groups of "anti-war people" -

        1) anti-war from the start, want immediate withdrawl
        2) anti-war from the start, think we must stay, at least for now, to prevent civil war
        3) pro-war at the start, now want withdrawl

        (a 4th group, pro-war, want to stay, cannot possibly be encompassed by "anti-war people").

        I think the 1 folks are wrong, as I'm in group 2. Group 3 pisses me off.

        -Arrian
        I can't think of anyone who is pro-war except some sort of sociopath, at least not in the way you probably mean. If you are in category 2, then I consider you pro-war. You are not for war, but you see military action as something that is sometimes neccessary. That is my opinion. I have never been for this war, but I did see it as inevitable and eventually neccessary. I am totally against the way it was executed. I think the way we fought this war warrants an investigation and could be considered criminal neglect at the very least.
        EViiiiiiL!!! - Mermaid Man

        Comment


        • #79
          Pro or Anti-this-war, Shrapnel. There are few outright pacifists around, and even fewer people who are outright sociopaths (pro-war in general, as in "war is good" or somesuch).

          I'm anti-this-war but believe that immediate withdrawl is the greater of two evils. The lesser is to stay, at least a while, in the hope that a political compromise can be reached. That doesn't make me pro-war. It does, I suppose, make me "pro-occupation" or somesuch label.

          Whatever. You used "anti-war" in a way that sounded like you were painting with a very broad brush and then accused "anti-war people" of some nasty things. Which I think is a steaming pile. Hence my response.

          -Arrian
          grog want tank...Grog Want Tank... GROG WANT TANK!

          The trick isn't to break some eggs to make an omelette, it's convincing the eggs to break themselves in order to aspire to omelettehood.

          Comment


          • #80
            Whatever, so we say tomato different ways.

            As for painting with a wide brush, If I spent my time clarifying everything I say that would satisfy every single person's viewpoint, my posts would be longer then a Harry Potter book. People still twist or misunderstand your words anyway.
            EViiiiiiL!!! - Mermaid Man

            Comment


            • #81
              To be fair, Arrian, I do think that a timetable to withdraw would be better policy than the status quo (obviously because I hate every single Iraqi and think they should die).
              "Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
              -Bokonon

              Comment


              • #82
                Clearly.

                -Arrian
                grog want tank...Grog Want Tank... GROG WANT TANK!

                The trick isn't to break some eggs to make an omelette, it's convincing the eggs to break themselves in order to aspire to omelettehood.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by Patroklos


                  So the media should stop covering individual bombings then? Or each each American casualty?

                  There is no getting around it, the media reports some things and not others, and their individual merits as news has nothing to do with it.
                  We give a **** about our own casualties. We don't really give a **** about Iraq or Iraqis except to the extent it affects our interests.

                  Or do you honest-to-God believe that any of this invasion was undertaken out of a concern for the average Iraqi goatf***er? (*** = arm )
                  When all else fails, blame brown people. | Hire a teen, while they still know it all. | Trump-Palin 2016. "You're fired." "I quit."

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by Arrian
                    Incidently, this:



                    Is also inaccurate, like most of shrapnel's arguments.

                    There are, I figure, three groups of "anti-war people" -

                    1) anti-war from the start, want immediate withdrawl
                    2) anti-war from the start, think we must stay, at least for now, to prevent civil war
                    3) pro-war at the start, now want withdrawl

                    (a 4th group, pro-war, want to stay, cannot possibly be encompassed by "anti-war people").

                    I think the 1 folks are wrong, as I'm in group 2. Group 3 pisses me off.

                    -Arrian
                    Count me in a fourth group.

                    Anti-war from the start, want withdrawal, realize we can't withdraw immediately for strategic and operational reasons, frankly doesn't give a rat's ass if these people insist on killing each other, think we need to get serious about determining the conditions and requirements for a secure (i.e. for our own forces) withdrawal and let the Iraqis sort their own **** out.
                    When all else fails, blame brown people. | Hire a teen, while they still know it all. | Trump-Palin 2016. "You're fired." "I quit."

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      I'm in a fifth group.

                      Anti-war, knows there's gonna be another war anyway, so just wants to piss the neo-cons off anyway possible.
                      I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
                      - Justice Brett Kavanaugh

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
                        Or do you honest-to-God believe that any of this invasion was undertaken out of a concern for the average Iraqi goatf***er? (*** = arm )
                        Sure, why not? It's not like the war is serving our interests.
                        I make no bones about my moral support for [terrorist] organizations. - chegitz guevara
                        For those who aspire to live in a high cost, high tax, big government place, our nation and the world offers plenty of options. Vermont, Canada and Venezuela all offer you the opportunity to live in the socialist, big government paradise you long for. –Senator Rubio

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by DinoDoc
                          Sure, why not? It's not like the war is serving our interests.
                          It never did serve our interests. It served these interests...

                          Haliburton
                          CACI
                          Titan
                          Bechtel
                          Aegis Defense Services
                          Custer Battles
                          General Dynamics
                          Nour USA Ltd
                          Chevron
                          ExxonMobil
                          And others...
                          I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
                          - Justice Brett Kavanaugh

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Sure, whatever you say Slaughtermeyer.
                            I make no bones about my moral support for [terrorist] organizations. - chegitz guevara
                            For those who aspire to live in a high cost, high tax, big government place, our nation and the world offers plenty of options. Vermont, Canada and Venezuela all offer you the opportunity to live in the socialist, big government paradise you long for. –Senator Rubio

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Originally posted by DinoDoc
                              Sure, whatever you say Slaughtermeyer.
                              Care to dispute?
                              I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
                              - Justice Brett Kavanaugh

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


                                Count me in a fourth group.

                                Anti-war from the start, want withdrawal, realize we can't withdraw immediately for strategic and operational reasons, frankly doesn't give a rat's ass if these people insist on killing each other, think we need to get serious about determining the conditions and requirements for a secure (i.e. for our own forces) withdrawal and let the Iraqis sort their own **** out.
                                That's group 1, Michael.

                                -Arrian
                                grog want tank...Grog Want Tank... GROG WANT TANK!

                                The trick isn't to break some eggs to make an omelette, it's convincing the eggs to break themselves in order to aspire to omelettehood.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X