COVID-19 INFORMATION What you need to know about the coronavirus if you are living in Japan or planning a visit.
world

147 killed in Baghdad suicide car bombings

47 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2009 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

47 Comments
Login to comment

"The insurgency"

Among the slowest learners in the world. When are they ever going to learn that Iraq is never going to be ruled by the likes of them?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sarge - "When are they ever going to learn that Iraq is never going to be ruled by the likes of them?"

Probably about the same time U.S. GOP/conservatives realize they made a collossal mistake invading that country.

Both groups are incredibly slow learners.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Probably about the same time U.S. GOP/conservatives realize they made a colossal mistake invading that country"

Lessee... an Iraq no longer ruled by an awful dictator, but by a freely elected government that doesn't seek WMD or threaten its neighbors...

Yes, a colossal mistake indeed!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The I used to rule Iraq crowd,not happy with what they got,after Saddam rule.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sarge - "Lessee... an Iraq no longer ruled by an awful dictator, but by a freely elected government that doesn't seek WMD or threaten its neighbors...Yes, a colossal mistake indeed!"

Your country is a good $2 billion poorer thanks to this idiot invasion of a country.

Moderator: Readers, please stay on topic.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Maybe their liberators can go a bribe more terrorists with the money of the taxpayers.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sushi supports dictators.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Iraq is now becoming a devastated wasteland due to Obama`s cut and run policies. When will the lame duck realise these people only respect and understand visble strength from the liberators.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If I understand sushi sake3 correctly, Islamic extremists have been blowing up themselves and innocent Iraqis for six years, and will continue to do so, just to spite anyone who thought that Saddam Hussein had WMDs.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Lessee... an Iraq no longer ruled by an awful dictator, but by a freely elected government that doesn't seek WMD or threaten its neighbors...

I would LOL, but I won't. If one had a slight idea of what is going on in Iraq, one would know that those attacks are just symptoms. What Bush started in Iraq and in the Middle East hasn't even reach its climax yet. We will pay for this stupid war for a century, probably more.

Moderator: Readers, please keep your comments focused on the current situation in Iraq, and do not rehash old arguments about Saddam Hussein and whether or not he had WMDs.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Your country is a good $2 billion poorer thanks to this idiot invasion"

Oh, we're a good deal poorer than that, Sushi.

GenevaMan: "What Bush started in Iraq and in the Middle East hasn't even reach(ed) its climax yet. We will pay for this stupid war for a century"

LOL! Well, I certainly hope that what Bush started ( freedom ) in Iraq and in the ME hasn't reached its climax! They've sure got a ways to go!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

147 dead, 721 wounded-- These stark figures don't begin express the pain, the loss, the suffering and the shattering of lives caused by these insane and cowardly attacks. The people affected are not statistics. They are individuals.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This isn't going to stop, and there's next to no way the U.S. military will be able to stop these attacks without implementing a draconian lockdown of the entire country.

Not going to happen.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"The bombs targeted two government buildings and called into question Iraq’s ability to protect its people as U.S. forces withdraw."

SushiSake3-"This isn't going to stop, and there's next to no way the U.S. military will be able to stop these attacks without implementing a draconian lockdown of the entire country."

PROBLEM (The bombs targeted two government buildings) REACTION (and called into question Iraq’s ability to protect its people as U.S. forces withdraw) SOLUTION (implement a draconian lockdown of the entire country.)

The CIA is happy you agree, SushiSake3. Their plan worked.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Pandora's box has been flung open and there's no solution in sight. Every time one of those bombs goes off, the Busheviks and their loyal supporters should be sent there to clean up the carnage with body bags and shovels.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This doesn't sound good. This really is a Pandora's box, without a lid. With there being no credible means by which to prevent such acts (whether it be a strong-man like Saddam, or a US military presence), I don't think there is much hope for future stability in Iraq. Indeed, the current administration in Baghdad is made up of people who are best noted for their scarcity during the Hussein years (many of them lived in exile, only choosing to return to the country due to the protection and stability offered by the US presence). As such, leadership and vision are two very rare commodities at the current time, while the illness that is corruption is growing unabated.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

$2 billion? Try $2 trillion. The amount spent in Iraq could have easily been spent on healthcare for everyone, or solved all the world's clean water ills.

Bush, Cheney and his ilk deserves to be tried for Class-A war crimes.

These suicide bombs are going to be going off for as long as America stays there.

Pandora's box has been flung open and there's no solution in sight. Every time one of those bombs goes off, the Busheviks and their loyal supporters should be sent there to clean up the carnage with body bags and shovels.

Well said.

Moderator: Readers, please keep your comments focused on the story and what is currently happening in Iraq, not what life was like under Saddam.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It is very sad..no need for words. If US presence is the problem why can't they just wait for them to leave quietly? Because if they continue to bomb civilians like this how can they expect that Iraqi government WON'T open its mouth and request US to delay its military withdraw? Or they don't really want US withdraw to concentrate on Afghanistan; they just want to force US to continue fighting war in 2 fronts , so it will further go into bankcruptcy?...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Another banner day for the religion of pieces!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

tclh - "Or they don't really want US withdraw to concentrate on Afghanistan; they just want to force US to continue fighting war in 2 fronts , so it will further go into bankcruptcy?..."

bingo.

This is the factor the war supporters don't take into account.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I would think that the family members of the 147 killed and 720 wounded would track down the scumbuckets responsible for these horrific and senseless attacks themselves instead of leaving it to the government.

"This is the factor the war supporters don't take into account"

Sushi, we're going to be out of Iraq in two more years no matter what happens there. Obama has promised it. ( actually he promised that would happen by July 2010 but he had to backtrack on that one )

0 ( +0 / -0 )

These suicide bombs are going to be going off for as long as America stays there.

They seem to be going off pretty frequently in the Middle East where America doesn't have a presence at all.....Pakistan, India, Somalia, Algiers, India and on and on.

You honestly think they are going magically stop if America leaves? It's Jihad and the target is anyone who isn't down with that.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Whenever I read or hear about stories like this one, I wonder whether they are truly suicide attacks. They could always send in someone for a delivery and then remotely blow the whole thing up when the guy reaches destination.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Hahahahah Americans and their ''democracy''. yes, Iraq is such a better place now.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

tanglewood: If I understand sushi sake3 correctly, Islamic extremists have been blowing up themselves and innocent Iraqis for six years, and will continue to do so, just to spite anyone who thought that Saddam Hussein had WMDs.

Classic.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

SushiSake3: This isn't going to stop, and there's next to no way the U.S. military will be able to stop these attacks without implementing a draconian lockdown of the entire country. Not going to happen.

Right. That's the situation in every country that's not run by ruthless dictators. The less freedom you have, the fewer opportunities you have to carry out terrorist attacks. If you ever want to personally live without fear of terrorism, then please move to the nearest country run by a ruthless dictator. You seem to think it's fine for others so I'm guessing you're OK with that for yourself.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

SuperLib: You're simply ignoring the facts in this case. Without said draconian lockdown, these attacks are clearly not going to stop. That has nothing to do with a fascist being in control, as the ruthless dictator you refer to was overthrown, remember? A 'democratic' government, and the US military are now in charge, so your comment is moot, really. Now, if there is a draconian lockdown, which Sushi says won't happen and we all know that he's correct, there would indeed be less chances for people to blow themselves/cars up and kill heaps of innocents and/or troops, police, etc. Clearly no one wants that kind of lockdown, and clearly things are NOT getting better.

sarge: "Sushi, we're going to be out of Iraq in two more years no matter what happens there. Obama has promised it.”

Since clearly nothing has changed since the illegal invasion and all major combat has ceased ("Mission accomplished!!"), it's better you get out sooner rather than later. McCain's proposed 100 years of colonization would only mean that many more American/Iraqi bodies. Staying in Iraq longer would have no benefit.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Superlib: "'tanglewood: If I understand sushi sake3 correctly, Islamic extremists have been blowing up themselves and innocent Iraqis for six years, and will continue to do so, just to spite anyone who thought that Saddam Hussein had WMDs.' Classic"

Yes, classic misdirection... a trait that tanglewood is clearly obsessed with and very poor at.

Sushi is talking about how nothing is improving; tanglewood is the one who came up with the 'anyone who thought that Saddam Hussein had WMDs'. More misdirected anger, bitterness, and guilt. Sushi mentioned nothing of the sort.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

smith...Nothing Improving?

You'd better tell to this guy that also.

Obama said the attacks were an attempt to stop progress in Iraq, but he said they were no match "for the courage and resilience of the Iraqi people and their determination to build strong institutions."

"The United States will stand with Iraq's people and government as a close friend and partner as Iraqis prepare for elections early next year, continue to take responsibility for their future, and build greater peace and opportunity," the president said in a statement. "Together, we will continue to work for lasting security, dignity and justice."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Also Smith, President Obama doesn't seem real keen on a putting another jackbooted dictator in charge of Iraq to stop the murderious bastards that would turn the place back into the dark ages either if they could.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Why don't they just go and kill lots of people at random? I'm sure that would help immensely...

Oh, wait, they are already doing it. Highly intelligent! Nearly as intelligent as a dog.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sailwind: Obama doesn't really believe things are improving with this attack, my friend, he's simply rehashing the same old lines, so what's your point? You attack Obama for this and that, but if Obama looked at the stark reality of the situation and pointed out that things really AREN'T improving, you'd criticize him for that, too. What else is the guy going to say that won't lose him the support of both Iraqis and people at home? Put me on the record as saying he's wrong on this -- I don't care. Should I put you on the record for saying he's right? Can you bear that?

"Also Smith, President Obama doesn't seem real keen on a putting another jackbooted dictator in charge of Iraq to stop the murderious bastards that would turn the place back into the dark ages either if they could."

Doesn't matter if he's keen on it or not. History has shown over and over again that overthrowing regimes (particular the US/CIA) leads to dictators, often worse, taking control. I don't WANT it to happen in Iraq, and I would love it if I am proven wrong, but I just don't think things are getting better in either Iraq or Afghanistan, and I will not at all be surprised when another dictator wrests control of either or both, and yet another few dark pages are written in US history.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

nandakandamanda: "Nearly as intelligent as a dog."

Pretty poor comparison. A dog, if it were die for someone or something, would die for its master or in helping someone else. The scum in question die for ideology. While this means that the latter are technically more intelligent, it certainly could be argued they are far less 'humane' than dogs.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Should I put you on the record for saying he's right? Can you bear that?

Of course I can put me record all day long. He is right on this and if he really doesn't believe things aren't improving he would have pulled out along time ago. You can't seriously be implying that he is letting his American troops die in a cause that he already knows is lost because he is only concerned about his political position???

Enlighten please?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What has enlightened me is how along near partisan lines, the GOP is pushing for Obama to increase troop numbers in Afghanistan - ie: to send more young men and women to their deaths for a pointless cause that will only further bankrupt America and create more enemies.

The meaning of "cut your losses" seems to be completely lost on the GOP.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Iraqis are blaming Syria and Iran.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

SmithinJapan: You're simply ignoring the facts in this case. Without said draconian lockdown, these attacks are clearly not going to stop.

No, that's exactly my point. You can't have it both ways. You either take the dictator or you take the threat of terrorism. Looking at a car bomb and saying liberation was a mistake is shortsighted since it ignores the pain and suffering of the alternative. These attacks aren't going to stop in Iraq. Or Afghanistan. Or Turkey, Egypt, Spain, England, Saudi Arabia, Canada, the US, etc. Do you want to be free from terrorism? Then move to North Korea.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

SushiSake3: What has enlightened me is how along near partisan lines, the GOP is pushing for Obama to increase troop numbers in Afghanistan - ie: to send more young men and women to their deaths for a pointless cause that will only further bankrupt America and create more enemies. The meaning of "cut your losses" seems to be completely lost on the GOP.

This is Sushi's position:

Obama has increased troop numbers in Afghanistan - ie: sent more young men and women to their deaths for a pointless cause that will only further bankrupt America and create more enemies.

Or.....am I wrong, Sushi? ;)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

SuperLib: "You either take the dictator or you take the threat of terrorism."

You treat this like it were a simple, two-way street, when of course it's a wee bit (sarcasm) more complicated. And there's no 'threat of terrorism' here, in case you didn't read the article. There is out and out terrorism, from all sides.

"Looking at a car bomb and saying liberation was a mistake is shortsighted since it ignores the pain and suffering of the alternative."

I'm sorry... did you say A carbomb, as though you believe this to be a small, one-time burp in the road to peace? Dude, in this incident alone there were two bombs that went off, and a few days ago, and a few days before that, and a few days before that. So you now have TERRORISM (not the threat, the fact).

"Do you want to be free from terrorism? Then move to North Korea."

Possibly the dumbest, most simplistic statement of the day, particularly when your ilk call NKorea a terrorist threat every day. No, my friend, you want to be free of terrorism, you don't reduce yourself to roughly the same tactics to 'bring it on'. Violence begets violence. Not all of this was brought on because the US illegally invaded a sovereign nation and overthrew a dictator; it was brought on and is GAINING SUPPORT because they simply illegally invaded a sovereign nation and brought war, with the moronic president at the time actually saying that war will bring about peace! Think a little bit, SuperLib. There are alternatives to making war, although in the cases of Iraq and Afghanistan it's far too late.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sailwind: "He is right on this and if he really doesn't believe things aren't improving he would have pulled out along time ago."

He announced he would withdraw the troops ASAP, my friend, for which he was indeed forced to backtrack once president for, wait for it, POLITICS!

"You can't seriously be implying that he is letting his American troops die in a cause that he already knows is lost because he is only concerned about his political position???"

He's not 'letting troops die', he's trying to get them out of there so they might not. Thanks to the GOP and their fear-mongering, and tag-teaming with the generals on the ground (and you STILL have Dead-eye dick and McCain saying more troops are needed elsewhere and what not!!), he's had to backtrack, as I said. I'd bet he's more concerned about the lives of American service-men and women, but the GOP and Republicans clearly are not, and want to keep them there, dying for no reason, even longer. Unfortunately, that affects things on Capital Hill. I don't like it any more than you do, and would love for them to be out tomorrow, unlike you... who it seems would rather have them there longer, with higher death tolls.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

They could always send in someone for a delivery and then remotely blow the whole thing up when the guy reaches destination.

Yeah, or it could have been aliens, or the cookie monster, or a really funny practical joke gone bad. It is interesting that you seem to lack the ability to see anything as it really is. Suicide bombings are not exactly unique. Welcome to reality.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Smith

He's not 'letting troops die', he's trying to get them out of there so they might not.

He sucks at that.

Oct. 3, 2009: Eight U.S. soldiers are killed when their outpost in Kamdesh, Nuristan, is attacked by as many as 300 militants.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sorry smith but it seems for every one sentence I write you respond with 3-5 rambling sentences that either make no sense from the start or end up in a completely different area than where they began. Just throw a few more catchphrases at me and we'll call it a day.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

At least 721 people were wounded, including three American contractors.

What are the ordinary Iraqui people's thoughts on all this? After all we're supposed to learn from our mistakes ... And we have to ask the question 'Where's the money?' Who is profiteering from American involvement in Iraq etc? To be fair I'd say Obama's hands are pretty much tied in all this. Not a lot he can really do if he doesn't want to pay the price that JFK payed.

On the streets of Baghdad, many Iraqis were angry at what they described as a lapse in security and wary about what will happen when U.S. forces leave.

It's going to be hell on earth with another possible Cambodia on our hands. But never mind, Saddam is dead and long live 'Democracy'.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

To be fair I'd say Obama's hands are pretty much tied in all this. Not a lot he can really do if he doesn't want to pay the price that JFK payed.

Umm...Kennedy supported the Vietnam war. I realize you are attempting to hint at a conspiracy theory. However, it fails when compared with reality.

The question is would these people be better off if Saddam were still around.

Compared to the way things ended up now? Any intelligent person would have to say 'no'.

And for what? Democracy doesn't seem to be very strong in Vietnam these days.

Probably because the US did not win that war. Equally, the US has not completely won the war in Iraq either. That is why people are still getting killed.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What are the ordinary Iraqi people's thoughts on all this?

Jane Arraf, a correspondent for the Christian Science Monitor in Bagdad, has done a lot of on-the-scene interviews and, interestingly, here is what her reporting has revealed about who the people in Bagdad are blaming for the bombings:

http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/1025/p06s01-wome.html

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Someone explained the whole Iraqi situation as a Parabola,as the number of US troops and the amount of militias "bribed" into supporting the government stays steady;things work out.

When the number of US troops decrease and the locals can't find jobs doing security for the government then violence starts to increase again.

It is not about winning or losing;it is just the math.If the US wants "victory",it is going to have to occupy Iraq(with a lot of soldier) and spend money making sure every Iraqi with a gun has something going for him.

Best thing to do at this point is dissolve Iraq and let Kurdistan and the Sunnis go their separate ways.Only thing worthwhile that can be done.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites