Female suicide bombers strike in Baghdad, Kirkuk, killing 57

Disappointing news for McCain who has been proudly boasting about success of 'surge' and criticizing Obama that he can not understand Iraq.

some14some, These terrorists are Obama lovers, don`t you get it?

McCain will destroy the evil doers, Obama will withdraw and run away.

McCain is the only option for US, and Fox News polls are showing pople are coming to that decision, despite liberal media bias.

No big deal folks, this is to be expected in this time of the year where pilgrimmages happen. Surge is still working full strength. No worries.

These are the same folks that will be homicide bombers in the US mainland if Obama is voted, (he wont).

McCain is the ultimate hero and good guy.His credentials or first class. Compare that with Obama, a guy who would run away and give strength to the bad guys.

This is a war of good against evil, we need the good of McCain to destroy the enemy.

In a war of good against evil, those who divide the world into good and evil would probably be evil.

The suicide bombings having nothing to do with Obama's strengths or weaknesses. However, they certainly do not vindicate McCain's assessment of Iraq, either.

Iraq suffers on a daily basis. 1 in 5 Iraqis have been displaced from their homes. Over half of the displaced remain in Iraq and if even a small fraction of a percentage of them are or become radicalized, these events will continue. Without a plan to deal with this there is no viable plan for Iraq.

THe reason for the troubles in Iraq, are that terrorists supported by Syria and Iran entered the country to attack our brave military.

The average Iraqi loves us being there to protect them and we have given them real freedom for the first time.

Obama would run away and let the evil ones regroup and destroy Iraq, they ould then take over Taliban style.

Is that what you really want to happen?

Female suicide/homicide bombers. When is Playboy going to do a photo spread on them. They could title it, "Underneath the Burka; Women of the Jihad." : )

SezWho,

It's been pointed out that the surge did nothing to address the issue of ethnic cleansing. Once Baghdad's mixed neighborhoods had been cleared of the residents who found themselves in the minority, Sunnis in most cases, there was nobody left to kill and quiet prevailed. Petreaus himself has acknowledged, "We don't have the manpower to enable those who were driven out to return to their homes." Those homes, of course, have been occupied by others who will not vacate without a fight.

Pilgrims are an easy target because a test of their religious conviction is the ability to show no fear in the face of potential violence. Iraq expects to welcome more pilgrims, from Iran of course since most of the sites important to Shia are in Iraq.

Female suicide/homicide bombers

They've been profiled. They are typically either women whose husbands have been killed or, in some cases, they are avenging a brother's death.

The Iraqi security forces have recruited very few women and therefore lack the staffers who could perform a competent "pat down" of a burka-clad (encased?) body.

Betzee does bring up an excellent point, le surge has been working in part due to the extreme bloodshed and ethnic cleansing in many formerly mixed neighborhoods. To say that this has created even worse animosities and bitterness for future generations compared to the past is an understatement of the century.

SezWho2 you wrote

In a war of good against evil, those who divide the world into good and evil would probably be evil.

Kudos to you, as our fellow American smithinJapan likes to say. You cut right to the relevant nexus there! But the thrust of your assertion is unfortunately dulled because you stop short of naming the manichaean mindset you so rightly characterize as evil, as in 'axis of evil'.

No one will come after you for denouncing the traditional Islamic division of this world into dar al Islam versus its enemies in dar al Harb.

Have courage!

Actually, Betzee also brings up a very valid point regarding the lack of female members of the Iraqi security forces. Social customs make it very difficult for male members of the security forces to check Iraqi women in the same way that they can check Iraqi men. This is a major weak point that needs to be addressed.

Well well, now how secure is Iraq again? I am glad to see that in Iraq, the land of safety and security, you can go to your favorite holy site without any problems.

Now what were we talking about again? Oh yes old man Mc and how secure Iraq is. LOL

BTW for all the folks that are saying that things will only get worse under Obama, who is the present President? LOL Oh yeah Mr. My Pet Goat is very important. LOL

JoeBigs, the war in Iraq is going well thank you, however the news networks you obviously watch never show this.

Fox News has regular reports of the good work we are doing in Iraq. You can see the Iraqi`s love our troops, and our troops care deeply about helping them.

Iraq is almost secure, these evil doers will be beaten shortly.

McCain will continue the success story of Iraq, the good guys will win!!!

i dont get people in here praising mccain. bush with a similar strategy for 8 long years of sending more and more of his own men and women to die couldnt stabilize iraq. why would any american want to continue? oh i know why, because we're not the ones going over there to die. 4000 americans, 4000 americans have died and whats the solution? send more to die because the surge will fix everything. i'm tired of the whole freedom isnt free crap, if its not free then let the locals die for their freedom. enough americans have died to make the USA what it is today. why should so many more have to suffer to make another country stand on its own two feet.

a war we cant afford to lose? is this even a war? who the hell are we fighting against?

japanyesterday, Please educate yourself more by watching the only fair and balanced news show.

You wil then learn why we are fighting, and what happens if we follow Obama`s path, which will destroy everything we have achieved.

Iraq is a new democracy millions of people who were living in terror are now free. We should be celebrating GW and his wonderfull achievements, not moaning.

Well well, now how secure is Iraq again?

How secure is Turkey? How secure is India?

Who is the common enemy?

Fox News - Oxymoron

How secure is Turkey? How secure is India? Who is the common enemy?

Hm I could swear that this topic was about Iraq. I must have read it all wrong.

Female suicide bombers strike in Baghdad, Kirkuk, killing 57 Nope I was correct in believing this topic was about Iraq. Now please do tell how secure Iraq really is.........Any one here had a brisk walk to the bazaar without a tank and 200 heavily armed security personnel with orders that if anyone moves wrong or if anyone opens a window open fire?

Hm next time you fair and unbalanced sort of fellows are in Iraq please do take a walk by yourselves in good old Baghdad. Then post here how much fun you had...

Any takers??? I didnt think so...LOL

The problem here is that when violence is down war supporters, in all their successive IDs, want to crow about how the "surge worked." When violence flares up, however, then it becomes about Islam. To prove the surge worked, you have to spell out conditions under which we can recognize it didn't work.

undecidedbout08,

You get no traction with me with that argument. I grew up in the Bible Belt reading tracts entitled "Can the Jew be Saved?" and so on. Islam is not the only religion that separates itself from others. That is more the bread and butter of religion than not.

japanyesterday, Please educate yourself more by watching the only fair and balanced news show.

You wil then learn why we are fighting, and what happens if we follow Obama`s path, which will destroy everything we have achieved.

Iraq is a new democracy millions of people who were living in terror are now free. We should be celebrating GW and his wonderfull achievements, not moaning.

im hoping youre being sarcastic because this is just too funny to even start a debate over.

japnyesterday; i am not being sarcastic, why should youn think so?

Everything i have written is true, and we should be celebrating.

Way to go McCain!!!

Iraq is going to have to hire those women to do these pat downs. When you have more and more women being suicide bombers, then you have to get the people to do the checks.

It is true that there may be more pilgrimages, but people want to feel safe anywhere you go. < :-)

japnyesterday; i am not being sarcastic, why should youn think so?

Everything i have written is true, and we should be celebrating.

Way to go McCain!!!

lol there you again. i just cant take you seriously.

The religion of peace in Iraq. Feel the love. There are Mandeans, Yazidis, Christians, and Jews (well, 11 of them by now) in Iraq. NONE of the these groups have ever carried out a suicide bombing, EVER. Of course, they don´t go to paradise for killing unbelievers...

Obama is right - Maliki can handle this on his own, without any foreign troops.

Obama is right - Maliki can handle this on his own, without any foreign troops.

no, we need more surge!! surge, surge, surge, because our military and monetary means cannot be exhausted.

The Surge must continue. The evil ones are closer to defeat every day.

What a great Legacy Bush will be leaving, great job!!!

Nouri al-Maliki 's comments about US withdrawal remind me of a few years back when the then President of South Korea ran on a platform of getting the US troops out of South Korea. However, interestingly, once elected president and upon voices in the US agreeing with said withdrawal, the newly elected president suddenly realized the importance of the US troops and reversed his position. I think the closer it would get to an actual premature withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, the more likely a reversal on Maliki's part would be as well.

That is not to say that an eventual withdrawal should not be worked on. It is just to say that a premature withdrawal could make things even worse.

Just curious, but are we at a "level of violence Iraqi's can live with" yet?

"Obama is right - Maliki can handle this on his own, without any foreign troops."

I know you're trying to be sarcastic, but let's face it - it doesn't matter how big your "stick" is, no gureilla war can be won waving it, however patrioticaly.

You broke it and you can't fix it. Go home and let the locals fight it out.

Arab/Muslim women are taking up arms against the infidels now. Will they now start letting them drive, get divorced, choose their husbands, and at least wear a different color of clothes?

Obama is right - Maliki can handle this on his own, without any foreign troops.

It's not Obama who said that, it's Maliki who made that claim in supporting Obama's plan. The McCain alternative, namely US troops remain on an open-ended basis, is politically unacceptable to the elected Iraqi leadership. They'd prefer to roll the dice on security. That's democracy...

"Will they now start letting them drive, get divorced, choose their husbands, and at least wear a different color of clothes?"

Nah.

Religions were created by man to better control man. Much of Islam simply hasn't moved on from the middle ages so women on't get to drive.

Heh, Saddam Hussein championed womens rights though.

Madverts,

That is one of the most ironic things about the present situation in Iraq. Saddam Hussein was a loose nut, but he was a secularist loose nut. If people are not careful, Iraq will go the way of Iran and more and more women there too will learn to "like" the burka whether they like it or not.

Kinnuku,

"Saddam Hussein was a loose nut, but he was a secularist loose nut."

Exactly. That, and fear of what would happen after they toppled him, in a region notorious for fundie nutters were some of my main resons for opposing the madness.

Now, the US are incapable of fixing what they broke and some of the remaining supporters retain their utter delusion that they will defeat an gureilla insurgency in fundie lands where they are most un-welcome.

You'd have thought Vietnam would have burnt their fingers enough to see this once coming.

Nouri al-Maliki 's comments about US withdrawal remind me of a few years back when the then President of South Korea ran on a platform of getting the US troops out of South Korea. However, interestingly, once elected president and upon voices in the US agreeing with said withdrawal, the newly elected president suddenly realized the importance of the US troops and reversed his position. I think the closer it would get to an actual premature withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, the more likely a reversal on Maliki's part would be as well.

Charles Krauthammer made a similiar observation: "Any Iraqi leader would prefer a more pliant American negotiator because all countries — we’ve seen this in Germany, Japan, and South Korea — want to maximize their own sovereign freedom of action while still retaining American protection."

Yet the function of US troops is fundamentally different in Iraq than those other countries where we are there to deter external threats not assist in maintaining internal order. What has dribbled out about this bilateral security agreement would give any sovereign government cause for concern. Specifically Washington, not Baghdad, will determine when Iraq has been attacked. US soldiers (and contractors) will not be subject to local law. Where else is this the arrangement?

Maliki had a cousin who was killed recently when residents of his home town were awoken by an unnannounced operation conducted by US forces against suspected Iranian insurgents. What would be the reaction of the national leadership if such a thing occurred in Germany, Japan or South Korea?

"Specifically Washington, not Baghdad, will determine when Iraq has been attacked. US soldiers (and contractors) will not be subject to local law. Where else is this the arrangement?"

That's why we all know they're charlatans an they're there for the oil and other associated booty.

The current US administration and the dwindling war supporters are prepared to fight for it right down to the very last Iraqi corpse.

As reported today:

Violence in Iraq had been at a four-year low, and U.S. and Iraqi security forces claim to have crippled al Qaida in Iraq and the Shiite militias fighting them.

But the attacks are a reminder of the deep fault lines — between Kurds and Arabs in the north, and Sunni and Shiite Arabs in the rest of the country — still dividing Iraq.

"People wrote the requiem for sectarian conflict and AQI too rapidly," said Dr. Vali Nasr, of the Council on Foreign Relations.

"In the absence of a final settlement, the country is always vulnerable to regression, and we still may end up back where we were."

He's not referring to the security agreement but legislative progress on the issues which divide Iraq, political representation and divvying up the oil revenues. Some credit the US threat of withdrawal as having provided the impetus for what reconciliation has occurred.

Betzee,

And there was me thinking all those concrete walls between communites were to block out the excurciating Iraqi summer sun....

"Specifically Washington, not Baghdad, will determine when Iraq has been attacked. US soldiers (and contractors) will not be subject to local law. Where else is this the arrangement?"

Normally, when these treaties are drawn up, the territory to be defended corresponds to that under actual government control. The US was not going to get involved in a war to defend the Philippines claim on the Sprately Islands, for example, over which at least five other governments claim sovereignty.

Here, by contrast, the agreement opens the door to the US dragging Iraq into a war with Iran. "We've decided Iran has attacked you." The Iraqis are therefore understandably leery of entering into such an agreement.

Betzee,

Good points about the comparison between internal and external threats. However, I am not sure Maliki is actually that confident that his government will be able to control the internal threats after a premature US withdrawal.

Specifically Washington, not Baghdad, will determine when Iraq has been attacked. US soldiers (and contractors) will not be subject to local law. Where else is this the arrangement?

That is a rather bizarre arrangement. My guess is that the US still doesn't have much confidence in the Maliki government. Of course, if that is true, the US should be doing more to shore it up and make it into a government they can have confidence in.

Maliki had a cousin who was killed recently when residents of his home town were awoken by an unnannounced operation conducted by US forces against suspected Iranian insurgents. What would be the reaction of the national leadership if such a thing occurred in Germany, Japan or South Korea?

Korea? They riot over beef. I wouldn't want to venture a guess as to the reaction if something like that were to happen in Korea.

A big problem is that the US sooner or later is going to have to start thinking in terms of Iraq being a sovereign nation again. At this time, I think it can be successfully argue that they don't. They have to work harder to get the country more stable and give more and more responsibility for daily security issues to the Iraqis themselves.

USNinJapan,

Female suicide/homicide bombers. When is Playboy going to do a photo spread on them. They could title it, "Underneath the Burka; Women of the Jihad." : )

Gives, "wow, she's a bombshell" a whole new meaning.

Taka

Kinniku,

Neither side has ever been able to accord the Iraqi people "agency." War detractors have seen them as victims of GWB's bungling. War supporters, by contrast, have viewed them as people hiding under the bed from Saddam's tyranny in need of liberation (which was followed by an open-ended occupation). Yet as Tom Friedman observed, "No one likes to be liberated or occupied by someone else. It is humiliating. France still hasn’t gotten over the fact that it had to be liberated by the Allies."

The bottom line is that “Americans are looking forward to the post-Iraq phase of U.S. politics, and Iraqis are now looking forward to the post-American phase of Iraqi politics,” said Michael Mandelbaum, a foreign policy expert at Johns Hopkins University. That is the reality of post-surge Iraq and post-subprime America, Friedman points out, and any leader in either country who ignores that reality does so at his or her peril.

"Heh, Saddam Hussein championed womens rights though."

Yeah, that's why Saddam executed accused prostitutes....

If the US pulls out now Iraq will turn into a failed country, like Somalia after we (and the UN) pulled out of there or Afganistan after the Russians pulled out. Both are / were training camps for terrorists and piracy off the Somali coast is rampant.

With the power struggle between the Kurds, Shia and Sunni continuing there is no way we can pull out. All out civil war would be the result and al Quaida would be free to set up shop with their Sunni friends. The Iranians would arm the Shia. The Kurds would get stomped by everybody, IMHO.

So yeah, we pushed humpty dumpty off the wall. Are we mature enough to put it back together again? Or are we going to let history repeat itself?

ca1ic0cat,

"Saddam saw himself as a social revolutionary and a modernizer, following the Nasser model. To the consternation of Islamic conservatives, his government gave women added freedoms and offered them high-level government and industry jobs. Saddam also created a Western-style legal system, making Iraq the only country in the Persian Gulf region not ruled according to traditional Islamic law (Sharia). Saddam abolished the Sharia law courts, except for personal injury claims."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saddam_Hussein

Now I know Fox "news" and Bush Co don't want you to know it, Saddam was no more evil than your average tin-pot dictator acting today with impunity. The secular bit was especially in his favour, since the so-called war on terror is supposed to be combatting Islamic terrorism, rather than garnering support for it as it actually has.

Moderator: Readers, please stay on topic. Saddam is not relevant to this discussion.

Darn that Surge....

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,567268,00.html

Relative Stability Brings Opportunities for Foreign Investors By Wolfgang Reuter and Bernhard Zand

Now that the security situation in Iraq has improved somewhat, the government there is pushing ahead with plans to rebuild the war-torn country. Plenty of money -- but a lack of expertise -- is paving the way for lucrative contracts, particularly for German firms.

Good thing they waited whils't American troops died to pave the ground for their contracts.

Now that the security situation in Iraq has improved somewhat, the government there is pushing ahead with plans to rebuild the war-torn country. Plenty of money -- but a lack of expertise -- is paving the way for lucrative contracts, particularly for German firms.

What makes terrorism attractive to its practitioners is that it only takes one bomb (or one suicide bomber) to cause everyone to question whether relative improvements are reversible. Presumably Western investment will not require expatriate staff to oversee it, limiting the type and amount of investment.

I remember seeing evidence Marriot Hotels was interested in entering the Iraq market after Saddam was overthrown. Tourism is up, Iranian visitors are coming in droves, but presumably they will not be staying at American chains any time soon.

What makes terrorism attractive to its practitioners is that it only takes one bomb (or one suicide bomber) to cause everyone to question whether relative improvements are reversible.

What a load of crap.........Practitioners of terrorism do it for one reason and reason only, to force the rest of us to cede to their demands. They use civilians as bloody pawns to further their cause. They don't win elections they don't have popular support they blow innocent people up and use the most coarse form of itimidation...Fear.

57 people dead in the market...The message from the practitioners of terrorism....We Kill and the Government of Iraq can't protect you, we won't kill if you give want we want.

After all the discussions I've had with you Betzee of late it seems you want the gains reversible......... I am really starting to believe that by this and your past posts slamming the gains that the surge has accomplished to move Iraq forward lately.

Practitioners of terrorism do it for one reason and reason only, to force the rest of us to cede to their demands.

One bomb is effective in disrupting normal life, my point. It instills fear in everyone given the randomness of its victims.

I am really starting to believe that by this and your past posts slamming the gains that the surge has accomplished to move Iraq forward lately.

After all the discussions I've had with you Betzee of late it seems you want the gains reversible.

I like SezWho's response when you accused him of the same thing: It seems to me that you read into statements ideas that are not there just so that you can be a drama queen about them. Do you have any support for your opinion that I and others who judge the surge to have had limited effectiveness would like to see the gains reversed?

I like SezWho's response when you accused him of the same thing: It seems to me that you read into statements ideas that are not there just so that you can be a drama queen about them. Do you have any support for your opinion that I and others who judge the surge to have had limited effectiveness would like to see the gains reversed

The floor is yours to state that if the 'limited gains' were reversed wouldn't help your position as to our current policy in Iraq.

It was Petreaus who so described it that way and for whom the solution lies in "more of the same." McCain has adopted that approach while Obama wants a 16-month withdrawal, something Maliki signed off on. Those who disagree should take it up with the Iraqi PM who, in contrast to anybody else, has the authority to speak for his people.

sailwind,

"the surge has accomplished to move Iraq forward lately."

The surge has soothe horrific levels of violence. The fact that the commanders in Iraq have finally found a method (albiet un-sustainable) to stop the slayings after causing them isn't something to cause heightened swagger.

I've asked yo ubefore and you never replied; as a military bloke, show me a gureilla war that was won through superior firepower...

been won.

I must buy a new laptop.

sailwind,

Speaking for myself, that's a no pass. It is true that if the 'limited gains' were reversed it would help my position as to our current policy in Iraq. This does not mean that I want them to be reversed.

My position is that the gains we have achieved are unreliable and that the surge is unsustainable. Petraeus confirms the unreliability and al-Maliki confirms, in a different way, the unsustainability. I do not require a reversal to support my position.

Well, sez, if the extreme right have their way we'd have a president McCain spending all the American taxpayrers dough keeping alive the dream of neo-con madmen for another "100 years" if need be...

..there's ample Iraqi's left alive to continue the experiment.

Women in that part of the world seem to have nothing to live for anyway... just keep the crazies away from the normal people.

TonyUS; The Iraqi government can make it better for women. Heck; where were the female suicide bombers while we were in control?

You gotta make women equal, i know i come from the land of equality and freedom.