how many people died in iraq today?

[thepeopleslawyer]

and why the fuck are we still there and when the fuck are our boys coming home?

[ChumpDumper]

66.

I don't know about the rest:

Gen. George Casey said Iraqi troops were on course to take over security control from U.S.-led coalition forces, a move that would bring the foreign forces a step closer to withdrawal from the country.

"I don't have a date, but I can see over the next 12 to 18 months, the Iraqi security forces progressing to a point where they can take on the security responsibilities for the country, with very little coalition support," he said.

That takeover would not mean U.S. troops leaving immediately. It is part of a U.S. military plan to hand over responsibilities, move into large bases and provide support while Iraqis take the lead. A U.S. drawdown would start after that occurred.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060830/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq

Someone tell Gtown the plan got out.

[mookie2001]

This war was a mistake.

[Ya Vez]

so the goal of the american military in iraq is to have 0% violence....

[boutons_]

"0% violence."

Pull that straw man out of your ass, did ya?

Only you say the goal is "0% violence", whatever the fuck that is.

Serious, intelligent people see that Iraqi civilians murdered at rate of 40K - 50K per year after 3+ years after padded-crotch claims Mission Accomplished is not "progress" towards a pullout.

Stay the course is a 3-word slogan that stretches dubya's vocabulary, it's not a strategy for fighting an insurgency.

[Clandestino]

how many people died in texas today?

[Nbadan]

We can't pullout now, les Iran annex Iraq, at least the Southern Part. Can you imagine an Iran now with that much oil to influence regional and global opinion?

What we need immediately is new leadership in this war and the war on terra. Everyone from Rummy down should be gone in the DOD.

[E20]

how many people died in texas today?
If you don't care about the Iraqi people, which you probably don't (99% Conservatives), then you shouldn't care about the Iraq war and you should have never supported in the 1st place, because that's why we are there, to protect the Iraqi people.

[boutons_]

"to protect the Iraqi people."

Colin Powell told the UN it was because of mobil weapons labs,
dubya said it was WMD,
dickhead said it was because Saddam did the WTC.
etc, etc, etc.

[AFE7FATMAN]

We can't pullout now, les Iran annex Iraq, at least the Southern Part. Can you imagine an Iran now with that much oil to influence regional and global opinion?

What we need immediately is new leadership in this war and the war on terra. Everyone from Rummy down should be gone in the DOD.

Excellent post. 100% agreement.
The big mistake was in supporting IRAQ against Iran in the first place.
We should have supported the UN and got them to stop the WAR between the
two.

I don't see how we are going to accomplish our goals in IRAQ, whatever they are today :angel


If you don't care about the Iraqi people, which you probably don't (99% Conservatives), then you shouldn't care about the Iraq war and you should have never supported in the 1st place, because that's why we are there, to protect the Iraqi people.
Protect the Iraq people, from Whom, themselves?
Invaders from Syria?
Invaders from Iran?
Muslem Fanatics?

Can IRAQ be divided up so that there is no civil war, and the Kurds
get their own country, without totally pissing off Turkey, India, Iran, etc
and can we get the OIL? I wouldn't want Iran to get that. Maybe the new countries could share the resources from the former IRAQ? and than I woke up.

[velik_m]

Why would India be pissed off if Kurds get their own state?

[101A]

...
...We should have supported the UN and got them to stop the WAR between the two...



I don't really have any problem with your post, but that line makes me laugh - I mean, the U.N. has always had SO much influence in matters like that. Hell, look at how Iran is coming in line with what the U.N. says about its nukes...

[DarkReign]

I don't really have any problem with your post, but that line makes me laugh - I mean, the U.N. has always had SO much influence in matters like that. Hell, look at how Iran is coming in line with what the U.N. says about its nukes...

...he does have a point. The UN is notoriously ineffectual (without US support).

[George Gervin's Afro]

It's very simple now Bush and the GOP who support the troops better are using those same troops as bait.. very noble for even chickenhawks.. with friends like the GOP why do our troops need an enemy?

[ChumpDumper]

how many people died in texas today?There's a civil war in Texas?

Roadside bombs?

Political assassinaitons?

[George Gervin's Afro]

There's a civil war in Texas?

Roadside bombs?

Political assassinaitons?


no we invaded Texas because they posed a threat to our freedoms..

[Ya Vez]

There's a civil war in iraq?

[ChumpDumper]

How many people would have to die before you would call it a civil war?

[Ya Vez]

I guess no one told the iraqi kurds there was a civil war going on...

[boutons_]

Even dubya uttered last week "civil war". I sure Rummy was tickled, goshdarnit.

40K - 50K annual rate of civlian deaths between Sunni and Shiitte is inargualbly a sectaran civil war, a war between civilians, compounded by militias, and Iraqi army/police forces infiltrated by militia.

[ChumpDumper]

I guess no one told you that kurds aren't the only group in Iraq.

When would you call it a civil war?

[boutons_]

Iraqi Kurds must participate before the civil war is accepted as such by the red-state dubya suckers?

A civil war between Shiite and Sunni sects is not sufficient to be a civil war?

http://spurstalk.com/forums/images/smilies/smilol.gif http://spurstalk.com/forums/images/smilies/smilol.gif

[Ya Vez]

A little something from the backhanded compliment file: In the Senate Appropriations Committee hearings that are taking place this morning, Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV), who was apparently channeling the Pentagon press corps, just said in his opening statement: "[i]n recent days, Iraq has only narrowly escaped descending into civil war, and top administration officials admit the threat of civil war is still real" and "Iraq continues to teeter on the brink of a civil war." Byrd wanted to know what the plan is to respond to a civil war, should one occur. He asked, "How can we avoid it?" The answer is, of course, by doing what we're doing, which is not what Byrd wanted to hear. And here's the crux of the issue: despite the Senator's best efforts to put the worst possible face on the situation, he couldn't declare that Iraq is in a civil war. As disappointing as that state of affairs apprears to be for Senator Byrd, given what Iraq has endured in the last few weeks, it is a victory for the Iraqis and for the US Armed Services.

[Ya Vez]

so civil wars are bad... I mean it took a civil war in this country to end slavery... didn't it..?

[ChumpDumper]

So you want a civil war in Iraq.

Civil war in Iraq is a good thing to you.

[Ya Vez]

" Byrd wanted to know what the plan is to respond to a civil war, should one occur. He asked, "How can we avoid it?" The answer is, of course, by doing what we're doing, which is not what Byrd wanted to hear. And here's the crux of the issue: despite the Senator's best efforts to put the worst possible face on the situation, he couldn't declare that Iraq is in a civil war. As disappointing as that state of affairs apprears to be for Senator Byrd, given what Iraq has endured in the last few weeks, it is a victory for the Iraqis and for the US Armed Services.

[Ya Vez]

so ending slavery wasn't a good thing..?

[ChumpDumper]

So civil war is a bad thing.

Make up your mind.

[Ya Vez]

well you make up your mind .. the civil war in the US ended slavery.. was it a bad thing.. No...

[ChumpDumper]

Ending slavery good.

Civil War bad.

The former has been done in other countries without the latter.

If you're so uncomfortable with the term civil war in Iraq, I'll call it a violent insurgency bordering on civil war.

Do we have one of those in Texas right now that's killing around 100 people a day?

[Ya Vez]

yes the civil war is so bad in the south....


BAGHDAD, Iraq - Iraqi forces will take over security of a southern province from coalition troops next month, and will have control of most of the country by the end of the year, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said Thursday.

Dhi Qar will be the second province to come under the full control of Iraqi troops. British troops handed over control of southern Muthana province in July.

"This year will witness the handing over of other provinces and we hope that by the end of the year, our security forces will take over most of the Iraqi provinces," al-Maliki said.

"This makes us optimistic and proud because we managed to fulfilled our promise. We were able ... to develop the abilities of our forces," he said. "This gives us the feeling that we are close to taking over the whole security file of the country, God's willing."

On Wednesday, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, Gen. George Casey, said Iraqi troops were on course to take over security control from U.S.-led coalition forces within the next 12-18 months "with very little coalition support."

The military has long maintained that any American troop drawdown would have to be preceded by Iraqi forces taking on more and more responsibility.

Casey said it was too early to tell whether Iraqi security forces could assume full control of security, allowing coalition forces to withdraw, within that timeframe, but said they were now 75 percent along the path of being able to operate independently of coalition forces.

Earlier this month, al-Maliki's spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh said Iraqi government forces would take over security responsibilities in September from Italian troops stationed in Nasiriyah, the capital of Dhi Qar province.

Italy has about 1,600 troops in the country, mostly in Nasiriyah, and that force is expected to be withdrawn by year's end.

Romania has a battalion of about 402 soldiers in Dhi Qar out of a total of 628 in the country. On Wednesday, the Romanian president said his country could withdraw some of its troops from Iraq as the Iraqi government takes over military control of the province in 45 to 60 days at the most.

[ChumpDumper]

So mission accomplished. No one died in Iraq.

[Ya Vez]

yes its time to cut and run.. so say the democrats....

[ChumpDumper]

Not me. Hopefully we can calm stuff down long enough to get out before the real civil war begins.

[RandomGuy]

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1179164&posted=1#post1179164

moved post to new thread for ease of discussion

[RandomGuy]

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1179164&posted=1#post1179164

moved post to new thread for ease of discussion

[RandomGuy]

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1179164&posted=1#post1179164

moved post to new thread for ease of discussion

[RandomGuy]

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1179164&posted=1#post1179164

moved post to new thread for ease of discussion

[boutons_]

August 31, 2006

Attacks on Shiite Area in Baghdad Kill at Least 43

By EDWARD WONG

BAGHDAD, Iraq, Aug. 31 — A series of explosions ripped through predominantly Shiite neighborhoods in eastern Baghdad on Thursday evening, killing at least 43 people and pushing the death toll for the day to 53, Iraqi police officials reported. Nearly 200 people were wounded, adding to a week of bloody attacks throughout the country.

Since Sunday, more than 300 Iraqis have been killed in bombings, murders and a deadly pipeline explosion that occurred when security forces were diverted from their normal duties to fight Shiite militiamen. The violence is generally believed to be the work of insurgents, militias and criminal gangs embroiled in sectarian strife between Shiite and Sunni Arabs.

( sectarian strife = euphemism for civil war )

The recent surge in bombings calls into question the long-term effectiveness of a joint American-Iraqi security offensive in Baghdad. The security measures are expected to contribute to a relatively low civilian death toll in August, but there are increasing questions about whether that can be sustained.

The attack in eastern Baghdad appeared to be a well-organized strike on areas controlled by the Mahdi Army, a powerful Shiite militia led by Moktada al-Sadr, the radical cleric who led two uprisings against the Americans and Iraqi government in 2004.

Iraqi officials expressed fears that Thursday’s onslaught could ignite a wave of revenge killings by Shiite militiamen in the coming days, continuing a familiar pattern of reprisals in the Sunni-Shiite conflict.

Police officials counted seven explosions from a combination of car bombs and rocket or mortar fire. They shook eastern Baghdad shortly after nightfall and were clearly aimed at civilian areas, including a crowded market. At least one explosion took place in Sadr City, a Shiite slum that is a Mahdi Army stronghold.

Earlier on Thursday, a car bomb exploded in a line of drivers waiting for gas at a station in eastern Baghdad, killing at least four people and wounding 11, including four police commando recruits, an Interior Ministry official said. At least six other Iraqis were killed in scattered attacks across the country, The Associated Press reported.

The American military said a soldier was killed by a roadside bomb north of Baghdad on Wednesday.

The recent attacks have also brought into question whether Iraqi forces can take control of security in the country’s most troubled areas anytime soon.

General George W. Casey Jr., the top American commander in Iraq, said Wednesday that Iraqi forces might be ready take responsibility for security in 12 to 18 months. On Thursday, the office of Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki said Iraqi forces would take over security in Dhi Qar Province in September. The province is in southern Iraq, dominated by Shiites and has a contingent of Romanian troops operating under the guidance of the Americans.

Things were somewhat brighter on the political front, where Iraqi politicians said that Shiite and Kurdish leaders had put to rest, for now, their differences with the speaker of Parliament, a firebrand Sunni Arab, allowing him to keep his post after weeks of pressuring him to step down.

The speaker, Mahmoud al-Mashhadani, reached an understanding with the Shiite and Kurdish leaders after meeting with several of them, the politicians said in interviews. “The whole issue has been settled,” said Hassan al-Shammari, a member of the main Shiite bloc in the Parliament. He declined to give specific details of how the agreement had been reached.

The position of speaker of Parliament is the third-highest-ranking job in the Iraqi government, and an ousting of Mr. Mashhadani would have been the biggest shake-up in Iraqi politics since the government was installed in late May.

A senior Kurdish legislator, Mahmoud Othman, said the Kurdish parties backed down from their call for Mr. Mashhadani to withdraw after the Shiites made peace with him. The Kurds had simply been supporting the Shiites, Mr. Othman said.

“The Kurds had nothing specific against him,” he added.

He said the Shiites had become incensed over Mr. Mashhadani’s criticism of a possible Shiite autonomous region in the south, an idea championed by the head of the Shiite bloc, Abdul Aziz al-Hakim. Sunni Arabs are generally opposed to carving Iraq up into autonomous regions because of the lack of oil in provinces where they are in the majority.

Mr. Mashhadani said in an interview on Aug. 14 that he might resign because of pressure from the Shiites and Kurds.

American officials have also expressed displeasure at the speaker, who earlier this summer called the American occupation “the work of butchers” and suggested that statues should be built for insurgents who kill American soldiers.

Ali Adeeb contributed reporting for this article.

[George Gervin's Afro]

yes its time to cut and run.. so say the democrats....


I'm sorry let's 'draw down' our troops.. if dems say it they are advocating cutting and running but if the GOP does it's 'drawing down'..