home

100+ Killed in Iraq

by TChris

Today in Iraq:

Terrorists loyal to al Qaeda claimed responsibility for a wave of deadly attacks across Iraq that left more than 100 people dead today, saying they were retaliating for a military offensive against insurgents in the northern city of Tal Afar.

< My Rant: Are The Heads Just Beginning to Roll? "Off with his head!" | Roberts' Lack of Judicial Ethics? >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Re: 100+ Killed in Iraq (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:47 PM EST
    Weekly killings are over a thousand, so 100+ in one day is just a typical, bloddy day in Iraq.

    Re: 100+ Killed in Iraq (none / 0) (#2)
    by desertswine on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:47 PM EST
    Donald Rumsfeld:
    I don't do quagmires.


    Re: 100+ Killed in Iraq (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:48 PM EST
    Would we be in a pissing match with Saddam over who has evoked more death and destruction on that Country? I do not absolve the insurgents of their heionous acts. But for the invasion these murderers would not been in Iraq. To those who say "Better over there than in America." DAMN YOU! You consider trading Iraqs lives for American lives justifies the invasion? Shame on you!

    Re: 100+ Killed in Iraq (none / 0) (#4)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:48 PM EST
    Evidently the resistance in Tal Afar escaped the US onslaught through secret tunnels, and the populace mostly farmers 200,000 who left the destroyed village are now refugees. It seems that the Kurds and Shiites and the US were trying to do some ethnic cleansing against the Sunni Turkmen. The Death toll in Baghdad is at 150. Juan Cole has nothing good to say about the US/ PNAC operation in Iraq:
    And the guerrillas' ability at this late date to mount such a shatteringly effective operation in the capital itself is why the pitiful and arrogant Project for a New American Century fantasy of just crushing the Sunni Arabs of Iraq is a K Street wet dream generated by intellectual adolescents, not a realistic policy. (And of course the same thing could be say of virtually everything the PNAC has ever said).
    link

    Re: 100+ Killed in Iraq (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:48 PM EST
    And what evidence is there that Zarkawi took responsibility? This serves two Bush admin. purposes: furthering civil war in Iraq, and providing distraction for the loaded loser who lost Louisiana. The underlying purpose of the Tal Afar pogrom is to spread the invasion to Syria, in line with USPNAC's stated plan: "(Iraq), Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, Iran, Sudan, Somalia" and "partition Saudi Arabia." Whether or not Cole thinks it's a reasonable idea. It's the insanity of greed.

    Re: 100+ Killed in Iraq (none / 0) (#6)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:49 PM EST
    Squaky writes:
    and the populace mostly farmers 200,000 who left the destroyed village are now refugees.
    200,000? That's quite a village. As for Juan Cole's piece... Business as usual. Ed B - There is no quid pro quid, but yes, part of the strategy of regime change in Iraq is to keep the terrorists busy elsewhere. If that bothers you, sorry about that. bonabo - Could you provide some proof that weekly deaths in Iraq are 1000+ ????

    Re: 100+ Killed in Iraq (none / 0) (#7)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:50 PM EST
    PPJ-you are such a good proofreader. Tal Afar was a City not a village, I stand corrected. Now it is a ghost town.

    Re: 100+ Killed in Iraq (none / 0) (#8)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:50 PM EST
    Squeaky - And you missed a chance... Ed - Make that "quid pro quo." BTW - Ghost towns happen in war.

    Re: 100+ Killed in Iraq (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:50 PM EST
    It is obvious that PPj is a slug and Chickenhawk who does not value any Human life except his own. A pathetic self important know it all. You, PPJ, on one hand claim we were there because of the evil Saddam and to liberate the Iraqis then , on the other, Cheerfully gloat over the sacrificial slaughter of those liberated innocent men.woman and children, for the sole purpose of saving your dispicable cowardly butt! It's clear to me you never served in combat guys like you were alway the first to fall victim of friendly fire!

    Re: 100+ Killed in Iraq (none / 0) (#10)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:50 PM EST
    ppj-undeclared and Illegal war especially the undeclared part where the soldiers are on a lower pay scale, while Haliburton is on a higher pay scale.

    Re: 100+ Killed in Iraq (none / 0) (#11)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:50 PM EST
    Ed B - Nope. I never claimed we went into Iraq to save Iraqi citizens from Saddam's killers. We went to elimnate Iraq as a source of WMD's. It was at that time one of the few ME countries with the infrastructire to build them, and to establish a base in the ME for further actions if necessary. But, if we have saved some lives that is a good thing, don't you agree?
    It's clear to me you never served in combat guys like you were alway the first to fall victim of friendly fire!
    Are you confessing? BTW - The only thing I have ever said is that I served a little over 10 years in Naval Aviation. So don't try and establish something that I have not said.

    Re: 100+ Killed in Iraq (none / 0) (#12)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:50 PM EST
    Squeak - Was ever so. You want the big bucks, don't join up. But the war is legal in any number of ways, as you surely know. If you don't, try Google.

    Re: 100+ Killed in Iraq (none / 0) (#13)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:50 PM EST
    ppj-Legal only because the majority of both houses are republican. As you said the victor gets to write the history, beforehand if possible.

    Re: 100+ Killed in Iraq (none / 0) (#14)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:50 PM EST
    Wrong. Try again.

    Re: 100+ Killed in Iraq (none / 0) (#15)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:50 PM EST
    as we know, Bush et al knew there were no WMDs link A war based on lies, knowing ahead of time that your reasons were lies makes this war illegal, if it wasn't anyway

    Re: 100+ Killed in Iraq (none / 0) (#16)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:50 PM EST
    Welcome back, soccerdad!

    Re: 100+ Killed in Iraq (none / 0) (#17)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:50 PM EST
    It was at that time one of the few ME countries with the infrastructire to build them
    Link?
    and to establish a base in the ME for further actions if necessary.
    Yeah. Let's invade Iran. We can always cut the domestic budget by a few more billion more to pay for it. That oughtta make us safer back here. PPJ...reporting live and direct from the deepest orifices of Bush/Cheney Bizarro World.

    Re: 100+ Killed in Iraq (none / 0) (#18)
    by john horse on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:51 PM EST
    The paradox of our occupation of Iraq is that the longer we remain in Iraq, the weaker we become. Despite over 1800 American lives lost, the insurgents are not getting weaker but have instead become more effective.

    Re: 100+ Killed in Iraq (none / 0) (#19)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:51 PM EST
    SD returns! But the message is the same! Ernie - Try reading the Kay report. And no, I'm not gonna link it because your request is just a strawman comment. Squeak - Give up?

    Re: 100+ Killed in Iraq (none / 0) (#20)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:51 PM EST
    SD returns! But the message is the same!
    Truth doesn't change. care to refute the article. Didn't think so. Your interpretation of the Kay report was shown to be nonsense months ago. But go ahead just keep repeating your standard nonsense.