As Americans mourn the tragic shooting that left 12 dead in Colorado, consider that nearly ten times as many Iraqis died, in a country 1/10th the size, in a wave of attacks from presumably Sunni insurgents today.
In a coordinated display intended to show they remain a viable force, Iraqi insurgents launched at least 37 separate attacks throughout the country on Monday morning, setting off car bombs, storming a military base, attacking policemen in their homes and ambushing checkpoints, Iraqi authorities said.
At least 99 people were killed and more than 300 wounded in the single bloodiest day this year, according to local Iraqi officials in the many areas where attacks took place.
The attacks, coming in the early days of Ramadan, the monthlong Muslim religious rite, were predicted Sunday in an audio message attributed to the leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq, Abu Bakir Al Baghdadi, and posted on the group’s Web site. Mr. Baghdada vowed that a new offensive, which he called Breaking Down Walls, would begin soon.
The offensive was without precedent this year at least in sheer number of attacks, spread over so many locations in a third of Iraq’s 18 provinces, from north to south. It was sure to raise concerns about the government’s ability to contain the violence, six months after the last American troops left the country.
The US military basically left Iraq and never looked back. Because they never came close to stabilizing the country before the exit, it was inevitable that violence would continue. Iraq settled into a low level of political and ethnic violence during the final years of the occupation, but it always simmered under the surface. Days like this were fated to happen probably from the moment of the invasion, which badly underestimated the hornet’s nest of sectarian tensions such a disruption would stir up.
Iraq may not currently exist in a state of civil war, but it’s hardly representative of a healthy civil society. That’s going to take decades to fix, if it’s fixable at all. These spasms of violence represent the ripple effects of a war that should have never been waged.





32 Comments


Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Gun Control for Iraqi insurgents, anyone, or are we the ones who are expected to unilaterally disarm in the face of the same occupying regime?
Wait a minute! Who coulda known this when we went In there looking for those WMD? We can now do a repeat on Syria. Shit, they even told us they got them. Game on! The neo conservatives rule on foreign policy and the neo liberals rule the economy. What could go wrong?
Ok
This situation brought to you by an illegal invasion and occupation by USA,Inc. as a result of the taxpayer funded government program of exporting demockery at the end of a gun.
I always thought I have more in common with an Iraqi citizen than corporate scum. Now I know I do! Corporate fascists are not constrained by boundaries or law anymore. It is only a matter of time before the sleeping giant awakes.
Only difference is that the US Government wants democracy for Iraq but not for the US.
How could we have known that the three Iraqi factions that have been fighting and killing each other for hundreds, maybe thousands of years, would start up fighting and killing each other AGAIN after we showed them exactly how democracy works???? Helped ‘em wirte up a new constitution AND gfave them HBO and Cinemax.
Must be somethig in the water over there.
That’s consistent with our “Do as we say not as we do” practices.
Neo-con democracy imposed top down is an illusion. It is not a representative democracy. In reality it is called corporate fascism, motivated by
oilgreed as Iraqi and American are bothsodomizedsanduskitized! The innocents are then offered and sacrificed at a false monigod’s alter in return for leveragedbusiness modelsmonopolies in commerce.Hang on there Dave……..it’s just July.
I had September 21 in the office pool.
You?????????
WOW!!!!! That didn;t take very long to get into the lexicon.
(That;s the right word isn’t it, JJ?)
The divide and conquer strategy utilized in Iraq is also employed here in America. While their local religious factions engage in population control, they are ripped off blind by corporate’s extraction of wealth and oil. Here in America we waste over $1.5 billion out tailpipes transporting people, goods and services each and every day. Then after being brownshirted by politicians and media, we have the unmitigated stupidity to wonder where all the money went? Meanwhile another product of America’s
enlightenedsociety goes wacko and we don’t know why? It is called disconnect. The same type of disconnect which causes an American GI who has seen the “Heart of Darkness” in Iraq or Afghanistan, during or after service, to commit suicide.“The US military basically left Iraq and never looked back.”
You say that as if it were a bad thing.
Afghanistan next and the sooner the better.
“… as a result of the taxpayer funded government program of
exporting demockery…consuming military hardware so that it can be replenished”Fixed it.
I think we did what the Iraqi’s politely requested we do.
Excellent strategy for Afghanistan, I agree.
And I suspect that David Dayen preferred for America to stay in Iraq forever, much like McCain wanted America to stay in Afghanistan for the next 100 years.
Oh wait. We might actually be in Afghanistan for the next 100 years since unlike Iraq Bush never negotiated a withdrawal from that country.
You may be on to something. We certainly didn’t expend any serious effort to reestablish the infrastructure that we gleefully destroyed, so their water quality is probably as bad as their electric grid.
Paternalism personified. That’s an appropriate description of the policies of Amerika.
Wasn’t one of Paul Bremer’s priorities the establishment of an Iraqi stock market modeled on the NYSE casino?
The term “sandustkitized” is more appropriate to discussions involving NAMBLA HQ, aka the Vatican. The name of the god you refer to is Mammon.
Don’t we still have a military presence in Iraq or were they all mistakenly withdrawn? The number 25,000 seems to be stuck in my mind.
Stop trying to destroy a carefully crafted illusion/rationalization. Next you’ll be revealing that humanitarian intervention really means “lubricant for war”.
Don’t know the number but I think you are correct. I know I recently saw a graphic of the ring of US bases that surrounds Iran and I am msure they are not ghost towns.
And damn it. We mean well.
Don’t we?
Hang on, I got Coach on the line……
They’re just observers and Amway distributors.
Hey, who needs Amway products more than the Iraqis.
Actually, while the number of U.S. troops in Iraq has been drastically reduced, 4,000 troops remain. That still qualifies as an occupation–and, in my book, a war. The violence that continues to break out in that country is a direct result of what we did and are still doing. I find it maddening whenever some schmo on the Huffington Post message boards tells me that Barack Obama “ended the war in Iraq”, and that this is one of the reasons I should vote for him in November.
“The US military basically left Iraq and never looked back.”
where are they now?
how many soldiers, how much equipment is still in the region?
“The U.S. diplomatic mission in Iraq is the largest in the world; the State Department will employ 15,000 people, including 5,000 private security guards to protect buildings and personnel.”
bloomberg
This is insane.
Dday, it seems you’ve been caught up in the Grey Lady’s latest deception…
Policy Change: “Terrorists” Are Now “Insurgents”
This is the biggest Orwellian rewrite I have ever experienced.
For years the label “AlQaeda” and “terrorists” were practically used as synonyms. But, following the Obama administrations lead, the New York Times has now rewritten its stylebook and relabeled “AlQaeda” from “terrorists group” to a somewhat neutral “insurgency”. {…}
…So there are now “insurgents” in Iraq? Should we support them?
Further into the piece it becomes clear who these “insurgents” are:
Hmm – Al Qaeda now “predicts” such atrocities? Would not “announce” be a more factual word? Are we supposed to doubt that AlQaeda in Iraq committed these killings today after it only “predicted” them? Why?
On Twitter Yemen specialist Gregory Johnsen asked: Why is the NYT calling al-Qaeda in Iraq “Iraqi insurgents”
My short answer was: b/c AlQaeda in Syria are “rebels”
Thanks, David, for not ignoring this ongoing misery. Now that we’re on Obama’s watch, a lot of “progressive” bloggers would rather have a root canal with a jig saw than talk about the shit that’s still going on in Iraq, and Afghanistan.
W thinks the Iraqis should thank him.
word games……….