It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Baghdad Blasts Kill at Least 132 People

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 23 2006 @ 09:19 AM
link   
At least 132 people have been killed in a series of blasts in the Shia Sadr City area of the Iraqi capital, coming days after Gunmen raided a Iraq health ministry where About 30 gunmen are tried to take over the building, Iraqi TV reported sparking a heavy gun battle. And days after Saddam has been sentenced to death.
 



news.bbc.co.uk
At least 132 people have been killed in a series of blasts in the Shia Sadr City area of the Iraqi capital, police and medical sources say.
Details are still sketchy, but a further 200 people were reportedly wounded in three car bombs and at least one mortar blast.

In one attack a car exploded at a food market which is a regular target of mainly Sunni Muslim insurgents.

Elsewhere, gunmen attacked the health ministry, sparking battles with guards.

In Sadr City, a car exploded in the Jamila food market, where eyewitnesses told reporters burned bodies and human flesh littered the ground.



Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Over 132 people killed and 200 wounded, this must be the largest death toll in one day, and this coming days after Saddam has been condemned to death by a Shia led court. I wouldn't be surprised if they were not pro Saddam supporters.

[edit on 23-11-2006 by UM_Gazz]




posted on Nov, 23 2006 @ 10:09 AM
link   
Security, Peace, Democracy, and the Americanization of the middle east. Some have said it would never work, and it seems that time and the brutal violence is proving them right.




More than 140 killed in Baghdad's Sadr City

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- A savage string of bombing attacks erupted in Baghdad's Sadr City on Thursday, killing more than 140 people, according to Iraq's health minister.

Police told The Associated Press the death toll was expected to rise significantly.

The bombs and mortar shells struck the Shiite slum at 15-minute intervals beginning about 3 p.m., according to AP, with the first bombing hitting a vegetable market.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


I am wondering if the sectarian and other violence in Iraq is now at the point where it is completely beyond any control. The Iraqi people have suffered a worse fate than Saddam as a result of US led occupation and war?

[edit on 23-11-2006 by UM_Gazz]



posted on Nov, 23 2006 @ 10:14 AM
link   
Ah, and the true reason of this post rears it's ugly head out, nice spin BTW.



posted on Nov, 23 2006 @ 11:09 AM
link   
can one mans dictatorship kill as many as a secretarian war? It seems that its just not so in this case.



posted on Nov, 23 2006 @ 12:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by UM_Gazz
The Iraqi people have suffered a worse fate than Saddam as a result of US led occupation and war?

Noooo Man, that is just a Phase in the steps to Democracy, don't you know?

How can You say that the Iraqi people are worse off right now then under Saddam!



posted on Nov, 23 2006 @ 03:17 PM
link   
I believe that a lot of this could have been avoided if they had taken out Mookie at the beginning. But that's what we get for allowing the politicians to run a PC war.



posted on Nov, 24 2006 @ 07:04 PM
link   
Retaliation...




Shiites torch Sunni people, mosques, houses

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Enraged Shiites burned people to death, torched mosques and denounced Sunni leaders and the United States a day after a bloody assault on Sadr City, the Iraq capital's Shiite bastion.

That coordinated strike, which killed more than 200 and wounded more 250 Thursday, is considered the worst of the Iraq war, and Sunni militants are widely assumed to have carried it out.

Witnesses said Shiite gunmen on Friday attacked two mosques with rocket-propelled grenades and burned two other Sunni mosques in the largely Shiite area of Hurriya in northwestern Baghdad.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


The forecast in Iraq is for much more violence.

It seems that as Iraq spirals rapidly out of control. The once popular illusion of a peaceful democracy in Iraq, now seems farther away than it was prior to the US led war.

Worse than that, I believe there will come a point where the USA will bend under the constant pressure applied by both her own people, and the international community. Ultimately it could lead to the US military abandoning the conflict in Iraq.

What happened to the notion of leaving Iraq a better place than it was before we came?

Is that impossible now?

[edit on 24-11-2006 by UM_Gazz]



posted on Nov, 24 2006 @ 07:12 PM
link   
UM_Gazz it simply is impossible. We may have taken out a dictator, but we also revived a secretarian war. Which was worse? I think the war will be, because many many more will die. But americans will care little, even though we are well aware we caused this all to happen.



posted on Nov, 24 2006 @ 07:32 PM
link   
Well naturally there was no sectarian war under Saddam! I mean, he only had an organized army to suppress and put down an uprising..

Not to mention secret prisons to torture the public speakers, dissidents and family members of people suspected of being a dissident, whether or not they really where.

But, I forgot, people like you UM enjoy totalitarian regimes and the suppression of people through direct military force.


Personally, I am glad the Shiites can fight back now. And the Kurds are doing the best after the most supression.

[edit on 11/24/2006 by Rockpuck]



posted on Nov, 24 2006 @ 07:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
Well naturally there was no sectarian war under Saddam! I mean, he only had an organized army to suppress and put down an uprising..

Not to mention secret prisons to torture the public speakers, dissidents and family members of people suspected of being a dissident, whether or not they really where.

But, I forgot, people like you UM enjoy totalitarian regimes and the suppression of people through direct military force.


and if they were sick of it, they would have done something.

Apparently they valued the lives they had enough to not storm in and overthrow live or die. If it were as bad as we make it out to be, why didn't they just storm in. If it was so bad, obviously death would be better off then life under that regime. Why didn't they do anything?

They were the majority, yet did nothing.

Now we have a civil war on our hands, and people that don't want any trouble are getting it. People that said "well this regime is bad, but we are minding our own and we still have our family" are now dying without having to do anything. They may not have had freedom of speech under Saddam but apparently they were alright with that because now they may have the freedom of speech, but they don't have the freedom to live now. They can talk freely...and live in fear for their live and their families for what they said. Except now they aren't watching out for those guys in the military, they have to watch out for every single person.

Who knows who didn't like what you said and is going to kill you. And whos going to stop them from killing you? Nobody. The police force is a joke, the military is doing a piss poor job, and its lawlessness out there in Iraq now. Its not democracy, its anarchy in disguise.



posted on Nov, 24 2006 @ 07:47 PM
link   
No Grim, it has little to do with valuing life..

Do you honestly think that when we went to war with Iraq, Shiites values for life changed?

What is was, is that they had no chance at all. In fact they did rise up, and like I said they where ruthlessly put down by an organized army. Shiites did not have the strength, the money, the weapons or the political abilities the Sunnis did.

South Africa's majority was black. Who ran the country? Whites.

Should have gone into Iraq to help them? No, because it is my belief that if your not strong enough to take down the leadership they will not be strong enough to hold on to it when they have it given to them.

The next problem that really.. really hurt this war..

Politically correct wars.

Because cameras go where ever the battle is, battles will not be fought right. We should have decimated the country.. absolutely anihilated the enemy (suni) and armed a new army trained outside of the country. But, it is all PR. Why hasn't the that Cleric from Fallujah been killed? PR. The new Iraqi government will fail because we didn't have the balls to commit to a war. The reason for the war is regardless and irrelevant.



posted on Nov, 24 2006 @ 08:12 PM
link   
no they just didn't want to overthrow saddam enough to do it. If a majority wanted him gone, he would either be gone, or the country would have completely collapsed by now.

It would have collapsed economically because so many people would have died in the overthrow, and other countries probably would have invaded given the fact so many people are now dead.

Truth is, they knew that life was better under Saddam then being dead in a grave. They rather live then be "free" so they just went about their business.

Now, it doesn't matter if you mind your own, and do what they say, they will still kill you.



posted on Nov, 24 2006 @ 09:58 PM
link   
Well it seems that the Shiites are also divided between the clerical followers of Sadr that blames the US for what is going on in Iraq, and the Shiites government members that wants to keep US happy.

This is sure to keep turning ugly, because after all US liberated the Shiites from opression under the sunnis. Right?

Now they will take sides against the US involvement in Iraq.



posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 08:41 AM
link   



21 Shiites gunned down in front of families

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Sunni gunmen stormed two Shiite homes in Diyala province overnight and slaughtered 21 men in front of their families, Diyala authorities said Saturday.

The attacks north of Baghdad add to the series of sectarian reprisals that followed Thursday's assault on the Baghdad Shiite enclave of Sadr City, considered the single worst attack in Iraq since the war began.

At least 200 people were killed and 250 more injured in that attack, which Sunni militants are widely believed to have carried out.

In response, officials have imposed a strict curfew and shut down Baghdad's airport, forcing Iraqi President Jalal Talabani to postpone a trip to Iran on Saturday.

He was to meet with Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to discuss ways for Iran to help stabilize Iraq.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Welcome to the New Iraq, no one really wanted. But many warned of.

Can the United States of America do anything more to help the Iraqi people?

What should an occupying force do when surrounded by sectarian violence and 'civil war'?



[edit on 25-11-2006 by UM_Gazz]



posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 10:33 AM
link   
So the trip to Iran was stopped because the violence . . . and Officials shut down the airport .

Ok . . . which officials shut down the airport ? Iraqi government officials? or US security officials that are still in charge of security operations in Iraq.

I still feel that something is no quite right with the new wave of violence against Shiites and the talks of diplomatic meetings between Iran, Iraq and Syria.

Then Cheney seems to hurry up and make a visit to Saudi to look for help with Iraq violence, it seems that on the site Cheney is trying to get Saudi, Egypt and Kuwait to get involve also.

I don’t know about you people but, does this look like desperation or what



new topics

top topics



 
4

log in

join