You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Iraq
Bombs Kill 22 After Deadly Day in Iraq
2006-11-24
Two bombs killed 22 people in northern Iraq on Friday as the government tried to tamp down violence and head off civil war a day after Sunni-Arab insurgents killed 215 people in an attack on Baghdad's Sadr City slum that intensified Shiite anger at the United States. The blasts in Tal Afar, 260 miles northwest of Baghdad, involved explosives hidden in a parked car and in a suicide belt worn by a pedestrian that detonated simultaneously outside a car dealership at 11 a.m., said police Brig. Khalaf al-Jubouri. He said the casualties - 22 dead, 26 wounded - were expected to rise.

In Baghdad, followers of radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr threatened to boycott parliament and the Cabinet if Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki meets with President Bush in Jordan next week, a member of parliament said. Bush and al-Maliki were scheduled to meet Wednesday and Thursday in Amman. The al-Sadr bloc in parliament and government is the backbone of al-Maliki's political support, and its withdrawal, if only temporarily, would be a severe blow to the prime minister's already shaky hold on power.

Legislator Qusai Abdul-Wahab, an al-Sadr follower, said in a statement that U.S. forces were to blame for Thursday's bombings in Sadr City that killed 215 people and wounded 257 because they failed to provide security. The attack was the deadliest of the war so far. "We say occupation forces are fully responsible for these acts, and we call for the withdrawal of occupation forces or setting a timetable for their withdrawal," Abdul-Wahab said.
Posted by:Fred

#5  It seems like these guys need to "vent" for a while to prove their manhood to each other before they will settle down. It also seems to me that scores to settle that were on the fence before now need to be settled. Perhaps it would be best to let them at each other for a while. In the end it may cost less blood if there was an explosion of violence and the resulting catharsis than it would to try to contain it and get into a steady-state tit-for tat that has no clear beginning or end.

And maybe not.

I wouldn't want to be the guy responsible for managing this one!
Posted by: gorb   2006-11-24 15:27  

#4  "Al-Sadr also challenged sheik Harith al-Dhari, the Sunnis' most influential leader who heads the Association of Muslim Scholars, to issue a fatwa, or religious edict, that condemned Sunni attacks on Shiites. The Shiite cleric said al-Dhari should ban Sunnis from joining al-Qaida in Iraq and organize the reconstruction of the Shiite Golden Dome mosque in Samarra, north of Baghdad. "

This should happen.
Posted by: Penguin   2006-11-24 14:13  

#3  22 less LOL!
Posted by: Lancasters Over Dresden   2006-11-24 12:29  

#2  So, where's the upside?
22 less?
Posted by: gromgoru   2006-11-24 12:20  

#1  More of the same. But the Happy Faces crowd on Hannity Street USA insist it's all the MSM's fault for reporting the downside.

So, where's the upside?
Posted by: Lancasters Over Dresden   2006-11-24 12:05  

00:00