35 Children killed in latest Baghdad car bombings

Stravo · Post by **Stravo** » 2004-09-30 11:58am

Dozens of children die in Baghdad car bombings
Rumsfeld: Violence in Iraq 'getting worse'
Thursday, September 30, 2004 Posted: 11:18 AM EDT (1518 GMT)

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Suspected insurgents launched deadly car bomb attacks Thursday in Baghdad, killing at least 45 people -- most of them children -- and wounding scores more in operations aimed at Iraqi government targets.

A hospital official told The Associated Press 35 children were killed.

"We are obviously seeing a major onslaught by the terrorists on Baghdad and some other Iraqi cities," said interim Iraq Deputy Prime Minister Barham Saleh.

The attacks come as U.S. military officials note a record number of car bomb attacks for the month of September. In a radio interview, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld acknowledged the violence in Iraq is "getting worse" and said he expects it to increase in the country as elections approach.

Most of the casualties occurred in western Baghdad where 42 were killed and 137 injured, Yarmouk Hospital officials said.

Around 1 p.m. (5 a.m. ET), two car bombs detonated at the opening ceremony for a sewage plant, also in western Baghdad, according to U.S. military officials. The ceremony was being led by Iraqi officials.

About a half-mile away, another car bomb detonated at an Iraqi National Guard checkpoint, about two miles (3 km) west of Baghdad University, U.S. military officials said.

A suicide car bomber hit a compound used by the U.S. military and Iraqi police in Baghdad's Abu Ghraib neighborhood around 9:40 a.m. (1:40 a.m. ET), killing a Task Force Baghdad soldier and two Iraqi police officers, U.S. military and Iraqi police officials said.

Three other soldiers were wounded, the U.S. military said. The Ministry of Health said 60 more people were wounded.

"This despicable act killed not only a multinational forces soldier, but Iraqis who were merely going about their business of defending this country," said Lt. Col. James Hutton, a 1st Cavalry Division spokesman. "The terrorists offer nothing but destruction."

Police targets killed
An attack Thursday on the Tal Afar police chief's convoy killed four Iraqi civilians and wounded seven others -- five civilians and two police officers, according to a Task Force Olympia officer.

Initial reports received by Task Force Olympia that were passed on by the Iraqi police say that it was a car bomb.

A Mosul police officer also confirmed the incident to CNN. Tal Afar is west of the city of Mosul in northern Iraq.

In the northern city of Mosul, an Iraqi police official was killed, along with his driver, in a drive-by shooting Thursday morning, according to the security chief for Nineveh province.

Another police official was wounded in the attack which killed Maj. Ghassan Mohammed and his driver, according to Maj. Gen. Salim al-Haj Issa.

10 reported kidnapped
A group calling itself the Islamic Army in Iraq says it has captured 10 hostages, including two Indonesian women, Al-Jazeera has reported.

The Arabic-language news channel broadcast video Thursday reportedly showing three of the hostages. The network's anchor said the hostages worked for an electricity company called Jibel.

The hostages include six Iraqis and two Lebanese, Al-Jazeera said. The group did not say anything about its demands. (Full story)

Meanwhile, the British government said it was ready to listen to kidnappers holding hostage Ken Bigley in Iraq but was not prepared to negotiate with them or pay them a ransom. (Full story)

Elsewhere, two French journalists abducted last month reportedly were close to being freed.

An agreement has been reached with a militant group for the release within 48 hours of the French journalists, negotiator Philippe Berthe told the Al Arabiya network. Berthe said the negotiations did not involve payment of a ransom.

Airstrike in Falluja
U.S. forces struck a suspected safe house in Falluja used by terrorists linked to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, according to the Combined Press Information Center.

Three people died and eight others were wounded in the airstrike, an Iraqi hospital official said.

Four children were among the wounded, said the official from Falluja General Hospital.

CPIC did not report any casualties and noted multinational forces "take great care to minimize collateral damage and civilian casualties."

CPIC reported "significant" secondary explosions after the blast, a result of an illegal weapons cache stored in the safe house.

The United States believes al-Zarqawi has appealed to al Qaeda to help start a civil war in Iraq and has led foreign fighters there.

His group is blamed for the kidnappings and beheadings of some hostages, including Americans Nicholas Berg, Eugene Armstrong and Jack Hensley, as well as attacks on U.N. and Red Cross facilities.

CNN's Brent Sadler, Mike Mount, Ayman Mohyeldin, Ingrid Formanek, Faris Qasira, Mohammed Tawfeeq and Barbara Starr contributed to this report.

This is fucking horrible. Leave it to Rumy (Captain Obvious) to say that the violence is getting worse. Guess what asshole? Its been getting worse for some time. Announcing it now doesn't mean that worsening of the Iraq clock starts today fucker.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-09-30 01:08pm

We have turned the corner ... straight into Hell.

SyntaxVorlon · Post by **SyntaxVorlon** » 2004-09-30 01:43pm

Cthulhu's Ass.
This is just one thing added onto the cumulative tragedy of the entire affair.

Darth Raptor · Post by **Darth Raptor** » 2004-09-30 03:27pm

Look what a gigantic, inexcusable and irreparable clusterfuck we've caused.

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2004-09-30 04:30pm

I had to do a double-take when I heard this on the news. It's disgusting.

I can't believe it, but I actually think we've caused more harm "liberating" these poor sods than Saddam could've.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-09-30 04:34pm

Before the war, I asked "will the cure be worse than the disease?" That question is as pertinent as ever, because so far we're hammering the patient with chemotherapy and he's not looking too good.

Stravo · Post by **Stravo** » 2004-09-30 04:39pm

Darth Wong wrote:Before the war, I asked "will the cure be worse than the disease?" That question is as pertinent as ever, because so far we're hammering the patient with chemotherapy and he's not looking too good.

Someone on Hannity and Colmes on Monday I think mentioned that so far the occupation has seen the death of 20,000 civilians. Under Sadaam since his rise to power decades ago they estimated something like a few hundred thousand dead by torture or execution. More Iraqis are dying under American occupation than under Sadaam's rule on a simple time comparison. If this rate continues we will surpass Sadaam in a few years what it took him decades to accomplish.

This is a sad state of affairs. We are watching the slow disintergration of a society that was relatively stable and that was considered unable to harm us less than a year before the invasion by the same big dogs in the Administration that then beat the drums for war.

Faram · Post by **Faram** » 2004-09-30 05:14pm

Stravo wrote:This is a sad state of affairs. We are watching the slow disintergration of a society that was relatively stable and that was considered unable to harm us less than a year before the invasion by the same big dogs in the Administration that then beat the drums for war.

But hey it's all for a good cause.

Shrubby thought he might have WMD and Saddam tried to kill his dad!

What's a coupple of 10'000 dead Iraques compared to that?

And let's not forget that IRAQ has OIL!

Stravo · Post by **Stravo** » 2004-09-30 05:28pm

Faram wrote: But hey it's all for a good cause.

Shrubby thought he might have WMD and Saddam tried to kill his dad!

What's a coupple of 10'000 dead Iraques compared to that?

And let's not forget that IRAQ has OIL!

You can't make an omelette without breaking a few thousand eggs.

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2004-09-30 05:39pm

I initially supported going to war because I seriously believe that the people would be better off without Sadaam. We might not be able to get rid of every dictator, but knocking off a few of them would make life better for a number of people.

But looking at how this was handled afterwards... the prison abuse, there being no attempt at stopping looting, spending <10% of the reconstruction money, the fact that the megacorporations that backed the bush administration are robbing the country blind....

I have long since had to admit I was wrong. We never should have touched the place.

TheDarkling · Post by **TheDarkling** » 2004-09-30 06:27pm

Ender wrote:I initially supported going to war because I seriously believe that the people would be better off without Sadaam. We might not be able to get rid of every dictator, but knocking off a few of them would make life better for a number of people.

Same here.

The wholly amateurish way in which the occupation and reconstruction has been handled has shocked (dismayed would be a better word, I’m too jaded to be so easily shocked) me far more than the lack of WMD's, deception I expect from politicians but mass stupidity on this level is raising the bar for future politicians and government officials.

frigidmagi · Post by **frigidmagi** » 2004-09-30 07:14pm

I was there. This is not what we fought for, bleed for or what some of us died for. We were promised a free Iraq, not soon maybe but a free and stable country has a direct result of our actions. I didn't give a damn about fucking WMDs, no one in my unit did. We were going to overthrow a brutal, saditic, dictatior who's sons were worst.

Instead, we went from one of the most sucessful invasions in history. Where we tore the 55th Armored Bridage in half and ate the leftovers with a smile in under 24 hours, where we destoryed any tank, armored car or fucking armed jeep that dared showed it's face. We smashed over the Republician Guard and hunted them down. We shoved striaght over bridges that many had cried would be our deaths. To the biggest clusterfuck I have ever seen.

The occuipation wasn't going to be easy, we knew that from day 1. Occuipations are dirty, messy and bloody. Every Terrorist who could come would, like Baghdad was fucking Disney Land. We were told there was a plan and we could deal with it.

They lied. Instead men were pissed away for poll points, lawlessness was allowed, complete and utter boneheaded idioticy was let free without a single regard for the conquenses.

Twenty Six Million, men, women and children are being sent straight to Hell on Earth and all the blood was for nothing. Nothing.

Congrats President Bush. You fucking bastard.

The_Nice_Guy · Post by **The_Nice_Guy** » 2004-10-01 02:29am

I go to the Belmont Club frequently, and the analysis there is superb.

Much of Iraq is currently peaceful. It's only the Sunni triangle and Baghdad that's in the midst of heavy fighting, and because Baghdad is the political center, everything that happens there is magnified through the eyes of the press.

Every terrorist knows in his heart and mind that if they kill enough people, both Iraqi citizens and foreigners, the US public would lose its will and pull out. And by that time, no matter how the ordinary Iraqi citizen protests, they'll be ground down under another fundamentalist regime.

It's also important to note that the terrorists know as well as anybody that it's the US presidential elections. It's not out of the question for them to be pushing hard to affect public opinion. It's worked once before, it can work again.

Gut check time for the US. The stakes are on the table, and it's too late to pull out.

TWG

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2004-10-01 02:36am

The_Nice_Guy wrote:I go to the Belmont Club frequently, and the analysis there is superb.

Much of Iraq is currently peaceful. It's only the Sunni triangle and Baghdad that's in the midst of heavy fighting, and because Baghdad is the political center, everything that happens there is magnified through the eyes of the press.

Err, have you SEEN the latest maps of the place? There was one in Time just last week. About 50% of the country we do not have any control over right now.

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2004-10-02 06:18am

Ender wrote:*snip*

I have long since had to admit I was wrong. We never should have touched the place.

I have to agree. I've usually got the balls to admit I'm wrong, and I'll do it here. I was fucking wrong.

SyntaxVorlon · Post by **SyntaxVorlon** » 2004-10-02 11:34am

Stravo wrote:
Faram wrote: But hey it's all for a good cause.

Shrubby thought he might have WMD and Saddam tried to kill his dad!

What's a coupple of 10'000 dead Iraques compared to that?

And let's not forget that IRAQ has OIL!
You can't make an omelette without breaking a few thousand eggs.

No you can't make an fryed egg without breaking a few thousand eggs, and killing a few people too. We 'mericans to play around with them fancy hoity toity french eggs.

The_Nice_Guy · Post by **The_Nice_Guy** » 2004-10-03 03:06am

Ender wrote:
The_Nice_Guy wrote:I go to the Belmont Club frequently, and the analysis there is superb.

Much of Iraq is currently peaceful. It's only the Sunni triangle and Baghdad that's in the midst of heavy fighting, and because Baghdad is the political center, everything that happens there is magnified through the eyes of the press.
Err, have you SEEN the latest maps of the place? There was one in Time just last week. About 50% of the country we do not have any control over right now.

Really? I suppose it comes down to how much information there you trust. I have my doubts. Maybe Times regarded every province and city in which there were more than 50 attacks to be out of control. I don't disupte that they could be right!

Here's an analysis of the current situation.
http://belmontclub.blogspot.com/2004/09 ... -that.html

The data could be interpreted either way. But the key phrase for me is that "The first thing to notice is that 2,139 of the 2,429 attacks took place in 6 of the 18 provinces". Allawi was indeed exagerrating when he said that most of Iraq was 'completely safe'.

It all boils down to what you would consider to be 'in control'. Control of the municipal authorities? Number of attacks less than 5?

There's a lot of conflicting information out of Iraq, and I'd hesitate to say whether it'd get better or worse. My gut feeling is that the terrorists know that there's elections about to go off, in the Us and Iraq, and doing all they can, in a Tet-like offensive to sap enemy will and resolve. They might be taking horrendous losses and crippling themselves in the long run by alienating the Iraqi population, but the whole gambit might pay off if the US does elect Kerry, and if Kerry does pull out. For the sakes of two ifs, they're blazing in.

TWG