A pair of suicide bombers driving trucks packed with explosives detonated outside the Ministry of Justice and the Baghdad provincial administration, killing 132 Iraqis and wounding more than 500, police officials told Voices of Iraq.
The blasts set nearby cars ablaze and blew out windows in nearby buildings, adding to the casualties. The facade of the Ministry of Justice was smashed, and the building flooded after water pipes burst during the explosion.
Blast walls around the government buildings, which could have prevented some of the devastation, had recently been removed by the government.
The attacks are similar to the Aug. 19 bombings in Baghdad earlier this year. On that day, suicide bombers detonated their explosive-laded vehicles outside the Foreign Ministry and near the Finance Ministry and the Baghdad provincial government building, killing more than 100. The government had ordered the blast walls to be removed outside the buildings just weeks before the attacks, citing the improved security situation.
The Iraqi government has said unnamed neighboring countries are responsible for allowing the attacks to occur.
“The neighboring and distant countries should immediately refrain, forever, from harboring, financing and facilitating forces that openly proclaim their hostility to the Iraqi state,” President Jalal Talabani said in a statement released by his office.
“It is the same black hands who are covered in the blood of the Iraqi people,” Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki said in a statement. “They want to cause chaos in the nation, hinder the political process and prevent the parliamentary election.”
The Iraqi government has blamed Syria for allowing al Qaeda and Ba’athists to plan, organize, and train terrorists on Syrian soil to conduct strikes in Iraq.
In late August, the Iraqi government aired the confession of Mohammed Hassan al Shemari, a Saudi al Qaeda member who claims to be the leader of the terror group’s forces in Diyala province. Sherari said Syrian intelligence, or the Mukhabarat, actively supports al Qaeda in Iraq. Senior al Qaeda leaders Abu Khalaf and now Sheikh Issa al Masri direct al Qaeda’s operations in Syria.
The Iraqi government also pointed a finger at two senior Ba’athist operatives for involvement in the Aug. 19 attacks, while a Turkish newspaper claimed that the US has provided Iraq with satellite imagery that shows Ba’athist training camps for Iraqi insurgents. Lebanese intelligence officials claimed Syrian intelligence aided wanted Ba’athists who were behind the deadly Aug. 19 bombings in Baghdad to enter Lebanon.
25 Comments
This shows the United States has not been able to control Iraq from day up till now.
wow! that was huge! masya
zeeshan:
You’re dead wrong. We left both the Iraqis and Obama a winning hand in Iraq. Now that we’re drawing down, it’s theirs to lose. The Islamofascists don’t like or want an Iraq free of extremism. They’ve stepped up their bombings in an act of desperation; free elections means another step toward self-determination. It’s up to the Iraqis to control their own destiny. They’ve been trained and given the tools they need to carry on. They will have to step up to the plate and see that it happens.
These blasts and the ones before in August basically end the democracy experimentation in Iraq. Iraq is entering an unknown future.
The gains achieved during the so-called surge period appear to simply postpone the inevitable.
It’s time for the U.S. to accelerate its troop withdrawal from Iraq.
When Iraq with its over 70% literacy rate couldn’t be pacified, what chance an Afghanistan with a 25% literacy rate has?
The roots of democracy in Iraq are so shallow and the potential rewards of government so great that the risks of a coup increase as the U.S. withdraws – bombings like this further that process.
Democracy can still be strengthened – if the Iraqi people realize that when push comes to shove they must protest in the streets en masse and teach their sons in the Army and police not to accept the authority of illegitimate leaders. We will see.
zeeshan:
A major attack in 2 months and all of a sudden they have lost control? Have you been following the news at all? I guess Spain and the UK are spiraling out of control too because they had terrorist attacks in their countries. Give me a break.
Whichever case it becomes, its on the Iraqis, not us. Those bombings are meant as bait for us to stay and keep our attentions divided from Afghanistan and other potential problems.
The sad thing is however, is that its likely Iraq will fail. The Sunnis can’t stay in situ with the Shia so long as the Shia continue to basically have their vengeance party against their former masters. The Kurds can’t get through with the Arabs and will attempt to secede soon enough.
Frankly, I don’t know if Democracy is right for an artificial state such as this. Strongmen are needed to keep the state together. So long as we can find one who is begnign beyond his borders, and not too insane, we should simply accept it.
Well, I guess we should just give up and let the murdering thug Islamic radicals take over Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somolia, Lebanon, et al.
I am sure they will just stay within those borders and not try to take over any other countries or export their murderous extremism. Of course, I think they are on record saying they want to spread their radical ideology around the world and destroy the US and the West. They are such jokesters.
And turning our backs on the people who helped us there will just ultimately lead to their untimely demise at the hands of these extremists, but who cares right? It’s better for thousands to die for helping us than for these attacks to continue where hundreds die.
Iraq a lost cause? Then all humanity is a lost cause. If you can’t beat them, join them. Is that the answer?
Cui bono?
I don’t see this as creating intimidation, but perhaps instead calling for increased development of the ISF. Frankly I don’t see a coup…bombings happen even in democracies like Indonesia and Mexico. Who stands to benefit from these blasts?
Lost cause for democracy (at the moment), yes. Lost cause as a non-bastion of terror, no.
But ultimately it is the Iraqis who must do this, because otherwise we might as well remove the veil of supposedly standing for freedom and self determination and simply annex Iraq as a colony. Because it will only be by that level of micromanagement that we can have success of that level. And I am not necessarily condemning the idea either, just the disingenuous idea that America isn’t an empire. Its time we owned up to it, because the sooner we can, the sooner we can have that perfect result.
Since that will never happen, then we have to simply admit that we can’t win them all. Not without radically restructuring the state of Iraq and staying there for another decade or so. These things take time and treasure, not to mention will. We have none of the above. Same goes for Afghanistan.
Either we go in full, acknowledging our status as a colonizing power, or we do what we can and hope for the best. Because we can’t force a people of a sovereign nation to do our bidding. We have to let them choose to help us.
Posted by zeeshan809 at October 25, 2009 3:11 PM ET:
This shows the United States has not been able to control Iraq from day up till now.
———————–
That’s fine, we didn’t go to Iraq to control it. We went to depose Saddam Hussein and end his weapons programs. Done and done. We have stayed to allow Iraq time to build a government and internal security force as well as a standing army.
Perhaps you meant secure rather than control. We have pulled back from the cities at Iraq’s behest, so they can take over security. They experienced a failure. Attacks are rare now, and make big news. Try to keep current, you are falling behind.
One bad day and people are calling it the end of democracy in Iraq? Give me a break. The Iraqi people have more courage and persevearance than the cowards behind these attacks. Iraq is not full of barbarians incapable of governing a modern state. Anyone who suggests as much has no understanding of the history of the region. The simple reality is that there is a small minority of religoius zealots and power hungry secular nationalists willing to kill innocent people for their cause. Their chances of success are slim to none.
The “country” of Iraq is simply an exercise in wishful map making by Anglo/American governments after WWI. In reality, there are three well-entrenched groups of people – Kurd, Sunni and Shia – none of whom want to share power with the other. Two have powerful external sponsors who want a post-US Iraq to be in their sphere of influence and are heavily funding their Iraqi surrogates.
When something like this bombing happens, we Americans always (egotistically) think its aimed at us. In reality, much of the violence in the past, present and future is really part of an ongoing civil war among these groups. US forces have simply been a buffer, keeping the lid on (mostly), while chasing down some al qaeda evil-doers. As the US pulls out, the civil war will escalate.
There is a good chance that by 2015, there will be three “balkanized” countries in this part of Mesopotamia. Its not inconceivable that Iran and Syria will annex the shia and sunni parts later on, as Saddam tried to do with Kuwait in 1991.
Oregon_Maine:
Actually, quite the opposite. One good military campaign and people were saying Iraq was pacified. Today is just a signal that violence shall become the norm once the Americans leave, because it is only our relatively unbiased and moderating presence that keeps them in check, as it was with the Brits and Turks before us. And even under Saddam, it was one versus the other two, forcing the subjugated to unify to withstand his autocratic rule.
The Shadow Knows:
I agree with your assesment. As such, I honestly think the UN could negotiate a better, more confederal state structure before we get another Bosnia. Either way, the current republic won’t last in its current form.
My only true worry is Baghdad, which is truely its own entity within Iraq. The south and the west could exist independantly or annexed by nearby states, but the center is the epicenter of the Islamic and the Arab/Persian shatterbelt, and the north is a true wildcard that would depend on Turkish response.
I don’t think the doom and gloomers are very good analysts. This was not an attack on Shia, or Sunni, or Kurd, but a direct attack on the unified State of Iraq. I would say chances are pretty good that in a blast this big that all three segments of Iraqi society were represented. If you want to re-kindle the civil war, I don’t think this is the way to go about it.
I don’t think the attack delegitimizes the state in the least. It does, however, serve to delegitimize the insurgency and provides for a propaganda bonanza for the state to demonise whoever they want to blame.
Spooky, love your analysis, but you’re way off base. Iraq has a good chance of survival. These attacks still happen because the surviving terrorists and insurgents are of higher quality than the previous average.
That is you’re right about being a colonial power would make things much better for America and the world, but not Iraq being lost as a democracy. In fact it IS a democracy, a decrepit but rapidly improving one.
Wait, what? The UN??
The UN is a sanctimonious joke.
“We left both the Iraqis and Obama a winning hand in Iraq”
I can’t believe someone typed this & actually believes it.
@The Shadow Knows:
Joe Biden, is that you?
(http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/09/26/380756.aspx)
Zeissa-
Iraq has no democratic traditions. What little it does have will falter the moment we leave. The only way to prevent it would be to stay for decades to grow it, and no one has the stomach for that. Not to mention the treasure or the men. As soon as we leave, chaos will reign. Only question is which dysfunction will play out first, the Shia vengeance campaign on the sunnis, the sunnis thirst for regaining some semblance for power, the Kurdish nationalists, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia.
Iraq is the shatterbelt of the middle east, and thus without non-local moderation, it cannot sustain itself without a dictatorship of sorts, and in this country its one group subjugating all others, and we saw the results of that from Saddam’s Iraq.
As for the bombings, its just the terrorists trying to keep America here longer so that we cannot give our full and undivided attention to Afghanistan. We shouldn’t fall for it.
And this isn’t a speculation of doom and gloom. To assume democracy can grow and flourish without non-AQ related problems once we leave (and we will leave very soon) is optimistic to the point of naivete.
These repeated bombings are not an example internal Iraqi politics, but are being controlled and manipulated from the outside. If the United States wants to stabilize Iraq it will require a continued effort. It may not take 100,000 troops for much longer but a long term commitment will be required. You can bet Iran, Syria, Turkey, and Al Qaeda will all push hard to bring Iraq into their political sphere. Iraq is a prize to them and a vehicle for regional ambitions.
Regrettably, I think both sides of this debate are dead wrong about how Iraq’s future will be decided. Both sides of this debate assume that forces internal to Iraq will either split Iraq or bring it together. It would be nice to think the people of Iraq control their own destiny, but I have come to think that history doesn’t support this contention. Iraq’s destiny has been determined from the outside for much of its history and this time is no exception. It is a country that has always been too easy to invade and too hard to control. The Ottoman’s held it together for the longest period of time, but in that time it became a backwater. The Romans and the Parthians and later Sassanians fought their way up and down the upper Euphrates for the better part of seven centuries.
Unfortunately, for the Iraqi people, it is time again to pick your poison. If you are uncomfortable with America’s ambitions to stabilize Iraq, than you can deal with Iran’s ambitions, or Syria’s, or worse yet Al Qaeda’s. Hopefully any further military intervention will take something short of seven centuries. We will most likely be training Iraqi troops and government personnel for some time, and may have to provide a little extra muscle to back up the Iraqi army if the neighbors remain too much of a problem.
Has any country actually failed and collapsed completely due to AQ inspired mass bombings? I know we have examples of Somalia and Afghanistan to look to, but the majority of their problems came from warlords and invasions and only later did the jihadists make things worse.
I think we’re OK in Iraq as long as the government remains somewhat stable.
@SFC MAC:
Wonderful find at MSNBC – gotta love the web. Congrats! But no, I’m not Joe – my connection with the White House ended during the Reagan administration in mid-1986. Trust… but Verify !
@NEO – As you suggest, the middle east is quite an onion – layer after layer after layer… The enemy of my enemy is my friend. This is a really stupid philosophy – there is no “there,” there… other than more violence.
January 28th, 2009; August 19th, 2009; September 26th, 2009; October 15th, 2009; October 25th, 2009; and so on, we are hardly to have time to take off the black rubber wristbands that we wear for grieving over the victims in these car bomb attack, there is another bomb breaks the peace we have in a short while. There are more than 10 bomb attack took place in south Asia this year, the exploring noisy becomes the nightmare for the people there and for the soldiers of our army.
After the September 11th Terrorist Attack, the nightmare in all the Americans’ heart, Mr. Bush decided to take the “an eye to an eye”