PDA

View Full Version : Baghdad Morgue Tallies 1,815 Bodies in July - New High


Richard Tafoya
Aug 12th, 2006, 01:10 PM
Wow, these "last throes" of the insurgency get bigger and bigger each month.

Washington Post:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/09/AR2006080901773.html

Figures compiled by the city morgue indicated Wednesday that the number of killings in the Iraqi capital reached a new high last month, and the U.S. military said a new effort to bring security to Baghdad will succeed only if Iraqis "want it to work."

The Baghdad morgue took in 1,815 bodies during July, news services quoted the facility's assistant manager, Abdul Razzaq al-Obeidi, as saying. The previous month's tally was 1,595. Obeidi estimated that as many as 90 percent of the total died violent deaths.

Since the bombing of a Shiite shrine in the northern town of Samarra in late February, Baghdad has been ravaged by sectarian violence. Shiite militiamen conduct almost nightly raids on Sunni neighborhoods, and Sunni insurgents frequently bomb Shiite mosques and other gathering places. A report from the United Nations combining morgue and hospital body counts for June showed that, on average, more than 100 people were being killed every day.

On Tuesday, the U.S. military announced the start of the second phase of a U.S.-Iraqi crackdown aimed at securing Baghdad known as Operation Forward Together. A key element of the new phase is the transfer of thousands of U.S. troops to Baghdad from elsewhere in Iraq, but the military's top spokesman told reporters Wednesday that force of arms alone cannot bring peace to the capital.

"The key thing about this operation is that . . . it counts on the Iraqi citizens," said Maj. Gen. William B. Caldwell. "They have to be involved. The Iraqi people have to want this to work. If they are not involved, if they're not willing to commit, if they're not willing to be a part of the solution, then there is no solution."

db44
Aug 12th, 2006, 01:56 PM
So here then is the U.S. problem, the way I see it:

We have started in motion a situation that leaves a void on top of the heirarchy of Iraq. Some people saw the problem that this would only lead to more fighting and a civil war. The people in our goverment saw it differently, and we can only guess what they saw, or if they saw what we did and decided they didn't care.

If you look at the two sides, you have which is happy and yet not all the capable or willing to fend for itself when the going gets tough, part of their happiness is that they are in charge. On the other side, you have a group that's not happy, and more than able to create havoc and willing to kill and use whatever (and whoever) they can to get their way. Not to mention a third party which seems in between but can go either way.

So now, because of action taken, we either will have to sit there and protect the happy people for God knows how long, or we're going to one day have to say enough is enough, and let them try to fend for themselves... And probably lose and get us back to square number one just in time for Jeb's run at the House.

Come to think of it, maybe I was wrong in saying this would be a civil war all that way back. A war needs two sides to fight it.