U.S. military blames al-Qaida in Iraq for double suicide bombing

Friday 02nd May, 03:00 PM JST

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

Latest 15 of 55 Total Comments Show All

SuperLib at 01:44 AM JST - 3rd May

And Madverts blames the Bush admimistration for allowing al-Qaida to actually be in Iraq.

But your alternative is to allow a dictator to control the country. Is your position in any way burdened by that reality?

And who let Al Queda into Europe?
SuperLib at 01:55 AM JST - 3rd May

Most of these insurgents were created by the United States.

The insurgents and Al Queda are two completely different things. Al Queda's disastrous showing in Iraq is actually a direct result of the insurgents handing their asses to them, plus you have Al Queda acting as a unifying force between the US and the insurgents.
DXXJP at 02:38 AM JST - 3rd May

“Al-Qaida in Iraq continues their malicious tactics against the people of Iraq and their way of life,” the military said in a statement. “They seek violence and chaos in Iraq.”

Ah remember the good Ole days when they weren't.

By the way who is to decide which dictator is better than the next. Sarge and Co. simply believe that if dubya has a list then that's the definite answer. Funny I believe the Kim regime in NK out did Saddam. Don't give me the "he gassed his own people" That doesnt fly when you compare how many have died at the hands of the Kim family.

By the way how many of you have actually read the Koran. Really after reading it did it make you wanna suit up and go to Starbucks or do you just like posting the sound bites your fearless leader preaches to you.
adaydream at 06:26 AM JST - 3rd May

After 9/11 and this government aided at getting Saudi citizens out of the country, I wouldn't doubt it.

I'd have to consider that more of a possibily than an outside chance.

The attack Thursday evening came amid heightened worries that al-Qaida militants are regrouping, despite recent security gains by U.S.-led forces.

When the surge started and the violence started to subside, we said as soon as the surge was over, insurgents would be ready to restart operations. That is now happening.

But then there were these pro-war posters, we'll kick the crap out of them. They'll think twice about... right.

So now that we had to reduce numbers or increase their tours to 18 or 24 months, there aren't the troops to keep that kind of pressure on.

But with the draft we could have those troops levels that we need.
Betzee at 09:37 AM JST - 3rd May

Islam is the only religion that promises paradise (and a very graphic paradise) for the act of killing and getting killed in the name of fighting for god.....

I don't think any of us will ever understand...

But some have insisted it's possible to turn this country into a stable democracy and ridiculed those who questioned whether Iraq could become "normal." So I scanned the posts eagerly looking for the ones which laid out a path to get from here to there. Specifically, how can freedom prevail over the afterworld "material incentives" of bedding virgins which it is claimed, in more than one post, motivate suicide bombers? But no post addressed the crux of the matter, what a surprise. So I guess we will continue to fork over USD 3 billion a week because if we pull out, the country will be taken over by terrorists.
SezWho2 at 09:43 AM JST - 3rd May

redacted,

Thank you for your question. The answer would be, "no". It's difficult to elaborate in greater detail because you haven't really shown--except in tone--where your question is coming from.

I think that to say that we cannot know what these bombers actually believed is entirely consistent with the assertion that some people hold words literally and some people hold them metaphorically. Perhaps if you could be a little more straightforward I could answer your question in greater detail. Perhaps.
romulus3 at 10:17 AM JST - 3rd May

I swear, the only way out is to first get rid of all the media. then go about your business the way you would if they were not there. then you can win and only then.
SuperLib at 11:05 AM JST - 3rd May

By the way who is to decide which dictator is better than the next.

This is coming from a man who supports keeping dictators in power for as long as they wish.
Madverts at 05:57 PM JST - 3rd May

Superlib,

With respect, how many more dead Iraqis will you need to see in this malestrom of chaos and instability caused by the invasion before admitting that perhaps in this case, letting Saddam be dictator for life kept a relative peace and stability, and more importantly, kept the religious nutters at bay?

As Iraq continues down the path of fundie feuding and ethnic rivalry and the cadavers continue to pile up, I´m guessing at some point in the next few years you´re going to be forced to join the rest of us on this side of the fence. My arms will be open when thery dayeth come.
SuperLib at 09:09 PM JST - 3rd May

letting Saddam be dictator for life kept a relative peace and stability, and more importantly, kept the religious nutters at bay?

Just wanted to confirm that this was your position.
Sarge at 10:51 PM JST - 3rd May

Mad ( 5:57 PM )- The Kurds, the Kuwaitis and, yeah, even the Iranians would disagree with you that there was "relative peace and stability" under good ol' Saddam.
medievaltimes at 09:20 AM JST - 4th May

They shouldnt have been there in the first place, but if the US pulls out too soon, things will get a lot worse.
Zaphod at 01:15 PM JST - 5th May

Superlib:

" Let's not forget that Al Queda killed Muslims at the wedding, not Christians, not Americans, not Jews. Even in their own minds the terrorists make a separation between who is a follower and who is not, and just being Muslim doesn't spare you. You're essentially attacking the religion of the victims today, not the killers. "

That is the one complaint that Al-Quaida is getting on islamic websited... that they are killing "innocents" (innocents being muslims, unbelievers like you and I are NOT considered "innocent").

For Al-Q, of course that is irrelevant, since they considere Shiites heretics (Takfir). So read up on the religion, before forming opinions on the basis of wishful thinking.

Al-Quaida`s jihadist doctrine is entirely well founded in their religious doctrine.
frontandcentre at 01:03 PM JST - 7th May

In order to demonstrate that the cave-dwellers' pronouncements have no influence over their supposed "followers", I rather hope this was AQ rather than a sectarian attack, but there seems to be a lot of room for doubt. It is very much in US interests to blame AQ for any and all attacks in Iraq to justify their continued involvement in the country. The enormous irony is that without Bush's foreign policy, AQ, with their deluded agenda, wouldn't be there killing innocent people in the first place.

Please remember this, flag-wavers
1keiron at 08:21 AM JST - 9th May

What or Who actually provoked 9/11 and when? After it happened it was mission payback time in Afghanistan because apparently it was Bin Laden and his men. Then how did the West manage to go from there to attacking Iraq in regards to 9/11? What did Iraq have to do with 9/11 or did the West get it wrong after a game of spin the bottle and it was actually Saddam after all.Change of story now..Saddam had weapons of mass distruction. War kicked off in Iraq which spawned these mad men that today still blow stuff up and cut heads off..not because of the presence of the west but because of religion. The brainwashed that are still brainwashed believe its Al Qaida that are doing this. The truth is, the U.S dont know what's going on anymore and its story after story about unravelling new speculation and pointing the blame finger. Not all of the truth..but some truth will come out when the U.S gets a new president. I feel sorry for the U.S military puppets on the front line I really do.