Ominous sign

teejay

Insurgents today killed five people and wounded 18 others after breaching the heavy fortifications of Baghdad's green zone, setting off bombs they had carried into an outdoor market and a cafe.

Initial information indicated the attacks were a suicide operation. If so, it would be the first time that insurgents have struck from within the heavily guarded compound, home to the British and US embassies and Iraqi government offices.

A group loyal to Jordanian militant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi claimed responsibility for the attacks in a statement on a website.

A spokesman for the 1st Cavalry Division said the blasts appeared to be caused by "hand-carried explosives". They sent a large plume of thick, black smoke rising from the zone, home to about 10,000 Iraqis alongside US troops and international officials and contractors.

The green zone is a regular target for insurgents, who have frequently fired mortar rounds at the compound. There have been a number of deadly car bombings at its gates. Last week, officials said an improvised bomb was found in front of the Green Zone Cafe but was defused.

Late last night, the foreign office issued a warning advising British nationals to stay away from the cafe in light of the attempted bombing. After today's blasts, the US embassy strongly encouraged Americans living or working in the green zone to limit their movements, travel in groups, carry several means of communication and avoid the bazaar and restaurants inside the compound. ? Source

Some estimates conclude that the total number of terrorists in Iraq prior to the American invasion was perhaps in the hundreds. Now, analysts generally agree that the number is ten to twenty thousand, if not more.

IMO, Zarqawi has used the war zone as an opportunity to tweak his skill in targeting US troops. Today marked an ominous first: an attack in the heavily fortified Green Zone.

To enter and get as far as the targets were today, one must pass several check points... past highly trained and armed American troops. I hope this doesn't mean what I think it may mean.

LittleToe

This was a really sad piece of news.

Some estimates conclude that the total number of terrorists in Iraq prior to the American invasion was perhaps in the hundreds. Now, analysts generally agree that the number is ten to twenty thousand, if not more.

I have to wonder about these kind of reports. On what do they base such statistics (before and after)?
Did the extra terrorists ship in, or is it an increase in disillusionment amongst the populace?

fleaman uk

To enter and get as far as the targets were today, one must pass several check points... past highly trained and armed American troops. I hope this doesn't mean what I think it may mean.

You mean friends on the inside?Im intrigued

foreword

tunnels maybe? Takes a while to dig one I'm sure. They could've been at it for months.

But in all seriousness, only 100 terrorists in Iraq before the war? I highly doubt that. The whole army got fired. There were a lot more than 100 with anti-US sentiment and willing to fight. So if the 20,000 is correct, then I suspect at least 5000 were Iraqis. Otherwise, we might as well say we went to war with a bunch of wuss.

frenchbabyface

We will never know how much more today (but more for sure - as a natural consequence) ... we can only try to find the best way to CALM THEM, GIVE THEM LESS REASONS, like First of recognise the victimes on their side as victimes too (and not potential terroriste that can just be targeted as if they were) BEING FAIR ON MANY MATTERS ... before they act and before we got more of them ... (and who is leading now ?)

IT'S ALL SAD !!!

SixofNine

Weird, the timing. About a week ago, I heard some news item mention "the green zone", and it hit me; "the insurgents will penetrate that soon enough.... and they will likely help themselves immeasurably when they do".

An American, ANY American, in Iraq is a stranger in strange land.... and he's not wanted, not by a large enough percentage of the population to really protect him or get the upper hand. The only way this effort could ever have been done successfully is with a complete, methodical, disarming of every square kilometer of the entire country. Catastrophic success indeed.

hemp lover

Did the extra terrorists ship in, or is it an increase in disillusionment amongst the populace?

From what I've read, it's a lot of the first and some of the second. The U.S. made two huge mistakes (beyond invading a sovereign country) IMO. They didn't send enough troops and they disbanded the Iraqi army. More troops and/or the Iraqi army could have secured the borders. Instead there's been a steady stream of non-Iraqis coming into the country.

What I'm curious about is how Zarqawi can be responsible for every single thing that happens over there. He's quite the multitasker. I think it's a sign of how horrible American intelligence must be if we only know the name of ONE terrorist leader.

teejay

But in all seriousness, only 100 terrorists in Iraq before the war? I highly doubt that.

foreword,

If you'll note, I said "in the hundreds," not 100. The only specific number I've seen was 500. Now there may be 20,000, if not more.

The point is, before the "coalition" invaded, there were, generally speaking, no terrorists in Iraq to speak of. Now there are tons. Training. Using the proximity of the US military to watch and perfect their methods of attack. If they can sneak BOMBS pass multiple military checkpoints in one of the most heavily guarded places on earth, do you think they'd have the ability to walk across America's southern border with a bomb in a backpack?

A recent article in Esquire magazine about a NY City cop on detail in Israel contained a one-sentence blurb about an ominous series of events being investigated in NY City. Seems several suitcases have been left at various places all over the city. Authorities are clueless about what it means, if anything. They are hoping that there's nothing to it ? that no one was watching to see how long; how many; what responders did and when. Reading that one blurb gave me a bad feeling.

Iraq serves as the perfect "what if" test ground to a terrorist network like al Qaeda. They get to try everything. I think they're doing just that. Pardon me for thinking like a terrorist.

teejay

What I'm curious about is how Zarqawi can be responsible for every single thing that happens over there. He's quite the multitasker. I think it's a sign of how horrible American intelligence must be if we only know the name of ONE terrorist leader.

hemp lover,

That is a source of dark humor for me and my friends. Any time something bad happens anywhere in the world, we say to one another: "Al Qaeda!!" A bomb blows up? "Al Qaeda!!" There's a "natural" disaster? "Al Qaeda!!" There's a housefire? "Al Qaeda!!"

Frankly, I think the authorities, like the rest of America's workforce, is largely incompetent. They are satisfied with doing a half-ass job... so long as their paycheck is ready on Friday and the weekend has plenty of booze and televised sports. That's been fine up till now, but the problem we face NOW is that the enemy appears to be smart, focused, and hell-bent on accomplishing their goal. "Zarqawi" is an answer that, I think, the authorities hope will pacify a terrified public. They think that their ready answer of "Zarqawi" or "al Qaeda" let's a frightened public know that they have things under control. "We know who it is," they want us to think.

Fact is, they may NOT know who it is. Taking the pressure off bin Laden in the spring of 2002 allowed al Qaeda to regroup. Whether bin Laden is alive or dead, we don't know. One thing we positively know about al Qaeda: it's headless. So, every terrorist event may not be (and probably isn't) Zarqawi even as every terrorist event in the past most likely wasn't bin Laden. It may be a new face, a new name, a name that we haven't heard of before but we'll all get to know soon enough.

Just like a year ago we'd never heard the name "Zarqawi."

frenchbabyface

Sadly !!!

Ominous sign

Share this