Attacks continued apace in Iraq today, but the attention was not on the first deaths of August, but rather reflecting on the high death toll of July, which turned out to be the worst in two years.
The Iraqi Health Ministry put the overall toll at 325 dead and nearly 700 wounded. The vast majority of both dead and wounded were civilians, while 44 soldiers and 40 police were also killed.
Iraqi officials had sought to downplay the violence throughout July, which was mostly the result of a resurgent al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) faction. The group has been particularly active in the areas near the Syrian border, perhaps reflecting the civil war in that nation spilling over into Iraq.
AQI’s Islamic State of Iraq faction had issued a statement threatening a dramatic increase in attacks in July, and despite Iraq deploying additional forces to the Syrian border to prevent infiltration, they seem to have been able to make good on their threats.
8 thoughts on “July the Deadliest Month in Iraq in Two Years”
But isn't Iraq a democracy? Didn't the U.S. save it? Didn't they get rid of a fearsome dictator who had countless WMDs? Isn't the U.S. the saviour of the world, the most exceptional nation?
America talks the talk but it can't walk the walk!
Saddam Hussein's Iraq was actually a functioning society. The damage wrought by America's forced 'liberation' of that nation will be felt for generations. How many needlessly died? At what cost?
Those responsible for should be punished and forever purged from public life.
The same criminal intervention with the same terrible consequences can be seen in Lybia. Do the sheeple want the same in Syria? I guess they either don't care because it's not their country, their homes and their families or the neurons in their brains have more than enough trying to digest such heavy stuff as American Idol, Dallas, and so on
I do heard a news about Iraq country always in war. Hope all people in this country will have peace of mind to keep their country peaceful and prosperous.
Mission accomplished 😀
"I think what we need to do is convince people who live in the lands they live in to build the nations. Maybe I'm missing something here. I mean, we're going to have kind of a nation-building corps from America? Absolutely not. Our military's meant to fight and win war. That's what it's meant to do. And when it gets over extended, morale drops…. But I'm going to be judicious as to how to use the military. It needs to be in our vital interest, the mission needs to be clear, and the exit strategy obvious." – George Bush, October 10, 2000 ( http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2000/10/11/politic… )
"Dear Peace Activists: All honour to you. In your opposition to the United States’ impending war on Iraq, you represent a welcome voice for sanity and civilisation, lifted up against the incessant baying of the dogs of war. But I want to urge you to follow the logic of your position just a bit further…. A consistent peace activist must be an anarchist…. The state is the cause and sustainer of war, because the state by its nature is warfare incarnate. Its imperialist aggression beyond its borders is simply an extension of its inherent modus operandi within its borders. There is a peaceful, consensual alternative: Market Anarchism…. If you love peace, work for anarchy." – Roderick Long, March 7, 2003 ( http://praxeology.net/unblog03-03.htm#01 )
The Iraq War: "…a conflict triggered by an invasion of Iraq by the United States from March 20, 2003 to December 18, 2011." ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War )
Iraq Body Count: "Documented civilian deaths from violence: 107,789 – 117,776" ( http://www.iraqbodycount.org/ )
Of course, Bush got it wrong. The "purpose" of the military is to defend the United States…not to start (invade) wars. And because he didn't understand American history – must have skipped that class – and he didn't understand the reasons for constituting a standing military in the first place his decision making (despite what he thinks) was flawed.
He didn't understand American history? Really?
Comments are closed.