The escalation of US tensions with Iran has centered greatly, at least 
within the narrative, on Iraq. The idea is that US troops are endangered
 in Iraq, and that Iranian proxies, who are actually part of the Iraqi 
government, are plotting against them. 
And just because nothing ever happens doesn’t mean that isn’t going to continue to be a talking point, as US officials talk about “indirect fire” attacks in Iraq, with indirect in this case meaning they don’t appear to be firing directly at the US forces. 
Officials say they are perceiving an increase in the amount of mortar 
and rocket fire in Iraq. Which would be dangerous to US troops, except 
US targets aren’t actually being hit. It’s just that the US has so many 
targets in Iraq that something they have “come close.” The military 
confirmed there were no casualties, but declined to report on the number
 of these not-really-attacks that took place. 
No claims of responsibility, no US targets being hit, but experts are 
more than willing to tell the media that it is an “ongoing effort by 
Iran and its proxy militias.” US officials seem reluctant to say 
anything that might contradict that position. They just say Iraqi 
officials are investigating. 
The lack of anything actually happening means this can’t be a direct 
pretext by US hawks to do anything. Yet Mike Pompeo mentioned rocket 
fire in Iraq in his litany of grievances against Iran, which suggests 
this will continue to be a talking point for the sake of mounting 
tensions.
US Troops in Iraq See Surge in ‘Indirect Fire,’ Some Look to Blame Iran
Rockets, mortars almost hit sites, no US casualties reported
			Jason Ditz is Senior Editor for Antiwar.com. He has 20 years of experience in foreign policy research and his work has appeared in The American Conservative, Responsible Statecraft, Forbes, Toronto Star, Minneapolis Star-Tribune, Providence Journal, Washington Times, and the Detroit Free Press.
			Join the Discussion!
We welcome thoughtful and respectful comments. Hateful language, illegal content, or attacks against Antiwar.com will be removed.
For more details, please see our Comment Policy.
    ×
    
      
    
  


