« Troubling if true (UPDATED) | Main | Updates »

Christians attack Muslims in Baghdad

Well, not really, but it's the only way this story from Iraq would get an airing in the wider press:

At least four people have been killed and dozens injured in a co-ordinated series of attacks on Christian neighbourhoods in Baghdad.

More than 14 bombs and mortar shells were detonated, targeting homes and a church across the Iraqi capital.

At least one of today's attacks targeted the family of a victim of an assault last week on one of Baghdad's main cathedrals, which left 53 worshippers dead.

The terrorists identified the family by funeral signs still hanging outside the home.

Three Christian homes in the western Baghdad suburb of Mansour were bombed last night with improvised explosives. Early this morning, two homes were hit by mortar fire in Dora, a Christian neighbourhood in the south. A bomb also exploded near a church in Kampsara and a house in nearby Baladiyat.

The scale of attacks against Christian targets is unprecedented and is likely to give fresh impetus to calls from some Christian leaders for their community to leave Iraq.

In the meanwhile, Obama continues to sing the praises of the religion and ideology responsible for these attacks.


TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/40540.

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Christians attack Muslims in Baghdad:

» Brutally Honest linked with Christians attack Muslims in Baghdad

Comments (20)

You say it won't get any pl... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

You say it won't get any play in the wider press, but I heard about both stories on NPR.

And your characterization of Obama "singing the praises" of the "ideology responsible" for these attacks is dishonest and irresponsible.

Bruce, compare the coverage... (Below threshold)
Rodney:

Bruce, compare the coverage of killing Christians to the coverage of the potential burning of the Koran? Which was widely covered? Which was talked about for days on the AM and Evening News?

Say what you want about Sad... (Below threshold)
galoob:

Say what you want about Saddam, but this kind of thing did not happen under him.

Our invasion has devastated the Christian communities in Iraq.

Rick,"Well, not re... (Below threshold)
ryan a:

Rick,

"Well, not really, but it's the only way this story from Iraq would get an airing in the wider press..."

Funny how you used a link from "the wider press" (the Guardian in the UK) to make your claim. You must have taken your irony supplement early this morning.

Also, how do these links fit with your little thesis:

http://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/attacks-target-iraqs-christians-734690.html

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jtIHakXHez8S6dw_Fk81I6ym4T9Q?docId=c7b65ad2902a4176b4b57038b7b34115

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/wire/sns-bc-mi--iraqattack-michigan,0,620102.story

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=1&categ_id=1&article_id=121086#axzz14sra46nj

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/08/world/middleeast/08baghdad.html

galoob,"Say what y... (Below threshold)
ryan a:

galoob,

"Say what you want about Saddam, but this kind of thing did not happen under him."

Say what? So the gassing of Iraqi Kurds doesn't count as "this kind of thing"?

Yes, the war has brought further conflict and devastation to Iraq. But don't make the naive mistake of assuming that life was just peachy under Saddam Hussein. That guy got into power in part because of his reputation and capacity for brutality. Saddam was by no means shy about using violence.

galoob: "Say what you want ... (Below threshold)
Drago:

galoob: "Say what you want about Saddam, but this kind of thing did not happen under him."

Yeah, I mean, all he did was drop nerve gas on an entire town, feed human beings in to shredders feet first, set up rape rooms where opposition parents got to watch their children being raped, threw people off the top of 3 and 4 story buildings so they would be crippled and died slow. So, you know, that's cool and all.

Just as with Castro, whose regime actually gave cuban homosexuals lobotomies, the lefties still find something good about these totalitarian leaders.

Hmmmm, I wonder if there is a common thread here that would explain the consistent left-wing rhetorical support and excuse-mongering for these dictators..........what could it be.... oh, thats right. Each one of them is either an outright communist or is aligned against the US politically.

Cue galoob to pop back in with a well-timed "well, at least the trains ran on time" comment for saddam.

galoob: "Our invasion has devastated the Christian communities in Iraq."

There it is again. Those darn brown-skinned people just can't help themselves. Everything is the fault of the west and the US.

good old galoob. He/she is a caricature of the typical 30's marxist.

Say what? So the gassing... (Below threshold)
galoob:

Say what? So the gassing of Iraqi Kurds doesn't count as "this kind of thing"?

"The gassing of the Kurds" came from the Iran-Iraq war. Halabja, where the gassing occurred, is on the border with Iran and was occupied by Iran during the war. Some Kurdish forces helped the Iranians. The Iraqis did a counter-offensive and used gas. Yes, it was reprehensible, but it was directed against the Iranian occupation of Iraqi territory.

By the way, the USA encouraged and aided Saddam during his war with Iran, even after the gassing.

Yes, the war has brought further conflict and devastation to Iraq. But don't make the naive mistake of assuming that life was just peachy under Saddam Hussein. That guy got into power in part because of his reputation and capacity for brutality. Saddam was by no means shy about using violence.

Of course Saddam was brutal, but he really did not care whether you were Muslim, Christian, Kurd, Sabean or Yezidi as long as you did not oppose his regime. If you opposed Baathist rule, all bets were off, but he did not mess with Christians for just being Christians and did not allow other Muslims to do so.

Drago, don't forget all tho... (Below threshold)

Drago, don't forget all those very credible reports about how many Iraqi children were dying each and every month because of the brutal, savage, inhuman sanctions imposed on Iraq after the first Gulf War. Remember how awful it was, and how we needed to bring Iraq into the family of nations?

Here's a little prompter: the same people saying that suddenly started talking about how great the sanctions had been working once the invasion started. That ring any bells now?

J.

There were at least 39 sepa... (Below threshold)
GarandFan:

There were at least 39 separate documented attacks against the Kurds. Most where no where near the disputed border area.

http://hnn.us/articles/1242.html

galoob,"Yes, it wa... (Below threshold)
ryan a:

galoob,

"Yes, it was reprehensible, but it was directed against the Iranian occupation of Iraqi territory."

And that's somehow a justification? Are you serious? You DO realize that Iraq started the Iran-Iraq war in 1980 with a full on invasion, right? And you do realize that the Baathist regime took control of the country through some pretty violent measures, right? I am not sure why you feel the need to make excuses. When it comes to Hussein, call a spade a spade.

"By the way, the USA encouraged and aided Saddam during his war with Iran, even after the gassing."

No shit. What does this have to do with anything? Try to stay on point, if possible.

"Of course Saddam was brutal, but he really did not care whether you were Muslim, Christian, Kurd, Sabean or Yezidi as long as you did not oppose his regime. If you opposed Baathist rule, all bets were off, but he did not mess with Christians for just being Christians and did not allow other Muslims to do so."

And? So what's your point? That Iraq has shifted from one form of violence to another? What opinions do you have about Saddam's decimation of Shiites who rose up against him at the end of the Gulf War? I think that you're making the classic mistake of making excuses for the "other" side because you disagree with a particular political position. Kind of like people who make excuses for Castro or Chavez (who are both pretty willing to screw their own people over).

Point: the enemy of your political adversary is not necessarily your friend.


There were at least 39 s... (Below threshold)
galoob:

There were at least 39 separate documented attacks against the Kurds. Most where no where near the disputed border area.

http://hnn.us/articles/1242.html

GarandFan, I'm amused you're appealing to Juan Cole, who is a hated figure among right-wingers. Are you going to quote Chomsky next time?

This is what Cole said:

The Baath regime launched 39 separate gas attacks against the Kurds, many of them targeting villages far from the Iran-Iraq border. Beginning at night on Thursday, March 16, and extending into Friday, March 17, 1988, the city of Halabja (population 70,000), was bombarded with twenty chemical and cluster bombs

First, do you know the difference between "most" and "many?" Because Cole did not say "most." He also did not give any examples other than Halabja, which is close to the border.

ryan a, I'm not making excuses for what Saddam did, just pointing out that the US invasion and incompetent occupation had as a consequence devastating effects on the Christian community, along with others (Sabeans) which had lived in Iraq for hundreds of years. Saddam had many faults, but trying to kill and drive out the Christians was not one of them.

It is the US-created and backed Iraqi government which is allowing this to happen through action, weakness or incompetence.

galoob-<i... (Below threshold)
914:

galoob-

"The gassing of the Kurds" came from the Iran-Iraq war. Halabja, where the gassing occurred, is on the border with Iran and was occupied by Iran during the war. Some Kurdish forces helped the Iranians


Translation: Bush did it!

galoob,"ryan a, I'... (Below threshold)
ryan a:

galoob,

"ryan a, I'm not making excuses for what Saddam did, just pointing out that the US invasion and incompetent occupation had as a consequence devastating effects on the Christian community, along with others (Sabeans) which had lived in Iraq for hundreds of years."

Decades of war and violence in Iraq have obviously had severe consequences for Iraqis across the board. This includes the rise of the Baathists, the brutal Iran-Iraq war, Gulf War I, the years of sanctions, and the current conflict. While the recent US invasion is clearly a critical factor, it is by no means the only factor that has lead to the violence and destruction in Iraq.

"Saddam had many faults, but trying to kill and drive out the Christians was not one of them."

Look, the point you are trying to make on this thread is about as cheap and politically expedient as the one that Rick tried to make.

"It is the US-created and backed Iraqi government which is allowing this to happen through action, weakness or incompetence."

This is a gross oversimplification of the situation. I am not sure if anyone is "allowing" this sort of thing to happen. I am pretty sure that there is still a lot of violence in Iraq, that governance is limited, and that there is a serious lack of control. Blame who you want, but ultimately it's the people who carried out the attack that are responsible for this.

"Say what you want about Sa... (Below threshold)
GarandFan:

"Say what you want about Saddam, but this kind of thing did not happen under him."

Which also explains why you have no problem with fellow liberals who wax about "If only we could be like China for one day, the things we could accomplish."

Look, the point you are ... (Below threshold)
galoob:

Look, the point you are trying to make on this thread is about as cheap and politically expedient as the one that Rick tried to make.

That's a low blow.

Otherwise, I agree with you that taking any one factor and making it a cause for Iraq's horrors is oversimplifying, but as Colin Powell said about the "Pottery Barn rule" - "If you break it, you own it."

So the USA "owns" this horror in that sense.

ryan a, why are you trying ... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

ryan a, why are you trying to school Galoob? It is a waste of text and effort. In his world, Saddam was just minding his own business trying to unite the arab world for peace and prosperity. Then along came the nasty Americans, who thought having the peaceful Saddam use chemical weapons was wrong. Then the nasty Americans thought that the people of Iraq should breathe free and not worry about getting killed, tortured or raped because Saddam was in a sadistic, paranoid mood. Galoob is a very sick man. When you try to justify the use of chemical weapons on a village of people, that is reprehensible. ww

It's too bad we won't simpl... (Below threshold)

It's too bad we won't simply scoop up all the US military personel in Iraq and Afganistan, and bring the home. I don't believe you can police countries like these in the middle east. If you want the military to go in and take the flag? It's done in two weeks. But policing, is a completely different story. And by the way, as long as the media is allowed in the war zones, we don't have a change.

Get them out!

galoob-"That's a l... (Below threshold)
ryan a:

galoob-

"That's a low blow."

Maybe. But I really don't think that countering Rick's post with, "Well, at least Saddam Hussein didn't bomb Christians" is a very respectable point. It's not like the current Iraqi govt or the US ordered this to happen. The real problem is the fact that there is still rampant violence and a flimsy government. Bringing up Hussein in this case is pretty irrelevant if you ask me.

"So the USA "owns" this horror in that sense."

I think Powell had a point, and basically, he's right. This situation in Iraq is the USA's problem in many ways. We invaded, removed the power brokers, and have been dealing with the resultant vacuum ever since. Owning the problem means that the US has to do something about violence, corruption, and lack of governance. It does not mean that every act is somehow the US's fault.

Simply arguing that each and every act of violence is somehow the fault of the US, or the Iraqi govt, is pretty flimsy. This takes away responsibility from those who actually committed these acts. If law, government, and civil society collapse, is a murderer somehow no longer responsible for killing? You tell me. But by blaming the US and the Iraqi govt for this you are basically absolving the group that actually did this, IMO.

ryan a,You are rig... (Below threshold)
galoob:

ryan a,

You are right and I did not want to make the point be any bigger than the "Pottery Barn Rule," and that invasions have consequences far down the road.

It's going to be more and more in the Iraqis hands going forward.

"This sort of thing" = any ... (Below threshold)
SCSIwuzzy:

"This sort of thing" = any reporting at all.
Yes, Sadaam had Eason Jordan, CNN and Bagdad Bob making sure the worst news didn't get an audience when Sadaam ran the show...




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy