The New Baghdad Bombing Campaign

November 12, 2008

Last week I highlighted a string of bombing in Baghdad. The series continued and today:

In Baghdad, the first car bomb ripped through a bustling section of downtown Baghdad during the Wednesday morning rush hour, killing four people and injuring 15. The blast occurred off Nasir Square in the heart of the city — a busy neighborhood of shops, pharmacies and photography stores.

A second car bomb exploded near a secondary school in the Shiite-dominated neighborhood of Shaab in north Baghdad. Iraqi police said five people were killed and 12 wounded.

Two bombs blew up within moments of each other in the Shiite district of New Baghdad, with the second explosion occurring just after police arrived to investigate the first.

One wonders why this surge in bombings occurs now.

The Bush administration is continuing to press for a Status of Force Agreement with Iraq, while all available polls and accounts say most Iraqis and most Iraqi politicians want the U.S. to leave.

One argument for the need to keep U.S. forces in Iraq to provide security for Iraqis. The recent bombings by whomever may reinforce that argument.

As does the AP coverage linked above by quoting this representative Iraqi voice:

Hassan Rahim, a 42-year-old barber who lives in the neighborhood, heard the blasts as he fixed his rooftop satellite dish.

"I do not know why Iraqi officials keep talking about the improving security in Baghdad everyday. We are fed up with such lies and we will hope that the security file in the capital will not be handed over to Iraqi government," he said.

Hmm – who in the discussion about a SOFA will mention the bombings and will quote this genuine and eloquent barber voice in the further argument?

There is specialist in the U.S. government known for the ability to creating tense situations in foreign countries. When was the last time John Negroponte visited Iraq? And when did this fresh string of bombing in Baghdad start?

Though I am not sure about the validity of this
account, but it may well be that Negroponte threatened Maliki and the
central government should the SOFA not get passed. Are the bombings and
the information campaign we are seeing right now part of that threat
against Maliki, the adversary in SOFA negotiations?

Does this fit the new September 2008 Field Manual FM 3-05.130 (pdf) – Army Special Operations Forces
Unconventional Warfare? (thx b real)

Page 72:

5-31. During the employment phase, SF units support indigenous or other irregular forces conducting operations against the common adversaries
of irregular organizations and the United States. Such operations may
involve any or all components of the irregular organization. The
classic conception of UW employment is SF Soldiers advising and assisting guerrilla forces to raid, ambush, sabotage, and otherwise interdict the adversary in ways designed to drain that hostile power’s morale and resources through military activities up to and including combat.

…
5-33. Regardless of the type of operation employed, the overall purpose is to achieve strategic political-military objectives. The U.S. Army specially selects, trains, equips, and prepares SF Soldiers to persuade irregular forces to act in concert with such U.S. strategic political-military objectives.

Bod Woodward quotes Bush on the Joint Special Operations Command:

Asked in an interview about the intelligence breakthroughs in Iraq, President Bush offered a simple answer: "JSOC is awesome."

What are current "U.S. strategic political-military objectives" in Iraq under Bush?

Posted by b on November 12, 2008 at 20:34 UTC | Permalink

Comments

Well spotted, b. I would suspect that is exactly what went on; much like the ‘work’ done on the mosques in order to propagate the initial sectarian violence. These men are so utterly evil that their deeds surpass the imagination of most folks who blithely read and believe comments put out by the Iraqi version of Joe the plumber.

Posted by: Fred | Nov 12 2008 20:51 utc | 1

b, Why did he discuss the SOFA with the Kurds? Or did he discuss something else?
Something else, as in… this?
Barazani warns of “civil war” if pact not signed

President of the Iraqi Kurdistan region on Wednesday expressed his doubts that the proposed Iraqi-U.S. security pact would be signed, warning of a “civil war” in Iraq if the pact is not approved, as Iraqi security forces are “unable” to control the situation.
“If the pact is not signed, the situation in the country may deteriorate to the point of a civil war,” Barazani said in a press conference in Arbil that was attended by Aswat al-Iraq.

It does sound like the sort of musing a tête-à-tête with Negroponte could inspire.

Posted by: Alamet | Nov 13 2008 0:09 utc | 2

Let me throw this in for dark humor:
Iraqi PM nominated for Nobel Peace Prize

Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 for his role in maintaining peace and security in Iraq, a source from the cabinet said.
“The nomination of Maliki for the Nobel Peace Prize came because of his role in maintaining peace and security in Iraq,” the national information center said in a statement received by Aswat al-Iraq.
The statement did not add more details.

Posted by: Alamet | Nov 13 2008 0:11 utc | 3

I doubt that the surge in bombings would be enough to change Iraqi opinion on the security agreement. They seem to be determined to be rid of the US. If it is the US (possible), they have misinterpreted the potential consequences.
By the way, if you’re interested in ancient history, a draft report passed today over the desk of a colleague (I wasn’t supposed to see it) about the reconstruction of the Golden Dome in Samarra. Although bland, it confirmed what we all thought, that the destruction of the Golden Dome in 2006 was carried out out by professional demolitionists with professional explosives. Indeed more holes were drilled than were actually used. I never heard of al-Qaida in Iraq having that sort of skill; they’ve never otherwise shown evidence of it.
It will never be proven, of course. The point of the reconstruction project has been to remove all evidence that might exist of who did it.
That was one of the rare operations of the type you describe, b, that did succeed. Today, it would be foolish, though it seems the US doesn’t evaluate the situation in Iraq properly. That’s why you could be right. They still think a few car bombs will provoke conflicts. They need to do another Samarra, though even that wouldn’t succeed.

Posted by: alex | Nov 13 2008 0:14 utc | 4

Negroponte it seems visited Iraq in early October and after a short stopover in Baghdad he went to Sulaimaniya the Kurdish part of Iraq. Why did he discuss the SOFA with the Kurds? Or did he discuss something else?
there was some discussion on this @ the dead sofa link last month.
#8 link discusses Barzani receives VP Abdel Mahdi and Ambassador Croker in Baghdad (includes satterfield)
23, i don’t link to my source but i remember doing some googling that day re the neonuts he’s meeting w/brazini the same day brazini is meeting w/the prez of turkey and and also meeting w/officials from the baghdad contigency. now why would that be? because if the sofa is in question who’s going to be on team kurdistan/separate states? meanwhile, as b has documented we have another killing in mosel and the recent reports of kurdish militias killing christiansd in mosel. mosel being a region that the kurds want to usurp.
telegraphing upcoming bombs that haven’t happened yet syncing w/negropontes visit last month was a big red flag.
will these people stop once cheney is not in ‘control’? sometimes i wonder about our ‘secret comrades’. i imagine if the iraqis have made it thus far they will make it into next year.
god, it is so dreadful, isn’t it.

Posted by: annie | Nov 13 2008 1:18 utc | 5

the Golden Dome in 2006 was carried out out by professional demolitionists with professional explosives. Indeed more holes were drilled than were actually used.
alex, check don’s comments at my last link, specifically 19.

Posted by: annie | Nov 13 2008 1:21 utc | 6

@ alex #4
“a draft report passed today over the desk of a colleague (I wasn’t supposed to see it)” doesn’t quite cut the mustard. In fact, as a source for a very, very serious accusation it is silly. Not that I doubt that there was (US-led) professional involvement, but this sort of told by a friend of my aunt is counterproductive for anyone attempting to find real evidence. If your colleague genuinely did have such evidence in their possession they should be made aware that this single act led to the torture and death of many thousands of people. If they have any decency or conscience at all they should at least ensure that the document is copied and later leaked.

Posted by: Fred | Nov 13 2008 1:43 utc | 7

The current spike in bombings could also be connected to Maliki’s desire to get rid of the awakening groups. The U.S., having designed and administered the entire program, could easily exploit the rogue elements within it against Maliki. This would serve many interests, not the least of which is the U.S. in pressuring for the SOFA – through an unmistakable threat of re-igniting the civil war. Because for the U.S.the entire occupation has been little more than a protection racket. First the Shiites, then the Sunnis, now the Shiites again.

Posted by: anna missed | Nov 13 2008 1:58 utc | 8

The U.S., having designed and administered the entire program, could easily exploit the rogue elements within it against Maliki.
as opposed to doing the dirty deed themselves. sounds highly plausible. isn’t this one of negroponte’s fortes?
as a source for a very, very serious accusation it is silly
hi fred. as an online community, the source is as good as the word of the poster who after time either builds credibility, or doesn’t. if the information alex passes on to you seems silly, skip it. if, on the other hand alex earns credibility in your estimation, incorporate it. as for telling us it is silly..hm.. who are you?
but this sort of told by a friend of my aunt is counterproductive for anyone attempting to find real evidence
how is it counterproductive? does it waste your brainpower?

Posted by: annie | Nov 13 2008 2:24 utc | 9

fyi mcclatchy

Kirkuk
– A magnetic bomb detonated under a civilian car in Ummal neighborhood in downtown Kirkuk. The car belongs to a member of the committee to implement article 140 of the Iraqi constitution which deals with the disputed areas between the Kurdistan region and the central government. The member was injured with three others who were with him.

other horrible incidents not mentioned.

Posted by: annie | Nov 13 2008 3:22 utc | 10

#9
“but this sort of told by a friend of my aunt is counterproductive for anyone attempting to find real evidence
how is it counterproductive? does it waste your brainpower?”
It is counterproductive simply because it is silly, without a shred of evidence being presented. Counterproductive in the sense that any accusation as serious as this requires a bit more evidence than the assumed credibility of an anonymous blogger, otherwise the whole blog site will assume the status of a coven of tin-foil hatters who choose to believe simply what they want. I thought this site was better than that.

Posted by: Fred | Nov 13 2008 3:24 utc | 11

LAT: n Iraq, a sudden spurt of violence

Baghdad residents at the scenes of some of the latest explosions had their own theories, some of which dovetailed with Grimsley’s. Many linked the attacks to negotiations between the United States and Iraq over a security agreement that will govern the presence of U.S. forces in the country after the United Nations Security Council resolution authorizing U.S. forces in Iraq expires Dec. 31.
Rafid Mohsen Saffar, who has a clothing shop near the site of the Saadoun Street blast, linked the violence to neighboring Iran, which opposes the pact and wants to see U.S. troops leave Iraq.
“Some sides will increase the violence to have their influence on the security agreement,” Saffar said.
Kamal Yaseen agreed, but he had his own conspiracy theory. “I don’t rule out the idea that an American agent planted it [the Saadoun Street bomb] to send a message to the government that violence will persist if there is no security pact,” he said.

I don’t see any Iranian interest in provoking more violence to get the U.S. to leave …

Posted by: b | Nov 13 2008 8:48 utc | 12

The problem, Fred @7, is that the evidence is not definitive, and most of it actually has been known a long time. Don Bacon’s summary, mentioned by annie @6, mentions most of the points, though there were also local witnesses. I don’t know whether those witnesses are still alive.
If you’re going to accuse the US government of crimes against humanity, you have to have the evidence really tied down. In any case, even if the evidence were 100% irrefutable, do you think that would put Negroponte or someone in front of a court?

Posted by: alex | Nov 13 2008 8:55 utc | 13

O holding the line in Iraq

Posted by: anna missed | Nov 13 2008 10:13 utc | 14

I don’t see any Iranian interest in provoking more violence to get the U.S. to leave
It’s a well-known widespread feeling among Iraqi Sunnis that Iran is behind everything, and is planning to take over the country. I’d call it a delusion, there’s doesn’t seem to be any rationality behind it. But it’s an observable fact. It may have historical origins.
So if you see an Iraqi being quoted accusing Iran, you can normally discount it.

Posted by: alex | Nov 13 2008 10:42 utc | 15

I regard Iraq as a Ba’ath nation, and will continue to do so for as long as no one mentions this hypothesis as an actual possibility (however remote).
We read and write about a conflict between Sunni and Shia, as if the Ba’ath were only Sunni; as if much of the Sunni were not Ba’ath; as if no Kurds had any place in the Ba’ath party, etc. etc. In effect, as if the Ba’ath had disappeared from the face of the earth in March of 2003.
If this disappearance is a fact, then it must have been established as such long ago–and I don’t know that it ever has been (someone please correct me if I’m wrong). And if it hasn’t been so established, or can’t be, then I see no reason to accept it as a fact. And lacking a reason to accept it as fact, I’m really bound to entertain the contrary possibility that it’s a falsehood, an exercise in wishful thinking.
Or to put it another way, what fun it would be to watch Obama negotiating with the Ba’ath….

Posted by: alabama | Nov 13 2008 11:58 utc | 16

Counterproductive in the sense that any accusation as serious as this requires a bit more evidence than the assumed credibility of an anonymous blogger
there were some witnesses at the time as i recall. one of the cool things about the fog of war is you can just kill off witness and then claim anyone who accuses you of being a nutjob or delusional.
the US military pronounced it was the work of AQ hrs after it happened w/no investigation whatsoever. why don’t you tell them their analysis is counterproductive?
maybe you should chastize the LATIMES for publishing this

“I don’t rule out the idea that an American agent planted it [the Saadoun Street bomb] to send a message to the government that violence will persist if there is no security pact,”

.
otherwise the whole blog site will assume the status of a coven of tin-foil hatters who choose to believe simply what they want. I thought this site was better than that.
i like the ‘coven’ touch, sounds so …scary. what are you doing here? you could be tainted by an association w/a blog like this. excuse me while i review daniel pipes (circa 02/03/2006, one week after the bombing) wax on about how ‘cool’ civil war is.

TONY JONES: Can you explain to me how you could regard a civil war in Iraq as anything but a strategic disaster?
DR DANIEL PIPES: Well, let me start by emphasising that it it is a humanitarian disaster and in no sense do I want one to take place. It’s a horrible prospect. Should, however, it take place I don’t, think from the point of view of the coalition it is necessarily that bad for our interests.
TONY JONES: Tell me what sort of trends you’re talking about? Because I’m still struggling to understand how it would be anything but a strategic disaster.
DR DANIEL PIPES: Well, in the first place, there would be fewer attacks on our forces in Iraq as they fight each other. More broadly outside Iraq. There would be fewer attacks on us as the Shi’ites and the Sunnis attack each other….
TONY JONES: Isn’t it far too cold-blooded a calculation for the invading force to say, “Well if the Shi’ia and Sunni are shooting and killing each other, at least they’re not shooting at us?”
DR DANIEL PIPES: ….. I’m just saying should there be a civil war, it is not necessarily all that bad for our interests……. I’m looking at it in a cool way and saying there are advantages to it…..
TONY JONES: It’s just slightly shocking for someone to say that so boldly, that’s the point I’m making.
DR DANIEL PIPES: Well I think it’s useful to look at it coolly and say, “What are our interests here?” After all, we are looking at Iraq from our national interest point of view. Will we be all that set back by this? I say no.

Posted by: annie | Nov 13 2008 13:50 utc | 17

Fred #7–
Copied and leaked! Leak something that can be traced to you and you lose your job.
No wrongs are about to be righted here. We are just piecing together what happened from fragments of evidence. As already mentioned, the US was the only credible suspect from the beginning, based on motive, who benefits, the blast pattern itself, and what witnesses said they saw at the time. (Witnesses did not finger the US. But the descriptions did.)
We already knew from the blast patterns this was a professional job.
Alex #4–
Thanks for your post.
What is actually new is that after lo, these many years, the US is bothering to destroy the evidence.
Things are definitely changing in Iraq. For one reason or another, that mosque is soon going to be in the hands of people who can look around and ask questions. Ooops.

Posted by: Gaianne | Nov 14 2008 7:12 utc | 18

NYTimes
They can start to get on your nerves, those…Sunnis…those…Shiites…those…Al Queda guys…those…militants…those…insurgents….

Posted by: alabama | Nov 14 2008 13:13 utc | 19

A step long mulled over comes to pass:
Reidar Visser – An Initiative to Create the Federal Region of Basra Is Launched

The Basra parliamentarian and former member of Wifaq Wail Abd al-Latif has announced that a petition requesting a referendum for the creation of the federal region of Basra (Iqlim al-Basra) as a standalone entity has been submitted to the Iraqi electoral commission, featuring 34,800 signatures.
(snip)

While this is not the larger 9 governorate federal region that the SIIC has been pulling for, SIIC’s bosom buddy the Kurdish Alliance sounds pretty pleased with the move so far.

Posted by: Alamet | Nov 15 2008 0:35 utc | 20

Sadr urges unified prayers in Baghdad to reject pact

Shiite leader Muqtada al-Sadr on Friday called for performing unified prayers next Friday at Baghdad’s al-Firdos square to reject the Iraqi-U.S. security pact.
(snip)

The part that caught my eye is,

“I call on Arab governments to launch enlightenment and reform and to use their authorities to drive the occupation forces out of the Arab homeland’s territories, because we would not be a unified nation as long as we are occupied,” he explained.

I’m not sure of the meaning here… Could Sadr be talking about Arab nations’ unification, the old Baath dream?

Posted by: Alamet | Nov 15 2008 0:44 utc | 21

Just to make everything clear — all the bad things happening in Iraq,and many other places, are the terrible fruit of devilish schemes of Al-Qaida.
Al Qaida is the source of all evil and, once it is destroyed, pulled up by the roots, a millenium of peace and prosperity will enfold the earth.
Anyone who disagrees is an Al-Q agent.

Posted by: Chuck Cliff | Nov 15 2008 12:30 utc | 22

Teh funny Chuck.
Does that include the PNAC ?
I read enough in the Mountain Runner to know something about how the U.S. military include media control in their purview : just ask the troops about their online ‘freedom’to blog and surf online sometime.
The U.S. has no interest in al Maliki succeeding in anything except continuing to be the agent of Iraq’s destruction. This is just a matter of fragmenting opposition to oil company supremacy. Two oil exec’s in the White House would have no interest in any such !
Riiight. http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB207/index.htm
Heh. Tom Engelhardt has always seemed to have his head screwed on straight to me ; he laid this out in all its glory about the same time as I realized the significance of an obscure little game plan.

Posted by: opit | Nov 17 2008 0:53 utc | 23

Back to Main