It appears that the remnants of the Ba’ath party, some Saddam loyalists, and the rest of the Islamist riff-raff that has congregated in Iraq have decided to spending the beginning of Ramadan doing what they do best- killing innocents:
A series of suicide bombings shook Baghdad early today, including an attack on the offices of the International Committee of the Red Cross and blasts at four Iraqi police stations that punctuated two days of bloody violence in this capital city.
Iraq’s police chief and deputy interior minister, Ahmad Ibrahim, said at a news conference that 34 people had been killed and 224 had been wounded in the attacks. He said 26 of the dead were civilians and 8 were police officers; 65 police officers and 159 civilians were wounded.
The explosions plunged the capital into chaos at the outset of the Muslim fasting month of Ramadan. Ambulances raced through the streets and smoke rose from smoldering cars blown up in the blasts. Iraqi police officers dug through rubble to search for bodies.
I guess this means in the future we do not need to schedule military action around Muslim holy days.
*** Update ***
Arash points to this piece on public reactions in Iraq. If you don’t feel for the poor people of Iraq after reading this, you have no heart.
David Perron
Why would we bother? It’s no accident the Yom Kippur War is also known as the Ramadan War.
DANEgerus
We certainly shouldn’t retaliate… that might ‘inflame’ the ‘Arab Street’…
M. Scott Eiland
“We certainly shouldn’t retaliate… that might ‘inflame’ the ‘Arab Street’…”
Not a problem, if it’s the part of the street where the perpetrators or anyone cheering for them is standing.
Scott
Welcome to Ramadan, as practiced by the more devout members of the Religion of Peace(TM).
The Commissar
Has anyone dubbed it “Bombadan” yet?
Arash
Actually, Sadat was a secular Arab nationalist so he wouldn’t care whether it was Ramadan or Christmas to fight his war.
Here are some Muslim responses to the bombing.
David Perron
I suppose all Egyptian and Syrian soldiers participating were secular as well? Given that both systems of government adhere to Islamic law (Egypt to a lesser degree, I’ll grant) it’s difficult to reconcile Ramadan attacks with nearly all of the non-Christian population being Islamic. Unless, of course, Ramadan isn’t nearly as significant as some maintain, or that some Muslims are more than willing to hide behind it.
David Perron
Ok, none of the above had anything whatever to do with the bombings in Iraq. It was all in response to John’s comment:
“I guess this means in the future we do not need to schedule military action around Muslim holy days.”
This does lend a little urgency to us getting Iraq to self-government and set up with trained law enforcement. Still, there’s a couple of misperceptions that need to be addressed. If the attacks were made more likely by the presence of U.S. military, why weren’t they directed AT U.S. military?
Dean
David:
Two reasons. The simpler is that American military targets are hard to get at. Yeah, individual soldiers can be targeted, even individual jeeps and stuff. But that’s nickel-and-dime.
The other is that you don’t have to attack the US military, if the aim is to eliminate the US military.
Attack targets like these (and the media), get the international public to be outraged (against the US, NEVER the perps), and you’ve got the formula for getting the US to withdraw.
Think of it as the terrorist equivalent of blitzkrieg. Just as blitzkrieg envisioned winning without having to bludgeon your way through the enemy’s front-line forces (by bombing their command, transport, and support lines), and knifing through their crust, so terrorists have figured that winning the PR war gives them their goal without having to blast every fire-base, checkpoint, and cantonment.
Arash
I suppose all Egyptian and Syrian soldiers participating were secular as well?
No, but I don’t think that’s of any significance. Most probably were Arab nationalists. Furthermore, those Muslims who did fight were following orders. Would Muslim soldiers in the U.S. army stop serving in Iraq because of Iraq? Sadat was a secularist who was hated and later assassinated by the Muslim Brotherhood. Sadat to this day is hated because he served the interests of others instead of the interests of his own people.
Given that both systems of government adhere to Islamic law (Egypt to a lesser degree, I’ll grant) it’s difficult to reconcile Ramadan attacks with nearly all of the non-Christian population being Islamic.
Unless, of course, Ramadan isn’t nearly as significant as some maintain, or that some Muslims are more than willing to hide behind it.
Syria does not adhere to Islamic “law”; it’s the most secular Arab country out there. Egypt.. well, Egypt is up to your own interpretation. I certainly wouldn’t call it Islamic.
No, I’m not saying that Ramadan is supposed to be a peaceful month. It certainly is for me, but others may disagree. The Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) fought the Great Battle of Badr and won despite being outnumbered three to one. For me Ramadan is time for focus on the inner-self; it’s the Holiest month. Other Muslims may disagree, but nobody is “hiding behind it.” That suggestion is just ridicilous.
David Perron
Arash, I think we’re talking past each other. The suggestion that we delay any attacks during Ramadan didn’t originate in the countries being attacked; it originated here. Without, as we’ve seen, any basis in fact.
Arash
Alright. But didn’t we slow down the bombing during Ramadan in 2001? I vaguely remember something similar.
David Perron
I think it was discussed, and discarded. But I can’t recall, and I’m too lazy to Google it right now.