Thursday, November 04, 2010

Terrorists are not insurgents

I keep reading articles that say (or quote people who say) "insurgents" detonated bombs in Baghdad and "insurgents" threaten more attacks on Christians. I just looked up the definition of "insurgent" in the Advanced English Dictionary (AED, iPhone app). According to AED, an insurgent is a "person who takes part in an armed rebellion against the constituted authority (especially in the hope of improving conditions)." AED offers three synonyms: "insurrectionist", "freedom fighter", and "rebel". AED gives another definition of insurgent, with "guerrilla" as a synonym: a member of an irregular armed force that fights a stronger force by sabotage and harassment.

The people responsible for this week's massacres of Iraqis are NOT insurgents.

From Time:
'The bomb that destroyed the cafe near Abdullah's house in Baghdad's Almeen district was one of at least 12 explosives-laden vehicles that were detonated almost simultaneously by remote control in mostly Shi'a areas on Tuesday. The Ministry of Health reported 86 dead and more than 360 injured. Security officials have blamed Al-Qaeda in Iraq and claimed the terror group had support from unnamed regional countries. The U.S. military has been quoted describing the attacks as typical of the homegrown al-Qaeda groups.

The day before, gunmen overran a Christian church in the middle-class Karada neighborhood during Sunday services, instantly murdering the attending priest and an acolyte. In the hostage siege that followed, 52 people were killed and 73 wounded when attackers sprayed bullets and set off suicide vests. Officials said the gunmen were Arabic-speaking foreign nationals. Later, the al-Qaeda-linked Islamic State of Iraq released a statement warning of more attacks against Christians — another devastating blow to Iraq's milleniums-old Christian community.

...Says Joost Hiltermann, Midddle East director of the International Crisis Group: "I am far from convinced that the attacks were a game changer, but let's wait and see. They are part of a pattern of such attacks aimed at jump-starting civil war, modeled on the success of similar attempts in 2004-2005. Insurgents will be successful only if no government is formed, or if a government emerges that is not inclusive of all of Iraq's main communities." Hiltermann points out, however, that forming a government that placates each of Iraq's different communities, as was the case in 2005, has its drawbacks as well. "An inclusive government could be very good at maintaining security; however, it would not be particularly effective at governing," because divvying up a government among Sunni, Shi'a and Kurdish power brokers could leave the administration as hamstrung as ever as it tries to pass laws, distribute petrodollars and protect its citizens.'

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2029501,00.html#ixzz14LKhRD9c
I'm not even sure if the terrorists' primary aim is to incite civil war in Iraq. It seems the terrorists' primary aim is to punish the Iraqi population so that most Iraqis will condemn the current government. No need to kill Iraqis ya mujrimeen (murderers). The government in Baghdad is condemnable enough without your terrorism. The AQ-Saddamist alliance wants to show the world that Iraqis were better off under Saddam. They do this by terrorizing Iraqis.

24 comments :

C.H. said...

The article neglects to mention what is obvious: that Iraqis themselves have absolutely no interest in fighting another "civil war"...and that the only people interested in seeing that are non-Iraqi, AQ scumbags. Maybe Khamenei as well.

I know its sickening to say, but there's always the chance that the plans for Tuesday's wave of cafe bombings were orchestrated from groups of Takfiri warriors from a starbucks in Damascus, Cairo, or Riyadh.

oh...and if AQ is so horrified for "Muslim women" in Egypt, then why don't they get the hell out of Iraq and take the issue up with Mubarak? Also, if they are going to maintain the sympathy and support from the world's dumbest people (ie. Dolly) they should stop raping Muslim Iraqi women and turning them into suicide bombers.

Al-Qaeda in Iraq needs to die already...it keeps clawing its way out of history's dumpster even though the Iraqi people continue to step on its fingers and kick it back in.

Iraqi Mojo said...

' if AQ is so horrified for "Muslim women" in Egypt, then why don't they get the hell out of Iraq and take the issue up with Mubarak? '

A damn good question! They kill Iraqi Christians to avenge two Egyptian Muslim women who are still alive. The "Islamic State of Iraq" is an embarrassment to peace-loving Muslims.

Maury said...

"a member of an irregular armed force that fights a stronger force by sabotage and harassment."

You mean women and children don't qualify? Oh my God. Someone tell Bruno and Dolly. They're still on cloud nine from the brave mujahadeens glorious victories over the weekend.

As a matter of fact, Bruno was just carrying on about the "mountains of dead Iraqis" caused by the Great Satan's invasion. Takfiri sociopaths get no credit at all.

Maury said...

Bruno said...
Pity about all the mountains of dead Iraqis that the invasion created, eh? But then, dead Iraqis don't count, do they?

Poor Bruno. You can tell he's very broken up over these massacres. Drowning in tears.

Anonymous said...

the non iraqis that need to leave iraq are the american pigs. muslims and arabs helping their iraqi brothers defend themselves from american and iranian terrorists are not foreigners. they are freedom fighters doing their duty.

the killers are the americans and the terrorists are the americans. if you cheered for the us unvasion you deserve death and death you will get until you leave iraq and give it back to the real iraqis.

go fuck yourselves

C.H. said...

Anon,

How many American invaders did your "resistance" kill in their blessed raid on the church full of defenseless civilians? Was it 0? What about during their barrage of cafe and market bombs a couple of days later? 0?

Just thought I'd ask...

BTW, if you have a problem with Iran, why don't you go battle it out with the Revolutionary Guards? It'd be nice if your "resistance" and Khamenei's assortment of thugs decided to leave innocent people alone and rid the world of yourselves.

Bruno said...

[mojo] "The people responsible for this week's massacres of Iraqis are NOT insurgents. "

No shit. They're the Al Qaedists that the murkins wanted to attract to Iraq to "fight them there".

[mojo] "The AQ-Saddamist alliance wants to show the world that Iraqis were better off under Saddam. They do this by terrorizing Iraqis. "

Still forging ahead with the ol' AQ/SH mantra, eh? No, these attacks seem clearly to me to be AQ attacks on 'unbelievers' -ie- Shia.

Seems like they wanna kickstart the sectarian war again.

On another tack, I wonder if the murkins still want to partition Iraq?

Iraqi Mojo said...

I suppose it could be only AQ and AQ-linked salafi slime. But their terrorism benefits the Saddamists in that there was no such terrorism under Saddam, and I wonder if the Saddam-lovers at least give ancillary support to the murderers. Let's not forget that the Baathists under Saddam mass murdered Iraqis to maintain power. It wouldn't surprise me if the Baathists allied themselves with AQ. Let's also not forget that Saddam was allied with the Wahhabi-infested Kingdom of Saudi Arabia throughout the 80s. So although there is no strong evidence, I think it's quite possible there is an alliance between AQI and the Saddamists.

Iraqi Mojo said...

"they are freedom fighters doing their duty. "

and their duty is to detonate car bombs all over Baghdad and massacre Iraqi Christians at their Church?

Bruno said...

[mojo] "But their terrorism benefits the Saddamists in that there was no such terrorism under Saddam"

... because Saddam kept such riff raff out of Iraq, or in cells where they belonged.

[mojo] and I wonder if the Saddam-lovers at least give ancillary support to the murderers."

Anything is possible, I guess. I wouldn't be surprised if there are Baath who close an eye when the Al Qaedists slip past them. On the other hand, given the ruinous state of Iraqi security today, Al Qaeda probably wouldn't need much support to operate freely.

I wonder what happened to all the "ex" Al Qaedists the Americans recruited?

I wonder if Americans are still actively pursuing a segregated Iraqi model?

[mojo] "Let's also not forget that Saddam was allied with the Wahhabi-infested Kingdom of Saudi Arabia throughout the 80s."

Let's not forget that the murkins were allied to the KSA before Saddam controlled anything more than his own playpen, and lets not forget that the murkins are allied to KSA to this day.

Don Cox said...

" I wonder if the murkins still want to partition Iraq?"

I don't think so. That was only ever a minority view anyway.

Iraqi Mojo said...

I wrote this almost a year ago:

"I think it's important to note that the Iraqi Shia have shown great restraint this year in the face of Sunni extremist terrorism directed at them. The Iraqi Shia showed similar restraint in 2004 and 2005, after hundreds of bombings killed and maimed thousands of innocent Shia and Iraqi ISF. Even at the height of the sectarian violence in 2006 and 2007, Iraqi militia did not bomb markets in Sunni neighborhoods.

Even more remarkably, in my opinion, the Iraqi Shia did not bomb markets in Sunni neighborhoods before 2003. During the 24 years of totalitarian rule by Sunni dictator Saddam Hussein, Shia rebels did not cause mass casualty bombings in markets or police stations in his home town or any Sunni neighborhood, maybe because the Shia knew that doing so would result in the deaths of innocent people. The Shia did not bomb markets or Saddam's security forces, despite Saddam's campaign of imprisonment, murder, and ethnic cleansing against Iraq's Shia that started in 1979. Nor do Shia bomb markets in Doha, Riyadh, or Amman. It is simply immoral and unjust to punish innocent Sunni civilians for the actions of Sunni extremists. "

Anonymous said...

Maliki the traitor and puppet of both iran and the US has been bombing Iraqis since 1979. In his Dawa party he was in charge of what they called "office of jihad" and he specialized in bombing Iraqi school children, hospitals, and other civilian targets at the behest of the iranians.

They continued their bombings throughout the 80s until the Iraqi authorities were finally able to put an end to them chasing most of them out of the country and putting the rest of them in jail.

They did not come back until the Americans told them to hop a ride with the invading army which the cowards did.

Under Saddam the great there was security, stability, and fairness. The terrorists and murderes were put in jail or chased out. Unfortunately for the Iraqis the Ameriacns and their shia puppets destroyed Iraq making it easy for anyone to come in and do the dirty deed.

Anonymous said...

The funniest thing is maliki and his kangaroo courts sentenced Tariq Aziz, another great iraqi patriot to death for oppressing "religious parties" The funny thing is the DAWA party was the one that was bombing Iraqis. They even tried to kill the same aziz at a university in the 80s. Instead Maliki and his terrorist gang killed 30 innocent iraqi students who were going to class to learn and get an education.

The dumbfuck who runs this blog forgot not everyone here is a stupid american pig. Some visitors know who these people are and where they came from.

Anonymous said...

speaking of education. That no longer exists in Iraq. Now the intelligent educated Iraqis are in exile and the riff raff hide behind the Americans reading Sistanis drivel all day instead of science and literature.

Iraqi Mojo said...

I lived in Iraq from 1980 to 1982. The Iranians did bomb Baghdad from the air. But there were no bombings of markets, cafes, police, no car bombs. That is because Shia don't bomb people like your peeps do.

Your stories are the familiar khara from falastizi and belong in an Arab nationalist's dream. The Iraqi nation was taken hostage by an Arab nationalist who mass murdered Iraqis. But the Arabs (and Arab Americans) still love him. I am no longer as shocked.

Iraqi Mojo said...

My sister was hospitalized at Yarmook in 1982. There were no car bombs. But there was a shooting in Dujail, a Shiite town in the middle of sunniville. Somebody tried to kill saddam. It's too bad they missed. By 1982 saddam's regime had already killed, imprisoned, and expelled tens of thousands of Iraqi Shi3a.

Dolly said...

Those are your internal affairs, I really don't care if you have Saddam in 1979 or you take him down.

The issue here is the war between the two countries USA and Iraq, as started by the aggressor side U.S.

Anonymous said...

well the good news is that the iraqi kalb ibn al kalb is now showing his colors and his shia pathology. this is not about saddam afterall. its just about the shia hatred of ahl al sunna of which the majority of arab belong to.

no wonder saddam the great had to deal with shia this way. imagine this piece of shit kid if he was actually significant or had some power. imagine what he would do the iraqi people. now we all understand why saddam the great had to deal with these scumbags they way he did.

and btw, no, in the early 80s the Dawa terrorists who are now working with the US occupation and killing the iraqi people were bombing iraqi civilians and kids. they specialized in hitting schools and clinicks and buses. they were the first to do it and they are still doing it.

keep your lies for the stupid americans. it doesnt work with the educated arabs.

Anonymous said...

Maliki and the shia scumbags are the murderers, terrorists, and killers. unlike other murderers terrorists and killers, they are also cowards. they can do their dirty deeds only when being helped by the american occupation army and the Iranian revolutionary guards.

go read wikileaks last report to learn about what the shia scumbags are doing. Assuange is not a Wahabi or Bathist last we checked.

go fuck yourself asshole. When the resistance is done with you there will be none of you left. Nobody can save you. Good thing you are here in the US though. You dont really have to worry about it.

just keep sucking american cock kid. deep real deep.

Dolly said...

I don't think bruno is supportive of these attacks, maury. Instead → his position is that the deterioration of security is the fault of the U.S.

A view which has some merit, because the U.S. dismantled the state apparatus of Iraq.

However I don't take that position, because it removes the angle of "personal responsibility" ← which I support.

Meaning: it was the choice of the bombers to do it, and it was the choice of the Shia to betray their own country.

Dolly said...

☼ they should stop raping Muslim Iraqi women and turning them into suicide bombers.☼
-- C.H.

What kind of garbage propaganda is that.
In sunni doctrine it's illegal to have extramarital sex, let alone to rape believing women.
Secondly, there is no armed jihad obligation on women.

You probably got this trash from Iraqi Shia TV, they are the worst liars in the world. Worse than Fox News.
But you are just as bad for repeating their claims blindly. That is very typical of you C.H., you just parrot whatever is fed to you.

You just repeat whatever the most retarded phrase in the world is.
You are probably in favor of "Free Tibet" as well.
I have no idea about Tibet, but it strikes me as something lame enough for you to be an activist

Dolly said...

Basically Shia TV stations in Iraq are set up to attack the resistance, and to demonize the neighboring countries.
So they threaten prisoners into saying stuff for the camera.

I have tapes from years ago, some extremely disgusting and transparent propaganda. Almost literally like this:

Interrogator: Who sent you?
Prisoner: A combination of Al Qaeda and Ba'thists. One of them was literally half Saddam half bin Laden.
Interrogator: Where did you take off from?
Prisoner: Saudi Arabia, then Syria.
I: How did you find cash?
P: I sold some orphans into slavery, but I mostly survived by eating newborn children.
I: But why must you attack the innocent people of Iraq? Can't you see this it wrong?
P: *Sobs* Yes you are right sir! I'm seeing the error of my ways, and voting for Sarah Palin soon.

Then, there was an Al Qaeda video in 2005 or 2006 where this Shia bastard confesses to what they did (before being executed himself):

http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/600/32345830.jpg


Iraqi Mojo said...

Notice the duplicitous argument by the anonymous Arab American: he says there was no terrorism under saddam, and then says da3wa killed Iraqi kids and civilians.