Un: Iraq 'ready To Explode' In Recent Wave Of Deadly Attacks

[News_Editor]

BAGHDAD, IRAQ (BNO NEWS) -- With the wave of recent attacks in Iraq and hundreds of deaths in the last weeks, the United Nations (UN) on Thursday urged for immediate action as the country is "ready to explode."

The increasing violence in the Middle Eastern country may re-ignite widespread sectarian strife unless the country's leaders take immediate action, the top UN envoy warned amid the latest wave of deadly attacks.

Anbar province governor reportedly escaped an assassination attempt when twin bombs exploded near his convoy, injuring four of his bodyguards, as a fresh wave of deadly bombings struck the Iraqi capital of Baghdad. Over 100 people have died since Monday, when a number of bombings in Baghdad killed more than 50 people. In May alone, estimates of over 500 deaths have been reported in such attacks.

Martin Kobler, the UN Secretary-Generalâs Special Representative and head of the UN Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI), condemned the attack against the governor's convoy In a news release issued in Baghdad in which he voiced his dismay at the horrific toll of lives lost following the "new criminal wave of attacks against innocent civilians," particularly targeting the capital.

"Systemic violence is ready to explode at any moment if all Iraqi leaders do not engage immediately to pull the country out of this mayhem," Kobler stated, reiterating the call he made on the country's leaders earlier this week.

On Wednesday, in an exchange of views with European parliamentarians, Kobler voiced serious concerns over the heightened level of violence in Iraq and the dangers of the country falling back into sectarian strife, if decisive action is not taken by its political leaders.

"The country stands at a crossroads," he stated, calling for a stronger European Union role in dealing with the developments unfolding in the country, and for increased interaction with the Iraqi Council of Representatives.

(Copyright 2013 by BNO News B.V. All rights reserved. Info: [email protected].)

[F430murci]

Great! I wish it would explode already. A really big boom large enough to take out some neighbors would be ideal. Big boom, biiigggggg boom.

[NeverSure]

Just your typical nice, peaceful Muslims. Nothing to see here.

[Steely Dan]

Unfortunately globalization and the resultant immigration means the explosion is not contained in the problem area. The Sunni-Shia spat taking place in Iraq is the same problem taking place in Syria. A little research reveals violent Sunni versus Shia clashes occurring in both the UK and Australia. Best we stay out of this rather than make the same stupid mistake a third time.

[phil2]

thanks to the.US for distabilizing the country. they should go fix the problem.

[FDog]

Just shows democracy is not the best thing for every country. Another Hussein type is needed to keep the country relatively in line.

In another decade or so I imagine there will be another war their to rid the nation of another despot because the west thinks democracy is the be all and end all. The cycle will continue.

[Mosha]

thanks to the.US for distabilizing the country. they should go fix the problem.

Unfortunately Tony Bliar (sic) swallowed the lie too

[NeverSure]

thanks to the.US for distabilizing the country. they should go fix the problem.

Hmmm. There were more than 20 countries involved in that attack, and the UK provided 1/3 of them. It was about weapons of mass destruction which are now believed to have been moved to Syria. Regardless, UK intelligence thought they were there as did other countries. Tony Blair stood before his leaders and said so and the UK voted to go to war.

Thailand even had troops in that attack. Your country probably did too.

Oh well...

[PoodMaiDai]

Just shows democracy is not the best thing for every country. Another Hussein type is needed to keep the country relatively in line.

In another decade or so I imagine there will be another war their to rid the nation of another despot because the west thinks democracy is the be all and end all. The cycle will continue.

This may sound like a horrible thing to say, but there are some groups of people who need to be ruled by an iron fist. Parts of the Middle East only work if they have heavy handed dictators.

[F430murci]

Just shows democracy is not the best thing for every country. Another Hussein type is needed to keep the country relatively in line.

In another decade or so I imagine there will be another war their to rid the nation of another despot because the west thinks democracy is the be all and end all. The cycle will continue.

This may sound like a horrible thing to say, but there are some groups of people who need to be ruled by an iron fist. Parts of the Middle East only work if they have heavy handed dictators.

Absolutely. Not much for us to do but exit stage left and let country sort itself out. I do feel for Iraq, but some of the other countries over their can burn to the ground and then the world would be a better place.

[Potosi]

Just your typical nice, peaceful Muslims. Nothing to see here.

But there is. Groundwork being done for the continued presence of the American military in Iraq.

[crusader79]

Meanwhile, George is seeing real progress on his dog paintings.

[GentlemanJim]

thanks to the.US for distabilizing the country. they should go fix the problem.

Hmmm. There were more than 20 countries involved in that attack, and the UK provided 1/3 of them. It was about weapons of mass destruction which are now believed to have been moved to Syria. Regardless, UK intelligence thought they were there as did other countries. Tony Blair stood before his leaders and said so and the UK voted to go to war.

Thailand even had troops in that attack. Your country probably did too.

Oh well...

Oh well...!!!!! 1 Million dead and ....Oh Well !!!!

As for the weapons of Mass Destruction, are you SERIOUSLY telling me that you believe that crap. You seriously believe they were moved to Syria? Is that why we will go in and wax that place next, then when we dont find them they will have moved to ....Iran maybe. It makes me sooooo angry that people with a view like you have above, that are so blindingly gullible are given the right to vote.

If it is so easy to accept that WMD's that never existed were actually moved to Syria, it should be much easier for you to accept that Bush and Blair LIED. They lied through their teeth. Get over it, World leaders do it. There is enough bad in the two of them to do us all a lifetime.

Edited June 2, 2013 by GentlemanJim

[F430murci]

GJ:

The question I have is if it was really about WMDs, then why didn't we follow them into Syria. Why didn't we hear about all of thus moved into Syria evidence in 03/04,

If is was all about WMDs, then why did we stay and pursue Sadam after knowing, allegedly, WMDs were gone into Sryia?

Could it be Bush lied about true mission from the start? His purpose from day one was to remove Sadam, save face, show US he was string and in control and etc. WMDs, whatever.

[Exsexyman]

GJ:

The question I have is if it was really about WMDs, then why didn't we follow them into Syria. Why didn't we hear about all of thus moved into Syria evidence in 03/04,

If is was all about WMDs, then why did we stay and pursue Sadam after knowing, allegedly, WMDs were gone into Sryia?

Could it be Bush lied about true mission from the start? His purpose from day one was to remove Sadam, save face, show US he was string and in control and etc. WMDs, whatever.

Any thoughts as to why US forces are training Al Qaeda terrorists in Turkey and Jordan? To do their bidding in Syria? I thought they were your enemy! Wake up!

[GentlemanJim]

GJ:

The question I have is if it was really about WMDs, then why didn't we follow them into Syria. Why didn't we hear about all of thus moved into Syria evidence in 03/04,

If is was all about WMDs, then why did we stay and pursue Sadam after knowing, allegedly, WMDs were gone into Sryia?

Could it be Bush lied about true mission from the start? His purpose from day one was to remove Sadam, save face, show US he was string and in control and etc. WMDs, whatever.

He lied. Blair lied. Hans Blix and everyone else says they lied. They wanted Hussein out, he was no longer useful and had threatened to use the Euro as their oil currency. There were no WMD's. There was so many satellite assets positioned over Iraq at the time, you could not scratch your ass without someone seeing it, let alone move WMD's into Syria. It was about oil, it was about money, it was about the arms industries, that is the truth and in that respect and that respect alone....Mission Accomplished.

[F430murci]

GJ:

The question I have is if it was really about WMDs, then why didn't we follow them into Syria. Why didn't we hear about all of thus moved into Syria evidence in 03/04,

If is was all about WMDs, then why did we stay and pursue Sadam after knowing, allegedly, WMDs were gone into Sryia?

Could it be Bush lied about true mission from the start? His purpose from day one was to remove Sadam, save face, show US he was string and in control and etc. WMDs, whatever.

He lied. Blair lied. Hans Blix and everyone else says they lied. They wanted Hussein out, he was no longer useful and had threatened to use the Euro as their oil currency. There were no WMD's. There was so many satellite assets positioned over Iraq at the time, you could not scratch your ass without someone seeing it, let alone move WMD's into Syria. It was about oil, it was about money, it was about the arms industries, that is the truth and in that respect and that respect alone....Mission Accomplished.

Exactly, so the old we they had them, buy moved them to Syria argument is just mire intellectual dishonesty or simple denial.

[GentlemanJim]

GJ:

The question I have is if it was really about WMDs, then why didn't we follow them into Syria. Why didn't we hear about all of thus moved into Syria evidence in 03/04,

If is was all about WMDs, then why did we stay and pursue Sadam after knowing, allegedly, WMDs were gone into Sryia?

Could it be Bush lied about true mission from the start? His purpose from day one was to remove Sadam, save face, show US he was string and in control and etc. WMDs, whatever.

He lied. Blair lied. Hans Blix and everyone else says they lied. They wanted Hussein out, he was no longer useful and had threatened to use the Euro as their oil currency. There were no WMD's. There was so many satellite assets positioned over Iraq at the time, you could not scratch your ass without someone seeing it, let alone move WMD's into Syria. It was about oil, it was about money, it was about the arms industries, that is the truth and in that respect and that respect alone....Mission Accomplished.

Exactly, so the old we they had them, buy moved them to Syria argument is just mire intellectual dishonesty or simple denial.

I don't believe there is anything remotely intellectual about it. The stupid make up the masses, no need to worry about the intelligent. Spout off a story aimed at convincing the stupid and as a Government you can do whatever you want and you will still get re-elected. Maybe the US Government learned that skill-set from Thai Governments.

[F430murci]

Haha, I was trying to be polite, lest I get a time out!

[Scott]

I once crossed from Syria to Iraq. There was no formal border crossing and the crossing was made in a small boat. The countries were enemies and the Assad gov't wasn't even on speaking terms with the Saddam gov't. I doubt they would have hidden his WMD for him.

[NeverSure]

thanks to the.US for distabilizing the country. they should go fix the problem.

Hmmm. There were more than 20 countries involved in that attack, and the UK provided 1/3 of them. It was about weapons of mass destruction which are now believed to have been moved to Syria. Regardless, UK intelligence thought they were there as did other countries. Tony Blair stood before his leaders and said so and the UK voted to go to war.

Thailand even had troops in that attack. Your country probably did too.

Oh well...

Oh well...!!!!! 1 Million dead and ....Oh Well !!!!

As for the weapons of Mass Destruction, are you SERIOUSLY telling me that you believe that crap. You seriously believe they were moved to Syria? Is that why we will go in and wax that place next, then when we dont find them they will have moved to ....Iran maybe. It makes me sooooo angry that people with a view like you have above, that are so blindingly gullible are given the right to vote.

If it is so easy to accept that WMD's that never existed were actually moved to Syria, it should be much easier for you to accept that Bush and Blair LIED. They lied through their teeth. Get over it, World leaders do it. There is enough bad in the two of them to do us all a lifetime.

I've made it clear that I didn't like Bush and I didn't approve of the War and I still don't.

What has never been explained to me, is why both British and US intelligence said there were weapons of mass destruction. Not just Blair and Bush, but the whole cadre. I never heard it was nukes, but rather other WMD's

Link

"In 1995, UNSCOM's principal weapons inspector, Dr. Rod Barton from Australia, showed Taha documents obtained by UNSCOM that showed the Iraqi government had just purchased 10 tons of growth medium from a British company called Oxoid. Growth media is a mixture of sugars, proteins and minerals that provides nutrients for microorganisms to grow. It can be used in hospitals and microbiology/molecular biology research laboratories. In hospitals, swabs from patients are placed in dishes containing growth medium for diagnostic purposes. Iraq's hospital consumption of growth medium was just 200 kg a year; yet in 1988, Iraq imported 39 tons of it. Shown this evidence by UNSCOM, Taha admitted to the inspectors that she had grown 19,000 litres of botulinum toxin;[54] 8,000 litres of anthrax; 2,000 litres of aflatoxins, which can cause liver failure; Clostridium perfringens, a bacterium that can cause gas gangrene; and ricin. She also admitted conducting research into cholera, salmonella, foot and mouth disease, and camel pox, a disease that uses the same growth techniques as smallpox, but which is safer for researchers to work with. It was because of the discovery of Taha's work with camel pox that the U.S. and British intelligence services feared Saddam Hussein may have been planning to weaponize the smallpox virus. Iraq had a smallpox outbreak in 1971 and the Weapons Intelligence, Nonproliferation and Arms Control Center (WINPAC) believed the Iraqi government retained contaminated material."

And this from some of the most liberal, anti-war people in the US congress, before 9/11:

“[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.” — From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998

So I don't, and never have, seen any proof that it was lies rather than universal blunders that caused people to declare that there were WMD's.

As for Syria, I should have said that "many believe" which they do. I don't know what to believe.

I don't know what happened, and I don't know how so many can adamantly claim that they do know. All I know is that the leaders of the US and Great Britain voted to go to war and did, along with about 20 other nations, and I never understood why. If they knew there were WMDs I don't know why they didn't also know where they were, and take them out from the air in a day or two.

I don't think I'll ever know.

[Jingthing]

Drats! I guess this means Iraq is off the "alternative retirement destination" list for at least a few more years ...

[lukey1979]

thanks to the.US for distabilizing the country. they should go fix the problem.

 

Hmmm. There were more than 20 countries involved in that attack, and the UK provided 1/3 of them. It was about weapons of mass destruction which are now believed to have been moved to Syria. Regardless, UK intelligence thought they were there as did other countries. Tony Blair stood before his leaders and said so and the UK voted to go to war.

 

Thailand even had troops in that attack. Your country probably did too.

 

Oh well...

Wow.. You don't still believe all that rubbish do you? I didn't think there were many people like you still around.

[NeverSure]

thanks to the.US for distabilizing the country. they should go fix the problem.

Hmmm. There were more than 20 countries involved in that attack, and the UK provided 1/3 of them. It was about weapons of mass destruction which are now believed to have been moved to Syria. Regardless, UK intelligence thought they were there as did other countries. Tony Blair stood before his leaders and said so and the UK voted to go to war.

Thailand even had troops in that attack. Your country probably did too.

Oh well...

Wow.. You don't still believe all that rubbish do you? I didn't think there were many people like you still around.

I believe only what I read. Do not confuse attack with invasion. Here is a list of countries which deployed troops in that war in 2003, the year of invasion. It lists the dates deployed and withdrawn.

It includes Thailand.

Is this enough for you? Link

Edited June 3, 2013 by NeverSure

[Scott]

We are getting a lot of topics running on Iraq. I will close this one and posters are welcomed to comment here:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/643829-1000-killed-in-may-iraq-hit-by-worst-wave-of-violence-in-5-years/

//Closed//