Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

the total number of insurgent attacks yesterday: 175, ...

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-31-05 08:20 AM
Original message
the total number of insurgent attacks yesterday: 175, ...



>
>
> ........
> Monday, Jan. 31, 2005, at 4:16 AM PT
>
>
> Everyone leads (online, at least) with Election Day in Iraq, where the turnout was unexpectedly high and the mood jubilant. As many as 8 million people, or almost 60 percent of eligible voters, cast ballots, sometimes within earshot of insurgents' repeated mortar, rocket, machine gun, and suicide attacks, which proved less deadly than feared but still killed 44. "The election was a victory of our own making," Iraq's national security chief told the New York Times. "Today, the Iraqi people voted with their own blood."......

> The Wall Street Journal's front-page story (subscription required) is, bizarrely, alone (as far as TP can see) in putting the casualty count in perspective by mentioning the total number of insurgent attacks yesterday: 175, well more than the recent average of 50 to 60, not that the U.S. makes these numbers public any more. Inside, the Journal also highlights the role of homegrown militias (sub. req.), such as the "Defenders of Baghdad Brigade," in securing polling sites across the country. Many such groups began spontaneously springing up over the last month and U.S. forces decided to back them, outfitting some with weaponry and body armor. The NYT, for its part, fronts a story on the massive security effort that helped keep the deaths from mounting.

http://slate.msn.com/id/2112889/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
WCGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-31-05 08:24 AM
Response to Original message
1. Maybe those security troops joined in the protection
in order to rearm themselves........
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jackie97 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-31-05 08:31 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Well, yeah...
God forbid that Iraqis want to protect themselves. I don't see that as a bad thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WCGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-31-05 08:36 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. Just more guns on the street
and less credibility to the Interim Government creadability...

Hell what can they protect if the US and the private Militias are front and center?

It would be like handing over responsibility to Cut Swilia or how ever that beret wearing SOB from New York spells his name, was given a neighborhood to guard with little or no restrictions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 10:53 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC