Iraq: Gunmen kill US-allied Sunni group leader

BAGHDAD — Gunmen killed a senior leader of a U.S.-allied Sunni group and six of his guards in an ambush south of Baghdad, a group member and residents said Tuesday.

The U.S. military confirmed casualties in an attack on the man's house but denied that he was killed.

Sheik Ibrahim al-Karbouli's convoy came under attack Monday in Youssifiyah, according to one of his followers and several residents in the town. All spoke on condition of anonymity out of fears for their own security.

The sheik was a senior leader of the so-called awakening council in the town, which is a former al-Qaida stronghold about 12 miles south of the Iraqi capital.

The two versions of events _ one from a group member and several townspeople and another from the U.S. military _ could not be immediately reconciled.

Al-Qaida has frequently mounted reprisal attacks against awakening councils because of their success in cutting into support for the terror movement among Iraqi Sunni Arabs.

Police also discovered the bodies of three awakening council members who were abducted several days ago, police Brig. Gen. Sarhat Qadir said.

Meanwhile, a series of bombings killed two people and wounded 19 others Tuesday in a second consecutive day of attacks in Baghdad. A day earlier, roadside bombs killed two U.S. soldiers and nine Iraqis in the capital and surrounding areas.

Story continues below

advertisement

One of Tuesday's blasts struck the commercial Bab al-Muadham district in the capital, killing one person and wounding five others, police and health officials said.

Another roadside bomb went off on Palestine Street, a major thoroughfare in Baghdad, wounding seven people, authorities said. It was the second such attack on the same street in as many days. Two Iraqis _ a soldier and a civilian _ were killed in Monday's bombing.

The police and health officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren't authorized to release the information.

Meanwhile, Iraqi leaders remain deadlocked in talks over a power-sharing dispute that is blocking U.S.-backed provincial elections. The disagreement over the oil-rich city of Kirkuk forced parliamentary officials to delay a planned vote on the provincial elections bill until Tuesday, at the earliest.

The United States considers provincial elections, which are expected to redistribute power at the local level, essential to reconciling Iraq's rival ethnic and religious communities.

But Kurds object to a measure that would equally distribute provincial council seats among Arabs, Kurds and Turkomen in Tamim province, which lies just south of their own semiautonomous region in Iraq's north.

___

Associated Press writer Saad Abdul-Kadir and Hamid Ahmed contributed to this report.

Comments

[Destin]

So, the occupation and surge of Iraq has led to the complete destabilization of Iraq, playing right into the hands of Al Qaeda by destabilizing countries for them so that they don't have to. So then anyone and everyone is invited in to do any amount of killing they want, and so it goes, just another day in Iraq.

Someone wanna clue Bush in, that this isn't exactly the best strategy to pursue?? Hell, I'm just a nobody and I could have told him all this stuff would happen. I've been in the military and know what the hell goes on. His ass never served.

If I've said it once, I'll say it again, the surge has been a colossal failure. Our troops are still there, no idea when they are coming home, presumably 100 years from now, violence hasn't gone down, bombs still going off in and around baghdad which is the most heavily fortified and militarized place on the planet.

Now, let's hear those neocon moonbats dispute that.

[Ramirez]

The surge was not just an increase in troops but also a change in strategy. It has worked and the situation has improved dramatically. Even 0bama admits this.

Wars do "destabilize" but that's not a bug, that's a feature. Destabilization of Iraq was (obviously) the goal of the invasion. Saddam was overthrown and the country is now moving toward democracy.'

As far as "inviting" people in to do violence... oddly enough that was also part of the plan. It was called the "flypaper" theory and was based on the idea of planting a US army right in the middle of the region, forcing AQ to throw every resource they have against it. So instead of attacking school children in Cleveland AQ is fighting in Iraq against hard American men with guns. The result has been tens of thousands of AQ bagged and out of the game. It's an ugly business but we are winning at it.

Final point: "Moonbats" is a term applied only to Progs and Lefties and has no application to Republicans. The comparison term for Rightwingers is "Wingnuts."

"Neocon Wingnuts" would be a valid term.

[Destin]

So who is making these rules about lefties, moonbats and wingnuts? Oh yah, you neocons who say we are all delusional and that our recession is just a mental thing, that gas prices aren't to be believed, to buy gas anyways.

Who are you trying to kid with your propaganda piece there?? Sure, the "flypaper" tactic has been the only thing to work, and that was by pure accident, unless you forgot that the war was over on May 1, 2003 as declared by Bush himself. He said it, not me, so if you are mad about that, respond to him, cause I didn't say it.

So, when is the stabilization of Iraq gonna take place?? Or is the destabilizatio of Iraq intended and is designed to give us a reason to be there for the next 100 years so that McCain doesn't have his own "read my lips" moment in time??

And with all the explosions, and assassinatoins going on in and around Baghdad, totally unimpeded and not even slowed down by the "surge"..... how the hell can you sit there and honestly say the surge has worked??

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/iraq
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6579335.stm

Read those links. And then I want you to come back here and tell me that violence has slowed down as a result of the surge. Hell, I don't think the surge was even a speed bump.

[esquire07]

Lol... what a tragic joke the illegal occupation of Iraq is. Over a Million dead Iraqis, 4200 dead Americans, and Billions in profits to the Oil companies and Arms dealers - including millions to the Bush and Cheney.

The US will simply BUY another Iraqi "ally." Really no big deal.... once of em gets killed, just buy another.

Dead US Troops/Iraqis = Halliburton Profits = Money in Dick Cheney's bloodied War Criminal Pockets.

Its really that simple.

[BobC46]

Chalk it up as a win for the Huffpo Moonbats.

[Soundofthunder]

Isn't it obvious what's happening? Radical elements within Iraq who want to undermine what little stability was gained through the Anbar awakening as to instigate a resurgence of violence to 2006 levels. If his campaign is consistent I'm sure John McCain will tell us that these radicals endorsed Obama for president.

SOT

[BobBrown]

surge or no surge, the sunni and shia will keep on killing each other until they find a way to make a peace that have eluded them for hundred of years. Why are we wasting our money and blood there is something that only McCane and neo cons do not understand.

[Roguewolf]

According the statistics compiled by the U.S. military, about 1,600 civilians were killed in "ethno-sectarian" incidents in Baghdad in December 2006, at the height of violence, compared with handful who"ve been killed in sectarian violence since May.

Baghdad " For years, when she approached Iraqi Army checkpoints and produced an identification card for soldiers to study for clues about her sect, Nadia Hashim used a simple formula to signal the mostly Shiite Muslim force that she, too, is a Shiite.

"I am one of you," she"d say.

The soldiers would harass Sunnis, but they"d simply wave Hashim through.

Now her pat line gets her an official reproach. When a relative used it recently, a soldier admonished the driver and the passengers. ""We are Iraqis, and you shouldn"t say such a thing,"" recalled Hashim.

The 35-year-old mother of three said that for her and countless other Iraqis, the fact that soldiers are now using nationalist rather than sectarian language is a significant change. Being a Shiite is no longer key to her survival.

With violence subsiding throughout Baghdad, residents said that sectarianism is becoming less pervasive. They"re starting to think of themselves as Iraqis, not as hostages to hyphenated, sectarian identities.

[nogimmicks]

Mc Cain undestands it, they just want to keep American soldiers there. He and his neocon friends never hesitated about killing Mc Abels to achieve their goals.

[KOisGod]

Defenders of bushcon, new policy here, you now have to give rank and serial # of your Rovian bloviator battalion. If you fail to do this, we will water board you (its now legal in defense of the survival of this country) to find out your affiliation to the Rovian bloviator battalion. Thank you for your cooperation in advance.

[eladora]

Oh its a win all right. The US oil companies are in there right now taking over the production etc of the oilfields. I think we know now how to describe victory. Thats why Bush is talking timetable now.
The oil co are in , so we can come home and soldiers can die no more for the $$$.

[foxbat]

I don't doubt the fact that overall violence in Iraq is down and it happens to coincide with several non-related items, including "The Surge", that have had a cummulative effect on the numbers; however, has anyone else noticed an interesting pattern? McCain has touted that The Surge, by itself, worked and did things like providing protection for the various Sunni and Shia leaders so they can "do their thing." How many Iraqi leaders have been killed by insurgents since the start of The Surge? The guy that McCain named as being protected by The Surge, Abdul-Sattar Abu Risha, was killed in Sept2007 at The Surge peak and in just the last month or two there have been at least three other "leaders" who have also been killed.

Insurgents are doing less wide-scale attacks, but they've become more selective and also going after higher-scale/value targets and systematically taking out various Iraqi leadership personnel. They've spent less time attacking US troops and more time going after softer civilian/infrastructure targets. It makes sense. Without thinking about the political solutions, we'll claim success ... just like the way we went in ... blast away and the post-war will take care of itself.

The Surge has been a limited success, but arguing about its success/failure now detracts from the bigger issue: what's next and how do we now adapt to an enemy that's adapted to our strategy? The insurgents have gotten over The Surge, when will we?

[SamEllison]

Ramirez, why did the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld regime wait more than three and a half years to do something different, like the surge?
Politics, that's what. They waited until the Dems stood up and did something.
Your president used our blood and treasure for political gain.
It's true, if you are honest with yourself. I hope you feel real good about that.

[Ramirez]

The doctrine of the "surge" had to wait until someone developed it. The Democrats tend to dismiss the surge as simply adding more troops but it was much more than that. It was an entirely new counterinsurgency strategy developed by Petraeus. You probably knew that.

I have no idea what you mean about "Dems stood up and did something." That makes no sense.

[obamanation31]

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/8/5/103331/8843/580/562840

[CostaMesaJoe]

McCain should ask that Sunni leader how the surge is working out for him. Oh wait...........

[Ramirez]

Here's a story pulled from the dustbin of history:
****

Friday, April 20, 2007
07:00 Mecca time, 04:00 GMT

Iraq war 'lost' says top Democrat

The US war in Iraq is lost and a further build-up of US troops in the country will not recover the situation, the senior Democrat in the US senate has said.

"This war is lost, and this surge is not accomplishing anything, as is shown by the extreme violence in Iraq this week," Harry Reid, the senate Democratic majority leader, told reporters.

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2007/04/2008525142923542568.html

[mathme]

I believe that Rachel Maddow summed it up well yesterday-- "success" in iraq is making Iraq safe enough for us to stay there forever. The people and the nation are NOT better off than they were with Saddam in power.

[Jackyldo]

HuffPost's Pick

When you fight another Army one wins, one loses or you have a stalemate.

When you fight an ideology, Communism, Radical anything, it can not be defeated by military might alone. You can put all the troops on the ground you want, but it will have it's ups and downs.

This is a lesson we should have learned from Vietnam and Russia certainly learned in Afghanistan.

They will keep you there and fight you forever if you try and wipe them out, for it is NOT possible.

[Redrover666]

Sure it's possible. When regular folks in Iraq get tired of insurgents hiding in their houses, it will end. Which is happening now.

[ReasonIsMyReligion]

Being paid by the word? Does cut&paste count?

[captnEarl]

The (SURGE) has killed an additional 1000 of our finest if it is working WHO is it working for. Iraq can only be controled by a strong armed ruler such as Sadam not by a U.S. installed so called democracy.
This total occupation has been in vain and so has all loss of life and limb and the TOTAL destruction of a country for the exception of the OIL FIELDS. For shame For shame

[marymansour]

That's an arrogant and dishonest Bush/Cheney White House notion that we can impress our American governing system on Iraq. This war is a travesty. Surge, purge. We need to get out of there and let these people reestablish - eventually - a government that works for them. I am sure it will be another strongman dictator sort. Iraq is an irresponsible war and idea that has failed miserably.

[Ramirez]

From Michael Yon:

"The war continues to abate in Iraq. Violence is still present, but, of course, Iraq was a relatively violent place long before Coalition forces moved in. I would go so far as to say that barring any major and unexpected developments (like an Israeli air strike on Iran and the retaliations that would follow), a fair-minded person could say with reasonable certainty that the war has ended. A new and better nation is growing legs. What"s left is messy politics that likely will be punctuated by low-level violence and the occasional spectacular attack. Yet, the will of the Iraqi people has changed, and the Iraqi military has dramatically improved, so those spectacular attacks are diminishing along with the regular violence. Now it"s time to rebuild the country, and create a pluralistic, stable and peaceful Iraq. That will be long, hard work. But by my estimation, the Iraq War is over. We won. Which means the Iraqi people won."

http://www.michaelyon-online.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1690:success-in-iraq&catid=34:dispatches&Itemid=55

[Teyshar]

Buy the movie Lawrence of Arabia. Just watch it. When you are done tell me if the war is won when if we repeat the same insane history it just postpones this crap for another 50+ years.

[Ramirez]

I like that movie. Always have.

Sometimes Hollywood takes liberties with history, though.

[Nyland8]

" ... We won. Which means the Iraqi people won."

Well I'm sure that those who continue to suffer privation, indignity, joblessness, loss of limbs organs and eyesight, will all be delighted to hear they've "won". I'm sure the 5 million people who've been displaced - a fifth of the total country - will be happy to hear they've "won". I'm sure the countless dead couldn't be happier about having "won".

Perhaps you can explain to them in Arabic what a Pyrrhic victory is. I'm sure they'll all be delighted, just as they're all likely to forget who has been responsible for the unfathomable failure of the last 5 years.

Just as you seem to have forgotten.

8

[Roguewolf]

Sounds like the situation in Kosovo before we saved them.

[Ramirez]

All victories are Pyrrhic to the dead.

Wars are fought and won to change the present and build for the future.