At least 20 dead after suicide attack at funeral.
By on Apr 30th, 2007 at 11:17 am
At least 20 dead after suicide attack at funeral.
“A suicide bomber wearing a vest packed with explosives killed more than 20 people when he blew himself up among mourners at a Shi’ite funeral north of Baghdad on Monday… The attack took place inside a crowded mourning tent in the town of Khalis in volatile Diyala province… More than 35 people had been wounded, police said, adding they expected the death toll to rise.”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Health Care
Hoffman
Immigration
International Relations
Iraq
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Now here’s the bloody parallel to the warhawks’ imaginary Domino Principle. Once you start this shit, IT DOESN’T STOP!
April 30th, 2007 at 11:42 amBush gave the Iraqis the gift of freedom and this is how these knuckledraggers show their thanks? It’s disgusting. But as John Gibson said, if the war is lost, it’s the Iraqis who lost, since America has done everything it can to win.
April 30th, 2007 at 11:47 amHorrifying.
You’re right, barfly. It makes me sick that we started all this.
April 30th, 2007 at 11:48 amI’m so glad this isn’t a civil war…
otherwise I’d be worried
April 30th, 2007 at 11:50 amCan’t even go to a funeral now.
The Surge is not working. It’s such a mess. The best situation for the US is to get out ASAP. The situation cannot improve for the US unless they increase the occupation to very, very large numbers and that will not be allowed to happen. Get out now before it’s no longer a problem for Bush because you know he is just stretching it out so it becomes the next governments problem – and my guess is it will not be a republican government.
April 30th, 2007 at 11:55 amBut, but, but … if we pull out now they’ll kill each other!
April 30th, 2007 at 11:55 am#2 – “… since America has done everything it can to win.” Comment by firehead — April 30, 2007 @ 11:47 am
Well, except for ignoring the “War on terra” in Afghanistan to go traipsing off into Iraq for the oil, and for not committing sufficient troops in 2003 to secure Iraqi borders from foreign extremists, and for refusing to hold ourselves accountable for the mess we made in Iraq, and for the corruption that Pres. Bush allowed to run rampant in the “reconstruction efforts” by non-bidding companies, and for refusing to set any standards for “winning” in Iraq.
Other than those colossal failures, we did pretty much all we could do that the incompetence of the Bush Administration and the Republicans allowed us to do.
April 30th, 2007 at 11:57 amWell we have out of the way that pesky “one bomb a day” that Laura Bush talked about on Larry King Live a couple weeks ago. I guess this means that the rest of the day will be peaceful and productive in Iraqnam.
April 30th, 2007 at 11:59 amClearly, the “surge” is working
April 30th, 2007 at 1:52 pmSending in the troops should be our last option when it comes to establishing national security in countries abroad. Genocides like that in Sudan, and what happened in Somalia should never be allowed to happen again. Our soldiers are warriors, not peacekeepers. This is the primary reason why they have such a difficult time in un-warlike scenarios, like in Iraq. The enemy is not clearly defined as fighting goes on in the midst of everyday civilian life.
April 30th, 2007 at 2:15 pmAs a nation, in order to preserve our own security should help establish other secure nations, not by military means. Hunger and poverty are petri dishes for militants, terrorists, and sociopaths. Eliminating the growth sites for such terrible things would reduce the need for immediate military action. It would also, be less expensive and possibly even make money. As those who are impoverished move out of poverty and begin to develop all nations involved could begin to profit in a healthy, sustainable way.
Clearly this is the fault of Think Progress and all the other blogospheres that are obsessed with the one daily bombing in Iraq.
April 30th, 2007 at 2:47 pmZooey. #3. We started all this? You are crazy, baby. Do you believe that the middle east was one huge peaceful nirvana before the U.S. got involved. To be honest, it’s more like blaming law enforcement for a shooting at a crack house. I know. You can say “things were so much better under Saddam”. Ask yourself this question, would you really live (or want to live) under that kind of repression? Would you trade you freedoms of speech, religion, right to vote, women’s right; for security? Are freedom’s reserved for westerns, while those with a little darker skin can bear some tyranny in order to protect the status quo and security? Are they less than us?
April 30th, 2007 at 8:46 pm