Female suicide bomber injures 5 in Iraq

So when is this surge supposed to start working?

A female suicide bomber wounded five members of a local Awakening Council who were manning a checkpoint north of Baghdad on Saturday, a local police official said.

The incident happened in Dhuluiya, a Sunni town about 56 miles (90 kilometers) north of Baghdad, according to an official with the town's police.

Council members at the checkpoint opened fire on the woman after she failed to obey orders to stop, the official said, but the woman kept running and managed to pull the trigger of her explosives vest near the checkpoint.

More than 30 female suicide bombers have carried out attacks so far this year.

Awakening Councils are groups consisting mainly of former Sunni insurgents who turned against al Qaeda in Iraq. The U.S. military credits them with playing a key role in the recent nationwide drop in violence.

• Coalition forces have captured two suspected terrorists in separate operations near Taji, about 11 miles (18 kilometers) north of Baghdad, according to the U.S. military.

The first man is believed to be a member of an al Qaeda in Iraq network and reportedly helps provide forged identification documents for group operatives, the U.S. military said.

Intelligence reports suggest the second man recruits suicide bombers for al Qaeda in Iraq, the military said.

• Bahraini Foreign Minister Sheik Khalid bin Ahmed Al-Khalifa arrived in Baghdad on Saturday for a one-day visit with his Iraqi counterpart, an official with Iraq's foreign ministry told.

Al-Khalifa plans to meet with Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari to talk about the relationship between the two countries, as well as other issues, the official said.

Zebari is expected to hold a news conference later Saturday to discuss the meeting

Female suicide bomber injures 5 in Iraq

Comments: 7

Robert A. Oct 18, 2008, 9:07am EDT

The 06 elections happened, the Democrats who were supposed to rein this thing in (at least that's what the experts said the mandate of the election was) sat slack-jawed in Congress as Bush increased rather than decreased troops. "The Surge" was the new plan by the guys who predicted the war would last 2 weeks, that Iraq would pay for it's own reconstruction with oil revenues, declared major combat over, described the "terrorists" as being in their last throes, and all that's left is "dead-enders." There they were, prediction and statement after statement ...all wrong. Yet when they came up with the surge the Congress, and apparently the public went along with it. Three months we were told. They would try it out for three months, then three became six, and now it just goes on and on and on and on...

Well, when are we going to see that violence like the above (in this post) is what these guys needed to justify building their massive embassy and permanent military bases. They never wanted to "win." That characterization was just part of the big con.

reply to this comment

Jack E. Oct 18, 2008, 9:26am EDT

Your very right Robert all the way. The "sea of oil" is the only interest in Iraq. As far as rebuilding Iraq its not up to Iraq to rebuild what we destroyed. The rules of war say when you destroy infrastructure you rebuild it at your own expense.

The "end of major combat in Iraq" was just as big a lie as the surge or anything else that ever come out of a neocon mouth.

reply to this comment

Jeff H. Oct 18, 2008, 9:52am EDT

If you don't see the diffeence the surge has made you are deaf dumb and blind. But it doesn't surprise me to see petty liberals gleefully reporting any bad news they can find in Iraq as if it were good news for them. Pathetic.

reply to this comment

Jack E. Oct 18, 2008, 9:55am EDT

Jeff if you want to post you will post to the article and keep your wing nut name calling where it belongs. Or just do not bother at all because all personal attacks will be deleted.

reply to this comment

Robert A. Oct 18, 2008, 9:59am EDT

Well sure you move more troops to one area and violence goes down. But well after the surge, Anbar province was way up in violence. It's a civil war.

And, it's not about supporting bad news. It's recognizing the surge was never about "winning" but about staying forever to protect "our" oil, so whether it's working is irrelevant. The administration needs violence in Iraq to justify our permanent bases.

Jack, I agree with you about rebuilding, I was quoting Wolfowitz's comment before the invasion that "Iraq will be able to pay for it's own reconstruction with oil revenues, and relatively soon."

reply to this comment