BAGHDAD — The American military announced on Thursday that three more American soldiers had been killed this week, as the combat-related deaths for United States forces in Iraq reached a monthly toll not seen since 2008.
Readers' Comments
Share your thoughts.
The deaths occurred Wednesday in southern Iraq, and the military did not disclose details on how the soldiers died. A military spokesman confirmed that they were killed by enemy attack. Recently, the increase in casualties has been attributed to rocket or mortar attacks on American bases by Shiite militias. American convoys have also come under increasing threat from improvised explosive devices.
The increased threat comes as the Pentagon begins to coordinate a withdrawal of all forces by the end of the year, an effort the military says has resulted in militants’ stepping up attacks so as to claim credit for pushing the Americans out.
The casualties are particularly striking given the diminishing numbers of American forces and their reduced combat role. Fewer than 50,000 troops remain, compared with more than 160,000 at the height of the war.
Fifteen American soldiers have been killed in June, 14 of them in hostile incidents. According to icasualties.org, an online database, this was the highest number of combat fatalities since June 2008, when 23 soldiers and Marines were killed.
The biggest attack came on June 6, when militants fired rockets at Victory Base Complex, the vast garrison near Baghdad’s airport, killing six soldiers. Kataib Hezbollah, a militia that American officials believe is supported by Iran, claimed responsibility for that attack.
Last August, President Obama declared that America’s combat mission had ended in Iraq, and while American forces have largely settled in to an advisory role to the Iraqi military, they are still in harm’s way, whether they are on their bases or moving around in convoys. According to the security agreement between Iraq and the United States, American forces are severely restricted in their ability to act unilaterally to face threats, a fact that has ratcheted up the anxiety — and the anger — among troops who find themselves under attack but unable to respond.
This is compounded by the Iraqi government’s historical reluctance to make targets of Shiite militias, many of which are linked to officials in or close to the Shiite-dominated central government.
Iraqi security forces have been far more aggressive in singling out Sunni insurgent groups such as Al Qaeda in Iraq than they have in carrying out operations against Shiite militants.
Meanwhile, the debate persists in Baghdad over whether the government of Iraq should ask the United States to extend the troop deadline and allow some units to stay and continue training exercises. The United States has indicated that it would say yes to such a request, although it is unclear what impact the latest attacks — and troop deaths — would have on that decision.
The increased threat comes as the Pentagon begins to coordinate a withdrawal of all forces by the end of the year, an effort the military says has resulted in militants’ stepping up attacks so as to claim credit for pushing the Americans out.
The casualties are particularly striking given the diminishing numbers of American forces and their reduced combat role. Fewer than 50,000 troops remain, compared with more than 160,000 at the height of the war.
Fifteen American soldiers have been killed in June, 14 of them in hostile incidents. According to icasualties.org, an online database, this was the highest number of combat fatalities since June 2008, when 23 soldiers and Marines were killed.
The biggest attack came on June 6, when militants fired rockets at Victory Base Complex, the vast garrison near Baghdad’s airport, killing six soldiers. Kataib Hezbollah, a militia that American officials believe is supported by Iran, claimed responsibility for that attack.
Last August, President Obama declared that America’s combat mission had ended in Iraq, and while American forces have largely settled in to an advisory role to the Iraqi military, they are still in harm’s way, whether they are on their bases or moving around in convoys. According to the security agreement between Iraq and the United States, American forces are severely restricted in their ability to act unilaterally to face threats, a fact that has ratcheted up the anxiety — and the anger — among troops who find themselves under attack but unable to respond.
This is compounded by the Iraqi government’s historical reluctance to make targets of Shiite militias, many of which are linked to officials in or close to the Shiite-dominated central government.
Iraqi security forces have been far more aggressive in singling out Sunni insurgent groups such as Al Qaeda in Iraq than they have in carrying out operations against Shiite militants.
Meanwhile, the debate persists in Baghdad over whether the government of Iraq should ask the United States to extend the troop deadline and allow some units to stay and continue training exercises. The United States has indicated that it would say yes to such a request, although it is unclear what impact the latest attacks — and troop deaths — would have on that decision.
15 Readers' Comments
- Oldest
- Newest
1.
Is there anyone out there of sane mind who thinks we should still have troops in Iraq?
Recommend Recommended by 19 Readers
2.
Why are our soldiers still in Iraq? Just seems pointless to keep them there.
Recommend Recommended by 13 Readers
3.
They are sitting ducks, and our government should be held accountable as to why they are still there. This is insanity personified keeping our forces in a land where we are and have always been the enemy. Get these troops out now.
Recommend Recommended by 14 Readers
4.
In 2003 when Bush and the Republican-controlled Congress abandoned our troops in Afghanistan with no mission, no leadership, no strategy and few resources, the outcome of the war in Afghanistan was decided: we lost. The collateral damage of Bush’s decision to invade Iraq was almost one trillion dollars of deficit spending with most of the money being transferred to Republican-friendly corporations as 40,000+ U.S. soldiers were needlessly killed or wounded in Iraq...and Obama continues to spend billions to fight a war in Afghanistan that we have already lost.
Recommend Recommended by 17 Readers
6.
7.
American troop deaths in Iraq? How long has this been going on? Ten plus years? Pull the troops from Iraq, pull the troops from Afghanistan, pull American troops (ruled by the egregious military/industrial complex of our United States) out of every Arab country and Pakistan, too. Pakistan is an American problem. Once all the ongoing billions of dollars greasing the wheels in our "ally" Pakistan are withdrawn, and better spent on domestic issues within the United States, then Pakistan will stand or fall or be hoist by its own petard as it should have been since the Year Dot when the Raj quit India (1947?). The meat-grinder of American troops in Iraq keeps grinding away. When will the people of this country rise up against that war in Iraq, that war in Afghanistan, that terrorism perpetrated by Pakistanis who sheltered Osama bin Laden for 5+ years? How many ore of our troops have to die for George W. Bush and Halliburton's excesses before an "American Spring" occurs, as it did in the 1960s? Then again Americans these days are dancing with the stars and doing their couch potato thing.
Recommend Recommended by 16 Readers
8.
The reason they are still over there is because there arent any jobs here.
Recommend Recommended by 10 Readers
9.
It's sad and painful to hear that the country is losing lives of the brave marines at a time when the nation is in midst of great debt crisis and perhaps Iraq is only the main cause of the debt.
Recommend Recommended by 4 Readers
10.
BRING THEM HOME!! For God's sake haven't they done enough. Iraq will probably never have a true democracy. If they aren't ready to take care of themselves now, they never will be.
It is time to stop playing daddy to these failed nations and time to stop sacrificing our young people and our treasury.
It is time to stop playing daddy to these failed nations and time to stop sacrificing our young people and our treasury.
Recommend Recommended by 10 Readers
11.
Well, this sort of stuff must make the friendly patriotic execs at Raytheon, Lockheed, General Dynamics, Northrup, etc., etc., drool in anticipation of many more years of militarized nation building. No doubt they are quietly pushing for another surge, and perhaps a full invasion of Iran and Syria while we're at it. That would certainly make shareholders happy, no?
Recommend Recommended by 8 Readers
12.
Why are we wtill hanging around in Iraq, I thought we were leaving.
How naive I am. The military/industrial/congressional complex wants the money to stay. I forgot for a moment!
How naive I am. The military/industrial/congressional complex wants the money to stay. I forgot for a moment!
Recommend Recommended by 7 Readers
13.
Just as a reminder, we were in Vietnam from 1955-1975, with 'advisers' from 1950.
What exactly would you do with all the young people overseas fighting? Bring them home to get lucrative and rewarding jobs in what I am told are our two main domestic industries: employment in prison and employment in a warehouse distributing goods made elsewhere.
You can see how we run into a problem of conflicting complexity since our third industry is war.
The son of one of my high school friends is on his fourth deployment to the Middle East and was with one of the Humvees blown up a few days ago. He was not physically injured but it is his third involvement and he has been injured twice before.
Shame, shame, shame on us as a country.
What exactly would you do with all the young people overseas fighting? Bring them home to get lucrative and rewarding jobs in what I am told are our two main domestic industries: employment in prison and employment in a warehouse distributing goods made elsewhere.
You can see how we run into a problem of conflicting complexity since our third industry is war.
The son of one of my high school friends is on his fourth deployment to the Middle East and was with one of the Humvees blown up a few days ago. He was not physically injured but it is his third involvement and he has been injured twice before.
Shame, shame, shame on us as a country.
Recommend Recommended by 8 Readers
14.
Bring them home. O'bomber now owns the war, it can't be blamed on Bush anymore. Why are we there? We know why the military wants to be there, no war, no medals, fewer promotions, less interesting careers. But should we spend trillions so that they can indulge their penchant for boy toys?
Recommend Recommended by 2 Readers
15.
Politicians seem to have established a test; if they can start a war then they have demonstrated strong leadership and proven they can keep the country safe. As it turns out, starting the war is the easy part, the real test of strength and leadership is being strong enough to end the war. So far strength and leadership have been in short supply in DC.
No comments:
Post a Comment