{"id":68149,"date":"2006-10-31T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2006-10-31T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2006\/10\/31\/octobre-2006-en-irak-plus-de-100-gis-tues\/"},"modified":"2006-10-31T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2006-10-31T00:00:00","slug":"octobre-2006-en-irak-plus-de-100-gis-tues","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2006\/10\/31\/octobre-2006-en-irak-plus-de-100-gis-tues\/","title":{"rendered":"Octobre 2006 en Irak: plus de 100 GI’s tu\u00e9s"},"content":{"rendered":"

Aujourd’hui, les forces am\u00e9ricaines en Irak ont eu deux tu\u00e9s suppl\u00e9mentaires, atteignant 103 tu\u00e9s pour le mois d’octobre. C’est l’une des plus fortes pertes statistiques (par mois) depuis l’invasion du printemps 2003, et un chiffre symbolique (plus de 100 tu\u00e9s) frappant.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tL’agence Associated Press d\u00e9taille cette situation statistique dans une d\u00e9p\u00eache<\/a> aujourd’hui: \u00abOctober 2006 is already the fourth deadliest month for American troops since the war began in March 2003. The other highest monthly death tolls were 107 in January 2005; at least 135 in April 2004, and 137 in November 2004.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tLa situation en Irak en constante d\u00e9gradation est caract\u00e9ris\u00e9e par le paradoxe d’un pouvoir am\u00e9ricaniste qui ne cesse de critiquer plus ouvertement le pouvoir irakien qu’il a lui-m\u00eame mis en place, apr\u00e8s avoir suivi le m\u00eame processus (jusqu’en janvier) avec l’\u00e9quipe pr\u00e9c\u00e9dente. (Il y a m\u00eame des rumeurs de complot US contre ce pouvoir en place, r\u00e9pandues presque sans dissimuler.) Bien entendu, tout cela n’a rien \u00e0 voir avec la situation en Irak.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tLa seule chose qui pr\u00e9occupe l’administration GW Bush, aujourd’hui, c’est la situation int\u00e9rieure US, avec les \u00e9lections du 7 novembre. La seule importance qu’a la situation irakienne pour l’administration, c’est son effet sur la situation int\u00e9rieure am\u00e9ricaniste. Toutes les initiatives washingtoniennes, comme le voyage \u00e0 Bagdad hier du conseiller de Bush en mati\u00e8re de s\u00e9curit\u00e9 nationale Stephen Hadley, ont pour motif d’obtenir un changement de la situation en Irak qui influence favorablement la perception du public am\u00e9ricain et vite (!), avant le 7 novembre<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tThe Independent<\/em> r\u00e9sume la situation de cette fa\u00e7on<\/a>: \u00abIt was strenuously denied in Washington yesterday that the Hadley trip was a fence-mending exercise, but tensions clearly linger. The Americans are unhappy at the Iraqi government’s apparent reluctance to take on the militias and Mr Maliki was infuriated when Zalmay Khalilzad, the US ambassador in Baghdad, publicly pinned him last week to an agreed series of benchmarks for action. Iraqi officials believe that the timetable was announced to try to convince the US public that the Bush administration had a grip on the crisis barely a week before mid-term elections in which the Republicans may take a severe beating. Whatever the truth, one thing is certain: Iraq is the issue uppermost in the country’s minds ahead of the poll. Some commentators are talking about a tipping point in public opinion against the war, as the sectarian violence seems only to intensify, with US forces caught in the middle. A Fox News poll at the weekend found that 26 per cent of likely voters said that Iraq was the most important factor, more than twice as many who mentioned the economy or terror.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tMis en ligne le 31 octobre 2006 \u00e0 08H51 (15H30)<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Aujourd’hui, les forces am\u00e9ricaines en Irak ont eu deux tu\u00e9s suppl\u00e9mentaires, atteignant 103 tu\u00e9s pour le mois d’octobre. C’est l’une des plus fortes pertes statistiques (par mois) depuis l’invasion du printemps 2003, et un chiffre symbolique (plus de 100 tu\u00e9s) frappant. L’agence Associated Press d\u00e9taille cette situation statistique dans une d\u00e9p\u00eache aujourd’hui: \u00abOctober 2006 is… <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[4141,5137,857],"class_list":["post-68149","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-elections","tag-hadley","tag-irak"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/68149","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=68149"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/68149\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=68149"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=68149"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=68149"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}