Talk:Iraq

Assyrian translation

I have added another Assyrian translation, however the translation I added has voweling for inexperienced Aramaic readers

sincerely -Assyrio —Preceding undated comment added 01:37, 13 March 2010 (UTC).

Prior constitution

How about some more informtion regarding the goverment under Saddam, I know he was an asshole but I believe that the goverment under the Bath party was secular, is that correct? I say it because I read that Iraq is now an Islamic State. --98.212.30.23 (talk) 01:04, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Reference 53/54

These two references now give a bad link —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jokem (talk • contribs) 19:23, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Etymology

Can I suggest the following minor amendment to improve the readability of one sentence

another maintains according to Professor Wilhelm Eilers, "The name al-‘Irāq, for all its Arabic appearance, is derived from Middle Persian erāq lowlands".[9]

should be changed to:

According to Professor Wilhelm Eilers, however, "The name al-‘Irāq, for all its Arabic appearance, is derived from Middle Persian erāq lowlands".[9]

Pmbeck (talk) 10:11, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

marwah farouk

i love love love IRAQ this my life and my country too.i will kill everyone talk about IRAQ>>>

marwah farouk

i love love love IRAQ this my life and my country too.>>> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.93.142.99 (talk) 18:29, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Elections on March 7th, 2010

... were accompanied by terroristic attacks.

Already in the first hours of the opening of the elections in serveral cities nearby the polling stations exploded bombs and hit grenades.

The Ministery of the Interior informed about the killing of 38 persons and hurting of 110 by these attacks.

Two houses collapsed in Bagdad after explosions (in the districts Ur and Schurta al-Rabia killing 12 respectively 4 persons in). The "Green Zone" and other districts of Bagdad were hit by more than 60 grenades.

Some polling stations were closed after the attacks. People frquented the stations less after the attacks.

The polling commission critized deficient protection of the voters.

Sunnites priests and politicians promoted the poll. Car traffic partially has been forbidden an Saturday and the day of the poll, Sunday.

SITE (a company in Washington, DC watching Islamic websites) informed that the Al-Kaida branch in Iraq warned electors to attemd the poll, declared a curfew for Sunday.

Source: [1] (Austrian public radio-station, in German). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.248.72.43 (talk) 15:10, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

image removal

Another editor ( this computr lacks the font set to read user name) removed images here. I reverted once. They reverted me back. Should these images be in this article or should they remain out? Please opine here. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 22:35, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

I think they should be included. --Kyknos (talk) 22:40, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

I don't think there is a need for macabre pictures to be included. and there are plenty of pictures as it is. ܥܝܪܐܩ (talk) 22:43, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

I agree with the guy who has squiggles for a name. The photos may be relevant for an article about those specific events, but this is an overview article on the modern country of Iraq, not for titillation. (Taivo (talk) 22:53, 26 March 2010 (UTC))

Improving discussion of factors leading to 2003 invasion

The bolded portion of the following quote is vague:

"The Bush administration made a number of allegations against Iraq, including that Iraq...had secret weapons laboratories in trailers and isolated facilities throughout Iraq;[citation needed] none of these allegations have proven true."

Whether "allegations" refers to all allegations by the Bush administration or just the examples given is unclear. If it refers to all allegations, then it is false, since:

"The battle led to...the uncovering of a chemical weapons facility at Sargat."

It is more accurate to state that "The extent of weapons facilities proven to exist in Iraq after the U.S.-led invasion was not as great as publicly feared by the Bush Administration."

Also, any discussion of the invasion is incomplete without a reference to the events of 9/11/01, which polarized American opinion against those perceived to be sympathetic to terrorists, such as Saddam Hussein (see Deroy Murdock, Saddam Hussein's Philanthropy of Terror (Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace at Stanford University, adapted from a September 22, 2004 presentation), last updated January 4, 2006).

Romans annexed Iraq?

There is a problem with this sentence in the first subsection of the History section of this article:

A Central Asian tribe of ancient Iranian peoples known as the Parthians later annexed the region, followed by the Romans, then the Sassanid Persians.

Did the Romans officially annex Iraq, or rather, Mesopotamia? I think not. The invasions by the Roman emperors Trajan, Marcus Aurelius, Septimius Severus, and Caracalla amounted to very brief and fleeting moments of Roman control, with Parthian authority established soon after in each case. Indeed, when Trajan invaded, he explicitly did not annex Iraq, but instead tried to install a loyal client ruler, i.e. Parthamaspates of Parthia, who was quickly overthrown by the Parthians because they considered him a turncoat, not a legitimate ruler. The Romans also pillaged and burned the Parthian capital Ctesiphon to the ground on more than one occasion before withdrawing, which is certainly not the act of those intending to stay. This sentence is also misleading in another way, since it asserts the Sassanids "annexed" the region after the Romans. When the Sassanids under Ardashir I conquered Iraq, Artabanus IV of Parthia was the defender of this region, not the Romans! In fact, the easternmost settlement the Romans were able to capture from Parthia and maintain for any significant amount of time was Dura-Europos, taken during the invasion of Avidius Cassius in 164 AD and never returned to Parthian hands. There's just one problem: Dura-Europos is in eastern Syria, not Iraq. This sentence certainly needs some reworking; the Roman invasions should certainly be mentioned, but annexation is a fantasy inserted by someone who is unfamiliar with historical subjects.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 02:53, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh, and to anyone who asserts otherwise, I would suggest reading Bivar, A.D.H. (1983). "The Political History of Iran Under the Arsacids," in The Cambridge History of Iran (Vol 3:1), 21-99. Edited by Ehsan Yarshater. London, New York, New Rochelle, Melbourne, and Sydney: Cambridge University Press.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 04:12, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Right, since no one else seems to object or care about this issue, I'll be bold and take care of it.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 07:30, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Photoshopped pictures?

Could we replace those two obviously processed pictures with something a little less absurd looking? Amber388 (talk) 16:35, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Please add Iraq

Iraq is missing from:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_colors_of_national_flags

Thank you.