As result of series of deadly attacks in nine cities and towns in Iraq, around 32 people were killed and more than 100 injured on Sunday, September 30, 2012. With Sunday's casualties, more than 250 people have been killed and 800 wounded insurgents. According to available reports, attacks centered in Baghdad and the nearby areas of Taji, Madaen and Tarmiyah.

However, insurgents are viewed weaker than in the past years but are still able to carry out deadly attacks and also target heavily protected areas across the country. Several times they put spectacular show by exploding police headquarters and attacking government offices. Meanwhile it should be noticed that resurgence of insurgents, unlike Afghanistan, seems too hard if not impossible.

The US combatant troops left Iraq after years of engagement. They left the country when the government became strong enough to deal with al-Qaeda and other armed opposition. Unlike their engagement in 2003 when thousands were delighted seeing them, there was a public demand for their withdrawal. The Sunni sect, from the very start was against the presence because they viewed them as force that ended to their long-rule over the country. The case was similar for radical Shiite group led by Moqtada al Sadr.

Months ago when Washington started discussing about the destiny of military engagement after 2011, a very strong protest organized by followers of Moqdata al-Sadr, saying they would get Americans out of the country by force. President Barack Obama came to White House mainly because of opposing Iraq war, because it was justified on the basis of secret developing nuclear arm and supporting Al-Qaeda which proved, later on, unauthentic and false reports.

Former president, G.W. Bush attacked Iraq and brought down Saddam Hussein for two reasons: his support to al-Qaeda and second having mass destruction weapons. Right after 9/11 when anti-terrorism hatred changed into gigantic storm and global mentality supported US military activities to go after them and hunt their leaders like al-Qaeda, proportionately Washington decision makers resolved to ride on the waves and pressurize countries opposing or challenge its policy across the globe. President Bush clearly said that those who were not with US were with al-Qaeda and terrorism. He made very stark distinction between friends and foes. His statement clearly was based on the ideology—good and bad, nothing else.

He attacked Iraq with no UN's mandate, which cost Washington a lot in diplomatic sphere. That policy indeed proved harmful to US international fame and prestige. Many countries were resented. They interpreted the statement that Washington asked them to follow the lead blindly. When those who wanted to support turned back to it, like Turkey initially avoided allowing American air force to use its military airports. The response of these was clear: we can be with not parts. But top White House officials remained decisive to persist on their policy with no retreat.

Policy makers pushed to reward followers and punish oppositions. In 2001, US and its allies intervened in Afghanistan and toppled the supporter of terrorism. The blow was big enough that Taliban militants could not reestablish the structure and mount pressure against foreign involved forces. So, Washington without considering the possible resurge of insurgency in the country, Washington started another war which was comparatively far difficult to Afghanistan one.

But President Bush actually did not care much. What Washington officials cared much was about uprooting Saddam Hussein who kept no warm relation with West during his incumbency. And they cared much about the outcome and output of war. A world without al-Qaeda and its leader Osma bin Laden looked much attractive and better. Same was the case with a world without Saddam Hussein who many maintained was following secret mass destructive weapons.

So, White House officials thought that when Saddam Hussien was brought to justice and Osama bin Laden and Mullah Omer executed, then the international community would appreciate US's quick military action. Perhaps, their assumption might prove true if everything went according to military, economic and political calculations. But the process stumbled severely and there are statements talkingabout US failure in both fronts——Afghanistan and Iraq.

The world without Saddam Hussein does not look as ideal as depicted. Two very reasons former President used to convince Congress for attack on Saddam Hussien regime proved false. After the occupation of Iraq, there was no document to denote on Saddam regime's linkage with terror network. And the secret program for mass destruction weapons was an illusion.

So with the both reasons phony, was the war justifiable? Seemingly, Americans increasingly turned against the Iraq and pressures enlarged to end it as soon as possible. Due to the same, republicans lost both Houses as well as presidential election. President Obama came to power with the promise to end the war in Iraq and concentrate on Afghanistan and finally call troops back from there too.

Meanwhile, due to increasing friction with Islamic Republic of Iran, President Obama has also not been willing to waste the achievements of nine years of engagement. The war proved too costly for Americans. Around five thousand American troops lost their lives and around 30 thousands injured. And it imposed around a trillion dollars to government's budget, suffering itself from huge deficits.

Therefore, to prevent countries like Iran to benefit from American toils, Washington discussed about keeping a small portion of combatant force in the country. But the negotiation failed and American troops left the country. Now it has been more than a year that US left Iraq. However, the nightmarish sectarian violence has not changed into reality but insecurity continues on.

The administration has failed to persecute armed groups and restore peace and instability. Rather there are allegations about huge graft, embezzlement and corruption within the political structure which are the key factors preventing the country to change into a prosperous country.