THE US, THE UN AND IRAQ VI

From the BBC this morning:

Quote:

Iraqi forces 'turn on coalition'
The new coalition-trained Iraqi police force is being infiltrated by insurgents, a US army general has said.
Maj Gen Martin Dempsey said about 10% of new officers were rebels and a further 40% had left their jobs - but the rest "stood tall and stood firm".

His comments came hours after a series of bomb blasts in southern Iraq killed at least 68 people.

In the city of Falluja, coalition forces say 36 insurgents have died in fighting which began on Wednesday.

US troops said this began when up to 60 rebels attacked them with small arms and rocket-propelled grenades - despite a ceasefire agreed earlier in the week.

The city, west of Baghdad, is held by Sunni militants.

'Intimidation'

Gen Dempsey, commander of the US army's 1st Armored Division, told media executives in an interview that he believed popular support for the coalition among Iraqis remained high, though it could not be taken for granted.

But he acknowledged that one in every 10 of the Iraqi security forces trained by the coalition ended up working against the US-led forces.

"About 50% of the security forces that we built over the past year stood tall and stood firm," he told the annual meeting of the Associated Press news agency.
"About 40% of them walked off the job because they were intimidated and about 10% actually worked against us."

Basra bloodshed

Gen Dempsey, who commands the units in charge of Baghdad, said he believed the attacks in Basra may have been ordered to grab the headlines while other areas of Iraq were relatively calm.

A series of apparent suicide bombings targeted three police stations in the southern city which is under the command of UK forces.

Many of the dead and injured were children travelling in passing buses on their way to school in Wednesday's morning rush hour.

Those who perpetrated such atrocities seek division and instability to advance their own agendas
Jack Straw
UK Foreign Secretary

A fourth attack south of Basra is said to have killed three Iraqis and wounded five UK soldiers.
UK Foreign Minister Jack Straw has said the attacks would not delay the planned 30 June transfer of sovereignty back to the Iraqi people.

He also said he expected agreement to be reached on a new United Nations Security Council resolution, probably in May.

British officials do not think local Shias were responsible for the explosions, but blame them on "al-Qaeda type elements or former regime loyalists".

Briefing reporters in London, one official said: "The Shias have broadly accepted the British presence in Basra and I do not think this has changed."

Funds shortfall

In Washington, the Pentagon's top general said the increased violence and extended US troop deployments was pushing the cost of the war over budget.

"When the service chiefs last talked about this, there was, I think, a $4bn shortfall," Gen Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff told the House Armed Services Committee.

"We thought we could get through all of August. We'd have to figure out how to do September."

The White House has said it does not expect to seek more money from Congress until early next year. But on Wednesday it did not rule out the possibility of asking for more funds before the end of the year.

US costs in Iraq are running at about $4.7bn a month, officials say.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/middle_east/3648489.stm

Published: 2004/04/22 10:42:31 GMT

© BBC MMIV

0 Replies

CDK, RE:

Quote:

"You forgot "Respectfully,""

Yep,
I was hoping the tone of my post would imply such. But such political thoughts are always interpreted subjectively and are always in danger of, at least, misinterpretation if not unabashedly being "mined" for ammunition to be used in passionate arguments. But c'est la vie! :wink:

JM

0 Replies

I think most people do not understand, " the planned 30 June transfer of sovereignty" means. I wish somebody would provide the correct interpretation of this statement, because I know it doesn't fit the meaning.

0 Replies

sumac wrote:

ican said:

"O'Neill has been proven wrong about the effect of tax cuts and tax increases on the economy.

Clarke frequently contradicts his book when under oath.

Christine Todd Whitman was not a competent federal administrator.

Powell was misquoted by Woodward. Woodward contradicts his own book when on TV. "

Surely you are not serious, ican.

Yes I am serious. These judgments of mine are not inferred from hearsay oral or written commentary about these individuals. They are based on what I actually observed on TV and heard on radio from these specific individuals themselves. In public both Clarke and Woodward have told different stories on TV and broadcast on radio than the stories they told in their books. Read their books and watch copies of the hearing video tapes from C-Span and from 60-minute et al interviews.

O'Neil did advocate on C-Span income tax increases on the more wealthy to cure the deficit. He seems not to understand that there is anywhere from an 18 to a 30 month delay in the economic impact on the economy of tax increases or decreases (e.g., Clinton's increases and Bush's decreases). Also O'Neil seems not to comprehend that it is the more wealthy who create by far the most jobs for the less wealthy with their disgressionary income investments. I'm in the 15% tax bracket and want people like Bill Gates and Michael Dell to be able to invest more of their earnings and give less to the government for government to squander. And if that causes the wealthy to become wealthier I will be happy for them. Good for them. I despise the pernicious envy nurtured by too many on the left and right.

Whitman lacked sufficient knowledge of science or of scientists to be able to know the difference between the invalid environmental science (junk science) and valid environmental science. Some very simple questions:
When did the end of the last major ice age occur? 10,000 years ago. Has the earth been warming up or cooling down since then? Duh! When did humans begin emitting large quantities of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere? Less than 300 years ago. Has that carbon dioxide emission been causing earth warming? Duh! Has there been more than one ice age? Duh! What are the principal causes of the multi-thousand year cycles of earth cooling and earth warming? Could it be due to the coincident fluctuations in the sun's radiation, wobble of the earth's spin axis, and earth's elliptical orbit around the sun? Hmmmm?

0 Replies

Good questions Ican. Don't know all the answers but it was clearly George W Bush's fault Smile

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

ican's quote, "The mindless preoccupation with rote variations of the theme Bush is no damn good absent constructive suggestions of how to rectify the Iraqi mess is destructive not constructive, dumming not enlightening."

First I want to thank you for posting:

Quote:

What is a neo-conservative anyway? By Jim Lobe

I read and studied it carefully. I shall here assume it is an accurate definition, characterization and description of neo-conservatism. If others think otherwise please post your disagreement.

Second, I want to respond to this comment of yours:

Quote:

Now that he's created this mess, he wants us to offer constructive solutions? You gotta be kidding. It's called taking responsibility for your own actions.

You've got it wrong. I am not speaking for Bush. I'm speaking for me. It is I who am requesting constructive criticism. It is I who am holding you as well as others responsible for your actions. You among others are not taking responsibility for your actions. We are all in the same boat with a captain who is perceived by us both to be "no damn good". You perceive some of the current aspirants to the presidency to be better. I perceive them to be worse. Eitherway, it is in our mutual self-interests to try and figure out how to rectify this situation regardless who captains our boat.

You and many others here do not seem to discern the on going consequences of your actions. They are analogous to drilling holes in our boat, or laughing or grousing while ensconsed in a seemingly safe deck lounge-chair watching others scramble to rectify things; you and they are not helping. You and they are encouraging our mutual enemies to continue escalating their murderous behavior in the vain hope of driving us off.

OK already: Bush is no damn good! Put a cork in it! Why should we believe any other known aspirant is better? Based on what? Based on what he is going to do? What is he going to do? What do you want him to do?

Based on the article you posted, I infer that those who advocate that the US delegate some of its significant self-governing powers to a world federation of states (e.g., under the UN) are not neo-conservatives. However, they are people who lack comprehension of the strong and frequently evidenced propensity of those with great power to exercise their power corruptly (e.g., a "Big Brother" state).

0 Replies

ican711nm wrote:

First I want to thank you for posting:
Quote:
What is a neo-conservative anyway? By Jim Lobe

I read and studied it carefully. I shall here assume it is an accurate definition, characterization and description of neo-conservatism. If others think otherwise please post your disagreement.

The only problem I see with CI's use of the term "neocon" is that he sees himself as the final authority on who is and who is not a "neocon", and he places that label on others rather than allowing them to define themselves. CI refers to me as a neocon, using the word as an insult. This is pretty silly from where I sit, because (A) I don't really know what he means by the word and (B) I have a sneaking suspicion that if he thinks it's bad I'll probably think it's good.

But the bigger issue here (and I've been guilty of this too, but am trying to be more careful in my wording) is: shouldn't we let others tell us how they define themselves, rather than pinning labels on them? Labeling others is almost always a way we give ourselves permission to ignore their point of view: "Oh, he's a liberal. I'm not going to bother to read his citation it's bound to be crap." It may be crap, but I can't know that unless I read it. Cool

0 Replies

Steve (as 41oo) wrote:

Good questions Ican. Don't know all the answers but it was clearly George W Bush's fault

Yeah, but you have to give the guy credit where credit is due. He did cause the sun to rise this morning. Right? Laughing

It happened on his watch!

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

I think most people do not understand, " the planned 30 June transfer of sovereignty" means. I wish somebody would provide the correct interpretation of this statement, because I know it doesn't fit the meaning.

CI, would the word you are looking for be 'expediency'?

0 Replies

Gelisgesti wrote:

cicerone imposter wrote:
I think most people do not understand, " the planned 30 June transfer of sovereignty" means. I wish somebody would provide the correct interpretation of this statement, because I know it doesn't fit the meaning.

CI, would the word you are looking for be 'expediency'?

I think holding an Iraqi plebiscite is a better idea. It will accomplish two things right away and a third subsequently. First the Iraqies will realize their fate is truly in their own hands. Second, they will realize we are there to help only so long as they want us there to help. Third they will come to realize that the US is not capable of solving their problem for them--they must be willing and eager to take the risks necessary for them to achieve for themselves the kind of lives they want for their children and grandchildren.

We can teach the Iraqies to fish, but Iraqies must do their own fishing.

0 Replies

oh dear...............

0 Replies

You can lead a horse to drink but you can't make him water ............... or .... a mind convinced against it's will is of the same opinion still.

About a year ago I posed the question on this forum ... 'what happens when they (Iraqis) tell us to 'shove' our democracy'?
I didn't think the answer would come this soon.

0 Replies

Gelisgesti wrote:

You can lead a horse to drink but you can't make him water ............... or .... a mind convinced against it's will is of the same opinion still. About a year ago I posed the question on this forum ... 'what happens when they (Iraqis) tell us to 'shove' our democracy'?
I didn't think the answer would come this soon.

OK, In that case we simply say "bye bye baby!"

I understand that you don't like my proposal. I think I even understand why. I consider your reasons rational. I judge the risks of my proposal to be on balance net favorable. However, I might judge your proposals to be on balance net more favorable, if I knew what your proposal(s) are. Smile

The only proposal, I have currently rejected is turning the problem over to the UN as did the British in 1948. Crying or Very sad

0 Replies

ican said:

"Read their books and watch copies of the hearing video tapes from C-Span and from 60-minute et al interviews. "

You were mighty testy in that post, but aside from reading their books, I have watched all testimony,newspaper articles, etc., TV programs, quotes in response to reporters' questions, and on and on. But I seriously disagree with some of your asserted questions when I asked you if you were serious.

Whitman was a very effective state administrator when she served as governor for New Jersey. Nor do you need to be an expert in a particular content area to effectively manage.

I do not believe that there have been significant discrepanies between the printed words in the referenced books, and subsequent comments given while under oath.

Nor do I believe, or accept as facts, some of the other things you raise issues with in your list.

0 Replies

Gelisgesti wrote:

About a year ago I posed the question on this forum ... 'what happens when they (Iraqis) tell us to 'shove' our democracy'?
I didn't think the answer would come this soon.

It's come sooner for you because you are willing to consider thugs and foreign insurgents as the voice of the Iraqi people.

0 Replies

I have serious doubts regarding the Iraqis capability to self govern at this time. They seem young inexperienced teenagers in this regard. They see a much wanted and anticipated goal of self determination but fail to recognize the other side of the "Freedom" coin: responsibility. This may stem from the fact that an entire generation of Iraqis have not experienced anything but totalitarian rule--someone else did their decision making and decided their fates. The lesson of Russia now slipping back into its comfortable garb of totalitarianism comes to mind and is of no surprise when one views the polls of popular opinion where a large majority think democracy is, essentially, too much work.

Even all this aside and given a well informed Iraqi public willing to responsibly take on the rigors of democracy, the security (or lack thereof) problem looms. This is not as simple as eliminating a few bad guys. It seems that a significant amount of Iraqis will merely go towards that side that is presently more threatening--their loyalty shifts with the rise and fall of the sun. Their character seems in dire need of a spine transplant. Simply put they lack individual will --they wash back and forth with the wind and the tide.

The Only solution is us as in the U.S. We are their only hope. They are our charges and we have taken on this responsibility of a group of people that are in severe need of direction. The channel through which we must work is personified by Ayatollah Sistani but his hard gained wisdom can easily be defeated by those such as M. Sadr and the hot lead dispensed only too readily by his followers.

Elections? The logistics involved at this point seem daunting. But even if flawlessly carried out, will the leaders so chosen stand up to the present bad guys? More importantly, will the Iraqis follow through on their own choices and support those leaders against the insurgents? Given that the Iraqis want to change their leaders will they do it with the point of a pen and not that of a gun?

JM

0 Replies

ican711nm wrote:

Gelisgesti wrote:
You can lead a horse to drink but you can't make him water ............... or .... a mind convinced against it's will is of the same opinion still. About a year ago I posed the question on this forum ... 'what happens when they (Iraqis) tell us to 'shove' our democracy'?
I didn't think the answer would come this soon.

OK, In that case we simply say "bye bye baby!"

I understand that you don't like my proposal. I think I even understand why. I consider your reasons rational. I judge the risks of my proposal to be on balance net favorable. However, I might judge your proposals to be on balance net more favorable, if I knew what your proposal(s) are.

The only proposal, I have currently rejected is turning the problem over to the UN as did the British in 1948.

I have a problem with the idea that a nation based on a thousands of years old ideology would be expected to regard their way of life as inferior and therefore shouldll be replaced with the totaly alien ideology held by their invaders. Not only that, if they resist, they will, regretably, be killed.

The WMD's are no longer a problem, the bad guys are dead or have been captured ..... the Iraqi's want us to leave ....... what are we hanging around for, a tip? The Kurds have it together so it can be done without our kids dying. It's time to get out of Dodge.

0 Replies

JM, You've touched on my concern about passing sovereignty onto the Iraqis when they are but teenagers in adult clothing. They are NOT leaders of their country. They do not have sovereignty when the security of their country is controlled by the US. Who's kidding who? They are a puppet regime with very little ability to lead their country as a sovereign nation. We'll probably 'control' Iraq for another ten years or more.

0 Replies

Scrat wrote:

Gelisgesti wrote:
About a year ago I posed the question on this forum ... 'what happens when they (Iraqis) tell us to 'shove' our democracy'?
I didn't think the answer would come this soon.

It's come sooner for you because you are willing to consider thugs and foreign insurgents as the voice of the Iraqi people.

It has not come for you because you refuse to look past the spin. Hear it from a real live Iraqi ..........

Thursday, April 22, 2004
Explosions and explosions, Basra and Riyadh too.

The Dominican and Hondurans decided to pull their armies from Iraq, after the Spanish decision, others are planning to follow too.

But really
What is this war on Al Jazeera all about?
Evil? Bad? Change the channel?!
I mean.. why?
Why do Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz waste their time cursing Al Jazeera?
Isn't that very childish and funny? Having the Ministers of the only Super Power on earth whining all the day about a T.V. channel?
Let's say that Al Jazeera and Al Arabia are pure evil channels, (unlike CNN and FOX), doesn't the bush administration believe in democracy and in exporting freedom to the world?
I really wonder how far this irresponsible and impolite criticism will go are they going to bomb the central offices of evil Jazeera like they bombed their branches in Kabul, Baghdad and Falluja?

Can't a person like Wolfowitz respect himself a bit more and think of other reasons for the failure of his administration in Iraq?
"we cant change everything overnight" he said!
Habeeeebi!!! If u hadn't noticed it has been a YEAR not a night.
And attacking media channels (by bombs or by words) is only more proof of how the bush administration is bankrupt and lost.

Over a year, and no one can name a single success for the American administration in Iraq
I mean I really try to find something bright

Public services? Electricity... water... telecommunication hospitals schools
The only thing that has happened is "rehabilitating" some schools by Bechtel, and let me tell u more about it
Bechtel charged around $75,000 per school, and gave the contracts to Iraqi sub-contractors, the Iraqi sub-contractors gave to other Iraqi sub-sub-contractors, and the sub-sub-contractors painted the schools, fixed the bathrooms, changed the broken windows and put some light bulbs, the thing that cannot cost more than $7,500 (around fifteen million Iraqi Dinars). Rehabilitation was poor and extremely costly; it was the first corruption story that destroyed the credibility of the plans of reconstruction. I'm sure I had already said many things about how bad the situation of hospitals, libraries (the ones that were not burned and looted), universities and gas stations are.

Infrastructure? Landmarks? Governmental buildings? Telephone exchanges?
Destroyed buildings and bridges are as they were one year ago, some buildings were brought down at Najaf and Basra (which is better than leaving them standing and adding more depression to the urban skyline), but the buildings in Baghdad were not even touched they look sad and painful, downtown Baghdad looks like a battlefield, can you imagine all the buildings that you love that you spent your life watching and using being burned and partially destroyed? Can u imagine the feeling you would have if you went by the White House or the Capitol while it was burning and destroyed? Can you imagine what it would feel like to have the twin towers of the WTC standing for months burned and partially destroyed the skyline of Baghdad reminds me of war and death, reminds me of explosions and destruction. Other smaller landmarks like status of people, pictures, small monuments and other things that were destroyed after the war, under the campaign of De-Baathification left Baghdad and the other Iraqi cities full of small destroyed icons, I mean I don't care about the Statue of Al-Baker (the former Iraqi president), and I don't see his status as a sign of Evil and Baath, it is simply the landmark in front of my house!! We either put another one or remove this one completely! Leaving things partially destroyed is the worst thing to do.

Social changes? Democracy? De-Baathification? Gender issues?
The entire society is more protective and defensive. We had a real democratic couple of weeks after the war and everyone could do whatever he wanted loot sing in the street start his own political party and build some palaces on moving sand, but "democracy" became a cheap word that is used in jokes now we have something like a dozen small Saddams trying to prove how powerful can they be now. De-Baathification (led by the corrupt figure, Chalabi) destroyed the hopes of rebuilding the community, it added more reasons for conflicts and gave Bathists a dark corner to hide and rebuild themselves slowly, instead of using their experiences in rebuilding the post war Iraq. When an Iraqi-Man-Professor-smart-Architect-educated-father-teacher like my supervisor and Director of the Architectural Department of Baghdad's University is simply judged as a Baathist that must go and die slowly in his house we are not doing the right thing. The GC discovered this some weeks ago when they started their First Conference of National Reconciliation but that was late as their other decisions. Gender-related problems increased, women can't go outside without covering their hair, they can't easily go to public markets, and maybe Riverbend can describe more details of what she face in her life as a girl in Baghdad. Iraqis -in general- are disappointed and losing/lost faith.

Security? Business? Average income?
Bad bad bad and getting worse. Most people don't go outside their homes.
But maybe the worst button that the Coalition forces pushed was humiliating Iraqi individuals. Pictures like this and this are not coming out of nothing.

But you know what
I think everyone heard so much criticism, I know
But still it is not enough.

The unjustified war on Iraq will be criticized for decades.

But I think the time of suggesting some answers came too.
I will discuss some ideas tomorrow,
I really think the time of the Iraqi Road Map is coming soon.
Posted by: Raed Jarrar / 5:27 AM

Source

0 Replies

John McCain (R), said the following; "We need to make tough decisions about where our wartime priorities lay and this means that we have to reassess our domestic priorities ... we simply cannot have it all -- tax cuts, pork for the special interests, ever-growing entitlement programs and war in Iraq."

Sounds to me like he's the only republican brave enough to question this administration's decisions.

0 Replies

THE US, THE UN AND IRAQ VI

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know