0
   

THE US, THE UN AND THE IRAQIS THEMSELVES, V. 7.0

 
 
Brand X
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Jan, 2005 06:36 am
That's a good start...at least 100% of them won't be voting for Saddam for fear of losing their life.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Jan, 2005 08:11 am
Yes, and if Iraq is successful in adopting and installing some kind of representative government, jt will only get better and better from there. It isn't like they are electing a permanent king this time around. And there is not an infinite number of terrorists. If all committed to the war against terrorism keep methodically taking them out, they'll run out of people and resources eventually. The alternative is to let the terrorists win, and that is not acceptable.
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Jan, 2005 08:26 am
There was a time in my life that I hustled pool to pay the rent and eat. If I made a ball on the break and had a following shot, I ran the table in nineball, and eight ball or three rail billiards. In straight pool and snooker I was a master of the saftey, seldom leaving an open shot. Why was I so much better than my competition? For the same reason I was a lousy hustler .... because I loved the game. When I played there was me, my cue, a table, and balls. I could read a table three balls ahead and more often than not would play position for a combination or billiard on the pay ball pocketing it for an early win. I lived to play.
Why am I boring you with this self aggrandizement? To set up this point ... you can shear a sheep countless times .... but you can only skin him once. That was the answer I got from my friend and mentor Cedrick Cox, dubbed 'Shady' by his friends, (rest in peace shady) when I asked him why my opponents only played a short time then quit. He answered 'good God Doug you skin em, lay back and throw a game once and a while'. He then said those words 'you can shear a sheep countless times .... but you can only skin him once.' I tried his advice but found that I was incapable of 'laying down', my game went right out the window .... but Shady was right, burn and pillage was not the way to go.
After I read the following article the thought crossed my mind 'maybe Bush has more than a reptillian brain'. What if the entire country ..... Dems and Reps alike, are viewed as 'sheep' valued only for the wool that is carefully harvested a bit at a time. There has been a slow transfer of the wealth in an upward flow ..... no accountability fo the 300 billion dollar cost of the war of which all has been as a suplemental expenditure and therefore not counted as part of the deficit. The people that deal in munitions and other components of war are making money hand over fist. Hell anyone with an income of 200,000 or more has suffered a windfall.
And all the while Grandma and Grandpa are displacing the illegals by serving burgers. Now Bush is drooling over the social security funds.

Read the article and try not to bleat ......

Quote:

Informed Comment

Thoughts on the Middle East, History, and Religion Juan Cole is Professor of History at the University of Michigan
1. The Speech Bush Should have Given This is the s...
The Speech Bush Should have Given

This is the speech that I wish President Bush had given in fall, 2002, as he was trying to convince Congress to give him the authority to go to war against Iraq.


My fellow Americans:

I want us to go to war against Iraq. But I want us to have our eyes open and be completely realistic.

A war against Iraq will be expensive. It will cost you, the taxpayer, about $300 billion over five years. I know Wolfowitz is telling you Iraq's oil revenues will pay for it all, but that's ridiculous. Iraq only pumps about $10 billion a year worth of oil, and it's going to need that just to run the new government we're putting in. No, we're going to have to pay for it, ourselves. I'm going to ask you for $25 billion, then $80 billion, then another $80 billion. And so on. I'm going to be back to you for money more often than that unemployed relative that you don't like. The cost of the war is going to drive up my already massive budget deficits from about $370 billion to more like $450 billion a year. Just so you understand, I'm going to cut taxes on rich people at the same time that I fight this war. Then I'm going to borrow the money to fight it, and to pay for much of what the government does. And you and your children will be paying off that debt for decades. In the meantime, your dollar isn't going to go as far when you buy something made overseas, since running those kinds of deficits will weaken our currency. (And I've set things up so that most things you buy will be made overseas.) We'll have to keep interest rates higher than they would otherwise have been and keep the economy in the doldrums, because otherwise my war deficits would cause massive inflation.

So I'm going to put you, your children, and your grandchildren deeply in hock to fight this war. I'm going to make it so there won't be a lot of new jobs created, and I'm going to use the excuse of the Federal red ink to cut way back on government services that you depend on. For the super-rich, or as I call them, "my base," this Iraq war thing is truly inspired. We use it to put up the deficit to the point where the Democrats and the more bleeding heart Republicans in Congress can't dare create any new programs to help the middle classes. We all know that the super-rich--about 3 million people in our country of 295 million-- would have to pay for those programs, since they own 45 percent of the privately held wealth. I'm damn sure going to make sure they aren't inconvenienced that way for a good long time to come.

Then, this Iraq War that I want you to authorize as part of the War on Terror is going to be costly in American lives. By the time of my second inaugural, over 1,300 brave women and men of the US armed forces will be dead as a result of this Iraq war, and 10,371 will have been maimed and wounded, many of them for life. America's streets and homeless shelters will likely be flooded, down the line, with some of these wounded vets. They will have problems finding work, with one or two limbs gone and often significant psychological damage. They will have even more trouble keeping any jobs they find. They will be mentally traumatized the rest of their lives by the horror they are going to see, and sometimes commit, in Iraq. But, well we've got a saying in Texas. I think you've got in over in Arkansas, too. You can't make an omelette without . . . you gotta break some eggs to wrassle up some breakfast.

I know Dick Cheney and Condi Rice have gone around scaring your kids with wild talk of Iraqi nukes. I have to confess to you that my CIA director, George Tenet, tells me that the evidence for that kind of thing just doesn't exist. In fact, I have to be frank and say that the Intelligence and Research Division of the State Department doesn't think Saddam has much of anything left even from his chemical weapons program. Maybe he destroyed the stuff and doesn't want to admit it because he's afraid the Shiites and Kurds will rise up against him without it. Anyway, Iraq just doesn't pose any immediate threat to the United States and probably doesn't have anything useful left of their weapons programs of the 1980s.

There also isn't any operational link between a secular Arab nationalist like Saddam and the religious loonies of al-Qaeda. They're scared of one another and hate each other more than each hates us. In fact, I have to be perfectly honest and admit that if we overthrow Saddam's secular Arab nationalist government, Iraq's Sunni Arabs will be disillusioned and full of despair. They are likely to turn to al-Qaeda as an alternative. So, folks, what I'm about to do could deliver 5 million Iraqis into the hands of people who are insisting they join some al-Qaeda offshoot immediately. Or else.

So why do I want to go to war? Look, folks, I'm just not going to tell you. I don't have to tell you. There is little transparency about these things in the executive, because we're running a kind of rump empire out of the president's office. After 20 or 30 years it will all leak out. Until then, you'll just have to trust me.


Wed, Jan 26, 2005 0:35
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Jan, 2005 10:38 am
Good speech, but too truthful. This kind of thing won't catch on. Lies are what we expect from politicians.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Jan, 2005 10:41 am
Excerpted

Quote:
What exactly is being argued here? That we should withhold democratic elections out of a fear that the majority of the population will finally get political power? That is what democracy is generally assumed to be for: to give power to the majority, while protecting the rights of minorities to as great an extent as possible.

Which brings us to the claim that these elections will be somehow delegitimised if the Sunni minority is terrorised into abstaining. Minorities need protecting if full-blooded democracy is to flourish. But to establish the rule of law that would permit such protection, there must be a democratic process.

It may be a fledgling, imperfect, not-quite-complete democratic process that is on offer in Iraq. It may require that ordinary life come to a virtual standstill, that borders be closed and mobile phone networks taken down, that what we would understand as basic rights to travel and to communicate be temporarily suspended. But that is a testimony to how much is at stake here.

The post-Cold War world is an unstable place. On both sides of the old divide, we are having to adjust. Vladimir Putin, who speaks of "the post-Soviet space" in eastern Europe, has managed at last to congratulate Viktor Yushchenko on his victory in the Ukraine. Democracy is coming to some of those places that Mr Bush called "the darkest corners of the world". -- Janet Daily


Entire article:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml;sessionid=F0DS1YDJ3NRXHQFIQMGSM5OAVCBQWJVC?xml=/opinion/2005/01/26/do2602.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2005/01/26/ixop.html
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Jan, 2005 11:15 am
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/01/26/iraq.main/index.html

Quote:
Deadliest day for U.S. in Iraq war
31 Marines killed in chopper crash; 5 troops in other incidents
Wednesday, January 26, 2005 Posted: 12:09 PM EST (1709 GMT)


...

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Jan, 2005 11:27 am
Quote:
Top U.S. General: 15,000 Insurgents Killed or Caught
Source
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Jan, 2005 04:29 pm
January 26th:
Attention Y’all!
There are now 14 million registered Iraqi voters.
Outstanding!
The total number of Iraqis voting will be

Corection! 13,030,984 or more.
That’s more than 93%!

Astonishing!
After they vote, there will be
[/b]
Corection! 13,030,984 or more
Iraqi Patrick Henrys.
Quote:
Patrick Henry: "It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry peace, peace!—but there is no peace. The war is actually begun. The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms. Our brethen are already in the field. Why stay we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God. I know not what course others may take, but as for me: give me liberty, or give me death!"

[size=7]13,131,313[/size]
You can count on it!
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Jan, 2005 04:44 pm
Quote:
The Iraqi people will defy the Ba'athists and Islamofascists

Blair is right. Why aren't more democrats backing these elections?

William Shawcross
Monday January 24, 2005
The Guardian <http://www.guardian.co.uk/

Just look at who is trying to stop Iraqis voting and by what methods. That alone shows how important this week's elections are to Iraq.

The horrific war against the Iraqi people is being run by the same people who oppressed and tortured them for decades - Saddam's henchmen and gaolers. They are more than ably abetted by the Islamofascist jihadists led by Osama bin Laden's Heydrich in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

Elections really do matter to people - especially to people who have been denied them. We saw that in 1993 when millions of Cambodians braved threats from the Khmer Rouge. We saw it in Algeria in 1995, when the government, almost overcome by years of Islamist terrorist assault, called elections and the silent majority defied the terrorists' threats and voted en masse.

We saw it much more recently in Afghanistan, where the people confounded the western critics and scoffers and, despite Taliban threats, voted overwhelmingly to put the curse of the Taliban's Islamic extremism behind them.

And we are seeing it most brutally and clearly in Iraq today, where everyone associated with the attempt to give the Iraqi people a decent future risks being murdered.

One of the foreign heroes of the Iraqi election process is Carlos Valenzuela, the Colombian who is the chief UN election official in Baghdad. He has been asked constantly if legitimate elections can take place despite the non-stop violence, the car bombs, the suicide bombers, the multiple murders. He has replied yes. "Look," he has said, "in my country we have elections that are not perfect, that have been marred by violence and terrible intimidation. But still people go to the polls. And still the results are accepted as legitimate."

He has also, quite rightly, praised the Iraqi election workers. If you need one image to remind you what this election is about, remember the horrific photograph from December of three Iraqi election workers dragged from their car in Baghdad and murdered, on camera, in the street.

The Iraqi elections are at one level a brutal theocratic struggle between Sunni and Shia, between Bin Laden and Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani. Sistani, the principal leader of the Shias, who constitute 60% of the Iraqi population, has told his followers that it is their duty to vote. But in a video aired on al-Jazeera, Bin Laden declared that "Anyone who participates in these elections... has committed apostasy against Allah". He endorsed killing of security people in the new government - "Their blood is permitted. They are apostates whose deaths should not be prayed over."

Zarqawi describes the Shias as "the lurking snakes and the crafty scorpions, the spying enemy and the penetrating venom, the most evil of mankind". Every day he murders more. Last Friday a car bomber murdered 14 people, including children, as they left their mosque in Baghdad. He murdered Ayatollah Mohammed Baqr al-Hakim, the head of the Supreme Council of the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, one of the principal Shia parties, and he recently tried to murder Hakim's brother and successor. In that attack 13 other Iraqis were killed and 66 wounded.

Allied to the Islamist groups are Ba'athist groups who want to restore Sunni Ba'athist dictatorship. Several of their military leaders were arrested in Falluja in November.

One was Colonel Muayed al-Nasseri, who said that Saddam had set up his group, Muhammad's Army, after the fall of Baghdad. Under interrogation he said that his group had been receiving aid from both Iran and Syria, neither of which wish to see a democracy in Iraq. He said Iran had given them "one million dollars... cars, weapons... even car bombs". He said that Saddam had sent him to Syria to liaise with Syrian intelligence, which was proving especially helpful with money. Other Saddamite officials are working with impunity from Damascus. Washington has protested about this, but the US has not yet put any really strong pressure on Syria.

The impact of terrorism on the election has already been huge. Many of the political parties have not dared name their candidates for fear they will be murdered. Public meetings are virtually impossible. The risks of going to the polling stations are real everywhere, huge in some places. Many candidates have been murdered; those who are elected will face real dangers.

What is astonishing is that people still seem determined to vote for a new Iraq. A recent poll by the London-based paper Al-Sharq Al-Awsat found that 66% of those asked supported the elections on schedule. Iraqi women, who due to past bloodshed constitute a majority of the Iraqi population, are particularly interested.

According to the latest poll conducted in Baghdad, Mosul and Basra by Women for Women International, "94% of women surveyed want to secure legal rights for women; 84% of women want the right to vote on the final constitution; [and] nearly 80% of women believe that their participation in local and national councils should not be limited... despite increasing violence, particularly against women, 90.6% of Iraqi women reported that they are hopeful about their future".

Although al-Jazeera broadcasts poison, Iraqi domestic television is now among the freest in the region. There are more than 20 licensed local TV stations, and 65% of the population are thought to have satellite dishes, banned until the fall of Saddam.

People are being extremely brave in flouting the demands of the killers. Both Kurds and Shias are resisting the horrific provocations from Sunni terrorists. The election will not end the crisis in Iraq. But Iraqis, like the Algerians and Afghans, clearly wish to defy those who seek to murder, mutilate and incarcerate them.

Tony Blair said in Baghdad in December: "On the one side you have people who desperately want to make the democratic process work, and want the same type of democratic freedoms other parts of the world enjoy, and on the other side people who are killing and intimidating and trying to destroy a better future for Iraq. Our response should be to stand alongside the democrats."

Blair is absolutely right. It is shocking that so few democratic governments support the Iraqi people. Where are French and German and Spanish protests against the terror being inflicted on voters in Iraq? And it is shocking that around the world there is not wider admiration of, assistance to and moral support (and more) for the Iraqi people. The choice is clear: movement towards democracy in Iraq or a new nihilism akin to fascism - Islamist fascism.

· William Shawcross's most recent book is Allies: the United States, Britain, Europe and the War in Iraq
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Jan, 2005 04:45 pm
You stopped cutting too soon Foxy.

Quote:
What exactly is being argued here? That we should withhold democratic elections out of a fear that the majority of the population will finally get political power?

Idea
http://www.clicksmilies.com/s0105/party/party-smiley-017.gif
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Jan, 2005 04:54 pm
Yeah, I thought about posting the whole piece Bill but figured nobody would read the whole thing. But then you did, didn't you?

Of course there are some here on A2K that have sort of indicated they don't believe in majority rule. I think that's usually when they aren't in the majority though. And that's probably the case in part in Iraq too.

But as the writer of the piece said, Democracy is coming, ready or not.


http://www.clicksmilies.com/s0105/party/party-smiley-017.gif
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Jan, 2005 05:21 pm
Gotta love that Tony Blair for telling it like it is!

Of course I read it Foxy. I'm very excited for the Iraqis. It's a crying shame so many are still resisting the changes but they'll see. Mindless bigotry and oppression have to lose... as long as good men and women resist it. That piece Walter posted yesterday about some Sunnis wanting a part in drafting the constitution has filled me joy. That is a prelude to acceptance if I've ever heard one. Of course it'll take time... but so far they're advancing the cause of freedom at a truly awesome pace, IMO. If you're interested, I rattled on more about that here.

http://www.clicksmilies.com/s0105/party/party-smiley-017.gif
0 Replies
 
InfraBlue
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Jan, 2005 11:36 pm
You're repeating your argument which is predicated on leaps of logic, assumptions, and outright falsities, ican.
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Jan, 2005 04:30 am
In the news this morning, one of the chief architects of the Iraq invasion, John Fife (?) is leaving the administration. Mr Rumsfeld cited personal reasons, nothing to do with recent history, Mr Fife was a fine servant and a great blah blah blah.

MR Bush said he wishes he had never met either of these men, who have been instrumental in bringing the country down to its lowest point ever, rejecting the rule of law, reviled and distrusted abroad.

I made that last bit up. (Not only abroad.)
0 Replies
 
Joe Nation
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Jan, 2005 05:24 am
They are probably minting Fife's Medal of Freedom right now.

But, McTag, doesn't the rest of the world respect our decision to be the moral authority for the world? One wouldn't think that winning an election by three percentage points would give an administration that much political capital but it not only has in this country but beyond to the entire planet.

Personally, I like it. I like that we liberals have gotten the more conservative of our brethren to do our work for us. You remember when Jimmy Carter was President and wanted to promote Human Rights around the world? The right wingers here laughed up there sleeves at the idea. Now they must grit their teeth as their starry eyed, baptized in the spirit, leader goes forth to end tyranny. Wow, we liberals couldn't have done it without them. Thanks, George.

We've done this before. We got Richard Nixon to open relations with China. Can you imagine the hew and cry from the right if say Johnson had tried that? Whew. Oh, and don't forget the Environmental Protection Agency and OSHA, both programs liberals couldn't do on their own, we had to use righteous Republicans to do it.

What else? Deficit spending. Berry, berry bad, the conservatives used to say. Liberals used to say good, let the government spend more than it takes in to help vitalize the country and the economy. NO! Smaller deficits and balanced budgets said the right wing, that is until our friend Ronald Reagan spewed red ink all over the federal budget, after that deficit spending was not only only okay with conservatives, they wouldn't help Bill Clinton achieve his budget surplus. Thanks Ronnie. Oh, and good work ending the Cold War peacefully even though you never gave any credit to the Polish dock workers who really pulled the plug.

So now we have our work, that is, liberalizing the world, being done for us by George W. Bush and we can't thank him enough.

Joe (another example of opposites attract) Nation
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Jan, 2005 07:42 am
Interesting article.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Jan, 2005 10:43 am
InfraBlue wrote:
[size=7]You're repeating your argument which is predicated on leaps of logic, assumptions, and outright falsities, ican.[/size]

FACTS:
1. AL Qaeda declared war on Americans.
2. Al Qaeda declared that American civilians and military must be killed wherever they can be found.
3. Al Qaeda murdered American civilians.
4. Al Qaeda murderers were trained in al Qaeda camps.
5. Al Qaeda were encamped in Afghanistan and in Iraq prior to the US invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq.
6. US air attacks on Al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan did not remove al Qaeda camps from Afghanistan.
7. US ground attacks in Afghanistan did remove al Qaeda camps from Afghanistan.
8. Kurds defeated al Qaeda in northern Iraq by 1999.
9. Al Qaeda reformed in northern Iraq by 2001.
10. The US requested that Saddam Hussein's regime extradite the leadership of the al Qaeda encamped in northern Iraq.
11. Saddam Hussein’s regime did not attempt to extradite the leadership of the al Qaeda encamped in northern Iraq.
12. Saddam Hussein’s regime did not attempt to remove al Qaeda camps from northern Iraq.
13. The US invaded Iraq on the ground and in the air in 2003.
14. The US removed al Qaeda camps in northern Iraq.

ARGUMENT
The US's discovery and destruction of the al Qaeda encampment in northern Iraq is evidence that at the time of the US's invasion of Iraq 3/20/2003, the al Qaeda were encamped in northern Iraq;
That in turn, plus the fact that Saddam Hussein NEVER claimed that the taQeinI (i.e., the al Qaeda encamped in northern Iraq) were NOT so encamped, plus the fact that Saddam NEVER claimed he tried to remove taQeinI, are evidence that Saddam did NOT attempt to remove taQeinI;
That in turn is evidence that Saddam tolerated taQeinI;
That in turn is evidence that Saddam harbored taQeinI;
That in turn, plus the fact that the Kurds were NOT able to prevent the taQeinI from reforming by 2001 after the Kurds had defeated taQeinI by 1999, are evidence that a US invasion of Iraq was required to remove taQeinI;
That in turn, plus the fact that air attacks in Afghanistan were insufficient for removing al Qaeda camps from Afghanistan, plus the fact that a US ground and air invasion was required to remove al Qaeda from Afghanistan, is evidence that the US had to invade Iraq on the ground and in the air in order to remove taQeinI from Iraq.
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Jan, 2005 11:20 am
McGentrix wrote:


First Jennings, and now THIS! Is the MSM bowing to pressure from the folks here at home and FINALLY printing the Marines' positive takes on how things are going and their valid complaints of media bias? We can hope!

Quote:
Report From Triangle Of Death
Jan. 26, 2005


On the brink of Iraq's historic election on Jan. 30, Correspondent Dan Rather reports from the "Triangle of Death," a region notorious for attacks on Iraqi and multi-national forces. It's been a difficult mission for Sgt. Kevin Lewis and the rest of the 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit. They travel constantly on dangerous roads: 31 men have died here and more than 300 have been injured by roadside bombs, hidden by an enemy they rarely see.

We were heading to a remote outpost in the town of Ludifayah. Ten of the men based there have died. Still, these Marines insist the enemy is losing, at least in this key area.

"They've got plenty of ammunition," says one Marine. "I think they are running out of bodies pretty soon to plant those IEDs."

IEDs are what the Marines call the roadside bombs. They have killed three men in Sgt. Eric Abbott's squad.

Are those kinds of incidents increasing, decreasing or about the same as when Abbott first got there? "I believe they are definitely decreasing since we have been here," says Abbott.

Is the election, scheduled for Jan. 30, going to come off well? "I believe we are going to make it happen," says Abbott.

So does the commanding officer, Col. Ron Johnson, a 25-year Marine veteran. "I don't think it will be spot-free incident," he says. "But I think you'll see you'll be pleasantly surprised about the number of Iraqi citizens who want to put their name on a piece of paper."

Col. Johnson has made it a priority to keep his troops highly visible That's why he set up a small outpost in the town of Hasweh, after bombers leveled the police station. A platoon of 40 Marines moved into the building next door.

Johnson says the Marine presence has changed life in Hasweh. His convoys are being attacked much less frequently. The market is busy. Schools, which were closed last year, are open now. And there is water and electricity most of the time.

But Johnson doesn't think that story is getting out. Neither does Sgt. Lewis. "I am tired of hearing the crap," says Lewis. "The whole, well, 'We are barely hanging on, we're losing, the insurgency is growing.' All that. We are doing fine. It's just a small, a small amount of people out there causing the problems. I mean, it is a small number, and we're killing them."

The Marines are out every day looking for the enemy, and trying to round up the old artillery shells used to make the deadly car bombs. The ammunition is everywhere.

Johnson's men thought some of it might be hidden in a van they spotted by the road. So they cordoned the area off while the bomb squad went to work and blew it up safely.

From the force of the explosion, the Marines concluded there was a cache of 12 to 15 artillery shells inside the van. "I'm just glad none of our guys were coming by there when that thing went off," says one Marine. "Could have gotten a lot of people hurt."

But no one was hurt, thanks to an Iraqi teenager who reported the suspicious van to the police. Johnson believes there are approximately 1,500 insurgents still on the loose in the Triangle of Death. At a briefing, he was told about one group said to be planning an election-day attack with 10 barrels of explosives.

60 Minutes joined a team of Marines and Iraqi commandos when they launched a raid before dawn the next morning.

Capt. Tad Douglas and his team flew on six transport helicopters to the town of Jabella. As soon as they arrived, they advanced on one building, but there was no one inside.

Inside the next building, two men were sleeping. Surprised, they screamed as they were rousted from their beds. Douglas and his men moved quickly, finding guns and the type of wiring used to make roadside explosive devices. The Marine commandos also found documents indicating one of the suspects was a former Iraqi intelligence officer.

By dawn, the Marines had rounded up 13 more suspects and returned them to base camp to be interrogated. They also discovered 2,000 rounds of ammunition and a few more weapons, including an Iranian assault rifle hidden in one of the bedrooms.

"All of the weapons we found were all lubed up; all the ammunition was cleaned with solvent, so everything had all been taken care of to be ready for the election," says Douglas.

The Marines never retrieved the 10 barrels of explosives they set out to find. But as they do after each mission, they flew back to their base camp to brief Col. Johnson. He said he'd add the names of the detainees to a detailed database showing the 1,000 suspects already in custody, and their links to other known or suspected insurgents still out there somewhere.

Who are these people who are causing the trouble? Who is it that they are fighting?

"What we got out here is a bunch of different people who have different goals and objectives. We got terrorists who just want to maim and kill people," says Johnson. "Baathists who have lost their big power base, their position in life. We have unemployed people who just need a job."

Are they fighting people who are, one way or the other, connected to Osama bin Laden, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, or one of the major terrorist leaders?

"I do not dispute that bin Laden and Zarqawi are providing a message for these people, but to say that they are linked is really stretching it," says Johnson. "What we have here is a multitude of different groups that all have their own goals and objectives."

There are also plenty of low-level criminals, the colonel thinks, who are ready to sell all the individual ingredients to make a roadside bomb.

"The best analogy that I can give you is if you can remember the Gambino crime family in New York. That's what we're dealing with here," says Johnson. "Gangsters, criminals, thugs who are opportunists, who want to make some money and they are trying to take advantage of the situation. But as soon as one gets in the way, they have no hesitation about going over and trying to whack the other guy."

And, the colonel acknowledges, he's been more successful in arresting the Mafia-like foot soldiers than the syndicate bosses who are financing the local terror attacks.

With four days to the election, Col. Johnson's Marines are changing tactics. They had been very publicly showing force, but on Election Day, they hope to be nearly invisible.

They'll come in for backup if there are widespread terror attacks. But the Iraqi police are to handle polling place security, and if they need backup, they won't call the Marines first. Instead, they'll call up a special unit sponsored and trained by Johnson's men, an Iraqi SWAT team from the town of Hila.

There is widespread criticism all over the country of the ineffectiveness of the Iraqi police and security forces. And there are also reports of widespread defections. But the Marines say they can rely on this SWAT team.

Staff Sgt. Dutch Hoemann just wishes he had more time to train the Iraqis. "This is what we consider a short course. The original squad crew before they upped the numbers got a two to four week training package," says Hoemann. "These gentlemen here are getting four days. It's a short course. We're getting ready for the election, and they've come a long way."

Johnson is doing his best to open roads, secure bridges and increase security at roadblocks. He is posting wanted signs for known killers and troublemakers. And he's about to set up hundreds of barriers at polling places, in an effort to stop suicide bombers.

"The worst thing that could happen to us is a suicide vehicle bomb to come during the day to the election centers and attack us," says Johnson. "We expect that to happen. In some places, we do. Somewhere, it is going to happen."

Col. Johnson is hoping it doesn't happen in the Triangle of Death. He's keeping his fingers crossed that his strategy will keep working. Not only because Iraqis will be able to vote, but because it will honor the lives of the men he's lost.

"When one of these Marines comes up to you and says, 'I am glad to be here. I am a Marine to the core. But tell me, is it worth it?' What do you tell them," asks Rather.

"Lives are definitely going to be missed, but our efforts here, I think, are going to be worth it. And I think we all we feel the same way," says Johnson.

"Are we going to miss our guys that we lost? You are damned right, because when we are old and gray, sitting down in the soldier's, sailor's home, those guys are still going to be young. We are going to have gray hair, and we are going to think about them, just the way they were, and we are going to miss them."


http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/01/26/60II/main669620.shtml
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Jan, 2005 11:30 am
This might be a news, interesting on this thread as well:

Quote:
Key Afghan-Iranian highway opens

The Afghan and Iranian presidents have opened a major road linking their two countries as part of reconstruction efforts aimed at boosting trade.
It is estimated the $60m Dogharun-Herat road, paid for by Iran, will carry over half of Afghan imports and exports.

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/40767000/jpg/_40767921_two2ap203.jpg
Presidents Khatami of Iran (left) and Karzai of Afghanistan


The highway has been called a modern day "silk route" and it is hoped it will eventually link the whole of Asia.

Afghanistan's illegal drugs trade and its leaders' close ties with the US have tested relations with Iran.

Iranian President Mohammad Khatami said he wanted a "stable, dignified" Afghanistan.

"I believe our security is Afghanistan's security," he said.

"Our stability and Afghanistan's stability are linked. Our progress and development is linked to Afghanistan's development."

Refugees

Iran's Revolutionary Guards built the 120-km (75-mile) highway to the Afghan city of Herat.

According to one of the engineers, interviewed by the Iranian state news agency, it was finished six months ahead of schedule.

The road is said to have police stations, rest stops and 24 car parks to accommodate the heavy traffic that is expected.

Iranian officials estimate that 60% of Afghanistan's imports and exports will travel on the road.

The BBC's Frances Harrison in Tehran says President Karzai's trip is mainly about business ties, but talks on Iran's repatriation of Afghan refugees are also likely.

The United Nations has accused Iran of exerting undue pressure on Afghans to make them go home, and has threatened to suspend its refugee programme in Iran.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai's visit to Iran to inaugurate the road and a power line is his first official trip since being elected last year.

"This is a very important step on the way to Afghanistan's reconstruction," he said at a ceremony on at Dogharun on Iran's eastern frontier.
Source
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Jan, 2005 11:36 am
Nice to know that people are staying positive. But the flaw in the thinking is here:

Quote:
We are doing fine. It's just a small, a small amount of people out there causing the problems. I mean, it is a small number, and we're killing them."


This convienently ignores the fact that the number of insurgents is MUCH larger than it used to be. Much larger. Therefore, how can one say that they are being 'killed off?' At what point does it become obvious that our presence is creating new terrorists and insurgents faster than we can kill them? Is our goal to kill every man and child in Iraq who resists US occupation? Does anyone even consider this a viable plan?

Optimisim is nice, but it's nicer when it's based on reality and not false hope.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 08/07/2025 at 11:33:06