The US, UN & Iraq II

nimh, ya nailed me again ... the criticisms I leveled at the generic "Arab World" are more aptly applied to regimes, not to peoples. There is much on which we agree, even if our perspectives may differ.

And I happen to feel the hidden, forgotten victims of war are the rank-and-file warriors. The survivors of that bunch are made up of two types; those who know the pain and traqedy suffered in defeat, and those who know the pain and tragedy required to achieve victory. Both will live with memories of having participated in shared horrors. Surviving civilians may draw comfort from the realization they were merely unfortunate enough to have been in proximity to actions in which they themselves were not actors. The soldier is always left with the mess.

Tartar, The current Iraqi civilian body count is between 877 and 1050. Current as of 9:00 PM PST. c.i.

If you folks don't mind, as it seems quite relevant to this thread as well, I'd like to paste in a response I made on another thread asking for notions of what a post-war administration might look like.

I think folks will project a post-war Iraq governance based on their notions of what factors motivated the US to begin this project. Those who hold that the US went in to 'free the Iraqi people' will likely assume governance to head in that direction. As I personally think such a view is supported only by rhetoric, and not by any evidence or historical precedent, that consequence wouldn't be my first bet.

I am actually not at all sure that the US will ever leave Iraq. That is, I think it certainly possible, perhaps even most likely, that the US will maintain Iraq as the base of its military presence in the ME. The advantages, for the US, to such an arrangement (cheaper, faster military access to the area, stability of oil supplies, protection of client-state Israel, freeing the Sauds from the PR problem of US presence, etc) will likely be far too tempting to pass up.

Therefore, I'd posit a post-war administration which denied the UN any effective decision-making control, an increasing US corporate presence in the country, financial and PR support to whomever is deemed most compliant with US plans, controlled media sources, and, when the results can be predictably agreeable, elections.

Nimh wrote:

NOTE: I'm not here putting the blame for their deaths on US/British side, at least not solely - it was Saddam who forced them to go to their death, after all, even if it was in a war that the Americans and Brits chose to start. But somebody should have kept track, at the least to prevent or counter the repeat of the whole "clean war" myth, thats now again being presented by the 'smart bombs team'. It might still turn out there have been relatively less deaths now than in the old days - but now we might just never know.

Damn nice of you to not blame the death of so many enemy soldiers on the US and Britain---at least not solely. We not only have killed fewer civilians than in any major war in history but now we must stop and tap each enemy on the shoulder and ask him if he is being forced to fight before we ask him to surrender and then if he won't we're supposed to wait until he kills one of our guys. You folks will resort to any criticism to put the US and gov't and our soldiers in the moral swamp. I don't recall anyone promising not to kill enemy soldiers if they were shooting at us.

Really Nimb just when I find some of your comments very logical and well founded you come up with the above kind of irrational, offensive accusation.

BTW--regarding your charge that we should fight a completely sterile war in which we should not kill either enemy soldier or civilian(it's OK if some of our guys get killed because they should know better) we are attempting to do just that by now dropping small bombs filled with CONCRETE INSTEAD OF EXPLOSIVES. Yes that's right concrete. Can you imagine being able to drop a bomb from 10,000 ft (two miles) and have it fly in the window where a sniper is firing a rifle and have it kill only the guy and no one else.

Also an aside---I believe today is the 20th day of the war and end of my prediction time period of an extra 10 to end the war. Actually I feel it is near enough to claim victory but I won't because until we drag Saddam from his rat hole dead or alive, it is not over. If people do not see his body or him in handcuffs there will always be a percentage of the Iraqi population who will live in fear that he will return. Can you imagine having the power to strike fear in the hearts of people even if you're dead but not found?

A-10s are circling within view of the cameras overlooking downtown Baghdad. They appear to be operating in active support of an armored recon-in-force. The sounds of moderate to moderately heavy engagement can be heard. 3ID i reported by Reuters to be mounting "Major thrust into city center", a Pentagon spokesman quoted as saying "Saturday was an incursion; this is for real"

Blatham wrote:

Therefore, I'd posit a post-war administration which denied the UN any effective decision-making control.

I surely hope so---we didn't spend Billions of $ and allow a hundred of our best to die just so some parasite from the UN could come in and screw it up. The UN can be allowed to administer humanitarian aid (they will probably wait for 6 months before they start that which means our guys will be forced to keep the Iraqi people alive during that time). I think it is only fair, just and logical to allow our team to come in and either fail or make it work so we can either get the credit or the blame. One thing for certain is that Russia, France and Germany will never be allowed to submit one word of persuasion toward the plan or execution of the plan.

Oh I almost forgot---neither will Canada.

Oh Bernie---Just to let you know I bear no grudge please take the SARS epidemic seriously especially in Vancouver---you have a large Chinese population from Hong Kong I believe.

A bit confusing, but there are indications US Forces in downtown Baghdad may intend to evacuate Al-Rasheed Hotel (journalists and dgnitaries) and to sieze or destroy Ministry of Information buildind essentially next door to the hotel. A Presidential Place has been siezed. This does not appear to be The Attack, but it is a major raid at the very least. The psychological value likely will oughtweigh the direct military gain. Any opportunity presented to 3ID will certainly be exploited. Developments are to be expected.

That has been a quotation, not my words.

no more journalists in Baghdad?

Timber

Please continue to keep the good folks on this thread informed. Many are in deep denial (probably don't believe a word you say) and only want to predict doom and gloom about the aftermath of the war.

I personally want to see the minister of information broadcasting an apology to the world for his lies.

"Sources": "Hundreds" of US combat vehicles in city center, "Numerous" attack aircraft overhead. "Resistance spotty, inconsistant, and ineffective"

Things are hotting up around Kirkuk, as well. Monday is likely to be a very big news day.

US officer on scene: "We intend to develop and exploit tactical opportunities aggressively."

No official word yet, but briefing rooms are getting busy, and cell phones are racking up minutes.

Walter wrote:


That has been a quotation, not my words.

I fail to see a difference between your words and the words of a quotation which you post ----if you post a quotation it would infer that you believe the quotation and it's intent---please correct me if I am wrong.

0633 GMT - U.S. troops have entered the Al Rashid Hotel and the Ministry of Informaton in central Baghdad.

Timber

There was a moment where I thought there was a possibility that they would save Tikrit for the 4th ID but now I think Tikrit will be stormed within 2 days from now. The guys in the tunnels may get there before the guys on the road.

A push by The Marines from the opposite direction may be underway. This would place the defenders against the anvil of the Tigris from two sides, should it develop. Helluva "Tactical opportunity". No Marine assault is confirmed, but there are sounds of skirmishing and some artillery or tank fire.

Perception

I think, my quotation was valuable, that's why I posted it.

A quotations are not my own words, that's why I (usually, if I don't forget that) mark them as such.

Quotations can be pro or contra my argumentation, or just a little bit of each or ... .

Timber

This is a major event.

Just an aside ---- I think Gen Franks is saving the 4th ID for the Turks or possibly Syria before the Turks.

Another aside---that first raid on Saddams palace was probably the best msg they could have sent that Loony Tune in North Korea. Too bad they couldn't show 30 cruise missiles taking out the actual palace and all structures above ground then having 4 bunker busters hit the bunker itself.

"Ranking Pentagon Source": "(This is) a demonstration, a reconaisance by force. It is a component of a series of planned operations."

Seems the Al-Rashid and the Ministry of Information have not been siezed or entered, but are "Within th US Zone of Control". There are also reports Iraqi forces were establishing defensive positions in the vicinity of the hotel and the ministry building, as well as at bridges and some major road intersections. First reports are rarely altogether reliable. No Marine assault is underway, apparently, though there are reports of considerable reinforcement and shuffling about of Marine units, as opposed to any concerted aggressive activity. A formidable Light Infantry force is on the ground at Baghdad International, but does not appear to be configured for immediate combat deployment at present.