The US, UN & Iraq II

he keeps misspeaking!

What the heck was that ...... tia


This is some very good stuff ..... please read in it's entirety ....


Crude Vision New!
The Secret History of the Aqaba Pipeline

In the early 1980's Iraq and America's newest enemy Iran were locked in a vicious conflict. The use of chemical weapons by Saddam Hussein was well-known. In fact, in November 1983, U.S. Secretary of State George Shultz received an intelligence report describing how Saddam Hussein's troops were resorting to "almost daily use of CW [chemical weapons]" in their war against the Iranians.

Undeterred by the reports, one month later, President Reagan dispatched a special envoy to Baghdad on a secret mission.

On December 20, the envoy meets with Saddam Hussein. He is not there to lecture the dictator about his use of weapons of mass destruction or the fine print of the Geneva Conventions. He is there to talk business.

The envoy informs the Iraqi leader that Washington is ready for a resumption of full diplomatic relations, according to a recently declassified State Dept. report of the conversation, and that Washington would regard "any major reversal of Iraq's fortunes as a strategic defeat for the West." Iraqi leaders later describe themselves as "extremely pleased" with the visit.

The envoy was Donald H. Rumsfeld, then the CEO of pharmaceutical giant Searle. The meeting is widely considered to be the trigger that ushered in a new era of U.S.-Iraq relations, one that opened the door to shipments of dual-use munitions, chemical, biological agents and other dubious technology transfers. But for years what exactly was discussed in that now infamous meeting has been shrouded in secrecy.

Until now.



http://www.guerrillanews.com/war_on_terrorism/doc1510.html

Red Cross Suspends Baghdad Work; Canadian Killed
1 hour, 19 minutes ago Add World - Reuters to My Yahoo!
BAGHDAD (Reuters) - The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) said on Wednesday it had temporarily suspended humanitarian operations in Baghdad because the situation in the city was "chaotic and unpredictable."
"Given the chaotic and totally unpredictable situation in the city, getting from one place to another involves incalculable risks," the ICRC said in a statement.
The Geneva-based agency said a Canadian staff member missing since Tuesday afternoon had been shot and killed when the vehicle he was traveling in was caught in crossfire.
"We have managed to recover the body. He was caught in a crossfire. It was not a targeted hit on our car. There was fighting," spokeswoman Nada Doumani said in Geneva. The dead staff member was 48-year-old Vatche Arslanian.
She said 12 other people were believed to have died in the incident when a number of vehicles were trapped in the midst of the fighting. But Doumani added that the other people aboard two Red Cross vehicles had managed to escape.
In a separate incident, two Belgian doctors working in a Baghdad hospital told Reuters correspondent Khaled Yacoub Oweis that two Iraqi brothers in urgent need of medical treatment had died when the ambulance they were traveling in came under fire on Wednesday afternoon from what they said were U.S. forces.
One doctor, Geert van Moorter, said he confronted a U.S. tank commander nearby over the incident. "His reply was that it (the ambulance) could have been full of explosives," he said.

I have no problem in "buying into" the argument that Saddam is a brutal dictator, or that most Iraqis are joyful about his defeat.

What I said Europeans would generally find it impossible to buy into, is "Saddam=Hitler, Stalin".



I submit that numbers count, both when making decisions and when making comparisons.

Each murderer is bad for having murdered - and the fact that he has only murdered one, while Jeffrey Dahmer murdered a dozen, may not make a difference to that one person - but it makes a difference to the judge when deciding on the sentence, and when deciding to refrain from saying the murderer "is like Jeffrey Dahmer".

All I was asking is for people like Rumsfeld to stop talking to us like we're little children who won't know better, anyway - to stop using inane rhetorics when just the facts could give him enough of a case. It would make it easier for me to see the pros about his case. I dont know if thats a cultural thing.

Protests Build Over Journalists Deaths in Iraq
Wed April 9, 2003 02:30 PM ET
By Merissa Marr
LONDON (Reuters) - Journalists walked off the job and politicians demanded answers on Wednesday in a new broadside against the United States over the deaths of three journalists in Baghdad.
From Egypt to Mexico City, media vented their fury after U.S. fire killed journalists from Reuters news agency, Spanish broadcaster Telecinco and Arab television channel al-Jazeera in Baghdad on Tuesday.
In Spain, journalists piled cameras, tape recorders and notepads at the front of a room where Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar was meeting his party. Reporters in Madrid also walked out of a news conference with British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw.

Perhaps worthy a thread of its own?

We have a thread on views of exile Iraqis; might be good to collect views of Iraqis within the country - of which we'll be getting many now, I hope - in a central place, as we come across them, as well - ?

good idea nimh.

This administration and the coalition are hoping that the scientists and engineers will now come forward to reveal where all the WMD are made and hidden. c.i.

Semper Enron?

Perhaps in keeping with the Bush moral standard, the troops have been told not to prevent looting unless it gets violent... (!)

I've been watching the news coverage on CNN and listening to NPR. I think Rumsfeld comes off as arrogant and rude (no new news here, I know). He interrupts people and makes faces, his tone of voice is disrespectful. If he's trying to make a case of the pros of this war, it seems he might want to consult with Carl Rove. I agree nimh, he is condescending and punitive, as is GW. And I don't like him.

My other impression from the coverage I've been able to watch is that we see no images or interviews with angry or unhappy Iraqis. There was one short statement by an Iraqi saying he didn't want America to govern Iraq, and his tone was stern. But he also said that any honest Iraqi would tell you they are glad to see Saddam out. Logically, it seems to me, if the news weren't being so tightly controlled, we would see at least a mix of feelings. I don't care to have my news strained through a sieve as if I were a child, unable to make up my own mind. I resent being fed pablum when what I want is honest information.

We're getting nothing but double talk from the news media. It's a bargain with the devil. And I agree with Steve, we're seeing GW say one thing, and do another (again no new news). I believe we'll try to maintain a military presence in Iraq for years to come. But just listen to this quotation of GW's:

"The I-rack-ie people are plenty capabull of governin thamsel-ves."

My apologies to those who have already read this quote on another thread.

Someone please explain the media's high horse to me.


The media were told since Day 1 that only the embeds could expect a degree of safety.

The independant, travelling bands of media were discouraged due to safety concerns.

The media in Baghdad were told they would be used as human shields by Saddam's army, and that they were not safe in Baghdad--they were not safe wandering around freely.

When shots were fired at our troops from the Palestine, what did the media WHO HAD BEEN WARNED expect the US soldiers to do--be killed?

They accepted their risk when they heard and dismissed the warnings.

Sofia, Not questioning your stance on the warning to media folks, but can you provide any support for this claim? c.i.

some months ago a fellow poster on this forum came up with what i assume to be his most scathing indictment of me he could think of, he called me a poet; so perception this one is dedicated to you:
what do the dead say?
does the soldier's tongue blather of honor?
does the child's lips ask for her heart back?
the old man does not ask for water.
does freedom ring in the ears of the dead?
does the despot beg for mercy?
to the dead it doesn't matter,
what do the dead say?
nothing.

That's one view, I suppose. Another is that the deliberate targeting of journalists, or of other non-combatant civilians period, simply affords no tactical advantage, and would be not only wasteful of resources but inefficient in terms of accomplishing a combat mission. While it is not likely to get reported, I note from watching the available video it seems improbable, from a techinical point of view, that the damaged upper-floor balconies were struck by fire from any of the Abrams tanks in the vicinity. The tanks were in relatively close proximity to the building, and their main guns don't elevate that high. The level of destruction evidenced appears far too limited to have been caused by a round from a 120mm Smoothbore ... a more plausible result from that munition would have been the removal of a significant portion of that corner of the building. A round which routinely blows the 8-ton turrets of T72 tanks 150 feet into the atop a colum of flame and sparks will do more than scar and char a bit of masonry. The hole in The Journalists' Story isn't big enough.

The Marine entrance into Paradise Square was, incidentally, the product of "exploiting tactical opportunies". Marine elements "Leapfrogging" around the units engaged in the stubborn firefight at Baghdad University encountereds only sporadic, insignificant resistance before them. In pressing to discover and engage additional enemy, they made their way relatively uneventfully to the square, likely nearly as much to their own surprise as that of the would-have-been Iraqi defenders. Some scrambling and reshuffling of otherwise engaged or committed elements reinforced the probe as it continued to proceed successfully. The videos clearly show tanks, amtracks, and other vehicles of multiple units very uncharacteristically intermingled throughout the square. Sort of a nitpicky thing, I know, but beautifully illustrative of the tactical flexibility of The US.

Now in Baghdad and elsewhere in the South, Civil Administration and Humanitarian Services must and will be given the utmost priority. I fully expect while there likely will be isolated terrorist-style incidents, Iraqis will become less reticent and mistrustful as aid pours in at a volume which will sorely strain transport and distribution. The Iraqi People very shortly will have far more of what they need than they will have any use for.

Interesting conjectural observation: According to an only-occasionally reliable news source, quoting a nebulous source (IOW ... Industrial Strength Rumor Mill stuff), Baghdad Hospitals recorded abberationally low instances of "Death by Natural Cause" during the past few weeks. ... far fewer folks seem to have just died than would be actuarially probable for a peacetime city of that population given its known attributes. Occupational injuries and traffic-related trauma appear to have been less evident than might have been expected, as well. If indeed true, given that it would be absurd to assume war might have a beneficial effect on the overall health of a populace, it likely is somethoing which should be considered when sorting out "Civilian Casualties"

Good poem. The oppressor always counts on silence, but doesn't always get it. Kosovo, Argentina, Vietnam.... the bones reappear on the surface eventually, Dys. You will know they are there when the administration tries to silence those who know what happened.

Sofia, surely you can understand our wariness about that "for your own protection" line, no? We believe that sometimes governments aren't wholy honest.

In the background, on the radio, someone is talking about the surprise that Saddam didn't blow up any of the bridges -- something which would have slowed the US military down quite a bit. Why? Any original thoughts on why he didn't?

Good one dys

Very nicely done, Dyslexia.

Tartarin, I can't help but think he's holed up in Tikrit, maybe saving his big-guns for that? I dunno, but baghdad seemed to easy in the end.