THE US, THE UN AND IRAQ, ELEVENTH THREAD

Ticomaya wrote:

What are your thoughts on the whole 9/11 event, Tigershark? You subscribe to any particular theories concerning the genesis, planning, and operations of that particular "attack" on the United States? (i.e., who do you think dunnit?)

I'm not a 9/11 crank. Who actually did it is beside the point, it was an unspeakable tragedy.

What disturbs me is the road we have gone down ever since.

A culture of fear has been cultivated on the back of 9/11 and people are surrendering more and more freedom for the perception of 'security'.

Better to die on your feet than live on your knees?

0 Replies

It has become the norm for the US to call almost all violence in Iraq Al Queda, really stepped it up since the "surge". In reality; I don't believe even half of those captured or killed or suspected are Al Queda. This is just another way for this administration to try to manipulate the minds of the American people. They know we are for fighting terrorist but are against the Iraq war so they keep on trying to equate the two and it works. This way even if you really want to end the war; in the back of your mind, you think but what about the AQ if we leave? Will they grow if left unchecked? It is all mind games. And given the past record of how this administration works there is no reason to assume they are being truthful or honest.

The Myth of AQI

Quote:

The essential questions are: How large is the presence of AQI, in terms of manpower and attacks instigated, and what role does the group play in catalyzing further violence? For the first question, the military has produced an estimate. In a background briefing this July in Baghdad, military officials said that during the first half of this year AQI accounted for 15 percent of attacks in Iraq. That figure was also cited in the military intelligence report during final preparations for a National Intelligence Estimate in July.

This is the number on which many military experts inside the Beltway rely. Michael O'Hanlon, a senior fellow in foreign policy studies at the Brookings Institution who attended the Baghdad background briefing, explained that he thought the estimate derived from a comprehensive analysis by teams of local intelligence agents who examine the type and location of daily attacks, and their intended targets, and crosscheck that with reports from Iraqi informants and other data, such as intercepted phone calls. "It's a fairly detailed kind of assessment," O'Hanlon said. "Obviously you can't always know who is behind an attack, but there is a fairly systematic way of looking at the attacks where they can begin to make a pretty informed guess."

Yet those who have worked on estimates inside the system take a more circumspect view. Alex Rossmiller, who worked in Iraq as an intelligence officer for the Department of Defense, says that real uncertainties exist in assigning responsibility for attacks. "It was kind of a running joke in our office," he recalls. "We would sarcastically refer to everybody as al-Qaeda."

0 Replies

The headline in last Friday's Washington Post says it all: "No Murder Charges Filed in Haditha Case."

Two years ago, a group of Marines killed 24 Iraqi civilians -- including women and children cowering in their own homes -- in a revenge rampage in Haditha. Once the story emerged from the usual layers of lies and cover-up, the atrocity flared briefly on the public stage, and eight of the Marines and their officers were charged "with murder or failing to investigate an apparent war crime," as the Post reports. But public attention moved swiftly on, and over the past few months, the Pentagon's "military justice" system has quietly reduced or dropped charges against most of the men. Yesterday's announcement signaled the final climb-down in the case, leaving only a single Marine, Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich, facing a charge of voluntary manslaughter, and lesser charges against one other enlisted man and two officers.

Two dozen civilians slaughtered, as confirmed by the Pentagon itself -- and yet there was no murder. Indeed, Brian Rooney, the lawyer for one of the officer charged with failing to investigate the killings, now says "it's clear now that no massacre occurred, yet this legal fiction is moving forward." Twenty-four actual, physical dead bodies in the ground -- yet the incident was a "legal fiction" -- "no massacre occurred."

It is also the historical legacy of every single public figure and presidential candidate who fails to stand up -- right now, today, and every single day-- and demand that this abomination come to an immediate end, and that its perpetrators face the full measure of justice for what they have done. Who gives a damn about Obama's "elevating rhetoric" or Hillary's "tough fight-back" in New Hampshire -- or any of the other soul-rotting bullshit of the presidential campaign -- when this innocent blood drenches us all, day after day after day? Moral insanity has gripped this nation -- and we are all of us, every single one, tainted and corrupted by it...and are passing it on to our children. Who will break this chain of madness? And where will we find mercy for these crimes?
http://www.counterpunch.org/

0 Replies

Professor Kholoud Nasser Muhssin of the University of Baghdad points out that approximately 60-70% of all Iraqi children suffer from psychological problems. Many of them have also survived traumatic experiences. Psychological wounds are difficult to heal and post-traumatic stress disorder is very common. "New generations, especially this one, will be aggressive," points out the Baghdad psychiatrist Bilal Youssif Hamid. Many children whom Hamid has tried to treat have witnessed or participated in murders and death. Although parents are frequently too afraid to take their children to a clinic for a medical check-up, much less to school, even the children who go to school have great learning difficulties, as well as anxiety, depression, aggressiveness, nightmares, bedwetting etc. War is always catastrophic for the human psyche.

How can new generations acquire an awareness of the preciousness of each individual when human life is so cheap, the dignity of all people so blatantly ignored and human potentials so suppressed? How can a country be democratized when the most basic rights, such as the right to strike, are prohibited, and the call for vengeance and voice of despair drown out more rational alternatives to imperialism? How to popularize the philosophy of nonviolence?
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=15&ItemID=14669
Why the hell the leading aspirants of the Presidential chair has no words about this?

0 Replies

According to the supporters of the Iraq war, the children do no matter. After all, we are reducing violence in their country....from the time we were responsible for increasing it.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

According to the supporters of the Iraq war, the children do no matter. After all, we are reducing violence in their country....from the time we were responsible for increasing it.

Your fantasy is trite fantasy from the sorosaian sociiety of dupe producers.

The multitudes of mass killing of Iraqis have been and are perpetrated by middle easterners, not Americans.

Quote:

Daily Average Violent Deaths in Iraq--PRE and POST January 1, 2003:

PRE = 1/1/1979 - 12/31/2002 = 1,229,210/ 8,766 days = 140 per day;
POST = 1/1/2003 - 11/30/2007 = 87,683/1,795 days = .. 49 per day;
PRE / POST = 140/49 = 2.87.

0 Replies

Ican .
That is true.
But before this barbaric war it was not the case.
Sorry to repeat a quote from the above link

". Who gives a damn about Obama's "elevating rhetoric" or Hillary's "tough fight-back" in New Hampshire -- or any of the other soul-rotting bullshit of the presidential campaign -- when this innocent blood drenches us all, day after day after day? Moral insanity has gripped this nation -- and we are all of us, every single one, tainted and corrupted by it...and are passing it on to our children. Who will break this chain of madness? And where will we find mercy for these crimes?"

0 Replies

Late in 2007, the U.S. military began paying monthly wages of 300 dollars to former militants, calling them now "concerned local citizens."

While this policy has cut violence in al-Anbar, it has also increased political divisions between the dominant Shia political party and the Sunnis - the majority of these "concerned citizens" being paid are Sunni Muslims. Prime Minister Maliki has said these "concerned local citizens" will never be part of the government's security apparatus, which is predominantly composed of members of various Shia militias.

Underscoring another failure of the so-called surge is the fact that the U.S.-backed government in Baghdad remains more divided than ever, and hopes of reconciliation have vanished.

a recent ABC/BBC poll, 98 percent of Sunnis and 84 percent of Shias in Iraq want all U.S. forces out of the country.
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=15&ItemID=14672

0 Replies

The perpetrators are middle-easterners, but that was before the US helped them establish themselves as terrorists. Some would call what the US has done as "half ass job."

0 Replies

1. Myth: The reduction in violence in Iraq is mostly because of the escalation in the number of US troops, or "surge."
2. Myth: Iraq has been "calm" in fall of 2007 and the Iraqi public, despite some grumbling, is not eager for the US to depart.
3. The Iraqi north is relatively quiet and a site of economic growth.
4. The Sunni Arab "Awakening Councils," who are on the US payroll, are reconciling with the Shiite government of PM Nuri al-Maliki even as they take on al-Qaeda remnants.
5. Some progress has been made by the Iraqi government in meeting the "benchmarks" worked out with the Bush administration
6. The US overthrow of the Baath regime and military occupation of Iraq has helped liberate Iraqi women.
7. Iran was supplying explosively formed projectiles (a deadly form of roadside bomb) to Salafi Jihadi (radical Sunni) guerrilla groups in Iraq.
8. The US troop surge stopped the civil war that had been raging between Sunni Arabs and Shiites in the Iraqi capital of Baghdad.
9. There have been steps toward religious and political reconciliation in Iraq in 2007
10. The US public no longer sees Iraq as a central issue in the 2008 presidential campaign.
http://www.juancole.com/2007/12/top-ten-myths-about-iraq-2007.html

0 Replies

I want to add one myth to his list, the one I find most galling and least debunked: that the surge has led to the pacification of large parts of Anbar province and Baghdad. Quiescence and pacification are simply not the same thing, and this is definitely a case of quiescence. In fact, the reduction in violence we are witnessing is really a result of the U.S. discontinuing its vicious raids into insurgent territory, which have been -- from the beginning of the war -- the largest source of violence and civilian casualties in Iraq.
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=15&ItemID=14666

0 Replies

This is part of a veritable explosion of fantasies by the sorosaian promotion of dupes.

0 Replies

Opinion differs sir.
Truth will knock the door.

0 Replies

Rama, The zmag report tells it like it is; we exacerbated the violence by how our soldiers engaged in house-to-house battles. The Shia and Sunnis are not going to disappear from Iraq; and they are the ones that are battling each other and themselves.

DUH!

0 Replies

C I
The author is not a CNN reporter or the embedded journalist who sip a glass of sanguine water to write a quick fix article.

0 Replies

What will happen if we:
(1) leave Iraq ASAP?
(2) leave Iraq before the end of 2008?
(3) stay in Iraq until the Iraqi people are able to protect themselves without our help?

0 Replies

Nothing but bliss and tranquility sir.
USA has no business to stay there after MISSION ACCompolished

0 Replies

ican711nm wrote:

What will happen if we:
(1) leave Iraq ASAP?
(2) leave Iraq before the end of 2008?
(3) stay in Iraq until the Iraqi people are able to protect themselves without our help?

1. Ummmmm..the war will end?
2. Ummmmmmmmmmmm...the war will end??
3. Whatever you may think they need protection from, it can't be worse than the last 4 or 5 years. And do you REALLY give a damn about the average Iraqi?

0 Replies

Tigershark wrote:

ican711nm wrote:
What will happen if we:
(1) leave Iraq ASAP?
(2) leave Iraq before the end of 2008?
(3) stay in Iraq until the Iraqi people are able to protect themselves without our help?

...
3. Whatever you may think they need protection from, it can't be worse than the last 4 or 5 years. And do you REALLY give a damn about the average Iraqi?

Yes, it can be worse! It can be a lot worse. It can be worse than when Saddam owned Iraq.

Yes, I REALLY give a damn about the average Iragi, about the above average Iraqi, and about the below average Iraqi.

What do you REALLY give a damn about?

0 Replies

Don#t get upset sir.
The whole world is of the opinion that Iraq misadventure is barbarism pure.

0 Replies

THE US, THE UN AND IRAQ, ELEVENTH THREAD

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know