THE US, THE UN AND IRAQ, ELEVENTH THREAD

Quote:

Call that humiliation?

No hoods. No electric shocks. No beatings. These Iranians clearly are a very uncivilised bunch

Terry Jones
Saturday March 31, 2007
The Guardian


I share the outrage expressed in the British press over the treatment of our naval personnel accused by Iran of illegally entering their waters. It is a disgrace. We would never dream of treating captives like this - allowing them to smoke cigarettes, for example, even though it has been proven that smoking kills. And as for compelling poor servicewoman Faye Turney to wear a black headscarf, and then allowing the picture to be posted around the world - have the Iranians no concept of civilised behaviour? For God's sake, what's wrong with putting a bag over her head? That's what we do with the Muslims we capture: we put bags over their heads, so it's hard to breathe. Then it's perfectly acceptable to take photographs of them and circulate them to the press because the captives can't be recognised and humiliated in the way these unfortunate British service people are.

It is also unacceptable that these British captives should be made to talk on television and say things that they may regret later. If the Iranians put duct tape over their mouths, like we do to our captives, they wouldn't be able to talk at all. Of course they'd probably find it even harder to breathe - especially with a bag over their head - but at least they wouldn't be humiliated.

And what's all this about allowing the captives to write letters home saying they are all right? It's time the Iranians fell into line with the rest of the civilised world: they should allow their captives the privacy of solitary confinement. That's one of the many privileges the US grants to its captives in Guantánamo Bay...

more at
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,2047128,00.html

ican711nm wrote:

OK!

Let's ask the Iraqi government what they want America to do.

Do they want us to stay or leave?

If they want us to stay, then what do they want us to do?

If they want us to leave, then when do they want us to leave?

I have a better idea; ask the Iraqi people.

...
Yet,I dont hear or see ANY of the democrats or those on the left saying anything about those violations of the GC.

As a matter of fact,the dems in the House are so concerned about the Brit prisoners that Nancy Pelosi has refused to allow H.Res 267...

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c110:15:./temp/~c110bzKL7l::

To even be voted on.
Why is that?

110th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. RES. 267
Calling for the immediate and unconditional release of British marines and sailors held captive by Iran, and for other purposes.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
March 26, 2007
...
Resolved, That the House of Representatives--

(1) condemns the Islamic Republic of Iran for the seizure of 15 British marines and sailors and demands their unconditional release; and

(2) calls on the United Nations Security Council to condemn this seizure and explore new sanctions against the Islamic Republic of Iran, including the restriction of the supply of gasoline, to prevent further Iranian hostile action, deny Iran's ability to militarize the Persian Gulf, and enforce Iran's nonproliferation commitments.

xingu wrote:

ican711nm wrote:

OK!

Let's ask the Iraqi government what they want America to do.

Do they want us to stay or leave?

If they want us to stay, then what do they want us to do?

If they want us to leave, then when do they want us to leave?

I have a better idea; ask the Iraqi people.

Yes, that is a better idea, if we can establish a reliable way to learn their answers. Would it be acceptable if we asked the Iraqi government to hold a plebiscite on these questions? Who do you recommend tally the votes?

4/1/07
Ex-Aide Details a Loss of Faith in the President A top strategist for the Texas Democrats who was disappointed by the Bill Clinton years, Mr. Dowd was impressed by the pledge of Mr. Bush, then governor of Texas, to bring a spirit of cooperation to Washington. He switched parties, joined Mr. Bush's political brain trust and dedicated the next six years to getting him to the Oval Office and keeping him there. In 2004, he was appointed the president's chief campaign strategist.

Looking back, Mr. Dowd now says his faith in Mr. Bush was misplaced.

In a wide-ranging interview here, Mr. Dowd called for a withdrawal from Iraq and expressed his disappointment in Mr. Bush's leadership.

He criticized the president as failing to call the nation to a shared sense of sacrifice at a time of war, failing to reach across the political divide to build consensus and ignoring the will of the people on Iraq. He said he believed the president had not moved aggressively enough to hold anyone accountable for the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, and that Mr. Bush still approached governing with a "my way or the highway" mentality reinforced by a shrinking circle of trusted aides.

"I really like him, which is probably why I'm so disappointed in things," he said. He added, "I think he's become more, in my view, secluded and bubbled in."

In speaking out, Mr. Dowd became the first member of Mr. Bush's inner circle to break so publicly with him.

He said his decision to step forward had not come easily. But, he said, his disappointment in Mr. Bush's presidency is so great that he feels a sense of duty to go public given his role in helping Mr. Bush gain and keep power.

Mr. Dowd, a crucial part of a team that cast Senator John Kerry as a flip-flopper who could not be trusted with national security during wartime, said he had even written but never submitted an op-ed article titled "Kerry Was Right," arguing that Mr. Kerry, a Massachusetts Democrat and 2004 presidential candidate, was correct in calling last year for a withdrawal from Iraq.

ican711nm wrote:

...
Would it be acceptable if we asked the Iraqi government to hold a plebiscite on these questions? Who do you recommend tally the votes?

Surveys have shown us that the iraqi people want us out of Iraq. However if a survey doesn't tell you what you want to hear I'm sure you can find ways to trash it.

I think what the government of Iraq is concerned about is how to hang on to power and corruption without incurring to much expense. After all if Americans are willing to die to maintaine the status quo and keep dumping money in their laps, then hell yes they want them to stay. Wouldn't you?

America will pull its troops out of Iraq before the end of 2007, unless your legislature by a public vote made before July 1, 2007, requests us to stay until the Iraq legislature subsequently decides the Iraq government is able to protect Iraqi non-murderers without our help.

January 24, 2007
Iraq Parliament Finds a Quorum Hard to Come By

15 Percent Increase in Iraq Deaths Despite Surge
6 US GIs killed over weekend
McCain Continues Magical Mystery Tour

For all those journalists and politicians who keep insisting that there are new "glimmers" of "hope" in Iraq because of the new security plan started 6 weeks ago, here is a sobering statistic from the Iraqi government. (I'm looking at you, John McCain. See below for more on McCain).

Iraqis killed in February: 1806 (64.5/day)
Iraqis killed in March: 2078 (67/day)

That is a 15% increase! (Readers have pointed out that it is 15% if calculated by month, 4% if by day).

(Of course, the real numbers are much higher than these government statistics suggest, since passive information gathering on casualties only catches a fraction).

While 44 Iraqi soldiers died in action, the total for US troops in March was 85. AFP is suspicious about the disparity given that US and Iraqi authorities have said that Iraqi troops are leading the security crackdown. If that were true, they should have more casualties than the Americans.

Killings in Baghdad have declined a bit, and death squad murders at night have been impeded, so that fewer bodies are found on the streets in the morning. But car bombing casualties rose. And, some of the violence was displaced from the capital to other cities, such as Baqubah and Mosul, which explains why the total is up so much. The US withdrew some 3,000 troops from Mosul last summer to concentrate them in Baghdad, and since then Mosul seems to me to have become increasingly insecure. It is Iraq's second largest city.

So the over-all death toll has actually increased since the surge began.

Another cautionary note is that major attacks on Shiites in the capital and elsewhere seem to me to be way up. They may not take revenge immediately, but they will eventually. That the US has forced the Shiite militias off the street will be held against America, since Iraqis conclude that they are being killed because the Americans are not letting them defend themselves.

This grandstanding trip that John McCain took to Baghdad on Sunday is another occasion for propaganda to shore up his falling poll numbers in his presidential campaign.

Look, I lived in the midst of a civil war in the late 1970s in Beirut. I know exactly what it looks and smells like. The inexperienced often assume that when a guerrilla war or a civil war is going on, life grinds to a standstill. Not so. People go shopping for food. They drive where they need to go as long as they don't hear that there is a firefight in that area. They go to work if they still have work. Life goes on. It is just that, unexpectedly, a mortar shell might land near you. Or the person ahead of you in line outside the bakery might fall dead, victim of a sniper's bullet. The bazaars are bustling some days (all the moreso because it is good to stock up on supplies the days when the violence isn't so bad). So nothing that John McCain saw in Baghdad on Sunday meant a damn thing. Not a goddamn thing.

It makes my blood boil.

Because McCain, you see, knows exactly what I know about guerrilla wars and civil wars. And if he is saying what he is saying, it is because he is lying through his teeth and attempting to deceive the American public.

The deception will get even more of our young men and women in uniform blown up, at a time when their mission has become murky and undefined. If the American public sacrifices the lives of the troops with their eyes open, for what they see as the sake of the security of the United States, then the loss of life is regrettable but the mission is clear, defined, and has public support. But if the American public is lied to and only thinks a mission is being accomplished as a result, then the sacrifice of soldiers' lives is monstrous. The Iraq War has become monstrous in this way. And John McCain, whom I have long respected as a straight shooter, has now been seduced into playing illusionist with the lives of our troops.

Kyra Phillips, who is CNN's correspondent in Baghdad, bravely took on McCain and the retired generals who are peddling this horse manure about how improved the situation in Iraq is, on Sunday on Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer. The transcript:

[Blitzer]: In Iraq, meanwhile, earlier today, Senator John McCain and some other Republican congressmen spent some time getting a personal view of the security on the streets of Baghdad, elsewhere.

Joining us, now, from Baghdad, CNN's own Kyra Phillips.

Kyra, you've had a chance to hear what Senator McCain and his delegation have to say today. First of all, update our viewers, Kyra, on what their bottom line is.

KYRA PHILLIPS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, that's what's interesting, Wolf. And this is what I'm taking away from all of this, as I listen to these politicians and also go out onto the streets throughout Baghdad and greater Baghdad, is that it's very easy to go into certain areas and say things are improving.

For example, I went into Dora Market yesterday with General David Petraeus. Things are improving. Shops are opening up. But, still, Al Qaida is active in the area. They're still dealing with a death squad.

So, I could see a John McCain coming forward today, like he did, saying, look, I'm not saying this is mission accomplished, but there's still a lot going on. There's still a lot of challenges. There's still a lot of danger.

It's the easy answer, Wolf, for anybody. There are improvements going on throughout this country, but, also, there are incredible security challenges and violence that plagues this country.

BLITZER: Kyra, when you went out with General Petraeus this weekend and you walked around some streets in Baghdad, describe for us how much security he and you had.

PHILLIPS: I would probably say triple the presidential entourage, Wolf.

(LAUGHTER)

Now, I'm exaggerating a little bit, but in all seriousness, outer, inner, and perimeter security; sniper teams, personal security guards, humvees, helicopters -- you name it.

That man cannot travel this country without security. And he even said to me, you know, we'd be in a lot of trouble -- all these men around me would be in a lot of trouble if anything happened to me.

There's a great responsibility. He is the general commanding all U.S. forces in Iraq. He has to have security. Anywhere he goes, he must be protected because he's the man in charge of all the military action that's happening in this country.

So, yes, we went through Dora Market, and we had security everywhere. He wore a soft cap. I didn't wear a helmet. We felt comfortable. Why? We had lots of security.

BLITZER: But for average -- I take it then -- correct me if I'm wrong, Kyra, and you've been there for a few weeks now -- for a U.S. soldier to simply leave his or her base and get into a car and drive to a coffee shop...

PHILLIPS: No, forget it.

BLITZER: ... go to a restaurant and just meet with a bunch of friends. That's outrageous?

PHILLIPS: No. That's a pipe dream, Wolf. I mean, I wish -- even driving down the streets of Baghdad, you see the closed-down restaurants.

People aren't going to -- whether you're a journalist, whether you're military, whether you're a leader in this country, whether you're an Iraqi civilian, you are taking a risk.

I talked to shop owners on the streets. I can only stay there a short time. Sometimes I can't even go there at all. I'm a target. I'm an American.

But even the Iraqis say, yes, I have to come to work, but every day I'm worried something is going to happen to me.

Everybody is at risk. There is not one type of individual that is safe in this country, including the extremists.

Posted By Juan to Informed Comment at 4/02/2007 06:30:00 AM

ican wrote:

America will pull its troops out of Iraq before the end of 2007, unless your legislature by a public vote made before July 1, 2007, requests us to stay until the Iraq legislature subsequently decides the Iraq government is able to protect Iraqi non-murderers without our help.

That may be difficult to do.

Quote:

January 24, 2007
Iraq Parliament Finds a Quorum Hard to Come By
By DAMIEN CAVE
BAGHDAD, Jan. 23 -- Mahmoud al-Mashhadani, the speaker of Parliament, read a roll call of the 275 elected members with a goal of shaming the no-shows.

...

I don't think the Iraqi legislator care any more about what the people think than George Bush cares about what the American public thinks.

These legislators have their power, privilege, money and protection. As I said, it's in their best interest to have Americans die for them as long as possible.

April 3, 2007
McCain Wrong on Iraq Security, Merchants Say

The latest massacre of Iraqi children came as 21 Shia market workers were ambushed, bound and shot dead north of the capital.

The victims came from the Baghdad market visited the previous day by John McCain, the US presidential candidate, who said that an American security plan in the capital was starting to show signs of progress.

More than 600 Iraqis have been killed in the past week despite a US-Iraqi security plan to quell violence in the capital. Most of the killings have been the result of truck bombs outside Baghdad.

Mr McCain said that the situation was showing signs of improvement and blamed waning support in the United States for the war on the media, which were portraying an overly negative image of the crisis.

Okay, where the f*ck is the Iraq Army? I can't find any actual evidence that they are actually doing anything at all. They certainly aren't 'taking the lead,' considering they had almost zero casualties last month.

Another lie by Bush

Cycloptichorn

The Iraqi army and the American army are co-mingled in and around Baghdad.

Soldiers doubt an influx of American troops will benefit Iraqi army
By Nancy A. Youssef
McClatchy Newspapers

MUQDADIYAH, Iraq - It was supposed to be a reconciliation meeting, a get-together to introduce the Sunni Muslim mayor and police chief of this city north of Baghdad to the mostly Shiite Muslim Iraqi soldiers who'd been assigned to protect their town.


But as the mayor and police chief approached the entrance to the Iraqi army base here last month, Iraqi troops seized their bodyguards and tossed them to the ground. Then the soldiers put their boots on the bodyguards' backs, a literal reminder that the Sunni officials were under the boot of the Shiite military.


For the Americans assigned to train Iraqi troops here, the incident was another in a long string of problems that's persuaded many of them that it will be years before Iraq's army can stand on its own.


On Wednesday night, President Bush is expected to announce that he's sending thousands more American soldiers to Iraq as part of a new plan to overcome the country's widening sectarian violence. But to many of the U.S. soldiers who already are struggling to prepare Iraqi troops in Diyala province say that more Americans won't solve Iraq's problems.


"The Iraqis will accept mediocrity," said Staff Sgt. Luke Alphonso, a U.S. Army medic from Morgan City, La., who's been assigned to train members of Iraq's 5th Army Division for the past six months. "They will let us do everything" for them.

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Okay, where the f*ck is the Iraq Army? I can't find any actual evidence that they are actually doing anything at all. They certainly aren't 'taking the lead,' considering they had almost zero casualties last month.

Another lie by Bush

Cycloptichorn

The Iraqi army and the American army are co-mingled in and around Baghdad.

Bush's biggest of many errors has been his persistent effort, until recently, to achieve consensus with the Dems.

ican711nm wrote:

Bush's biggest of many errors has been his persistent effort, until recently, to achieve consensus with the Dems.

...

His third mistake was to allow his handlers to put the US and the world in jeopardy with an illegal and inhumane war created solely to line the pockets of Halliburton.

Congress's Joint Resolution September 14, 2001
emphasis added
SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.
...
(a) IN GENERAL- That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.

Congress's Joint Resolution Oct. 16, 2002
Public Law 107-243 107th Congress Joint Resolution (H.J. Res. 114) To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq.
...
[10th]Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq;

[11th]Whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations, including organizations that threaten the lives and safety of United States citizens;
...

Congressional Intelligence Report 09/08/2006
REPORT OF THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE ON POSTWAR FINDINGS ABOUT IRAQ'S WMD PROGRAMS AND LINKS TO TERRORISM AND HOW THEY COMPARE WITH PREWAR ASSESSMENTS together with ADDITIONAL VIEWS;

[computer page 112 of 151 pages -- report page 109],
Conclusion 6. Postwar information indicates that the Intelligence Community accurately assessed that al-Qa'ida affiliate group Ansar al-Islam operated in Kurdish-controlled northeastern Iraq, an area that Baghdad had not controlled since 1991.

American Soldier, by General Tommy Franks, 7/1/2004
"10" Regan Books, An Imprint of HarperCollins Publishers

page 483:
"The air picture changed once more. Now the icons were streaming toward two ridges an a steep valley in far northeastern Iraq, right on the border with Iran. These were the camps of the Ansar al-Isla terrorists, where al Qaeda leader Abu Musab Zarqawi had trained disciples in the use of chemical and biological weapons. But this strike was more than just another [Tomahawk Land Attack Missile] bashing. Soon Special Forces and [Special Mission Unit] operators, leading Kurdish Peshmerga fighters, would be storming the camps, collecting evidence, taking prisoners, and killing all those who resisted."

page 519:
"[The Marines] also encountered several hundred foreign fighters from Egypt, the Sudan, Syria, and Lybia who were being trained by the regime in a camp south of Baghdad. Those foreign volunteers fought with suicidal ferocity, but they did not fight well. The Marines killed them all. "

UN CHARTER Article 51
Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defense shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.