The Iraq War - Chapter 5

[Pua'i Mana'o]

http://www.motherjones.com/bush_war_timeline/

Lie by Lie: Chronicle of a War Foretold: August 1990 to March 2003

The first drafts of history are fragmentary. Important revelations arrive late, and out of order. In this timeline, we’ve assembled the history of the Iraq War to create a resource we hope will help resolve open questions of the Bush era. What did our leaders know and when did they know it? And, perhaps just as important, what red flags did we miss, and how could we have missed them? This is the first installment in our Iraq War timeline project.

========================
this website is mindblowing.

[Leo Lakio]

Beyond FDR, on the topic of how "we" treat "the enemy":

"The only legitimate war on terror must also be a war on fear itself. Terror is defeated when the fear it has induced is dispelled. Dispelling fear is much more than merely neutralizing a threat. To dispel fear, the threat also has to be rendered irrelevant by precisely a moral fortitude unshaken by terror, by an unwavering dedication to higher principles."

~ Alexandre Trudeau, published in Maclean's, 9/11/06 ~

[Mahi Waina]

Who thinks terror will decrease if we ignore the problem?? - Timkona

A legitimate question that never got discussed before the thread degenerated into racist, infantile blathering. I say no, we should not ignore the problem. But doing what we are doing in Iraq is worse than ignoring the problem, it is counterproductive by exacerbating a civil war and alienating us from moderate Muslims whose support we will need if can achieve stability in the Middle East.

[Miulang]

No we shouldn't ignore the problem, but since the current Administration has done its best to alienate us from the rest of the world through some of its policies, I think the best way we have to fight terror is to beef up our own defenses within this country: i.e., strengthen the National Guard (bring 'em home so they can be our NATIONAL defense again, and not our INTERNATIONAL defense!), allocate more funds to beef up port security so that no WMDs and illegal aliens can get through, spend more time and money on healing this country by solving some of our internal problems (e.g., access to healthcare, creating meaningful jobs, protecting current jobs and pensions, encouraging development of alternative fuels) rather than starting wars pre-emptively all over the world.

The next White House administration is going to have to do a lot of fence mending by the time it's inaugurated in 2009. Around the world, leaders are changing too (no more Blair, no more Koizumi) so the next Administration will definitely have to restore good relations with some of our former "friends".

Miulang

[Miulang]

According to a recent State Dept. poll of Iraqis, the overwhelming majority (almost 75%) of people polled said they would feel safer if the US and its allies left Iraq (they also believe that our occupation has increased the violence in that country), and 65% said they wanted us out immediately.

Sounds like we've overstayed our welcome, and the longer we insist we need to stay there to maintain the peace, the more civilians and our troops (we've lost at least 3 Kaneohe Marines and Schofield soldiers in the last week) get killed.

Maybe we should bring the troops home, and give the people of Iraq the $1.2 billion we're spending every week on keeping our troops in Iraq to help them rebuild their country.

Miulang

[Mahi Waina]

Anybody still think we should be over there making the Mideast "safe for democracy?"

http://www.charter.net/news/read.php...ARSDCCLM_UNEWS

[Leo Lakio]

Let's see...

The crazy president of Iran - democratically elected; the crazy president of Venezuela - democratically elected; the crazy president of America - democratically elected.

Not the best arguments one could make in favor of "democracy."

[Miulang]

A newly released Congressional analysis indicates that the taxpayers are now sending about $2 billion a week to support our efforts in Iraq. This is 20% more than a year ago. If Congress votes to accept the new interim funding requests submitted by the Pentagon, we will spend more than $509 billion on both Iraq and Afghanistan since Sept. 11, 2001.

How many more teachers and nurses could be hired for that money? How much closer to being rebuilt would New Orleans be?

We're spending $370 million a week in Afghanistan. FOR WHAT????? The Taliban is gaining traction again in parts of Afghanistan, while the President wines and dines Afghan President Karzai in Washington, DC.

Miulang

[Miulang]

As expected, Congress approved an additional $70 billion to fund troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. That money will probably only last through the Spring of 2007, when the Pentagon will go before Congress again for more emergency funding. Of that amount, $24 billion will be given to the Army and Marines to replenish and repair equipment rendered inoperable over the last 3 years through continous use.

More ominously, the approved bill will allow for an additional 30,000 soldiers and 5,000 Marines to be called up next year. The next question is: given the unpopularity of the occupations, where will those additional troops come from? The IRR? Calling up more National Guard?

With passage of this appropriation, we, the taxpayers, and our children and their children are half a trillion dollars in debt with no end in sight.

Miulang

P.S. One of the saddest stories from the front is this one, about Merideth Howard, a 52-year old Reservist from Alameda, CA who, on Sept. 8, became the oldest woman soldier to die fighting for the United States during this conflict. She went because she was told to go. Here's an "official" obituary that chronicles her life up until the day she died. An incredible woman who didn't run away from her obligations.

And Reservist families are ordering cardboard likenesses of family members ("Flat Daddies") serving in Afghanistan and Iraq so kids have a way to remember their family members' faces.

[Miulang]

Somebody sneaked in a little $20 million line item into the last emergency funding bill for Iraq and Afghanistan. The purpose? To celebrate our "victory" in Iraq and Iran.

There's finger pointing on both sides of the aisle now about who allowed this allocation to be included. It appears that it was also in the last emergency funding bill passed in the spring but obviously the money was never spent because we haven't declared victory yet.

The fact that BOTH Republicans and Democrats UNANIMOUSLY approved the funding bill tells me 1) either Congress really is rubberstamping every bill without taking the time to read all the fine print, or 2) the leaders of Congress are forcing the body to vote on bills for which they don't allow adequate time to study the bill and/or be allowed to ask questions.

I'm not so worried about the $20 million right now (mainly because it's doubtful we'll ever be able to pronounce that we've won the occupation). What concerns me more is that all this was unanimously voted upon and only after the dust has settled that questions are starting to be asked.

I want my elected representatives to pay careful attention to any bills or resolutions which require a vote and to ask questions before casting their vote...not afterward when it's too late.

Miulang

[Mike_Lowery]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/10/23/fer...ent/index.html

Looks like someone made him retract his statement. Too bad. He was just spittin' some truth, IMHO.

[HelpStopTheWarDotOrg]

What does it take, America? What will it take before we demand our troops come home? Not only have the US military death tolls in Iraq risen astronomically since Bush declared “Mission Accomplished”, but on an almost daily basis military heavyweights and Middle East scholars alike tell us what a huge mess we are creating the longer we stay. Retired generals have come forward calling for Rumsfeld’s resignation for bungling the Iraq war. A US National Intelligence Estimate has recently been leaked that concluded the Iraq war has helped create a new generation of Islamic radicalism and that the overall terrorist threat has grown since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. A recent estimate by Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health puts the Iraqi death toll since the start of the war at 655,000 deaths. Almost 2800 US soldiers have been killed. Over 21,000 US soldiers have been wounded. The war has cost more than 300 billion dollars so far. What else has to happen before Americans wake up and do something about this? President Bush has said that while he is President, we will not leave Iraq. What Mr. Bush doesn’t seem to remember, is that it’s not up to him. He is not a monarch. While the constitution calls him “commander in chief” of the army and navy, Congress has the sole power to declare war. And Congress has the power to bring our troops home. And who controls Congress? We do — American voters. The current Republican-controlled Congress has shown that they do not have the courage to stand up to Bush. Please vote for change in the upcoming November 7 Election. If you really support the troops, you will do your civic duty to change their tour of duty — VOTE.

[Leo Lakio]

Today's big news --- Rumsfeld is out.

[damontucker]

Well, Mānoa, I agree with your Army Times article. And sadly, it doesn’t matter... because GwB has already said he’s keeping Rummy for the rest of his term. So what’s your point?

He maybe Keepy but that doesn't mean Rummy cant Runny.

[Miulang]

Ding dong, Rummy's gone! That's the BEST news coming out of yesterday's election. The people have spoken and the Emperor must concede. Our allies are smiling.

Now we'll just wait for the other shoe (the Baker Report) to drop and then watch to see how "staying the course" becomes "changing the course".

Miulang

[TuNnL]

Now that Rummy has resigned under pressure, the real question is: what do we know about this new guy that Dubya has nominated to replace him?

[Miulang]

Now that Rummy has resigned under pressure, the real question is: what do we know about this new guy that Dubya has nominated to replace him?

He's a Dubya family friend, for one thing. But his appointment also has to be confirmed by Congress, which because of the shift in power, I think will do a lot more due diligence at his confirmation hearings. I don't expect that Gates will have an easy time being confirmed, especially if the responses to questions he gets asked about Iraq are aligned more with the President's views than what the polls and the Baker Report say.

Miulang

[OSfllwr]

The things in Iraq took yet another wrong turn when Bush forced Maliki to meet him in Jordan. The meeting did not help Republicans in the elections, but broke the Iraqi coalition. The faction of Shiite cleric al-Sadr walked out of the government coalition, as promised, because of the meeting.

No one in Iraq has a slightest doubt that Maliki is an American quisling. That’s ok with the people. In Muslims countries, rulers are not expected to represent population; the US and the Qaeda each tries to change that. Muslims are very extroversive and value fac,ade and rituals. Maliki could be a puppet, but he should behave like a tiger – Iraqi tiger. At least, Maliki managed to skip social meeting with Bush and Jordanian King Abdullah (Olmert ignored Arab mentality and met Abdullah several times, a PR disaster).

If that attention to rituals looks silly to rational Americans, it probably is. But that’s how it works in the region. To reach an agreement with Iraqis – rather than simply punish the Baathist state – the US negotiators would have to sit hours and days with various Iraqis, both bureaucrats and radicals, drinking super-sweet Iranian tea, chain-smoking on par with their opponents and talking, talking, and talking. That might or might not bring the desired results, but no other approach could deliver a stable, moderate, US-friendly Iraq.

To please his American masters, Maliki brought together fictitious coalition. Its Shiite faction does not include al-Sadr’s group, the main Shiite organization. It includes only a minor Sunni party, also non-representative. The coalition is advertised as moderate, but listen to the names: Sunni Iraqi Islamic Party (sectarians), the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution (sic) in Iraq, and Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (separatist organization, as the name makes clear).

The coalition is meant to squeeze Sadr out of politics. He would indeed go – into the urban battlefields. Sadr could show himself a good Muslim, promise to step down the fighting – and use the truce to train his forces. He needs time to grow the Mahdi gang into an army.

Sistani’s approval won’t cement the coalition. He is merely a religious authority. Religious power in Islam is very dispersed because every cleric and theoretically every Muslim could pronounce fatwas. People go along with famous clerics insofar as they opportunistically serve the mob’s wishes. Sistani cannot afford to condemn fighting the Sunnis, thus his blessing of the coalition could only be half-hearted. Moreover, Shiite militia includes few fundamentalists who would blindly obey Sistani. They are common guerrillas who only superficially subscribe to religion or ideology. They fight for the sake of killing. Their loyalty is with Sadr. Iran – al-Sadr’s sponsor – does not care about Iraqi Shiite bosses such as Sistani. Civil war in Iraq suits Iranian national interest: strong and hostile neighbor turns into protectorate.

Iran, not Sadr is the problem, but Sadr handsomely contributes to the situation. Oddly, the US loses its soldiers, kills Iraqis and allows still larger numbers to die in the conflict while al-Sadr, who orchestrates much of the violence, lives in safety. Why not assassinate him?

The White House PR people offended the common sense when they staged Robert Gates’ meeting with a dozen of handpicked soldiers who assured him that the army is on the right track.

[Miulang]

The White House PR people offended the common sense when they staged Robert Gates’ meeting with a dozen of handpicked soldiers who assured him that the army is on the right track.

Yes, it's ironic that the media really played up that visit while downplaying the fact that many of the Generals in charge of the Iraq occupation (and seasoned veterans of war like Gen. Colin Powell) have publicly expressed doubt that sending in a large force of troops temporarily would do anything but exacerbate the problem of Sunni vs Shia infighting.

What's fishy about the whole thing now is, prior to Gates' officially taking over as Sec of Deeefence last week, the top leaders in charge of the war, namely Gens Abazaid and Pace, both publicly declared their doubt. This morning, however, they seem to have changed their minds. So what happened? Did they cave in to the President because he is, after all, their boss? With their minds being changed, it paves the way for the Prez to announce that he will order more troops to Iraq early next year. In the meantime, the Selective Service Agency conveniently decided that now was the time to fire up the old Selective Service computers to test out its capability to call up 100,000 young men. They claim that the test would probably not happen until 2009 and does not mean that a draft is imminent. Pray tell where, then, are they going to find 100,000 volunteers without bankrupting this country? One of the reasons why the occupation is costing so much is because the cost of recruitment is skyrocketing...some recruits are being paid $40k up front just to sign on the dotted line. Imagine if each of 100,000 volunteers had to be paid $40k to wear an Army or Marine uniform...that's $400,000,000 .

Meanwhile, the American death toll in Iraq approaches 3,000...which is more than the number of people killed at the World Trade Center. And the attack on the WTC had nothing whatsoever to do with fighting the war on terrorism (even the White House admits this now).

Miulang

P.S. al Maliki is buds with al Sadr. Al Sadr is buds with the Iranian government. The US refuses to engage in direct dialogue with Ahmadinejahd. The Iranian gov. is helping fund the Shia insurgency. Ahmadinejahd appears not to be so popular with the Iranian electorate as some members of his political party lost their elections last week. Saudi Arabia, a Sunni majority country (as are most other Middle Eastern countries) and our "friend" is threatening to help fund the Sunni insurgency if we pull out of Iraq. The US has no business being in the middle of a civil war.

[Miulang]

One proposal to increase the number of recruits for the Army and the Marines that is quietly getting some consideration is allowing more foreign nationals to enlist and using the promise of expedited citizenship as a way to get more of them to sign on the dotted line. Another form of outsourcing our war?

Foreign citizens serving in the US military is a highly charged issue, which could expose the Pentagon to criticism that it is essentially using mercenaries to defend the country. Other analysts voice concern that a large contingent of noncitizens under arms could jeopardize national security or reflect badly on Americans' willingness to serve in uniform.

The idea of signing up foreigners who are seeking US citizenship is gaining traction as a way to address a critical need for the Pentagon, while fully absorbing some of the roughly one million immigrants that enter the United States legally each year.

Miulang

[Leo Lakio]

-- Saddam Hussein's execution will take place before 6:00 a.m. Saturday local time (10:00 p.m. Friday ET), Munir Haddad, a judge on the appeals court that upheld the former dictator's death sentence, told CNN.

[Miulang]

-- Saddam Hussein's execution will take place before 6:00 a.m. Saturday local time (10:00 p.m. Friday ET), Munir Haddad, a judge on the appeals court that upheld the former dictator's death sentence, told CNN.

I dunno about that. All day there have been conflicting reports coming out of Iraq about whether or not Saddam had been turned over to the Iraqi government. If he isn't executed by late tonight our time, the next time he could be executed would after Eid was over, which is sometime next week.

What I am pretty sure is that his demise will cause even more problems for our troops in Iraq.

Miulang

[OSfllwr]

here's another one curious article
http://samsonblinded.org/blog/bearin...nsequences.htm

http://jewrusalem.net/muslim-insurge...ns-in-iraq-420

http://jewrusalem.net/the-return-of-...st-nations-288

[islandguy]

My wife just got extended for 3 more months (you know, a BACK DOOR DRAFT!) The military at war time SUCKS!

She left august 06, and will not be home till AFTER CHRISTMAS 07!

Boy, getting the @$@#$@# outta the army and moving back to hawaii is getting more and more attractive each week! (Even though we have 13 years in the military, I am sure this is THE NEXT VIETNAM, and I am SURE AN INVASION OF IRAN IS NEXT!)

[islandguy]

See what IRAN is up to..


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujnPblFT6mg

If you think an invasion of iran is not in the IMMEDIATE FUTURE, I think your nuts!

Then watch what is on their TV in islamic countries...

Fox News airs video of Qana dead children as props in Lebanon http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBe1hyVM9sI

Hezbollywood - CNN admits staging of photos by Hezbollah http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXy6q4cH4pw

Teaching Hatred via Music Videos in Palestine and Lebanon http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ad8ETI9B8rw

Teaching hatred of the US and Israel - Lebanon and Palestine http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mA9GkXFbL4