+ Reply to Thread
Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 183

Thread: Iraq War -- IV

  1. #101

    Re: Iraq War -- IV

    I didn't join the British Army to conduct American foreign policy'
    By Sean Rayment, Defence Correspondent
    (Filed: 12/03/2006) As a trooper in the Special Air Service's counter-terrorist team - the black-clad force that came to the world's attention during the Iranian Embassy siege in 1980 - Ben Griffin was at the pinnacle of his military career.


    He had already served in Northern Ireland, Macedonia and Afghanistan as a member of the Parachute Regiment, and his sharp mind, natural fitness and ability to cope with the stress of military operations had singled him out as ideal special forces material.

    Born in London but brought up in Wales, Mr Griffin left school at 18 with two A-levels and six GCSEs and, although he could have become an officer, he preferred life in the ranks.

    Within a year of joining the elite force in early 2004 and serving as a trooper in the SAS's G-Squadron, he learnt that his unit was being posted to Baghdad, where it would be working alongside its American equivalent, Delta Force, targeting al-Qaeda cells and insurgent units.

    Unknown to any of his SAS colleagues at their Hereford-based unit, however, Mr Griffin, then 25, had been harbouring doubts over the "legality" of the war. Despite recognising that Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator and posed a threat, albeit a small one, to the West, he did not believe that the case for war had been made. The events he witnessed during his three-month tour in Baghdad, and especially the conduct of the American troops, would force him into making the most difficult decision of his life.

    During a week's leave in March 2005 he told his commanding officer in a formal interview that he had no intention of returning to Iraq because he believed that the war was morally wrong. Moreover, he said he believed that Tony Blair and the Government had lied to the country and had deceived every British serviceman and woman serving in Iraq.

    Mr Griffin expected to be placed under arrest, labelled a coward, court-martialed and imprisoned for daring to air such views.

    Instead, however, he was allowed to leave the Army with his exemplary military record intact and with a glowing testimonial from his commanding officer, who described him as a "balanced and honest soldier who possesses the strength and character to genuinely have the courage of his convictions".

    In his first interview since being discharged from the SAS in June last year, Mr Griffin explained why he has decided to speak out about the war.

    He said: "I saw a lot of things in Baghdad that were illegal or just wrong. I knew, so others must have known, that this was not the way to conduct operations if you wanted to win the hearts and minds of the local population. And if you don't win the hearts and minds of the people, you can't win the war.

    "If we were on a joint counter-terrorist operation, for example, we would radio back to our headquarters that we were not going to detain certain people because, as far as we were concerned, they were not a threat because they were old men or obviously farmers, but the Americans would say 'no, bring them back'.

    "The Americans had this catch-all approach to lifting suspects. The tactics were draconian and completely ineffective. The Americans were doing things like chucking farmers into Abu Ghraib [the notorious prison in Baghdad where US troops abused and tortured Iraqi detainees] or handing them over to the Iraqi authorities, knowing full well they were going to be tortured.

    "The Americans had a well-deserved reputation for being trigger happy. In the three months that I was in Iraq, the soldiers I served with never shot anybody. When you asked the Americans why they killed people, they would say 'we were up against the tough foreign fighters'. I didn't see any foreign fighters in the time I was over there.

    "I can remember coming in off one operation which took place outside Baghdad, where we had detained some civilians who were clearly not insurgents, they were innocent people. I couldn't understand why we had done this, so I said to my troop commander 'would we have behaved in the same way in the Balkans or Northern Ireland?' He shrugged his shoulders and said 'this is Iraq', and I thought 'and that makes it all right?'

    "As far as I was concerned that meant that because these people were a different colour or a different religion, they didn't count as much. You can not invade a country pretending to promote democracy and behave like that."

    On another operation, Mr Griffin recalls his and other soldiers' frustration at being ordered to detain a group of men living on a farm.

    He said: "After you have been on a few operations, experience tells you when you are dealing with insurgents or just civilians and we knew the people we had detained were not a threat.

    "One of them was a disabled man who had a leg missing but the Americans still ordered us to load them on the helicopters and bring them back to their base. A few hours later we were told to return half of them and fly back to the farm in daylight. It was a ridiculous order and we ran the risk of being shot down or ambushed, but we still had to do it. The Americans were risking our lives because they refused to listen to our advice the night before. It was typical of their behaviour."

    Mr Griffin said he believed that the Americans soldiers viewed the Iraqis in the same way as the Nazis viewed Russians, Jews and eastern Europeans in the Second World War, when they labelled them "untermenschen".

    "As far as the Americans were concerned, the Iraqi people were sub-human, untermenschen. You could almost split the Americans into two groups: ones who were complete crusaders, intent on killing Iraqis, and the others who were in Iraq because the Army was going to pay their college fees. They had no understanding or interest in the Arab culture. The Americans would talk to the Iraqis as if they were stupid and these weren't isolated cases, this was from the top down. There might be one or two enlightened officers who understood the situation a bit better but on the whole that was their general attitude. Their attitude fuelled the insurgency. I think the Iraqis detested them."

    Although Mr Griffin has the utmost respect for his former colleagues and remains fiercely loyal to the regiment, he believes that the reputation of the Army has been damaged by its association with the American forces.

    "I had reservations about going out to Iraq before I went, but as a soldier you just get on with what you are ordered to do. But I found that when I was out in Iraq that I couldn't keep my views separate from my work without compromising my role as a soldier.

    "It was at that stage that I knew I couldn't carry on. I was very angry, and still am, at the way the politicians in this country and America have lied to the British public about the war. But most importantly, I didn't join the British Army to conduct American foreign policy."

    Mr Griffin said that although he was angered by many of the events he witnessed in Iraq, he waited until he returned to Britain on leave before making his views clear to his commanders.

    "I didn't want to say anything when I was in Baghdad because I still have great respect and loyalty for the soldiers I served with. I didn't want to cause any unnecessary pressure or discomfort by voicing my opinions.

    "When I returned to the UK for a week's leave I asked for an interview with my commanding officer and told him that what I thought was going on in Iraq was wrong, not just legally but operationally as well.

    "Initially, he suspected that I had been offered a job by a private military company in Iraq but when it became clear that was not the case he was very understanding. It was a big decision for me. I put a lot of effort getting into the SAS, so this wasn't a decision I made on a whim.

    "He understood my point of view and his attitude was brilliant, in fact everyone was brilliant about it. I didn't know what was going to happen. I thought I might be charged or end up in Colchester [the military prison] for refusing to soldier."

    Mr Griffin, who lives in London, denies being a peace activist or a member of any political party, or having an agenda designed to bring down the Government.

    But he said: "I do believe passionately in democracy and I will speak out about things which I think are morally wrong. I think the war in Iraq is a war of aggression and is morally wrong and, more importantly, we are making the situation in the Middle East more unstable. It's not just wrong, it's a major military disaster. There was no plan for what was to happen after Saddam went, no end-game."

    • Mr Griffin did not ask for or receive any payment for this interview.





    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...12/nsas112.xml

  2. #102
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,385

    Re: Iraq War -- IV

    Zarqawi was killed this morning.

    Aziz
    If you fail to prepare, you prepare to fail.

  3. #103
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Denver , usa
    Posts
    970

    Re: Iraq War -- IV

    yeah you are right , killed in a air strike.

    American military assault in Iraq on the militants may have created a major blow for the Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and his organization in Falluja!

    According to some sources he may have tried to escape but then died in the process. A rumor was spreading in Iraq that Zarqawi was captured by the American military.
    The U.S. military said on Saturday that reports that Jordanian militant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi had been detained in Iraq were not credible. "We have heard those reports and we do not believe they are true," Lieutenant Colonel Steve Boylan, a U.S. military spokesman in Baghdad, told Reuters. "We have been in contact with the marines based around Falluja and we have heard nothing about those reports through our channels," he said.

    An Iraqi defense ministry spokesman also denied the report. The official Kuwait News Agency earlier reported that Zarqawi was believed to be among 10 militants seized in raids in rebel-held Falluja, west of Baghdad. Another senior U.S. officer also denied the report.

    "There was a senior cleric who we seized earlier today and there may have been some confusion," Lieutenant Colonel Eric Schnaible told Reuters. Zarqawi, with a $25 million price on his head, is the United States'' main enemy at large in Iraq and is blamed for some of the worst insurgent violence against the U.S.-backed interim Iraqi administration.

    But some Iraqis say Washington exaggerates the threat from Zarqawi to disguise the strength of Iraq's homegrown insurgency, and Falluja residents say they have no idea where he is, despite warnings from the interim administration that they face tough action unless they give him up.

    The official Kuwait news agency KUNA had quoted Iraqi security sources as saying a man suspected of being Zarqawi was detained during U.S.-led military operations in Falluja on Friday.

    The man resembled Zarqawi and DNA tests were being conducted, the sources said. There were no further details. Zarqawi's Tawhid and Jihad group claimed responsibility for suicide bombings on Thursday that killed up to four Americans in the heart of Baghdad's fortified Green Zone, seat of the government and home to the U.S. and British embassies.

    election are comming closer republican's are in deep shit , Osama will turn up before the elections.

  4. #104

    Re: Iraq War -- IV

    probably he might have been captured and killed later by forces or just died in custody and now this cover up but cirtainly his killing will help American disengagement and withdrawl from iraq.

  5. #105

    Re: Iraq War -- IV

    Its nice to know the occupying forces that so decried the images of dead soldiers being shown in resistantce video, have the decency not to do the same. : ( : ( : (

  6. #106
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Pakistan
    Posts
    58

    Re: Iraq War -- IV

    Zarqawi was alive for about 52 Minutes after the strikes on his resting compound.

    Here is the news: Click here

    US troops arrived on the scene after 28 minutes and Zarqawi was alive but he was badly bleeding and even made a feeble atempt to escape. He died after 24 additonal miuntes under custody of US forces.

    The death of Zarqawi was a strong blow to Al-Qaeda network in Iraq but the threat of insurgency still looms according to senior US Officials. But removal of Zarqawi from the scene indicates that suicide bombing attacks will decline.

    Two F-16 C/D's were used in targetting Zarqawi's resting position, which resulted in deaths of 5 people including Zarqawi and his spiritual advisor.
    Last edited by Aslam_C; 06-12-2006 at 10:19 AM.

  7. #107

    Re: Iraq War -- IV

    Iraqi ex-pilot lives in fear in Dubai
    http://washingtontimes.com/world/200...3518-8215r.htm


    >> Who is behind this ?? Iran or Israel ? There has been alof of targetted killings of the former Iraqi Airforce, it particular the Pilots.
    Gaf

  8. #108
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    3,902

    Re: Iraq War -- IV

    Mahmudiya rape case



    US troops’ fate hangs in balance

    BAGHDAD: A US military court will convene in Baghdad on Sunday to decide whether to court-martial four US soldiers for the rape and murder of a 14-year-old Iraqi girl and the killing of her family in March.

    Following are the key elements of the Mahmudiya case: Private First Class Jesse Spielman, Specialist James Barker, Sergeant Paul Cortez and Private First Class Bryan Howard face charges of rape and murder among others.A fifth soldier, Sergeant Anthony Yribe, is charged with dereliction of duty and making a false statement and will also appear at the hearing at Camp Victory next to Baghdad airport. They were all charged on July 8.

    Steven Green, 21, pleaded not guilty on July 6 in a US federal court in Kentucky, home of the 502nd Infantry Regiment, to four counts of murder and one of rape over the deaths of a couple and their two daughters near Mahmudiya, just south of Baghdad, “on or about” March 12. A hearing was set for Aug 8. Green was a private first class in the 502nd, part of the 101st Infantry Division, for less than a year before being discharged for a “personality disorder”, court papers showed.

    The victim, Abeer Qasim Hamza al-Janabi, according to her death certificate, died of “gunshot wounds in the head, with burns...”. Documents, including her identity card, obtained by Reuters showed she was a minor aged 14, and not over 20 as US officials had said.

    http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=18773

  9. #109

    Re: Iraq War -- IV

    1611 civilians died in Iraq in Jan 2006. And 3414 died in july 2006.
    And Bush and his pupppet in Iraq, Nuri al Mailiki have the guts to say the 'situation' is getting better.

    Just because he was against one man ( Saddam) , he ( Bush) took a lot of lives and broke the country. If he runs away cheating Iraq the way he US has cheated every other nation on earth, ............( I dont wanna get banned again)

  10. #110

    New Al-Qaeda leader

    http://www.boston.com/news/world/mid...leader?mode=PF
    Al Jazeera airs audio of new Iraq al Qaeda leader

    September 7, 2006

    DUBAI, Sept 7 (Reuters) - Al Qaeda's new leader called on Muslims to unify ranks with insurgents in Iraq, according to an audio tape aired by Al Jazeera television on Thursday.

    "Place your hands in our hands ... our enemy has unified his ranks, now is the time to unite," said the speaker, identified by Al Jazeera as Abu Hamza al-Muhajir.

    Muhajir, also believed to use the name Abu Ayyub al-Masri, became the group's leader after the killing of his predecessor Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in a U.S. air strike in June. He has vowed to avenge Zarqawi's killing.

    Al Qaeda makes up about five percent of Iraq's Sunni Arab insurgency but its suicide bombers have been responsible for some of the worst violence, often killing over 100 people in a single attack.

    Iraq's south is dominated by Shi'ites who took power in the country after the 2003 U.S.-led war while central and northern cities are chiefly Sunni areas, where insurgents have been active against the Shi'ite-led government and U.S.-led forces.

    "Place your hands in our hands ... our enemy has unified his ranks, now is the time to unite," said the speaker, identified by Al Jazeera as Abu Hamza al-Muhajir

    Very inspirational. Where do all the fine muslims sign up to kill other Iraqis and increase the rate from 6000/month to 9000/month so everybody can be proud of their cowardice accomplishments in murdering civilians who did not have anything to do with the current situation.

  11. #111

    Re: Iraq War -- IV

    Guys,

    Interesting article.. It seems that both Israeli commandos and Kurdish guerillas are jointly training in Iraq.. BBC Newsnight is suggesting that, Israel has built a large airport in areas occuppied ky Kurds in Iraq, with a view to using it as a potential refuelling stop to attack Iran. Thoughts ? Kurds are Israeli proxies ?????

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programme...ht/5361442.stm
    Tuesday, 19 September, 2006

    Israelis in Iraq
    Also tonight a Newsnight exclusive - we have obtained the first pictures of Kurdish soldiers being trained by Israelis in Northern Iraq. The sensitivities for the Kurdish authorities are serious, since their political enemies have long accused them of being in cahoots with Israel. The Kurdish authorities have previously denied allowing any Israelis into northern Iraq.
    Last edited by Gaf; 09-19-2006 at 05:48 PM.
    Gaf

  12. #112

    Re: Iraq War -- IV

    I did not see the news report but had read, long before the current Iraq war that Israelis were in northern Iraq training Kurds. After all it makes perfect sense, what will suit them better than dismemberment of another Muslim country. The potential for using it as an attack on Iraq is very plausible. There is no love lost between the Iranians and the Kurds. The general impression is the Kurds are more nationalistic and therefore will not mind seeing the demise of another Muslim country as long as their aims are met (i.e. creation of a Kurdish state). I personally am amazed by the silence of the Iraq government and neighbouring Arabs on all this. The amazement is however tempered by the fact that what they say doesn’t really matter!!

    Regards
    ndad

  13. #113
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    3,902

    Re: Iraq War -- IV

    Iraq torture 'worse after Saddam'

    Torture may be worse now in Iraq than under former leader Saddam Hussein, the UN's chief anti-torture expert says.

    Manfred Nowak said the situation in Iraq was "out of control", with abuses being committed by security forces, militia groups and anti-US insurgents.

    Bodies found in the Baghdad morgue "often bear signs of severe torture", said the human rights office of the UN Assistance Mission in Iraq in a report.

    The wounds confirmed reports given by refugees from Iraq, Mr Nowak said.

    He told journalists at a briefing in Geneva that he had yet to visit Iraq, but he was able to base his information on autopsies and interviews with Iraqis in neighbouring Jordan.

    "What most people tell you is that the situation as far as torture is concerned now in Iraq is totally out of hand," the Austrian law professor said.

    "The situation is so bad many people say it is worse than it has been in the times of Saddam Hussein," he added.

    Brutal methods

    The UN report says detainees' bodies often show signs of beating using electrical cables, wounds in heads and genitals, broken legs and hands, electric and cigarette burns.

    Bodies found at the Baghdad mortuary "often bear signs of severe torture including acid-induced injuries and burns caused by chemical substances".

    Many bodies have missing skin, broken bones, back, hands and legs, missing eyes, missing teeth and wounds caused by power drills or nails, the UN report says.

    Victims come from prisons run by US-led multinational forces as well as by the ministries of interior and defence and private militias, the report said.

    The most brutal torture methods were employed by private militias, Mr Nowak told journalists.

    The report also says the frequency of sectarian bloodletting means bodies are often found which "bear signs indicating that the victims have been brutally tortured before their extra-judicial execution".

    It concludes that torture threatens "the very fabric of the country" as victims exact their own revenge and fuel further violence.

    Mr Nowak said he would like to visit Iraq in person, but the current situation would not allow him to prepare an accurate report, because it would not be safe to leave Baghdad's heavily guarded Green Zone where the Iraqi government and US leadership are situated.

    Story from BBC NEWS:
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/h...st/5368360.stm

    Published: 2006/09/21 16:27:31 GMT

  14. #114

    Re: Iraq War -- IV

    The Good News about Lying to Americans
    by Ahmed Amr
    www.dissidentvoice.org
    September 28, 2006

    Time was when every Arab not confined to a mental asylum was aware of the nature of Britain’s imperial project in the Middle East. Even illiterate peasants understood London’s rationale for tormenting the people of the region. It was common knowledge that obnoxious cockney lads were garrisoned among the native people to guarantee access to cheap raw materials, exclusive markets for British manufactured goods and certain strategic advantages like controlling the Suez Canal. Back then, Zionist agitators focused their lobbying efforts on British lords with the power to sign away Palestine with a single paragraph edict like the Balfour Declaration.

    It was a simpler world where apologists for the brazen repression of the darker people of the planet claimed to be on a “civilizing mission” and colonies were actually called colonies. It wasn’t only the natives who considered the foreign troops imperialists. England had no problem tattooing a sign on Victoria’s forehead identifying her job function as the mistress of an imperial landmass where the sun never set and exotic locals knew their place.

    With the exception of Iraq and Israeli occupied territories, today’s Middle East is a very different place -- populated by two generations that have never felt obliged to cross the street to avoid a nasty encounter with drunk Tommies out for a night on the town. The odious task of tormenting the indigenous population has since been turned over to authoritarian tribal elders who posture as custodians of the holy places or locally produced dictators who retain power by force of arms.

    Even in Iraq, cloistered space age Yankee invaders rarely venture outside their imperial garrisons. The really dirty work is subcontracted to native death squads recruited from American trained police and army units. Most of the occupation soldiers are quartered in the comfort of air-conditioned forts. Unless they are ordered on a mission to kill some Iraqis or get supplies, they are confined to base and oblivious to events outside the camp walls. None dare imagine a casual evening sipping mint tea in a Mesopotamian café -- much less a carefree night at a local bar. While Iraq might be Arabic for Vietnam, Baghdad is not Saigon. The occupation grunts rarely mingle with the natives.

    The sectarian civil war raging outside Baghdad’s plush Green Zone continues to claim a hundred lives a day. Under international law, an occupation army automatically assumes the responsibility for the safety of their colonial subjects. Even the neo-con wizards in Washington understand that. But because Americans are such an innovative bunch, they found a rather novel way to avoid assuming the obligation of an imperial master to provide security for their colonial subjects. They simply deny they are on an imperial mission motivated by crude economic interests. With the blessings of the United Nations, the Bush administration has managed to camouflage America’s colonial army as “guests” of a sovereign Iraqi government.

    Washington has very good reasons for dodging the “imperial” label. For one thing, imperialism has long been classified as a four-letter word. Most Americans are in denial about being citizens of the Imperial United States -- a country that invades other countries at will, bombs ancient cities to rubble and generally goes around messing with the destiny of foreign people who have no quarrel with New York or California or any other state.

    Unlike their English counterparts of a century ago, Americans tend to be very reluctant imperialists. This explains why CNN and FOX combined their immense media resources to launch volley after volley of weapons of mass deception against the people of the United States. They actively marketed the patently absurd notion that Iraq possessed a vast WMD arsenal, that Saddam had the means to deliver them on 45 minutes notice and intended to share his lethal stash with Bin Laden.

    If Rupert Murdoch, Judith Miller, Charles Krauthammer and Wolf Blitzer had not emerged victorious in the jingoistic campaign to bamboozle the American public into war -- 2,700 American soldiers and tens of thousands of Iraqis would still be among the living. Remarkably, 50% of Americans continue to believe the WMD canard. That figure is up from 35% last year. Only in America can an Australian immigrant like Murdoch achieve such a feat.

    There is plenty of other good news. After the WMD canards started losing their potent effect on American brain cells -- the Administration and their mass media allies came up with ever more ludicrous reasons for launching this war of choice. Against all evidence to the contrary, the public square in America is littered with the garbage about spreading freedom and democracy in the Middle East. When they’re not busy spreading the blessings of liberty, the Bush boys are out fighting “Islamo-fascism.” To stimulate a contagious war fever in the land of the brave, it’s always convenient to wrap the enemy in brown shirts and make a show of sending the troops on a mission to smoke another Hitler out of the bunker.

    Is anybody seriously monitoring the progress of democracy in the Middle East? A few male-only municipal elections have miraculously turned the Saudi Kingdom of Oil into an emerging democracy. Sham elections in Egypt resulted in the internment of Ayman Nour -- the only serious candidate to challenge Mubarak. While Nour rots in jail, Mubarak’s son -- the unofficially designated successor -- is hailed by the White House as the leader of young reformers.

    Both Bush and Congress have actively championed the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people and the barbaric Israeli campaign against Lebanon. Among other atrocities, Washington financed the Apartheid wall, the million plus cluster bombs dropped on the innocent civilians of southern Lebanon and the systematic wholesale destruction of vital infrastructure in both Palestine and Lebanon.

    American and Israeli policy makers actually spent months planning the serial war crimes that ravaged Lebanon this summer. Incidentally, Lebanon is the very same country that Bush hailed as a beacon of freedom. But that was last year when our opportunist commander-in-chief took a free ride on the coattails of a spontaneous Lebanese uprising in order to temporarily divert attention from his Iraqi debacle. Unfortunately for the Lebanese, Bush once again chose Beirut as his summer getaway from the Baghdad quagmire. But this time around, the president can actually take considerable credit for the carnage he and his Israeli partners left behind.

    In Washington, every Israeli war crime is anointed as a battle for survival. While the Israelis systematically torment the citizens of the West Bank and Gaza, the Bush administration promotes a farcical non-existent “peace process” designed to give Tel Aviv additional space to confiscate more holy land from the indigenous population of Palestine.

    Haditha, Abu Ghraib, Tel Afar, Jenin, Jabaliya, Bint Jbeil, Fallujah, Qana -- every Middle Eastern Guernica is made to appear as legitimate and inevitable “collateral damage” inflicted by well-meaning Israelis and Americans in service to the cause of world peace.

    After wittingly or unwittingly training death squads and igniting sectarian mayhem in Iraq, Bush insists that his $300 billion quagmire is a quest for promoting democracy in the region and enhancing the security of the American people. In fact, the United States actively supports every authoritarian regime in the region -- notably Egypt’s one-party kleptocrats and the Saudi custodians of the oil plantation. And the consensus of American intelligence professionals is that the war in Iraq is increasing the threat of terrorism.

    So, where exactly is all the good news here? Well, it’s a matter of historical record that the government of the United States has been forced to lie to the American people to carry out its foreign policy. To implement a hidden imperial agenda, the powers that be in Washington have force fed the public an ocean of drivel about the war on terror, fictional WMD arsenals, fanciful struggles against Islamic “fascists” and a noble mission to spread the blessings of liberty and democracy in the Middle East.

    Lest we forget, this is an administration that deliberately tampered with intelligence to make a case for a war that never had to happen. In their defense, they really didn’t have an alternative choice. Without an elaborate campaign of deception, the vast majority of Americans would have opposed this ill-fated project.

    Even the delusional neo-cons -- Israel Firsters to the last man -- couldn’t hope to sell the argument that the Pentagon should act as sub-contractors for Ariel Sharon.

    While the Israeli lobby played a major and probably decisive role in launching the Iraq war -- the major reason for the war was the imperial economic national interest. The United States has 200,000 soldiers garrisoned in the Middle East to prop up the Saudis and assure that the almighty dollar remain the only currency convertible to tangible barrels of Arab oil. Americans may be obsessed with money, but the proposition that young Marines should be dispatched abroad to kill and die in defense of their currency would have found few takers.

    Forget about the illiterate peasants. Even intellectuals in the Middle East seem to be confounded by the dollars-for-oil racket. As much can be said for the great unwashed in America -- including the peace movement. This has to be the only major conflict in modern history where the peons manning the barricades on both sides of the divide haven’t the remotest clue about what they’re fighting for.

    Back to the good news. When someone lies to you -- it’s an act of coercion. The deceptive party knows that if the truth were to see the light of day, you might make entirely different decisions. The day we get both Americans and Arabs to understand the nature of the imperial project in the Gulf is the day the war party will take to the hills.

    Of course, there is no way to get direct access to the American public because of the insurmountable sound barrier imposed by the lords of the mass media. And no one should expect the Arab governments to make a case against an imperial project in which they are full partners and collaborators.

    Regardless, the ball remains in the court of the Arabs -- especially the intellectual class. A pacifist grass-root campaign to boycott the American dollar will expose the real agenda behind the invasion of Iraq.

    As Churchill once observed, half the solution is identifying the problem. The biggest problem in the Middle East is the American imperial project. And half the solution is in making both Americans and Arabs familiar with the dollars-for-oil rationale that drives American foreign policy in the Middle East. Once an Arab dollar boycott is launched, the American public will start asking questions about the cause and consequences of this legitimate act of passive resistance. If they reach the right conclusion, they will be the first to demand an immediate end to American intervention in the region.


    http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Sept06/Amr28.htm

  15. #115

    thumbs up ! this is a realy good articale and is a must read for all.

    this is a realy good articale and it also points out the many tricks of the american & zionist lobbies tacticks and their instrument both economicaly, public support via both the systematicaly crafted print and electronic media & the use of force both in term,s of military(lebanon) (iraq) (afghanistan) and economic sanction (iraq in the early nineties), the point and "wit" with which it talks about the situation in egypt and saudi arabia makes things a lot clear , we should read and ponder over it coz this is a very good and truth oriented articale in fact ,its brife but puts the massage straight .
    Last edited by mirajborgza786; 10-03-2006 at 01:23 AM.

  16. #116

    Re: Iraq War -- IV

    Interesting yet extremely scary and upsetting article about 'free and democratic iraq'

    http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world...890260,00.html

    Regards
    ndad

  17. #117
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Varied.
    Posts
    3,956
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Iraq War -- IV

    Asalamo-a-laikum.

    With the absolute anarchy that the invasion has led to it was impossible to think that this was not going on.

    The scale to which it is being under-reported is horrifying.

    Congratulations Blair, Bush and Howard! See the the new iraq you have made!!
    LOVE OR LEAVE PAKISTAN.
    Wa-salaam.
    Zia.

  18. #118

    Re: Iraq War -- IV

    Few weeks ago an Arab journalist revealed that breaking up Iraq was the Zionist/Neo-con criminal's initial war policy and what went on for last three years was carefully choreographed for that to happen ultimately. Oh my God! Evil did it in Yugoslavia, Indonesia and now in Iraq. Same old divide and rule policy, isn't it?


    Iraq's Partition


    http://www.moonofalabama.org/2006/10...partition.html
    Last edited by Rahman AU; 10-09-2006 at 03:03 PM. Reason: making look good

  19. #119
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Varied.
    Posts
    3,956
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Iraq War -- IV

    Asalamo-a-laikum.

    Read the report on the link posted by Ndad, then read this. It seems to be poetic justice!!!


    Aussie link to 'poisoned' Iraqi police
    Email Print Normal font Large font October 9, 2006 - 11:29AM

    Hundreds of Iraqi policemen have fallen sick from poisoning at a base in southern Iraq after the evening meal breaking their daily Ramadan fast.

    An Australian contractor working through Iraqi subcontractors provides the food and water at the base in Wasit province, Governor Hamad al-Latif said. He did not identify the Australian firm.

    Officials said they were investigating whether the poisoning was intentional.

    An official with the Environment Ministry said 11 policemen had died, but the governor of Wasit province - where the poisoning took place - denied any deaths.

    He said some of the victims were in critical condition. There was no immediate explanation for the contradictory reports.

    Some of the policemen began bleeding from the ears and nose after the meal said Jassim al-Atwan, an inspector for the Environment Ministry, who was serving as a liaison in the investigation between the Health Ministry and the base, located in the town of Numaniyah.

    "Hundreds of soldiers were poisoned after taking food and water in the iftar," Wasit Governor Hamad al-Latif said, referring to the meal that breaks the sunrise-to-sunset fast during the Islamic holy month.

    "Investigations are underway to determine the cause."

    Samples of the food and water were being tested "to determine the substance in them" and will be sent to Baghdad for further tests, al-Latif said.

    Sunni insurgents who have targeted police and military forces with bombings and shootings have not been known to use poisoning as a weapon. But the suddenness and severity of the sickness raised speculation that the incident could be a new attack. The division is mainly made up of Shi'ites.

    Between 600-700 policemen were affected to varying degrees, and 11 who had the heaviest amount of the food had died, al-Atwan told AP.

    Some of the soldiers collapsed as soon as they stood up from the meal, others fell "one after the other" as they headed out to the yard to line up in formation, al-Atwan said.

    Iraqi ambulances and helicopters sent by the US military rushed the policemen to hospitals in Numaniyah and the nearby city of Kut.

    The afflicted policemen belonged to the 4th Division of the National Police, nicknamed the Karrar Division after a title of Imam Ali, the most revered Shi'ite saint.

    The division normally operates around the town of Salman Pak on the southeastern outskirts of Baghdad - an area of intense Shi'ite-Sunni killings. The division was sent to the base in Numaniyah, 80 kilometres southeast of the capital, for further training.
    LOVE OR LEAVE PAKISTAN.
    Wa-salaam.
    Zia.

  20. #120

    Re: Iraq War -- IV

    Iraq: Please open the link to find out how Divide and Rule, 'Ethnic Cleansing Works'


    http://www.twf.org/News/Y2006/1010-Regions.html

  21. #121

    Re: Iraq War -- IV

    Chalabi’s “Death Squads” mapped

    http://www.roadstoiraq.com/2006/10/1...%80%9d-mapped/

  22. #122
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    3,902

    Re: Iraq War -- IV

    Iraq limits data on death toll from violence, says UN

    Updated at 1030 PST
    UNITED NATIONS: Iraq's Health Ministry will no longer give death toll data to the United Nations, jeopardizing a vital source of information on the impact of the fighting there, U.N. officials said.

    Ashraf Qazi, who heads the U.N. assistance mission in Iraq, has cabled headquarters in New York to say that Iraqi PrimeMinister Nuri al-Maliki's office had instructed the Health Ministry to no longer give him mortality data, they said.

    Instead, the data would come from the prime minister's communications director, a change that could politicize the figures.

    http://www.thenews.com.pk/updates.asp#11656

  23. #123

    Re: Iraq War -- IV

    Pakistani's being used as slave labour to build American fortress to occupy Iraq !

    Slave Labor at US Embassy
    in Baghdad?

    by David Phinney
    Several months before a U.S. construction foreman named John Owen quit in disgust over what he said was blatant abuse of foreign laborers hired to build the sprawling new U.S. embassy in Baghdad, Rory Mayberry witnessed similar events when he flew to Kuwait from his home in Myrtle Creek, Ore.

    The gravelly-voiced, easygoing U.S. Army veteran had previously worked in Iraq for Halliburton and the private security company Danubia. Missing the action and the big paychecks U.S. contractors draw there, Mayberry snagged a $10,000-month job with MSDS consulting company.

    MSDS is a two-person, minority-owned consulting company that assists U.S. State Department managers in Washington with procurement programming. Never before had the firm offered medical services or worked in Iraq, but First Kuwaiti – Owen's employer – hired MSDS on the recommendation of Jim Golden, the State Department contract official overseeing the embassy project. Within days, an agreement worth hundreds of thousands of dollars for medical care was signed.

    The 45-year-old Mayberry, a former emergency medical technician in the U.S. Army who worked as a funeral director in Oregon, responded to a help-wanted ad placed by MSDS. The plan was that he would work as a medic attending to the construction crews on the work site in Baghdad.

    Like Owen, Mayberry immediately sensed things weren't right when he boarded a First Kuwaiti flight on March 15 to Baghdad.

    At the airport in Kuwait City, Mayberry said, he saw a person behind a counter hand First Kuwaiti managers a passenger manifest, an envelope of money, and a stack of boarding passes to Dubai. The managers then handed out the boarding passes to Mayberry and 50 or so new First Kuwaiti laborers, mostly Filipinos.

    "Everyone was told to tell customs and security that they were flying to Dubai," Mayberry said in an interview. Once the group passed the guards, they went upstairs and waited by the McDonald's for First Kuwaiti staff to unlock a door – Gate 26 – that led to an unmarked, aging white 52-seat jet.

    "All the workers had their passports taken away by First Kuwaiti," Mayberry claimed, and while he knew the plane was bound for Baghdad, he's not so sure the others were aware of their destination. The Asian laborers began asking questions about why they were flying north and the jet wasn't flying east over the ocean, he said. "I think they thought they were going to work in Dubai."

    One former First Kuwaiti supervisor acknowledged that the company holds passports of many workers in Iraq – a violation of U.S. contracting.


    "All of the passports are kept in the offices," said one company insider who requested anonymity for fear of financial and personal retribution. As for distributing Dubai boarding passes for Baghdad flights, "It's because of the travel bans," he explained. Mayberry believes that migrant workers from the Philippines, India, and Nepal are especially vulnerable to employers like First Kuwaiti because their countries have little or no diplomatic presence in Iraq.

    "If you don't have your passport or an embassy to go to, what you do to get out of a bad situation?" he asked. "How can they go to the U.S. State Department for help if First Kuwaiti is building their embassy?"

    Owen had already been working at the embassy site since late November when Mayberry arrived. The two never crossed paths, but both share similar complaints about management of the project and brutal treatment of the laborers that, at times, numbered as many as 2,500. Most are from the Philippines, India, and Pakistan. Others are from Egypt and Turkey.

    The number of workers with injuries and ailments stunned Mayberry. He went to work immediately after and stayed busy around the clock for days.

    Four days later, First Kuwaiti pulled him off the job after he requested an investigation of two patients who had died before he arrived from what he suspected was medical malpractice. Mayberry also recommended that the health clinics be shut down because of unsanitary conditions and mismanagement.

    "There hadn't been any follow-up on medical care. People were walking around intoxicated on pain relievers with unwrapped wounds, and there were a lot of infections," he recalled. "The idea that there was any hygiene seemed ridiculous. I'm not sure they were even bathing."

    In reports made available to the U.S. State Department, the U.S. Army, and First Kuwaiti, Mayberry listed dozens of concerns about the clinics, which he found lacking in hot water, disinfectant, hand-washing stations, properly supplied ambulances, and communication equipment. Mayberry also complained that workers' medical records were in total disarray or nonexistent, the beds were dirty, and the support staff hired by First Kuwaiti was poorly trained.

    The handling of prescription drugs especially bothered him. Many of the drugs that originated from Iraq and Kuwait were unsecured, disorganized, and unintelligibly labeled, he said in one memo. He found that the medical staff frequently misdiagnosed patients. Prescription pain killers were being handed out "like a candy store … and then people were sent back to work."

    Mayberry warned that the practice could cause addiction and safety hazards. "Some were on the construction site climbing scaffolding 30 feet off the ground. I told First Kuwaiti that you don't give painkillers to people who are running machinery and working on heavy construction and they said 'that's how we do it.'"

    The sloppy handling of drugs may have led to the two deaths, Mayberry speculates. One worker, age 25, died in his room. The second, in his mid-30s, died at the clinic because of heart failure. Both deaths may be "medical homicide," Mayberry says, because the patients may have been negligently prescribed improper drug treatment.

    If the State Department investigated, Mayberry knows nothing of the outcome. Two State Department officials with project oversight responsibilities did not return phone calls or e-mails inquiring about Mayberry's allegations. The reports may have been ignored, not because of his complaints, but because Mayberry is a terrible speller, a problem compounded by an Arabic translation program loaded on his computer, he says.

    Owen's account of his seven months on the job paints a similar picture to Mayberry's. Health and safety measures were essentially nonexistent, he says. Not once did he witness a safety meeting. Once an Egyptian worker fell, broke his back, and was sent home. No one ever heard from him again. "The accident might not have happened if there was a safety program and he had known how to use a safety harness," Owen said.

    State Department officials supervising the project are aware of many such events, but apparently did nothing, he said. Once when 17 workers climbed the wall of the construction site to escape, a State Department official helped round them up and put them in "virtual lockdown," Owen said.

    Just before he resigned, hundreds of Pakistani workers went on strike in June and beat up a Lebanese manager whom they accused of harassing them. Owen estimates that 375 laborers were then sent home.

    Recent First Kuwaiti employees agree that the accounts of Owen and Mayberry are accurate. One longtime supervisor claimed that 50 to 60 percent of the laborers regularly protest that First Kuwaiti "treats them like animals," and routinely reduces their promised pay with confusing and unexplained deductions.

    Another former First Kuwaiti manager, who declined to be named because of possible adverse consequences, said that Owen's and Mayberry's complaints only begin "to scratch the surface."

    But scratching the surface is the only view yet available of what may be the most lasting monument to the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq. As of now, only a handful of authorized State Department managers and contractors, along with First Kuwaiti workers and contractors, are officially allowed inside the project's walls. No journalist has ever been allowed access to the sprawling 104-acre site with towering construction cranes raising their necks along the skyline.

    (Inter Press Service)
    http://www.antiwar.com/ips/phinney.php?articleid=9919

  24. #124

    Re: Iraq War -- IV

    November 3, 2006

    The Neocons, Undaunted
    They're looking to make a comeback after the elections
    by Justin Raimondo

    You have to give the neoconservatives credit for tenacity (Mr. Roamando, you are wrong because any shrwed conn-artist can act as tenacious as Gladiator if he can make others fight his war and doesn't give damn about 655000 Moslems along with over 2800 poor yank's peishment). Any other political or ideological group saddled with their record would crawl off into the shadows to expire without fanfare. Not the neocons. Vampire-like, they rise from the crypt of Bush's "global democratic revolution," fangs extended and hungry for fresh blood. There isn't enough garlic in the world to deter them – I doubt that even a pointed stake in the heart would suffice. The War Party, it seems, is immortal – like evil itself.

    They told us the Iraqis would greet their American "liberators" with showers of rose petals; instead, U.S. troops are caught in a hail of bullets. They said Saddam Hussein was harboring "weapons of mass destruction," including an advanced nuclear weapons program, that posed a deadly threat to America; the closest they could come, once we'd invaded and combed the country for many months, was a storehouse of some very old mustard gas – the bad guys' WMD of choice, circa 1917. They proclaimed that the invasion of Iraq would lead to democratic revolutions throughout the region; what we got was Hamas, Hezbollah, and a flood of recruits to al-Qaeda's bloody banner. They assured us it would be a "cakewalk"; it turned into a death march.

    Instead of changing their names and getting as far from the crime scene as possible, the neocons – or, at least, some of them – are not only lingering, they're openly proclaiming their intention to visit fresh disasters on us. The most explicit such statement comes from Joshua Muravchik, a former leader of the Young Peoples Socialist League who now inhabits the heady heights of that neocon Olympus over at the American Enterprise Institute. Muravchik, author of Exporting Democracy, a pre-9/11 polemic in which he outlined what was to become the Bushian policy of "global democratic revolution," is as pure a neocon as exists outside of Michael Ledeen's study. Undaunted by the massive failure of the democratist crusade, he writes in Foreign Policy magazine of "Operation Comeback," in the form of a memo to his partners in crime. The subject line is: "How to Save the Neocons." Which raises the question: save them from what – public obloquy? The penitentiary? A lynching?

    I'd settle for two out of three, and much of the rest of the country is behind me, yet Muravchik finds this rising anti-neocon sentiment baffling, even "startling." Oddly, he has not been startled into anything like repentance, or even caution: instead, even as he describes he and his fellow cultists as "proven losers at Washington's power game," Muravchik boasts "our ideas have influenced the policies of President Bush" and avers "that does feel good." I'll bet. As I have pointed out before, the most powerful man in the world is the world's biggest, most fanatical neocon, and that is the ultimate prize in Washington's power game, now isn't it?

    He also crows that "a number of young people and older converts are swelling our ranks," yet he later complains that the ranks are being decimated by defectors. Which is it? Oh, but no matter, mere numbers are irrelevant, because the neocons have always been motivated – or, rather, inspired – by the sense that capital-H history is on their side. Stepping over the corpses, they confidently proclaim their next conquest, sights fixed firmly on Iran.

    Before they can get to that, however, it is necessary to deal with the blowback from their "success" in reducing Iraq to rubble and murdering 650,000 of the "liberated" in cold blood:

    "The price of this success is that we are subjected to relentless obloquy. 'Neocon' is now widely synonymous with 'ultraconservative' or, for some, 'dirty Jew.' A young Egyptian once said to me, '"Neoconservative" sounds to our ears like "terrorist" sounds to yours.'"

    The relentlessness of this obloquy has nothing to do with "ultraconservatism," since the real ultraconservatives have always hated the neocons, and with good reason: there is nothing in the least bit "conservative" about their doctrine of perpetual war and their towering hubris, unmitigated in spite of the massive rebuke the neocons have suffered.

    As for the anti-Semitic epithets he throws into the mix, one can only note that, next to the marginal David Duke, Muravchik is the loudest proponent of the neocon = Jew equation. It doesn't matter to him that some of the most prominent opponents of the neocons are themselves Jewish, nor does it matter that the quotation marks around the above epithet are unsourced. Muravchik knows perfectly well that the neocons' chief critics are not to be found in Egypt, but in the good old U.S. of A.

    As for those defectors:

    "I am shocked to hear that some among us, wearying of these attacks, are sidling away from the neocon label. Where is the joie de combat? The essential tenets of neoconservatism – belief that world peace is indivisible, that ideas are powerful, that freedom and democracy are universally valid, and that evil exists and must be confronted – are as valid today as when we first began. That is why we must continue to fight. But we need to sharpen our game."

    For someone who holds as an "essential" tenet "that ideas are powerful" to disdain second thoughts about the efficacy of those ideas is passing strange – unless one's ideas are held as dogma. Attributing defections to weariness, rather than an honest reevaluation in light of new evidence – such as that voiced by former neocon philosopher Francis Fukuyama – is indicative of the neocons' peculiar blindness. And who would've guessed, with all their warmongering and lists of countries that ought to be invaded forthwith, that neocons are advocates of "world peace" and its "indivisibility"?!

    All of this is easily dismissed as the apologetics of an ordinary thug standing in the dock attributing his career as a champion carjacker to high idealism, flawed only in its execution. The criminal assures the judge that he and his kind will "learn from our mistakes," as Muravchik writes, confessing that

    "We are guilty of poorly explaining neoconservatism. How, for example, did the canard spread that the roots of neoconservative foreign policy can be traced back to Leo Strauss and Leon Trotsky? The first of these false connections was cooked up by Lyndon LaRouche, the same convicted scam artist who spends his days alerting humanity to the Zionist-Henry Kissinger-Queen Elizabeth conspiracy. The second probably originated with insufficiently reconstructed Stalinists."

    If neoconservatism has been poorly explained, then it hasn't been for lack of opportunities and a public platform. The neocons have been agitating for a war in the Middle East for over a decade, and they have had at their disposal more than ample space in the mainstream media, as well as their own wholly-owned-and-operated press, including the Murdoch conglomerate, Lord Black's now-fallen media empire, and National Review, not to mention the impressive array of books penned by neoconservative authors, who never seem to lack for publishers – and fat grants from big foundations that cater to their cadre.

    As for the "canard" that Trotsky and Strauss are indeed avatars of neoconservatism, Matt Yglesias has a good retort here. One can only wonder how Muravchik expects us to ignore the public record – including the memoirs of such neocon worthies as Irving Kristol – and accept his contention that the neocons were born, like Venus, from the foam of the sea. The irony is that Muravchik is himself the exemplar of the neocons' Trotskyist roots, having served as youth leader of the Shachtmanite "third camp" Social Democrats, USA, the Young Peoples Socialist League, otherwise known as the "Yipsels." Lyndon LaRouche has nothing to do with it: plenty of mainstream commentators have traced the neoconservatives' ideological genealogy back to the founder of the Red Army.

    If Muravchik is not exactly loyal to his neo-Trotskyist past, his present allegiances are a bit more solid. Unlike Richard Perle, who now despises George W. Bush for supposedly abandoning the War Party, Muravchik argues that the neocons should stick by the president. Bush is, after all, a politician, and, by the way,

    "The administration made its share of mistakes, and so did we. We were glib about how Iraqis would greet liberation. Did we fail to appreciate sufficiently the depth of Arab bitterness over colonial memories? Did we underestimate the human and societal damage wreaked by decades of totalitarian rule in Iraq? Could things have unfolded differently had our occupation force been large enough to provide security?"

    They weren't just "glib" – they were dead wrong about "how Iraqis would greet liberation." Too many were "liberated" from their very lives. This never occurs to comrade Muravchik, who instead attributes the liberators' failure to over-dependence on high-tech weaponry, not enough troops, and not enough money spent on the military.

    Yet it was the very smallness of the invasion force that was one of the major selling points of the war. Those who suggested that half a million troops were required for the occupation of Iraq were attacked as "defeatists," and sidelined, as Gen. Eric Shinseki, former Army chief of staff, discovered when he was publicly attacked by then-Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz. And, of course, the American people would never have gone along with sending that many troops to Iraq – which is precisely why the number was kept low.

    The neocons, however, are not really interested in Iraq any longer: that, after all, was yesterday. But tomorrow belongs to them, as a very similar political movement once put it. Iraq is in ruins, the credibility of the U.S. as a force for good in the world is at an all-time low, and the body bags are coming home at an increasing pace – yet Muravchik, willfully blind to all this, is recommending that we:

    "Prepare to Bomb Iran. Make no mistake, President Bush will need to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities before leaving office. It is all but inconceivable that Iran will accept any peaceful inducements to abandon its drive for the bomb. Its rulers are religio-ideological fanatics who will not trade what they believe is their birthright to great power status for a mess of pottage. Even if things in Iraq get better, a nuclear-armed Iran will negate any progress there. Nothing will embolden terrorists and jihadists more than a nuclear-armed Iran."

    By all means, let's attack another Middle Eastern country – after all, it worked so well the last time.

    Speaking of "religio-ideological fanatics," only such a one would dare propose attacking Iran in the present context. Not content with plunging Iraq into a hellish nightmare, Muravchik and his confreres would start a regional war with global consequences – including the threat of renewed terrorism against the United States. Notice, too, the odd phraseology: Bush "will need to bomb" – this is said in spite of the CIA's assessment that Iran will not have a nuclear capacity for a good 10 years. What, then, is the big hurry? It's a high principle of neoconservatism that it's never too early to start the bombing.

    Muravchik's other suggestion: the Republicans should "recruit Joe Lieberman in 2008," running, no doubt, on a platform of Nuke Tehran! That should go over big with the American public – not! To say nothing of the reaction inside the network of "freedom-loving" "pro-American" "rebels" he suggests we set up abroad. To revive the stalled neocon "revolution," he wants increased aid to Muslim moderates, via the National Endowment for Democracy, and a Cold War-style propaganda apparatus, with sufficient resources to plot regime change on a political basis.

    Like the Marxists, who complain that communism didn't fail because it was never really tried, the neocons are full of excuses for the embarrassing implosion of their ideological hopes and dreams.

    The Iranian contingent of Muravchik's Democratic Internationale will doubtless be thrilled to learn that their country is targeted for pulverization. That should inspire them, all right – as long as they're getting subsidies from Muravchik's proposed version of the Congress of Cultural Freedom (a Cold War front group of intellectuals funded by the CIA) and are safely ensconced in Washington.

    You can't make this stuff up. The delusions piled on hallucinations are psychedelic in their effect, causing a uniquely dangerous collective craziness. Dangerous because the madness that infects large portions of Washington, D.C., also possesses our chief executive, never all that psychologically stable to begin with. Muravchik's evaluation of what President Bush will "need" to do to Iran is shared by many. It wouldn't surprise me one bit if the bombs starting falling the day after the election – or, as rumored, sometime in January.

    The Israelis are reportedly blackmailing us into a strike by declaring that they'll do it if we don't (There you go Mr. Romando. This time you got it right. If you were to dig a little bit further then you would discover the recipe of the blackmail in Zionist-Mossad's vain, artery and blood that caused millions of Moslems lives throughout the world and how efficiently david-zionist linked up its ulterior motive by leveraging Goliath- UNKIL's blood and resource. That's is the zenith of mastermindness not OBL/Zowhary's concocted arabic-videos from cave, which also seems like thoughtful decieving tools since most of the Americans don't understand arabic) And that's what this is all about. John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt are quite correct in noting that Israel's American lobby is in the forefront of the "let's bomb Iran" contingent, just as they were in the case of Iraq, and Muravchik's analysis perfectly reflects the Israeli perspective. His contention that Iran will "dominate" the Middle East leaves out one important fact: Israel already has nukes, at least 400. An Iranian nuke would end Israeli dominance and strike a balance of power in the region. By eliding this strategic reality – and the fact that Israel is somehow exempted from "the global nonproliferation regime" Muravchik supposedly seeks to uphold – Israel's amen corner in the U.S. hopes to scare us into war.

    However, the polls show that it isn't selling, and the neocons know it. That's why Muravchik is giving them this little pep talk and strategizing a "comeback" for a thoroughly discredited – and justly vilified – movement.

    It won't work. Muravchik is right that "the global thunder against Bush when he pulls the trigger will be deafening." The storm will likely include a good deal of lightning strikes, in which Muravchik, the neocons, and the legacy of Bush II all go up in a puff of foul-smelling smoke. If so, it will almost be worth it.

    http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=9959


    THE ARCHITECTS OF WAR: WHERE ARE THEY NOW?

    http://thinkprogress.org/the-archite...-are-they-now/
    Last edited by Rahman AU; 11-03-2006 at 04:30 AM.

  25. #125
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    32

    Re: Iraq War -- IV

    Bush = Take What U Need IN Irak!!!... All FREE!!!!

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts