Agencie BeEssá- Late Monday night there was a security lock-down at Guantánamo Bay. The following details have emerged:
A US military tribunal found all but seven Guantanamo detainees guilty of war-crimes against the United States of America. All were sentenced to death by firing squad. Beginning at 5:00 am the 357 prisoners were taken ten at a time, handcuffed, shackled and blindfolded and led to a field adjacent to a firing range. Their names were called out with their crimes announced and the sentence of death pronounced. In rapid succession, ten volleys of shots were heard and the process was then repeated.
At 10:17am the final group of seven were executed in a similar manner. The seven prisoners, not found guilty have been flown back to their native country. The Halliburton Company will start dismantling the Guantanamo facility early next week. Defense Secretary Gates had announced earlier in the week that with new ROE, it was no longer necessary to maintain the prison.
Presidential spokesman, Tony Snow had no comment, and further pressed about reports of US bombing in tribal areas of western Pakistan would only add, "Other US policies were up for review."
Comment: Fantasy yes, but would it be effective? Whit had proposed his Guantánamo Bay parody about a more likely scenario. But if you want some real fantasy try this from the Bush Administration:
Al-Qaeda No. 3 admits to dozens of plots
KATHERINE SHRADER
Associated Press
WASHINGTON — Khalid Sheikh Mohammed cemented his position as al-Qaeda's most ambitious operational planner when he confessed in a U.S. military tribunal to planning and supporting 31 terrorist attacks, topped by 9/11, that killed thousands since the early 1990s.
The gruesome attacks range from the suicide hijackings of Sept. 11, 2001 — which killed nearly 3,000 — to a 2002 shooting on an island off Kuwait that killed a U.S. marine.
Many plots, including a previously undisclosed plan to kill several former U.S. presidents, were never carried out or were foiled by international counterterror authorities.
“I was responsible for the 9/11 operation from A to Z,” Mr. Mohammed said in a statement read Saturday during a Combatant Status Review Tribunal at the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Mr. Mohammed's confession was read by a member of the U.S. military who is serving as his personal representative.
Kahlid is also responsible for:
ReplyDeleteGlobal Warming, ALL the murders committed by illegals, the entire Clinton Administration, the entire Bush Administration, the introduction of no-fat foods and artificial sweeteners into our diets, and is the real father of Anna Nicole's baby!
And it only took four years of gentle persuasion and probably $85 million of your money to get to the truth.
ReplyDeleteMOSCOW, March 15 (RIA Novosti) - An alleged confession by a prisoner in U.S. custody for terrorism could cause a wave of Islamophobia worldwide, a Russian human rights activist said Thursday.
ReplyDeleteEarlier in March, at a Guantanamo Bay hearing, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed confessed to masterminding the September 11th terrorist attacks, the Richard Reid shoe bombing attempt to blow up an airliner, the Bali nightclub bombing in Indonesia, the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and other failed attacks - a total of 29 terrorist acts.
"This is a major provocation. I believe it is the work of U.S. special services, targeted against Muslims," said Kamildzhan Kalandarov, chairman of the Al-Khak [Justice] all-Russian public organization.
He said it was inappropriate to discuss Khalid's guilt before the trial.
"I believe he was forced to make that confession. The problem is not that he confessed but that he has jeopardized the whole Muslim community [umma], and this could provoke a wave of Islamophobia," he said.
He said Muslims in the U.S. and other countries will again be seen as potential terrorists.
The insanity continues:
ReplyDeleteMark Denbeaux, a Seton Hall University law professor who represents two Tunisians held at Guantanamo, said that based on the transcripts, Mohammed might be the only detainee who would qualify as an enemy combatant.
"The government has finally brought someone into Gitmo who apparently admits to being someone who could be called an enemy combatant," Denbeaux, a critic of most of the detentions, said in a telephone interview from London. "None of the others rise to this level. The government has now got one."
Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch, questioned the legality of the closed-door session and confession and whether the confession was the result of torture.
"We won't know that unless there is an independent hearing," he said. "We need to know if this purported confession would be enough to convict him at a fair trial or would it have to be suppressed as the fruit of torture?"
The military held 558 combatant status review tribunals between July 2004 and March 2005 and the panels concluded that all but 38 detainees were enemy combatants who should be held. Those 38 were eventually released from Guantanamo.
I think that everyone is over wrought about those Gitmo detainees.
ReplyDeleteThe US should seek reconciliation with them, on a person by person basis.
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed has apologized for his misdeeds, we must take his apology to heart. Or this senseless violence, the World over, will continue.
Reconciliation is the only way forward, for US, to reach peace in our time. General P knows it, we should all embrace it.
Pardons for all the detainees, that is the solution to this phase of the War on Terror, because there is no military one.
We MUST accommodate and facilitate the integration of these men back into society. Or the bloodshed will continue and there will be no peace, well into the future.
Give reconciliation a chance, they have apologized, for goodness sake.
We MUST take them at their word, or their fellow Mohammedans will get mad and think we do not want to give peace a chance.
cutler, allen, rufus, and more all agree, reconciliation is the only way forward to Peace.
ReplyDeleteToning down expectations of Victory is required in the Global War on Terror.
We must accommodate, we must facilitate, we must pay tribute if required. Pardons all around.
They did apologize, well, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed apologized, the others, like Dr Z and Osama, might, if we act nice.
The US must not be provicative.
ReplyDeleteWho knows where that may lead, there could be violence and pestilence, even War.
Can't be having that.
Accept Khalid Sheikh Mohammeds' apology and "move on".
Then we will know peace, instead of no peace.
We should get Khalid Sheikh Mohammed a taxi to drive in Manhatten, then he can feel the shame of his past misdeeds, each time he takes a fare past "Ground Zero".
Mr Victor D Hanson calls 'em like he sees 'em, here is his job discription for General P
ReplyDeleteSomehow Petraeus has to quell Sunni-Shiite sectarian violence without impinging on the autonomy of the Iraqi government. That means not just winning hearts and minds, but also disarming militias; stopping the policy of arresting and then releasing terrorists; widening the rules of engagement; and preventing jihadists from infiltrating Iraq from Iran, Saudi Arabia and Syria -- and all the while giving the credit to the Iraqi military.
In six to eight months.
Just to give peace a chance.
The Sunni militias have not been disarmed after four years of US trying our bestest to achieve that goal. I'm sure they'll lay down their weapons, now.
Maybe they'll apologize, too.
For reconciliations sake.
Yep, rufus, it seems that the Mahdi Army has gone to ground.
ReplyDeleteNo longer playing tit for tat with the Sunni militias. Just as Mr Maliki said, they were never a "real" problem. Just another arm of the Federal Islamic Republic of Iraq's civil defence forces.
The security mission in Basra will soon be turned over to Mr al-Hakim and his Badr Brigade, that'll be another sure sign of further US and British success.
Things could not be going better.
We didn't miss it, rufus. I think allen linked to it.
ReplyDeleteGuess she REALLY does not want that Democratic nomination, after all.
Better to have run and lost,
then to have never run at all.
"cutler, allen, rufus, and more all agree, reconciliation is the only way forward to Peace.
ReplyDeleteToning down expectations of Victory is required in the Global War on Terror.
We must accommodate, we must facilitate, we must pay tribute if required. Pardons all around.
They did apologize, well, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed apologized, the others, like Dr Z and Osama, might, if we act nice."
So does the new strawman mean that you're done saying that Petraeus, himself, thinks that Iraq is impossible?
Everything - as it always does - depends on context. Hard and fast rules are good for both the conscience and coming up for 'easy' solutions, but vary rarely are tenable.
ReplyDelete*very
ReplyDeleteSenator Clinton reads the polls as well as anyone around. She will not become president by ignoring mainstream voters to placate some of her more radical primary constituents.
ReplyDeleteIf Senator Clinton's position is based upon her certain knowledge that the battle is shifting toward the President's side, we may take a lesson from that.
The war with Islam will outlive us all. Perhaps, Mrs. Clinton is bowing to reality.
General P says his troops cannot provide the US with a military victory in Iraq.
ReplyDeleteThat the problems in Iraq are beyond a military solution.
That only political reconciliation will bring peace.
I sugggest we lead the way in reconciliation. What is good for the goose, etc ...
We should show the Iraq that revenge and justice are not driving forces for finding a just peace.
Since it seems that there is also no military solution for aQ, either in Warizistan, or else where, we should lead by example.
We should take our own advise, that which we freely give to the Iraqi, and reconcile with Osama and the rest of his network.
Seems only reasonable.
If it is objectionable, for US to reconcile with Osama and Dr Z, why would it be more acceptable to the Iraqi?
Their losses to the jihadist networks have been far greater, both proportionitely and by gross numbers of killed or wounded.
If it is good for Iraq, it should be good for US, as well.
"Right now, Patton, or Grant, or MacArthur would be screaming for "More Troops, Faster" to keep the heat on. I wish Petraeus would. Dubya would have to accomodate him."
ReplyDeletePetraeus is walking a thin line, as we always have been, between getting enough manpower, and burning out a volunteer army that is already well above the Op-tempos and rotation-schedule that anyone thought wise or sustainable before we went in. We've only been able to do it because of high retention rates. If the ceiling falls out over personnel frustration, he'll not only not be able to keep the pressure on over the long run, but also have a broken army.
Mrs. Clinton is not intimidated by the tidal wave of anti-war protests sweeping the Capitol today.
ReplyDelete“A total of 10 peaceful anti-war protesters were arrested, both inside the committee room and outside the building where the debate was unfolding.”
House panel upholds Iraq pullout plan
Logistical support does not exist to get more than a Brigade a month to Iraq. Or so it was reported at the beginning of the Surge.
ReplyDeleteThe troops in the pipeline are getting there as fast as they can be delivered, according to Army spokesmen, at the time.
All of the Surge troops will not be there until May. At that time those troops already in country, that have had their deployments extended, are going to begin coming home.
It seems that even if General P called for more troops, they are no where to be found.
DR,
ReplyDeletere: reconciliation
What makes you think al-Qaida desires reconciliation?
"We should take our own advise, that which we freely give to the Iraqi, and reconcile with Osama and the rest of his network.
ReplyDeleteSeems only reasonable.
If it is objectionable, for US to reconcile with Osama and Dr Z, why would it be more acceptable to the Iraqi?
Their losses to the jihadist networks have been far greater, both proportionitely and by gross numbers of killed or wounded."
The question was not what I believe - it was what Petraeus believes, and he has said that the war is both winnable and supports the surge.
We're not expecting the Sunnis or Shi'ites to 'live with Al Qaeda.' We're trying to convince the Sunnis to kill and eject Al Qaeda for us, which though it has been slow, is in fact one of the few areas in Iraq where we've actually had progress with a number of tribes.
The problem with reconciliation (and this is merely my opinion) is we probably can't get the next step, which would be a wider Sunni-Shi'ite reconciliation. The longer-term problem is that even if we did, the Shi'ite groups, as you've said, are not our friends.
But - right now it seems like the more immediate problem is that whatever is happening in Iraq might spill into the neighboring countries. And no matter how much I hate the fact that this is somehow our business as world gendarmie, the Middle East going to hell in a handbasket isn't going to help us.
In the long term, I'd hope that the Arab Iraqis would rid themselves of Iranian influence, but that's just wishful thinking. 'There are no easy solutions' and we are probably going to come out with a net negative end result - but we can still try to choose how negative.
We may get ourselves out of the way of the civil war itself (by retreating to the borders or mega bases), but we're probably not leaving entirely. We have a huge interest, for obvious reasons, in making sure that Al Qaeda isn't left with a huge swathe of territory, at the very least.
"Cutler, sometimes it comes to pass that you have to take two cards that you're not really crazy about and push "all in." It's a function of "timing," and being out of time. We're there, now. If he doesn't make this work it won't matter if he has an Army, or not; because, he won't get a chance to use it."
ReplyDelete2 things: 1st, America will still need a healthy army even if it loses in Iraq.
2nd, the school within which Petraeus comes from thinks that any victory in Iraq is going to be long-term anyway. So it's no use shooting your bolt for 6 months, since you aren't going to solve the problem in 6 months.
Bigger problem is, of course, we don't have all that much more time. The pity is that we wasted years just getting here. Course, it could have been doomed from the get go (at least, the most optimal end games).
The Six Enemy Tribes of Anbar had a preWar population base of around 1.25 million people.
ReplyDeleteThe balance of the tribes, in Anbar, had around 1.6 million folk.
There are centuries old hostilities between the two factions. We may be gaining support from half of the Anbar population, which will serve to enhance Green on Green violence.
Just what the US is trying to curtail, in Baghdad.
The problems that the Iraqi face are greater than the aQ foreigners themselves. They have just utilized existing fractures in Iraqi society. Even if the US were to succeed and paper over those fractures, the building will collapse as soon as we leave the room.
Whether in a year, ten or more.
If we had implemented General P's program from the beginning we could have created a viable and possibly loyal Iraqi Army, one that could hold Iraq together.
Instead we have an Iraqi Army that is fractionalized. Kurdish units, Shia units & Sunni units. That, situation, standing alone, would create problems for any long term solution.
When added to the already fractionalize Iraqi government the future's so bright, we gotta wear shades.
Well, allen, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed apologized. That's gotta be worth it's weight in spit.
ReplyDeleteWhat makes anyone think that the Six Enemy Tribes of Anbar want to reconcile?
Or the Iraqi Government itself, for that matter.
What makes anyone believe that the Kurds want to reconcile in Kirkurk, before they gain control there?
Reconcilation is a fools errand, in Iraq, Afghanistan or Warizistan.
There will be no peace without a military solution, or as it was refered to in the old days, Victory.
"The great thing about our Army as it stands, right now, is it's made up of people that "Want to Fight." They enlisted, or re-enlisted, knowing that they were going to fight. We're as close to an "Army of Warriors" as we've ever been in our history. It won't fall apart if someone has to go to Iraq a couple of months early."
ReplyDeleteWith personnel, the problem's always been the families more so than the soldiers. The spouses and children.
I agree with the Army of Warriors part - at least outside some certain sections.
The United States has adopted 'unconditional surrender' as its objective in only one war in its entire history, so far as I know.
ReplyDeleteAnd we even cheated there, with regard to Japan (see, example 1, the Emperor).
We've even still got reservations as leftovers from the Indian Wars.
David Brooks in todays NYT op/ed page did a decent job of highlighting the two serious options for the immediate term in Iraq:
ReplyDelete"One serious position is heard on the left: that there’s nothing more we can effectively do in Iraq. We’ve spent four years there and have not been able to quell the violence. If the place is headed for civil war, there’s nothing we can do to stop it, and we certainly don’t want to get caught in the middle. The only reasonable option is to get out now before more Americans die.
The second serious option is heard on the right. We have to do everything we can to head off catastrophe, and it’s too soon to give up hope. The surge is already producing some results. Bombing deaths are down by at least a third. Execution-style slayings have been cut in half. An oil agreement has been reached, tribes in Anbar Province are chasing Al Qaeda, cross-sectarian political blocs are emerging. We should perhaps build on the promise of the surge with regional diplomacy or a soft partition, but we certainly should not set timetables for withdrawal."
The Long Exit
It seems to me the surge is just a temporary unsustainable option that is papering over the fissures in Iraq. We should, however, accept much responsibility for setting the mess in motion though the blunt instrument of the military is not very helpful in this regard.
"There are centuries old hostilities between the two factions. We may be gaining support from half of the Anbar population, which will serve to enhance Green on Green violence.
ReplyDeleteJust what the US is trying to curtail, in Baghdad."
The United States is promoting Sunni vs. Sunni violence, curtailing Shi'ite vs Sunni violence, and ignoring Shi'ite vs Shi'ite violence (or rather, the British were).
And all this time, I thought it was Iraqi on Iraqi violence we were trying to curtail. To contain the Civil War, not promote selected portions of it.
ReplyDeleteI had no idea there was a need to fill sectarian quotas for the dead and wounded, in Iraq, based upon who the aggressor was, vis a vie the victims.
The responsibility as occupiers and I thought the "Plan" was to provide security for all civilian Iraqi, not just those civilians who we prefer.
Seems I've been decieved by the rhetoric, once again.
Hey, *I* Linked Ms Hillary,
ReplyDeleteeven her dulcet tones on MP3.
---
No Big Thing (Kudlow, Rufus, et-al)
Home-loan backlash begins
Editorial: Rein in greedy mortgage industry
Silicon Valley may be insulated from mortgage morass
"Investors are poking around to see how much rotted wood there is here," said Jack Ablin, chief investment officer for Harris Private Bank. "It looks like the notion was subprime was contained, and now we're starting to see that maybe this problem has moved into other areas of the market. That's causing investors great concern."
Accredited Home contributed to the anxiety after it said it is in need of cash. Its shares plunged $7.43, or 65 percent, to $3.97.
(was the strongest of the bunch)
Don't be DENSE, Rat:
ReplyDeleteSectarian Quotas are the latest thing in Compassionate Neoconservative Circles.
New Age Sociology comes to Warfare.
Budgets w/o limits.
W fought long and hard to get here.
Bill gets long and hard just thinking about it.
Rufus gets a headache.
Trish,
ReplyDeleteWe mustn't bring that up.
Might remind folks that the hard-fighing Bush Admin only had bright red signs of danger since way back when Steven Vincent was killed.
How long ago was that?
The long, long, War.
"the main source of revenue for the central government"
ReplyDelete---
B-1 Bob's plan at the outset was to seize and secure the Basra Oilfields and let the rest sort itself out.
Took way too long to secure those fields:
(4 days?)
Bring back Ms T as a Morality advisor to P.P.
ReplyDelete"We may get ourselves out of the way of the civil war itself (by retreating to the borders or mega bases), but we're probably not leaving entirely. We have a huge interest, for obvious reasons, in making sure that Al Qaeda isn't left with a huge swathe of territory, at the very least."
ReplyDelete---
Hillary could not have said it better, although she DID say it!
I thought George Allen's immortal word was macaw, or minkey, or some such?
ReplyDeleteWebb would know.
Thanks trish,
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting to read about what success in Iraq really looks like.
A third and final reason to focus on Basra in particular is that the province has suffered one of the worst reversals of fortune of any area in Iraq since the fall of Saddam’s regime. Once a relatively calm part of postwar Iraq, where multinational forces were able to undertake community policing at acceptable risk without helmets or body armor, Basra has since been overwhelmed by a storm of violence and disorder, becoming an area where it is impossible to undertake road moves without heavily armored vehicles. Although it was one of the more liberal and cosmopolitan areas in Iraq during the 1980s, Basra has transformed into a bastion of Islamist groups and their associated militias, afflicted with high levels of insurgent and criminal activity. From being the heart of Iraq’s oil industry, Basra is increasingly a kleptocracy used by Islamist militias to fill their war chests.
Basra’s slide into chaos poses many uncomfortable questions. What dynamics caused the dramatic reversal?
What role has Iran played in the region? Was Britain fully committed to the task of bringing representative moderate governance to the deep south? Did the British style of community soldiering and minimal use of force help or hinder the effort to stabilize southern Iraq? Can the deterioration be reversed?
Most important, what happens next?
The Calm before the Storm
The British Experience in Southern Iraq
The sweet smell of success wafts through the air in Basra, to bad it smells of Shit
ReplyDeleteRory Stewart concluded that the occupiers were in an unenviable position: “The authoritarian response [the Iraqis] wanted—as instinctive to them as an old
ReplyDeletecolonial administrator—was not instinctive to us. Certain measures were difficult for us even to contemplate.
How many unarmed people were we prepared to kill to defend a ministry building?”
Stewart’s account of the conversation between the provincial governor Riyadh Mahoud and coalition officials is telling. When the governor asks why British forces allowed the mob to enter:
One of us replied, “Governor, maybe it is better that a little computer equipment gets stolen than more people get killed.”
And [the governor] said: “What are you talking about? Would you let the mob go stampeding into
your office and loot your computer equipment?”
We had no answer. Of course we would have shot anyone who tried to break into our compound.17
Of course some may say that the Washington Institute for Near East Policy must be made up of leftists and Bush Derangement Syndrome suffers:
ReplyDeleteBoard of Advisors
Warren Christopher
Lawrence S. Eagleburger
Alexander Haig
Max M. Kampelman
Samuel W. Lewis
Edward Luttwak
Michael Mandelbaum
Robert C. McFarlane
Martin Peretz
Richard Perle
James Roche
George P. Shultz
Paul Wolfowitz*
R. James Woolsey
Mortimer Zuckerman
In Memoriam
Jeane Kirkpatrick
Eugene V. Rostow
Nah, I guess not.
With regards the American Indians.
ReplyDeleteBefore the survivors made it to the Reservations, they had the living shit kicked out of them.
They were thoroughly defeated, some tribes totally eliminated, others just decimated.
One of the Tribes that was the least effected, militarily, the Navajo, surrendered to Kit Carson without to much of a fight. Saving their culture.
In January 1864, Carson sent a company into Canyon de Chelly to attack the last Navajo stronghold under the leadership of Manuelito. The Navajo were forced to surrender because of the destruction of their livestock and food supplies. In the spring of 1864, 8,000 Navajo men, women and children were forced to march or ride in wagons 300 miles (480 km) to Fort Sumner, New Mexico. Navajos call this "The Long Walk". Many died along the way or during the next four years of imprisonment. In 1868, after signing a treaty with the U.S. government, remaining Navajos were allowed to return to a reduced area of their homeland, where the Navajo Reservation exists today. Thousands of other Navajo who had been living in the wilderness returned to the Navajo homeland centered around Canyon de Chelly.
Do the same in Ramadi, remove the civilian population to a controled area, the Insurgeny would die.
Hope Rufus can turn this into good news.
ReplyDeleteKudlow will know:
Warlords probably give tax cuts to throat cutters.
Reward good behavior.
Basic Economix.
It was doug, rufus, that was discussing Mr Allens' sons' choice of vocabulary.
ReplyDeleteI have not thought much about him, since the Election.
Always causin trouble.
ReplyDelete"And all this time, I thought it was Iraqi on Iraqi violence we were trying to curtail. To contain the Civil War, not promote selected portions of it.
ReplyDeleteI had no idea there was a need to fill sectarian quotas for the dead and wounded, in Iraq, based upon who the aggressor was, vis a vie the victims.
The responsibility as occupiers and I thought the "Plan" was to provide security for all civilian Iraqi, not just those civilians who we prefer.
Seems I've been decieved by the rhetoric, once again."
Obviously, to clamp down on a civil war you have to make violence in order to stop violence, as there are some groups that are promoting it in the first place.
It has nothing to do with 'quotas,' and everything to do with targeted violence - as all wars do.
I realize that it isn't a nice bit of rhetorical ambiguity and nothingness for you to continue to bitch about, but it is what it is.
"Hillary could not have said it better, although she DID say it!"
ReplyDeleteAnd she was right to say it, regardless of whether she is wrong about most other things.
"Do the same in Ramadi, remove the civilian population to a controled area, the Insurgeny would die."
ReplyDeleteAnd noone on the American political scene will be suggesting this anytime soon. So we're forced to make do with what we can do. Or get out of the middle of it. Which is a possibility.
A little traditional warmaking by the British at the time would have done the trick.
ReplyDelete...but that would make them UNCOMFORTABLE.
Mercy!
(like not releasing terrorists might offend W's new Tone in Warfighting)\
ReplyDelete---
But remember, the tech bust devoured about $9 trillion in corporate equity; next to that, the subprime problem looks like an insect bite—unless it spreads to the rest of the mortgage market. But at least so far that doesn't appear to be happening: Mortgage rates for good borrowers have actually been going down. In early February, for example, the average rate for 15-year fixed rate mortgages was 6.06%, according to Freddie Mac (FRE). As of Mar. 8, that was down to 5.86%. If low rates continue, they should actually prop up most of the housing market.
I don't want to be too Pollyanna-ish about either the stock market or the economy. There are plenty of dangers, with the biggest one being the slowing of U.S. productivity growth in recent months. If productivity growth slides even further, it could undermine corporate profits, the economy, and the stock market. But at least for now, the subprime meltdown doesn't look like a reason for investors to dive for the fallout shelters.
Mandel is chief economist for BusinessWeek.
In retrospect, I apologize for the 'bitching' comment. The stream of consciousness dialogue that seemingly has no evident target, and therefore makes it unclear over whose mouth you are trying to insert words into, gets a bit annoying.
ReplyDeleteBitches or not, going forward it ain't gonna work to spend this much time and treasure to get this kind of result, while at the same time Al Q rebuilds in Wharizistan, and destabilizes Afghanistan to the point that Yon thinks were losing.
ReplyDeleteIMO
See, I take it personally even after an apology.
ReplyDelete(but I hadn't read it yet)
One of my targets is those that would defend postmodern warfare tactics proven not to work.
I can understand why 'Rat would annoy.
ReplyDelete(he enjoys it)
I think Hillary reads the general electorate correctly, but the DemNuts are so far gone that Obama continues to chip away at her lead.
ReplyDelete"There's really no other way of doing it."
ReplyDelete---
If that's true, we're F.....
I say good leadership could have done a LOT of things differently.
":One of my targets is those that would defend postmodern warfare tactics proven not to work."
ReplyDeleteand
"You go to war in the era in which you live. Not like it wasn't known. That was part of the set-up and the gauzy narrative - sold to ourselves and others. There's really no other way of doing it."
...And I can say from personal experience, that it is those post-modern warrior tactics that are being taught to the next generation of policy makers. I am actually, believe it or not, the resident skeptic within such an atmosphere.
A lot of it is good stuff - the problem is that our modern practicioners often err too much on the side of 'reconciliation' and 'cooperation.' As a result, we work with people that are obviously unreconstructable, like Sadr. But the basic theory of sticks and carrots is good, I think. We're just too gullible in trusting the wrong people.
...and not brutal enough with the people who can't be trusted.
ReplyDeleteRufus,
ReplyDeleteMaybe Bremmer should go back for a foto op with General P.
State Department Giving Baghdad to House of Saud?
ReplyDeleteBy Joel Mowbray
Monday, April 7, 2003
With war still raging, the State Department is planning to hold a “Baghdad Conference” a mere six weeks after the conflict ends to determine an interim leadership and to establish a framework for its new government—something that many inside the administration fear could give the House of Saud undue influence in a post-Saddam Iraq. The plan is modeled after the Bonn Conference, which Zalmay Khalilzad, now U.S. special envoy to Iraq, oversaw to prepare a transitional government that eventually succeeded the Taliban.
Administration officials and various outside experts agree that a Baghdad Conference, if it happens, would be simply the latest attempt by State to undermine the umbrella organization of democratic Iraqi opposition groups, the Iraqi National Congress (INC).
State is already placing—or attempting to place—pro-Saudi individuals in important positions in a post-Saddam Iraq:
· Assistant Secretary of State for Consular Affairs Maura Harty recently tapped Beth Payne—who one senior State official says “enjoys a cozy relationship with the Saudis,” even though her job has been to recover abducted American children trapped in the desert prison—to take over the consular section at the new Baghdad embassy.
· State last month forced the Pentagon to appoint longtime diplomat Barbara Bodine—who temporarily refused the FBI entry into Yemen to investigate the U.S.S. Cole—to be civilian administrator in Baghdad. Bodine has extensive ties to Iraqis—but not the right ones. Notes a senior administration official, “She only knows the Ba’athists, because that’s who she dealt with, and she’s never bothered getting to know the democratic opposition very well.” With a long career centered mostly in the Middle East, administration officials describe Bodine as an Arabist who favors traditional, “stable” Arab regimes—the kind where democracy does not flourish.
We got ourselves into a bind in Iraq when we ended the occupation and began the reconstruction too soon.
ReplyDeleteBut who knows? We were probably damned from the start.
I guess we've only changed plans a half dozen times or so.
ReplyDeleteDue to the exigencies of War.
(In Washington DC)
Whit,
ReplyDeleteAs I've said before, Cheney did a great job of outlining most of the problems back in 93.
But then...
"We thought of Iraq as WWII France.
ReplyDeleteFrankly, I knew Arabia was a dark, backwards place. If you had asked me on September 10th where the last place on earth I'd like to put US troops was, I would have said Arabia.
That the Administration actually thought that Iraq would suddenly spring into freedom still astonishes me. I assumed from the beginning that they either knew something I didn't know or had long term plans to do it. Same thing with regard to Sadr.
It is a pity that as bad as they are, they're still probably better than the Democrats.
Part of this is the 1990s...a decade of political sleepwalking.
Some officials and diplomats have described Friday's talks as an attempt to match the international community's reconstruction skills with areas where Iraq needs help until it realizes its own economic potential. They say it is not a meeting to secure more financial donations for the country.
ReplyDeleteThe 4-year-old war has devastated Iraq's economy and the country has relied on billions of dollars in foreign aid. Iraqi officials say economic hardship has driven people toward militant groups.
The Iraq Compact, which needs to be authorized by a U.N. resolution, is expected to focus on key areas like the training of Iraq's security forces and reconstruction of the country's oil and agriculture industries.
Support for Reconstruction
Well, cutler, it annoys me that after spending over $500 BILLION USD, not to mention the blood or defered maintainece costs, we are falling back.
ReplyDeleteI do not put words in folks mouths, I just quote them from a different perspective. Understanding that what they say is not always what we'd like to hear, or what they really want to report. I am not one for translating winks and nods.
The Basra situation just the tip of the iceberg. One that seems indicitive of the entire effort. Everyone of the senior Administration spokespeople, Bush, Cheney, Rice claiming the program a great success, there.
It seems anything but that.
Looks like a retreat from here.
We're drinkin' backsliders wine.
If the Shia factions can stabilize their hold on Basra, which seems evident, how long until the Iraqi/KSA border becomes as violated as the Iran/Iraq border?
The KSA oilfields underneath a majority minority Shia population.
The US Airbase in Ecuador is being invited to leave, I saw today. The new President, there in Ecuador, not a fan of US, but solidly in the Hugo camp. He's moving to disband the Congress there, as Hugo did in Venezuela.
Not especially "good" news.
Rufus,
ReplyDeleteSmoke Him!
Ecuador, Wharizistan, Gaza, what's the big Whups?
ReplyDelete---
IRAN IS BUILDING "HAMASTAN" IN GAZA IRAN IS BUILDING "HAMASTAN" IN GAZA
"I do not put words in folks mouths, I just quote them from a different perspective. Understanding that what they say is not always what we'd like to hear, or what they really want to report. I am not one for translating winks and nods."
ReplyDeleteWhen you claim, in the context of responding to *me*, that I am in favor of sectarian killing by quota: that is "putting words in folks mouths."
Accidents do happen, Watson
ReplyDeleteIs freedom of the press dead in Putin’s Russia? 14 journalists have died mysteriously; not one case has been solved
Decades of economic mismanagement as well as U.N. sanctions under former President Saddam Hussein have bloated inefficient state-owned industries and created a web of government subsidies for food and gasoline which western advisers say hinders growth and fosters corruption.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, reforming state-run industries would inevitably mean throwing thousands of employees out of work and adding to the misery of ordinary Iraqis, while the benefits of reform may take years to appear.
A replay of disbanding the Iraqi Army?
We are entering the fifth year of the Iraqi War, I heard from the Senate, today.
We've controled the country almost for as long. But talk of "economic reform" only now making the news.
The US, the Worlds' economic powerhouse cannot get the place kickstarted. No problem spending another $10 Billion USD there in the next year, though. Maybe half of the money will go missing, as the auditors reported happened to the previous aid monies.
Monies misspent, much more serious a problem than disbanding the Iraqi Army, an Army that had already deserted, anyway.
US troops shift battle to Baghdad suburb
ReplyDeleteThe fighters have renewed their campaign of bombings and killings just 35 miles northeast of the capital as the war enters its fifth year. Diyala province is quickly becoming as dangerous as Anbar province, the Sunni insurgent bastion west of Baghdad.
You brought in a perspective that the US would promote some intrasectarian violence, that Sunni killing Sunni, tit for tat in Anbar, was a product of US policy.
ReplyDeleteMs Rice, in a meeting with Mr Maliki demanded that he take action against Shia militias, that to much of the Operation was targeting Sunni. Ms Rice spoke as if there were quotas in the Plan.
Put the two together and it would seem evident that there are quotas involved in the casualty counts, at least in Ms Rice's mind.
Shias must be targeted, to be "fair"
From USA Today 2/17/07
During a private meeting with Iraqi leaders, Rice said the Shiite-led government must "rise above sectarianism" and noted that no U.S. or Iraqi forces have yet moved into Sadr City, according to an Iraqi official familiar with the discussions.
The Iraqis, however, told her that the Mahdi Army and al-Sadr had been losing influence and were cooperating with authorities on security issues, the official said. The Iraqis said they did not want to "waste our resources in a place that's stable," the official added.
Then, to prove the point, when the US did move into Sadr City, not a shot was fired.
The Mahdi Army is an extension of the Iraqi Government, proofs in the pudding.
Free flowing association coming to the point.
The other question, which must be asked, with regards the Sunni on Sunni violence is...
ReplyDeleteHow does it effect the Iraqi Governments "Monopoly of Force", to have these Sunni tribal militias fighting each other?
The Mahdi Army and the Badr Brigades both being integral parts of the Iraqi Government are part of its' "Monopoly of Force"
ReplyDeleteCan the same be said of the Sunni militias?
In Baghdad, the 5-20 met little resistance as it scoured suspected insurgent dens in neighborhoods around Sadr City. They often drank tea with residents.
ReplyDeleteThings were different in Diyala, which could prove far more difficult to tame than Baghdad.
“I think the chai (tea) days — the quiet days — are over,” said 24-year-old Pfc. Allen Groth of Winona, Minn.
Sadr City, a safe place for US troops.
ReplyDeleteTea time with Sadr, who'd have guessed, other than Mr Maliki, who knew the entire time.
"Free flowing association coming to the point."
ReplyDeleteClear as mud.
"The Mahdi Army and the Badr Brigades both being integral parts of the Iraqi Government are part of its' "Monopoly of Force"
Can the same be said of the Sunni militias?"
The Sunni vs. Sunni violence isn't merely 'tit for tat,' we're also using them, as far as I know, for recruits in the local police.
As for monopolies of violence - the place is a Mad Max world of ethnic, religious, and political allegiances. You've got a third of the country that really isn't even a part of the country and wouldn't be if it didn't think it would pay big time for declaring independence.
Can't solve everything at once, if at all.
And that third of the country is divided into two armies itself, divided between two parties - the PUK and KDP - that fought a civil war as little as 10 years ago.
ReplyDeleteKurdistan isn't even all clear.
"Welcome to the Jungle."
ReplyDeleteNo fun and games.
US Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs Richard Boucher announced a $750-million five-year aid package on Thursday for security along the Pak-Afghan border and the development of FATA (Federally Administered Tribal Areas).
ReplyDeleteBoucher told reporters after meeting President Gen Pervez Musharraf that the aid package was proof of the US and Pakistan’s long-term strategic partnership. He said the US administration was trying to convince the House of Representatives and the Senate to amend a Pakistan-specific bill, and it was hoped that the final version of the legislation would not undermine the two countries’ long-term relations.
He said chances of amendments to the bill were “big”, and the US would soon pass another bill to establish ‘reconstruction opportunity zones’ in FATA. About the chief justice’s suspension, Boucher said, “It’s a sensitive matter which should be worked out through the Pakistani system.
Border Security
If a fence will not work on the US/Mexico border, to stop unarmed infiltrators, how could spending the same kind of money stop armed combatants especially when
ReplyDelete... President General Pervez Musharraf said in February that Pakistan would fence 35 kilometres of its northwestern border to restrict the movement of Taliban militants. The fencing relates to only 35 km and not to the whole 2,500 km that is described as the Durand Line.
Only 35km for $750 million USD?
Westhawk might have written this piece instead of Wretchard.
ReplyDelete“Although it is fashionable to think that the Sunni insurgency is stronger than ever and effortlessly shrugging off American blows, in reality their decision to boycott the political process, instigate civil war through attacks on the Shi'ite minority -- in other words the whole strategy which al-Qaeda insinuated -- has resulted in unmitigated catastrophe.”
“An estimated 1.8 million Iraqi refugees are currently scattered around the Middle East, with Syria hosting nearly 1 million of them.”
Tens of thousands of “Loyalists” fled to Canada and the Carribean during the Revolutionary War period.
Baghdad to the Sea
"Pushtunistan"
ReplyDeleteThe aQ tactics in Iraq are only a failure if Iraq is a local conflict.
ReplyDeleteIf the purpose of the War is to destabilize the Region, allowing Jihadisti to topple governments and create a Caliphate, the tactics are working fine. aQ never represented the Sunni of Iraq, but radical Sunni jihadisti that would love to see Syria & Jordan destabilized.
W is looking at it with blinders that cut off the peripheral vison.
“At the same time, Britain and Europe experienced a mass influx of Muslims as the borders opened and the poor south migrated en masse to the north. The problem was that, unlike other immigrant groups, successive generations of Muslims have failed to integrate and instead try to colonise their host countries – a programme of subversion for Europe that has been explicitly laid out by the Wahabbi Muslim Brotherhood for the past 30 years.”
ReplyDelete[…]
“What should be done? Simply, this. We all have to grasp that terrorism is not the biggest threat we face. The biggest threat is the ideology that drives it. It’s not enough to fight terror, vital though that is. The principal battleground is the world of ideas. {...}"
Melanie Phillips, in fine form
Melanie Phillips
March 2, 2007
The Quadrant lecture
The lecture, entitled “Hitler’s Legacy: Islamic antiSemitism in the Middle East”, was organised by the university’s German department and publicised three weeks ago. A large attendance had been expected.
ReplyDeleteDr Köntzel, a former adviser to the German Green Party, said: “I have been told that it has had to be cancelled for security reasons. It seems there were concerns that there could be violence against my person.
“I have lectured in lots of countries on this subject. I gave the same talk at Yale University recently, and this is the first time I have been invited to lecture in the UK.
Islam Lecture
"Muslims have failed to integrate and instead try to colonise their host countries"
ReplyDeleteSo confused...I thought redneck vigilangtes similar to those in AZ were the problem...that Islam posed no threat in Europe or the U.S. - Never mind the sword verses
Just overseas where the danger lies
Yeah, he's the biggest terrorist of all times, he's behind more terrorist attacks than anyone, he's a pro, he's the best, he's the tops. Maybe we can get him to admit to the Oklahoma bombing too...
ReplyDeleteabsurd thought -
God of the Universe hates
lazy terrorists...
.
"The biggest threat is the ideology that drives it. It’s not enough to fight terror, vital though that is. The principal battleground is the world of ideas."
ReplyDeleteHaven't you learned...
What is the provocation in the US?
You're views are as inflammatory as those spouted by Abu Usamah.
The US government does not (cannot) limit immigration by religious denomination. Being a Muslim does not disqualify one from entry (or residence).
If there are treasonish ideas or behavior, within the US, the FBI should sniff it out, as is their mandate.
Although reconcilation is a fools errand - in Iraq, Afghanistan or Warizistan...
Understanding and tolerance is key for harmony in the U.S., wetern Europe, India, Thailand, Russia, et al.
In the dar al-harb:
How about defeating the Enemy?
In the emerging dar al-Islam:
Detroit, London, Paris, Brussels - these are the models of success
We must accommodate, we must facilitate, we must pay tribute if required.
...Those in charge of the clattering train, the axles creak and the couplings strain.
The pace is hot and the points are near and sleep has deadened the driver’s air.
The signals flash in the night in vain, for death is in charge of the clattering train.
In all, Mohammed took responsibility for 31 attacks and plots - some of which never occurred - during his closed hearing at the U.S. naval prison at Guantanamo Bay.
ReplyDeleteAl-Qaida and other Islamic terror groups often accuse their targets of working for Israeli intelligence as justification for violence, according to Rita Katz, director of the SITE Institute, which monitors extremist messages on the Internet.
"It's a way of getting more support, justification, and sympathy for your actions," Katz said. "Rather than saying we killed him because he's a reporter or just because he's Jewish, you make a better case if you say he's an agent."
Beheading Pearl
Picture released 15 March 2007 by the US military shows Spc. Jason Peacock, from the 14th Cavalry Regiment, scanning the rooftops from his overwatch position during a cordon and search mission in Baghdad.
ReplyDeleteThe US military reported the deaths of three more troops, two in blasts and one hit by small arms fire in restive Diyala province today.
3:55 a.m. ET, 3/15/07
From a paper I'm writing:
ReplyDelete"Given Islamic terrorism’s global reach, the problem potentially exists wherever there are Muslims."
Hmmm.
Definitely a potential hate crime violation by stating the simple truth too bluntly.
Bobal's link:
ReplyDeleteCosman said 84 hospitals in California have been forced to close because of the high cost of treating illegal aliens with only 50 percent of all treatments reimbursed by government.
Among the organizations directing illegal aliens into America's medical systems, according to the report, are the Ford Foundation-funded Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, the National Immigration Law Center, the American Immigration Lawyers Association, the American Bar Association's Commission on Immigration Policy, Practice, and Pro Bono, the Immigrant Legal Resource Center, the National Council of La Raza, George Soros' Open Society Institute, the Migration Policy Institute, the National Network for Immigration and Refugee Rights and the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Because drug addiction and alcoholism are classified as diseases and disabilities, the fiscal toll on the health-care system rises.
"Illegal aliens simply cross our borders medically unexamined, hiding in their bodies any number of communicable diseases."
Cutler,
ReplyDeleteJust write "ROP"
100 times,
You'll get over it.
Peace.
Now you are getting the picture, elijah.
ReplyDeleteWhere there is armed conflict, the enemy must be rooted out and taken or destroyed.
In the US there has yet to be armed conflict. Just the OK City bombing, 9-11 and an occasional attack by auto. In each of the domestic cases the Police tell US they got the perp. It is a criminal process. The Mohammedan aspect covered up when possible.
In the foreign cases we do not catch the majority of the perps, and it is still treated as a criminal process. Especially in Iraq where US troops lead the way in policing the country.
If we cannot use old fashion war fighting techniques in the War in Iraq, it is hard to make the case to use them here.
Nice hypothesis.
ReplyDeleteIt's working really well in Eurabia (and in the U.S. for that matter-hmm-would the Malvo shootings and others be considered armed combat)?
By the way, you and Trish need to go educate tom_holsinger over at BC and WoC.
I don't think he got the memo about Iran.