Category: Iraq

Vacation, All I Ever Wanted….

The fact that the Iraqi Parliament is going on vacation indicates that they know something that our morally bankrupt intelligentsia do not, that regardless of what they do, GW Bush will not pull out of Iraq.

If Lichtenstein were to conquer Texas, and claim it as their own right now, George Bush would not pull a single soldier out of Iraq to stop them and to take it back.

For Shrub, it’s all about him, and Iraq, for various oedipal and addictive personality driven reasons is what he thinks he is.

Ten Schoolgirls Murdered for Bush’s Oedipal Issues

This is what George W. Bush’s Oedipal obsession with Iraq has bought us: the Taliban taking over Afghanistan again.

As War Enters Classrooms, Fear Grips Afghans
By BARRY BEARAK

QALAI SAYEDAN, Afghanistan, July 9 — With their teacher absent, 10 students were allowed to leave school early. These were the girls the gunmen saw first, 10 easy targets walking hand-in-hand through the blue metal gate and on to the winding dirt road.

The staccato of machine-gun fire pelted through the stillness. A 13-year-old named Shukria was hit in the arm and the back, and then teetered into the soft brown of an adjacent wheat field. Zarmina, her 12-year-old sister, ran to her side, listening to the wounded girl’s precious breath and trying to help her stand.

But Shukria was too heavy to lift, and the two gunmen, sitting astride a single motorbike, sped closer.

As Zarmina scurried away, the men took a more studied aim at those they already had shot, killing Shukria with bullets to her stomach and heart. Then the attackers seemed to succumb to the frenzy they had begun, forsaking the motorbike and fleeing on foot in a panic, two bobbing heads — one tucked into a helmet, the other swaddled by a handkerchief — vanishing amid the earthen color of the wheat.

Six students were shot here on the afternoon of June 12, two of them fatally. The Qalai Sayedan School — considered among the very best in the central Afghan province of Logar — reopened only last weekend, but even with Kalashnikov-toting guards at the gate, only a quarter of the 1,600 students have dared to return.

Shootings, beheadings, burnings and bombings: these are all tools of intimidation used by the Taliban and others to shut down hundreds of Afghanistan’s public schools. To take aim at education is to make war on the government.

….

You Have to Destroy Army You Have, Not the Army You Want.

It appears that the US Army has missed its monthly goal by 15%.

It should be noted that the army has consistently backpedaled on these goals, in order not to make the shortfalls sound too bad too.

It got only 5/6 of the men it needs, and people are leaving the Army, Guard and Reserves as fast as they can.

Then you have the people who are staying only because they don’t want to leave their buddies while combat continues in Iraq.

Do I feel a draft in here?

Maybe, Just Maybe, Senate Democrats Know What This is


Perhaps this is no longer terra ingognita

Check out the NY Times article, Sensing a Shift, Reid Will Press for an Iraq Exit, Harry Reid is saying that they haven’t done enough, and I think that he means it.

I think that the so-called moderate Vichy wing of the Democratic party got one chance, and they lost. After seeing the poll numbers plummet, the Democrats now realize the equation:

  • Knuckle under again, and the Republicans gain points.
  • Take this to the mat, using everything at their disposal, and they gain points.

The country favors impeaching Cheney, and is close to favoring this with Bush.

Additionally, every time the Republicans senators vote for the war, they lose votes, and 2008 is already figuring to be a bad year for the Repuiblican senators who will be standing for re-election then.

Not One Step Back

Dems are Finally Telling Lieberman to Go Cheney Himself

Let me be the first to say:


Don’t let the door hit you on the butt on the way out, loser.

Altitude Drop For Lieberman the Hawk
by Steve Kornacki
Early last week, a distressing, if not entirely unsurprising, Newsweek poll found that fully 40 percent of American adults continue to believe that Iraq was directly involved in the 9/11 attacks.

It must, then, have been this exasperating chunk of the electorate that Joe Lieberman had in mind when he declared Sunday on ABC’s “This Week” that Democrats are doomed in the 2008 presidential race unless they re-embrace the Iraq War.

“I think that’s the best tradition of our party, and if we don’t recapture it … the Democratic candidate is going to have a hard time winning that election next year,” Mr. Lieberman said, likening his own hawkish Iraq posture to Harry Truman, John F. Kennedy, Hubert Humphrey, and Henry “Scoop” Jackson – all of them much too deceased to protest such a questionable comparison.

Ouch!!!!!

Given the Senate’s partisan balance – 49 Republicans, 49 Democrats (one still recuperating from a December cerebral hemorrhage), and two tie-breaking independents who caucus with the Democrats – Democrats are still technically at Mr. Lieberman’s mercy, their fragile control of the chamber dependent on his continued willingness to live up to his campaign pledge to side with his old party for organizational purposes.

But it’s now apparent that they need nothing more than that from him. Republicans have labored to portray Mr. Lieberman’s defeat in last year’s Senate primary as evidence that the Democratic Party has been over-run by weak-willed McGoverniks, a contention that Mr. Lieberman, in making reference to Democrats’ past vulnerabilities on foreign policy and national security issues, sought to reinforce on Sunday.

That game, however, has ceased to work. In years past – 2004 and 2002, say – a public association with Mr. Lieberman was helpful to Democrats, a reassurance to a more hawkish electorate that they were as “tough” as the G.O.P. But in 2007, embracing Mr. Lieberman’s intransigence is a decided political liability – evidenced most startlingly by a recent poll that found that even 58 percent of Republicans in Iowa want a troop withdrawal in the next six months. When, as he did on Sunday, Mr. Lieberman uses a national television interview to dust off old attacks on the Democratic Party’s foreign policy credentials while at the same time actually declaring that “the surge is working,” it only benefits his former party’s standing with the war-wary public. There are few, if any Democrats, quaking at his threat to endorse a Republican in ’08.

Those politicians are on the run to catch up with the public before November 2008. Mr. Lieberman should probably consider himself lucky that his seat was up last year – and not next year.

Military Times Says Army “Nearing a Breaking Point”

They are deploying troops for a year. In WWII, they determined that soldiers needed relief after 180 days.

When this is over, we will have many broken men, and recruiting problems for a generation.

Editorial: Balance home, away time

Many soldiers have deployed three, four and more times to Iraq, Afghanistan or both. But you won’t hear much in the way of complaints, because a shared sense of honor and duty overrides most self-interest.

Yet there is no escaping the fact that the Army is nearing a breaking point.

In the fifth year of war in Iraq, when deployments should be winding down, combat tours instead are being extended.

Time between deployments, meanwhile, is unchanged. So today, soldiers can look forward to 15 months in the war zone for every 12 months at home.

Fifteen-month deployments mean some soldiers can expect to miss two Christmases, two anniversaries, and two of the same child’s birthdays in one war tour. It means more mental health problems for soldiers, more stress on families and less support for the mission at home.

This is bad policy.

Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., plans to introduce legislation to mandate that deployed troops get a month at home for every month deployed. So if a deployment does have to last 15 months, soldiers wouldn’t have to go back for another 15 months.

US Mega Embassy in Baghdad Uninhabitable

Once again, I am compelled to make the repeat the wisest thing that I’ve read this century:

But it does inspire in me the desire for a competition; can anyone, particularly the rather more Bush-friendly recent arrivals to the board, give me one single example of something with the following three characteristics:

1. It is a policy initiative of the current Bush administration
2. It was significant enough in scale that I’d have heard of it (at a pinch, that I should have heard of it)
3. It wasn’t in some important way completely f#$@ed up during the execution.

Seriously. I’ve yet to see anything wiser yet, and I’m using the loose definition of the 21st century which includes the year 2000.

Construction Woes Add to Fears at Embassy in Iraq
By Glenn Kessler
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, July 5, 2007; A01

U.S. diplomats in Iraq, increasingly fearful over their personal safety after recent mortar attacks inside the Green Zone, are pointing to new delays and mistakes in the U.S. Embassy construction project in Baghdad as signs that their vulnerability could grow in the months ahead.

A toughly worded cable sent from the embassy to State Department headquarters on May 29 highlights a cascade of building and safety blunders in a new facility to house the security guards protecting the embassy. The guards’ base, which remains unopened today, is just a small part of a $592 million project to build the largest U.S. embassy in the world.

The main builder of the sprawling, 21-building embassy is First Kuwaiti General Trade and Contracting Co., a Middle Eastern firm that is already under Justice Department scrutiny over alleged labor abuses. First Kuwaiti also erected the guard base, prompting some State Department officials in Washington and Baghdad to worry that the problems exposed in the camp suggest trouble lurking ahead for the rest of the embassy complex.

The first signs of trouble, according to the cable, emerged when the kitchen staff tried to cook the inaugural meal in the new guard base on May 15. Some appliances did not work. Workers began to get electric shocks. Then a burning smell enveloped the kitchen as the wiring began to melt.

All the food from the old guard camp — a collection of tents — had been carted to the new facility, in the expectation that the 1,200 guards would begin moving in the next day. But according to the cable, the electrical meltdown was just the first problem in a series of construction mistakes that soon left the base uninhabitable, including wiring problems, fuel leaks and noxious fumes in the sleeping trailers.

“Poor quality construction . . . life safety issues . . . left [the embassy] with no recourse but to shut the camp down, in spite of the blistering heat in Baghdad,” the May 29 cable informed Washington.

Such challenges with construction contracts inside the fortified enclave known as the Green Zone reflect the broader problems that have thwarted reconstruction efforts throughout war-torn Iraq.

The “fairly serious problems” noted in the cable indicate that First Kuwaiti’s work fails to meet basic safety standards, said an administration official who was not authorized to speak to the news media. But the State Department’s Overseas Buildings Operations (OBO), which oversees construction of the new embassy, has kept a “close hold” on the project, making it difficult for anyone else in the government to gauge progress. “We are suspecting we will find the same issues in the new embassy,” resulting in months of delays, the official said.

The embassy cable prompted a stinging response from James L. Golden, OBO’s managing director for the embassy project. In a cable dated June 8, he berated personnel in Baghdad for sending their message over an open embassy system, rather than keeping the complaints in-house. He defended First Kuwaiti and accused the embassy and KBR — a Texas-based company that runs many facilities in Iraq and discovered the wiring problems — of making false claims to deflect attention from their own errors.

…..

Hmmm….is James L. Golden a political appointee? I quick google can’t confirm one way or the other.

Taliban Learns from Iraq Insurgents

You this whole “fight them there so we don’t have to fight them here”, bulls$%@ is going swimmingly.

We have created a petri dish for terrorists, and proving and training grounds for tactics ant technology to be used against us.

If this is safer, I’m going to have start taking up French Kissing Cobras as a hobby.

Taliban adopt deadly Iraqi tactics
6 Canadian soldiers and interpreter die as insurgents use powerful bomb against Canada’s strongest troop carrier

GRAEME SMITH

July 5, 2007

KANDAHAR, AFGHANISTAN — Six Canadian soldiers and their interpreter died yesterday as the Taliban continued to launch bold attacks inside zones considered mostly pacified, shifting their tactics toward the kind of bombings that have proved devastating in Iraq.

About a dozen military vehicles, Canadian and Afghan, were driving west along a gravel road after finishing a search of a village about 20 kilometres southwest of Kandahar city, when a powerful bomb detonated at 11 a.m. local time.

The explosion engulfed an RG-31 Nyala troop carrier, a vehicle manufactured in South Africa and specifically designed with a boat-like hull to withstand mine blasts. It’s the Canadians’ strongest vehicle against roadside bombs, but the insurgents have recently been wiring up bigger caches of ordnance and more sophisticated-shaped charges into their so-called improvised explosive devices, breaking through even the best armour.

“We’re not perfect and we do miss some, as we have seen today,” said Brigadier-General Tim Grant, the top Canadian commander in Afghanistan. “But the battle against the Taliban and the battle against their choice of weapons, IED, is successful.”

Meanwhile The Surge Continues

Yes, our presence is helping the Iraqi people, in the same way that John Wilkes Booth helped people enjoy their time in the theater.

New Level of Horror in Iraq: 20 Beheaded, Bound Corpses Discovered in Baghdad
20 Beheaded Bodies Found on Banks of the Tigris River Southeast of Baghdad, Iraqi Police Say
By SINAN SALAHEDDIN
The Associated Press

BAGHDAD

Twenty beheaded bodies were discovered Thursday on the banks of the Tigris River southeast of Baghdad, while a parked car bomb killed another 20 people in one of the capital’s busy outdoor bus stations, police said.

The beheaded remains were found in the Sunni Muslim village of Um al-Abeed, near the city of Salman Pak, which lies 14 miles southeast of Baghdad.

The bodies all men aged 20 to 40 years old had their hands and legs bound, and some of the heads were found next to the bodies, two officers said on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to release the information.

Meanwhile, a parked car bomb ripped through a crowded transport hub in southwest Baghdad’s Baiyaa neighborhood at morning rush hour, killing at least 20 people and wounding more than 50, another officer said on the same condition.

Many of the victims had been lining up for buses, awaiting a ride to work. Some 40 minibuses were incinerated in the explosion, police said.

Associated Press Television News video showed an open square strewn with smoldering car parts and charred bodies with clothes in tatters. Bystanders, some weeping, gingerly loaded human remains into ambulances.

A pickup truck rumbled slowly away from the scene, with two pairs of legs the dead bodies of victims dangling out of the back.

One of the police officers who gave information about the ghastly discovery of bodies southeast of Baghdad is based at Interior Ministry headquarters in the capital, and the other is based in Kut, 100 miles southeast of Baghdad.

Iraqi Ally Takes Money and Runs

Courtesy of Abu Aardvark.

Abu Aardvark: Anbar Salvation Council head skips town?

This story from al-Malaf is currently the talk of the forums: Sitar Abu Risha, head of the Anbar Salvation Council, has allegedly fled Iraq with $75 million that the Americans had given him to fight al-Qaeda.

The article is in Arabic, which I cannot read, but it matches my cynicism.

We can’t even f&^%ing bribe people competently.

What a mess.

Dick. Lugar Trows Bush and Petraeus Under Bus

The Republithugs are starting to peel off.

Richard G. Lugar, United States Senator for Indiana – Press Releases

Connecting our Iraq Strategy to our Vital Interests

Monday, June 25, 2007

Mr. President, I rise today to offer observations on the continuing involvement of the United States in Iraq. In my judgment, our course in Iraq has lost contact with our vital national security interests in the Middle East and beyond. Our continuing absorption with military activities in Iraq is limiting our diplomatic assertiveness there and elsewhere in the world. The prospects that the current “surge” strategy will succeed in the way originally envisioned by the President are very limited within the short period framed by our own domestic political debate. And the strident, polarized nature of that debate increases the risk that our involvement in Iraq will end in a poorly planned withdrawal that undercuts our vital interests in the Middle East. Unless we recalibrate our strategy in Iraq to fit our domestic political conditions and the broader needs of U.S. national security, we risk foreign policy failures that could greatly diminish our influence in the region and the world.

The current debate on Iraq in Washington has not been conducive to a thoughtful revision of our Iraq policy. Our debate is being driven by partisan political calculations and understandable fatigue with bad news — including deaths and injuries to Americans. We have been debating and voting on whether to fund American troops in Iraq and whether to place conditions on such funding. We have contemplated in great detail whether Iraqi success in achieving certain benchmarks should determine whether funding is approved or whether a withdrawal should commence. I would observe that none of this debate addresses our vital interests any more than they are addressed by an unquestioned devotion to an ill-defined strategy of “staying the course” in Iraq.

Emphasis mine

OOps…Me Bad. Opposing the president apparrently does not mean voting against him.

Wanker.

Lugar won’t switch vote
However, Fisher said the speech does not mean Lugar would switch his vote on the war or embrace Democratic measures setting a deadline for troop withdrawals.

In January, Lugar voted against a resolution opposing the troop buildup, contending that the nonbinding measure would have no practical effect. In spring, he voted against a Democratic bill that would have triggered troop withdrawals by Oct. 1 with the goal of completing the pull out in six months.

Next month, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., plans to force votes on several anti-war proposals as amendments to a 2008 defense policy bill. Members will decide whether to cut off money for combat, demand troop withdrawals start in four months, restrict the length of combat tours and rescind Congress’ 2002 authorization of Iraqi invasion.

Expected to fall short of the 60 votes needed in the Senate to pass controversial legislation, the proposals are intended to increase pressure on Bush and play up to voters frustrated with the war.

What the Other Matthew Said

I couldn’t agree more.

I can’t speak for Mr. Yglesias, but in my case, it’s always Matthew, not Matt. Matt is my step-brother.

Matthew Yglesias:

This is a somewhat delicate issue to raise, but the war in Iraq seems to have spawned a wholly abusive use of the term ‘terrorist.’ The battle came about because ‘Coalition aircraft were called in to strafe fighters who attacked Coalition troops in Amarah and Majjar al-Kabir, two Shiite cities in the Mayson province bordering Iran, the military said.’ Surely, though, people who use force against soldiers are paradigmatic examples of people who aren’t terrorists — with terrorism being defined by the use of force against civilians.

US Arming Sunni Insurgents In Iraq

What is going on here is desparation as the situation collapses faster than the World Trade Centers did on September 11, 2001.

Gen. Petraeus concerned about US arming insurgents

06/17/2007 @ 11:34 am
Filed by David Edwards and Josh Catone

On Fox News Sunday General David H. Petraeus expressed concern about the new US plan to arm Iraqi Sunnis who promise only to fight al Qaeda.

“How do you know, or do you worry, that they are going to end up using those weapons to either attack US forces or to fight their civil war against the Shiites?” asked host Chris Wallace.

“Those are legitimate concerns,” replied Petraeus, but said that the US was taking precautions to prevent that from happening.

The Iraqi government has strongly objected to to the US strategy of arming Sunni insurgents. In a Newsweek interview published Saturday, Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki blasted that strategy, saying that it “will create new militias.”

….

BTW, the reason that al-Maliki objects is because it’s HIS militias, particularly those in Iraqi security forces uniforms, and not al Sadr’s that are engaging in most of the ethnic cleansing, and he is afraid that this will become more difficult because of arming the Sunnis.

Brown Disses Tony Blair Over “Dodgy Dossier”

Brown has pretty much said that Blair used maipulated intel on this.

When the Tories win, there will be an investigation, and I wouldn’t be surprised if Tony Blair goes to gaol over this, as well he should.

Brown promises to avoid the mistakes that led to war in Iraq

By Andrew Grice and Ben Russell
Published: 12 June 2007

Gordon Brown has promised to prevent the “party political” use of intelligence material so that he would never repeat Tony Blair’s mistake in taking Britain to war on a flawed prospectus.

On his first visit to Baghdad, the incoming prime minister said he would learn lessons from the run-up to the 2003 Iraq invasion, when Mr Blair based his case for war on intelligence reports about Saddam Hussein’s supposed weapons of mass destruction.

Mr Brown said he had already begun discussions with Sir Gus O’Donnell, the Cabinet Secretary, to ensure security and intelligence material was collected “free of the party political process” and was ” fully verified” if it was to be made public. “That is learning the lessons from things that happened in the past, and we should make sure that we can do things better in the future,” he said.

His remarks were seen as a barely coded criticism of Mr Blair and an attempt to draw a line under a controversy which left a stain on the Government. Mr Blair’s official spokesman said measures to reform the use of intelligence recommended by the 2004 Butler inquiry were already being taken forward.

The Chancellor, who heard nine mortar shells land near by during his Baghdad visit, refused to be drawn on a possible cut in the number of British troops in Iraq. He said he was there to “listen and learn” and that such decisions were for another day.

In interviews, he declined to repeat Mr Blair’s pledge to the Iraqis that Britain would not “cut and run” but said Britain had obligations to the Iraqi people and the United Nations. He said the number of British forces would continue to decline as Iraqis took over more responsibility for security.

Mr Blair and Mr Brown rejected growing demands for an immediate inquiry into the mistakes made before and since the invasion, but Mr Brown left open the option of calling one after more British troops have left Iraq.

Last night a Tory attempt to force the Government to hold an inquiry into the conflict was rejected by 288 votes to 253 in the Commons. Ten Labour MPs backed the calls for an inquiry.

Earlier, the Government amendment saying that a further inquiry would ” divert attention” from the campaign in Iraq was passed by 274 votes to 229, a majority of 45.

During the debate, Margaret Beckett, the Foreign Secretary, had dismissed the idea as self-indulgent and poured scorn on Conservative calls for the Government to accept the principle of an inquiry, insisting that there had been four inquiries into the war.

She said: “To carry this motion would be both an unnecessary and a damaging diversion of effort, focus and attention. All our time and energy is badly needed now to address the challenges of the present. It is our responsibility to the people of Iraq which should receive our focus and attention in the critical times ahead.”

William Hague, the shadow Foreign Secretary, urged ministers to bow to the ” gathering consensus” and called for an inquiry by privy councillors. He said: “It’s not true that our troops would be demoralised or our enemies would take heart if we took the trouble to find out what’s gone wrong. In a democratic society the examination of successes and failures is a sign of strength not of weakness.” Michael Moore, the Liberal Democrat foreign affairs spokesman, told MPs: “The Government is still trying to avoid an inquiry while hinting that there will be one, simply ducking the question of when.”

The Surge is Working—NOT

We’ve already lost. Let’s get out before we lose any more troops.

Bombings target 3 key bridges in Iraq – Yahoo! News
By KIM GAMEL, Associated Press Writer 2 hours, 41 minutes ago

BAGHDAD – Suspected Sunni insurgents bombed and badly damaged a span over the main north-south highway leading from Baghdad on Tuesday — the third bridge attack in as many days in an apparent campaign against key transportation arteries.

The attack occurred 35 miles south of Baghdad and just six miles south of a bridge brought down on Sunday by what was believed to be a suicide truck bomber. Three U.S. soldiers guarding that bridge were killed in Sunday’s blast.

The explosion at 7:30 a.m. Tuesday — not thought to be a suicide bomb — struck a bridge linking the villages of al-Qariya al-Asriyah and al-Rashayed in northern Babil province.


We’re F&^%ing Up Afghanistan

This is why Iraq is so dangerous. There are places in the world that need those resources.

U.S. Troops Kill 7 Afghan Police

U.S. Troops Kill 7 Afghan Police
Tuesday, Jun. 12, 2007 By AP
Article Tools
Print
Email

(KABUL, Afghanistan) — Afghan police mistakenly thought U.S. troops on a nighttime mission were Taliban fighters and opened fire on them, prompting U.S. forces to return fire and call in attack aircraft, killing seven Afghan police, officials said Tuesday.

U.S.-led coalition and Afghan troops, meanwhile, killed more than 24 suspected Taliban fighters during an eight-hour battle in southern Afghanistan on Monday, the coalition said.

President Hamid Karzai’s spokesman labeled the shooting at a remote police checkpoint in the eastern province of Nangarhar ‘a tragic incident’ caused by a lack of communication.

‘The police forces were not aware of the coalition’s operation,’ said spokesman Karim Rahimi. ‘The police checkpoint in the area thought that they were the enemy, so police opened fire on the coalition, and then the coalition thought that the enemies were firing on them, so they returned fire back.’

The commander at the post, Esanullah, who goes by one name, said U.S. gunfire and helicopter rockets killed seven policemen and wounded four.