Category: War

US Marines Want to Leave Iraq

No Comments

The US Marines are suggesting that they be redeployed from Iraq to Afghanistan.

With about 25,000 Marines in Iraq, and about 26,000 soldiers in Afghanistan, this would seem a relatively straightforward swap, though the obvious question is, “why?”

I think that it is because the Marines as a group recognize that Iraq as a lie, and while they are willing to fight, they find that fighting for a lie is disheartening.

There is some push back on this, particularly from the USAF, because the Marines bring their own air capability, one that would probably seriously outperform the USAF, since a Marine air wing is more focused on the ground, with every pilot being a trained rifleman, which would mean less civilian casualties, and better coordination with ground troops.

90 Congressmen Have Signed Letter to Defund Iraq War

No Comments

In July, it was 70 Congressmen, and now it’s “nearly 90”, and the letter is still being circulated.

The interesting thing is that with about 25 more signatures, over ½ of the Democratic members of congress will have signed this. What does the leadership do then, because it can only pass with Republican votes, and more Dems opposing than supporting.

What do the craven elements of the house leadership *cough* Steny Hoyer and Rahm Emmanuel *cough* do then?

This is a good sign.

Text of letter below:

The Honorable George W. Bush
President
United States of America
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Ave. N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20500

Dear Mr. President:

Seventy House Members wrote in July to inform you that they will only support appropriating additional funds for U.S. military operations in Iraq during Fiscal Year 2008 and beyond for the protection and safe redeployment of our troops out of Iraq before you leave office.

Now you are requesting an additional $45 billion to sustain your escalation of U.S. military operations in Iraq through next April, on top of the $145 billion you requested for military operations during FY08 in Iraq and Afghanistan. Accordingly, even more of us are writing anew to underscore our opposition to appropriating any additional funds for U.S. military operations in Iraq other than a time-bound, safe redeployment as stipulated above.

More than 3,742 of our brave soldiers have died in Iraq. More than 27,000 have been seriously wounded. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have been killed or injured in the hostilities and more than 4 million have been displaced from their homes. Furthermore, this conflict has degenerated into a sectarian civil war and U.S. taxpayers have paid more than $500 billion, despite assurances that you and your key advisors gave our nation at the time you ordered the invasion in March, 2003 that this military intervention would cost far less and be paid from Iraqi oil revenues.

We agree with a clear and growing majority of the American people who are opposed to continued, open-ended U.S. military operations in Iraq, and believe it is unwise and unacceptable for you to continue to unilaterally impose these staggering costs and the soaring debt on Americans currently and for generations to come.

Sincerely,

What Happened in Syria?

No Comments

The New York Times is reporting that Dick Cheney, and his merry band of lunatics is maintaining that the DPRK was shipping nuclear technology to Syria, and Condi Rice and the State Department are maintaining there there is no conclusive evidence on which to act.

It’s clear that Israel felt that there was some sort of threat, but they are not talking. That being said, if there is a faceoff between those who are completely batsh$# insane and always wrong and those who are sometimes insane, and usually wrong, I’ll go with the latter.

Syria has no background in nuclear weapons technology, but I could see them getting improved chem/bio warheads from the DPRK, as they do have active programs there, at least on the chem side.

The Problem With Hillary

No Comments

For once, Maureen Dowd gets it right. Her thesis is that Hillary Clinton is too focused about her being a woman, and so she will vote for anything bellicose to show that she has the balls to be presieent.

…….

When Hillary voted to let W. use force in Iraq, she didn’t even read the intelligence estimate. She wasn’t trying to do the right thing. She was trying to do the opportunistic thing. She felt she could not run for president, as a woman, if she played the peacenik.

By throwing in with Joe Lieberman and the conservative hawks on the Iranian Revolutionary Guard issue, she once more overcompensated in a cynical way. She’d like to paint Obama as the weak reed who wants to cozy up to dictators, while she’s the one who will play tough. It was odd, given her success in the debates conveying the sense that she is the manliest candidate among the Democrats, that she felt the need to man-up on Iran.

But maybe she knows that Rudy will hurl thunderbolts at her, as he did in the debate yesterday, suggesting that she doesn’t have the guts to use a military option to stop Iran from going nuclear.

Voters seem more concerned with Hillary’s political expediency — which the vote underscored — than with her ability to be manly.

Her camp seems to think her vote was a safe one because W. and Cheney do not have the time or support to bomb Iran, and that Bob Gates can stop it. But she may be underestimating W. and Cheney. She should be at least as paranoid about that pair as she was about an Iowa Democrat.

She nailed it.

Once Again, The Regular Army Screws the National Guard

No Comments

Over 1100 members of the Minnesota National Guard were deployed to Iraq for 22 months.

Their orders had them deployed for 229 days, more than any other unit. However, if they had been deployed for 730 days, they would have gotten more than three times the educational benefits under the new GI Bill.

This is about two tings, the Bush Admin and the Pentagon wanting to run the war on the cheap, and the general disdain that the regular army has for the guard and reserves.

It’s penny wise and pound foolish. Their retention rate on these soldiers will be a lot less than it would have been.

What Dan Said

No Comments

In this case, Dan Fleshler, when he says that the Jewish Neocons are dead wrong, not disloyal.

I would add terminally stupid, and that they have actually done significant damage to Israel’s negotiating position and security because of their idiocy in Iraq.

I could see at the start of the invasion that this would end badly for Israel, with pressures coming for a quick settlement in the hope that a vain hope that it will calm things down in Iraq.

These folks honestly believed that they would create something like Norway by invading. It just goes to show you that, as the Japanese say, “baka ni tsukeru kusuri wanai”*.

*There is no medicine for stupidity.

Petraeus a Liar

No Comments

The Public Editor of the New York Times*, Clark Hoyt, just called General David H. Petraeus a liar. He was circumspect, but here is the money quote:

Stephen Biddle, a scholar at the nonpartisan Council on Foreign Relations, said Petraeus’s December number was “very high” but was likely the result of “statistical noise” — the tendency of Iraq numbers to jump all over the place. Biddle was an adviser to Petraeus last spring but believes the general’s testimony was “potentially misleading” because it didn’t discuss all the reasons why the numbers might have improved.

He said the best way to analyze statistics from Iraq is to gather all the numbers from all sources and look for broad trends instead of picking isolated points, as Petraeus did. Biddle examined data from nine sources on Iraqi civilian deaths, including the U.S. military, independent organizations like Brookings and Iraq Body Count and four news organizations. Although the specific monthly numbers varied widely, he said they all showed declines since late 2006.

Let’s be clear. The general is not a politician, or a pundit, and his testimony is given under the authority of his rank, and he purposely misled congress. The man is a liar, and a suck-up, at least that is what his boss thinks.

Petraeus used numbers that his numbers guy said were unreliable, because he’s a lying sack of excrement REMF.

*In less pretentious papers, they are called an Ombudsman.

What Ezra Said

No Comments

Ezra Klein answers the question of why liberal war hawks are lumped with the Neocons.

The answer is, simply enough, that they are indistinguishable from Neocons so long as they continue to enable Bush’s war.

I do not care what the internal machinations are of wankers like Richard Cohen’s mind. I care about the actions of wankers like Richard Cohen, and they are providing as least much aid and comfort to the supporters of Bush’s war as people like William Kristal.

Cohen may not, personally, think like Bill Kristol. But he certainly writes like him. “Neocon, for many, has become shorthand for neocon-Zionist conspiracy,” he says, naming no names, and instead offering a simple, generalized accusation of anti-semitism against all those who question the neoconservatives. “Baghdad is closer to Sarajevo than the left has allowed,” he writes, obliterating the difference between a bombing campaign undertaken to end an ongoing genocide and a ground invasion undertaken to unearth weapons that didn’t exist, overturn a regime we couldn’t replace, and forcibly impose a system of governance that lacked foundations. “MoveOn.org is the Petraeus-insulting face of never-set-foot-in-a-war-zone liberalism,” he scoffs, having never, himself, fought in a war, but nevertheless adopting the authority of those who have.

These are not arguments. They are smears. They are attacks aimed at degrading the credibility, rather than the beliefs, of the coalition that opposes the Iraq War. And in intent and effect, they are indistinguishable from Bill Kristol’s worst columns, save for the possibility that they are more effective, because they ostensibly come from within the Left, rather than outside of it.

More Confirmation of Preparation for Nuclear Strike on Iran

No Comments

This is a followup to my earlier post on this matter.

B-52 Nukes Headed for Iran: Air Force refused to fly weapons to Middle East theater
By Wayne Madsen
Sept. 24, 2007
Author’s website

WMR has learned from U.S. and foreign intelligence sources that the B-52 transporting six stealth AGM-129 Advanced Cruise Missiles, each armed with a W-80-1 nuclear warhead, on August 30, were destined for the Middle East via Barksdale Air Force Base in Louisiana.

However, elements of the Air Force, supported by U.S. intelligence agency personnel, successfully revealed the ultimate destination of the nuclear weapons and the mission was aborted due to internal opposition within the Air Force and U.S. Intelligence Community.

…

A quick google of Wayne Madsen seems to indicate that he’s a bit out there, so if anyone can provide me information as to his reliability, it would be appreciated.

“I hate all Iranians”, Says the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Coalition Affairs to Defense Secretary Robert Gates

No Comments

This is scary.

I hate all Iranians, US aide tells MPs
By SIMON WALTERS

Britsh MPs visiting the Pentagon to discuss America’s stance on Iran and Iraq were shocked to be told by one of President Bush’s senior women officials: “I hate all Iranians.”

And she also accused Britain of “dismantling” the Anglo-US-led coalition in Iraq by pulling troops out of Basra too soon.

The all-party group of MPs say Debra Cagan, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Coalition Affairs to Defence Secretary Robert Gates, made the comments this month.

…..

The MPs say that at one point she said: “In any case, I hate all Iranians.”

Although it was an aside, it was not out of keeping with her general demeanour.

“She seemed more keen on saying she didn’t like Iranians than that the US had no plans to attack Iran,” said one MP. “She did say there were no plans for an attack but the tone did not fit the words.”

Another MP said: “I formed the impression that some in America are looking for an excuse to attack Iran. It was very alarming.”

…

The Pentagon denied Ms Cagan said she “hated” Iranians.

“She doesn’t speak that way,” said an official.

But when The Mail on Sunday spoke to four of the six MPs, three confirmed privately that she made the remark and one declined to comment. The other two could not be contacted.

She’s scary too:

Yikes!!!!

And no, this is not a photoshop job.

This is Where Our Sabre Rattling With Regard to Iran Leads Us

No Comments

Iran’s parliament votes to label CIA, U.S. Army ‘terrorist’ groups.

Considering the fact that the US Senate has done the same with units of the Iranian military, this is unsurprising.

Of course, this means that Iran does not feel bound by the requirements of POW status, and they could set up their own little Gitmo for our troops, which is, of course, the implicit threat here.

The worst kept secret in the Middle East is that US special forces, and possibly CIA operatives are operating in Iran, and by our actions, we have given the Iranians license to abuse them.

Sy Hersh Details Bush/Cheney’s Plans for Attack on Iraq

No Comments

It appears that the Bush administration is changing their justification for an attack on Iran. No one is believing their nuclear weapons claims (gee, I wonder why?), so now they are claiming that Iran is actively arming and supporting unsavory and violent elements in Iraq (like the Malaki government, I guess).

The explosively formed projectile claims are bogus. The IRA was making these in Irish basements 30 years ago, and they have found workshops where they are being made.

Explosives are from the unsecured ammunition dumps in Iraq.

And then, there is the issue that any US attack will secure the position of the Iranian government for the next 20 years, as Saddam’s attack did 25 years ago.

I don’t see Congress doing anything to stop him, and absent that, the only possibility of stopping this is a mutiny of the general officer corps, which is potentially far worse than an attack on Iran.

As I have stated before, I believe that the US intends to use nuclear weapons in this attack, and the long term consequences of this are catastrophic (the short term consequences are $200/bbl oil).

State Department Obstructs Congressional Investigation

No Comments

The State Department has instructed Blackwater not to cooperate with congressional investigators.

Absent a claim (which would be bogus) of executive privilege, this is a felony.

The State Department official, Kiazan Moneypenny, wrote Blackwater VP Fred Roitz to “advise” him of Blackwater’s obligations under the terms of State’s contract. Among them: “all documents and records (including photographs) generated during the performance of work under this contract shall be for the sole use of and become the exclusive property of the U.S. government.” These obligations, according to the contract, exist in perpetuity — not just until the contract expires. As a result, Moneypenny told Roitz to make “no disclosure of documents or information generated under [the contract] unless such disclosure has been authorized in writing by the Contract Officer.”

Miss Moneypenny (gotta love that name) mentions that she has communicated this previously.

Sounds like the notoriously closed-mouthed mercenaries are too talkative for the State Department.