Iraq - Today..*and tomorrow?*

[Nascar_James]

Ocean, they terrorize the lives of ordinary civilians

and your planes and bombs don't???? How would you like to live in Iraq with all this heavy metal in the sky and with it erupting now and then when one least expects it??? That is living in terror.......(IMHO) This has been going on for years now....with no end in site. How about the Iraqi mental health ??

and let's not confuse terrorism with war........yet again.

The planes and bombs are part of the landscape during war, Ocean. They are there to fight the enemy not the Iraqis, so no, we don't "deliberately" terrorize innocent civilians ... terrorists do.

 

[Ocean Breeze]

Ocean, they terrorize the lives of ordinary civilians

and your planes and bombs don't???? How would you like to live in Iraq with all this heavy metal in the sky and with it erupting now and then when one least expects it??? That is living in terror.......(IMHO) This has been going on for years now....with no end in site. How about the Iraqi mental health ??

and let's not confuse terrorism with war........yet again.

The planes and bombs are part of the landscape during war, Ocean. They are there to fight the enemy not the Iraqis, so no, we don't "deliberately" terrorize innocent civilians ... terrorists do.

well, you deliberately beat the drums for war.....( terrorizing Iraq in anticipation of the bombs and killing. You deliberately made up a series of lies in order to diliberately invade a nation that posed NOT DANG THREAT to you. How on earth can ya be so gullible ??? Bush has been lying since he took office ,......but his big lies have KILLED & TERRORIZED THOUSANDS.

 

[Ocean Breeze]

October 29, 2005

This is an interview conducted Friday with Khulood, a woman who had been displaced from her home. She, her husband and young child are currently living in Baghdad at the Women’s Will Building. She provided a great deal of insight into the situation facing internally displaced people in Iraq as well as her thoughts about the conditions in Baghdad and the situation with the Resistance.

Omar: Why did you leave your house?

K: We left our home because of the threat and killing and people used to call our area the Death Triangle, Mahmudiya, Thuluayah, and Yusifiyah.

Omar: Did the government provide food supplies, material aid or at least security?

K: No, there wasn’t any kind of support from the government, even the police checkpoints, they were not distributed correctly and it is an open area. Anyone can come and kill and no one will look after him.

Omar: Was the Resistance helping that area, by providing material aid or security?

K: Yes, we were having such things, but after the American forces and the Multinational Forces entered the area, everything was mixed. We can’t identify who are the terrorists and who’s the Resistance.

Omar: How is the life in Baghdad now?

K: Well the situation in Baghdad is chaos. All the people are afraid from the blasts. Even if a person gets back to his home, he will still be scared because he’ll feel that the next blast will be in front of his house.

Omar: How is the life in Baghdad for you as an individual?

K: Life has become so difficult, the prices are too high and there are no jobs. We are facing so many difficulties. From the financial side life became so difficult for us, because there is no work, no jobs, even if we found jobs, we can’t get there safely, because most of the roads are dangerous and we can’t go peacefully to workplaces and come back safe.

Omar: How do you describe the life in Baghdad before the Occupation?

K: I consider it Heaven on Earth.

Omar: How did you expect the War would be?

K: Well I expected that this war would be for Iraq’s good.

Omar: Did you think that this would be like the first Gulf War, without Occupation?

K: No, no, no. I didn’t expect that one day I would wake up from my bed and see the Americans filling the streets.

Omar: How was the Iraq situation after the first Gulf War?

K: Well the situation was much better, at least we used to have security, the prices were kind of low, and everything was available. Education was available, but now we can’t let our children or our brothers to go to the school or the college, because of the blasts and the dangers hidden in the street, or the kidnapping. Or anything else similar.

Omar: So do you think that the education fell down because of the blasts, because of the security, because of the financial condition for each individual?

K: Yes because of the Occupation, the Occupation made a lot of effects on the education and the financial state of all the people.

Omar: What is your message for the American People?

K: I would send a call, a rescue call. To the American people and especially to the mothers to not let their sons to come to Iraq. Because we are completely destroyed, and we are wounded. We want to feel rest, and we are requesting to all the American forces to pull out from Iraq, and also all the occupying forces, in order to live in peace, to get security. To let our children have a better future.

Omar: Is there anything else you would like to say?

K: We want to have a rest because we are so tired and so sick.

Omar: Can you be more specific about how the life was in Mahmudiyah before the war?

K: Life was so natural in Latifiyah, we used to have a lot of relationships with the people around us, because you know the tribes they are the people who rule that area. There was no fear, no terrorism, but we started to be afraid after the events take place. We started to be afraid of everything and we lost our trust in the things that we used to trust. We even started to be afraid from the usual people, that they would send a report about us, that we are terrorists, so they can detain us. So our life there became so bloody, at least there were ten people killed daily. Even when they were killed there was no one who came to carry the dead bodies. My own opinion is that the terrorism came along with the Occupation. In the past we didn’t have anything like racism or a civil war. We didn’t think about all those things at that time. The occupation is the one who brought the terrorism and also it is the one who brought the prejudice. So why are they talking about the terrorism, when they are the terrorists themselves?

Omar: According to what you’re saying there was no race war between people before the occupation, so can you describe how the Sunna and Shi’a lived before the war?

K: Well this is a very funny thing. I can describe it for you right now; I will give you a small example. I am Sunni and my husband is Shiite. We built a family and I didn’t think one day that I’m Sunni and he is Shiite. And also we used to have a Christian neighbor, we were very good friends. We didn’t have any problems with any other people who had a different religion or a different race. Everyone was living happily together with the different types of people; we were just living like one family, with nothing dividing us. And the only one who benefited from this change was the Occupation.

Omar: So the problems between Sunni and Shiite happened after the Occupation?

K: Yes.

Omar: Do you think that the new Iraqi Constitution will make any difference in life?

K: Well for me, I’ll give you my personal opinion that, I don’t believe in the Constitution and I didn’t vote for the Constitution either. I don’t believe in any constitution written under the Occupation, because this is illegal and you can add to that, there are some Governorates that didn’t agree on the constitution. And also they gave ten days to find the results for the vote and I think this is not enough, because it doesn’t make any difference if they gave 2 days or 100 days, the results is clear, they will agree on the Constitution. And that’s why it won’t make any change in the Iraqi’s life.

Omar: So do you think there are people who didn’t vote because they didn’t read the Constitution? Like there are some Governorate who didn’t agree on the Constitution or because they didn’t think this Constitution is Iraqi 100%?

K: Yes. I agree with you. Because there are some people who didn’t read the Constitution, and at the same time, we believe that the Constitution was not written by Iraqi hands and I think that they needed more time to set up conferences and make long conversations about the Constitution, because a Constitution is not an easy thing. And even they started distributing the Constitution only a very short time before the voting process. And they started giving an explanation about the Constitution and giving books about the constitution only a very short time before the voting process.

Omar: So they didn’t give the Iraqi people enough time to read the constitution and to understand the constitution?

K: Yes. Yes. Even the one who put the Constitution, he might be an Iraqi, have Iraqi citizenship, but he didn’t live in Iraq. And he didn’t go through the bad conditions that Iraq has gone through because the Iraqis suffered a lot and he just go on the television then he talks about what he’s going to do and what he’s willing to do, and he doesn’t know anything about the Iraqi people. So the one who is supposed to create the Constitution, he’s supposed to someone who lived in Iraq, and gone through all the Iraqi’s suffering, not someone who came from outside Iraq.

Omar: Did you feel any kind of change after they agreed on the constitution?

K: You mean like anything serving the community? Absolutely not. And for example you have me, I’m a woman with my husband, and I have a very young child and we are still living here, nothing has changed, and the war is still happening in my area. And we are suffering a lot right now, and I’m wondering why the constitution didn’t serve me with anything.

Omar: So it didn’t change anything in your life, like material or security or anything?

K: Absolutely not. It didn’t change anything. It did not terminate the unemployment. And for example, I graduated from the teachers’ institution and I don’t have a job. I’ve been sitting for a year without a job and I’m still like this right now. So, where is my right as an individual in this Constitution? So you know that the Iraq community is having a lot of problems in their family because the father of any family needs to have a job to feed his kids and help them live. And even there are a lot of children who left the school, to find work, to live. So that’s why the suffering continues.

Omar: How is your experience with Women’s Will?

K: Well, after god, they are the ones who saved me. When my family and I left, we didn’t know where we were going or where we were headed to, and my child was only nine days old. And I had a caesarean section. And after I went to Baghdad as a refugee and my husband was jobless, and if we wanted to rent a house we needed a lot of money, and we don’t have that money. So we found the Women’s Will Body with the manager Hanna Ibrahim and Fatima Abood and Wejdan Kareem. They took us in and considered us a family and they provided us accommodation and were like a shelter for us. The Women’s Will Body has been like a second family to me; they helped us a lot through the things we have suffered in.

Omar: So you have heard about Zarqawi and what he has done, do you believe in his existence and what do you think about him?

K: Well from my own opinion I think that there is no Zarqawi or he is an invisible character. And even if he was real, its here to take revenge on the United States, but where? On Iraq’s land.

Omar: So do you think all the beheading operations and all the bombing operations are pointed toward the US Military or is there a part of it toward the Iraqi people?

K: No I think its pointed at the US military, because since I was born, I haven’t heard about such stories or anything like beheading or killing this much. Also I didn’t expect that one day the Iraq condition would be so bad as today, what we are living in. So I think all those operations are pointed at the US Military.

Omar: Do you think that the Zarqawi groups and Zarqawi himself were invented by someone to create instability in Iraq?

K: Well the United States of America, they are the ones behind all of that, because they are the only one who benefits from the unstable situation in Iraq.

Omar: Who do you think benefits from the Occupation?

K: Iraq is a rich country. Anyone who occupies this country will be rich. He will have a lot of benefits from occupying this country, financially because there is a lot of oil in this country. And speaking about oil, we used to have a lot of problems with the gas and the oil. When we came here my child was nine days old and we didn’t have anything to keep her warm, so we used to hold her with a lot of blankets to keep her warm. So we were holding her and we were crying, because we couldn’t provide her oil to keep her warm. There are a lot of things that aren’t available like gas and oil.

Omar: So, speaking about oil and gas, do you think there is an invisible hand stealing those resources?

K: Yes, because we are an oil country, why is the gas not available? They want to make the situation unstable, to use it as a benefit for them. Even if we take the long gas line we will be shocked by a car bomb attacking us, or maybe killed by an exchange of gunfire. Or the driver will stay for one day without work.

Omar: Why do you think all the problems about providing gas and oil are happening? As far as we know Iraq is one of the countries that has a lot of oil in their lands.

K: Iraq is a very, very rich country, but it doesn’t get any of its rights and the Occupation forces, they are the one who decided what happened in here, and what happened tomorrow. The Iraq population started thinking that tomorrow will be worse, it will be chaos.

Omar: What will make the Occupation forces leave Iraq?

K: If Iraqis support each other and the Iraqi people become one group, and keep away anyone trying to mess with this country. And to think about our children and about their future, and to unify and if we are spread we will be weak, and that for sure will make the Occupation forces get out of Iraq. And make the Arab countries try to help Iraq instead of taking a negative stance towards Iraq.

Omar: A negative stance like what?

K: Like sending terrorists to Iraq. The Occupation helps those people to get into Iraq easily because when they occupied Iraq they opened those borders to help people get into Iraq.

Omar: What about the Civil War? Who is responsible and who benefits?

K: The Occupation forces. We didn’t have any of those things ever. It didn’t exist before in Saddam’s time it came with the Occupation. So that’s why they’re saying when one of the Sunni is killed they say one of the Shiites killed him. In my opinion, the Occupying forces are responsible for all these things; the invisible hands belong to the Occupation forces.

Omar: What do you think would make the Resistance stop using guns and come to the negotiation table?

K: Well very simple. Getting the Occupation forces out. When the Occupation will end, the peace will take place. We don’t need a Resistance after that, we will stay in peace.

Omar: So when the Occupation will go and there is a bad government, do you think there will be another Resistance?

K: Well my own opinion is that I don’t think this government will serve us. But if they leave and there are democratic elections as they say, we will vote for a government that will really serve Iraq. If that government will serve the population, there won’t be Resistance anymore.

Omar: That’s in the case if the election is from the population?

K: Yes if it is real.

(gives a better idea of what the bushregime has done to Iraq. ......while continuing to offer "promises" for the future. WE all know how credible the US is about fullfilling its "promises....

 

[Ocean Breeze]

So Iraq Was About the Oil
By Robert Parry
November 8, 2005


When Colin Powell’s former chief of staff Lawrence Wilkerson publicly decried the Bush administration’s bungling of U.S. foreign policy, the focus of the press coverage was on Wilkerson’s depiction of a “cabal” headed by Vice President Dick Cheney that had hijacked the decision-making process.

Largely overlooked were Wilkerson’s frank admissions about the importance of oil in justifying a long-term U.S. military intervention in Iraq. “The other thing that no one ever likes to talk about is SUVs and oil and consumption,” the retired Army colonel said in a speech on Oct. 19.

While bemoaning the administration’s incompetence in implementing the war strategy, Wilkerson said the U.S. government now had no choice but to succeed in Iraq or face the necessity of conquering the Middle East within the next 10 years to ensure access to the region’s oil supplies.

“We had a discussion in (the State Department’s Office of) Policy Planning about actually mounting an operation to take the oilfields of the Middle East, internationalize them, put them under some sort of U.N. trusteeship and administer the revenues and the oil accordingly,” Wilkerson said. “That’s how serious we thought about it.”

The centrality of Iraq’s oil in Wilkerson’s blunt comments contrasted with three years of assurances from the Bush administration that the war had almost nothing to do with oil.

When critics have called the Iraq War a case of “blood for oil,” George W. Bush’s defenders have dismissed them as “conspiracy theorists.” The Bush defenders insisted the president went to war out of concern about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction and Saddam Hussein’s links to al-Qaeda, neither of which turned out to be true. Later, Bush cited humanitarian concerns and the desire to spread democracy.

Always left out of the administration’s war equation – or referenced only obliquely – was the fact that Iraq sits atop one of the world’s largest known oil reserves at a time when international competition is intensifying to secure reliable oil supplies.

O’Neill’s Revelations

But Wilkerson is not the first senior Bush administration official to cite the importance of oil in the U.S. calculus toward Iraq. Former Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill made similar assertions in 2004.

O’Neill, who was fired in late 2002 after disagreeing with Bush on tax cuts and Iraq, told author Ron Suskind that Bush’s first National Security Council meeting just days into his presidency included a discussion of invading Iraq. O’Neill said even at that early date, the message from Bush was “find a way to do this.”

Oil and Iraq were soon mixing in the administration’s thinking about energy and politics.

On Feb. 3, 2001 – only two weeks after Bush took office – an NSC document instructed NSC officials to cooperate with Cheney’s Energy Task Force because it was “melding” two previously unrelated areas of policy: “the review of operational policies towards rogue states” and “actions regarding the capture of new and existing oil and gas fields.”

Before this disclosure, which appeared in The New Yorker three years later, it was believed that Cheney’s secretive task force was focusing on ways to reduce environmental regulations and fend off the Kyoto protocol on global warming.

But the NSC document suggested that the Bush administration from its first days recognized the linkage between ousting unreliable leaders like Saddam Hussein and securing oil reserves for future U.S. consumption. In other words, the Cheney task force appears to have had a military component to “capture” oil fields in “rogue states.” [For more on the NSC document, see The New Yorker, Feb. 16, 2004.]

After al-Qaeda’s Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, Bush had the political opening he needed to turn his designs on Iraq into reality. Though there was no credible evidence connecting Hussein to al-Qaeda and Sept. 11, Bush and Cheney made the linkage anyway.

Active preparations for war with Iraq were soon underway. Behind the scenes, O’Neill said he watched as the administration refined its plans for how to divvy up Iraq’s oil reserves after the invasion.

“Documents were being prepared by the Defense Intelligence Agency, (Defense Secretary Donald) Rumsfeld’s intelligence arm, mapping Iraq’s oil fields and exploration areas and listing companies that might be interested in leveraging the precious asset,” Suskind wrote in The Price of Loyalty.

Beyond giving U.S. firms access to Iraq’s oil, the Bush administration recognized how the oil could help induce both allies and rivals to back broader U.S. policies.

“One document, headed ‘Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfield Contracts,’ lists companies from 30 countries – including France, Germany, Russia and the United Kingdom – their specialties, bidding histories, and in some cases their particular areas of interest,” Suskind wrote in recounting O’Neill’s observations.

“An attached document maps Iraq with markings for ‘supergiant oilfield,’ ‘other oilfield,’ and ‘earmarked for production sharing,’ while demarking the largely undeveloped southwest of the country into nine ‘blocks’ to designate areas for future exploration.

“The desire to ‘dissuade’ countries from engaging in ‘asymmetrical challenges’ to the United States … matched with plans for how the world’s second largest oil reserve might be divided among the world’s contractors made for an irresistible combination, O’Neill later said.”

In pronouncements to the American people, however, Bush and other administration officials denied that oil was a reason for the Iraq invasion. Instead they stressed the danger posed by Iraq’s supposed WMD, then the humanitarian interest in removing Hussein, then encouraging democracy to flourish in the region, and finally preventing the spread of Islamic extremism.

Air Force Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski, who was among the career military officers pulled into the war planning, said she and her fellow officers were troubled by how the American people were manipulated.

“Many of us in the Pentagon, conservatives and liberals alike, felt that this (Iraq) agenda, whatever its flaws or merits, had never been openly presented to the American people,” she wrote. “Instead, the public story line was a fear-peddling and confusing set of messages, designed to take Congress and the country into a war of executive choice, a war based on false pretenses.” [See Salon.com’s “The New Pentagon Papers.”]

Wilkerson’s Critique

By contrast, Wilkerson openly acknowledged the oil factor both in explaining the U.S. invasion and in justifying the need to remain in Iraq to ensure that any new government is not hostile to American interests.

Despite his earlier doubts about the wisdom of invading, the former chief of staff to Secretary of State Powell said the Middle East’s oil reserves makes withdrawal from Iraq more dangerous than leaving Vietnam three decades ago.

“We can’t leave Iraq; we simply can’t,” Wilkerson said in his Oct. 19 speech to the New America Foundation in Washington.

“I’m not evaluating the decision to go to war. That’s a different matter. But we’re there, we’ve done it, and we cannot leave. I would submit to you that if we leave precipitously or we leave in a way that doesn’t leave something there we can trust, if we do that, we will mobilize the nation, put five million men and women under arms and go back and take the Middle East within a decade. That’s what we’ll have to do.”

Wilkerson made clear that what made Iraq such a strategic concern was the oil.

“We consume 60 percent of the world’s resources,” he said. “We have an economy and we have a society that is built on the consumption of those resources. We better get fast at work changing the foundation – and I don’t see us fast at work on that, by the way, another failure of this administration, in my mind – or we better be ready to take those assets (in the Middle East).

“If you want those resources and you want (Middle Eastern) governments that aren’t inimical to your interests with regard to those resources, then you better pay attention to the area and you better not leave it in a mess.”

So, it appears those Iraq “blood-for-oil” accusations were right all along, at least in identifying one of the real reasons for invading Iraq. The present danger, however, is that U.S. policy-makers have no better solution to the quagmire in Iraq than continuing indefinitely to barter more blood for a continued supply of oil.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories in the 1980s for the Associated Press and Newsweek. His latest book, Secrecy & Privilege: Rise of the Bush Dynasty from Watergate to Iraq, can be ordered at secrecyandprivilege.com. It's also available at Amazon.com, as is his 1999 book, Lost History: Contras, Cocaine, the Press & 'Project Truth.'

war for resources (oil)......would be murder for theft.

 

[Reverend Blair]

war for resources (oil)......would be murder for theft.

Yes it would, Ocean. It would also remove any doubt that George Bush is a war criminal.

 

[Ocean Breeze]

Bomb attack on Baghdad restaurant

More than 25 people have been killed and at least 19 others wounded in a suicide bomb attack on a restaurant in Baghdad, Iraqi officials have said.
Witnesses said the explosion in the city centre could be heard from several miles away, soon after 0930 (0630 GMT).

The restaurant is said to be commonly frequented by police officers.

It comes a day after at least six people were killed and 25 others hurt in two car bomb blasts in a mainly Shia district in north-eastern Baghdad.

 

[Colpy]

This bit of garbage is just silly:

"A few years ago, it was discovered that Israel had perfected a biological weapon that could kill Arabs, yet was harmless to Jews. In addition, it could target Iraqi Arabs. All this sounds like science fiction, but because of the distinct differences yet closeness of Arab and Jewish DNA (Semites include about 95% Arabs and 5% Jews), it is now possible to create such a doomsday weapon. Israel has it. I guess "never again" does not apply to Arabs."

And I don't read this stuff. It just caught my eye as I was scrolling down. Were does this come from?

 

[Ocean Breeze]

Ukraine to withdraw soldiers from Iraq before December 30
KYIV. Nov 10 (Interfax) - Ukraine will end the withdrawal of its soldiers from Iraq by December 30, 2005, Ukrainian Defense Minister Anatoliy Gritsenko said.

"According to the plan, our soldiers will celebrate the New Year with their families," he said on Thursday at a press conference in Kyiv.

Gritsenko said that the period from December 20 to December 30 will see three stages of the major part of the contingent withdrawal.

 

[yballa09]

A few years ago, it was discovered that Israel had perfected a biological weapon that could kill Arabs, yet was harmless to Jews. In addition, it could target Iraqi Arabs. All this sounds like science fiction, but because of the distinct differences yet closeness of Arab and Jewish DNA (Semites include about 95% Arabs and 5% Jews), it is now possible to create such a doomsday weapon. Israel has it. I guess "never again" does not apply to Arabs."

LOL, are they for real?? Someone please tell me this is a joke...

 

[PoisonPete2]

A few years ago, it was discovered that Israel had perfected a biological weapon that could kill Arabs, yet was harmless to Jews. In addition, it could target Iraqi Arabs. All this sounds like science fiction, but because of the distinct differences yet closeness of Arab and Jewish DNA (Semites include about 95% Arabs and 5% Jews), it is now possible to create such a doomsday weapon. Israel has it. I guess "never again" does not apply to Arabs."

LOL, are they for real?? Someone please tell me this is a joke...

In the early 1970's I worked in a Canadian lab that was doing contract work for the U.S. government in developing a 'blood-type specific virus' (call it germ warfare). With the Genome Project such targeted diseases are likely more easily developed and, with the lack of moral leadership in the world, more likely implimented.

 

[Hard-Luck Henry]

The spectre of new biological weapons made possible by the mapping of the human genome makes it more urgent than ever to prevent biotechnology research from being hijacked for evil purposes

It sounds like science fiction, but like many another prediction that was once dismissed as far-fetched it may become a reality.
Scientists have warned that recent advances in biological research could eventually lead to the creation of a new type of biological arsenal capable of targeting a specific group of human beings with common genetic characteristics, as may be the case with certain ethnic groups.
“It will unfortunately be possible to design biological weapons of this type when more information on genome research is available,” says Dr Vivienne Nathanson, head of science and health policy at the British Medical Association (BMA), the body which represents the medical profession in the United Kingdom.

http://www.unesco.org/courier/1999_03/uk/ethique/txt1.htm

Another:

"Ethnic-cleansing weapons" within 10 years: report
Agence France Presse, 23 January 1999
LONDON, Jan 21 (AFP) - Advances in genetic research raise the possibility of biological weapons, available within 10 years, that would attack one ethnic group but leave others untouched, according to a report published Thursday.

Given the availability of bomb-making instructions and "recipes" on the Internet, the British Medical Association said, the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention of 1972 needs "urgent" strengthening.

While "genetic weapons which target a particular ethnic group are not currently a practical possibility", the report concludes "it would be complacent to assume they could never be developed in the future".

The report "Biotechnology, weapons and humanity" by the BMA, which represents all Britain's doctors, predicted their existence within "five or 10 years" and warned of their attractiveness to terrorists.

http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/27a/005.html

 

[Ocean Breeze]

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Five U.S. Marines were killed in fighting with al-Qaida-led insurgents near the Syrian border and an Army soldier died of wounds suffered in Baghdad, making Wednesday the second deadliest day for American forces in Iraq this month.


Eleven other Marines were wounded Wednesday in Obeidi, 185 miles northwest of Baghdad, according to a New York Times reporter traveling with U.S. forces.

A U.S. Marine statement confirmed the five deaths but made no mention of wounded. The statement also said 16 insurgents were confirmed killed in the fighting.

from Yahoo news.

Dying for bush. :x

 

[Ocean Breeze]

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20051128/berman

the "no exit " strategy.


( and the no surprise factor..... :roll:

 

[Colpy]

Okay guys, let's engage in a little exercise. Sort'a like role playing.

Pretend for a moment you are George W. Bush. What would you do? :idea: Shoot yourself will not count as a serious answer. 8)

I hear a lot of criticism, no corrective ideas. The US is in Iraq. How would you get out? What would you have to achieve before withdrawal? Would you just leave now?

Let's hear it, Mr. President.

 

[Ocean Breeze]

Okay guys, let's engage in a little exercise. Sort'a like role playing.

Pretend for a moment you are George W. Bush. What would you do? :idea: Shoot yourself will not count as a serious answer. 8)

I hear a lot of criticism, no corrective ideas. The US is in Iraq. How would you get out? What would you have to achieve before withdrawal? Would you just leave now?

Let's hear it, Mr. President.

If one was Georgie??? Graciously RESIGN. .... after acknowledgeing the big mistake one made by invading a nation under false premises. (aka big fat lies) Then make public a schedule of the troops return......and act on it. show evidence for good faith. Stop all construction of us military bases in Iraq. Immediately. Invite GRACIOUSLY and with some humility ...other nations to assist in PEACEKEEPING In Iraq.....so the focus is totally changed from ongoing war .......to peacekeeping and peace initiatives. Make amends with all the nations bush has offended.....verbally and with his arrogance. Show some humility and humanity .....and start telling the TRUTH. Render some sincere apologies for some of the statements made. (and bashing at anyone that has opposed the invasion from the onset or changed their minds. )

and that is just for starters.

 

[Colpy]

Okay guys, let's engage in a little exercise. Sort'a like role playing.

Pretend for a moment you are George W. Bush. What would you do? :idea: Shoot yourself will not count as a serious answer. 8)

I hear a lot of criticism, no corrective ideas. The US is in Iraq. How would you get out? What would you have to achieve before withdrawal? Would you just leave now?

Let's hear it, Mr. President.

If one was Georgie??? Graciously RESIGN. .... after acknowledgeing the big mistake one made by invading a nation under false premises. (aka big fat lies) Then make public a schedule of the troops return......and act on it. show evidence for good faith. Stop all construction of us military bases in Iraq. Immediately. Invite GRACIOUSLY and with some humility ...other nations to assist in PEACEKEEPING In Iraq.....so the focus is totally changed from ongoing war .......to peacekeeping and peace initiatives. Make amends with all the nations bush has offended.....verbally and with his arrogance. Show some humility and humanity .....and start telling the TRUTH. Render some sincere apologies for some of the statements made. (and bashing at anyone that has opposed the invasion from the onset or changed their minds. )

and that is just for starters.

Thanks for the answer OC.

I disagree with much, but I will let most of it go to challenge you on one point: calling something "peacekeeping" does not make it so.

The "insurgents" in Iraq don't give a damn about your high moral standards, they'll kill anyone, infidel or Muslim, that stands in the way of a Sunni Theocracy in Iraq. Any nation with troops in Iraq would wind up doing exactly what the USA is doing.

As an aside, what did you think of PPCLI troops in Afghanistan during the hot times? The Yanks loved us, especially our snipers. They tried to give our men medals, much to the horror of Ottawa.

For all you fellow gun nuts out there, one Newfie sniper had a confirmed kill on a Taliban soldier at 2430 meters! INCREDIBLE!

 

[Ocean Breeze]

calling something "peacekeeping" does not make it so.

maybe......maybe not...

what it does do is change the mindset and focus. The more the word peace is mentioned.......the more it becomes engrained in the collective psyche. Just as the word "war " has become almost popular in same.

the problem is that no one can define who makes up the "insurgents" anymore.... and let's face it.......with the number of new phrases that have evolved since this invasion ......it is hard to know what is being defined and how. Then of course .......just as one phrase or term seems workable ...along comes a new one. The entire language has changed. this is another area where the bush regime manipulated things to suit themselves and their own agenda. Part of the spinmeisters drindel. one has to suppose.

 

[Ocean Breeze]

Yanks loved us, especially our snipers.

yes, they would. That is what the yanks admire. Prowess at shooting , guns and all that goes with it. :roll:

 

[Reverend Blair]

Pretend for a moment you are George W. Bush. What would you do?

Turn myself and my cabinet into the ICC for prosecution, but not before I took full responsibility for Iraq and agreed to pay reparations including:

Funding a non-US peacekeeping effort there governed by UN panel in which the US had NO SAY. About 75% of Iraqis want the US out. The insurgency is so widespread and includes so many factions that you don't even know who you are fighting against. Take the US out of that equation and peacekeeping becomes at least a possibility. Add in peacekeepers from Muslim countries, countries that Muslims trust (nobody in the current crooked alliance) and an honest plan to rebuild infrastructure, and the insurgency will be reduced.

 

[no1important]

Secret death squads feared among Iraq's commandos

BAGHDAD, Iraq — Among the varied armed security men on Baghdad's streets these days, you can't miss the police commandos. In combat uniforms, bulletproof vests and wrap-around sunglasses or ski masks, they muscle through Baghdad's traffic jams in police cars or camouflage-painted pickup trucks, clearing nervous drivers from their path with shouted commands and the occasional gunshot in the air.

The commandos are part of the Iraqi security forces that the Bush administration says will gradually replace American troops in this war. But the commandos are being blamed for a wave of kidnappings and executions around Baghdad since the spring.

Things are sure looking up. :roll: