Notifying veteran Afghan leader Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, a former Prime Minister of Afghanistan and leader of Hizb-e-Islami, as a global terrorist, the US has declared that money used in association of any finances, assets held by him would henceforth face world-wide freeze. The Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) notified on Wednesday the declaration to all the interested countries, organizations and parties that it is effective at 11:59 pm on February 18, 2003. The declaration says that Gulbuddin Hekmatyar's name has been added to the list of Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist. Took them long enough to do it. They gotta do something about that bureaucracy they've got in the State Department. After being chased out of Kabul with his tail between his legs by the Taliban, Hek snuggled up with the Medes and Persians in Teheran. After the takeover of Kabul by Taliban, Mr. Hekmatyar moved to Tehran in self-exile. Through out Talibanâs regime, he stayed in Iran, afraid to show his face anywhere near Afghanistan, but after the fall of Kabul to US led forces, Iran forced him to leave the country under US pressure. Currently he is in Afghanistan fighting against the US invaders. Actually other people are doing the fighting, while Hek pretends to be a combination field marshal and pope, but that's his style.
According to the US announcement, he has been included in the list of global terrorists after his recent activities in Afghanistan and linking him to the so-called terrorist group al-Qaeda led by Osama bin Laden. A US official told AFP that the current whereabouts of Mr. Hekmatyar were not known. It is interesting to note here that the US authorities do not know where the person is, but they do know that what he is doing. When we say we don't know where he is, we just mean we don't know which particular block in Peshawar.
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
02/20/2003 08:36 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Fred, almost everything I know about Hek I've learned from reading your blog, but he seems to be a real prick...any pictures of this budget Napoleon around? or are they all the same quality as the Brownie Hawkeye snapshot of Mullah "Cyclops" Omar
Posted by: Frank G ||
02/20/2003 21:54 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Frank G, you hit on an interest of mine. This guy looks like a real dork. I had read about him before finding Fred's site and figured he would be kinda scary looking. Then I saw the picture and saw that he looks like a wanker -- a dangerous wanker to be sure, but a wanker nontheless. He appears just dorky enough to think the Predator drone that we all hope will eventually kill him is kinda cool.
BTW, anytime you want a picture, I recommend google image search. It rules.
#3
thanks for the pic and google-tip ;-)
Wasn't he in a Woody Allen pic as a rabbi?
Posted by: Frank G ||
02/20/2003 22:19 Comments ||
Top||
#4
If would've have been nice if they branded
HEK a terrorist in 1993 after he first blew
up the wtc. But then that would have ruined the
movie plot. They could have supported Massoud
against HEK but chose not to. WHY? WAR!
Source: The Strait Times
Saudi Arabia has said it will put 90 of its nationals on trial for belonging to Al-Qaeda. It would be the first prosecution of alleged members of Osama bin Laden's terrorist network reported in the secretive kingdom. 'There is evidence that these 90 people belong to this organisation and their cases have been sent to court,' Tuesday's edition of the Okaz newspaper quoted Interior Minister Prince Nayef bin Abdul Aziz as saying. A little more serious, now that the occasional bigwig's getting bumped off?
He said 250 other people were still being interrogated while another 150 had been released after questioning. Among those being interrogated, there was 'available evidence' to show that they had links to Al-Qaeda, he added. 'We have to make sure by interrogating them...their links to Al-Qaeda vary.' Ouch. Not that I care...
After the Sept 11, 2001 attacks on the United States, the Saudi authorities launched a round-up of people with links to Al-Qaeda. Many Saudis were arrested after returning from Afghanistan following the overthrow of the Taleban rulers by US-led forces at the end of 2001. After the Sept 11 attacks, Saudi-US ties took a battering as 15 of the 19 suicide attackers who hijacked airlines and smashed them into key sites in New York and Washington were Saudis. The Soddies could have lessened the impact of that battering by simply saying loudly, "Those sonsabitches! We're rounding up all of them we can find, dammit!"
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
02/20/2003 08:28 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
A British man has been killed in the Saudi capital, Riyadh. Saudi television said the Briton, who worked at a British aviation company in the kingdom and was a resident there, was attacked as he sat in his car at traffic lights. His attacker is reported to have been arrested. An official statement about the incident is to be issued later on Thursday. "...and we can conclude that this is another case of decadent westerners' alcohol-smuggling fueds getting a little out of hand."
Posted by: Bulldog ||
02/20/2003 11:23 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Security officials chased and caught a man identified as Saud bin Ali bin Nasser, 30, and confiscated "the weapon used in the shooting," the statement said. He was arrested and was being interrogated. Nasser works as a sales agent for Toyota, the statement said.
Posted by: Steve ||
02/20/2003 12:50 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Probably some sort of argument over a warranty. Nothing to see here. Move along...
Posted by: Fred ||
02/20/2003 22:51 Comments ||
Top||
A Kuwaiti criminal court Wednesday adjourned the trial of a Kuwaiti policeman who allegedly fired on and wounded two U.S. soldiers last November after a psychiatrist testified the policeman was mentally ill. Allegedly?
A psychiatrist had testified that Khaled Massir al Shamri was hesitant to open fire and had asked a friend to take him home before he committed the crime. Friends don't let friends shoot people, unless you are Islamic.
"He was in a difficult psychological state and did not know what was happening around him," the psychiatrist said.
Al Shamri's lawyer, Nawwaf Sari al Matiri, told the court his client was insane and unaware of his behavior most of the time.
After the incident, al Shamri fled to Saudi Arabia where he was arrested and returned to Kuwait. His trial was set to resume on Sunday. Lawyers seem to be the same, worldwide.
Posted by: Steve ||
02/20/2003 08:43 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"Allegedly" - that's just legal CYA for reporters, lest the reporter be accused of defamation or slander before a verdict is handed down. Journalists seem to be the same worldwide, too.
Britain ordered banks Thursday to freeze the assets of a Kurdish Islamic guerrilla group that operates in northern Iraq. Secretary of State Colin Powell has accused the group, Ansar al-Islam, of harboring al-Qaida fugitives from Afghanistan. The Bank of England ordered all financial institutions to freeze any funds held by Ansar-al-Islam, which has terrorized residents of the autonomous Kurdish region near the Iraq-Iran border. "The Treasury has reasonable grounds for suspecting that Ansar al-Islam is or may be a person who commits, attempts to commit, facilitate or participate in the commission of acts of terrorism," the Bank of England said. Took 'em long enough, didn't it? It's only been a couple years since they popped up and started killing people...
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
02/20/2003 02:00 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
Some heartening news from this side of the Atlantic (Edited for length)
Despite claims to the contrary, YouGov's survey for The Telegraph suggests that regardless of party preference, sex, age, social class or income, the British public is broadly united in its approach to dealing with Saddam Hussein. Large majorities of both sexes believe Saddam does possess weapons of mass destruction, does pose a threat and should be disarmed, by force if necessary. For example, YouGov asked respondents which of three possible ways of dealing with Saddam corresponded most closely to their own view. [...]only a small minority of either men or women believes Saddam does not pose a threat to the outside world and that therefore no kind of attack on Iraq would be justified.
A difference between the sexes exists but it concerns the relatively narrow issue of the role the United Nations should play. A considerably larger proportion of women than men would prefer to see Britain, America and their allies act on the basis of a new Security Council resolution. As the figures in the chart make plain, large majorities of both men and women are firmly on the same side of the issue. Both groups would prefer to see the UN taking the lead. I conclude from this that whilst the likes of Chirac reduce the moral authority of our oppsers in the UN to risible whimperings, provided Blair and others can shout loud enough the moral case for action, public opinion will only shift more towards military action.
Even more striking is the fact that exactly equal proportions of women and men - 84 per cent - accept that Iraq under Saddam does pose a threat and that it is one that should, if necessary, be countered by force. Other findings from the YouGov survey point to considerable public uncertainty about what the ultimate aim of any military action in the Middle East should be. I can see why this worries people.
YouGov asked whether people thought the main purpose of external pressure on Iraq should be to force that country to disarm or whether it should be to topple the Iraqi dictator. Perhaps not surprisingly, given the mixed messages emanating from the Government on the issue, opinion on the point, as the figures in the chart indicate, is almost evenly divided.
What is clear from YouGov's data is that neither Tony Blair nor President George W Bush has succeeded in causing Britons to link Iraq in their minds with the September 11 attack on the World Trade Centre. The poll asked respondents: "Is it your impression that the US wants to attack Iraq partly to revenge September 11?" It then asked: "If the US does want to revenge the attack on the World Trade Centre, is Iraq an appropriate target for such an attack?" The answers point to considerable doubt in Britain about both America's motives and its apparent selection of Iraq as a target. By more than two to one, Britons believe America does indeed have revenge in mind but, by considerably more than two to one, Britons do not believe Iraq is an appropriate target for American wrath. Britons seem to find Saddam sufficiently objectionable without his having to be linked to al-Qa'eda.
YouGov's findings also suggest that a large majority of people in this country fears that the continuing Arab-Israeli conflict is souring relations between the Islamic world and the West. It asked: "Do you believe that the way Israel is handling its dispute with the Palestinians is causing Muslims in other parts of the world to turn against western countries like Britain and the US?" The responses, set out in the chart, are unambiguous. By nearly seven to one, people in Britain believe the widespread tensions between much of the Islamic world and the West are linked, at least in part, to the continuing Middle East conflict.
YouGov elicited the opinions of 2,357 adults across Britain online on Feb 17 and 18. The data have been weighted to conform to the demographic profile of British adults as a whole.
Blair and Bush: Must try harder
Chirac: Keep up the excellent work
Posted by: Bulldog ||
02/20/2003 10:26 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
Former prime minister Shimon Peres on Thursday criticized France and Germany for their opposition to a US-led attack on Iraq, and questioned France's status as a permanent member of the UN Security Council. Whoa! But he's one of the "good guys"?
Peres, a Nobel Peace Prize laureate, also criticized recent mass demonstrations around the world against a possible US attack on Iraq. Ouch! that would make either he or the protesters illegitimate as "peace" activists... note the Reuters-type scare quotes?
"Why didn't they demonstrate when Saddam Hussein invaded Iran, or invaded Kuwait?" Peres told the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations. "That was a war. It cost a million lives." But America and Israel weren't involved so it's not worth the effort
Peres also suggested another country replace France as a permanent member of the Security Council. "Why not for example, India, that represents much more of the 20th century, in terms of people, in terms of position, in terms of visions?" Peres said.
There was another proposal yesterday that Japan be substituted. I believe there was another one to substitute the Holy Roman Empire EU as a whole (which would mean giving the seat to Burgundy Belgium.)
If France and Germany oppose positions backed by other European countries, they should provide alternative proposals, Peres said. He also questioned their support, without UN backing, for the use of force in the Balkans in 1999. "One must ask, why was it right to bomb Kosovo... without the United Nations? Is (former Yugoslav President Slobodan) Milosevic more dangerous than Saddam Hussein?" Peres said. Darn good questions, all of them, but I especially like the India initiative
While Israel has not openly called for a US attack on Iraq, it has made no secret of its desire to see the ouster of Saddam, whose regime fired 39 Scud missiles at Israel during the 1991 Gulf War.
Posted by: Frank G ||
02/20/2003 02:38 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I concur with the logic behind replacing France with India on the Security Council--I think it's a long overdue idea. However, does anyone know if there is a feasible way in which France could be voted off the Council as a permanent member and replaced?
Posted by: Bill ||
02/20/2003 18:31 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Since France is so good at surrendering, maybe they could surrender their seat to India.
One of four Algerians accused of plotting to bomb a crowded French holiday market pleaded guilty in his final statement to a German court Thursday, and lawyers for another defendant did not contest charges that he had planned a bombing. In his statement, Aeroubi Beandalis thanked the police for arresting the group and thereby foiling the plot. "I admit to the charges against me and would like to say again that I'm sorry," he said in Arabic through a court translator. He did not elaborate, but his lawyer reiterated the plea. "Oh, Gawd! I'm so sorry I got caught!"
Lawyers for co-defendant Fouhad Sabour in their own closing arguments asked that he be cleared of violating weapons laws and conspiring to murder, but they did not contest he conspired to plant a bomb. They asked Frankfurt court to sentence him to no more than seven years in prison. "The defendant ain't a well man, y'r honor."
"What's the matter with him?"
"He's nuts."
Prosecutors have sought sentences of 10 years for Beandalis and another defendant, Lamine Maroni; 11 1/2 years for Sabour, and 12 1/2 years for the fourth defendant, Salim Bourkari, whose lawyers will make closing arguments Tuesday. All are charged with conspiring to murder and plant a bomb as well as weapons violations. Spandau's available, isn't it?
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
02/20/2003 01:32 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"I admit to the charges against me and would like to say again that I'm sorry,"
How odd. Has this happened before? Would like to know if this guy's sincere. If he is, could be worth his weight in weapons grade plutonium.
Jimmy has one, so does Yasser. Looks like we're going for the trifecta.
The French president, Jacques Chirac, has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts to avoid a US-led war against Iraq, it emerged yesterday. The news came as Mr Chirac was preparing, amid protests in Paris, to welcome the Zimbabwean president, Robert Mugabe, and other controversial leaders to a two-day summit of African heads of state due to start today. I just loved the juxtaposition of these two sentences. The Guardian editor obviously was asleep!
It also follows uproar in eastern Europe after he told former communist states hoping to join the EU that they had been "infantile" and "reck less" to support the US on Iraq. For someone who before his re-election nine months ago was widely seen as a charming chancer who had achieved nothing of note in a 40-year career and would be in prison were he not in the Elyse palace, Mr Chirac's return to the world arena has been spectacular. The Elysee said it did not know who had submitted his name to the Nobel Institute, ... Lessee now: Colin? Nope. Condi? Nope. Tony? Don't think so. I'm running out of nominators.
But if Mr Chirac can take credit for building an international axis of opposition to an early attack on Baghdad, some observers wonder whether the success has gone to his head - or whether his quest to star on the diplomatic stage is betraying less principled motives. Less principled? Oh, giggle. He's French fer crissakes!
"In publicly criticising the eastern European applicants to the EU, Chirac has made the same mistake as the US officials who have attacked 'old Europe' and demanded that their allies be either 'with us or against us'," the daily Lib¿ration said in an editorial. "Arrogance is never a good policy." And when a French newspaper tells you that you're arrogant, you're really over the top.
After five years with his diplomatic wings clipped by a Socialist government, Mr Chirac is plainly enjoying throwing his weight around. But one western diplomat warned: "He's overplaying his hand. The outburst against eastern Europe and the red carpet for Mugabe could lead people to doubt the sincerity of his stance on Iraq. Faced with such apparent double standards, you could legitimately start questioning his real motives." Clearly a deserving candidate for the Nobel!
Posted by: Steve White ||
02/20/2003 11:21 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"He's overplaying his hand. The outburst against eastern Europe and the red carpet for Mugabe could lead people to doubt the sincerity of his stance on Iraq. Faced with such apparent double standards, you could legitimately start questioning his real motives."
The western diplomat here nails it on the head. Surely anyone with half a brain can see that our amphibian friend has guilty secrets to hide. When we find "Produit de France" stamped on everything in Iraq from Saddam's reactors (well, we know that already) to his nail extractors, even lefties might see the light. Oh, and those unsigned post-dated oil rights..
#4
wow! It's just so easy to be cynical these days.
Posted by: kanji ||
02/20/2003 12:07 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Humor article excerpt from www.jewishworldreview.com: In an apparent show of solidarity with the Republic of Iraq, French President Jacques Chirac has officially changed his last name to Chiraq.
Posted by: Dar Steckelberg ||
02/20/2003 12:21 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Norway is the home of the Nobel Peace Prize and the home of Vidkum Quisling. It's sooooooo fitting.
Posted by: Don ||
02/20/2003 15:24 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Chiraq the one man wrecking crew. Destroys the UN, NATO, EU, and now Nobel. Pretty soon there will be no institutions left.
Memo to Bob: Dining with Jacques may be hazardous to your health!
Posted by: john ||
02/20/2003 19:30 Comments ||
Top||
Posted by: Steve White ||
02/20/2003 07:37 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"Outside, protesters waved banners..."
How many, I wonder? Were the cheesey monkeys filling the streets for miles, marching past waving banners, shouting "Stop the killing, Freedom for Zimbabwe!" No. One Brit and a gay group, the Pink Panthers, are just about all those who find this objectionable.
#2
I saw the demo on the news and there were all of six protesters present.Since it's not the Americans or the Jews doing the killing,who cares?
Posted by: El Id ||
02/20/2003 9:07 Comments ||
Top||
#3
There have been some demonstrations about 23 human rights serial-offenders among the 52 countries invited, nothing massive, but real nonetheless. I'd like to mention that this summit is an attempt at pulling back theses african countries in France's orbite, and it has ties to the powerplay against the US ' policy, if only about Nigeria, Gabon, Congo,... 's oil.
WASHINGTON (Variety) - Wielding his presidential-like appeal, actor Martin Sheen headlines a TV ad debuting in Los Angeles and the nation's capital on Thursday urging Americans to join a Feb. 26 "virtual march" on Washington to oppose a war with Iraq. A virtual march led by a virtual president. How unique!
He's displaying virtual reasoning, too...
Sheen -- who plays fictional U.S. President Jed Bartlet on NBC's "The West Wing" -- was one of several celebrities joining a long list of church leaders and other activists in announcing the campaign at a Wednesday press conference in Los Angeles. There are some people who think he actually IS the President.
The umbrella coalition Artists United to Win Without War wants citizens to deluge the nation's capital with e-mails, faxes and phone calls. Win what?
Groups emerging in recent weeks to advocate a peaceful solution to the Iraqi crisis have had a difficult time buying national air time for anti-war spots. CNN and other networks say they are reluctant to air any advocacy ads, regardless of the issue. Well, isn't that interesting. First I've heard of it.
To get around the skittish networks, groups are buying up time from local cable companies. Sheen's ad will appear on both CNN and Fox News Channel in Los Angeles and Washington, D.C. The spot will continue running throughout the next week. Win Without War, headed up by former Capitol Hill lawmaker Tom Andrews, is hoping to buy time in other local markets. "This virtual march on Washington will allow every American opposed to the war to stand up and be counted, by calling, faxing and e-mailing the U.S. Senate and the White House," Sheen says in the ad. Thank you, President Bartlett. Now it's time to go back to fantasyland and get out of the f***ing way...
For years, there were strict federal regulations governing advocacy ads, with networks required to give equal time to the other side. Although those rules have been all but erased from the books, networks are still wary about airing such spots nationally. All right! Then they'd have to put Prowar ads up. I can see it now..."Nuke Mecca!"..."Faster please!"
Other celebrities flanking Sheen at Wednesday's press briefing included Janeane Garofalo (news) and Mike Farrell (news). If these 2 are the cream of their celebrity crop then I'm not too impressed. Was Ed Asner too busy shaving his back?
Organizations on hand included the National Council of Churches, Business Leaders for Sensible Priorities, Greenpeace, NAACP and Physicians for Social Responsibility. ...and the other usual suspects.
Posted by: tu3031 ||
02/20/2003 11:51 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Laughible organization names:
"Business Leaders for Sensible Priorities" and
"Physicians for Social Responsibility".
Are there any opposing groups I can join? perhaps
"Slackjawed losers united against all parental expectations"
or
"Physicians for questionable bookkeeping"?
Where do people come up with this stuff?
"Mothers against all icky bad things",
"Kids for Park Equipment and no homework",
"The Committee For Cookies And Milk Now!".
Its just nonsense.
Posted by: Frank Martin ||
02/20/2003 12:05 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Aid and comfort, Martin, aid and comfort.
I stopped watching West Wing because the real person is such a weenie compared to the character, and the character is a weenie.
#3
Last night there was a PBS program on WWII featuring color film footage. Among the images were scenes of liberating the Nazi death camps. The narrator was...you got it...Martin Sheen!
Although the images were compelling, I couldn't help thinking that Sheen had 'phoned in' this job if for no other reason than he can read a text but have absolutely no clue what real evil is when he is confronted with it.
#5
The scam is they don't need to pay for airtime because every new show will show the ad and talk about it. They get the air time for free and get to play Freedom of Speach victim at the same time.
Pakistan's Islamic hard-liners are promising to fill the streets with over 1 million demonstrators to show their "fury and anger" at a possible American attack on Iraq — and to warn the government not to support such a war. "Fury and anger" are to Islamists as heartburn is to occasional chili eaters...
Anything approaching that kind of turnout in protests scheduled for March 2 and March 9 would send a chill through the halls of power here, and produce anxiety for the Bush administration, which counts a stable Pakistan as a vital ally in the war on terror. He said "stable" and "Pakistan" in the same sentence and his lips fell off...
"The fury and anger of the people will turn on the government if they back the U.S. war," said Qazi Hussein Ahmad, head of the GambinoJamaat-e-Islamimobcrime family party — a key partner in the six-party religious alliance organizing the protests. "We will get at least 1 million people. We will make sure it becomes an unprecedented event in the history of Pakistan." Pakistan is currently a member of the 15-nation U.N. Security Council, and might be called upon to vote on a second resolution authorizing military action on Iraq. So far, the government has said it favors a peaceful solution to the crisis, but has not said how it would vote on such a resolution. Qazi, being a Soddy stooge, is determined they won't vote with the U.S...
Up until now, anti-war protests have failed to draw large numbers of people in Pakistan, and some have petered out with just a few dozen demonstrators. Protests before the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan also attracted less support than expected, in part because of a fierce campaign by the government of President Pervez Musharraf to blunt the movement. Ahmad says this time will be different, because anti-American sentiment is at an all-time high in the country. As proof, he pointed to the strong showing of the religious coalition, called the Mutahida Majlis-e-Amal, in October elections. And nobody's worked harder to make Pakland anti-American than Qazi and his boyz...
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
02/20/2003 01:43 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Take that fury and head into Afghanistan to restore the Taliban. Stop hiding in Pakistan and come out and fight you cowardly crapheads.
A Pakistani air force plane has crashed in northwestern Pakistan, according to government sources. All 17 people aboard -- including the country's air force chief Mushaf Ali Mir and several other top-ranking officials -- were killed, the sources said. The Fokker aircraft went down around 9:15 a.m. (11:15 p.m. Wednesday ET) west of Islamabad, the sources said. It is not clear what caused the crash. The plane was en route to Kohat... The vice chief of the Pakistan Air Force Syed Qaiser Hussain has been appointed acting chief of the air force, according to news agency reports.
Posted by: Pete Stanley ||
02/20/2003 10:14 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Well, here's the obvious question: did the plane have any encouragement prior to kissing dirt?
#2
Didnt the Paki's lose a prime minister this way some time back? A General Zia, I believe his name was.
You know what they say, once by accident, more than once, by design.
Posted by: Frank Martin ||
02/20/2003 2:23 Comments ||
Top||
#3
General Zia was killed in a plane crash that lead to Pakistan's brief and ineffectual democracy of the 90's. Theories about who brought it down included the CIA, KGB, ISI, it's Indian equivalent, the Military, aliens, Allah. But one of the more accepted theories is that a Shia from Pakistan controlled Kashmir, angry at Generals Zia's brutal crackdown on an uprising there with the use of hundreds of Pashtun mercaneries, planted the bomb.
The funny thing is that absolutely noone has ever shown the slightest interest in finding out exactly what happened, which shows you how popular Pakistan's last military dictator was before he died.
Posted by: Paul ||
02/20/2003 3:57 Comments ||
Top||
Has the deal been made?
Ankara moved Thursday to end a standoff with Washington by announcing it would send to parliament a motion to allow U.S. troops to deploy in Turkey, but U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell said he wanted a reply by the end of the day.
"We're through screwing around. Are you?
The Turkish move was intended to ease a crisis in relations between the two NATO allies. The bone of contention has been the terms for allowing U.S. and possibly other "coalition of the willing" forces into the country on their way to form a northern front in neighboring Iraq. The U.S. military considers a northern front would greatly expedite conduct of the widely expected war to topple Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.
If we're going to be your friend, it'd be nice if you were ours. Otherwise we might stop.
The Turkish constitution requires parliamentary approval for foreign troops to be allowed into the country. The parliament went home for the weekend Thursday without taking up the motion, but was expected to do so early next week, possibly Tuesday. Powell said Thursday in Washington he expected an answer from Turkey by the end of the day on whether it had accepted the terms as negotiated. "There may be some other creative things we can do but the level was our ceiling. ... I expect to hear back from them before the day is out but I have nothing further to report there," he said in a joint news conference with NATO Secretary-General George Robertson.
"That's the baksheesh we're paying, not a penny more..."
The Justice and Development Party, or AKP, which has a broad majority in parliament, was expected to follow the lead of its leader, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, and Prime Minister Abdullah Gul, and give its consent to the motion. Turkey has already authorized U.S. personnel to upgrade ports and airfields to handle deliveries of U.S. forces and material. At stake for the Turks is economic aid and military and political issues. Although there have been reports of as much as $26 billion of assistance for Turkey's troubled economy, well-informed sources in Ankara said Washington would not raise its final offer of $4 billion in grants and $2 billion in military debt write-offs as well as $1 billion in shares from Iraqi oil revenues after the war. However, the sources said, Washington foresaw reviewing the deal within six months of the start of a war.
Negotiations were said to have stalled over Turkey demanding that financial aid be raised to around $10 billion with written guarantees that the United States would deliver on its promises.
Apparently it's not all about oil. It's all about cash.
The Turks allege U.S. promises made during the 1991 Persian Gulf war were not kept. Equally important were details of military arrangements between U.S. and Turkish forces in Iraq. Turkey has had a military presence in Iraq for many years, pursuing Turkish Kurdish separatist insurgents. In the past two weeks, it has set up posts on the Iraqi side of the frontier. The Turks say the posts are to serve humanitarian purposes in helping a flood of Iraqi refugees expected to attempt to flee a war. Western analysts say the Iraqi Kurds are worried about an increased Turkish military presence, which the United States is reported to have accepted.
"Presence" isn't the same thing as "slaughter."
The Turks have made it plain they won't tolerate an attempt by the Iraqi Kurds to set up an independent state and also oppose proposals by Iraqi opposition bodies for a federal Iraq after Saddam has gone. A federal state would enable the Kurds to continue enjoying the self-rule they have had in an area free of Saddam's control since 1991. Ankara is troubled by this situation, which it sees as potentially giving encouragement to aspirations for self-rule among its own Kurds.
The longer the delay and the higher the bribes required, the better the Kurds are looking. And they didn't look bad when we started.
Ankara also is determined that Kurdish forces be kept out of the oil centers of Kirkuk and Mosul, and the United States has said it will control both sites with neither Kurds nor Turks occupying them. Revenues from Kirkuk and Mosul would assure the Iraqi Kurds economic independence if they controlled them. Another issue concerns relations between the U.S. and Turkish militaries. While Turkish forces will be commanded by a Turk, it isn't clear how much freedom of action the United States is prepared to allow the Turks in the area they would occupy. Iraqi Kurds believe the Turks intend to establish control over the region if allowed to do so. Developing
Posted by: Steve ||
02/20/2003 02:31 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
Iraq has given U.N. inspectors the names of people who took part in the destruction of banned materials from its biological weapons and missile programs. In his report to the U.N. Security Council last Friday, chief U.N. inspector Hans Blix said Iraq had presented a list of 83 participants "in the unilateral destruction in the chemical field, which took place in the summer of 1991." He asked Iraq for a similar list of people who took part in the destruction of other proscribed items, especially in the biological field. "Since then, the Iraqis have provided lists of individuals involved in unilateral destruction of biological and missile items in the early 1990s," Blix's spokesman, Ewen Buchanan, said Thursday. "Those lists are being studied, and clearly might be potential names for interviews." This is a part of Iraq's strategy of continuing to hand out spits and dribbles of cooperation, in the hope of dragging things out until the weather's too hot. At that point, they expect the Merkins to go away, and there won't be any momentum to resume next cold season. They're trying to ride out the clock.
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
02/20/2003 01:47 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
Iraqi officials are yet to live up to promises of increased support and aid to U.N. inspectors looking for the country's suspected weapons of mass destruction, U.N. officials told The Washington Post. The Post, in a report Thursday from Baghdad, said Iraq is apparently taking heart from the split in the Security Council regarding possible military action against the country and the world-wide protests against war on Iraq. As a result, Iraq has changed from saying that its officials are complying with U.N. demands to asking for a lifting of sanctions instituted against Iraq after it was forced out of Kuwait more than 10 years ago. Yup, those protests are working just fine.
"We have not seen any positive moves on the part of Iraq," one U.N. official in Iraq told The Washington Post, while another said, "They are not fulfilling their promises." U.N. inspectors returned to Iraq in November after the Security Council unanimously passed Resolution 1441, a strongly worded document that promised "serious consequences" should Iraq not live up to the stipulations outlined in the document. Those included giving U.N. inspectors unrestricted access inside Iraq and orders to report any interference by Iraq with the inspections.
The newspaper said that since last Friday, when lead weapons inspectors Hans Blix and Mohammad ElBaradei reported to the Security Council, the United Nations has not seen Iraq carry through on promises to deliver documents about old weapons programs nor have there been interviews with scientists involved with possible weapons technology. "We have done when was asked of us -- and the whole word sees that," the Post quoted an unnamed senior Iraqi official as saying. A U.N. official in Iraq told the newspaper that Iraq could well give in to U.N. demands, but only if the Security Council and lead inspectors push their point. "What we've seen is that without pressure, Iraq is not going to cooperate with the inspectors," the official said. Over the weekend there were large anti-war demonstrations in several cities around the world. The United States and Britain are having trouble finding support for anything stronger than additional inspections in Iraq in their Security Council deliberations. The Post cited Iraqi newspaper accounts terming the anti-war movement a "humiliating international isolation" for the United States and Britain.
The Post quoted a U.N. official as saying: "They are feeling: The world opinion is with us. We can resist further pressure. We have time. We can play with the U.S. and U.K. Sammy's been watching CNN and the BBC.
"This is very dangerous." The Iraqi's digging in their heels may help get that 2nd resolution.
Posted by: Steve ||
02/20/2003 08:33 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
These are some of the major headlines and their brief stories in Turkey's press on February 20, 2003. The Anadolu Agency does not verify these stories and does not vouch for their accuracy.
VITAL POINT IS MONEY
Bargaining with the United States on motion regarded with deployment of foreign soldiers in Turkey and dispatch of Turkish soldiers abroad, which would be sent to the Parliament, tangled up on ''money''. As important progress has been recorded in political and military parts of the negotiations carried out between Turkey and the United States pertaining to Iraq, the bargaining was mainly locked on the bigness of the economic package. Bush administration is reluctant to accept Ankara's demand to increase the amount of donation which it prepared aiming to compensate the loss which Turkish economy would suffer in case of a war. Bush administration earlier increased this amount from four billion U.S. dollars to six billion U.S. dollars. In Turkey, Turkey's loss has been estimated as 21 billion U.S. dollars only for the first year. It is seen that there is a very big gap among those amounts.
NEW IRAQ TO BE FOUNDED IN 8 STAGES
In line with Turkey's sensitivities, the United States presented a plan to Ankara which puts forward ''sine qua non'' conditions about issue of ''Iraq after Saddam'' in return for its support to a military operation. The plan which constitutes political framework of the talks on memorandum of understanding, foresees transition into civilization in 18 months. The plan which describes the operation as ''rescue of Iraq'' will be put into practice in eight stages:
1- A 'military government' will be formed shortly after operation. U.S. Central Command Army General Tommy Franks will head this government that will stabilize chaotic environment that is going to emerge after overthrow of Saddam regime.
2- An 'interim civil government' will be formed during same stage. Retired general Jay M. Garner, the first commander of the Provide Comfort, will head this government. This government will settle civil order.
3- A single Iraqi army and a single Iraqi police will be formed. Forces especially the groups in Northern Iraq that have 'army structure' will be prevented from making use of chaotic environment.
4- An Iraqi Consultative Council will be established. This council will form the superior structure of rebuilding of Iraq.
5- A Judicial Council will be formed. The function of this council will be formation of judicial order after operation.
6- A Constitutional Council will be formed. This council will prepare a new Iraqi Constitution.
7- The new constitution will be brought to referendum together with general elections that will be held 18 months after operation.
8- Under ''geographical'' restructuring which constitutes the most important part of the political plan in regard to Turkey, protection of Iraq's territorial integrity is the priority. A kind of 'states system' is planned to be formed not through ethnic, but geographical separation, particularly between Turkmen and Kurds. Plan looks good to me. Of course the Iraqi oposition doesn't like it because they all think they should be in charge.
COUNT BACK IN KIRKUK
Northern Iraqi Kurdish groups and Turkmen parties started to launch initiatives to hold political superiority in Kirkuk before the war starts. Kirkuk, which is another important oil city after Baghdad, became an issue of political fighting in case of a possible U.S. operation on Iraq. Iraqi opposition groups and Turkmen parties accelerated their secret political activities toward Kirkuk before the war started. They base on the account that those who has political sovereignty in Kirkuk, would have an important part of the Iraqi oil.
ERDOGAN CHALLENGES
Justice and Development Party (AK Party) leader Recep Tayyip Erdogan reacted harshly to the U.S. administration. Erdogan said, ''we will not accept verbal guarantee. Many agreements have been made so far, but none of them has been taken into consideration. Prime Ministry will not prepare the motion before our demands have been fulfilled.'' Erdogan said, ''they always expect us to make concession. Nobody has the right to make Turkey to pay a cost as it had happened in 1991. First of all, the demands should be met.'' AK Party leader Erdogan stated that, ''we will not accept verbal guarantee. The agreement that would be made should be like the international agreements.'' They want it in writing. I guess I would too.
SENER: EVERYTHING MAY CHANGE IN FIVE MINUTES
Council of Ministers discussed in details the developments experienced in Iraq. However, the motion regarding deployment of the U.S. soldiers in Turkey was not brought to signature at the meeting. Government Spokesman Abdullatif Sener said no decision has been taken regarding the motion. Responding to the questions of reporters, Sener said, ''you ask me the situations that may occur within some hours. However, very new developments may occur within five minutes.''
WE GET COMMAND
According to the agreement which was reached after bargaining that continued for several days between Ankara and Washington, a Turkish officer will command all of the Turkish soldiers who will enter Northern Iraq in a possible Iraq war. Turkish soldiers will act only upon orders of this Turkish commander. According to the agreement, American soldiers will be under control of an American commander. Also Turkish officials will be assigned at command centers to be formed in Diyarbakir and Qatar to prevent occurrence of any coordination problem. OK.
SHIPS WAITING FOR 'MOTION'
Although the parliament has not approved the motion that allows crossing of U.S. troops, an American vessel arrived at Iskenderun port and discharged 522 military vehicles. Meanwhile, it was mentioned that several ships that were carrying soldiers and ammunitions cast anchor off Cyprus and they were waiting for approval of ''motion''. Maybe not as good as I thought yesterday.
Posted by: Steve ||
02/20/2003 07:52 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
British nationals were warned yesterday to leave Iraq immediately, or risk becoming "human shields". The warning was issued as the last major wave of troops was dispatched from Britain to the Gulf for a possible war. The deployment, from RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire, comprised more than a thousand paratroopers, infantry and support troops from 16 Air Assault Brigade. Military sources pointed towards mid-March as the most likely time for a conflict. Or earlier.
With diplomatic manoeuvring accompanying the military build-up, the Foreign Office also urged Britons not to travel to Kuwait or Israel unless absolutely necessary, and to leave the West Bank and Gaza Strip. The warning may be extended to other countries in the region depending on changing circumstances. Personally I'd stay west of, oh, Rome, for a while.
Defence sources say a campaign against Iraq is likely to start with fierce aerial bombardment lasting "just a few days" followed by a massive armoured sweep towards Baghdad. American and British special forces are believed to be entering the region, including elements moving into Kurdistan. On its travel advice website, the Foreign Office cited the "increasing regional tension" and the risk of terrorism as the reason for its advice. It said "If you are considering going to Iraq you should be aware that British nationals were used as hostages during the 1990-91 crisis by the Iraqi regime, being held where their safety was at most risk. You should also be aware that there is no British diplomatic presence in Iraq." Which makes one wonder just how stupid a Brit national would have to be to go there in the first place.
It is estimated there are between 150 and 250 Britons in the country, including journalists as well as volunteer "human shields" â anti-war protesters. Oh, now I see.
Posted by: Steve White ||
02/20/2003 10:11 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
The US navy is boarding an average of six vessels a day as it steps up patrols in international waters searching for Iraqi weapons rumoured to have been hidden on ships or smuggled overseas. Most of the operations have been in and around the Persian Gulf, where western naval detachments are enforcing international sanctions against Saddam Hussein's regime, ensuring there is no traffic in forbidden goods. If you're looking for Iraqi contraband, it makes sense to board ships in the Persian Gulf, as opposed to the South China Sea. Sheesh.
Unmovic, the UN agency searching for hidden chemical and biological weapons, yesterday said there had been a steady stream of reports suggesting that Iraqi weapons had been smuggled abroad in recent months to countries such as Sudan and Syria. Peter Hinchliffe, marine adviser at the International Chamber of Shipping, said steps were under way to design an internationally accepted tracking system to maintain a closer watch on vessels. There was no evidence that ships carrying Iraqi missiles were concealed at sea, although he added: "The Indian ocean is a very big place - it's not difficult to hide things there." US naval patrols in the Gulf have yielded only minor discoveries of drugs and a handful of unauthorised guns. David Osler, industrial editor of the maritime journal Lloyd's List, said: "It's becoming a bit of an embarrassment to them - they haven't really found anything." Maybe because it's all coming overland from Syria?
Chemical weapons take up little space and would not need to be stored on a large cargo vessel, he said. Missiles could not be stored safely on a commercial ship without large-scale adaptation. Though you could always throw them under some bags of cement.
Posted by: Steve White ||
02/20/2003 10:10 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
ARRRRRGGGGGGG! We bein' pirates again! ARRRRRGGGGGGG!
The Guardian is almost gleeful.
The Bush administration's determination to keep to a tight timetable that would see its forces ready to go to war against Iraq by early March is in danger of coming unstuck. Plans to open a northern front against Iraq - seen as vital to ensure a pincer movement against Baghdad - were looking shaky last night as Turkey resisted an ultimatum from Washington to accept US troop deployments or forfeit a multi-billion dollar compensation package. I'm hoping all this is massive disinformation, but I'm beginning to wonder.
The White House spokesman, Ari Fleischer, warned Ankara it had been presented with a final financial offer - believed to exceed $26bn - and that a response was needed. "There comes a moment when plans must be made, decisions must be made, and it cannot stretch on indefinitely," he said. The trouble with Turkey is compounded by fresh diplomatic hurdles. The US and Britain have been forced to postpone until next week the publication of a second UN resolution designed to marshal support within the security council for military action. The resolution will now not be put to a vote before early March, following another report by the chief weapons inspector, Hans Blix. British jitters over persuading the UN to back war were underlined yesterday when officials insisted that they would press ahead with military action even if the resolution were heavily defeated. We'll do that but it might cost Tony his head.
The likelihood of such a defeat has deepened with the open rift between the US and France and Germany which was again on display yesterday. The US secretary of state, Colin Powell, in effect accused the two European countries of being too cowardly to go to war."It is not a satisfactory solution to continue inspections indefinitely because certain countries are afraid of upholding their responsibility to impose the will of the international community," Mr Powell said. My, that was blunt.
But the most urgent problem facing the US in its push to war is Turkey, traditionally a staunch Nato partner. The Turkish leader, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, indicated yesterday there was little sign of the impasse being resolved quickly, saying there were no plans for a parliamentary vote this week on allowing US troops on Turkish soil. Failure by Turkey to open its bases to American troops would mean that US transport ships carrying thousands of servicemen and essential equipment would have to be re-routed to the Gulf or elsewhere. Any diversionary attack against Baghdad from the north may then have to be scaled back dramatically. The block on US servicemen might also leave the Kurds vulnerable to an Iraqi counter-attack. Or a Turkish attack. Say, you don't suppose ...
As a fallback position, US special service troops and Kurdish fighters have been upgrading three airstrips in northern Iraq which might be used as advance supply positions. But the US would be denied the modern infrastructure of the main Turkish airbases such as Incirlik, Batman and Diyarbakir. I had previously read that our use of Incirlik didn't depend on the current negotiations. That back in play?
The latest opinion polls in Turkey suggest that 90% of the electorate is opposed to war. Turkey's resistance to participating in an unpopular war, which it fears would undermine its weakened economy, has been bolstered by the strength of anti-war protests around the world last weekend. The US defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, admitted the lack of cooperation was causing some discomfort: "Obviously, the more assistance one gets the easier it is. The less assistance one gets, the more difficult it is." He predicted an eventual Turkish climbdown. Depends on whether the generals order the parliament to vote yes.
The disarray over military planning will boost the Iraqi government, which has already been buoyed by Mr Blix's last report as well as by worldwide anti-war demonstrations. UN officials said yesterday that the Iraqi government has been emboldened to the point where it sees no urgency in meeting the weapons inspectors' call for deeper cooperation. Not that Chirac or Schroeder will understand the relation between cause and effect here.
In a move which suggests that the inspectors are taking a tougher stance, Mr Blix has decided to ask Iraq to destroy its al-Samoud 2 missiles, diplomatic sources said last night. Iraq's response to the demand will be a crucial test of the inspection system. UN officials in Baghdad also said yesterday that they had detected a disturbing shift in Baghdad's attitude in the last few days. They say the protests have encouraged Iraq to believe it can turn the divisions in the security council to its advantage, a strategy that could stall the speedy progress sought by Mr Blix, who is expected to make a further report to the security council around March 6 rather than, as suggested by Washington and London, on February 28. Blixie will report that the "last two weeks have been frustrating, but we see some evidence that hope could possibly be restored such that inspections might become useful at some point in the future, whenever that is."
And that will be enough for Chirac to say 'non' forever.
Posted by: Steve White ||
02/20/2003 10:06 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Steve,
From your comments I see you are not very familiar with Turkish politics or army. The army or generals as you wish have not the political power that you assume they have. I have two relatives who are general in rank, unless when there are special "wartime" provisions in times when politics are paralized which requires a military takeover of parliamentary decisions are in act, they have no more political influence than I as civilian have. Ofcourse we could argue the whole military establishment who have undoubtably more leverage in political decisions than an individual, but let say the army in Turkey has not more political leverage in Turkey than the US army has in the US.
Posted by: Murat ||
02/20/2003 9:42 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Murat - you protest too much. American generals have never presided over regime change. Nor has an American general ever declared the the army is the guardian of the secular state.
As 1,000 paratroopers flew to Kuwait yesterday to join an escalating number of British soldiers in the Gulf, battle plans for an invasion of Iraq were being refined. Royal Marine commandos will spearhead an amphibious assault on Basra, Iraq's second city and only port, a crucial objective geographically and psychologically. They will be supported by US marines, airborne troops, and elements of a British armoured brigade now building up in Kuwait, which will attack Basra from the west. The rest of the British armoured brigade, equipped with Challenger 2 battle tanks, will be deployed at the rear of the much larger American force. Hey Saddam: this might be the plan. It might not.
Commandos, possibly joined by other highly mobile forces, including elements of the 16 Air Assault Brigade now being deployed to Kuwait, will also move in quickly to secure the 1,000 oil wellheads in the Al Faw peninsula, another key objective. Other units in Britain's helicopter-borne assault brigade will secure towns and deal with local resistance, helping to give the main US force a clear drive to Baghdad. From the north, depending on Turkey's agreement, thousands of American airborne troops will protect the oilfields in northern Iraq and take the cities of Mosul and Kirkuk. US special forces are already in Kurdish-controlled areas, advising local commanders. Air cover provided by the Kurdish air force.
From Jordan in the west, special forces, including the SAS, will be dropped by helicopter in the wide open spaces of Iraq's western desert looking out for mobile Scud missile batteries which could pose a threat to Israel and Jordan. Or they could be coming in from Iran, Saddam. You'd better cover both.
But first there will be a large bombing campaign, with "precision" weapons, including cruise missiles, some from two Royal navy submarines already in the Gulf, attacking symbolic targets such as Saddam Hussein's presidential palaces and headquarters. Might use up all the cruise missiles in the inventory if we attack all the presidential palaces.
This will not only land a psychological blow but also prevent the regime's leadership from communicating with military commanders around a country with a highly centralised Soviet-style, command and control system. Thus the south and north of Iraq will collapse, and the centre - Baghdad - will follow. These, at least, are the assumptions based on talks with defence officials and a series of leaks from the Pentagon to American newspapers over the past few months, presumably designed to step up psychological pressure on the Iraqi regime. They will certainly include an element of misinformation. However, there are some targets which must be a priority. Basra is one. Its importance, and the threat posed by Iraqi forces there, is demonstrated by the stepping up of bombing by British and US aircraft on targets within the no-fly zone over southern Iraq. Forces there are mostly cannon fodder.
On two consecutive days last week they attacked missile batteries near Basra which could threaten allied forces in Kuwait as well as troops invading Iraq from the south. In further, hitherto unreported, attacks this week, British and American planes bombed five communication centres and a mobile early warning radar in southern Iraq. Basra is a formidable target, not least because it is surrounded by marshes and water, defence analysts warned yesterday. "The Iranians spent many years trying to take Basra and never did," Andrew Brookes, of the International Institute for Strategic Studies, said, referring to the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war. We're not going to use human wave attacks using 14 year olds, so there's no comparison.
Posted by: Steve White ||
02/20/2003 10:03 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I understood Saddam drained all the marshes as part of the campaign to wipe out Marsh Arabs. Duh!
Posted by: john ||
02/20/2003 20:31 Comments ||
Top||
President Saddam Husseinâs government, apparently emboldened by antiwar sentiment at the U.N. Security Council and in worldwide street protests, has not followed through on its promises of increased cooperation with U.N. arms inspectors, according to inspectors in Iraq. âThey are feeling: The world opinion is with us. We can resist further pressure. We have time. We can play with the U.S. and U.K.,â a U.N. official said. âThis is very dangerous.â I can hear the Left now: Bush and Blair made us protest! It's not our fault we started the war!
Posted by: R. McLeod ||
02/20/2003 10:02 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
That only works if you are a mind numbed robot, with no ability of free will. You chose to protest, or else are defective. Either way, it is your fault, not Bush, not Blair. The only difference is in the corrective action needed to correct such a defect.
Posted by: Ben ||
02/20/2003 2:52 Comments ||
Top||
#2
"I have something to tell you. I'm not left-handed, either." - GW Bush
He plays a bumbling fool or a cowboy or whatever is needed, and people forget he's got a Harvard MBA.
At this point, I'd be willing to wager even money that Condi asked Blix to tone down the Feb. 15 report because the rest of the elements weren't ready yet.
Right now, there's so much rope out there, it's not even funny.
I'm very glad he was able to establish a close personal bond to Vladimir... which everyone seems to have conveniently forgotten.
#3
I doubt Chiraq is in on it.
Here's my assessment:
Concept and planning: Rice, maybe Rove, Sun Tzu
Main Group: Bush, Blair, Wolfowitz
Co-conspirators: Rumsfeld, Putin, Powell
Innocents: Blix, Annan
Ropes: Gaullists, Saddam, Ba'athists
Collateral Damage: 'peace' activists, J. Jackson, numerous other figures
The key question which I believe led to this is:
How do we protect our troops from chemical and biological weapons?
They are relatively safe once they are in motion. Until then, they are vulnerable. Clearly, the best way to protect our troops is to have it seem like they are not coming until they are already under way. The same logic applies to our forces in Northern Iraq. Until Saddam thinks war is unavoidable, they are safe from attack. Once he believes it is unavoidable, he will likely try to attack them.
The logic of the situation and teachings of Sun Tzu say "When you are close, make your enemy believe that you are far away." The more ready we get, the further away we seem.
Acid test: UN Security council still meeting at 4:30 pm EST on a Friday (after the markets close), discussing use of force. Blix makes unscheduled report of Iraqi non-compliance.
Risk: Saddam works this out. Actually, not really such a great risk. Increasing Saddam's paranoia would only further cloud his already poor judgement.
Risk: Tony Blair vote of no-confidence. He's can count on support from the conservatives. Not going to happen.
Risk: Blix has a Quisling moment. This is a serious risk, but unlikely. Over-trumps held in reserve to cover this possibility.
Risk: Putin gets cold feet. Bush is presumably chatting with Putin daily. Alternate strategies would have been chosen if this had been a serious risk.
Risk: France fails to over-play hand. Chiraq's personality has been extensively documented. One downside to continued presence on the world stage.
Is this whole proposition outlandish? Yes. However, Condi and company had a lot of time to work this out. Various parties have had 12 years to plan this out, thinking a little bit at a time. If someone has spent one hour a week for a dozen years, there is a very high probability of one or more brilliant insights.
#6
Been getting letters from the CIA, eh Dishman?? :)
excerpt:
Senator Levin: Now if he did initiate an attack you've . . . indicated he would probably attempt clandestine attacks against us . . . But what about his use of weapons of mass destruction? If we initiate an attack and he thought he was in extremis or otherwise, what's the likelihood in response to our attack that he would use chemical or biological weapons?
Senior Intelligence Witness: Pretty high, in my view.
#7
I'll be both laughing and cheering, Dishman!
I think your analyis is going to turn out to be pretty close. Depending on what Russia does, you might put Putin up into the planners category (or at least advisor to the planners). I'm sure you remember what his old 'job' was.
As for Sun Tzu, I think you are spot on. The more confused and wobbly things seem to get, the more hopeful I get.
Liberalhawk, keep in mind that Bush doesn't have to be brilliant, as long as he has brilliant advisors and is smart enough to listen. Which I think he is.
Posted by: Kathy K ||
02/20/2003 15:41 Comments ||
Top||
#8
What happens if we get 13 abstentions?
Pooty-poot already said he's not helping, but DEBKA reported after Iraq, France, Germany, the UN and Russia will be dealt with because W is a wee bit upset w/the weasels. The x-KGBr did not read W's profile.
What if GW and Powell don't need another UNSC vote?
What if Tony Blair only talks about another resolution?
What if Blix is afraid to issue a tough report because he will be forever remembered for triggering the war?
And Chiraq continues to stonewall?
This discussion then becomes not about Saddam but the survival of the UN. Now the real business of diplomats starts, to come up with wording for a vote everyone can live with. Notice how quiet some of the players in NY have become. A win-win way in the making. And very much an MBA grad way.
Posted by: john ||
02/20/2003 20:57 Comments ||
Top||
An attack by heavily-armed men has left at least 14 dead in the southern Philippines. Five houses were gutted by a blaze, after being hit with grenades and machine gun fire in a village on the island of Mindanao. The Philippines military said the Muslim rebels of the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) were suspected of being behind the attack. In a separate attack, at least one person was reported dead after a bomb exploded in a market town on the island... A MILF spokesman denied that his men had carried out the village, but said the guerrillas would investigate it. "Yep, Mohammed over there just completed a crime scene forensics course at Mindanao Community College. Ballistics, fingerprints, fiber analysis, you name it. I wuz just goin' now to fetch the microscope an tweezers.
An army spokesman said that about 50 gunmen attacked the village near Kalawit in Mindanao on Wednesday evening...Some residents of the village were shot as they tried to put out the flames... The market explosion went off in Kabacan, in North Cotabato province. The army said a device, probably a mortar, had apparently gone off prematurely, and the dead man was suspected of being the bomber. Trained to the exacting standards of Jihadis worldwide.
Posted by: Pete Stanley ||
02/20/2003 10:01 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
--Trained to the exacting standards of Jihadis worldwide.--
Let's pray (for those who do) or continue to hope so.
Tampa Bay's sizable Muslim community reacted Wednesday with suspicion and alarm to the news that a University of South Florida professor had been arrested, accused of heading a violent terrorist organization. "This used to be the land of freedom and democracy," said Lubaba Aldaker, a worker at a Middle Eastern bakery in a strip mall that also has an Arabian grocery and cafe. "Not anymore." "Suspicion and alarm" means toilet paper consumption spiked. Normally, the definition of freedom and democracy doesn't include the freedom to run international conspiracies dedicated to slaughtering one's fellow man...
"There is no justice," added Gheyas Swar, a fellow worker at Bonsoir Bakery. "We don't see any evidence. Where is the evidence? They have to show somebody the evidence to arrest him." As a matter of fact, they do. Presumably, they showed the evidence to the judge prior to rounding him up. The rule book doesn't say anything about calling down to the bakery for permission to grab the Bad Guys.
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
02/20/2003 10:22 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
China and the United States have a 'shared view' on North Korea, Secretary of State Colin Powell said on Thursday, despite apparent differences of approach on how to ease the peninsular nuclear crisis. "We think they're nuts."
"A nation of loop-loops."
"Straight jackets."
"Strong sedatives."
"Nope, straight jackets."
"Too much noise. Sedatives."
Mr Powell, who is due in Beijing as part of a three-nation Asian tour on Sunday, said that Beijing and Washington were closely cooperating on the issue. 'Certainly the situation in North Korea will be a subject of considerable interest and discussion,' he said. 'The United States and China do have a shared view that the North Korean nuclear programme is not acceptable and that the Korean Peninsula must not have nuclear weapons. That is a position that President Bush and President Jiang Zemin took publicly when President Jiang Zemin visited Crawford.' Officials said later that Mr Powell would meet Mr Jiang and new Communist Party chief Hu Jintao in Beijing. "Hey, Hu! How you?"
"I hate it when he says that."
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
02/20/2003 08:47 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
As near as I can tell, our view of NK is, "give them nothing and deter them from doing anything too crazy while we wait for them to starve to death."
So China shares that view?
Posted by: Patrick Phillips ||
02/20/2003 21:15 Comments ||
Top||
Hang on to your lunch everybody...
Has former President Bill Clinton hit the campaign trail again?
That's the word according to a Pittsburgh Tribune-Review columnist who reports a "major international move" is afoot to help install the ex-CEO of the most powerful nation as the CEO of the most powerful world body â the United Nations. Will this make me President of the world?
Sunday's "Dateline D.C." column, which the paper says is written by a Washington-based British journalist and political observer, named no names but cited reports that Clinton had already lined up support for his candidacy for the secretary-general position from Germany, France, England, Ireland, New Zealand, a handful of African states, Morocco and Egypt. The Tribune-Review also reports Russia has made it known it would not object and added that China is also a big fan of the former president. I think we already knew about China being a "big fan"..
According to the Tribune-Review columnist, U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan is "under pressure to resign before the end of his second term in 2006." Should he do so, the General Assembly would select his replacement, on the recommendation of the U.N. Security Council. This may come as early as this Fall. ...and then what? Head back to whatever third world shithole he came from? Don't bet on it.
"This is the first I've heard about it and it's certainly not true," Annan's deputy spokesperson Hua Jiang told WorldNetDaily. "As far as we know, he has the full trust of all the members."
Jiang said Annan, who took over as U.N. chief in 1997, intends to fill out his entire term through 2006.
A PBS documentary, which aired earlier this month, offered highlights of Annan's U.N. career. A low point came in 1994 with the genocide in Rwanda. Annan calls it "the greatest catastrophe the U.N. ever faced."and did little about High points include the independence of East Timor and accepting Norway's Nobel Peace Prize in 2001. The UN, Carter, Yasser,...the list is just endless.And I thought it was presented in Sweden?
Odds favor an American secretary general next time around because there has never been one from North America.
Clinton's fund-raising prowess, according to the Tribune-Review, is also viewed as just what the doctor ordered for the 50-year-old U.N. headquarters building on 42nd Street in New York, that is in need of a serious overhaul. Maybe he can get Jimmy Carter and some of those Habitat folks to swing on by and help out?
A rested and refreshed Clinton recently appeared on CNN's "Larry King Live" program, a customary pit stop for modern-day political campaigns. He made repeated references to the U.N. throughout the interview.
Responding to King's query about Secretary of State Colin Powell's presentation on Iraq to the Security Council, Clinton sounded more like a U.N. diplomat than a former U.S. president. Just like when he was actually President...
"The most important thing [Powell] said from the point of view from the United Nations is that we had intelligence and photographs which seemed to prove that Iraq was almost taking these chemical stocks, at least, out of the backdoor while the inspectors were going through the front door, that they were moving things. And if that's true, it means Mr. Blix and his inspectors might never get to do the job that they were appointed to do. So I think that we need to listen to Blix, listen to Secretary Powell and I still hope the United Nations can act together on this and I think there's still a chance we can," he said.
"And, you know, there's still a chance that Saddam Hussein will come to his senses and disarm," he added. There's also a chance that someday Bubba will just fade away and never be heard from again. The odds are about the same.
Clinton stressed the need for abiding by international law and making sure action taken against Saddam Hussein is coordinated through the global body.
"We're trying to get rid of the chemical and biological storehouse in the hands of a tyrant ... The second thing we're trying to do is to build a global alliance for peace and freedom and security. So if we can do it with broad support within the U.N., it would be much better," Clinton said. "If we can get, based on this evidence, and letting the inspectors do a little more work if we can get an agreement with the French and the Germans and the others who are skeptical and who think that we've been too eager to do this all along, that would be better and it might give us a chance to resolve this peacefully. I think the greatest victory of all would be if Saddam Hussein saw the whole world arrayed against him and thought, you know, the jig was up." Bill, how can we start missing you if you won't go away?
Throughout the duration of the interview, the 42nd American president took credit for keeping a lid on the nuclear showdown with North Korea, now threatening to bubble over and for giving the approval for the first Israeli astronaut to go into space aboard the space shuttle Columbia. God, is there ANYTHING he won't take credit for?
"On the day that he went up, former Prime Minister Barak called and thanked me and reminded me that he and I had done this deal to allow this remarkable human being to go into space," Clinton recalled. ...and if he hadn't died up there, I wouldn't even remember his name.And then Kim Jong Il called to thank me for the nuclear weapons.
In addition to increasing his visibility in the media, Clinton is taking a cue from his Democratic predecessor former President Jimmy Carter and conducting international diplomacy. He is slated to participate in the World Economic Forum in Davos next week. The forum is part of the U.N.'s effort to mediate a solution to the North Korean nuclear issue. Yes, it worked out SO WELLthe last time they took a shot at it.
He also has been promoting his William J. Clinton Foundation, which has collaborated with the Harvard AIDS Institute, Columbia University Medical School and other organizations, to help countries battling AIDS develop better systems to deliver care. Clinton also co-chairs the International AIDS Trust with Nelson Mandela.
#1
Obviously, the real attraction here is the much larger, universal pool of potential interns to select from. "All sizes, all colors, and every accent you can think of!"
Posted by: Dar Steckelberg ||
02/20/2003 14:15 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Looks like the anti-Christ is ready to assume his throne.
#7
Well, now W has another reason to turn the UN into the United League of Nations. He destroyed the party, and he can now drive a stake thru the UN and hopefully his wife's campaign.
Again, very, very slick, der slickmeister. He can bury his dirty dealings in committee.
#8
This actually wouldn't surprise me. The First Sociopath's got the ego for it; the boy's always wanted to be king of the world. Plus, there's all the perks. He'd get treated like a head of state again, there'd be interns from every nation under heaven, he'd have no electorate to pander to, there wouldn't be any religious leaders hanging around lecturing him about things and he wouldn't have one of those pesky constitution deals to uphold so he'd be impossible to impeach.
Actually, this would be a pretty good fit for Turtle Bay. They know the Perjurer-in-Chief's still got a following in this country and can raise a buck or two. I guess they figure that Kyoto might even get ratified if the old fraud campaigns around the country for it. Plus, Bill can get just about any Hollywood airhead actor around on board for whatever UN idiocy is next. And it might be a way to get a lot of Americans on the UN's side because our Bill's running them so how can they be anti-American?
If it weren't so scary, it might be fun
Posted by: Christopher Johnson ||
02/20/2003 17:23 Comments ||
Top||
#9
And Jessie Hi-Jackson will get a job with Willie, for sure!
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
02/20/2003 18:27 Comments ||
Top||
#10
"All sizes, all colors, and every accent you can think of!"
Dar, they need to speak when they're "working" with His Clintonness???
#11
As a Pittsburgh resident, I feel compelled to rain on your parade a bit and point out that the Tribune-Review is quite possibly the worst source in the world when it comes to news about Slick Willie. The paper is owned by the Mellon-Scaife family (i.e. the same people who bankrolled Ken Starr), and has been known to print anything and everything it can find that's even remotely derogatory about the guy, regardless of its veractiy.
Whatever you may think of Clinton, it's probably not a good idea to trust a paper that claimed not once, not twice, but THREE times that he didn't just get it on with Monica, but actually physically raped the girl in the Oval Office.
#12
Why doesn't Bush embarass Carter by suggesting publicly that Carter go back to N. Korea to stall smooth over ruffled feathers? Bush would be able to silence some of the critics who are panicking and saying Bush should DO SOMETHING!. Carter would be embarrassed by having to confront the crisis and calling on Bush for concessions would reveal his position, past & present, to be asinine. Carter would be canny enough to refuse, which would likely have the same effect. It would also send a message to Clinton to think twice about meddling in vital security policies.
Or perhaps we should send Carter back to Venezuela, now that Chavez is cranking up the oppression.
#14
"All sizes, all colors, and every accent you can think of!" Dar, they need to speak when they're "working" with His Clintonness???
Kinda hard to speak with 6-8"of tube steak in trhe mouth,
I'm sorry, Fred, but it is about a Indian and a Pakistani.
At least it doesn't start "An Indian, a Pakistani and a giraffe walk into a bar, see?..."
An Indian man who smuggled a Pakistani into Hong Kong in his suitcase was sentenced Thursday to 16 months in jail. Pardeep Singh, 22, was found guilty of aiding and abetting the Pakistani's illegal entry into Hong Kong, officials said in a statement. On Dec. 26, Singh entered Hong Kong through a checkpoint at the mainland Chinese border city of Shenzhen, carrying a large suitcase. When authorities found the hidden Pakistani man inside, Singh denied the luggage was his and claimed an Indian friend gave it to him. "I didn't ask you if anyone had packed your bag, I asked you who bagged the Pak?"
Posted by: Steve ||
02/20/2003 01:48 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
i'm thinking of a classic Soviet-era Russian joke where the KGB bigman says to his flunky,
"fear not, comrade -- if we are attacked by the West, our agents will carry nuclear bombs concealed in suitcases into every Western capitol and destroy them,"
and the flunky replies,
"well, I suppose we have enough bombs... but will we have enough suitcases?"
The Homeland Security bill that passed Congress last November included a provision to allow pilots to carry guns in the cockpit, but before that happens the Transportation Security Administration is making sure pilots are properly vetted before they are handed any firepower. Ohfergawdsake! This kind of metaphysix in place of thought means we're going to have to wait until the next aircraft atrocity, maybe even the one after that, before something of substance actually gets done. It'll probably be six or seven atrocities from now before they do what should be done: make sure all passenger firearms over .32 caliber are in checked baggage. Other than that, try not to hit each other when Mahmoud pulls out his exploding platform shoes.
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
02/20/2003 12:03 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Permit calibers higher than .32 if loaded with the new frangible type ammo; save a lot of passengers from having to purchase a new firearm.
A North Korean fighter jet briefly crossed the western sea border with South Korea on Thursday, and a South anti-aircraft missile unit went into battle position, a South Korean military official said. The NKors probably consider the missile tracking the overflight as a provocation. Then again, they get provoked every time somebody takes a deep breath, don't they?
The North Korean jet retreated without incident after two South Korea fighter jets went to the area, said Major Lee Dong-chan, a spokesman for the South Korean air force. The MiG-19 jet fighter crossed the border at 10:03 a.m. and headed back into communist territory two minutes later. This was the first incursion by North Korean military jet since 1983. A MiG-19? Did they have to roll that sucker out of the Great Korean People's Museum of Juche and Stuff? I guess coal production is up, since they have enough to shovel into the back of it to make it go.
A South Korea anti-aircraft missile unit based near Incheon, a seaport west of Seoul, went into battle position. At the same time, two South Korean F-5E jets went to the scene to try to intercept the North Korean intruder, Lee said. Later, four more South Korean F-5E jets were deployed to the area. It's a good thing they didn't engage. A MiG-19 is probably worth some pretty good money from an antique dealer. Woulda been a waste to blow it to smithereens.
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
02/20/2003 11:58 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
A Florida professor and seven other men were charged Thursday with operating a global terrorist organization. University of South Florida professor Sami Al-Arian was shown in television images being led in handcuffs to FBI headquarters in Tampa. "It's all about politics," the Kuwaiti-born Al-Arian told reporters as agents led him inside. So's terrorism, Perfessor...
The 50-count indictment charges the eight men with operating a criminal racketeering enterprise since 1984 that supported Palestinian Islamic Jihad and with conspiracy to kill and maim people abroad, conspiracy to provide material support to the group, extortion, perjury, mail and wire fraud, obstruction of justice, attempt to procure citizenship or naturalization unlawfully and other charges. Each defendant faces up to life in prison if convicted. It'd be nice if each got it, too...
Those arrested in the United States Thursday were described as setting up a terrorist cell at the University of South Florida. They are:
Al-Arian, the Florida college professor the government says ran the Jihad's U.S. operations. Al-Arian is a native of Kuwait and teaches engineering.
Sameeh Hammoudeh, 42, born in the West Bank, now a resident of Temple Terrace, Fla. He also is an instructor at the University of South Florida and administrator at the Islamic Academy of Florida.
Hatim Naji Fariz, 30, born in Puerto Rico and now living in Spring Hill, Fla. He is a manager at a medical clinic.
Ghassan Zayed Ballut, 41, a West Bank native now living in Tinley Park, Ill., and owner of a small business.
Four men who live abroad were also charged. It was not immediately clear if they had been arrested as well. They are:
Ramadan Abdullah Shallah, 45, a Gaza Strip native and now resident of Damascas, Syria. He is described as the worldwide leader of Palestinian Islamic Jihad and is a former instructor at the University of South Florida.
Bashir Musa Mohammed Nafi, 50, originally from Egypt and now living in Oxfordshire, England. The indictment calls him the United Kingdom leader of the group.
Mohammed Tasir Hassan Al-Khatib, 46, originally from the Gaza Strip and now living in Beirut; described as the treasurer of the organization.
Abd AL Aziz Awda, 52, born in Israel and now imam of the Al Qassam Mosque in Gaza Strip. The indictment calls him the founder and "spiritual leader" of the group.
I tend to doubt at least three out of the four are ever going to make their way to the USA, but it's nice to be on record as wanting to have a long talk with them. Perhaps the Israelis might be so kind as to snag Awda next time they're in Gaza. That might make it two out of four. We'll havae to wait until the 82nd Airborne's in Damascus before we get Shallah and al-Khatib...
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
02/20/2003 11:49 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Jon - correcto - in fact O'Reilly was crowing about this on Imus's show this AM
Posted by: Frank G ||
02/20/2003 14:54 Comments ||
Top||
#2
He's been running Palestinian Islamic Jihad from Tampa since '84 and we're just getting around to shutting him down? A whole lotta people got some 'splainin' to do!
General strike leader Carlos Fernandez was seized at a restaurant by gunmen who identified themselves as secret police agents, Venezuelaâs largest business chamber said. Fernandez had been under government investigation for his role in the strike, which crippled Venezuelaâs economy.
Hugo's getting better at his Fidel imatation...
FERNANDEZ, PRESIDENT of the Fedecamaras business chamber, was the co-leader of a two-month strike that sought President Hugo Chavezâs ouster. The strike ended earlier this month in all but Venezuelaâs oil sector. Fernandez was arrested about midnight Tuesday in a restaurant by gunmen who said they were with Venezuelaâs secret police force, said Fedecamaras vice president Albis Munoz. âWe know absolutely nothing about his whereabouts,â Munoz said, adding that Fernandez was arrested without any court order. âWe demand that the government guarantee his safety.â
I'd guess he's already dead...
Fernandez had been under government investigation for his role in the strike, which crippled Venezuelaâs economy. Chavez has repeatedly accused strike leaders of trying to topple his government and threatened they would be prosecuted. Strike co-leader Carlos Ortega of the Venezuelan Workers Confederation condemned the arrest as âa terrorist actâ that presaged a wave of repression against Venezuelaâs opposition.
I'm not sure about the "presaging" part of that statement. Sounds like it's already underway.
The arrest followed the slayings and possible torture of three dissident Venezuelan soldiers and an opposition activist this week. All four bodies were found in the suburbs of Caracas with their hands tied and their faces wrapped with tape. Darwin Arguello, Angel Salas and Felix Pinto and opposition activist Zaida Peraza, 25, had multiple bullet wounds and showed signs of torture, Raul Yepez, the deputy director of Venezuelaâs forensics police, said at a press conference on Wednesday. Human rights groups warned a continuing impasse between Chavez and opponents demanding early elections could lead to more violence.
Hugo's feeling his Marxist oats. Fernandez is likely dead the same way...
According to the New York-based Human Rights Watch, a witness to the abductions saw the victims being forced into two vehicles by men wearing ski masks, not far from the plaza that has become the central rallying point of the opposition. Yepez said the abduction took place on Saturday night. âI donât think anybody should expect the violence to decrease,â said Michael Shifter, an analyst at the Inter-American Dialogue think tank in Washington. âAs long as there is an impasse on both sides, if anything, the violence will increase.â No arrests have been made in connection with the killings. Maybe because those doing the arrests would be the same guys doing the killing...
Funny how no one from the left is shouting "no blood for oil " over Mr. Chavez's methods in Venezuela.
Posted by: Frank Martin ||
02/20/2003 11:30 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The great Jimmy Carter was in Venezuela a few weeks ago. His soothing drivel probably helped Chavez decide that roughing up the opponents wouldn't be noticed.
#2
It's odd that Chavez has suddenly decided to go from waiting the strike out to his own little "Nacht und Nebel" routine. You'd figure that this would make him less fashionable...
Posted by: Paul ||
02/20/2003 12:25 Comments ||
Top||
Syrian forces dismantled some bases and began leaving northern Lebanese areas, witnesses reported Thursday, leaving a region Syria considers crucial to its national security after 26 years. The redeployment, expected to be completed by week's end, was agreed to at a meeting Tuesday of the Lebanese-Syrian military committee, according to a Lebanese army statement. A senior Lebanese army officer said Tuesday that 3,500 Syrian troops would be withdrawn. Syria began thinning out its military presence in 2001, making two withdrawals from Beirut and populous central Lebanon to bring down the numbers to about 20,000 soldiers from a high of 35,000 after Syria first intervened in the Lebanese civil war in 1976. Military analysts said the small numbers of troops withdrawn would be of little military significance. There were suggestions, not confirmed, that Syria wanted to strengthen its troop presence along its eastern border with Iraq. That's my guess.
Military trucks and other vehicles, including trailers carrying tanks and armored personnel carries, grouped near the coastal town of Batroun 27 miles north of Beirut, and began heading north, the witnesses said. A total of 21 trucks were seen headed toward the border Thursday morning, the witnesses said on condition of anonymity. They added that Syrian soldiers were spotted at some positions loading ammunition and hardware on military trucks. Some positions were abandoned by Wednesday night. It was not clear whether all the withdrawing troops would return to Syria or if some would be rebased in other bases further north or in the Bekaa Valley in eastern Lebanon. I'm sure they are being watched closely by the IDF.
The redeployment was not expected to reduce Syria's domination of Lebanese politics, but was seen as being influenced by rising regional tensions as the United States threatens to attack Iraq, Syria's neighbor to the east. Gibran Tueni, general manager of Lebanon's leading An-Nahar newspaper and a harsh critic of Syrian policy in this country, said Thursday the redeployment was a Syrian message to America on the eve of an ''earthquake that may strike the region'' designed to help Damascus ''polish its image'' in the West. We'll see.
Posted by: Steve ||
02/20/2003 11:31 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
It's possible that they think Israel might try to use the distraction of the fracas next door to whack them. It's possible -- I personally think that Israel has a long hit list that they're going to get started on the moment Saddam is out of the way.
#2
Syria is getting some serious bunching of the undies, with all that activity going on around them.
Israel has been told to lay low for awhile, doubtful if they will try anything bold. Unless Saddam decides to send them his love, again.
#3
If I had a very large American force unloading in Turkey and planning to head to Iraq, I might want to redeploy some assets in that direction. The fastest way from Southern Turkey to Iraq lies through Syria.
Posted by: john ||
02/20/2003 21:10 Comments ||
Top||
Largely unseen by the rest of the world, America has opened up a new military front in the so-called war on terror. From a warship off Yemen, and from a heavily guarded base in East Africa, the Pentagon is running the "Joint Task ForceâHorn of Africa". Quietly, and with little fanfare, the Pentagon and the CIA have been building up a sizeable presence in Djibouti, the peaceful republic in the Horn of Africa. At an old Foreign Legion base in the former French colony there are now nearly 2,000 US troops, preparing to go on counter-terrorist missions.
Armoured Humvee jeeps burst periodically from the gates, probing into the surrounding bush. Blackened helicopters with encrypted communications for special operations clatter above the camp then sweep low over the white-washed walls of Djibouti city and vanish towards the mountains. A few miles offshore, sits the hi-tech warship USS Mount Whitney, the HQ and intelligence base for the JTF-HOA. The commander is Marine Major-General John Sattler. "We're here to stop this region turning into a haven for Al-Qa'ida," he says. When they lost their bases in Afghanistan, he explains, the Pentagon feared the terrorists would flee west to Yemen and East Africa. So a task force was set up to react rapidly to reports of terrorist activity. His command covers seven countries, Sudan, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Djibouti, Yemen, Somalia and Kenya. So is he just watching, I ask him, or preparing to go in, guns blazing? "Direct action", in the Pentagon jargon, is the last resort, I was told. Might be the last resort but it's not off the table.
The Pentagon would prefer to work with the countries in the region, training them to tackle terror and pooling their intelligence resources. Yemen is held up as a shining example of such co-operation. British and US special forces have been training Yemenis in counter-terrorism. But in Yemen, America has already taken the law into its own hands. Last November, the CIA used Djibouti to launch an unmarked Predator drone over Yemen. Using co-ordinates phoned in from a Yemeni intelligence officer on the ground, the drone flew to a car carrying six Al-Qa'ida suspects, fired its missiles and destroyed the car. The drone returned to Djibouti. It would have been the perfect "deniable op", had the Pentagon not gloated over it so publicly.
The US has been accused of extra-judicial killing, targeting suspects without bringing them to trial. There have been no further US airstrikesbut officials told me privately that Somalia and Yemen remained prime candidates for such an operation. Awwwwwh. That makes me feel bad, to think that terrorists might not have their rights protected.
"One of our aims is to make this is a hard place for Al-Qa'ida to work in." General Sattler says. But while Washington feels it is now taking the war on terror to the enemy, by having so visible a presence here, America may well be offering Al-Qa'ida a new and tempting target. al-Qaeda could always get lucky, but not in Djibouti. Those speical forces and Marines mentioned above will be ready.
Posted by: Steve White ||
02/20/2003 10:29 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
That's gotta tickle the french too, having a real military operating from one of their old digs...
The publicity over the drone killing in Yemen was probably ok'd for two reasons - 1) morale builder at home, and 2)it's gotta be on the bad guys' minds that death can come unannounced out of the sky at any time. Might be a reason why there are so many poorly aimed rockets/mortars as well as "work accidents"...jittery hands are careless hands
Posted by: Frank G ||
02/20/2003 9:02 Comments ||
Top||
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
