Al-Arabyiah TV on the 11th Sep 2004 broadcasted a live programme about the New York Twin Towers attack in 2001... The question of the programme was "Do you think that there are organizations other than Al-Qaeda responsible for the 11 Sep 2001 attacks in NY?!"
More than 85% of the callers voted for YES! Less than 15% voted for no! Those who said yes think that Israel, the Zionists, and the USA are the ones that carried out the NY attacks in 2001! Some of them considered Osama Bin Laden as a hero Mujahed and others variably said that he is an American agent or (made in the USA) who shared the attack with them!
Some expressed very strange views by saying that GWB arranged these attacks as a gratitude to the Jewish who make him to win the election earlier! They explained that by this GWB send his troops to plunder the region's wealth and to protect Israel!...
Hammorabi considers this as evidence that the Arab world is insane. It reminds me of a Star Trek episode where Spock said {approx}, "In an insane world, the sane man is thought insane."
Posted by: mhw ||
09/14/2004 9:14:47 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Well, there ya have it. Let Binny off the hook. Just like everyone else (The Jews, US, Russia, etc.) was responsible for Beslan, too. I would love to live in a culture where everyone else is responible for my barbaric ations. That must be sweet.
#3
Nada
Well if you live in LLL-land, you can blame whitey for any problem if you are black and you can blame male dominated society for any problem if you are a woman. If you are a white male, you can still blame Bush for any thing.
#4
Doesn't look like a scientific sample to me. Sort of like polling Rush Limbaugh's audience on who will win in November.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
09/14/2004 10:00 Comments ||
Top||
#5
OF course, it wasn't OBL. It must have been the tooth fairy.
Posted by: Douglas De Bono ||
09/14/2004 10:08 Comments ||
Top||
#6
mhw - I'm a white male, so I blame Bush for the dinosaurs' extinction, the Genesis crash, and Hip-Hop's popularity. And Sharon Stone's movie career.
#10
Dammit! I forgot all about Gigli. Guess we can lump Madonna's "Swept Away" in there, too. (I guess to be fair, I haven't seen either movie, but all those reviews can't be wrong.)
#12
This highlights a primary reason for the affinity between the mass media and the Islamofascists: Arabs in particular are probably the most gullible large audience in the world.
This is not the result of some inherent inferiority or low intelligence, or even of moral depravity (except of course on the media side), it is simply the natural outcome of recent history.
In terms of media access, oil wealth and the growth of technology have resulted in the Arab masses being force-marched from the 8th century to the 20th (the 1960s specifically)in the space of less than 40 years. This has occurred with no opportunity for social, cultural, and political institutions and practices to catch up. The result is about what you would get if you went back to Chaucer's England and gave every peasant family their own cable tv setup.
#13
AC - Lol! What a visual... and, of course, it fired off a neural path I hadn't visited in awhile...
I'll prolly regret this, I'm sure, but *here is something (from cable TV, heh) that might cause Lawrence to write an entirely different Lady Chatterly's Lover, lol! It would spin a bunch of turbans, I'm sure.
SFW
* The codec is I-263 and a zip file for it is here. Use at your own risk and, no, I won't help you with installing it. Read the readme and do what you want. Is the video worth it? Lol, Of course it is! The vid's a scream!
Abdul, go down to the bank and slay the Zionist Drysdale. He has insulted the honor of your sister Ellie-Fatima. Also, make sure the cement camel watering hole is filled.
More likely there's a new deal in the works, IMO, assuming it hasn't been finalized already.
Saudi Arabia is quieter again after a tumultuous summer of unprecedented violence — gun battles, kidnappings, killings and beheading of foreigners — that ripped through this usually tranquil desert kingdom. Most Saudis one meets these days seem confident the worst is now behind them. "It is 95 percent game-over for the terrorists," says Waleed Abalkhail, president of SISCOM, a Saudi E-commerce firm. Pro-al Qaeda insurgents' hoped their summer rampage would shake the establishment and royal family. That would be Muqrin's little campaign that culminated in his eventual demise...
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
09/14/2004 1:28:26 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I agree with the last sentence of the article, that the Saudi security forces will be better prepared for the next uptick. Of course.
But,
-What about outside urban centers? Hail, Al-Jouf, Qassim? IOW, north of Riyadh to Jordan-Iraq border?
-What about terrorist funding?
Look, this guy did the best he could, I guess, but when you talk to an al-Feisal, an Abakhail (family name of former min of finance IIRC) you're dealing with Saudis who want to make sure the MagK seems more palatable to the outside world. All PR, IOW. I mean, look at the comment on how the bad, bad guys were ones who had learned violence due to their experience in Afghanistan. Now they've been killed, only peaceful saudis are left. Total snow job to a reporter writing for the Western media.
Knowing what is happening in the MK requires the skills of an astute Kremlinologist of the 1950's.
Posted by: chicago mike ||
09/14/2004 15:09 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Knowing what is happening in the MK requires the skills of an astute Kremlinologist of the 1950's.
Yes!
The good news is look around the 'burg, hell we got posters who write poetry about camels. :>
India will give Bangladesh a fresh list of insurgent training camps being operated there when the Home Secretary, Dhirendra Singh, pays a three-day visit to Dhaka from September 15. India is also likely to seek custody of fugitive insurgent leaders, including the United Liberation Front of Asom (ULFA) chief, Paresh Baruah, from the Khaleda Zia Government. Well-placed sources in the Home Ministry said the revised list of camps will include those serving as shelter-cum-transit points for insurgents active in the north-eastern States. These camps belong to the ULFA, the National Democratic Front of Bodoland (NDFB), the National Liberation Front of Tripura (NLFT) and other militant outfits active in Manipur, Nagaland, Assam and Tripura.
During talks with the Bangladesh Rifles (BDR) last month, the Border Security Force (BSF) had submitted a list of 195 camps run from Bangladeshi territory. The BDR denied the existence of these camps. The list is being updated for the Home Secretary's visit. The list of fugitive leaders, whose handing over is to be demanded, includes Paresh Baruah, who is hiding in Dhaka with the connivance of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). Others are his deputy Arabinda Rajkhowa and the NLFT leader, Deve Burman.
The sources pointed out that a recent five-part article in a prominent Bangladeshi newspaper, Prothom Alo, reported that the banned Bangladeshi Islamic extremist outfit, Harkat-ul-Jehad-al-Islami (HUJAI) declared a terrorist outfit by the U.S. State Department for its links with the Al-Qaeda and the Taliban has established an active network through `madrasas' and local non-governmental organisations. It is imparting training to extremist groups from Myanmar and India, the newspaper report said. The HUJAI was reported to be using its clout with certain Bangladeshi Islamic political groups such as the ruling Jamaat-e-Islami and Islami Oikya Jote (Islamic Unity Forum). Top HUJAI leaders such as Mufti Abdul Hannan, Mufti Qamaruzzaman and Mufti Saleh Ahmed, who have fought in Afghanistan and Chechnya, are now operating from underground, the report said.
Posted by: Paul Moloney ||
09/14/2004 1:43:59 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
China is reported to have sent heavily armed troops to protect its huge Three Gorges Dam against terrorist attack. Military helicopters, patrol boats, armoured vehicles and bomb disposal robots have been deployed around the dam, the China Times said on Tuesday.
The newspaper made no mention of who might want to target the project. But a US suggestion in June that Taiwan might target the dam to deter a Chinese invasion provoked an angry response from Beijing. Chinese military officials said at the time that any attack on the dam would provoke a devastating response. China regards Taiwan as part of its territory, and has repeatedly threatened to invade if the island declares independence.
According to the China Times report, military police have been training a "pool of talented anti-terrorist professionals" to work at the dam and its massive hydroelectric project. "The important anti-terrorism measures taken by the military police on the main bridges, dams and hydro-electric stations have basically been completed," the newspaper said.
China has huge hopes for the Three Gorges, the world's largest dam and flood control project, which Beijing hopes will help solve China's energy problems when it is completed in 2009. But the 180bn Yuan ($22bn) project is also proving controversial, with some environmentalists doubting its ability to prevent flooding - a claim which again resurfaced during recent floods earlier this month, when the authorities were forced to close the dam to shipping.
This is not the first time the project has been singled out as a possible terrorist target. In its annual statement to the US Congress, released in May, the Pentagon said that Taiwanese "proponents of strikes against the mainland apparently hope that merely presenting credible threats to China's urban population or high-value targets, such as the Three Gorges Dam, will deter Chinese military coercion."
In an angrily worded response, senior Chinese General Liu Yuan was quoted as saying that China would be "seriously on guard against threats from Taiwan independence activistsmilitants terrorists". "The Three Gorges Dam will not collapse and cannot be destroyed," he said at the time.
Any chance the Uighurs would have the ability/desire to take out the dam?
Posted by: Anonymous5089 ||
09/14/2004 11:18:45 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
My first thought was Xinjiang Muslims might target the damn dam, but that Taiwan connection is just juicy. If Taiwan faces invasion they can do incredible damage to the PRC by blowing the damn dam.
So what would it take to blow a damn damn with some settling cracks and a full load of water behind it. Could a non-nuclear load carried by a fighter bomber do it? Could a cruise missile? Does Tiawan have cruise missiles with the range?
#2
Figure almost all our memory chips, and such are made in Taiwanese factories, they'd have no trouble stealthily deveoping highly accurate missles.
As for warheads, if terrorists can try for suitcase nukes from the former USSR, imagine what the wealth of an economically strong nation like Taiwan can do on the market.
#3
A real bold statement, "The Three Gorges Dam will not collapse and cannot be destroyed," They said that about the Titanic too.
Like the man said "Never say never again" .
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
09/14/2004 15:57 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Perhaps there's a connection between this and last week's mysterious explosion in North Korea?
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
09/14/2004 15:59 Comments ||
Top||
#5
My first thought was how do they expect the troops to stop the water.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
09/14/2004 16:11 Comments ||
Top||
#6
That raspy sort of squeaking sound you hear in the background is China's collective military sphincter puckering up at the realization that their same sort of belligerent swaggering attitude can be turned against them in spades.
There should be an international pact to blow the Three Gorges to atoms if the communist Chinese so much as fart in Taiwan's general direction.
#7
The key to taking out a dam is placing the explosion against the dam on the water side. The water helps to focus and magnify the effect compared to a explosion on the air exposed face. Technology to deliver a bomb to the water side of a dam was developed in WW2 to take out dams in Nazi controlled Europe by the Allies. Check out "bouncing bomb" on google. The only difference is how much more explosive yield is needed for the three gorges dam compared to the dams on the ruhr river.
#8
A few words on the effect of destroying German dams from the Nation Master database:
The Moehne and Eder lakes poured around 330 million tons of water into the western Ruhr region. Mines were flooded and houses, factories, roads, railways and bridges destroyed as the flood waters spread for around 50 miles (80 km) from the source. In terms of deaths: 1,294 people were killed, 749 of them Ukrainian POWs from a camp just below the Eder Dam.
Of course, the Yangtze is known for killing thousands of people at a time, whenever it floods. The Three Gorges Dam will have a much bigger impact because of how big it is.
#9
Several bits: the easiest way would be to put a small submersible (think torpedo) in the water upstream, that would use mostly current to get into position, guiding itself to the wall of the dam *or* to a spillway. That would be if the Taiwanese hadn't already pre-positioned explosive charges inside the dam, during construction, designed to sit there for years. I might note that the achilles heel of Three Gorges is the poor rock on which it is set. It could go spontaneously at any time.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
09/14/2004 17:20 Comments ||
Top||
#11
NEWS FLASH: A "friend" advised me that Norks may be interested in a little "hydroelectic dam" payback to the Chinese. (Implying that it was the Chin that blew the whatever in Norkland to smithereens.)
#13
I am no expert on dam busting, especially on such a large gravity dam such as Three Gorges. It would seem to me that one would need the power of a nuclear weapon on the water side of the dam, like mudcapping a boulder. How to get the nuke there would be problematical, except for a missile delivery. Troops on the dam site are useless except for a show of force or for protecting against sabatoge. Destruction of the turbines and alternators in the powerhouse would be a serious blow. You just do not rebuild huge units like these in a week or two. They are basically built in place. It is amusing, though to see the Chicoms with their knickers in a knot.
Fly Ash Liberation Army----great handle, heh heh.
Posted by: Alaska Paul in McGrath, AK ||
09/14/2004 23:03 Comments ||
Top||
#14
Fly Ash Liberation Army, that must be Shipman. Where do you come up with this stuff. Only an infintessimally small precentage of the world population has sucked fly ash into their lungs.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
09/14/2004 23:09 Comments ||
Top||
Nothing to see here, Yankee warmonger...
South Korea is making much ado that there was a big explosion in Kim Hyong Jik County, Ryanggang Province of the DPRK, on Sept. 9, according to a radio report from Seoul. It first claimed that the explosion was presumed to be a nuclear test or a forest fire and the explosion took place in Kim Hyong Jik County and then asserted that it might happen in an area along the Military Demarcation Line, not in Ryanggang Province. This is a preposterous smear campaign. Pay no attention to the mushroom cloud!
There has been no such accident as explosion in the DPRK recently. Probably, plot-breeders might tell such a sheer lie, taken aback by blastings at construction sites of hydro-power stations in the north of Korea. Just blowing up a mountain. Nothing to see here...
The story about the explosion is nothing but a sheer fabrication intended to divert elsewhere the world public attention focused on the nuclear-related issue of south Korea for which they are now finding themselves in a dire fix. Move it along, Yankee dog....
#9
There are no mountains in our beloved country.Many of the bunkers of our world-leading golf courses have over-achieved out of devotion to our Beloved Glorious Master of Golf Great Leader.
Since there are no mountains in the Peoples Paradise,there cannot be a mountain leveled by an explosion.
There was no explosion.
There are no stockpiles of ammo hidden in caves under our glorious golf courses.
There was no mushroom cloud.
Our Glorious Leader has made a great advance in modern Socialist communications technology-smoke signaling.Perhaps you saw our demonstration of the brilliance of our Intellectually Superior Great Leader.
There was not an accident that caused a cache of Socialist Construction Equipment to explode.
Members of our Invincible Peoples Army often hold fireworks displays in honor of our beloved Great Leader.Unlike the effete cowardly running dogs of the decadent West,we hold fireworks displays in our subterranean wonderlands.
Our Most Exalted-Of-All-Time Great Leader has developed the awesome powers of his mind to the point he can alter the very landscape of our beloved land.Which Our Great Leader didn't do.But Our Great Leader could.
Posted by: Stephen ||
09/14/2004 20:46 Comments ||
Top||
If Poland decides to withdraw its troops from Iraq it will appear to be surrendering to terrorists, Poland's largest opposition party, which tops the country's popularity polls, said on Monday. "To decide to stop participating in a war because there are casualties means, de facto, surrendering," Donald Tusk, head of the liberal Civic Platform party, told public radio a day after three Polish soldiers were killed in an attack south of Baghdad.
His comments came on the same day Iraq's interim President Ghazi Al-Yawar arrived in Warsaw for an official visit. "The idea is to withdraw the Polish troops from Iraq in agreement with other allies so as not to give the impression that the Poles are surrendering to terrorism as the Spaniards did" last spring, said Tusk, who is considered a potential presidential candidate for the elections set for the end of 2005. "On the other hand, we must pressure our allies, especially the Americans, so that they present a precise plan for ending the intervention in Iraq, and to learn what in the end was the object of this intervention," he added.
Three Polish soldiers were killed and three others injured when their patrol was attacked with rockets and machine guns near the central Iraqi city of Hilla on Sunday. With this last attack the number of Polish nationals killed since the country dispatched 2,500 troops to Iraq last year in the wake of the US-led war has risen to 17 -- 13 soldiers and four civilians. Poland heads up a multinational force of 6,000 soldiers in the war-torn country. According to the latest poll, more than 70 percent of Poles are opposed to the presence of their country's troops in Iraq. Parliamentary elections are also due next year in Poland, with a recent poll putting the PO in the lead with 25 percent support, with the ruling Democratic Left Alliance (SLD) party which committed Polish troops to Iraq receiving seven percent support.
Posted by: tipper ||
09/14/2004 11:03:26 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
God bless the Poles - for a people who have been repeatedly screwed over by bigger powers in history, they sure keep a big brass pair.
They have to be amongst the toughest most resilient people in the world.
#3
Yes, and never forget who stopped the last major invasion of Islam into the West in 1683.
Oh yes, and when Jan III Sobieski, attacked the Turks at 4 A.M. it was September 11, on an island called Manhatten, in New York harbour, in the New World.
#4
We should have a Kosciusko Scholars program patterned on the Marshall Scholars program to make sure that the next generation of Polish leaders is not Der Spiegelized.
#5
The Poles were under the jackboot for many years. They understand the stakes and do not want to go back. Polish history should be taught in our high schools. Lots of lessons to be learned here.
Posted by: Alaska Paul in McGrath, AK ||
09/14/2004 23:09 Comments ||
Top||
#1
Dutchgeek, you need to give us excerpts. We are not going to register at the website just to find out what your headline means.
Posted by: Tom ||
09/14/2004 8:09 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Something to do with pot or sex.
Posted by: Howard UK ||
09/14/2004 8:10 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Ok listen up....go to the Google new section and type [dutch terror] ...press enter and u c the story....no need to register ...google user agent does wonders.
"On the other hand -- and this is no minor detail -- experts believe the Netherlands, with its lax laws and vast Muslim population, has become a haven for terrorists. So, by preserving their way of life, the Dutch may just be making it easier for terrorists to disrupt life in other countries, and eventually their own."
"The Dutch believe that there are at least 100 individuals with active links to terrorism living here. And they are fully aware of continuing efforts to recruit more terrorists among young Muslims. The Dutch Intelligence and Security Service (AIVD) had long denied charges that the country has become a favorite base of operations for terrorist organizations. But in recent months AIVD has acknowledged that a growing number of terrorist groups have indeed found a safe base of operations in the freedom-loving Netherlands. Even when police find terror suspects, most cases unravel at trial because Dutch law makes it difficult for prosecutors to obtain a conviction."
Posted by: Tom ||
09/14/2004 10:04 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Dutch, thanks - I use bugmenot but most of the time the IDs there are very stale and do not work - I haven't had much luck with it. (Running Firefox 0.9.1 on Linux).
The Dutch supported us in Iraq; the French opposed us.
The Dutch are too lax to crack down on jihadists in Holland; the French kick the sh*t out of their domestic jihadist suspects, have mass sentencings and deportations etc.
EFL - CNN makes no mention of the reason for the attack in the title.
La Louviere midfielder Rachid Belabed has been fired by his Belgian first division club after he was arrested on assault charges at the weekend. He was put under arrest by an examining magistrate on Monday for punching and kicking a terrorism expert outside the Brussels studios of RTL-TVi where the victim had taken part in a television talk show. "Unable to tolerate behaviour that goes against democratic values, La Louviere club has decided to fire Mr R. Belabed," read a club statement that described his acts as "unacceptable and unjustified."
Belabed, a 24-year-old Belgian of Moroccan descent, was waiting outside the studios when Claude Moniquet, a former journalist, walked out with a friend after the show, Controverse, which had hosted a discussion on terrorism. "A man approached me. He was tense, nervous and said he wanted to talk to me," Moniquet, a writer on terrorism, told local tabloid La Derniere Heure. "He said 'I don't like you. You are an enemy of Islam, a racist'." Belabed hit him in the head and kicked him when he fell to the ground, Moniquet said, adding that he later had to be treated at a clinic for his injuries.
Civil, well-reasoned discourse, Islamic-style. Notice the subtle wit employed to rebut the arguments of M. Moniquet?
Posted by: Super Hose ||
09/14/2004 3:19:43 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
"He said âI donât like you. You are an enemy of Islam, a racistâ."
I don't know about anyone else, but hearing that would probably set me off, and Mr Belabed would probably have ended up in the hospital. But that's just me.
EFL
A suspected leader of a Turkish al-Qaida cell told a court Monday that last year's suicide bombings in Istanbul were part of al-Qaida's global campaign and warned of more attacks if Turkey continues to support U.S. policies or maintains close ties with Israel.
He calls what Turkey has been doing support?
Defendant Harun Ilhan told the court that he and two other suspected ringleaders who remain at large _ Habib Akdas and Gurcan Bac _ were behind the November truck bombings that left 61 people dead. Ilhan said most of the 69 suspects charged in the case were not directly involved in the bombings. "I accept that I am an al-Qaida warrior," said Ilhan, who opened his testimony with a brief prayer and at times refused to stand during the trial. Ilhan, a bearded man who wore blue jeans and sports shoes to the hearing, also praised the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and warned that while Osama bin Laden is mortal "jihad (holy war) is eternal." "Even if Osama dies, our jihad will continue," he told the court.
I guess you don't need him then. We'll just kill him.
"Al-Qaida exists in all of the Islamic world for victory and until this fight is finished with success it will continue," he said. He also warned Turkey that if it supported the U.S. occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq and continued with friendly ties with Israel "we will never leave the Republic of Turkey, the price will be paid." "The war is not over and it will continue until imperialist forces withdraw" from Muslim countries, he said.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
09/14/2004 12:59:12 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
This Turkey just put his head on the chopping block.
Posted by: ed ||
09/14/2004 7:29 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I've been watching both the news and our beloved Murat. It seems that the (all to human) desire to hedge one's bets has well and truly bitten Turkey on the butt.
By being both truly helpful in a limited way (pace .com, et al.) and by trying to create a symbolic and yet very real conflict and distance between Washington and Ankara at the same time, the turks have managed to thoroughly annoy both sides. The turks have an impossible situation, compounded by their (i'm afraid un-realizable, if the comments by EU MP's are any guide) goal of admission to the EU.
Let this be a lesson to the rest of us that half measures in foreign policy can (but are not always!)be worse than even siding with the loosers (read Jihadis).
Posted by: N Guard ||
09/14/2004 9:49 Comments ||
Top||
#3
A suspected leader of a Turkish al-Qaida cell told a court Monday that last yearâs suicide bombings in Istanbul were part of al-Qaidaâs global campaign and warned of more attacks if Turkey continues to support U.S. policies or maintains close ties with Israel.
EFL of an interview with Chris Wallace - Holbrooke explains why Iraq is worse than Vietnam:
... Chris, there is a double standard in this campaign. Senator Kerry is constantly being asked what his position is on Iraq, but he has been very clear on it. When he voted to support President Bush in October of 2002, he voted, as most of Congress did, to give President Bush the authority to take care of Saddam. He voted the same thing in 1998. But...
WALLACE: Ambassador Holbrooke, before we go into all of that, let me ask you some questions.
HOLBROOKE: May I just make the connection to your question? Because it's critical.
At that point, the president used the authority to start a war in Iraq in the wrong way at the wrong time instead of finishing the job in Afghanistan. And that's the point I wanted to underscore.
WALLACE: OK. Let's talk about Iraq, because a lot of people are confused, and not just in the Bush-Cheney campaign, about some of Senator Kerry's varying statements about Iraq over the last couple of years. And I want to give you, as one of his top advisers, a chance to clear that up.
We're going to first play a series of statements by the senator and also one by one of his opponents in the Democratic primaries. Take a look.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIPS)
U.S. SENATOR JOHN KERRY, D-MA: I think it was the right decision to disarm Saddam Hussein. And when the president made the decision, I supported him and I support the fact that we did disarm him.
HOWARD DEAN, FORMER GOVERNOR OF VERMONT: I think this was the wrong war at the wrong time.
KERRY: It's the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time.
(END VIDEO CLIPS)
WALLACE: Ambassador Holbrooke, simple question: Does John Kerry now support the decision to take Saddam Hussein out of power or not?
HOLBROOKE: As I just said, Chris, twice in 1998 and 2002, John...
WALLACE: That's not the question I'm asking you, sir. I'm asking you, does he support the decision now to disarm and oust Saddam Hussein?
HOLBROOKE: Let me try to answer, Chris, and then I want to make a general comment about what I consider a very one-sided coverage of this issue. Because it's President Bush who's changed his positions much more than anyone else.
WALLACE: If I may, sir, I'd like to get an answer to my question. Does he support disarming Saddam Hussein or not?
HOLBROOKE: Senator Kerry has supported getting rid of Saddam Hussein from the beginning. But giving the authority to the president is quite different from the president taking that authority and creating a mess worse than Vietnam, which is the mess we are now in.
And the effort to find Senator Kerry's nanonuanced differences in his position, as opposed to the massive changes in the Bush administration's position, is quite...
WALLACE: Wait a minute, Mr. Ambassador. You're telling me that you think that Iraq is worse than Vietnam?
HOLBROOKE: Yes. It is strategically worse than Vietnam.
We are in a — you just heard the secretary of state avoid your very tough questions on whether there was an end in sight. I'm telling you that, given what President Bush said in his acceptance speech at the convention, the goal of the United States in Iraq is — there's no strategy for success, there is no exit strategy, there's no end in sight.
There are now three major parts of Iraq that are no-go areas for American and coalition troops, areas that we liberated and now they have liberated themselves from us. Millions of people are now living in areas which are sanctuaries for terrorists, Al Qaida, all sorts of people trying to kill Americans.
Last week, they went into the middle of Baghdad and snatched two young Italian aid workers, women right out of their offices.
You cannot say, Chris...
[more at the link]
Posted by: Super Hose ||
09/14/2004 2:15:56 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
We are in a â you just heard the secretary of state avoid your very tough questions on whether there was an end in sight. Iâm telling you that, given what President Bush said in his acceptance speech at the convention, the goal of the United States in Iraq is â thereâs no strategy for success, there is no exit strategy, thereâs no end in sight
Leftists like Holbrooke love exit strategies. They love them because they cannot conceive of military victory. They love the idea that they cannot use force to win a war so they will use diplomacy to bring about defeat, which is what Holbrooke advocates.
What Holbrook is saying about exit stretgies, just that a Kerry presdiency would not only not have liberated Iraq, they would cut and run the moment Kerry appears in office.
Here's the deal folks. And its not a platitude, but it is a real concept:
Victory belongs to those who believe in it the longest. Osama et al have a 12 year jump on us in that department and if we fail to grasp the concept that victory will be ours, we may as well go to the polls in November and vote Kerry and this sycophantic pencil dick Holbrooke into office, and prepare for far, far worse casualties than have been dealt so far.
And prepare to lose the Iraq war.
Well, I am not going to allow these defeatist mutherf*ckers like Holbrooke another chance at deprecating the defenses and the national security of the United States and its allies. They did it in the 70s, and millions, literally, died. They are doing it again because they want to kill more Americans, or force us to run before we can claim victory.
And victory isn't hearing all good news all the time. There will be times like now when our domestic socialists will screech for 'exit strategies' and jerk off about 'quagmires' and the news in the field isn't so good. We may even suffer a tactical defeat from time to time, but that doesn't mean we won't win the war.
We have to believe in victory, folks. Those people fighting in Iraq and elsewhere deserve nothing less than that from the home front.
#2
giving the authority to the president is quite different from the president taking that authority and creating a mess worse than Vietnam
lets try to parse this. Is Holbrooke saying that the president would have been right to take the authority and go in without UNSC approval, without the French, and with the WMD info that he actually had, IF he had a better plan for the postwar, AND that kerry would have had such a plan? Or is he saying, a la Dean, that there was NO way to avoid a bad postwar, and therefore there was no way we should have gone in? Or is he saying that these are connected, that we could have had a better post-war IF the French had been with us, and had sent in their mysterious 30,000 supertroops to help us, and therefore we should only have gone in with French support?
He is trying to say all three, since he is addressing at least 3 different Dem constituencies. The Deanies and beyond, who were against Iraqi Freedom from the beginning. The "core Kerry voters" whos main concern is the French and Germans. And folks like myself, who think Iraqi Freedom was the right war at the right time, but who can see about a hundred things the Bush admin did wrong in executing it.
And quite frankly Kerry is failing to make a case - by trying to reach out to all those groups, hes being incoherent and waffling. Its not so much a personality thing as a fundamental political strategy problem that a Dem faces the midst of a war pursued for grand strategic reasons (I wont say optional war) We Dems are NOT in fundamental agreement on approach on this. And my fellow liberal hawks may be few in number, but in a close election we'er crucial to dem chances.
Better for the Dems to lose this one, and wait for Hillary :) in '08.
#6
I watched Holbrooke hack his way through this interview. The transcript makes it look more forthcoming and clear (!) than it really was. He wouldn't or couldn't answer simple questions as to what Kerry's "secret" plan was to end the Iraq "crisis". This guy would be the SecState if Kerry won, and probably the worst since Maddy Halfbright. Arrogant elitist asshats with no agenda but capitulating to the New World Orderâ¢
Posted by: Frank G ||
09/14/2004 9:57 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Better for the Dems to lose this one, and wait for Hillary :) in '08.
That seems to be the strategy. My question is how they got Kerry to buy in so completely.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
09/14/2004 9:58 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Every single Kerry campaign interview I have heard follows this same track. They say that the problem with Bush is that his plan for X is bad snd Kerry would do it better. When asked what Kerry would do, they simply respond by listing with what Bush did wrong. No amount of coaxing from he interviewer can get them to answer what Kerry would do.
I'm guessing it's becaue Kerry hasn't told them - and so what else can they do but deflect a question that has no answer.
It's not playing well with the public. But they are so wrapped up in their own little insular world that they actually seem to believe that Kerry can win on Bush-Bashing alone.
#9
Has anyone else noticed that something's missing in the Kerry campaign.
For example: Prior to, and through the Democratic convention everywhere you looked it was Kerry hanging on Edwards and vice versa. Stickers proudly proclaimed "Kerry-Edwards"...but lately, it's Kerry, or John Kerry, with nary a mention of Edwards.
Even in this article, HolBroke sez "Bush-Cheney" but, Senator Kerry. Am I being too sensitive?
#10
Badanov nails it. With military geniuses like Holbrooke and Maddy Halfbright (love that nickname Frank) in Kerry's line-up, why does anyone think that there's some kind of brilliant military strategy behind Kerry's bluster?
Posted by: V is for Victory ||
09/14/2004 10:48 Comments ||
Top||
#11
why does anyone think that there's some kind of brilliant military strategy behind Kerry's bluster
German historian Paul Carrell said it best about Stalin and his General Staff; and it applies to ABB movement headed by J. Fn. Kerry: The wish is father to the thought.
The media, wanting to remove Bush, will lie, make up any 'fact, ignore any theory or history and glom on to anything leftists like Holbrooke says as immutable fact. It is the reason why we have a bad hoax being treated as something real by CBS and other allies.
#13
Holbrooke's in a tough spot and spinning as best he can. He's actually a very clever, moderately hawkish diplomat who offered excellent advice and analysis in the run-up to the war, notably, pointing out that the second UNSC resolution was not just unnecessary but counterproductive. He argued then that we had all we needed to go to war in late 2002 and should not have offered Blair a carrot which only muddied the waters further and did nothing substantial to help Blair at home anyway.
LiberalHawk's take on this is correct. I'd add that the leftist, Deaniac Dems are moving the party's base into isolationist territory, which, if the party leaders adopted it would be a sure vote-getter (perhaps with a strong nationalist tinge for the Dale Earnhardt? crowd, as in "screw the furreigners, bring the boys home and focus on healthcare...). And of course disastrous for the country.
Will the left-isolationists would act as a serious constraint on responsible, normal, reasonably hawkish types like Holbrooke, Biden, Hillary et al? Probably, because they can get critical mass in this country by allying with right-wing isolationists like Buchanan.
An analogy: Deaniac Dems today resemble . the Dewey-Taft midwestern, nativist, isolationist Republicans ca. 1940-48. Dewey attacked FDR for some supposed conspiracy to drag us into a war on behalf of "limey" imperialists and godless "reds". Howie and Mikey and Teddy and Jimmah attack Bush's "Texas conspiracy" and substitute oilmen for "reds" and Saudis for "limeys." In both cases, isolationist tendencies hold sway.
But the hysteria cannot mask the basic failure to confront a radically changed, complex and difficult world environment. It will be very interesting to see what Biden, Hillary, Holbrooke, Michael Mandelbaum et al come up with in the way of a responsible, Eisenhower-type course correction for the Dems after the debacle in November.
#14
lex - my fear is that the dems will learn the wrong lessons from a kerry defeat - that it was all Kerrys fault as a personality, or that it was cause he wasnt sufficiently antiwar, and that whats needed is Dean.
After the string of losses (And the one postwatergate victory) in the 70s and 80s the road was clear for Clintonism. 2000 was taken by many that Clintonism wasnt a surefire formula, at least without Bill himself. Kerry as a straddler, can be seen either way in the post defeat recriminations.
A truly hawkish liberal candidate would win this election easily. The message is simple: this is a liberal war against fascism. So ratchet it up, go on the offensive in Fallujah and elsewhere, and win. Take better care of our underpaid, mistreated soldiers. Provide health insurance for all.
A hawkish liberal with an aggressive strategy for victory in this war could win over a majority of the soldiers, their families and the ex-soldiers in the red states and also pick off the moderate Repubs who are queasy about the bible-thumpers who dominate their party. Which would instantly make the Dems competitive in military-rich states like Texas and North Carolina and mean easy victories across the west, including swing states like Colorado, AZ, NM. Game over.
#17
yah, well Joe faced an uphill fight, with Iraq looking bad in late 2003, and with his own weaknesses as a campaigner. Edwards was too young, and Gephardt too old school. Or maybe theres no hope for the Dems in wartime, I dont know. Course the Repubs seem to have a hard time picking a McCain.
#18
The worst outcome would be a capturing of the party by xenophobic, anti-military, isolationist young lefties like that very well-spoken young man from Illinois.
The best outcome would be a splintering of both parties and the creation of a centrist, socially moderate but aggressively hawkish new party dedicated to winning the war, restoring fiscal sanity, providing (better: mandating individual responsiblity for) universal health insurance, and reorienting our foreign policy focus generally away from Europe and toward India, China, Russia, Japan.
#19
lex / LH - you guys are assuming your desire for social liberalism mixed with an effective military response to the WoT is the answer. What if some of us have a thing or two to say about that first half of the equation, lol?
You must both still be young(ish) and vibrant and compassionate and optimists, lol! I'm happy for you - but I have no intention of paying for your largesse without a tad more information. Universal healthcare, lol, can you show me a working example where those who live with it are happy and don't go elsewhere for serious issues that require heavy capital equipment and the best expertise - and pay for that out of their own pockets?
Nothing is perfect. Checks and balances on everything works best, IMO. Remember the Boston Faux Tea Party when you start mentally spending my tax dollars, lol! But they were fun posts to read - I like old Joe a lot, but he's too centrist for the Dhimmicraps. And as dull as dirt, but a good man. Biden? Lol!
#20
I think you vastly underestimate the appeal across both parties of isolationism. This appeal is increasing and will, I predict, divide our politics throughout this decade. This is consistent with what we saw again and again during the last century.
My point is that one or the other party will in coming years adopt a xenophobic, bring-the-boys-home message that resonates across the country-- I believe that's what people liked so much about Obama's lightweight, xenophobic speech.
#21
Holbrooke is one on the left that, when he talks, doesn't sound like whiney ass, but he's still on the wrong side for me. But about how Iraq has "no go" areas, those areas are not under saddams control and are not being funded with Iraqi petro dollars developing first strike capabilities. Yes they are in a lawless, cutthroat, state. But that doesn't threaten me, yet!
A great deal of what you say about isolationism is true, but 2004 is not analogous to 1934. Back then, many folks saw the conflicts in Europe as strictly an internal affair: if crazy Krauts and foolish Frogs wanted to slaughter each other, who were we to care?
The problem this time is that Muslims have targeted us as the problem. We are the lebensraum in Al-Qaeda's master plan.
Part of what we do here at RB is to make folks aware that retreat is not an option, that once again we are up against another utopian "ism" that can't tolerate a society that promotes freedom of conscience.
And like Dot, I'd want a close look at that health care plan before someone goes diving into my wallet.
#23
my analogy is to 1948, not 1934. Jihadists = Soviet expansionists. Iran = Mao's China. Dean wing of Dems = Taft wing of Repubs.
The difference is that in 1949-52 we had a much more elitist foreign policy process, which allowed a bipartisan group of "wise men" to steer the country away from the populist, isolationist path toward a robust interventionism.
The danger in the internet/MikeyM age is that responsible, interventionist old pros like Holbrooke will be shoved aside by rabid isolationists.
Mark my word, this tendency will hurt the Repubs going forward as much or more than it hurts the Dems today. Isolationism is as American as apple pie.
#24
Americans may have been somewhat isolationist-leaning til 9/11. Once the fight was brought to our shores, Americans understood that they could not stay in bed, hiding under the covers. I think you overestimate how many stand with you as pacifists, isolationists...
Posted by: Frank G ||
09/14/2004 12:55 Comments ||
Top||
#25
I was at my father-in-laws place, nice place, covered parking for his motorhome, triple garage with nice rides in each slot. He's trying to retire but health care issues keep him employed, bummer. He lammented how this country doesn't take care of the elderly (free health care) well enough. I told him that in the countries that have what you wish for, most folks his age live in apartments and take public transportation.
Posted by: Frank G ||
09/14/2004 13:01 Comments ||
Top||
#27
Frank, I'm on the same side as you. I loathe isolationism. That's why I raise the alarm.
But if you talk to many formerly pro-war ordinary people in the heartland (Texas and Michigan and Illinois, in my case) you will notice a quite audible cringe in their voice when the subject of Iraq comes up, as in "Oh, I'm so sorry, I didn't know [your son was serving there]." This is to me a sure sign that the great patriotic decent middle of the country is losing confidence in the direction of the war effort. Another telltale sign: lots of conservative bloggers, chatters, columnists seem to want to avoid addressing the situation on the ground in Iraq altogether. Not good.
And someone who's more clever than Buchanan and more experienced than Barracks Osama will pick up on this soon and fashion a message about the need to "bring the boys home", defend the homeland, stick to our knitting, etc.
That will be a very powerful message. It behooves those of us who loathe isolationism and are determiend to wage this war ruthlessly and conclusively to recognize this threat in advance before we get railroaded by such a movement.
#28
Bush was elected on the implied promise of disengaging from some of our worldwide commitments. The Islamist attacks on 9-11-2001 shattered that prospect.
Posted by: ed ||
09/14/2004 13:02 Comments ||
Top||
#29
dot com = im not assuming any one position is the answer - i just want to vote for my answer, as i assume you want to vote for yours.
as for Canadian problems with their healthcare system, despite those problems I dont see any canadians, not even the conservatives, pushing to get rid of it and adopt our system instead.
#30
*my apologies then - misunderstood your intent*
Posted by: Frank G ||
09/14/2004 13:10 Comments ||
Top||
#31
np.
Ed, I'll accept that "9/11 shattered the prospect" of disengagement if you show me evidence that a clear majority of Americans is in favor of ratcheting up the war. I don't see it. After the election, Bush needs to lay out the strategy clearly for the public and take off the gloves in Iraq. Complacency will kill us.
First let's see if we can reach a few points of agreement:
1. Islam is an expansion by the sword religion.
2. Islamists/muslims are in an expansionary period.
3. Expansion involves conquest, conversion, and death of non-muslims.
4. Most peoples currently under attack by muslims did not attack muslims or invade Islamic lands, but just the opposite.
My take:
1. Muslims are going to bring death and destruction to you and me.
2. It makes no difference whether Americans are in favor of isolationism or ratcheting up the war. War is here.
3. Those who won't fight are much easier to kill than those who fight.
4. Do you want to fight the war in American streets or muslim lands. If unsure, read up on Tamerlane and descendants, and the Muslim conquest of Central Asian Buddhists and Hindus.
The end states:
1. We surrender and convert or are conquered and dead.
2. At a minimum the halt of muslim ideas of expansionism/conquest of infidels.
3. More likely, the destruction of Islam as currently practiced.
4. The destruction of Islam and conquest and colonization/conversion of what are currently muslim lands.
End state 1 is unacceptable for us.
End state 2 just foists the problems on our children when the muslims will be stronger and more numerous.
End state 3 is the most desired, but requires the cooperation of the muslims themselves.
End state 4 is the worst case for muslims but doesn't require their cooperation.
We will know what option Americans favor after the nukes start igniting over our cities.
Posted by: ed ||
09/14/2004 13:52 Comments ||
Top||
#34
Amongst all of this, does anyone realize -
Chris Wallace, son of Mike, made Holbrooke queasy. . .
1. Islam is an expansion by the sword religion. Not entirely. Turkish and Indian muslims work peacefully and within democratic structures.
2. Islamists/muslims are in an expansionary period. Demographically, yes. Economically, the opposite is true. Militarily, see response to point # 1.
3. Expansion involves conquest, conversion, and death of non-muslims.
4. Most peoples currently under attack by muslims did not attack muslims or invade Islamic lands, but just the opposite.
True but most wars are lost, not won. They key is to make fewer serious tactical and/or strategic mistakes.
My take:
1. Muslims are going to bring death and destruction to you and me. I hope not, but I agree that the probability of a dirty nuke attack on US soil or at a US port in hte next decade is maybe 50% or greater.
2. It makes no difference whether Americans are in favor of isolationism or ratcheting up the war. War is here. Dead wrong. It makes a huge difference whether the president can wield a big stick overseas or not. Osama calculated, correctly, that Clinton could never summon the political strength or will to respond decisively. The danger now is that the same would be achieved by a battle-weary public responding to the isolationist siren song.
3. Those who won't fight are much easier to kill than those who fight.
4. Do you want to fight the war in American streets or muslim lands. If unsure, read up on Tamerlane and descendants, and the Muslim conquest of Central Asian Buddhists and Hindus. Dude, popular support is crucial. My point is that Rantburgers are not emblematic of the public. I'm sounding an alarm here,'s all. We need the public to be on our side, and most Americans IMO are beginning to lose the stomach for the long drawn-out struggle. Not good.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
09/14/2004 01:05 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Created March 1, 2003, ICE has been described as the most complicated law-enforcement merger within the Department Homeland Security, uniting different jobs, missions, philosophies and responsibilities to prevent terrorists and others from exploiting America's financial systems and immigration-enforcement policies.
Prevent terrorists and other from exploiting..?? What about those undesirables that are ALREADY HERE? How about ENFORCING our immigration laws?
Iran rejected Tuesday any attempt by Arab Gulf countries to challenge its sovereignty over three disputed Persian islands.
Foreign Ministry Spokesman Hamid Reza Asafi was responding to a call on Monday by the foreign ministers of the Gulf Cooperation Council on Iran to return the islands of Abu Mousa and Greater and Smaller Tumb to the United Arab Emirates.
Asafi was quoted by the Iranian News Agency, IRNA, as warning the six-state GCC against interfering in the process of ongoing talks over the three islands between Iran and the UAE.
"Maintaining stability and security in the Gulf region and the continuation of cooperation between countries of the area is in the interests of all countries overlooking the Persian Gulf," Asafi said.
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
09/14/2004 10:29:20 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Let them get rid of mullahs and bring Shah back we give them the islands. Then probably the Camel Jockeys will get busy against Iran and forget USA
In a meeting with high-ranking (terrorist) officials on Monday, Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, Supreme Leader of the Islamic (Terrorist) Revolution, called on Muslims worldwide to unite and resist what he termed, the global arrogance of the U.S., this according to a report in IRNA, the official news agency of Iran.
Speaking on Be'sat, the anniversary of the Prophet's announcement of his prophethood, the Supreme Leader charged the U.S. would not be satisfied with anything less than the "absolute domination of the Muslim world and the Middle East." (In his demented dreams)
Khamenei went on to criticize Islamic countries, who he believes, have remained silent and complacent towards what he called the "atrocities" of the U.S. and Israel in the Muslim world, saying that the U.S. and Zionists are the real sponsors of terrorism. (Man needs to be in a home)
The incendiary rhetoric comes at a time when Washington. is charging that Iran is engaged in the covert development of nuclear arms, in defiance of the international community, and should be brought before the U.N. Security Council for sanctions.
European governments have called for a November deadline to resolve the issue and are seeking assurances that Tehran has no designs on developing atomic weapons. (Like Iran is going to pay any attention to the Franco-German oil thirsty E.U.)
Robbie Daniels 9-15-04
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
09/14/2004 10:22:55 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Sounds like they are backing off that whole "death to America", thingie! Not sure though. Maybe have half the planet pay attention.
US urges allies to step up pressure on Tehran; hints at possible use of force
If Iran's atomic program is not checked, Tehran will have the capability to develop nuclear weapons early next year, Israel's chief of military intelligence warned Sunday.
"This does not mean that it will have a bomb in 2005," MI chief Aharon Ze'evi told the Israel-Jordan Chamber of Commerce on Sunday. "It means that it will have all the means at its disposal to build a bomb," without any further outside help.
On the eve of a crucial International Atomic Energy Agency meeting in Vienna on Monday, America stepped up pressure on Tehran to agree to European-led diplomatic initiative to dismantle its weapons program or face stiff UN sanctions. While visiting Israel on Sunday on his way to the Vienna talks US Undersecretary of State John Bolton also hinted that Washington is ready to use force against the Islamic Republic if it successfully develops a nuclear bomb.
At stake in Vienna on Monday is a European draft resolution spearheaded by the EU "big three," Britain, France and Germany that gives Tehran until November to suspend its ongoing attempts to enrich weapons-grade uranium but one lacking an "automatic trigger" that would refer Iran immediately to the UN Security Council as Washington had wished.
Iran's attempt to achieve nuclear weapons capabilities is not just a challenge to Israel but to the Western world, and "we have to worry about it," IDF Chief of Staff Moshe Ya'alon said in a speech on counter-terrorism Sunday. But it is not only Iran's attempts to attain non-conventional weapon capabilities that threaten the region, Ya'alon argued, but its active sponsorship of terrorism.
"I can illustrate a connection between suicide bomb attacks in Tel Aviv, Beersheba, or the 14-year-old boy who was arrested at the Hawara checkpoint near Nablus wearing an explosives belt," Ya'alon said, according to The Jerusalem Post. "I can trace it all back to Teheran, Iranian money, Iranian weapons smuggling."
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
09/14/2004 10:17:55 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom said Iran has replaced Saddam Hussein as the source issuing checks to families of suicide bombers. He made his comments during an address in Herzliya. Shalom stated that Israel must work towards isolating both Iran and Syria to prevent them from causing further turbulence in the area. Regarding the PA, Shalom attacked statements made by PA Prime Minister Ahmed Qureia (Abu Ala) justifying a Hamas attack against Israel following Israel's elimination of Hamas terrorists. Shalom added that any Hamas attack that may occur in the future will result in the "victim's being on Abu Ala's hands".
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
09/14/2004 10:12:15 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
Jordan's state security court Tuesday sentenced eight people to prison terms ranging from five to 15 years for smuggling weapons from Syria. The seven Syrians and a Jordanian were convicted of smuggling and possessing illegal arms, including explosives and automatic rifles, which they intended to use in terrorist attacks. Five of the accused, who are still at large, were sentenced in absentia while the rest appeared in court. The accused clashed with police last November as they tried to smuggle the weapons on the backs of mules on the Jordanian-Syrian border. Five managed to flee and three were arrested.
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
09/14/2004 10:11:03 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
Arab foreign ministers agreed on Tuesday to avoid a position on United Nations intervention in the Syrian-Lebanese relationship after Syria and Jordan disagreed on the right approach. An Arab League resolution, approved but subject to amendment, does not mention a UN Security Council resolution demanding Syria withdraw its troops from Lebanon and end interference in the affairs of its neighbour, diplomats said. An Arab diplomat said the UN resolution posed an impossible choice for the ministers, who are in Cairo for a regular twice-yearly meeting of the Arab League council of ministers. They cannot endorse the resolution, because they oppose US and French interference in inter-Arab affairs, but they cannot reject it because their case in the Israeli-Palestinian dispute rests on other UN Security Council resolutions, he said.
Support for Lebanon
The Arab League resolution says only that the ministers "decided to support Lebanon in its sovereign right to practise its internal political choices ... and to support its free decision to establish and strengthen fraternal relations, coordination and cooperation, especially with Syria." The formula was approved on Monday at the level of ambassadors but disagreement emerged when the ministers met in closed session on Tuesday morning, league sources said. Jordanian Foreign Minister Marwan al-Muashir said that Syria should comply with the UN resolution and the Arab League could not challenge decisions taken by the Security Council, the sources said. Gulf states supported the Jordanian position.
Submission
Syrian Foreign Minister Faruq al-Shara said this position meant submission to American pressure. The United States and France were the driving forces behind the resolution. The sources quoted Shara as saying the resolution was a "flagrant threat to Syria and official intervention in the internal affairs of Lebanon and relations between states. To stay silent about it would be to give America the right to intervene in every matter that concerns the Arabs." The aim of the resolution was to serve Israeli interests and to put pressure on Syria to cooperate with the occupation of Iraq, "and that will never happen", Shara added. Shara said the Arabs were the only regional grouping that complies with UN resolutions while Israel ignored resolutions dating back to the 1960s.
No disagreement
An Arab League official played down the disagreement and said that no one had proposed amending the agreed text. In Amman on Monday, Jordanian government spokeswoman Asma Khadir said Jordan stood by fellow Arabs but could not stand against "international legitimacy". She was quoted by the official Egyptian news agency MENA. On Monday the Saudi Press Agency quoted Kuwaiti Foreign Minister Sheikh Muhammad al-Salim al-Sabah as saying the Gulf Cooperation Council "supports the latest Security Council resolution that demands withdrawal of all forces from Lebanon."
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
09/14/2004 10:06:27 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
Can I hear a, "Faster please?"
The head of Israeli military intelligence, General Aharon Zeevi, claimed on Monday that Iran could be in a position to develop nuclear weapons without outside help within six months. As the UN's nuclear watchdog prepared to meet on Monday to set a deadline for Iran to allay suspicions it is secretly making atomic weapons, Zeevi said time was rapidly running out for the international community to deal with Tehran.
"The next six months will determine if Iran will achieve in the spring of 2005 a non-conventional capability in the sphere of nuclear research and development," he said in remarks broadcast by public radio. "In other words, it will no longer require external assistance to acquire an unconventional capability. "This does not mean that it will have a bomb in 2005. It means that it will have all the means at its disposal to build a bomb." Zeevi said that failure to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons would merely encourage other regimes to develop an atomic arsenal.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
09/14/2004 2:02:38 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"Iran can have nukes in 6 months"
I don't want to nitpick but the article states:
"Iran could be in a position to develop nuclear weapons without outside help within six months"
Which does not in any sense mean that they can have them. I would tend to think just the opposite. :-)
#2
Zara'
we all know very well what Zeevi was trying to say
I have this creepin' suspicion that someone is trying to prepare the PR background for some preemptive action.
Rantburgers, (and any possible trolls) any bets on who acts first - the US or Israel ??????
Posted by: Elder of Zion ||
09/14/2004 4:37 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Sadly for the U.S. I think Israel has the balls... we'll keep talking for a while longer.
#4
Maybe some one can convince Vlad the 1st that Iran is funding Islamic independence movements in the Caucasus and the matter will not be the wests problem anymore.
#5
If the US bombed Iran, it would put us in a state of open war with them, and I think that means we would have to be ready for a conventional ground war to finish the job. So I don't think it's as simple as just taking out a few facilities.
Posted by: V is for Victory ||
09/14/2004 8:05 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Right, V, we'd need to take out their military facilities and decapitate their leadership at the same time. Can't allow them to start wiping out neighboring oil facilities in retaliation. That's why I've advocated a few well-placed simultaneous nukes, though I'm open to conventional bombing of military/leadership targets near population centers. We need to decide whether, after 25 years of being "The Great Satan," we are going to win this war or not. Iran has had perpetrated so much mischief in the last 25 years that they deserve to be wiped clean. And we need to scare the crap out of North Korea, Pakistan, and Syria.
Posted by: Tom ||
09/14/2004 8:22 Comments ||
Top||
#7
They can have nukes today - made in American and brought to these turban tight terrorists by the United States Air Force.
Posted by: Douglas De Bono ||
09/14/2004 10:06 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Anonymous6446, saying Israel has the balls misses the point. Israel is the stated target of those nukes and I don't think its possible for the world to hate Israel any more than they currently do.
Israel has nothing to lose and a lot to gain by such action.
Seventeen months after U.S. forces toppled Saddam Hussein, instability in Iraq is creating opportunities for its mainly Shiite Muslim neighbor, Iran.
"The real long-term geopolitical winner of the 'War on Terror' could be Iran," concludes a new report by the Royal Institute of International Affairs, Britain's most respected foreign-policy research organization.
The report suggests that Iran's refusal to give up its nuclear program — despite U.S. and European pressure to do so — reflects the Iranian leadership's judgment that the Bush administration, bogged down in Iraq, is in no position to "launch a serious military operation against Iran."
Nervous that it might be the next U.S. target after the pre-emptive invasion of Iraq, Iran agreed last year to suspend enrichment of uranium, a fuel that can be used for power plants or bombs. But an Iranian official, Hossein Mousavian, said Monday that Iran could resume enrichment "within a few months" and has a "legitimate right" to do so to provide fuel for power plants. Mousavian spoke at a meeting in Vienna of the board of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the United Nations' nuclear watchdog.
Despite U.S. lobbying and the discovery by U.N. inspectors that Iran hid crucial elements of its nuclear program, the board is expected to put off any consideration of punishing Iran until after the U.S. presidential election in November.
Since the U.S. interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq, Iran has increased funding for Shiite groups and social services in western Afghanistan and southern Iraq. Iran experts say Iran has strengthened ties with Iraqi Shiite religious and political leaders, including rebel cleric Muqtada al-Sadr. Al-Sadr loyalists battled U.S. forces in Najaf last month and are still fighting Americans in Baghdad's Shiite slums.
"The Iranians have so much control over what happens in Iraq," says Gareth Stansfield, a research fellow at the University of Exeter and one of the authors of the British report. "The United States is only beginning to realize this."
Supporters of the Iraq war say that creation of a democratic government in Iraq will undermine Iran's authoritarian regime by encouraging Iran's democratic opposition. "If a democratic Iraq develops, protected by the Shiite clergy, that is not good for Iran," says Reuel Marc Gerecht, an Iran expert at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, a conservative think tank. "The ideal situation for the Iranians was a weak Saddam Hussein" who was unable to wage another war on his neighbors.
But movement toward democracy in Iraq has been hindered by violence, which could delay or limit elections set for January. Even if voting takes place on schedule, the victors are likely to be the majority Shiites, who would be expected to seek good relations with Iran.
Iran wins in every Iraqi political scenario except a new secular dictatorship, the most unlikely outcome of U.S. intervention, says Kenneth Katzman, a Middle East expert at the Congressional Research Service, a think tank that prepares reports for Congress. "The losers are Kuwait and Saudi Arabia," which face new challenges from Sunni Muslim fundamentalists and restive Shiite minorities, Katzman says.
Emboldened by U.S. difficulties in Iraq, the Iranian government has been increasingly assertive about its right to build a nuclear infrastructure and to support radicals in countries stretching from Israel to Afghanistan.
"I say the presence of Americans (in Iraq) is not a sign of strength," Iranian Defense Minister Ali Shamkhani told the Al-Jazeera television network last month. Bragging about Iranian influence, he said: "We are present from Quds (Jerusalem) to Kandahar (in Afghanistan). We are present in the Persian Gulf, Afghanistan and Iraq."
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
09/14/2004 1:59:36 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"I say the presence of Americans (in Iraq) is not a sign of strength," Iranian Defense Minister Ali Shamkhani told the Al-Jazeera television network last month. Bragging about Iranian influence, he said: "We are present from Quds (Jerusalem) to Kandahar (in Afghanistan). We are present in the Persian Gulf, Afghanistan and Iraq."
The prime challenges of the next US president
1) Defanging Iran's and NK of nuclear capabilities.
2)Regime change in both.
This is not me saying this, this is straight from the mounth of Ali Shamkhani himself. They are so sure of themselves that they dropped al pretense regarding their ambitions.
I hope President Bush is smart enough to have the army prepare the proper response now and not wait till reelection. This way he can unleash them on the Mullahs while there is enough time. If Bush fails I hope my own government will do something about them, otherwise this is going to be the beginning of the end for western civilization.
Posted by: Elder of Zion ||
09/14/2004 5:04 Comments ||
Top||
#2
good post EZ. However, considering the overall quagmire tone of the article above, I wonder if Iran is really that close?
Not saying they aren't - but this article is even attempting to make Sadr look like a major threat. This strikes me as wishful thinking by the latte left, that Iraq is spiralling out of control and the US is mired! Mired! in Iraq.
#3
When does that Shiite pilgrim season begin? Until a large part of the insurgency is crushed, the border should be secured and "pilgrims" not allowed to enter.
#6
2B,
It is immaterial if they are that close to a nuke
what matters is that in a little time they may possess enough stashed critical stuff that can be hidden away, and then they may at their leisure construct nukes as the need arises.
I definitely don't think Iraq is a quagmire - the opposite is true, considering the objective conditions the Americans have achieved a lot. The problem is that this kind of change will take years and requires patience and a long attention span (which I doubt common american voters possess).
Therefore it is extremely important that the de-fanging of Iran (and possibly of the Norks) is done NOW, while you can still gather public support and understanding for this.
Later, it may be almost impossible to locate and deal with already half formed nuke components, while right now the uranium purification plants and the reactor are sitting ducks.
So I say now is the time to do it and IMHO you dont even need nukes to accomplish this if you plan correctly.
Posted by: Elder of Zion ||
09/14/2004 12:48 Comments ||
Top||
#7
I don't disagree. One think that Iran might be mindful of is that there are two months between November and January 4. Looking at our past militay actions - that's pleny o' time.
Between Israel, Russia and the US - things aren't looking good for Iran - despite all their customary bluster.
By Sonja Pace
Jerusalem
Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon says he rebuffed a U.S. effort last year to restart peace talks with Syria. He made the surprise revelation during an interview published today in a leading Israeli newspaper. Mr. Sharon says White House envoy Elliot Abrams made the proposal during a meeting in Rome in November of last year. He says Mr. Abrams told him the Syrians were ready to enter into negotiations. But, Mr. Sharon told Israel's Haaretz newspaper, he rebuffed the American proposal for talks, adding, the issue was never raised again.
Talks between the two hostile neighbors have been held under previous prime ministers, but they never reached an agreement. In exchange for peace, Syria wants a complete return of the Golan Heights, land Israel captured in the 1967 Mideast War and has since annexed. Mr. Sharon describes previous talks with Damascus as "dangerous to Israel." He rules out agreeing to Syrian demands. Mr. Sharon says if Syria really wants to talk it must first expel, what he calls, the "terrorist headquarters" of Palestinian militant groups and rein in Hezbollah guerrillas along the Israeli-Lebanese border.
A few weeks after the Rome meeting, Syrian President Bashar Assad said he was ready to talk with the Israelis. He repeated the overture just last week. Mr. Sharon rejected both offers, saying the Syrian leader was only trying to lessen American pressure on Damascus. In the Haaretz newspaper interview, Mr. Sharon also discloses that during his meeting with Mr. Abrams last year, he surprised the American envoy by mentioning for the first time his own proposal for unilateral withdrawal from the Gaza Strip. That plan was later sanctioned by Washington and is now being hotly debated in Israel.
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
09/14/2004 10:09:15 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Yo Sharon way to go. Syria is just pretending to want to talk because they are gonnah get their ASS KICKED
The Small Arms Survey said millions of firearms pillaged from the military and security forces of the Saddam Hussein regime have flooded Iraq over the last year. The survey said the collapse of the Saddam regime precipitated one of the largest and fastest transfers of light weapons ever recorded. The survey said at least one in every three Iraqis possesses a firearm. In all, about eight million firearms are in the hands of Iraqis, with the actual number believed to be considerably higher, Middle East Newsline reported.
Another threat raised by the survey comes from what the institute termed the proliferation of man-portable surface-to-air missile launchers. Insurgency groups have used such weapons in efforts to knock out airliners, such as the firing of an SA-7 missile toward an Israeli passenger jet over Mombasa, Kenya in December 2002. "Iraq now poses a regional proliferation risk," Keith Krause, the survey's program director said. "That's going to be with us for years to come," Krause said. "The consequences of the great Iraqi small arms abandonment may endanger stability in much of the Middle East for years to come," the survey said.
The annual survey, coordinated at the Graduate Institute of International Studies in Geneva and financed by Western governments, said the pool of such weapons could fuel instability throughout the Middle East. The survey cited the dramatic rise of shooting deaths in Baghdad in 2003. Finland, however, has the highest ratio of firearms per person. "We do not know what proportion of these weapons are military style."
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
09/14/2004 10:04:26 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
Uzbek President Islam Karimov yesterday had words of advice for his counterparts in Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan: clamp down on banned religious groups and prevent their members from crossing borders. More than 50 people have been killed in Uzbekistan this year in violence the Uzbek government blames on Islamic extremists. Both the Kazakh and Kyrgyz governments say they are doing, or will do, something to increase security.
Speaking at a press conference, Karimov once again blamed the Islamic group Hizb-ut Tahrir for the recent acts of violence. But he also pointed a finger at neighboring countries for allowing that group and others to operate freely. "How can we fight when we don't have borders and [members of] [Hizb-ut Tahrir] are freely able to go to neighboring territories, train, live and operate there freely, conduct their activities and the next day they commit their wild acts?" Karimov said. Hizb-ut Tahrir, for its part, has denied involvement, saying it rejects violence as a means to its goal of establishing an Islamic caliphate in Central Asia.
Kazakhstan has recently come into focus as a possible haven for militants. Uzbek authorities say one of the suicide bombers blamed in a July attack on the U.S. and Israeli embassies in Tashkent came from Kazakhstan. Russian investigators have also charged that Kazakhs were present during the recent Beslan hostage crisis. Kazakh President Nursultan Nazarbaev last week made clear his country would spend more money on security. "We must pay the utmost attention to strengthening our country's defense and security," Nazarbaev said. "The people should remember that we must spend more money now on our safety, on strengthening our defense, on the fight against drug trafficking, on preventive measures against the spread of terrorism."
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
09/14/2004 8:37:32 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
Looks like it's falling into place just as we predicted ...
The US ambassador to Georgia says some international terrorists are still present in Georgia's Pankisi Gorge on the border with Chechnya. His words echo concerns from Moscow that hostage-takers from Beslan could have infiltrated into Georgia. Georgia shares its borders with the troubled republics of Ingushetia, Dagestan, Chechnya and North Ossetia. The country is worried it will become the first place where Moscow will carry out its threat of preventive strikes.
They could always scrub it out, like they've been saying they were going to do for the past three years...
All the major newspapers here have been speculating on their front pages about the possibility of a Russian attack. Both Moscow and now the US ambassador to Georgia, Richard Miles, say they believe there are international terrorists still hiding in the Pankisi Gorge on the border with Chechnya. Russia's Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov, has also said that he does not exclude links between Georgia's breakaway province of South Ossetia and the events in Beslan. And the Russian media alleges that one of the hostage-takers from Beslan is hiding in the Kodori Gorge, in the country's other breakaway province of Abkhazia. For its part, Tbilisi blames Russia for supporting these breakaway states. Just last week, Russia launched a new train service between Moscow and Sukhumi, the capital of Abkhazia. Officials in Tbilisi are adamant that no Chechens have crossed into Georgia and that the borders along the snow-peaked Caucasus mountains are under full control. The question, they say, is whether Russia will choose to believe them.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
09/14/2004 6:25:06 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The question, they say, is whether Russia will choose to believe them.
Russia doesn't care. The Belsan massacre gave Putin a green light to do whatever he wants to and there is oil in them thar hills.
They created a monster. It will eat whatever is closest, first.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
09/14/2004 18:29 Comments ||
Top||
#3
methinks the Pankisis Gorge will soon become the Valley of Death....reminds me of a psalm. Hope the Arabs remember it
Posted by: Frank G ||
09/14/2004 19:01 Comments ||
Top||
#4
well..I see the new Vlad like Stalin - we need him and it's great that he's going to smite our enemies, but he's clearly becoming a monster we will have to deal with at some point on down the road.
Don't enjoy the carnage too much, there will be a paypack.
Many in Pakistan and other Muslim countries like both Osama bin Laden and President Pervez Musharraf, according to a series of survey opinion polls conducted by the Pew Research Center. Despite soaring anti-Americanism and substantial support for Osama bin Laden, there is considerable appetite in the Muslim world for democratic freedom, says the study — conducted in various stages from February to August this year. A broader, 44-nation survey, also conducted by the Pew Research Center, shows that people in Muslim countries place a high value on freedom of expression, freedom of the press, multi-party systems and equal treatment under the law.
In other words, they're coming around to the idea that they should have the right to express any opinion they want, even if it's stoopid. They just don't want to see anyone else doing it. But I don't see anything at all in there about freedom of religion...
This includes people living in kingdoms such as Jordan and Kuwait, as well as those in authoritarian states like Uzbekistan and Pakistan. In fact, many of the Muslim publics polled expressed a stronger desire for democratic freedom than the people in some nations of Eastern Europe, notably Russia and Bulgaria. President Musharraf is widely unknown in the countries surveyed and a third or more in every country except Pakistan gave no opinion. Pakistanis expressed highly favorable opinions of their president; 86 percent rate him favorably, and 60 percent view him very favorably — by far the highest rating of any leader in the survey.
I wonder what the opinions of the same segment of population are of Qazi and Fazl and Sami?
Views of Gen Musharraf are more positive than negative in Turkey, and are about evenly divided in Britain, the U.S., Russia, and Jordan. Negative opinion of President Musharraf is strongest in France, Germany, and Morocco, according to the poll. (who needs the opinion of pussies like them) But 65 percent in Pakistan, 55 percent in Jordan and 45 percent in Morocco also view Osama bin Laden favorably. About half of Pakistanis also say suicide attacks on Americans in Iraq and against Israelis in the Palestinian conflict are justifiable. (now thats seriously fucked up)
Support for the US-led "war on terrorism" also has fallen in most Muslim countries. America's image abroad remains negative in most nations, according to the poll. Musharraf is excellent for a country like Pakistan. If you see that how stupid the general populance is, you will realize that Dictatorships are the only forces keeping the Terrorists from getting power. Just as the Communism was checked by dictatorchip in 60s. So all proponents of democracy please note that democracy is not for stupid bastards. You need a high level of education and awareness before democracy. You wont let a baby put salt & pepper in his food. Well Musharraf way to go. All the Arabs who dislike him should mind their own business. And OBL you have a LGB coming up your ass.
I've made the point here before that we use the word "democracy" as a sloppy synonym for "individual liberty." The reason the concept won't catch on in the Muslim world is that individual liberty involves freedom of religion, which means that lots of Muslims might choose to become Christians, or Buddhists, or agnostics. It will be many years before the Muslim world can accept the concept of a person being allowed to make his own mistakes, of a population being governed rather than ruled. Which is probably why Bush isn't pushing the idea of freedom of religion in conjunction with his push for "democracy."
#1
What Fawad says makes a lot of sense, although I'm not entirely sold. There have been economists that charted new Democracies and found that a certain economic level is required for success (economics based purely on natural resources didn't count). Its likely that the economic success also equates to a certain basic educational level.
Having said that I think its not hard to teach democracy if you start at the local level and work your way up. People will vote for whats best at each level, and slowly begin to understand how these things work. It also insulates the nation from voting for a national figure who could lots of damage until they have a bit more experience in voting.
RJ, I believe that the stepwise progression is what we're working on in Iraq. That is, in most locations, participatory government has been taking place on the very local level -- and from what I've been able to gather, the locals are very enthusiastic and effective participants. We'll soon see if they have developed the understanding to translate this to the national level -- one can hope!
#3
All due respect, but for even a very basic local body setup you need an industrial based economic system. Pakistan has a feudal society with very tightly knit clan system. To win an election you just have to buy or coerce the tribal leader, Mullah or the feudal lord of the area. People dont have the economic opportunities to move out of the feudal sphere of influence. So no matter how you look at it it is a loose loose situation until major economic and social changes take place. Namely the abolition of feudal system and mass abandonment of religion. Untill it happens you need a guy with a very big stick
#4
Same as Latin America. Some make it some don't. When they break out of the feudal stage, it's hard to keep 'em down on the farm. If they're still feudal, you've got to wory about where tomorrow's meal comes from if you flip off the boss.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
09/14/2004 21:12 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Yes, but the most important point still remains to be made: you cannot teach democracy while simultaneously killing the people. Doesn't family mean more to all of you than country, duty, or democracy? That's only natural. The Iraqis see it not as a matter of insurgents eliminated, but as a matter of losing brothers and uncles - and wives and children.
So long as the U.S. military is on the ground in Iraq the local population will play passive/aggressive in the face of our overwhelming strength. They will kowtow in public while simultaneously ambushing inattentive or exposed Americans and other foreign targets of opportunity. Meanwhile, their leaders will be maneuvering for the big takeover once we've gone.
Not one of the fundamentals of democracy is present in Iraq. Least of all stability. Perhaps we've found our Ireland?
German article in Die Welt, quick and dirty translation of TGA (better than machine translation)
Note that German Intelligence Services usually leak to Die Welt, so they don't make that stuff up. Secret Services: dozens of victims
from Jacques Schuster
In June of this year Syrian special forces have used chemical weapons against the Black-African population of Darfur. The action in which dozens of people died, occurred in arrangement with the Sudanese government, a conclusion Western Secret Services have reached. This is supported by reports of eyewitnesses which were published in different Arabian media.
Judging from the documents of Western Intelligence services in possession of die WELT, Syrian officers have met representatives of the Sudanese army in May of this year in a suburb of Khartoum. The conversations dealt with the question about how to expand the military collaboration. According to Secret Service information the Syrian delegation has offered Sudan a closer cooperation in the area of chemical warfare. The sources furthermore say that it has been suggested to test the chemical agents on the rebels of the Sudan People's Liberation Army (SPLA). Because in May Khartoum was in peace negotiations with the rebels, the Sudanese delegation apparently advised to test the agents on the Black-African population. To do that at least five airplanes of the Syrian civil airline Syrian Arab Airlines were flown from Damascus to Khartoum. Aboard were specialists of the Syrian University for Chemical Warfare including engineering equipment.
When the Darfur mission started cannot be exactly ascertained. Yet in an article of the Arabian website "Ilaf" on August 2nd Sudanese eyewitnesses report odd occurrences in Khartoum's Al Fashr hospital. In June suddenly several dozens of deep frozen corpses are said to have been brought to the hospital, showing strange injuries on the whole body. After a short time Sudanese soldiers are said to have blocked off a wing of the building. Afterwards, if one believes the witnesses, the access was only permitted to an unknown Syrian doctor's team. After days Sudanese forces transported the bodies away.
For some time already military experts have information about a Sudanese Syrian collaboration in the area of chemical weapon research. Also Syrian members of the opposition have repeatedly reported on the testing of chemical weapons on prisoners.
Posted by: True German Ally ||
09/14/2004 2:10:26 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[10 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
There you have it folks:
The Iraqi WMD, sneaked out to Syria by Saddam, is further transhipped to the South of Sudan.
#3
Wasn't there a story a while ago about the Sudan asking Syria to get its chemical weapons out of town?
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
09/14/2004 14:34 Comments ||
Top||
#4
I am surprised Powell didn't raise this on Sunday when he was on the talk shows. It was clear from the one I saw that he is personally invested in the Sudan situation.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
09/14/2004 14:40 Comments ||
Top||
Sudan has ordered the removal of Syrian missiles and weapons of mass destruction out of the African country. Arab diplomatic and Sudanese government sources said the regime of Sudanese President Omar Bashir has ordered that Syria remove its Scud C and Scud D medium-range ballistic missiles as well as components for chemical weapons stored in warehouses in Khartoum.
The sources said the Sudanese demand was issued after the Defense Ministry and Interior Ministry confirmed a report published earlier this month that Syria has been secretly flying Scud-class missiles and WMD components to Khartoum.
The sources said the Bashir regime has been alarmed over the prospect that the United States would discover the Syrian arsenal and conclude that Damascus and Khartoum were cooperating in the area of missiles and WMD. They said this would have delayed or dashed U.S. plans to lift sanctions from Sudan.
A U.S. official confirmed the Syrian missile shipments to Sudan, saying they were meant for use against rebels in the south. But the official said the U.S. intelligence community has not determined that Syria sent WMD systems to Khartoum.
#11
Sam, I'm drinking a shot of Bushmills to you tonight.
If this ends up on drudge and doesn't get shot down, it's going to be impossible to wipe the smile off my face. And I can't wait to see the faces of a few choice "where-are-the-WMD" lefties around town.
#12
DisclaimerMy opinions here are merely conjecture informed by a little bit of open research, and some years of known that region and being an analyst - and a current analytical mindset that covers the civilian job I now do.
I bet a lot of you wonder why hasn't the US Government come out and said as much as I have?
If the US has anything on this, its probably from sensitive "sources and methods", so they cannot disclose it without destroying vital sources of info.
My bet it is that they do have solid data, but are precluded from revealing it because they want to act on it eventually. As in take out the chemical weapons and their depots, or capture it in a coup de main. To do so, they cannot reveal what they know, because that would shut off their sources.
Remember, Syria is a Baathist police state, and has large terror organizations embedded there. Those types are quite ruthless in weeding out traitors, so even the merest hint of somone being a leak, or something being vulnerable to US technical capabilities, would trigger a response that would likely destroy the utility of the intelligence source.
As an example, look at Osama Bin Laden and his use of Sat-phones. We used to be able to intercept his sat phone, and listen in on his calls. But a story broke in the Boston Globe (lefty newspaper kills us again) about this, so Bin Laden and his staff stopped using them - we were at least partially (if not mostly) blinded from late 1999 to what Al Qaueda's command staff was up to.
So loose lips may not sink ships, but they damned well can eventually cause towers to fall.
A second Bush administration will likely be the one to move on Syria, but this time, learning from Iraq, the first objective will be to secure the WMD as proof, probably with indigneous local forces, who would be reinforced by Rangers and the Airborne - the "rescued" overland by forces from Iraq. They would form an "occupation zone", leaving the rest of Syria alone, except for Aerial attacks on military infrastructure. Basically we woudl take only the areas needed to secure and destroy the WMD - leaving the rest of Syria to rot, rather then be stuck occupying it. That leaves the police state there shown as impotent, and will likely cause Syria to devolve into chaos unless the central government comes around to the side of the light and gets outside help from the West..
#13
OS, Let's consider giving Syria to the Kurds as the blue water access for Kurdistan.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
09/14/2004 15:31 Comments ||
Top||
#14
The BND generally is too small to do the whole world the way the US services do, but what they do, when they do a job, is usually superlative work.
So if this is coming from the BND, then pay attention.
#22
OldSpook-always appreciate what you add to the discussion. If any news site has it though, it's already out of the bag in a sense, isn't it?
LH-True. I think these two border-sharing, Baathist regimes have much in common. Wonder if we have really been thinking in those terms up to this point.
Syrian special forces have used chemical weapons against the Black-African population of Darfur. The action in which dozens of people died.
That is a fairly weighty accusation. Since the UN seems hamstrung as soon as the word "Muslim" is uttered in connection with crimes, what possible repercussions could there be, if it does turn out to be true?
#24
RN (1st posting) You are 100% correct about Saddam's WMD 'trucked' shipped into Syria and beyond. Where is the New York Times on this?
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
09/14/2004 15:59 Comments ||
Top||
#25
Since the UN seems hamstrung as soon as the word "Muslim" is uttered in connection with crimes, what possible repercussions could there be, if it does turn out to be true?
I believe the technical term is "bugger all".
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
09/14/2004 16:02 Comments ||
Top||
#26
TGA
Any ideas as to which part of the BND favors Die Welt?
Ab1, Ab2 or Ab5?
If its Ab5, then this all of a sudden gets VERY interesting.
#28
Ummmmmmmm, maybe. What's in it for the Syrians? Why would they use Chem in the Sudan. What is their payoff? Makes more sense to sit on the good stuff, especially while the Yankees are so close to the border.
#32
Payof: Syria needs oil and if they are in a fight with the Iraqi's then it won't come from there. Sudan is sitting on a pile. Or maybe they did want to test in an area where they believed they would not be caught.
Posted by: remote man ||
09/14/2004 20:06 Comments ||
Top||
#33
Ummmmmmmm, maybe. What's in it for the Syrians? Why would they use Chem in the Sudan. What is their payoff?
Think 'Spanish Civil War'. Sudan has had low-intensity conflicts going on for over 30 years. Plenty of training opportunities.
#35
Drudge doesn't have this up yet, Yosemite Sam, but Little Green Footballs has it posted, with over 100 comments on the thread. Any bets on how long until Rush Limbaugh mentions this?
TGA, Old Spook, thanks for the perspective on the source. The Syrians are going to find the near future more interesting than they'd expected when they got up this morning!
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
09/14/2004 21:12 Comments ||
Top||
#39
There certainly are jihadis and camps in the Sudan that need to be taken out, but I think that the Sudan intervention has been sold to Americans correctly - as a humanitarian necessity. I'm sure that terrorist camps and chemical weapons can be made to disappear, but I'm sure that we won't have any trouble finding oppressed people in Darfur once we get in there.
I'd like to see an immediate "no-fly" zone established and Special Ops begin taking down the terrorist training camps.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
09/14/2004 21:20 Comments ||
Top||
#40
TGA: You dont work for them do you? LOL!
And no, I dont want to peel the onion any further. Leave it up to the guys on watch now.
No sense in me waking up the mooks before they get whats coming to them.
#41
This will cause some sleepless nights in Tel Aviv, if even remotely true. I'm sure the Israelis know where the "sensitive" areas are, and how to take them out. I'd also bet that Turkey is none too happy about it, either. Iraqi missiles had to travel a long way to hit Israel - Syria's right next door. Lebanon's open to them as well. Asshat may have just cut his own throat. There's no way Israel can allow chemical weapons to be positioned on its northern border and hope to survive.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
09/14/2004 22:08 Comments ||
Top||
#42
Old Spook, no, I don't work for them.
Know a few things, don't know a few other things...
#43
Syria's never looked back after Powell gave Baby Assad a good cop warning. They figured that Bush would lose the election, and their Mad Mullah buddies in Iran would help take up the slack after Saddam's fall. Syria is begging for a serious wack, especially if this CW stuff turns out to be true. I hope that we or someone can get good proof of this CW, just to silence the asshats. The theatres of operations are very fluid these days, and so critical.
BTW, the moose stew here is great! They are organically grown, heh heh.
Posted by: Alaska Paul in McGrath, AK ||
09/14/2004 22:50 Comments ||
Top||
#44
Mmmmmm, I don't think we really want to invade Syria guys. We're two invasions away from WWIII as it is. That's why the U.N. tiptoes so daintily around Muslim issues.
Luckily invasion is not necessary. The whole world already knows we're waging a war on terrorism, and that Mr. Bush has said we'll hunt them down no matter what country they're hiding in. So use the CIA and other intelligence assets to positively locate the WMDs - if they exist - and send in the crack teams.
If you invade, you become responsible for the real estate and the masses and nation-building and all that jazz. And you spend billions on that.
Best, I think, to handle this one the old-fashioned way, with spooks backed by our military elite.
#48
Old Spook, this sounds as if the chemical attacks happened quite a while ago - before the Sudanese called on the Syrians to remove the chemical material. Is it probable that the camps for training jihadis that are located in the Sudan are very simular to the AQ camps in Afghanistan. The Taliban allowed the camps but didn't directly control the actions of the jihadi Arab-mafia in the camps. These Sudanese camps would have the advantage of being located in close proximity to a population of victims. When the Syrian/Arab thugs decided to try out the gas on the local populous, the Sudanese realized that news of this would be the third-rail for their regime and demanded that the evidence be packed up and returned to Syria. I don't know when in the timeline the Zarqawi attempted chemical attack on Jordan occured.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
09/15/2004 0:51 Comments ||
Top||
One of the hijackers of the Kathmandu Indian Airlines plane, Hashim Qureshi, has issued a diktat to owners of restaurants, cyber cafes and beauty parlours in Kashmir Valley to make their business transparent and remove cabins from their workplaces within 10 days. Hashim Qureshi , who floated a separatist outfit under the name of Democratic Liberation Party here said, "under the cover of tinted glasses and the cabin system, vulgarity is getting encouraged." Toeing his line, a youth, claiming to be a JeM militant, on Saturday threatened about half a dozen beauty parlour owners, asking them to close down within 12 hours, failing which their premises would be blasted.
Posted by: TS(vice girl) ||
09/14/2004 11:33:45 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
Former hostages on verge of suicide 09/10/2004 11:15
Ten former hostages from Beslan arrived in Moscow on Thursday on board a plane of the Russian defense ministry and were hospitalized to Serbsky's State Scientific Center in Moscow (the central psychiatric hospital in Russia). Doctors say that each of those people, who experienced the nightmare of the hostage crisis in Beslan, were on the verge of suicide. One of the former hostages committed suicide, when she came back home from the stormed school. Psychiatrists say 132 other victims of the horrific terrorist attack need to be hospitalized urgently, the Kommersant wrote.
Ten leading specialists of the Serbsky's Institute left for North Ossetia soon after the end of the hostage crisis. The doctors rendered first psychological aid to those, who survived the storm of the Beslan school. "Our specialists work at hospitals and at funeral ceremonies," the institute's director Tatiana Dmitrieva said. "Unfortunately, we have lost one woman. She committed suicide when she identified her dead child," Dmitrieva said. Psychiatrists are deeply concerned about a possible series of possible suicides to occur. "It is not time for mass suicides, - senior psychiatrist of the Russian Healthcare Ministry Boris Kazakovtsev said. - An outburst of suicides usually starts a month or two after an emergency situation ends."
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Zenster ||
09/14/2004 2:41:40 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Zen When I read this stuff I just go into a red rage. None of this stuff had to happen. But the evil that authors this has no remorse.
As predicted the "moderate muslims" have dried up and blown away. My hope is that Vlad the 1st hunts them down and has them slowly given the Dracula treatment.
#2
Thanks for the post, Zenster. I think it's extremely relevant, and I 'm glad you put it on the board today.
First: thereâs no fixing this. Teenage girls were raped (and videotaped while they were being raped). Children saw their friends and teachers bayonetted, shot, and blown up. They witnessed suicide bombings up close. They saw people all around them dying from thirst. Their captors showed no mercy. Parents and police that tried to rescue them were murdered in front of their eyes. They saw their school destroyed. And all this from their ânext-door neighbors,â so to speak. Saying that this community will be suffering from the effects of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder for, literally, generations, doesn't even come close to describing what these people will be going through.
I agree with you, Zenster, when you say that âI feel that we all need every single argument possible when we are confronted with people who refuse to comprehend the enormity of terrorism.â Itâs true. Until people see the true aftermath of the actions of the terrorists, they simply cannot comprehend how far it goes, and how bad it is. As you, and everyone else here knows, I have been a very outspoken critic of Islamic neofacism, and I agree with you that, while itâs tough for us to keep revisiting this situation, we must.
While your âbible quoteâ at the end is appreciated by me, it also mystifies me. It mystifies because you consistently rail against President Bush for having some sort of âfaith-basedâ agenda to which you strongly object. It also mystifies me that, as an avowed secularist, you are now inserting religious verses into your posts, when just 10 days ago your âcivil, well-reasoned discourseâ to me, when I challenged your personal sacred cow, was to say that I am âan hysterical hate-monagerâ with âa paranoid eggshell ego,â that Iâm an âintolerant hysterical totalitarianâ at the âlunatic fringe level of hyperventilating panic,â and that "I deserve deserve every iota of the bile, vitriol and raw sewage floating in (my) veinsâ (at this link ).
One of the âevery single arguments possibleâ against Islamic neofacism you advocate for, is a rational and critical comparison of the ideologies that drive the opposing views of Islam and Christianity--if only because of the very fact that Islamofacismâs stated goal is to destroy Christians (and Jews) as primary targets. (Beslan is an old Christian community--no doubt thatâs why they were selected for termination.) What happened in Beslan is the end result of Islamofacism and a peculiar totalitarianism which seeks, by any and all means possible, to dismantle and deconstruct Western civilization on psuedo-"religious" grounds. We need to understand the machinations as well as the "end goal" of the Islamofacists. Beslan is just one more example of the realization of their aims. Like it or not, what happened in Beslan is a direct outworking of the terrorists' "faith-based" agenda.
I found two links I thought might be applicable and helpful to the current discussions. A comparison of Islam with Christianity and some different points of view regarding your own particular "hot button".
Just food for thought.
And BTW, I like you better when you're quoting bible verses. Go figure.
If you need a quote, then best to heed that agnostic president and war leader's wisdom: The Almighty has his own purposes. As for those of us on earth, I want to destroy this scourge. Period.
#6
No. Just win. I don't hate muslims any more than Lincoln hated confederates. I don't wish to reform their world any more than Lincoln wanted to destroy slavery.
I just want to destroy the jihadists. And I'm sure that my determination will burn longer than the kind of righteous indignation that waxes and wanes with each news cycle.
#8
It also mystifies me that, as an avowed secularist, you are now inserting religious verses into your posts, when just 10 days ago your âcivil, well-reasoned discourseâ to me, when I challenged your personal sacred cow, was to say that I am âan hysterical hate-monager
I got no problem with this quote (except it should be allow the children, nothing about suffering children in our sense) and I aint no christian, and i can even find some christians who are hysterical hatemongers :)
#10
though I do think that theres a need for a broader reform in Islam beyond the Jihadists - the Jihadists arose out of a failed society, and until that society is changed I fear we wont be done with jihadists, baathists, and related problems. Im more of a root causer that way. guess it has to do with radical rather than strictly liberal roots, like the Neocons ;)
#11
LH - I have now completed the circle. From wide-eyed romantic to fry 'em up.
Beslan was the last straw. The support for the Chechens that came after Beslan from all over Islam cured me of my last vestige of sympathy for the imagined plight of the mythical moderate muslims. I found no posts from Islamic sources (Arab News, Al Arabiyah, Islam Unspun, Islam Online, etc) that took the Chechens to task for the loss of life. The closest to come to that said it was fully justified - and the dead would be treated well in Paradise for their sacrifice. No links - I saw nothing to save.
And I no longer see anything to save in Islam. That which is passive is merely an untapped resource for the active. No Muslims say "No!" to the jihadis. Got a bunch of nifty links saying they do? Post away.
As for Pipes, as I've said here before - and got Anon1 all wild-eyed when I did, he's on a path of discovery. He was not that far off Edward Said pre-9/11. Post 9/11 he said there are just a few bad Muslims. Just a few Caliphatists who are doing all this damage - think about how many locations where there is Islamic "unrest" - MSM-speak for the spread, voluntary or by force, of Islam... Wasn't there a recent post indicating 85+% of the world's current conflicts are actually Islam spreading - by force? Well Danny-boy is still learning - and his center of gravity moves with him. Closer and closer to accepting that the mythical moderate is, well, mythical. It must be very disheartening for him, and I am not bashing him, despite that perception last time. I am observing the slow shift in his writings. If he wants to flail away at the reality and pretend that what's actually happening in practice is the aberration, not his view, well he's free to do so. I am free to say he's still a few bricks shy of getting it, but he's coming along.
I know you can cut much of Islamic terrorism by cutting the funding - and I advocated for that for about the last 18 months, no?
But Beslan, on the other side of the planet, has made it clear to me that there is no authority which will make the mythical moderate free of the jihadi. Look at Sistani, who you used to (still do?) defend as a moderate. He sits on his fucking hands as Iraq burns around him. Fat lot of good he is to his minions. Back to the "moderate" and the jihadi - in practice, there is no difference. Just tapped vs untapped resources. I have given up on Islam. Period. The reservoir dried up in Beslan.
This truly underscores why ALL these islamofascists need to be put to death -- they have lost any right to live by forsaking the most basic of all human contracts: respect for the right to life of others. These islamofascist monsters could not have reached these abject levels of depravity, without first seeing their victims as less than human, less than worthy of the respect owed to all other creatures. And, they would not have dehumanized their victims WITHOUT THE TEACHINGS OF THEIR RELIGION.
Show me where the islamofascists' teachings tell them NOT to do what they did. Any such suggested teaching is far outweighed by the numerous clear teachings to do exactly what they did. THIS IS A WAR OF RELIGIONS. Mind you, Iâm not saying Judeo-Christianity versus Islam -- but, yes, Judeo-Chrisitianity versus Islamofascism.
As an aside, regarding Lincoln: his strong faith in what was right and what was wrong (steeped as it was in Judeo-Christian faith) took this nation through some of its darkest days -- and laid the bedrock principle of reconciliation, forgiveness and tolerance where possible, and determined and dedicated eradication of sedition where not possible. In that vein: Death to Islamofascism!
#13
He was not that far off Edward Said pre-9/11
what you been smoking man? I followed said before 9/11, and Pipes too - ive even skimmed his book on Greater Syria. Your sentence makes no sense.
And yes, ive seen plenty of muslims condemn the attack in Beslan. No i havent seen any condemn the Chechens in general. Cause, er, the Chechens in general didnt do that. Hell, there are pro-Putin Chechens. In fact Putin and pals say the pro-Putin Chechens are the majority. So if Putin is right, why should anyone condemn Chechens in general?
#14
Look at Sistani, who you used to (still do?) defend as a moderate. He sits on his fucking hands as Iraq burns around him.
I still see Sistani as different from Sadr, and and even more so from AQ et al. I no longer consider strengthening him a good thing, but thats a far cry from considering him the moral equivalent of murderers.
Iraq burning around him? No the Sunni triangle is burning around him, plus Baghdad. Everything from Hilla south to Basra has been quiet the last few days.
Should he condemn Zarq? Im pretty sure he has - doubt that the Sunnis in Fallujah, or on Haifa Street in Baghdad pay much attention to him. And Allawi has implied that if Fallujah is still in insurgent hands in January, they may go ahead and have elections without it. Since this increases the Shia share of the vote, why whould Sistani be worried?
#15
sistani and pals have been busy consolidating their position in Najaf.
Al-Sadr posters and pictures tacked up around the city streets and neighborhood shops have been torn down. The police, whom al-Sadr's fighters drove from their Najaf and Kufa compounds last spring, have packed their jail cells with the cleric's followers.
They also have used heavy-handed tactics such as door-to-door searches, checkpoints and arrests during the past two weeks to curb the al-Sadr influence in Najaf.
On Thursday they carted off three pickups filled with Kalashnikovs, rocket-propelled grenade launchers and other weapons confiscated from the basement of al-Sadr's office after the cleric acquiesced to the search at the request of the Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Husseini al-Sistani, the leading Shiite religious authority.
The backlash by the city's merchants, police and affluent class, who suffered most under al-Sadr's five-month rule, has rattled the cleric's top advisers, who are hunkered in his office within earshot of the protests. They blame Najaf's governor and police for orchestrating the demonstrations and using officers dressed in street clothes to rally the crowd
#16
lex - you're playing with the words and cutting a line where it suits you. The muslims vs jihadists... So you're a Daniel Pipes nitpicker?
I certainly don't oppose Fouad Ajami or Fareed Zakaria or Kanan Makiya. If I'm not mistaken, all of these pro-war, anti-jihadist intellectuals are muslims.
#18
Yes, moderate muslims exist, and more are being created every day. We need to win both wars, the one with fire and sword and the one for hearts and minds. This was our two-track strategy in the Cold War, and it produced success.
As to your demonization of muslims, I recall the same melding in certain minds of "Soviet" and "Russian." Which is especially annoying to me and my Russian wife and our Russian- and English-speaking son. I can understand how the normal, decent muslims feel, and I would do anything in my power to increase the chance that some muslim Gorbachevs begin to appear.
As I say, my goal is to win this war. What's yours?
#19
#2While your âbible quoteâ at the end is appreciated by me, it also mystifies me. It mystifies because you consistently rail against President Bush for having some sort of âfaith-basedâ agenda to which you strongly object.
ex-lib, did you happen to notice the various obsevations that followed your post in the linked thread? I'll put them here for your edification:
#81"Anyone else thinks that ex-lib needs to go back to his medication?" - Aris Katsaris -
#83Â I don't know about medication, Aris, but the language is over the top for me. I don't see homosexuality as the moral equivalent of terrorism, nor the likely cause for the end of the western world. To each their own, ex-lib... - jules -
#85Â Ex-lib just having his first 'acid experience' Makes Joyce look lucid. - Howard UK -
#93... Your whole posts, both yours and ex-lib's, are synopsised down to "We hate you because you don't like Bush, because you support issues that both we and Bush oppose." - Aris Katsaris -
#106Â ... Ex-lib, this is the last I'm gonna bother with a crazy such as yourself who has claimed supporting gay rights is as evil as supporting terrorism: You are a raving lunatic. Get a fucking grip and get a fucking perspective. - Aris Katsaris -
ex-lib, note the repeated drug references, be they to medications or LSD? Note how others immediately recognized your intolerance and willingness to equate support of gay rights with terrorism? Do you remotely comprehend how difficult this makes it to accept anything you have to contribute? Are you able to understand that this is the "raw sewage in your veins" that I was referring to?
The virulent hatred you demonstrate for homosexuals and their right to peaceful coexistence in modern society highlights an inability to extend your own faith's golden rule. What you would do unto others could only bring forth howls of certain protest were they done to you.
It also mystifies me that, as an avowed secularist, you are now inserting religious verses into your posts, when just 10 days ago your âcivil, well-reasoned discourseâ to me, when I challenged your personal sacred cow, was to say that I am âan hysterical hate-monagerâ with âa paranoid eggshell ego,â that Iâm an âintolerant hysterical totalitarianâ at the âlunatic fringe level of hyperventilating panic,â and that "I deserve deserve every iota of the bile, vitriol and raw sewage floating in (my) veinsâ
ex-lib, did you bother to notice how I omitted Mark's tag line regarding "the kingdom of God?" The "me" in that phrase could also be construed by more open minds to be anything from mother nature to the soil which eventually receives us all. I'm confident it will probably enrage you that I would willfully take a Biblical quote out of context, even if it is in a benign manner, but that is just something you'll have to deal with. My intention was to show how we are forced to suffer the departure of our children from us by the evil in this world.
One of the âevery single arguments possibleâ against Islamic neofacism you advocate for, is a rational and critical comparison of the ideologies that drive the opposing views of Islam and Christianity--if only because of the very fact that Islamofacismâs stated goal is to destroy Christians (and Jews) as primary targets. (Beslan is an old Christian community--no doubt thatâs why they were selected for termination.) What happened in Beslan is the end result of Islamofacism and a peculiar totalitarianism which seeks, by any and all means possible, to dismantle and deconstruct Western civilization on psuedo-"religious" grounds. We need to understand the machinations as well as the "end goal" of the Islamofacists. Beslan is just one more example of the realization of their aims. Like it or not, what happened in Beslan is a direct outworking of the terrorists' "faith-based" agenda.
ex-lib, you are nearly astounding in your level of disconnect. Quite obviously you are incapable of understanding how any "faith-based" agenda posed within a political framework, as in sharia law, theocracy or the "office of faith based giving" and DOMA, all represent a basic violation of the separation of church and state. Your ability to disregard this glaring hypocrisy is what I find so disturbing about your brand of "Christianity." I feel that Jesus, who most certainly did exist, would have extreme difficulty in accepting the sort of intolerance and blame you attempt to place upon others who wish you no direct harm.
At this point, I am also obliged to note how you have, once again, taken the liberty of attempting to hijack a thread with your own personal agenda and attacks upon myself. At the earliest opportunity, please get over yourself.
#7When the Muslims start frying up the jihadists for endangering their existence, I'll listen.
.com, your statement is a bullseye dart. I've tried to say the same thing many times myself, perhaps in a more subtle way. It is why I have repeatedly asked about where are all the moderate imams who're willing to gloriously martyr themselves while they preach against violent jihad to their Islamist brothers?
Your statement would seem to carry an additional modicum of weight because of the pervasive inclination towards violence that so many Muslims exhibit. While many would argue that this is not so and many ordinary followers of Islam wish only for peaceful coexistence, it is their tacit acceptance of jihadist violence that condemns them. I believe these are the "untapped resources" that you refer to.
Islam's unspoken approval of violent jihad must therefore be turned against them per your own proposition. If Muslims silently condone jihadist violence then they are not allowed to skate with respect to them using similar violence in order to eliminate a potent internal threat to their very own existence. When Muslims finally begin to get on board with how they must wage their own jihad against the Islamists, only then will they begin to gain a single iota of credibility.
Until then, any proclamations of moderation and peaceful intent all go out the window. Muslims must vigorously defend their faith from the vicious and brutal savages that would endanger them all. If no such peril is seen in the barbarity that jihadists perpetuate, then every Muslim forfeits all right to demand any distinction from those same Islamists.
It is this commutative equation that Islam somehow willingly blinds itself to. Beslan and so many other Islamist atrocities are slowly bringing about recognition of this appropriate guilt-by-association within the non-Muslim global community. Even as it is impeded by stupidity, naked greed and the most callow of self-interest, thinking people everywhere must one day open their eyes to the monstrous threat leveled at us all.
That Islam refuses to understand or unanimously protest the poison that jihadists are regularly injecting into their religion's veins will be a death knell for all Muslims.
#8I got no problem with this quote (except it should be allow the children, nothing about suffering children in our sense) and I aint no christian, and i can even find some christians who are hysterical hatemongers :)
Liberalhawk, the term "suffer" does not refer to the children's agony. I would liken the word's use more to the context of its meaning in the term "universal sufferage." I interpret it as how the grieving parents must suffer (or allow) that their children depart them, not that the children themselves suffer as they do so. Causing children to suffer is nothing I would ever glorify.
#12This truly underscores why ALL these islamofascists need to be put to death
cingold, without wishing to start any sort of brawl, I hope that you can appreciate why I advocate using wetwork teams to achieve the end you posted above, which I have excerpted.
Islamists must meet the most hurried of deaths before they can wreak even another single murder of innocent life. I want it done immediately and have essentially zero faith that a majority of the governments overseeing Muslim dominated nations will do very much about eradicating this problem anytime soon.
However grievous it is, due process will not and cannot address this issue quickly enough. If it is not wetwork teams performing summary execution of those who proclaim the religious right to indiscriminately slaughter civilians, then it must be total war. I see no other viable alternatives.
Prosecution of routine military intervention on the scale we are now witnessing will lead to only one thing;
A terrorist nuclear attack upon America or another major international metropolis, in that order. This is utterly unacceptable.
#20
nah, dot com, a few intellectuals wont stop the madness. Hell, if 30% of muslims are moderate that wont stop the madness.
Heres my top of the head guesstimate breakdown - Truely moderate muslims - 15%. Anti-terrorist but still fucked up in other aspects of their thinking - 15%. Anti-jihadi, but willing to justify terror in select cases 40%. Support the Jihadis - 30%. Of these last probably less than a third (10%) provide active support.
Is this enough to stop the madness - not without our help, no, and even with our help its not clear. But its enough to make it morally right to make distinctions. And its enough to make it strategically right to do so.
Cmon dot com, youre around here enough. How many Americans troops are killing jihadis in Algeria? None. In Morocco? In Waziristan? In Uzbekistan? the list is endless. You start pogroming muslims, you think youre gonna keep the cooperation of one muslim govt? Whatcha gonna do with Indonesia - turn it over to the jihadis? Occupy it? you gonna occupy Algeria? Egypt? I aint get it nailed (nice rhetorical trick there) but you dont have an answer either.
While other governments are indeed doing something to quell jihadists within their midst. Is it enough to avert the major atrocities that are still coming our way?
I do not see where it is. I believe this is what contributes to .com's vehemence. Current progress against terrorism is plainly insufficient. Beslan was adequate proof of that. Interdicting terrorism on a case-by-case basis is simply not feasible.
An overarching intervention against Islamist terrorism is required. Be it the credible deterrents and wetwork teams I've mentioned, or flat-out total war, it is something on this order that will begin to make the least dent in terrorist activity.
I do not think it is paranoid or hysterical at all to anticipate how current tactics, if left unchanged, will lead to a terrorist nuclear attack. This must be prevented at all costs. Even one single terrorist atomic bombing could send the global economy into a tailspin that would make the post 9-11 downturn look like a picnic.
With Beslan, the terrorist's gloves came off. Those of us who are determined to combat terrorism are now obliged to find similar bare-knuckled approaches to rooting them out and killing them at every opportunity. As always, I welcome alternative suggestions and solutions. I'll ask everyone to note the increasing frequency of people here suggesting that Mecca and Medina be subjected to immediate nuclear attack. While this is nothing I support, I do feel that holding the shrines hostage or physically taking possession of them (the ultimate "flypaper") will better serve the ends of making the global Muslim population realize just how much is at stake should they continue refusing to expunge jihadists from within their ranks.
#22
Sorry but that won't cut it against some anonymous jihadist slipping a dirty nuke into one of the x-thousand generic containers that arrive at the ports of Baltimore and Houston and LA and Oakland every hour.
Not trying to be cute here-- I don't really have the answer-- but we're not in a MAD era anymore. Neither can we really take on the "muslim world." We need a realistic, flexible doctrine and strategy that gets support from whatever quarter we can find it, be it the Kremlin or New Delhi or muslim reformers where such exist.
#23
lex, we really need to come up with some answers. Our lives depend upon it.
I'm beginning to think that physically securing the Arabian shrines may have some potential. They would become the ultimate "flypaper" for jihadis from all over the globe. Let them come and be killed there, rather than on our own soil. Land mines, cluster bombs, remote control machine guns, whatever it takes to mow them down on a regular basis.
How could retaking the shrines not become their top priority? I know this sounds loony, but I am fed up with sitting around and waiting for the next Beslan atrocity. I'll repeat what I said elsewhere.
Just as 9-11 forever changed hijacking protocols, so did Beslan permanently alter all future hostage-taking situations. The only thing we can truly count upon is that some twisted jihadi somewhere will arrive at an even worse escalation to challenge these already depraved limits.
#24
zenster, without analyzing them, i note you are proposing concrete solutions. I agree that current activities are inadequate. I was merely taking issue with the "kill every muslim approach" which seemed to be implied in derogating Daniel Pipes of all people for being to "moderate"
I note Russia is increasing its security budget and making reforms in the organization of its security services. I suspect they will soon be cleaning out the Pankisi Gorger, and I hope we pressure Georgia to go along. I would hope Russia would help us in Iraq and elsewher in return. I note Russia is now increaing cooperation with Israel, and hope this expands.
I could say what i want the Euros to do differently but that wouldnt surprise you.
I think the current admin is doing about all it can abroad militarily - i dont see much room for improvement from a tougher stand, beyond what is being done and what i think is already in the works (which include taking out Fallujah soon, and increasing pressure on Iran). I would like to see fuller mobilization at home, but thats another story we've been over before. I dont see Beslan leading to that, and thats unfortunate. And yes, i still think we should be doing much more in terms of public diplomacy, propaganda, culture war, etc.
#25
I'm not keen on the flypaper strategy. Fine for dealing with jihadists already in situ but there's no point in creating new ones, which is what your idea would do. I'd rather apply such creativity to the political side of this thing, as that's the way to shift the correlation of forces, as it were, in our favor.
I think it's time to consider splitting Kurdistan off from Iraq. Also time to get serious about a deep and strategic relationship with India and Russia. That's my $0.02
#26
Wow, Zenster. Ex-lib compliments the thread you started and you go ap#sh!^ all over her. Get a grip, dude. So much for the topic . . . (which, I for one, thought was pretty germane)
But, you are masterful. Check out, for instance, the rhetorical sophistry of the âstraw man.â âThe virulent hatred you demonstrate for homosexuals and their right to peaceful coexistence in modern society highlights . . .â Gee, thatâs terrible, but ex-lib never said that, did she?
I also liked the ad hominem. The old tricks are the best tricks, right? Those personal attacks always serve to detract from real points.
Oh, oh, and the âhow we are forced to suffer the departure of our children from us by the evil in this world . . .â Wow, like thatâs in the bible? Christ said that? How Zen. Wait did He?link? And to think Iâve always read Mark 10:14 as Christ thought kids were cool.
Now on to me, you write âcingold, without wishing to start any sort of brawl, I hope that you can appreciate why I advocate using wetwork teams to achieve the end you posted above, which I have excerpted.â Now? I always have, as you well know (see link). NO BRAWL NECESSARY. My objections, as you remember (see link), were to your suggestion that the sovereignty and cooperation of an ally be compromised by your sloppy suggestion. :)
#28
What this thread really touches on (note: attempt to get back on track here) is how human beings can get so twisted that they do the horrific stuff we see here. The same questions were asked after the death camps were discovered in Nazi Germany, and I think those early studies are useful.
This guy named Stanley Milgram researched âobedience to authorityâ (see link) and found out that you can get a great majority of people to do truly terrible things. All it really takes is the deconstruction of social norms and mores in the mind of the subject, which is accomplished all the more easily by doing the deconstruction through a trusted authority figure. Thatâs how Islamofascists monsters are made. The mullahs and the ayatollahs are the puppet masters of a death cult. What we need is some serious deprogramming throughout the Muslim world.
#29
Zenster--HOW MANY TIMES DO I NEED TO SAY THIS:
I never equated gay rights with terrorism. And you know it. Nor do I, or have I ever, exhibited any "virulent hatred or homosexuals" as you falsely assert. Rather, I think it's you who are exhibiting an "astounding level of disconnect." Please--get over yourself, will you? READ my post C-A-R-E-F-U-L-L-Y, and analytically, and you'll see that. I mean, what does it take?
Secondy: using "Aris Katsaris'" posts to "spank" me ain't gonna fly, Zenster. I didn't have time to answer jules that day, and HowardUK did express that he thought I was out of it. But I chalk it up to the fact that people have been conditioned to unquestioningly accept exactly what the homosexual lobby has been promoting for the last twenty years--which is that: to question anything about their political aims is âbad,â âintolerant,â âevil,â âoppressive,â âmean,â etc. In so doing, they limit dialogue and debate.
I will always âquestion authority.â Any and every topic is open to discussion, which is all I was doing. By saying I was doing anything else, just proves my point of your intolerance and the intolerance of the gay lobby to stand up to reasonable critique.
Next, you say, "I'm confident it will probably enrage you that I would willfully take a Biblical quote out of context." âEnrageâ me? Oh yeah, right. Whatever! Zenster--I don't care what you do about stuff like that. That's your deal. You said "My intention was to show how we are forced to suffer the departure of our children from us by the evil in this world." Okay, that's fine. Youâre free to think and post anything you want. (Of course, the context of the verse has to do with Jesus' rebuke of his disciples for ostracizing children from him--like he was too special for them. He said "allow (suffer) them to come to Me, for such is the kingdom of heaven.") Just FYI, and like I said, itâs no big to me. Sorry, but as much as you might want to pigeion-hole me, it's not going to happen.
You said, "What you would do unto others could only bring forth howls of certain protest were they done to you." WTF, Zenster? What do you think I want to do? Hurt homosexuals? Kill homosexuals? I see most homosexuals and lesbians transexuals as people who have a legitmate need for same-sex love relationships (usually denied in childhood) --legitimate needs which they are trying to meet sexually (and it isn't working out very well for them). Good grief. Your stupid accusations against me stink.
Further, as you well know, I was talking about deconstructionism and societal outcomes of redefining human relationships within a context that, essentially, is ARTIFICIAL. "Gayness" as an entity or class, simply doesn't exist. Again, my position is that heterosexual males and females (who âcallâ themselves gay, lesbian, or transexual) are engaging in sexual activities with members of the same sex, are bouncing back and forth between the sexes, or are trying to escape their sexuality--for a number of reasons, usually specific to the individual. It's a valid point, which you, apparently, cannot discuss on an intellectual or rational basis.
Zenster, please try to understand that I don't care what people do in their private lives. But when any group fictitiously tries to define themselves as a special âclassâ in the legal sense--based on certain behaviors--then, yes, I have some trouble with it. (BTW: As a point of interest: Did you know pedophiles are now using the exact same arguments of the radical homosexuals to try and secure legislation to lower the age of consent? They claim children's "sexuality" is being hindered and oppressed by outdated "Christian" cultural norms. Sick, no?)
My understanding is that you support deconstructionism in the form of âgayâ âmarriage.â Am I wrong? Have I misunderstood you? It is clear, though, that you definitely donât like organizations that have any connection, whatsoever, to anything religious, except for âsecularâ organizations, which actually are just as âreligiousâ (--define âreligionâ). But I read, at the whitehouse link that: âPresident Bush announced nearly $189 million in Federal funding to support the work of organizations serving America's needy. Many of these social service providers are faith-based and community organizations. $43 million was awarded through the President's Compassion Capital Fund, $45.6 million was awarded through the Mentoring Children of Prisoners program, and $100 million through the Access to Recovery drug treatment voucher program.â Just clicking on the Mentoring Children of Prisoners shows how the monies are allocated. It doesn't look that "terrible" to me. Almost all of the organizations helping these kids are what you'd call "secular" anyway.
I said, "One of the âevery single arguments possibleâ against Islamic neofacism you advocate for, is a rational and critical comparison of the ideologies that drive the opposing views of Islam and Christianity--if only because of the very fact that Islamofacismâs stated goal is to destroy Christians (and Jews) as primary targets. (Beslan is an old Christian community--no doubt thatâs why they were selected for termination.) What happened in Beslan is the end result of Islamofacism and a peculiar totalitarianism which seeks, by any and all means possible, to dismantle and deconstruct Western civilization on psuedo-"religious" grounds. We need to understand the machinations as well as the "end goal" of the Islamofacists. Beslan is just one more example of the realization of their aims. Like it or not, what happened in Beslan is a direct outworking of the terrorists' "faith-based" agenda."
Too bad you can't talk about the stuff I really say. But you've been so angry and ugly--saying that "I deserve deserve every iota of the bile, vitriol and raw sewage floating in (my) veins,â (Wow. I've never said anything like that to you), and equating me with Nazis and the witchhunts at Salem (which actually has been traced to fungi-contaminated grain, causing hallucinations), that I'm not sure I want to talk to you anymore. You're just too narrow-minded and intolerant.
#30
cingold--you said: "All it really takes is the deconstruction of social norms and mores in the mind of the subject, which is accomplished all the more easily by doing the deconstruction through a trusted authority figure. Thatâs how Islamofascists monsters are made. The mullahs and the ayatollahs are the puppet masters of a death cult. What we need is some serious deprogramming throughout the Muslim world."
I really liked what you said, but are you saying that the mullahs actually need to deconstruct Muslim thinking to accomplish these atrocities? I thought that what we would consider "deconstructed thinking" is actually the norm for Muslims, according to Islam, (although your "basic Musim" probably wouldn't agree with the crazies). Explain? I'm not sure I understand what you're saying.
#32
#78 ex-lib: The "values" espoused by the homosexual/lesbian activist lobby accomplishes the same thing as the terrorists want--i.e., the Destruction of Western Civilization.
#29 ex-lib: Zenster--HOW MANY TIMES DO I NEED TO SAY THIS: I never equated gay rights with terrorism. And you know it. Nor do I, or have I ever, exhibited any "virulent hatred or homosexuals" as you falsely assert.
#33
ex-lib said (#30):are you saying that the mullahs actually need to deconstruct Muslim thinking to accomplish these atrocities? Yes, from the date of their birth to the date they become splodydopes. Personally, I believe morality and basic human goodness is innate -- so, those inborn constructs must be deconstructed to breed these monsters. If you look at what they teach their kids, what else could be produced by that swill?
Shipman said (#31):How much is your retainer Cingold? It depends . . . Tell me about your assets and how much this task means to you . . . ; )
#34
Sheesh .com, you're calling for WWIII here. That's fine as your considered opinion, but you must know that in the real world that dog won't hunt. This is still America, and half the population thinks the war in Iraq may have been a bad idea. Iraq already pushes the limits of our national willingness to embrace militancy.
#35
Ah Zenster, what did the homosexuals or lesbians ever do to you? Only the extremely religious or people who have been molested think that way. Shit, half the country is secretly sick and twisted in the bedroom. So, you wanna watch? That's what we'll have to do if we start legislating morals.
Leave 'em alone, let 'em do what they want in private. Long as they keep it quiet, and stay away from the kiddies.
EFL from WaPo - the writers don't seem to have a problem with the following occurrence. I suspect that embracing the Moslem Brotherhood would be attempted agin in a Kerry presidency.
When U.S. immigration officers in New York City whisked away Ishaq Farhan as he stepped off an incoming international flight in May 2000, his Jordanian diplomatic passport was no help to him. Federal agents questioned him for hours before barring his entry into the country. Then they made him pay for the flight back to Jordan.
The U.S. Embassy in Jordan lost no time making amends to Farhan, a leading opposition politician who has been closely affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood, a worldwide movement opposed to Western influences. A State Department official visited his home, issued him an immediate visa and passed on the United States' "deep regret for the difficulties Dr. Farhan experienced."
The episode demonstrates the U.S. government's dilemma. Some federal agents worry that the Muslim Brotherhood has dangerous links to terrorism. But some U.S. diplomats and intelligence officials believe its influence offers an opportunity for political engagement that could help isolate violent jihadists.
[...]
the writers of this piece seem to portray this episode as an example fo embracing diversity.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
09/14/2004 4:05:53 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Screw him. If he shows back up toss his ass in jail. The Muslim Brotherhood is a known terrorist orgization.
Posted by: Howard UK ||
09/14/2004 8:05 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Let's play "good cop / bad cop." The good cop keeps issuing him a visa and the bad cop keeps turning him around and sending him back. Works for me, and he can get lots of frequent flyer points.
Posted by: Tom ||
09/14/2004 8:56 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Lol! Saab Erakat is the best-dressed flack on the planet. Definitely Saville Row.
#5
"Diversity?"
The Muslim Brotherhood is a racist organization that would no doubt join the KKK in fighting the "Zionist/Negro occupation" in America, as they do in Iraq.
With its stereotyped and pitifully transparent attempts to conceal and encourage Eurabian bigotry, the media/academic multi-cult is a trojan horse for genocidal racism.
I have a new policy that will ignore the media cover-up and academic dhimmi propaganda, and address the real issues in this war: for every African murdered or abducted into slavery, 100 Saracen terrorist prisoners will be hanged. For every African village or Israeli bus destroyed, one Eurabian city will be bombed to the ground.
#6
The U.S. Embassy in Jordan lost no time making amends to Farhan, a leading opposition politician who has been closely affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood, a worldwide movement opposed to Western influences. A State Department official visited his home, issued him an immediate visa and passed on the United Statesâ "deep regret for the difficulties Dr. Farhan experienced."
The episode demonstrates the U.S. governmentâs dilemma. But some U.S. diplomats and intelligence officials believe its influence offers an opportunity for political engagement that could help isolate violent jihadists.
Seems to me the "government's dilemma" is the presence of officials that think appeasing or negotiating with terrorists and/or terrorist sympathizers is a viable strategy.
#8
Isn't it nice to sit back, pop a cold one and listen to the manic rants of neo-nazi/Christian racists like the above Communents, POP! Ahhh! God Bless US everyone!
typical....get a job, loser
Posted by: Frank G ||
09/14/2004 12:56 Comments ||
Top||
#9
I thought we were Zionists, anon. And the nazis are on your side, stupid.
#11
It's odd that media-conformist lefties are so fond of calling people nazis when the entire philosophy of the media-left, from Goebbels inspired rhetoric to hatred of Jews and admiration for common criminals, is directly derived from the neo-romantic fantasies of National Socialism.
In treating this as a deadly insult, they condemn themselves and make their well-deserved self-loathing all the more obvious.
#12
AC, did you notice the date of the incident. It looks to me as if the State Depart was inviting the Moslem Brotehrhood to America for a visit and the FBI was trying to protect us.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
09/14/2004 17:08 Comments ||
Top||
#13
#9I thought we were Zionists, anon. And the nazis are on your side
Permit me to clarify for you, Atomic Conspiracy. All things are possible when examining the microcosmic portion of reality viewable through the fractured and opaque prism of Islamist thought. Embracing the breathtaking periscopic (colonoscopic?) vistas of such twisted dementia permits the existence of even such unique and exotic fauna as Zionist Nazis.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
09/14/2004 03:54 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
You had to have a force that came from Falluja in order for it to be accepted by the people," Conway said. "Because they were from the local area, they were emasculated as far as their ability to do something very aggressive."
Am I reading this right? You need to have a local force to have it accepted by the people. But because the force is from the area, they don't have the ability to do anything aggressive.
#2
The creation of the Falluja Brigade also fell on Conway through Sanchez's orders.
Maybe it was a bad idea, I don't know. But Sanchez's biggest mistake was giving it to someone who didn't believe it had a chance of success to begin with, as it appears from this article. Thus the "experiment" was doomed before it even started.
#8
those are pretty defensive words coming out at a COC. It's considered very bad form to use the normally tea and crumpet format bash others for what you feel didn't go well during your command.
Usually those ceremonies are all about praising the command for a job well done and listing the highlights of what was accomplished. Deflecting blame reflects poorly on the speaker. Conway would be aware of that.
Knowing the MSM - it's possible that his words are taken out of context. You'd have to hear the whole speech to know if that was really the thrust of his comments.
Posted by: Frank G ||
09/14/2004 9:53 Comments ||
Top||
#10
I want to digest this at length, but I clearly recall that the Fallujah situation was initiated by Sunni political screams for help - because the sweeping operations were working great. Then we were told that this Fallujah Brigade thingy was a MILITARY idea. Yeah, right. Wotta joke. It was hung on the military to get the press to play along - a PR thingy - and guys like Conway saw the writing on the wall before the first sentence of this fabrication was finished. A bunch of corrupt ex-Army Sunnis are going to clean up and police a city historically known for being under the control of its criminal elements - all Sunnis. Yewbetcha. I felt sorry for the Mil guys then, and sorrier for them now. Fucking politicians.
There is only one way to handle the Sunni Triangle. No need to say it, yet again, is there?
#11
dot com, i dont know. Im inclined toward Fallujah delenda est, but .... We've taken Samarra without a massive assault, and also without a Falujah style compromise. One of the MSM sources, I forget which quotes a Marine Colonel that there is gunfire in Fallujah on nights when the USMC isnt doing anything - apparently the different factions in there are having it out. And the implication is that the bombings we've been seeing are designed to help that process along. Too clever by half? Maybe.
I am impressed by the fact that Conway didnt want the Fallujah brigade, and if i ever defended that act based on the military on the ground supporting it, i hereby admit to being wrong. I continue to think we wont understand this whole thing till years from now, when all the memoirs are written.
#12
2B: It may be bad form and maybe the remarks were taken out of context, but I'd bet the general is fit to be tied, because he's going to lose more Marines when they finally decide to finish the job.
Posted by: V is for Victory ||
09/14/2004 10:14 Comments ||
Top||
#13
The guy's just covering his butt. After the contractors were killed, Sanchez had no choice but to order Conway to move in. Conway dragged his feet for an eternity before starting the operation. During that interval, the outrage meter from the scenes of mutilation downticked rapidly. And the outrage meter was what provided the political capital for the push. Conway squandered that political capital by delaying the operation for so long. And because of Conway's procrastination in carrying a mission he did not agree with, there wasn't sufficient political capital to finish the job.
#14
I would permanently reroute the Baghdad-Amman highway at least 20 miles from Fallujah and cut off all services. Let them get their house in order or slowly starve. Allah Darwin knows best.
Posted by: ed ||
09/14/2004 10:27 Comments ||
Top||
#15
And because of Conway's procrastination in carrying a mission he did not agree with, there wasn't sufficient political capital to finish the job.
It's such poor form to use the COC to deflect blame that I have to think that ZF is right - unless these words are out of context.
What I really suspect is that it is a little bit of all of the above. The Fallujah brigade was a bad idea, thus Conway didn't embrace it, but by not giving it the best shot possible, it made a bad situation even worse. Because there were too many cooks in the kitchen the situation, it just became a mess.
Good news is that there will be a new CO over there. Let's hope he and his superiors have a better working relationship.
Conway said the U.S. military could "crush the city in four days," though he contends that that will not be the way things are done.
Iraqi forces will be the next soldiers to set foot in the city with U.S. support, Conway said, adding that he doesn't know what the immediate future holds.
#18
Hmmmm. ZF's got a great point that indicates Conway is just not a fighting leader - too ambivalent, and that's unacceptable in a military commander. And this, if true, would complicate the situation a lot. He was a major party to the decision process.
LH, I'm sure there are hundreds of factors that led to the Brigade idea being accepted - new interim gov't confusion, guys (mil & pol) second-guessing everything and watering down every option such that none could succeed.
Fallujah is a smuggler's roost - always was. So it has many mercenary factions and is a perfect place for Al Zarqi and his ilk to operate. Ramadi, as the Provincial seat, is / was also corrupt. Samarra isn't on the smuggler route, as I read about it, since it ran to Al Qaim on the Syrian border... so I don't think it's the same situation, much like Tikrit turned out differently than many (including me) expected.
I don't know about Conway, this story, et al. I don't doubt, however, that only force will work here. It must be sanitized - and I'd use the approach they used in Tal Afar - much like what we thought would be used in Fallujah - cutting off water, solid cordon, etc. Just as in the earlier sweep in Fallujah, the weenies come out of the woodwork screaming for a truce / political accommodation. And this means that what we're doing is working very very well.
I am quite disheartened by the lack of will present - prolly due to the political events here at home. Sometimes time and events just won't allow for convenience. We must clean out these nests - they are the source for much of the death toll, whether it has come in bunches or singles. Kill the planners, wipe out the inventories, destroy the bases - leave the cannon fodder no center of gravity to attract it. Remove the expertise and materiel. Do it, or bleed from hundreds of cuts, tiny or not. Just my $0.02.
#19
Not a Military Guy. Question intended seriously, even if dumb. How does somebody get to be a Lt. General in the USMC without being a fighting leader? I would have thought that if any organization had the filters in place to ensure fighting leaders it was the USMC.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
09/14/2004 10:46 Comments ||
Top||
#20
I don't know if that's the case - maybe he was severely handicapped after the attack on the contractors by the higher-ups. No way to be sure.
But about a non-fighter becoming a General, only war reveals a person's ambivalence to fighting. McClellan was a super-duper General - until a fight presented itself. Repeatedly he proved that he was a drilling maniac, but unable to stomach a real fight. Only war makes the fact clear.
And I'm not convinced Conway isn't a fighting man, just following what we have to go on: events. Get rid of the politics and he might turn out to be a Grant.
#21
MD: How does somebody get to be a Lt. General in the USMC without being a fighting leader?
In times of peace, the politicians get ahead. In times of war, the fighting leaders get ahead. And the only time we can sort out the wheat from the chaff is when we're in the middle of a war. As we are now.
The military selects its leadership in the same way that training programs like business schools select their top people, via simulations and grades. Business school graduates get graded in the real world when they graduate. Military leaders only get evaluated for real when a war breaks out.
#22
just to nitpick about little mac - he was out of the army in peacetime - he was a railroad exec, though a west point grad - he made his rep with a win in West Virginia, and only later got his rep for drilling - and more then drilling, he really did build the AoP as an Army.
Note there are revisionist views of little Mc. Lincoln finally fired him for not destroying Lee after Antietam - some question whether that was realistic.
#26
If little Mac had been running the Army of Northern Virginia the Army of the Potomac would never have had the competition necessary to make it a real army. :)
#27
He was commissioned in 1970 as an infantry officer and served initially with the 3d Battalion, 1st Marines, Camp Pendleton, as a rifle platoon commander and as the Battalion's 106mm recoilless-rifle platoon commander. Subsequently, he served as a company commander in the Infantry Training Regiment; as Executive Officer of the Marine Detachment aboard the USS Kitty Hawk (CVA-63); at the Marine Corps Recruit Depot in San Diego as a series and company commander in the Recruit Training Regiment, as the aide to the Commanding General, and as Director, Sea School.
After career level school in 1977, he reported to 3d Battalion, 2d Marines, 2d Marine Division where he commanded two companies and served in the Regiment's S-3. Posted to The Basic School he commanded two companies of officer students and taught tactics. Following intermediate level school, his next tour of duty was as operations officer for the 31st MAU, where he spent 13 months at sea in WESTPAC and in contingency operations off Beirut, Lebanon.
Returning to CONUS in July 1984, he was assigned to Headquarters Marine Corps, and later served two years as Senior Aide to the Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff. Upon completion of top level school, he was reassigned to the 2d Marine Division serving as Division G-3 Operations Officer before assuming command of 3d Battalion, 2d Marines in January 1990. Under his command Battalion Landing Team 3/2 deployed to Southwest Asia for eight months as the 4th Marine Expeditionary Brigade's surface assault force. Selected for colonel, he was assigned as the Ground Colonels' Monitor, HQMC. He assumed command of The Basic School on April 30, 1993 and in that role was selected for Brigadier General in December 1995. Re-assigned to the Joint Staff, he served as the Deputy Director of Operations J-3 for Combating Terrorism. He then served as the President, Marine Corps University at Quantico, VA. After being selected for promotion to Major General, he served from July 2000 to August 2002 as the Commanding General of the 1st Marine Division, and from August 2002 to November 2002 LtGen Conway served as the Deputy Commanding General Marine Forces Central. In November of 2002 LtGen Conway was promoted to his current rank and assumed command of the I Marine Expeditionary Force.
LtGen Conway hit all the classic "infantry officer" leadership billets. There's little argument that unless he's brain dead, these assignments prepared him to command troops in combat.
Early in the war, under Conway's command the Marines charged all the way to Baghdad, at one point, a Marine Regimental Cmdr (Colonel) was reassigned for not moving fast enough.
In the Falluja campaign, the Marines replaced the Army, which had basically hunkered down in cantonments, taking casualties as crew-served weapons on a regular basis hit their positions.
Gen Conway ordered the Marines to move out of the cantonments and aggressively into Falluja. Through reinforced patrols, assisted by air cover and sniper teams, the Marines were prepared to "clean their (the terrorist's) clocks", but, when the Iraqi coalition was approached by the Falluja elders (complaining the Marines were actually killing da bad guys), the decision was made to stand up the Falluja Brigade. This was a case of giving good training and good equipment to bad people.
Anecdotally, at one point, several Falluja elders approached Conway and requested that he cease the use of Marine snipers. The reason given was that they (the snipers) were killing too many Iraqi people. Without missing a beat, the Gen asked the elders if theyâd like him to withdraw the snipers, who are capable of surgically removing the bad guys with a single round, and replace them with the fire of an AC-130 gunship, or a hellfire missile.
War-fighting Generals tend to want to kill people and break things.
#28
Lol! Foote's writing is, indeed, easily the most enlightening (IMHO) and conversational. The fact that he researched everything so deeply and uses notes, journals, orders, diaries, books by the participants, newspaper stories, first-hand accounts by neutral observers (such as photographers) - hell, everything available, and then wove it into such a narrative is, simply, awesome. I have the trilogy and have read it cover to cover 4 times. He is fair, IMO, to McClellan and just calls a spade a spade. The Union had soooo many advantages, including the services of Bobby Lee right up until the first shell fired at Sumter, lol, that it was an amazing war - and proof that between resources and will, will is powerful - but insufficient alone. Which is why I figure that Tsar Putty will eventually wipe out Chechnya. Their will is no match, in the end, for an outraged and wounded Russia run by an autocrat with the power that Putty now possesses. If he gets his way and is given the power to appoint the "governors" of all of the Russian provinces, it's game, set, match - both for the Chechens and for Russia's version of democracy. Sigh. On the latter. Fuck the former. Fry 'em up.
#29
for a well written, if outdated treatment of the ACW that defends Mclellan, despises Halleck, and is mixed on Lincoln as war commander, you must read Bruce Cattons trilogy on the Army of the Potomac.
#30
RN - Great post - thx! So Conway, from your take, was hamstrung by Sanchez, Bremer, Iraqi interim gov't, et al. He's been the scapegoat for the Fallujah Brigade, that's certian. If he doesn't deserve it he should be vindicated, damnit. I bitched here on RB about Sanchez at least 50 times - but it doesn't make me happy. I'd rather see Fallujah reduced, the rubble bounced a few dozen times, and the Allawi regime can do what it wants about the credit for cleaning out Al Anbar Province. Who cares - as long as we stop them killing us and innocent Iraqis, not to mention the kidnapping BS, with IED's and ambushes. Time to put an end to this shit.
#31
Shelby Foote for sure, all three, enjoy. Far and away the best. Loved the way McClellan menuvered his little ass right off the penninsula.
A great read regarding Braggs defeat by Sherman up till Atlanta is "Decisions in the West", sorry I'm lame on the author. But I do remember in his pre-note, about how he was no fan of Sherman. Then he wrote a great piece about him.
So the Falluja Brigade was a failure. Hell Iraq as Berg is a failure. I hate having to fix it.
I'll admit I havn't read the above article yet. Couldn't wait to get to your comments. But wasn't Conway the guy who manuevered the rats' ass into an acceptable sized kill zone?
#32
In the larger scheme of things, it makes no difference - Iraqi guerrillas don't have the combat power to push the US out. But their time will come - Ramadi, Samarra and Tall Afar are in the process of being cleaned out. It's only a matter of time, and we're talking months, not years. Again, the point is to fight this war while not alienating ordinary Iraqis, who will be voting in new leaders in January. We need our handpicked candidates to win.
#33
Iraqthemodel has some 2nd hand news from Fallujah today.
"...is totally different where control is in the hands of the radical Islamic groups together with Arab fighters from across the borders. The latest information I received indicate that seven major âarmiesâ have united their efforts; the âarmiesâ are: Mohammedâs army, Al-Farouqâs battalions, the Salafies, Ansar Al-Sunna and three other groups I couldnât get their names.
There was a dispute about who should lead the âarmyâ and whether this commander should be a cleric or a military expert. Abdullah Al-Janabi, one of the significant Sunni clerics there was a candidate for that position but the dispute was settled and an agreement was reached to assign a military professional..."
#34
ZF, Is that why the Iraqi election is not being held until the Florida recounts are finished?
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
09/14/2004 12:09 Comments ||
Top||
#35
The Mil guys are prolly the bomb makers too. Boy, if there are seven major formations massed in Falluja then F Troop was a great idea. The enemy is showing its face. It's a diverse group and their destruction could lead to alot of info regarding their funding.
#36
Anecdotally, at one point, several Falluja elders approached Conway and requested that he cease the use of Marine snipers. The reason given was that they (the snipers) were killing too many Iraqi people. Without missing a beat, the Gen asked the elders if theyâd like him to withdraw the snipers, who are capable of surgically removing the bad guys with a single round, and replace them with the fire of an AC-130 gunship, or a hellfire missile.
Good anecdote, RN. So apparently Conway has balls, even if he lacks tact. One thing of note is that he's not retiring and making snarky comments on his way out - he's doing it before heading to his next assignment.
And despite being in an openly adversarial relationship with his superiors - he HAS a next assignment. Not sure what that says - but it says something.
Sooo...I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and let history sort it out.
#39
The Army tried hard, following WWII, Korea and Viet Nam to disband the Corps, or fold it into the Army. Once the USMC received co-equal status on the Joint Chiefs (70's), with the other services, the ball began rolling toward full status across the unified command spectrum.
At all levels, the USMC now swaps out with the Army for 4-star command at US European/Central and Southern Command and Gen Pace is currently Vice Chairman of the JCS.
The Marines have landed and the situation is well in hand!
#40
Sorry, I'm watching this one CNNi. They are cutting and snipping his tape. I can't wait to see the full transcript come out. He's getting Wallaced (V Corp commander in OIF): "the enemy we are fighting is not --snip--- the enemy we wargamed against.
Let's start calling this the Rather Effect.
My two cents (or Euro) is that when the transcript is published, LTG Conway is going to come down as saying "you send in the Marines, expect the enemy to die in great numbers. Won't look good on CNNi, but the fewer Jihadi Joes, the better."
Joke for the day:
"Good evening, I'm Dan Rather, reporting."
"Prove it."
#41
.com wrote: "I am quite disheartened by the lack of will present - prolly due to the political events here at home. Sometimes time and events just won't allow for convenience. We must clean out these nests - they are the source for much of the death toll, whether it has come in bunches or singles. Kill the planners, wipe out the inventories, destroy the bases - leave the cannon fodder no center of gravity to attract it. Remove the expertise and materiel. Do it, or bleed from hundreds of cuts, tiny or not."
If Bush's numbers continue to improve, I think the Fallujah assault may come before the election. At the very least, there will be a hard cordon around the city soon to cut down on incidents like today's car boom in the run up to November. I am not so sure that Fallujah has been handled too badly. Back in April, the IGC was screaming about "collective punishment" and the US made a political decision that credibility for the IGC was more important than levelling Fallujah. That might not have been the best decision, but it was a rational one. Now, we have political support from the interim government for precision strikes and a cordon. I would bet that almost all of our targeting information is coming from pissed off Iraqis who don't want to live under a theocracy or a thugocracy. As for Conway's comments, I would bet that some were taken out of context, some were delivered as a warning to the incoming commanders (which should have been done in private IMO) and some were the result of frustration that the high hopes of taking a constructive approach to Fallujah was a failure (no thanks to the Islamofascists).
Posted by: Tibor ||
09/14/2004 14:48 Comments ||
Top||
#44
I can't be sure, but while we maintained a strict cordon around Fallujah earlier this year, the number of car bombs throughout the country declined precipitously. I don't have a cite for that assertion, but I remember reading it in more than one article. A little help? Anyone? Bueller?
Posted by: Tibor ||
09/14/2004 15:13 Comments ||
Top||
#45
yes in April when we had heavy combat and a cordon there weren't any suicide car bombs
but that was then, this is now -- the terrorists have devolved some of their ops
#46
i think its stil clear that both the Allawi govt and Amb. Negroponte want Fallujah cleaned out by Iraqi troops. Thats the pattern in Najaf, and in Samarra, where final action wasnt threatened till an Iraqi unit was available. Fallujah is a tougher nut than Samarra (as dot com has explained elsewhere) and arguably tougher than Najaf as well. I think theyll wait till there is a considerable body of Iraqi troops before going on. Probably December or January.
#47
At all levels, the USMC now swaps out with the Army for 4-star command at US European/Central and Southern Command and Gen Pace is currently Vice Chairman of the JCS.
My plan is comming together!
3 Armies, 3 corps, 3 Divisions, 3 regiments, 3 battalion, 3 companies, 3 platoons, 3 squads, 3 fire teams.
And that's just the ground.
Semper Fi and get the Money!
#48
Good post RN. I served w/one of Conway's sons at my first unit. If the General says something's bullshit then you can take it to the bank. Once you commit forces to taking a city, you take the fucking city. Politicians are only supposed to negotiate *after* a battle, not during. Someone mentioned Grant and I think his initials as unconditional surrender are appropriate today as they ever were. I think Conway got screwed by the IGC and is pissed (rightfully so), however you feel about the protocol of his making this known at a COC is up to you. As far as I'm concerned he cares more about the average Marine then the fucking suits blowing the calls - good for him. We should've whacked fallujah like a elephant w/a bad case of hemhroids. Let the pseudo-arab street bitch, because they'll bitch anyways.
I think the lesson of Viet Nam is that the brass should not put up with that kind of BS. If Conway felt that way at the time, he should have resigned. If he didn't want to resign, he should follow orders and not whine in public later. Bad show.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
09/14/2004 18:56 Comments ||
Top||
#50
Dang, this has been bugging me all day. Bragg bugged out after Missionary Ridge, much to NBForrests complaints, of course. Johnston was Shermans' patsy.
#51
Mrs. D, Conway's not a whiner or was he whining - prolly just telling it like it is. Plus, maybe he didn't feel it was worth resigning over - and I do believe he followed orders as fallujah is still standing. However, he was there and we were not, I'll accept what he has to say before a lot of other folks.
#52
I don't doubt him, just the wisdom of expressing his opinion publicly.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
09/14/2004 21:45 Comments ||
Top||
#53
It would be convenient to cast Sanchez as the weak reed, but I'm not sure that he is at fault either. I think in the end Fallujah needs to happen the way it is playing out today. Although it bothers my miltary self to see the Falljah nut be cracked by the Pershmerga with the US in support, that's what is healthiest. You can't democratize people, they have to sacrifice their own blood for their own freedom.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
09/14/2004 22:54 Comments ||
Top||
#54
"Once you commit forces to taking a city, you take the fucking city"
Well said, Sir.
Posted by: V is for Victory ||
09/14/2004 23:21 Comments ||
Top||
#55
Fallujah is a big pile of broken glass that is bleeding both the Marines and Allawi. If we all are to survive, Fallujah needs to be cleaned out. Allowing the jihadis and assorted terrorists to stand, even if they are surrounded is a propaganda victory for the bad guys. It is a nasty business, especially with civilians, but nobody in their right mind would keep their family in such a rat's nest when a war is going on. Fallujah needs to go down now as an object lesson to the rest of Iraq and potential terrorists.
Posted by: Alaska Paul in McGrath, AK ||
09/14/2004 23:38 Comments ||
Top||
#56
Aggression was not the intended objective, but rather calming of tempers -- the fact that the intent was misunderstood by some speaks volumes about the level of their intelect.
EFL - looks as if Azerbaijan didn't understand the title of the proposed excercises.
NATO's Cooperative Best Effort-2004 exercises, scheduled to take place on 14-27 September in Azerbaijan, have been canceled, according to a NATO press release of 13 September.
"We regret that the principle of inclusiveness could not be upheld in this case," the press release stated, without elaborating. But Lieutenant-Colonel Ludger Terbrueggen, who is a spokesman for NATO military command, told RFE/RL's Armenian Service the same day that "the reason...is that Azerbaijan did not grant visas to soldiers and officers of Armenia."
Since January, Baku has sought repeatedly to thwart the planned Armenian presence at this year's Cooperative Best Effort maneuvers. Three Armenian military officers who tried to travel to Baku in early January first from Turkey and then from Georgia to attend a planning conference for the maneuvers were prevented from doing so. In June, members of the radical Karabakh Liberation Organization (QAT) picketed, and then forced their way into, a Baku hotel where two Armenian officers were attending a second planning conference in preparation for the exercises. Five of those QAT activists were arrested and sentenced in late August to between three and five years' imprisonment on charges of hooliganism, violating public order, and obstructing government officials. Those verdicts triggered protests from across the political spectrum, fueling public opposition to the Armenians' anticipated arrival.
[...] Adding the Azerbaijan/Armenia controversy to the Turkey/Greece headache should be the mortal thrust for NATO.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
09/14/2004 3:36:29 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
Oh, well. After all, it was just a "Best Effort". They'll try harder next year. Perhaps the Git Yer S**t Together and Git'er Done exercises will go smoother.
The terrorists who ravaged the school and community of Beslan came from a direction startling enough to jolt Russian president Vladimir Putin into taking a hard look at the Islamic terror now rampant outside Chechnya - in at least two additional Caucasian republics.
The 32 hostage takers were not Chechens but members of al Qaeda cells, Arabs and natives, known locally as "Wahhabis" (after the austere state religion of Saudi Arabia), from a place whose name is even less recognizable than were the battle arenas of Afghanistan and the Balkans: Nalchik, capital of Kabardino-Balkaria, northwest of North Ossetia. [edit]
[Putin] signed a presidential decree ordering the Russian army to mass enough strength to place Ingushetia and Kabardino-Balkaria under military siege preparatory to going in to re-assert Kremlin control of the two republics and drive the Islamic terrorists out. ... The first Russian units are beginning to take up positions around the borders of the two republics. [edit]
The existence of Wahhabi terrorist cells in quiet, scenic Kabardino-Balkaria has claimed little attention from the chroniclers of Islamic terror, even though of late Nalchik has been seeing the sort of street battles familiar to Riyadh. The last shootout between police and wanted "Wahhabis" took place on September 6. One terrorist was killed, the rest escaped.
(And I've decided that "Another Dan" -- originally chosen when I de-lurked in response to a Dan Darling post -- is too generic. In his place, I give you The Caucasus Nerd.
Posted by: The Caucasus Nerd ||
09/14/2004 1:56:06 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul said yesterday that he told US officials that Turkey would no longer cooperate with the US over Iraq if ethnic Turks continued to be harmed in US military operations against suspected insurgents in northern Iraq. Don't talk throw the fucks out of Incirlik
The US military has launched an offensive in Tal Afar, a largely ethnic Turkish city in northern Iraq. Iraqi and American forces say the operation is aimed at trying to root out hundreds of militants and restore government control. Turkey has said the US should end its operations there, insisting the attacks have caused casualties among the mostly ethnic Turks living there. Reports from the area said that several ethnic Turks were killed or wounded in the operation, while thousands more were forced to flee. Gul said he spoke to US Secretary of State Colin Powell "and told him that what is being done there is harming the civilian population, that it is wrong, and that if it continues, Turkey's cooperation on issues regarding Iraq will come to a total stop."
"We have conveyed this very openly. ... Of course we won't limit ourselves to words. We never shy away from carrying out whatever is necessary," he added. He did not elaborate and it was not clear if he was hinting that Turkey might intervene in the region. Gul also did not say when the conversation with Powell took place. Hundreds of Turkish trucks haul goods for US soldiers and for the Iraqi people each day from Turkey. US officials have said the US was taking efforts to avoid civilian casualties and make sure that humanitarian aid can reach the area. Turkey has been concerned lately with efforts by Iraqi Kurds to claim northern cities, such as Tal Afar and Kirkuk — where ethnic Turks are concentrated — in the run-up to a scheduled census in October.
Posted by: Murat ||
09/14/2004 3:15:10 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
Talking turkey, I see. Their feathers are a little ruffled, but there's no need to lay an egg. Don't get in a flap! If all parties keep abreast of one another's concerns, we can deal with the meat of the issue amicably even if, ultimately, a carve-up is in order. However, Turkey needs to keep in mind that there's a pecking order here, and the American hawks are quite prepared to cook the goose if needs be...
#5
Murat exclames: "Donât talk throw the fucks out of Incirlik"
I think, Murat, that you should have a chat with the Turkish base employees. Not that you would convince them to quit their jobs, but it is quite possible that they would do some magic like turning a chicken into a vegetable.
#6
Gul to torturers liberators:
Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gül called the offensive a mistake, saying Turkey would call a complete halt to support operations if it continued. Hundreds of Turkish trucks currently cross into Iraq every day to supply US troops. Meanwhile, there have been new accusations of torture levelled against US troops in Iraq. According to the British newspaper the Guardian, American soldiers in the northern Iraqi city of Mosul regularly tortured and mishandled prisoners.
Posted by: Murat ||
09/14/2004 4:36 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Look Murat. The torturing is rare and only done when thought to be waranted by our zionist masters in Israel. Its no big deal, if it were, we'd see it more on MSM.
#8
According to Al Guardian, Al Zarqawi is a revolutionary. It's a rag that makes things up on the fly.
As for the prisoners, I would recommend that they would be sent to Turkish prisons. They may get a bit more clearer idea what torture and mishandling actually means. Sure, Turkish prison is a paradise in comparison with, for instance, a Syrian prison, but it is still no picnic.
Posted by: Murat ||
09/14/2004 5:13 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Ehm, the new word for it is: Bush
The Turkish word for Hypocrite has a sexual undertone to it? That's against Islamic principles, isn't it?
Posted by: Charles ||
09/14/2004 5:26 Comments ||
Top||
#14
Maybe Charles, but Turkey doesn't function on Islamic principles but on secular principles, so there is no problem.
Posted by: Murat ||
09/14/2004 5:37 Comments ||
Top||
#15
Hey Murat, didn't another Turkish truck driver buy it yesterday? Thought you'd be as keen to get rid of the fascist scum that's hijacked your religion as anyone else? Even if it means a few friendlies buying it as well...
Posted by: Howard UK ||
09/14/2004 6:15 Comments ||
Top||
#16
I mean to add Beeb sneer marks- 'friendlies'
Posted by: Howard UK ||
09/14/2004 6:16 Comments ||
Top||
#17
Heard the Kurdish to Turkey oil may go on permanent maintenance. Pity.
#20
"Donât talk throw the fucks out of Incirlik"
Careful, Murat, or someday we won't help protect you from those Kurds you fear so much.
Posted by: Tom ||
09/14/2004 8:06 Comments ||
Top||
#21
"Donât talk throw the fucks out of Incirlik"
And lose your pending membership of the EU. I really don't think so sh*t-fer-brains.
Posted by: Howard UK ||
09/14/2004 8:09 Comments ||
Top||
#22
Hey Chinaman, using Bush or Erdogan for hypocrite, both will do, but Bush is globally more accepted :)
Posted by: Murat ||
09/14/2004 8:27 Comments ||
Top||
#23
We're all missing the real key to this story.
Read it again, and concentrate on this:
Turkey would no longer cooperate with the US over Iraq if ethnic Turks continued to be harmed
The Turks are just being racist fucks. Once we realize that, we can appreciate where they're coming from and start ignoring the little twits the way they deserve.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
09/14/2004 8:28 Comments ||
Top||
#24
Hey Chinaman
Still sore about the Mongols?
Posted by: ed ||
09/14/2004 8:50 Comments ||
Top||
#25
Oooooooooooo! The Turks are still mad at us! Oooooooooooo! The Turkish! Oooooooooooooooo! Hide me, Smithers! The Turkish are mad at us!
#26
How can Murat be racist? He's working to support the terrorists who are using blackmail against the Turkomen populace in Iraq so they can use them as human shields.
Here's a hint: go find some former S. Vietnamese somewhere besides Vietnam and ask them if all the stuff in the left-wing history books about the Viet Cong is actually _true_. Then ask yourself if what happened to them is what you want for the Turkomens.
China was one of North Vietnam's main allies, who helped them wipe S. Vietnam from the map in the name of international communism and Sticking It To The Americans. And within two years of winning the war the unified Vietnam killed or kicked out most Vietnamese of Chinese descent, even the ones that had supported the North.
Those people accounted for some 300,000 or so of the million to a million and a half refugees who left via sea; I don't have any figures for how many of that subset of the refugees died.
Convince yourself the people using turkomens as hostages and human shields are a popular resistance if you want; pretend they have the best interests of the turkomen at heart as well... just do yourself a favor, and ask the last group of people who got a dictatorship disguised as a popular resistance how it worked out first.
Posted by: Phil Fraering ||
09/14/2004 8:58 Comments ||
Top||
#27
Sure, Murat. Do they teach you that some turn-of-the-century Turk invented the airplane? That's a standard one for nationalist bigots and hypocrites these days.
The other day someone at Al Guardian slipped up and admitted the truth by publishing an interview with an Iraqi hero-freedom fighter who declared that "a negro occupation" was deeply humiliating to his people and that they preferentially attacked Black American soldiers.
Just as Euro-swine sneer at "fat Americans," anti-Americanism is nothing but the crudest kind of nationalistic bigotry and racism.
It is time we faced the truth. Europeans sneer at American patriotism and nationalism, not because they are beyond such things, but because it conflicts with their own much more rabid and primitive belief in their own inherent superiority.
Ever meet a Euro America-basher who was not sublimely convinced of his or her inherent superiority?
It is the same with Muslims but worse. CAIR and its hypocritical apologists scream "racism" every time someone tells the truth about them, but they represent the most bigoted and racist large group of people in the world, followed closely by the stupid, docile, media-slave masses of Europe.
#28
I'll state it plainly: the global bigot masses will perish from belief in their own stupid mythology, and the monstrous hypocrites and traitors in America who abet them and cover for them will share their fate.
This war is the next step in human evolution, the rise of mass media has made it necessary to eliminate the more credulous strains of social and political thought and the inferior masses who fall for them. The law of survival dictates this, and it has never been wrong.
#29
If you ignore the noise here, what I suspect is going on is that Turkey, once again, I might add, sent a large group of elite soldiers undercover to Tall Afar, looking to create mischief. We have told them to stop doing that, and have kicked out a bunch of their people. But they just can't resist the golden opportunity to involve themselves in Iraqi affairs.
#31
AC - you rock. Excellent 2-steps-back big picture. Without it, this just looks like adventurism - but it's much more than that - it's a systemic problem and it's not limited to the Turks. And a reckoning will follow - as evolution, indeed, marches on, whether anyone likes it, wants it, or not. Thanks, bro.
#32
Turkey would no longer cooperate with the US over Iraq if ethnic Turks continued to be harmed
Has cooperation from Turkey been a thing of wonder up til now? Maybe it depends on at what time you measure it-when we needed them, as an ally, at the entrance of the war, or now, when they should also be with us? Steadfast is not a word I would use to describe Turkey.
#33
AC - what you are prescribing may actually occur, but we Americans would be unwelcome in many areas of the world. On the plus side, we wouldn't wish to travel there, anyway, due to the high levels of radioactivity
Posted by: Frank G ||
09/14/2004 10:03 Comments ||
Top||
#34
Whatever you bumheads interprete, some countries begin to speak out loud how they think about torturing babykilling nazi's
Posted by: Murat ||
09/14/2004 10:03 Comments ||
Top||
#35
you welcome them, right? Asshat
Posted by: Frank G ||
09/14/2004 10:04 Comments ||
Top||
#36
Murat: Hey Chinaman, using Bush or Erdogan for hypocrite, both will do, but Bush is globally more accepted :)
I'm not Chinese. But it's understandable why a Turk would be resentful towards the Chinese. The Turks originated in China's Far West. The reason the Turks ended up on the Anatolian peninsula is because they couldn't stand up to Chinese military pressure. Even today, the borders of the various Turkic states in Central Asia are under consistent Chinese pressure. If Turkey doesn't walk back from its anti-Americanism, there may come a time when Murat will have to speak Mandarin to communicate to his country's Autonomous Region's rulers.
#37
Murat: Whatever you bumheads interprete, some countries begin to speak out loud how they think about torturing babykilling nazi's
We'd have to go a long way to match Turkey's massacre of 1 million Armenians, in addition to an assortment of other massacres carried out in the name of the Ottoman empire.
#38
Murat, you need to stop worrying about a few Turkmen and start being a pain to Syria. Provocations against the U.S. are eventually going to unleash our nukes because we have a low tolerance for ground wars and a low tolerance for losing and about 7,000 nukes. Iran is going to get nuked for its nuke ambitions and Syria is going to get nuked if any of Saddam's WMDs turn up there. That's the only way we can be sure that Syria won't use the rest that it has burried. Murat, the only thing you've got going for you is that the fallout will probably drift eastward.
Posted by: Tom ||
09/14/2004 10:17 Comments ||
Top||
#39
Gul to torturers..
You sure you're not Ted Kennedy or one of his disciples?
#40
Well that 1 million Armenians claim is a fictive figure, while Iraq, Vietnam etc. are real, you have surpassed us long time mr Chinese convert.
Posted by: Murat ||
09/14/2004 10:18 Comments ||
Top||
#41
Murat, both of my parents are unfortunately intimately familiar with real baby-killing Nazis. And grandmother-killing Nazis, too. By comparing American soldiers to them, you demonstrate abysmal ignorance.
For whatever reason, you are being offensive and hysterical. Please go away, and don't come back until you can argue sensibly.
Posted by: Frank G ||
09/14/2004 10:22 Comments ||
Top||
#43
You know nothing about Vietnam, Murat, except the nazi-style big lies your bigot overlords have told you. The demonization of our effort to prevent the Stalinist conquest of South Vietnam is the number one reason I despise the Eurabian media, and the most compelling piece of evidence that they are not just innocently mistaken but depraved, willful liars and apologists for genocide.
Even that propaganda is not original, they borrowed it from American traitors and Kremlin apologists, elaborating along the way. It is what bigoted and primitive minds want to believe and the Eurabian master race always feeds them what they want.
#44
Murat: Well that 1 million Armenians claim is a fictive figure, while Iraq, Vietnam etc. are real, you have surpassed us long time mr Chinese convert.
Murat, I'm a China-watcher, not Chinese or a Chinese convert (whatever that is). Uncle Sam won't bail Turkey out forever. And China has so many people and so little land. In time, Turkey will be full of refugees from the various 'stans, as the Chinese continue pacifying the barbarians Turks on their borders. Watch for it.
As to Armenia, it is curious how Muslims can never own up to their atrocities. Westerners tend to magnify their faults, but Orientals will outright deny even the most bestial blood-fests they were responsible for. But then again, most Muslims believe that Jews were responsible for 9/11.
#46
In the not too distant future, somewhere in sub-Saharan Africa, the oppressed and abused populations will rise up, find the leadership they need, and sweep north to the shores of the Mediterranean.
This will happen despite the best efforts of Eurabian NGOs and business interests to maintain chaos and disaster through continued support of corrupt leadership.
#48
United Nations Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities At least 1 million, and possibly well over half of the Armenian population, are reliably estimated to have been killed or death marched by independent authorities and eye-witnesses. This is corroborated by reports in United States, German and British archives and of contemporary diplomats in the Ottoman Empire, including those of its ally Germany. The German Ambassador, Wangenheim, for example, on 7 July 1915 wrote "the government is indeed pursuing its goal of exterminating the Armenian race in the Ottoman Empire" (Wilhelmstrasse archives).
Estimates for the 1915-16 Armenian genocide range from 1-2 million with 1.5 million the agreed best estimate. Over 2 million were murdered if the previous 30 years are included. For instance the 1895 massacres killed 100,000-200,000 Armenians. That Murat is your Turkish legacy.
Posted by: ed ||
09/14/2004 10:40 Comments ||
Top||
#49
You know nothing about Vietnam, Murat
Offcourse my dear, you Americans have always noble excuses for your crimes, if it is not stalinizm, you invent WMD or bringing freedom & democracy or other blah blah, (All of your claims turned to be an empty balloon). Has hollywood run out of inventivity, can't she produce a bunch new just causes anymore? Powell is in dire need since his sattelite photo's of mobile WMD units turned out a flop.
Posted by: Murat ||
09/14/2004 10:41 Comments ||
Top||
#50
Murat, so what's your "noble excuse" for...well, you know... that "Armenian thing"?
#52
Ed how comes that 1915 Ottoman register of population give only 1.2mln Armenians lived in the Ottoman Empire and there has supposedly been killed 2mln (800.000 non existing Armenians) in a tempo that Hitler himself would be jealous, without any concentration camps ever proven to have existed. That all while it is proven that no single Armenian in the capital Istanbul has seen any harm. The whole Armenian genocide claim is just that, a fictive claim.
Posted by: Murat ||
09/14/2004 10:48 Comments ||
Top||
#53
Whatever you bumheads interprete, some countries begin to speak out loud how they think about torturing babykilling nazi's
You're right; I hear Muslims aren't too popular in Nepal and Russia right now.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
09/14/2004 10:48 Comments ||
Top||
#54
C'mon, Murat. The bumheads are waiting. Let's have it.
In 1890 there were 2.5 million Armenians in the Ottoman Empire,
So your own numbers say that 1.3 million were killed over the course of 25 years.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
09/14/2004 10:55 Comments ||
Top||
#57
Because Turks (as Muslims) lie. Just as you lie about the Armenian Genocide.
A local (for me) lie put out by the Muslim community is that their are 7 million (and as high as 10 million) Muslims in the US. The most scientific estimate was about 2 million (in 2001?) and no reputable estimate has ever gone above 3 million. 6-7 million might be reached if all Arabs are also counted. But most Arabs in the US are Christians who couldn't wait to get as far away from their muslim neighbors.
So Murat, where are the extra 4-8 million muslims? Why do muslim lie so much? Oh, yeah, the Koran says it's a duty to lie if it helps the umma.
Posted by: ed ||
09/14/2004 10:57 Comments ||
Top||
#58
So, Murat -
How come a Greek's being so protective of the despised Turk?
#59
"Has hollywood run out of inventivity, can't she produce a bunch new just causes anymore?"
Murat, you stupid slave. Don't you know your own masters? Hollywood/media traitors like Jane Fonda and Walter Cronkite invented the lies your slave media have told you about Vietnam.
#60
Question, if the Greeks and the Turks got dragged into war who would win? Assuming everyone else stayed out of the conflict. Would they just destroy each others navy's, air forces, and then throw insults at each other, or would there be some possibility of one gaining the upper hand (outside of Cypress).
How well defended is Istanbul/Constantinople and how easy would it be to block reinforcements crossing from Anatolia to the balkans?
#61
The Turks are walking a fine line here... I guess Greater Kurdistan (comprising Northern Iraq, Eastern Turkey, Northern Syria and Northwestern Iran would guarantee the U.S. an ally that would not falter.
Oh btw, how about returning the robbed Armenian territory?
#62
RJS, the Turks are tough (except for slaves like Murat) but the influence of Islamism, however suppressed, would probably be a fatal weakness. On the other hand, Greek society is in the heyday of saturation-media credibility and influence, another potentially fatal weakness.
This would be an interesting contest. Is Muslim stupidity and mythology a greater weakness than Euro-bigot stupidity and hubris?
Break out the popcorn.
Incidentally, childlike faith in various tenets of the Vietnam myth, universally accepted in Eurabia and its American colonies (Berkeley, etc.), was an important factor in the downfall of the Taliban and Saddam Hussein, and even perhaps in the collapse of the Soviet Union.
#63
AC, well said. I wonder how much you could make for a Greece-Turkey rematch on Pay-per-View?
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
09/14/2004 11:32 Comments ||
Top||
#64
TGA - Amen. Given Caucusus Nerd's map and this one, the Turks are flirting with serious territorial issues. Oohweee! Look at all those Kurds... Prolly what gets the dipshit's panties all bunched up. With a chunk of Northern Syria to provide them a nice port or two, who knows what these civilized industrious folks could become?
#65
"without any concentration camps ever proven to have existed."
Hey 'Rat, SO WHAT? There weren't any concentration camps in Rwanda either, and genocide was perpetrated there in a "tempo" that, in your words, "Hitler would be jealous".
There is not a shred of doubt that Turkey engaged in genocide of the Armenians. In fact, the Turks did such a good job that Hitler used them as an inspiration.
#66
"I guess Greater Kurdistan (comprising Northern Iraq, Eastern Turkey, Northern Syria and Northwestern Iran would guarantee the U.S. an ally that would not falter."
#67
Murat writes: That all while it is proven that no single Armenian in the capital Istanbul has seen any harm. The whole Armenian genocide claim is just that, a fictive claim.
#69
Question, if the Greeks and the Turks got dragged into war who would win? Assuming everyone else stayed out of the conflict.
Turkey has vast numerical superiority. Most of the defeats Turkey has suffered from Greece have been in the stage of a wider conflict (e.g. 1st Balkan war when it was a Bulgaria-Serbia-Greece alliance against Turkey) or with the aid of Western powers (war of independence and the Brit-French-Russian fleet destroying the Turk-Egyptian fleet at Navarino)
#70
Turkey is probably interfering by once again sending Spec Ops troops into Iraq. Tal Afar is a smugglers paradise, not very differernt from Fallujah. It needs to be cleaned out. That fact that ethnic Turkomen live there is of no consequence, just as that fact that Fallujah is full of Sunni Arabs. Both are rats nests. In Tal Afar's case, it is a rats nest with Turkish troops. There is no other reason that Turkey would be crying about this.
Posted by: remote man ||
09/14/2004 12:30 Comments ||
Top||
#71
Well, perhaps we could reform the Greek/Bulgar/Serb alliance. Then, with the Kurds breaking away in the south, that would give the Turks two fronts. Heck, let's invite Armenia in again. Wouldn't it be nice to have Haiga Sophia in a Christian Constantinople?
Sooner or later, the world, if it wants to survive, will have to eliminate Islamism.
#74
You now what is funny ... Most of people on this site are pro Israel at any cost that should be send there at tax payer expence . Pro g bush that should work for free on is Texan ranch sucking is toros or retired American irrelevant with no voice in the politicks of their foreign controlled country.... but they still bravely convicted of they are doing their part in spilling their irrelevant opinion because maybe somebody (their Hope) going to find their ranted to be of interests
PS: to the graaamaticaly inclined one SU&%^ MY D9432
#76
Here, little one, let me help you out a little:
Anon6454 - You're rather pathetic, Fuckwit.
What is funny is that you're just another whining gutless powerless little twitter who doesn't have a vote on November 3rd - LOL - so you run around dropping little rabbit turds wherever you go - scared of your own shadow. Good. Be afraid.
And I believe that was "Suck My Dick" you were trying to say in your whimpering pussy-boy way. But you don't have a dick, little one. That's a nubbin' you're sporting, not much good for anything.
#78
Hey #76 from the fisherman point of view the most stupid!
The most idiot always fell.
I guess you are a destined to be eliminated ...erased as a culture and genetically it was tried in the past but the energy still at work and today because many morons especially in this post will be easier when time come
#82
I think I've found the dialect:
U dere, hun-troll 6454, kiss der arse de Arafat, eat our MOAB. you make nice splash, on front of Bradley, no? U mama not recognize, even tiny dick she know so well. Bomb find u and you die of own lies coz u 2 dum get our of out way. GWB smarter than next 100 huns/trolls what comin' here.
I say, must be true.
#83
Linked above was a map of the Kurdish areas and it got me wondering. Is that Iraqi/Saudi neutral zone just west of Kuwait (I believe PJ O'Rourke called it "Churchill's hiccup") still there or have they finally just drawn a line in the sand.
What is the legal status of such an area if smugglers and such set up bases there?
#84
I'd also like to add that its refreshing to see the borders don't overlap everywhere in the middle east. Clearly there must be just sand in the hiccup.
#85
Looking at the map, and the ethnic distribution, maybe we should give up on a "united" Iraq. Give the Kurdish areas their own state, and force Turkey to hand over the Kurdish lands there - the final dissolution of the Ottoman Empire.
Then arm the Kurds and let them pressure Iran and Syria.
There's always been a concern on the part of the Turks that that's exactly what might happen and we've shied away from that to mollify them.
Well the Turks have proven themselves half-hearted allies at best. I say the Kurds get northern tier and the oil fields, thus providing them the resources to support a governmental infrastructure, purchase weapons and bribe those that need it.
They are a military minded people that could easily defend themselves and offer the U.S. led coalition a counter balance to the radical Islamists in the region.
#89
Not a bad option. Good piece by senior US diplomat Peter Galbriath arguing same--see part 3 of this essay: http://www.nybooks.com/articles/17406
In the May 13 issue of The New York Review, I argued that the breakup of Iraq seemed more likely than a successful transition to centralized democracy. I suggested that Iraq can be held together only as a loose federation consisting of Kurdistan, a Sunni entity in the center, and a Shiite entity in the south, with Baghdad as a jointly administered federal capital.
Subsequent events make such a breakup more likely than ever. The Kurds, whose attachment to Iraq was minimal to start with, have been further estranged by the bungled way they were excluded from the top positions in the transitional government and by the Bush administration's decision to abandon the TAL. As support for extremists grows in Arab Iraq, the Kurds increasingly regard the rest of Iraq as an alien land. While just a few months ago Kurdish leaders concentrated on how to increase their influence in Baghdad, they now think as much about how to disengage from Iraq in the event of further deterioration, which most see as inevitable.
... the differences between Iraq's Sunnis and Shiites are not nearly as deep as the ethnic gulf between Kurds and Arabs.
The opposition between Kurds and Arabs (both Shiite and Sunni) in Iraq is rooted not just in ethnicity and history. The two communities have radically different visions of what Iraq should be... Public opinion polls show that Kurds have their own distinctive views on such matters as democracy, the role of women, the place of religion in government, and on whether Iraq needs a new strongman.
The Kurds are avowedly secular, wishing to keep religion and state separate; many are proud of the progress women have made in many spheres during the twelve years of Kurdish self-rule. Arab Iraqis, and in particular the Shiite majority, want Islam to have a significant role in the state. They believe Islam should be the principal source of public law, governing, for example, the personal status of women in matters such as divorce.
These differences are most pronounced in the attitudes toward Americans. The US government poll showed that 90 percent of Arab Iraqis see the US as occupiers (and just 2 percent as liberators) while other surveys showed more than 80 percent of the people in Kurdistan see the US as liberators. But apart from these attitudes toward the US, it is hard to see how a country can be held together when its major peoples hold such fundamentally different views of the nature of the state.
The Abu Ghraib prison scandals, combined with the success of the Falluja and al-Sadr insurgencies, have, if anything, heightened these ideological distinctions. Arabs were appalled by the abuses of naked Iraqi prisoners; and even those opposed to the insurgencies welcomed the exposure of wrongdoing by an unpopular occupying power. The Kurdish press and television played down the scandals of Abu Ghraib.... And the Kurds, who see their fate as linked to that of the United States, wish the US could do better in the fight against the twin insurgencies.
#90
I feel us reaching a consensus, an idea we can all agree on. Murat, you too?
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
09/14/2004 16:47 Comments ||
Top||
#91
Give the Kurdish areas their own state,
I always figured this was our trump card for dealing with the Sunnis and Shites. If everyone doesn't play nice together, we split the place into 3 parts: the Sunnis and Shites divide the south and our close, personal friends, the Kurds, get the north with the oil.
#92
Even better, we deepen ties with a grateful, freed people who have shown loyalty to us. That's a rare starting point in those parts-the populace recognizes us as decent people. Let's not blow it.
#93
Murat, how about a trade? You let all the Kurds in Turkey go to Iraq and the Iraqis send Turkey ALL the Turkmens in Iraq. Both countries would be better for it. Oh by the way, the US would pull out of Turkey to new bases in Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon.
Posted by: Random thoughts ||
09/14/2004 20:38 Comments ||
Top||
#94
Murat's gone back under his rock
Posted by: Frank G ||
09/14/2004 20:42 Comments ||
Top||
#95
Well, we did say we wanted a secular democracy in the middle of the region, one that was self sufficient, and had oil.
#96
Nah - set up an Army Stryker brigade and a USAF Base in Kurdistan. Use the NW part of Syria as oceanic access. Put an oil terminal and port there, as well as a small US Naval base.
Cue the Imperial march ...
President Vladimir V. Putin on Monday proposed measures that would enhance his own power and the Kremlin's political control of the country, arguing that stronger state authority is needed to fight terrorists in the wake of a school hostage crisis earlier this month.
In televised remarks to Cabinet ministers, top security officials and regional leaders, Putin said he would soon submit to parliament a draft law giving him the power to appoint the top leaders of the 89 regions that make up the Russian Federation.
His appointments would be subject to confirmation by regional legislatures. These administrative heads — who have the role of governor but hold various titles in different regions — currently are elected by popular vote.
BESLAN, Russia -- The first day of classes following the massacre of more than 330 hostages at a school in this southern Russian city have been abruptly canceled, a principal at one of Beslan's schools has told CNN. Classes were canceled about 15 minutes before school was scheduled to start. No reason was given and no date was immediately set for classes to resume.
On September 1, a group of 32 terrorists stormed the school in Beslan, taking some 1,200 hostages in a 48-hour siege that ended with the deaths of at least 335 hostages, mostly children.
Yeah, wonder why they cancelled classes. Maroons at CNN can't figure it out.
Posted by: Steve White ||
09/14/2004 1:34:35 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
This one's a tough call. While I'd like to see the gym made into a memorial, having it in the middle of a children's school would be a little too much.
Call me overly "sensitive," but they need to tear down the whole d@mn school complex and rebuild it from the ground up. Of course, they'll need to screen the construction crews a little more carefully, this time.
I'd cheerfully toss in a few dollars to make it happen. Hell, Bill Gates could fund the entire thing in his sleep. It would be gratifying if the people of Beslan could see the entire world reach out to help them heal.
As usal, terrorism has more than just its intended effect. The kids left alive are now going to fall behind in school. As it is a number of them have been brought to Moscow for psychiatric treatment due to suicidal depression.
I think I'll post this link as a separate article (even if it is Pravda).
#2
Right, the whole school should be demolished and relocated. The bad psychic vibrations will linger on far too strongly - whether we choose to believe such or not.
#3
And, perhaps, build in the future with an eye toward security, defensibility, in all areas anywhere near an outpost of Islam - i.e. war zone, present or future.
#5
Frontpage has a good article on the three roads that lead to the Beslan trajedy: Russia's Gathering Storm
Posted by: Super Hose ||
09/14/2004 3:05 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Tell me the Paypal account numnber and I'll give money towards a new school on a new site.
This one is not specifically for rebuilding the school,SPoD.⢠But it is 100% outgoing funds, no administrative salaries, all volunteer. They may let you tag it for the school, I'd recommend enquiring. So far, they've raised almost $700,000 out of their $10,000,000 goal.
"It is clear that the Beslan tragedy is the worst terror-related human catastrophe in the history of Russia. There are at least 335 victims, mostly children, who already died as a direct result of this terror act. Over 700 victims, also mostly children, have been hospitalized, a large number of them with very serious injuries.
Our Foundation is raising charitable donations which will be fully distributed to the families or injured children or caretakers of those children who lost their parents. We are a grassroots project run by a group of volunteers, and we are the only such foundation outside Russia.
The Foundation is the only US charity committed specifically to helping children victims of the Beslan tragedy. It incurs no administrative expenses related to personal donations, all of which are delivered directly to victimsâ families.
The Foundation has a proven track record helping terror victims in Russia, with local presence in Beslan established within days after the terror act.
The Foundation is a US 501(c)(3) public charity and is managed by a group of volunteer activists in full accordance with applicable US charity laws. All donations are fully tax-deductible."
Here is the link for Russia's Embassy in Washington DC. As an American, no matter how heart wrenching, I'm proud to see that the Embassy's fence and sidewalk are covered in flowers.
I've been checking regularly for an American online condolence book so that I could post it here. I am unable to locate one, if anybody else has heard of one, please post a link.
#12
TGA is right. To expose the children and their families to the "scene of the crime" on a daily basis, is not only unthinkable, it would be cruel. Zenster has posted another important story on the Rantburg board today, at this link which, I think, clearly illustrates why they cannot and should not try to "rehabilitate" the school.
Schools are typically the symbol of community, safety, learning, and hope. But the terrorists transformed the school in Beslan into an Islamofascist slaughterhouse. The memories and experiences of horror the children and adults experienced cannot be erased.
They should raze the school, plant a garden on the site, and rebuild a new school in a different section of town. Just "going to school" at all, will be tough enough for the traumatized residents of Beslan.
Posted by: Steve from Relto ||
09/14/2004 10:25 Comments ||
Top||
#8
"Racial profiling on the rise in U.S."
1. Moslem isn't a "race."
2. 'Bout damn time!
Listen up, Idiots International. I'm a middle-aged woman of European descent. If the destruction and murder on 9/11 had been caused by middle-aged white women, and if the continuing war and murder around the world were being caused almost exclusively by middle-aged white women, then as a middle-aged white woman I WOULD EXPECT TO BE PROFILED.
I would also be going out of my way to find and report/stop the idiots doing these things, if for no other reason than it reflected poorly on me. Maybe the people who look like the non-middle-aged, non-white, non-women WHO ARE ACTUALLY PERPETRATING MOST OF THE VIOLENCE AROUND THE WORLD could think about doing that too.
Instead of constantly whining like a bunch of pussy losers.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
09/14/2004 10:30 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Instead of constantly whining like a bunch of pussy losers.
Barbara, I like the cut of your jib but talk like that is tantamount to flirting with Dotcom and will likely get him all heated up again. :)
#11
Yes Barbara, if Leprecauns were flying planes into buildings then anyone 3 feet tall with read hair better be ready for a cavity search every time they leave the house.
#14
Outlaw databases - they aer worse than assault weapons.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
09/14/2004 16:56 Comments ||
Top||
#15
Cool your jets, .com honey. I'll be here all evening. ;-Ã
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
09/14/2004 18:40 Comments ||
Top||
#16
Without opening the linked article, permit me to guess that this is no longer about police stops of black drivers in the wealthier districts of American cities.
European Union foreign ministers called Monday for the United Nations to "immediately investigate" whether atrocities in Sudan's Darfur region constitute genocide, highlighting growing impatience with the Sudanese government for failing to end the conflict.
These guys stall worse than Dan Rather.
The 25 EU foreign ministers urged U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan to "establish as soon as possible" a special inquiry. In a statement they also urged Sudan to stop the fighting and implement a cease-fire in Darfur or face U.N. sanctions, including a possible oil embargo. They said there was "no indication that the government of Sudan has taken real and verifiable steps to disarm and neutralize" the warring factions. The ministers added an investigation was necessary to confirm Washington's claims that acts of genocide were being committed.
"Like, you expect us to take the word of a bunch of simple peasants?"
They called for "an international commission of inquiry ... to immediately investigate all violations of human rights and humanitarian law in Darfur, and to determine whether acts of genocide have occurred." British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw refused to call the atrocities in Darfur genocide but said an investigation was urgently needed. "Some people call it genocide, some people call it ethnic cleansing, some people call it civil war, some people call it none of the above," he said. "Whatever it is, it's a desperate situation which requires the urgent attention of the world."
Walks like a duck ...
His German counterpart, Joschka Fischer, called it "a humanitarian catastrophe with genocidal potential," while French Foreign Minister Michel Barnier said there was "massive violation of human rights" occurring.
... quacks like a duck ...
So far, the European Union has been hesitant to back Washington's claims that the crisis can be considered genocide.
... must be a penguin.
The EU ministers threatened sanctions against Sudan sometime starting in 2009, unless the French disagree "if no tangible progress is achieved" in meeting U.N. demands. "Sudan will need to understand that the prospect (of sanctions) will come much closer, turn into a reality, unless we see ... cooperation by them on this crucial issue of law and order and safety in Darfur," Straw said. He said that would be the focus of discussions at the U.N. Security Council later this week, which is expected to pass a newstrongly worded resolution against Sudan. Ismail said he doubted the United Nations would impose sanctions on Sudan, citing opposition from France and China some U.N. countries. "It would be very difficult for the U.S. or the Security Council of the United Nations to pass any sanctions on Sudan," he said in Seoul.
Might find it easier just to drop JDAMs.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
09/14/2004 00:55 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
ABC news had a story on Darfur last night. Said the US has finally recognized it as genocide! No mention of the UN at all or even the EU. Implied that the US let it happen. I almost threw a shoe through the TV. Jennings pisses me off even more than Dan "what's the frequency, Kenneth" Rather. I want to hear some wailing and gnashing of teeth when W wins.
#3
I think that Powell's statements that Darfur is, indeed, a genocidal effort were sweet. Directly refuting the EU twinkie who said that the murder spree didn't "qualify as genocide" just a week ago.
Now, while the diplos dither over Powell's remarks, Bush will gather the steam to act - unilaterally again - and prolly follow the suggestions many have posted here.
I do so love the smell of fried bureaucrat in the morning, lol!
#6
Keep investigating and sooner or later all those pesky natives and Christian will starve to death. That should fix the problem - NOT!
Posted by: Douglas De Bono ||
09/14/2004 10:09 Comments ||
Top||
#7
It's such a sad and hopeless situation that I find myself wanting to look away.
The Latte Left should be so completely ashamed of their silence on this issue. It hasn't seemed to enter their radar due to "nuance" that only an idiot can understand.
When they can somehow pin this on Bush, Sudan's atrocities will get full coverage and need immediate resolution. If Kerry wins, they will be content to let the black on black killing continue without mention.
#8
Spot-ABC, if they were unbiased, should have followed it with a soundbite from our beloved and ethical partners in the UN asserting that it isn't genocide. ABC can't do that though; that would be switching teams in mid-game.
I wrote the BBC website in July that the world might finally get off its collective a** and do something about Darfur by October (ie, too late). I was wrong, of course. They aren't doing anything; they're just talking, as usual.
Could someone pass the creme and the fall agenda, please?
#10
Yeah, Anon6449. Where are the saviors from the international community when you need them? Always flapping their mouths, never getting off the couch.
#11
2B its not really black on black but arab on black. In islam 'arabs' are more 'holy' or 'better' then blacks (or anyone else -- anyone in Indonesia listening?)
The MSM and United Nations will never pay more then token attention to the murder, rape, and genocide in Sudan until they can pin the blame on someone other then their allies (the Islamic terrorists).
When the MSM or UN can blame those who are against terrorism (Bush, Putin, Israel) the 'disaster' will be placed firmly on the front burner and the heat turned on high.
#12
This is simply too good to true for Mr Bush, He can effectively control both the Rebel force(CIA backed for years now)cause the "genocide" starvation/slaughter of thousands of civilians, and then respond as the great hero/salvation sending in troups to deliver the masses from the warring rebels. This has already been practiced on several other civilian populations in recent years, Somalia/Iraq though few of you would admit to paying for it with your Tax dollars, eh? What was the civilian death toll from US sanctions in IRAQ, 1.3 million was it.. nO more like 1.45 million in the Pre-Preemptive strike. Yeah who needs the Geneva convention anyway...it's so outdated.. Bush quote!
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.
