Countries with troops in Afghanistan as part of the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) are discovering that they need better protection from roadside bombs and land mines -- the weapons most commonly used by Taliban fighters.
Britain, Canada, the Netherlands, and Germany all have recently ordered light armored vehicles to replace less-protected military transport in Afghanistan and Iraq. Freshly deployed Australian special forces also have brought about a dozen armored personnel carriers for their work in southern Afghanistan.
When U.S. forces invaded Iraq in March of 2003, the advance across the desert to Baghdad was spearheaded by Abrams M-1 tanks and Bradley armored personnel carriers.
U.S. tank commanders like Sergeant Jerold Pyle spoke confidently about their vehicles -- knowing that even the best Soviet-era tanks of Iraq's Republican Guard were no match for the Abrams.
"The Abrams tank in a battle? This is the heavy armor," Pyle told RFE/RL. "These are the killers. This is what the enemy is afraid of. The Abrams was made to fight the Soviet Union, designed back in the 1980s. It's been updated over the last 20 years until it's the best tank in the world. This is the heavy armor. This is the tip of the spear."
A few weeks later, however, when Pyle became one of the first U.S. soldiers to enter Baghdad, his tank was destroyed in an ambush by Iraqi ground troops using guerrilla tactics.
The lesson was clear for U.S. military planners. Heavy tanks, with their clanking metal tank treads and fuel-guzzling engines, can dominate a battlefield in the open desert. But many advantages are neutralized in an urban guerrilla war.
#1
But many advantages are neutralized in an urban guerrilla war.
Depends on how they're used, doesn't it?
Drive them up and down the street to impress people, and they just guzzle fuel and clank treads.
Use them to destroy buildings infested with killers, so your troops don't have to enter the building, and they still dominate the urban battlefield. See Falluja II.
Posted by: Bobby ||
08/17/2006 6:25 Comments ||
Top||
#2
What a terrible article. The ISAF troops are discovering second generations jeeps get the shit blown out of them in mine or IED attack. So they're getting light armor. Which has next to nothing to do with Abrams tanks in Baghdad.
#4
IIRC there was a big article on a émigré or second generation Indian serving as a armor officer who received much press in India for this successful fight with tanks in crowded urban combat.
Bottom line is that because armor has been successfully used in a combined arms manner in Iraq, that the use of armor in urban terrain doctrine is now being rewritten. So the author of this article is way off base on his opinion.
After leading his platoon through a fierce onslaught, enemy fire pounding them from every direction, 1st Lt. Neil Prakash went back in for more.
First Infantry Division Commander Maj. Gen. John R.S. Batiste joined Soldiers from the 2nd Battalion, 63rd Armor Regiment at FOB Scunion Jan. 14 to award this 24-year-old tank platoon leader one of the militarys highest honors - the Silver Star Medal.
An incredible officer, his accomplishments on 24 June are clearly heroic, said Batiste. He sets a very high standard for every one of us. I guarantee veterans of the past are standing very tall right now.
Although born in India and maintaining strong ties to the Indian community, Prakash was raised in Syracuse, New York, in what he called a very patriotic American household.
An ROTC cadet at Johns Hopkins University, he planned to follow in the footsteps of his mother, father and older brother - all doctors - and attend medical school. But after attending an ROTC Branch Orientation during his senior year, he knew what he was meant to do...
As the article says, the Silver Star is one of the US Military's highest combat awards. The Indian-American community was quite proud of him, as were we all.
MOGADISHU, Somalia (AP) - Mogadishu's Islamic leaders gave seven men 40 lashes each for using or selling marijuana, meting out the punishment in public Wednesday in a dramatic example of the region's new fundamentalist rule.
It was the first public lashing since a militia-backed Islamic group took control of the capital, Mogadishu, in June. Officials said that the men were arrested two weeks ago, but did not say whether they were tried.
Why bother? Allan's already told you what to do.
The seven were lashed at the Konis Stadium in Mogadishu in front of scores of people. The marijuana was burned before the crowd. ``This punishment is in accordance with the Islamic law. Thank God, we can implement Islamic law in parts of the country freely and we hope we shall be able to do so throughout the country,'' Sheik Farah Ali Hussein, an official of the Islamic group, told the crowd.
Wonder if they'll lash the qat dealers? That'll go over well.
Posted by: Steve White ||
08/17/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Doc, can I get a prescription for medical marijuana?
These lacerations on my back are killing me.
#6
Again, re : the guy in the schmock administering the lashes... Was he breathing heavily, and groaning , "Yes, yes, pot is against Allan...Oh, yes, baby!"?
Lord's Resistance Army (LRA) rebels in Uganda on Wednesday asked South Africa to join efforts to mediate faltering peace talks with the Ugandan government aimed at ending two decades of fighting.
The announcement from LRA supremo murdererJoseph Kony, through his deputy thug, Vincent Otti, came a day after the rebels won a 72-hour break in peace talks with the government in order to mourn the death of a top commander -- and International Criminal Court fugitive -- killed by the army over the weekend.
They should have more of these breaks.
In a statement, Otti said South Africa has a successful track record in conflict resolution in Africa. "I, Lieutenant General Vincent Otti, deputy chairperson of the high command and second-in-command of the Lord's Resistance Army, do hereby appeal to the government of the Republic of South Africa to come and act as co-mediator," he said.
He said South African mediation would complement the efforts of the government of southern Sudan in the ongoing peace talks, which are taking place in southern Sudan.
Face-to-face talks are expected to resume on Friday, when the insurgents will declare their stand on accountability and reconciliation.
Officials said the rebels chose South Africa in order to exert pressure on Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni's government to be serious in efforts to end the insurgency that has claimed tens of thousands of lives and displaced more than two million others. In addition, they argued that the chief mediator, southern Sudan Vice-President Riak Machar, "was not new in the Ugandan peace process," and thus there was fear of bias, according to an unnamed official.
The LRA has warned that Uganda's refusal to match its unilateral truce, its insistence that the rebels disarm and surrender, as well as its death threats to top commanders are stymying the talks.
Killing the top commanders does make it more difficult for them to 'negotiate'.
"In order for the Juba negotiations to be meaningful, successful and binding, the [LRA] ... calls upon the government of Uganda to respond positively and declare a cessation of hostilities and respect the agenda and code of conduct agreed upon by the negotiating parties, the mediators and facilitators," Otti explained.
"Please stop killing us!"
The Ugandan government insists any truce agreement with the rebels will be at the end of the peace process, arguing that the insurgents would take advantage of a cessation of hostilities to regroup, rearm and recruit new fighters.
What's the word in Arabic for that, um .. um .. oh yeah .. hudna.
Over the weekend, the army said it had killed Major General Raska Lukwiya in northern Uganda. On Wednesday, meanwhile, the Ugandan army said troops killed four rebels, including a commander allegedly involved in last year's slaying of a British tourist in northern Uganda. Army spokesperson Lieutenant Chris Magezi said Reagan Akena, a junior LRA commander, and three fighters were killed in an ambush on Monday in Amuru district. "[Akena] was responsible for the killing of Steve Wills, the British tourist who was killed in Murchison Falls Park in November," the spokesperson said.
Excellent! Who put the starch in the army's shorts?
A Community Affairs spokesman for phone giant Orange has been suspended over posting allegedly racist comments on a website. An article under Inigo Wilson's name on the ConservativeHome.com discussion site gives a series of definitions for "politically correct" terms.
One of the entries reads: "Islamophobic: Anyone who objects to having their transport blown up on the way to work." Oooh, have to remember that one! Good line!
The post defines Palestinians as "Archetype 'victims' no matter how many teenagers they murder in bars and fast food outlets. Never responsible for anything they do - or done in their name - because of 'root causes' or 'legitimate grievances'." I think that's the official definition in the Rooters/AP/CNN/BBC stylebook....
The piece sparked fury among Muslim readers who regarded them as racist, and a number said they would be contacting the company to complain. One email apparently sent to Orange, and posted on the website of community group the Muslim Public Affairs Committee, said: "I think Orange need to find a more appropriate 'community' PR representative who does not hold such Islamaphobic and racist views." "Yeah! Find someone who doesn't mind if the 7:17 goes KABOOMY!"
A statement released by Orange's Head of Media Relations Stuart Jackson today said: "Orange has received a number of complaints regarding the content of an article written by an Orange employee and published on an independent website which has offended some of our customers. "We take the opinions of our customers very seriously and believe that this matter warrants further investigation. We have therefore suspended an employee while this investigation takes place."
Mr Wilson's article, which was posted on August 2, says he is a married father of one who lives in Fulham, south west London.
#1
Interesting comment from the ConservativeHome website...
Some humourless Muslims - who, at the same time, appear willing to defend the terrorist organisation Hezbollah - have taken exception to Inigo's article and have complained to his employer about what he wrote. Inigo joked that charges of Islamophobia were thrown at "anyone who objects to having their transport blown up on the way to work". Unfair charges of racism are often, of course, thrown at people who want to debate an issue like immigration. It is vital that Britain and Britain's Muslims face up to the extremists within Britain's towns and cities who distort the religion of Islam to provide cover for their wicked plots. Some Muslims do not want to have any discussion of these issues. Just look how some reacted to George W Bush's 'Islamic fascists' remarks of last week.
#3
You can always tell how close to home you're hitting by the amount of rage and spittle flying. Because deep down the muzzies know they are worthless pieces of camel dung.
#6
Odd how the Muslim community -- which we've been repeatedly told is mostly "moderate" -- gets into a lather whenever someone pokes fun at terrorists.
Almost like the Muslims themselves can't distinguish between themselves and terrorists.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
08/17/2006 21:39 Comments ||
Top||
Posted by: ed ||
08/17/2006 07:42 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"Muslims are not an ethnic group and come from many different backgrounds including from the black community and increasingly from the white community," said Inayat Bunglawala, spokesman for the Muslim Council of Britain.
"There is concern that such profiling would perhaps only contribute to further alienating a group whose close cooperation is essential in countering terror."
That's the dude that emailed death threats to Charles Johnson of LGF, something about slicing a throat. So, the rational thing would be to do just the opposite what this POS recommends.
#2
One's religion and one's ethnicity alone don't determine a terrorist, but should be considered as important aspects of overall profiling. Such imperative factors can not be ignored due to the obvious relevance they have in identifying terrorists (in spite of protestations from the minority groups in question who feel victimized).
Marketing researches companies profile and target consumers, for commercial reasons, and make lot of money because the techniques work. The same principles can be applied to terrorists.
A Palestinian born Muslim, for example, should draw more attention when checking onto a flight by virtue of situational association with conflict. Not even Gandhi would be impartial having been spawned from such a background.
Religious and cultural profiling makes complete sense.
#7
"Religious and cultural profiling makes complete sense"
Naturally when only one 'religion' today has the likes of unending jihad as its central pillar and a whole herd behind it to variously support that ideology of murder.
#8
"That's unpalatable to everyone. It is communities that defeat terrorism..."
I dont profess to be a mind reader. But Im willing to bet that if even the most diversity minded ACLU member was waiting in line to board an airplane next to someone who visually fit the most common profile of a terrorist I could figure out what they were thinking. The same thing everyone else is thinking. (That includes people that fit the profile themselves)
#9
Better be unpaleatable to everyone than for everyone to be dead. One particular community predictably spawns terrorists and we have to pretend this isn't so? Paleatable dead hypocrites is the current fashion?
#10
"Any measures introduced have got to be intelligence-led and not beard-led," said Shahid Malik, a lawmaker with the governing Labour Party.
Fine, fine ... women with beards may be excluded.
Let's just say that such profiling can be halted when one religion is no longer responsible for 99% of the world's major terrorist atrocities. You'd think the so-called Moderate Muslims would welcome such profiling in order that a majority of terrorists could be apprehended and thereby have their ever-so-benign Religion of Peace [spit] be purged of its violent adherents. Wait, I think they're trying to respond about this. What's that they're saying?
John Prescott has denied a report he said the Bush administration had been "crap" on the Middle East road map.
The Independent newspaper claimed the deputy prime minister made the remark during a private meeting on Tuesday with a number of Labour MPs. It also said he called the US President a "cowboy with his Stetson on".
Mr Prescott issued a statement in which he said: "This is an inaccurate report of a private conversation and it is not my view."
#3
No it's the truth. He is covering his arse. The majority of the Labor party believe this and are actively anti Isreal and US. He simply was spweaking his mind. It leaked out now he is covering his behind.
We need to face the reality that the BBC speaks for the UK and the Labor party. 100% anti US and ant Israel 100% of the time.
The UK is currently an ally in Iraq and Afghanistan. Notice I say currently. As soon as Blair is out expect that to end. The numner of Britons that support the WoT or even believe their is one is a minority. For the way the rest of the UK thinks just look at their press.
A MAJORITY of voters support moves by the Government to introduce security screening at airports that focuses on the passengers who pose the greatest risk.
A poll in todays Spectator shows that 55 per cent backed the idea of passenger profiling and only 29 per cent opposed it.
The Times disclosed this week that the Government was in talks with airlines about profiling people who behave suspiciously, have unusual travel patterns or, more controversially, are from certain ethnic or religious backgrounds. Half of the 1,700 respondents said that most British Muslims were moderates but 28 per cent disagreed and almost as many said that they did not know.
The poll suggests that Britain is increasingly preparing for a long, bitter and potentially bloody struggle, with 60 per cent of respondents saying that they expected the threat from terrorist groups to worsen and 79 per cent arguing that the Government was not winning the war against terrorism.
A large majority, 86 per cent, predicted a terrorist attack within the next 12 months.
YouGov interviewed 1,696 respondents online on August 14 and 15 for the poll, the first since the airport terrorism alert. Not quite the suicidal culture some ascribe...
#1
There are many reasonable Brits (just look who posts here). But their political classes are very disjoint from the common people. For all our troubles with Kenneday, et al, people like Ronald Regaon or Bill Clinton can become President here.
Last week, British police and security services thwarted what looks to have been an attempt to cause mass murder by terrorists. Thousands of European holidaymakers both in Britain and across the Continent shared the frustration of disrupted holiday plans. Millions more expressed their shock and worry as details of the alleged plot emerged. While loss of life was prevented, the events served as a stark reminder that the threat of terrorism affects us all in our everyday lives and that we are all part of the fight against it.
That is why on Wednesday we met with the Finnish presidency of the European Union and other European partners to discuss how we can build on the progress we have made since the attacks in Madrid in 2004 and in London last year.
In the wake of the failed terrorist attacks in London on July 21 last year (two weeks after the deadly July 7 bombings), one of the key suspects was swiftly returned to Britain from Italy to face trial, thanks to the European arrest warrant. And the European evidence warrant will improve and speed up the process by which European countries can help one another obtain evidence.
This cooperation demonstrates what we can achieve when we help our European neighbors tackle domestic terrorist incidents. We all know that the threat from international terrorism is undiminished and that next time terrorists may target another European country. Together we need to deliver a comprehensive response to the challenge facing us all: How do we, as democratic and open societies, best fight terrorism without compromising our values? How do we balance the individual rights that we all enjoy with the collective right to safety and security that as a society we demand?
We need to protect ourselves by responding to new terrorist techniques with appropriate security measures. The European Commission has already emphasized the need for new standards of security that should be adopted at European airports. We must now also target research into liquid explosives.
We have to deliver all of this while staying true to our shared European values of respect for fundamental rights and freedoms. Why? Because they are tools themselves which will enable us to fight terrorism. By defending our citizens from terrorism without destroying the freedoms upon which our societies are built; by seeking to defeat terrorists without making Muslims feel we are trying to attack Islam; by addressing the legitimate grievances of the Muslim world without validating the terrorists' narrative, we will build an environment where tolerance and freedom reigns, and where terrorism does not thrive.
We are only too aware of the scale of these challenges, but we share the belief that the best way to defeat international terrorism is through international cooperation and the vigilance of our citizens - something we can all work together to achieve. We are threatened as individuals, as communities, as societies, as nations and as a Union; we must rise to the challenge at all levels, together.
(John Reid is Britain's home secretary. Nicolas Sarkozy is the French interior minister.)
#1
We have to deliver all of this while staying true to our shared European values of respect for fundamental rights and freedoms
A lovely sentiment, but how does it jibe with reports that the plot was blown due to info from a suspect that was tortured in Pak?
I think Sarkozy is making a laudable (for a French politician) attempt at broaching the dangers non-Muslim states face from Islamicists.
The bromides may be necessary, but in making the wakeup call more palatable, does it also undermine the effectiveness of the point he's trying to make?
Our own politicos have had the same problem with their "Religion of Peace" meme.
Denver, Aug. 16, 2006 (CNA) - Denver Archbishop Charles Chaput spoke out this week against the promulgation of lies regarding the history of Christian-Muslim relations. In his weekly Denver Catholic Register column, Chaput said that recent fallacious statements by a Denver-area Islamic leader, who reportedly claimed that Muslims have never tried to force conversions to their faith, do nothing to advance the causes of peace or interreligious understanding.
Chaput said that the Muslim-Christian conflict has existed for centuries and is based upon deep religious differences. During centuries of fighting, both Christians and Muslims have acted in a sinful manner towards one another, he said, but its necessary to be honest about the sins both sides have committed in the past in order to bring about peace in the future.
The archbishop said he felt compelled to address the issue after reading a recent news story which contained claims that, it was European Christians, never Muslims, who tried to root out those who didnt agree with them, a statement which Chaput says is just plain false.
Chaput said that while Christians have certainly committed sins against Muslims in the past, to claim that Muslims have not committed their own sins and acted in violent, militant manners is a lie.
Added emphasis mine. Read the rest at the link. The Catholic Church needs more like this guy - he certainly calls things what they are and isnt afraid of the truth about Muslims or history.
#2
Why can't out newspaper peopel learn these thigns that wer ein the article - and debunk all the BS the Islamists spout?
The archbishop pointed out the armed military expansion of Islam which has occurred since the religions creation. On the other hand, he said, Christians struggled with the place of military force in its worldview for the first 300 years and had no theology of Crusade until the 11th Century. In fact, Chaput said, the Christian Byzantine Empire had already been resisting Muslim expansion in the East for 400 years before Pope Urban II called the First Crusade as a defensive response to generations of armed jihad.
Chaput also pointed to the forced conversion of the once Christian Middle East. Surviving Christian communities have endured centuries of marginalization, discrimination, violence, slavery and outright persecution not always and not everywhere; but as a constant, recurring and central theme of Muslim domination, he said.
That same Christian suffering continues down to the present, Chaput said.
In addition to mentioning the persecution of Christians in the Muslim Ottoman Empire of the early 1900s, in Turkey, and in Egypt, Archbishop Chaput pointed to more recent reports of harassment and violence throughout the world, from Bangladesh, Iran, Sudan, Pakistan and Iraq, to Nigeria, Indonesia and even Muslim-dominated areas of the heavily Catholic Philippines.
In Saudi Arabia, the archbishop continued, all public expressions of Christian faith are forbidden. The on-going Christian flight from Lebanon has helped to transform it, in just half a century, from a majority Christian Arab nation to a majority Muslim population.
#6
Nah, for some reason I transpose a lot when I'm in a rush. I even transpose syllables. the odd thing is that they read normally when I look at them, but later jump out. I have been diagnosed as mildly dyslexic.
#8
Archbishop Chaput has some serious stones. He has been outspoken on a lot of things - he is remarkable compared to the many other mealy-mouthed "politician" Bishops/Archbishops.
Would that more in the Catholic Church have such courage to speak the truth!
(or at least KNOW the truth unlike Soldano and the euro-leftys that seem to abound in the Vatican, in spite of the Pope's more orthodox views)
#20
In true form they should loudly scream that the Archbishop is lying, that Islam is a religion of peace, and threaten to behead him. Hopefully all in the same sentence.
#21
While I am not a big fan of the Catholic church and its historical track record, I can only applaud both Pope Benedict and Archbishop Chaput for their unflinching assessments of Islam.
As seen with Pope John Paul's intercession regarding Poland, the church has within its grasp the power to instill much positive change. I can only hope that Pope Benedict et al will continue to press Islam with respect to freedom of religion within the borders of Muslim majority nations.
This is a keystone issue in making the final determination that Islam is not a religion and, instead, a political ideology. It is almost incumbent upon the Catholic church, as a global institution, to begin applying this pressure, if only for the sake of its own spread.
Moreover, for the sake of all mankind and, even, its putative salvation, the Catholic church is literally obliged to begin administering less-than-subtle pressure upon Islam and Muslims in general. That all other religions, save perhaps Judaism, stand mute in the face of relentless religious persecution by Islamic theocracies is an indictment of their own, however sublimated, desires for ascendancy.
If our governments lack the fortitude to enforce a prohibition upon the current practice of Islam, with its death sentence for apostasy, then it is up to our religious institutions to begin a push for the proscription of any religion that maintains a death penalty for conversion to another religion. Elsewise, it betokens an acceptance or admission that all other religions are inferior to Islam.
All undue bias aside, I can confidently say, based upon mysogynistic practices alone, that Islam is decidedly inforior to a vast majority of this world's other faiths. Such being the case, perhaps it is time for the church to dispense with the outdated concept of moral relativism (i.e., judge not lest ye be judged) and begin calling a spade a spade. Pope Benedict has done so and gets my loud applause for it.
Matt. 7:1-5 Do not judge lest you be judged. For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you. And why do you look at the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, `Let me take the speck out of your eye,' and behold, the log is in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye.
Its a shame the whole of the quotation is never used, and the context is almost always lost.
The "Judge Not" was an admonishment to the hypocritical Pharisees and Sadducees of the times. The held others to letter of the law without understanding the spirit of the law. They distorted the laws of God in order to use them to persecute people they didn't like, and were simply blatantly unfair. Jesus' warning to them was to be objective, just, impartial and fair, not to be morally relative, nor to abuse the law for their own powers.
It is a warning to judges that they will be held to a higher standard by God. This is pointed out in James:
James 3:1 Let not many of you become teachers, my brethren, knowing that as such we shall incur a stricter judgment.
James 2:13 For judgment will be merciless to one who has shown no mercy; mercy triumphs over judgment.
The intent here is not to aver judgment - indeed judgement is necessary for repentance - and repentance is the key for mercy. The intent here is to allow Christians to judge, because wrong is wrong, but to show mercy to those who repent and genuinely try to reconcile themselves to God, and to not abuse the law such as certain parts of Judaism were doing at the time.
From a Catholic point of view, we can draw on the Catechism of the Church: The Catechism #1868 says,
"...we have a responsibility for the sins committed by others when we cooperate in them:
by participating directly and voluntarily in them;
by ordering, advising, praising, or approving them;
by not disclosing or not hindering them when we have an obligation to do so;
by protecting evil-doers."
Pretty encompassing, eh?
As beings "in God's own image", we are called to discern good from evil (remember that tree and banishment from Eden?), and to state the truth and point out error. If we do not, we fail part of our essential natures; we may tacitly encourage error or sinful actions of others to continue, and the burdens of those sins will fall on us as well.
John 7: 24 calls us to "judge with righteous judgment." So we cannot be reluctant to call evil, "evil" and good, "good." We should never judge hearts except in perhaps extreme circumstances, but we are to judge behavior against Gods standard of right and wrong. As Catholics, we are a moral people and must make moral judgments -- consequently we cannot be afraid to stand for the truth.
Chuck Colson (whose prison ministries have done wonderful work) puts all of the above quite succinctly:
"True tolerance is not a total lack of judgment. Its knowing what should be toleratedand refusing to tolerate that which shouldnt."
Archbishop Chaput seems to be center target on this with his comments.
#23
an aside about the Catechism I quoted regarding Catholic obligations when dealing with sinners or those doing sinful acts, we are culpable for sins when we promote them ...
by ordering, advising, praising, or approving them;
by not disclosing or not hindering them when we have an obligation to do so;
Now you can see why so many Catholics are angry with the Church over its coddling of the pro-abortion positions so-called Catholic politicians like Kennedy and Kerry - the Church's own guidance contradicts the "hands off" that some Bishops and Cardinals have taken.
If you aren't Catholic there is no binding on you - so go ahead and be pro-abortion or pro-choice, but don't expect to be able to call yourself a Catholic in good faith, and don't expect the Church to support you because of your involvement in such matters.
I have no problem with Lieberman being pro-choice. I oppose him, but understand his position (even as I disagree with it). But for Kerry and Kennedy to proclaim themselves to be Catholic and Pro-Choice is beyond the pale. They denigrate Catholicism by flouting God's rules (as Catholics see them) for political convenience. They are dishonest and dishonorable as shown by those actions.
OK done ranting, back to your regularly scheduled rantburg....
Endorsing Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's suggestion to institutionalise arrangements to bring people from both sides of divided Kashmir closer, Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf has said this needs to be discussed as it could be a "starter" for the "joint management" of the region.
Musharraf noted that "none of us is in favour of their (Kashmir's) independence" and suggested that a "joint framework for self-governance" of the entire Kashmir region should be worked out as part of solution to the problem.
"Yes, I think that is a starter. This is a very good term," he told noted Constitutional expert A G Noorani in an interview to Frontline magazine when referred to Singh's recent remarks that there should be institutionalisation of arrangements to bring people from both parts of Kashmir closer.
Musharraf was asked whether he would consider Singh's suggestion as "an acceptable mode of joint management" of the two parts of Kashmir.
Singh had made the remarks at the Kashmir roundtable in Srinagar on May 24 while addressing various groups of the state.
"The term ...'institutional arrangements' is what I think is correct. But we need to define the modalities," Musharraf said in the interview published in the latest issue of the magazine.
Musharraf said there needs to be "discussion and thought" with regard to the idea of institutionalising the arrangement.
With regard to "autonomy" for Jammu and Kashmir as advocated by New Delhi, he said the word creates confusion and "negative optics", and needs to be replaced.
On Singh's contention that the Line of Control should be made irrelevent, Musharraf said, "I think it is a good statement." Asked whether India and Pakistan could agree on a joint quantum of autonomy for the two parts of Kashmir and have a common model, he said, "Certainly, because none of us is in favour of their (Kashmir's) independence. So, therefore, short of independence, what is it that we are devolving on them?"
He said the two countries could discuss his proposal of "joint management mechanism on top, consisting of representatives from Pakistan, India and Kashmir, who oversee ...the joint management (aspect)".
Musharraf expressed his readiness to allow Kashmiris from both sides of the divided state to meet and debate among themselves the issue of how much power they should get to administer their affairs. Contending that a resolution of the Kashmir dispute was "do-able", he said he saw a "drag" in India with regard to the settlement. "...developing, as you say, consensus for the solution appears difficult on the Indian side," he said.
"I am reasonably sure that we will develop consensus on this (Pakistani) side." He noted that he had suggested four points to resolve the Kashmir issue, the first of which was to "identify Kashmir". Elaborating on this, he said that "there are certain areas, nuances, the strategic implications of which may not be acceptable to Pakistan or India. We have to see to that. So, let us identify the region."
As the next step, Musharraf said there should be demilitarisation of Kashmir, starting with three cities in the Kashmir Valley. The demilitarisation could be undertaken in steps, he said.
He said "self-governance" could be a subsequent measure, followed by the formation of a "super-structure which gives comfort to both, Pakistan and India, and their involvement and some responsibility and some commitment...in having their say on both sides of the border".
On the July 11 Mumbai bombings, Musharraf suggested that it could be the handiwork of "freelance terrorists" and said the two countries should have trust in each other.
"...these are freelance terrorists who are doing this (terror attacks). That is the reality. There are freelance terrorists who are roaming around and doing all this," he said.
He said the two countries should join hands to investigate and "move against them".
Acknowledging that intelligence agencies of the two countries have been operating against each other over the past 50 years, Musharraf said it was time that these agencies "reach an agreement to stop interference in each other's internal affairs, if at all there is."
With regard to India's demand for preventing certain groups in Pakistan to operate as these are cover organisations for terror outfits, he said, "One has to see what is the evidence against them...There are legal compulsions".
New Delhi has asked Pakistan to ban the Jamaat-ud-Dawa as it is a "reincarnation" of the banned Lashkar-e-Tayiba terror outfit. India has also demanded the arrest of its leader Hafiz Mohammed Saeed.
Posted by: john ||
08/17/2006 11:55 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Does Perv want a pony also?
Posted by: john ||
08/17/2006 12:01 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Dehli should shift gears and support Kashmir independence. The ball would start rolling and before you know it Pakistan would be wracked by independence movements that would tear them apart.
Then if Dehli allows Punjab (or Kalistan) to vote for independence or not they could ensure they have a solid nation, or a friendly independent tough as nails nation as a buffer between them and disintegrating Pakistan.
#3
That cuts both ways. If Kashmir gets independence, twenty other Indian states will demand the same. India would fall apart first.
Posted by: Steve White ||
08/17/2006 12:50 Comments ||
Top||
#4
There are politicians all over India who would just love to have the ability to print their own currency, loot their own treasuries, parade around the UN giving speeches etc.
India would fragment into many pieces and turn into another africa.
There are many parts of India as bad as africa but having a federal governemnt, courts, armed forces provides a way out for them. There is money from Delhi for development, corrupt local governments are dismissed, ministers jailed.
Micro-nationalism only leads to savagery.
Posted by: john ||
08/17/2006 12:51 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Photos by Margaret Bourke-White taken the last time a part of India was given Independence
Posted by: john ||
08/17/2006 12:58 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Isn't there already a problem because there aren't enough vultures to dispose of the bodies of the sect that uses that method? (I think it's the Sikhs, but I'm not sure, and that isn't the point anyway.) I assume the pictures are of the establishment of Pakistan. Am I correct, john?
If Dehi were to support Kashmiri independence, then Pakistani interference would only get worse, once Kashmir didn't have the Indian Army to fight interference for them. Once upon a time Kashmir was rich, but that was before Pakistan's pet jihadis started killing people and breaking things on the Indian side of the border.
"But to recap the usual factors held responsible for the founding of Pakistan, Islam was not in danger in pre-1947 India. Indeed, considering the sectarian violence and religious bigotry we face today, it was in better health then. Nor was democracy the issue because even if partition had not happened, India was getting democracy once the British left. The Indian Independence Act promised that.
So what was the compelling reason for the Muslims to insist on a separate homeland especially when there was no going around the uncomfortable fact that, no matter how generously the frontiers of the new state were drawn, an uncomfortably large number of Muslims would remain in India?
The purpose of Pakistan, transcending anything to do with safeguarding Islam or promoting democracy, was to create conditions for the Muslims of India, or those who found themselves in the new state, to recreate the days of their lost glory."
Posted by: john ||
08/17/2006 13:18 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Isn't there already a problem because there aren't enough vultures to dispose of the bodies of the sect that uses that method? (I think it's the Sikhs, but I'm not sure, and that isn't the point anyway.) I assume the pictures are of the establishment of Pakistan. Am I correct, john?
The towers of silence, where bodies are placed for the vultures to consume are built by the Zoarastrians, who fled to India from Iran to escape persecuation centuries ago.
During partition in 1947, there was mass cremation of bodies.. when wood ran out, they used kerosene and oil.
Posted by: john ||
08/17/2006 13:21 Comments ||
Top||
#10
A glimpse at what an "independent" Kashmir would be like
Srinagar, Aug 16: Chairman of a faction of Hurriyat Conference Syed Ali Shah Geelani on Wednesday said Kashmir was never a part of India and accused its leaders and troops of occupying it by deceit.
Kashmir is natural part of Pakistan. It has 7000 miles of border with it and shares similar cultural bonding. But India through deceit in 1947 illegally occupied it and we are fighting for its freedom since then,
...
What kind of Kashmir do you see after you get freedom? Will it be Islamic or secular? a man from the crowd asked Geelani. Islam and secularism have no relation. Islam is a complete way of life. It has its own culture. Islam doesnt ask you dont sing but it tells you to recite Naat. Allah will not accept any way of life other than Islam, the veteran leader replied.
See what America is doing in the name of secularism in Iraq and Israel in Lebanon. America is a big terrorist and enemy of Islam, he said.
Posted by: john ||
08/17/2006 13:35 Comments ||
Top||
#11
And this is the "moderate" Hurriyat...
Posted by: john ||
08/17/2006 13:43 Comments ||
Top||
#12
John, thanks for the history lesson and the photos. A worthwhile addition to Rantburg University.
Posted by: Steve White ||
08/17/2006 15:17 Comments ||
Top||
#13
I still say to john:
If you are not writing your book yet, you should be.
After the expulsion of an Indian diplomat by Islamabad and the subsequent retaliation by New Delhi, India has in its latest move barred Pakistani diplomats from moving beyond the municipal limits of Delhi.
According to a Pakistan Embassy official, even the neighbouring towns of Noida and Gurgaon, which come under the National Capital Region (NCR), are also now out of bounds for Pakistan Embassy personnel.
Earlier this month, Pakistan had ordered the expulsion of Deepak Kaul, who was posted as Political Counsellor in Islamabad, after charging him of possessing secret papers. New Delhi retaliated the move by expelling Kaul`s counterpart in Pakistani Embassy in New Delhi, Syed Muhammad Rafique Ahmed.
The tit-for-tat expulsions came less than a week after the two countries pledged to push the two and half year old peace process forward.
The peace process between the two countries has been in limbo for nearly a month, especially after the last month's serial blasts in Mumbai that killed nearly 200 people.
Intelligence agencies in India suspect the Pakistan-based terrorist organisation Lashkar-e-Taiba and Pakistan`s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) of being behind the carnage. However, both Islamabad and LeT have denied of being linked to the blasts.
Posted by: john ||
08/17/2006 11:47 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
There are no Pakistan-based training camps for militants, as alleged, having been wound up much before 9/11 by the then interior minister Moeenuddin Haider, Sardar Abdul Qayyum Khan told a news conference at the weekend. However, the struggle in Kashmir, he added, would continue until such time as there was no acceptable solution of the issue. He regretted terrorist attacks such as the one that occurred in Mumbai recently and said that those responsible were no friends of either India or Pakistan. He urged both governments not to let such incidents derail the peace process. If you let that happen, those who do not want peace and an amicable settlement of issues, win, he added.
Sardar Qayyum said militancy in the Kashmir freedom movement had only crept in because there was an unwillingness on the part of India to move towards a political settlement. The moment there is progress on the political front, militancy will begin to die down. He said the Kashmiri people were not a herd of sheep which could be divided between this and that party. Any attempt to bypass the people would fail. He did not think there had been any change in Pakistans position on Kashmir. A change in tactics is sometimes necessary, he added, but that should not be taken to mean that the basic stand has changed.
Posted by: Fred ||
08/17/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Uh huh, all those terrorists must be training in some imaginery camps.
And the terror training camp in Rawalpindi must be a figment of the prosecutor's imagination.
Posted by: john ||
08/17/2006 8:34 Comments ||
Top||
The Lahore High Court on Tuesday asked the Punjab government to respond to a petition challenging the detention of Jamaatud Dawa chief Hafiz Saeed. Justice Muhammad Akhtar Shabbir sought a report from the Punjab home secretary by August 23 in response to the petition, which was moved by Saeed's wife. Saeed's lawyer Nazir Ghazi said his detention was linked to his plan to stage a rally in Lahore on Independence Day. He said the home secretary issued a detention order on August 9 that was not even signed by the authority concerned. He claimed that Saeed had been detained on the wishes of a "neighbouring country". Jamaatud Dawa is believed to be a front for Lashkar-e-Taiba, which India says was involved in last month's bomb blasts in Mumbai.
Posted by: Fred ||
08/17/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
Hizbut Tahrir, an organisation outlawed in Pakistan, said on Wednesday that it had no role in the London plot and did not believe in violent action.
We believe in the establishment of a caliphate in Muslim countries through peaceful struggle and not through jihad, because jihad can only be launched by an Islamic state and not any group or individuals...
"The authorities in the UK should thoroughly investigate this plot before putting any blame on any organisation or community because British investigations have been imperfect in the recent past," said HT spokesman Mohammad Shahzad Shaikh.
He said Hizb did not support militancy or approve the killing of innocent civilians. "We believe in the establishment of a caliphate in Muslim countries through peaceful struggle and not through jihad, because jihad can only be launched by an Islamic state and not any group or individuals," he said. Shaikh said the Pakistani government's ban on the group had been challenged in court and a decision was pending.
Posted by: Fred ||
08/17/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
With tears welling up, a little Iraqi girl reacts to receiving a shot from a coalition forces medic that will clear-up her upper respiratory infection. While pain is minimal, the after effects will provide her with a more healthy start in her young life. The little girls medical treatment was courtesy of the Soldiers from 5th Iraqi Army Division and Soldiers from 1st Battalion 4th Infantry Division, Task Force Band of Brothers, who jointly conducted a Medical Civil Action Project (MEDCAP) in the town of Tahrir; a town that is not used to readily available medical care.
A building in the town had been converted into a waiting room, pharmacy and doctors offices where one Iraqi doctor, Capt. Farhan, from 2nd Brigade, 5th Iraqi Army Division and one American Maj. Jeremy Beauchamp, battalion surgeon, 1-68 Cab, prepared to see patients. Word of the MEDCAP was broadcast over Humvee loudspeakers that joint forces were ready to see patients; then the people began to pour in from the surrounding streets. Its one way to make the Iraqi people see the Iraqi Army and the U.S. as good people, said 1st Lt. Edmond Jackson, operations officer for the Military Transition Team, 1-68 CAB, about the MEDCAP.
Often the local people hear information about coalition forces and the Iraqi Army that has been distorted by the enemy, Jackson said as he was about to be overrun by a squad of six year-olds who desperately wanted the Beanie Babies in his hands. While the medics were treating Iraqis, Jackson and his Soldiers were handing out toys, pencils and notebooks to the children.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Bobby ||
08/17/2006 15:15 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
ISRAEL is ready in principle to free Palestinian prisoners in exchange for a soldier captured by Gaza-based militants in a June 25 raid, the serviceman's father Noam Shalit told Israeli television overnight.
#3
And thus the betrayal is complete. Way to go Olmert. Check his law degree to be sure it isn't from Tehran University. This asshat just put a price tag on the head of every IDF soldier.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
08/17/2006 18:01 Comments ||
Top||
The Poor Israeli people must feel like total saps hustled by another LLL into the false belief that when needed a LLL can make the hard decision. That mistake at the voting booth will be paid for dearly todays blood and humiliation was just a down payment.
(KUNA) -- Israel's Defense Forces (IDF) Chief of Staff Dan Halutz said Wednesday the decision to expand the armed incursion to the Lebanese Litani River was not endorsed because it was not expected the conflict would continue for longer than 48 hours.
Halutz, who appeared before the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee at the Knesset, said the decision to expand the war to the Litani River had come before UN Security Council Resolution 1701 was issued. Halutz declined to answer some questions he was asked, specifically on the "reasons for moving Israeli forces at such a large scale even after a US-French breakthrough was reached" on the conflict. The chief of staff had said that the IDF could be forced to stay in south Lebanon for months until the deployment of the expanded United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL).
Halutz had reportedly sold his shares in the Tel Aviv Stock Market shortly after Hezbollah abducted two Israeli soldiers on July 12 triggering the more than month-long destructive conflict. Some Israeli MPs had called for prosecuting Halutz on charges of using his insider information for personal profit on the share market.
Posted by: Fred ||
08/17/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I think this is the key to Israeli actions. They were caught flat-footed by the large weapos emplacements and the extensive tunnel/bunker network. They,like the US, are enamored of air power and thought air "shock & awe" would quickly make Hezbs plead for ceasefire. This is not going to happen. As a former ground pounder, I know how valuable air support is. But boots are necessary for taking and controlling territory and dominating the enemy. Cheap surgical attacks don't stop fanatical foes. Masses losses eventually stop him. If air is used, massive wide area bombing like in Germany and Japan in WW II is actually much more effective. It takes out infrastructure, military, and civilians. The overall loss is what really brings them to their knees. Get over wars without casualties. It's only a fantasy.
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and the ruling Hamas agreed Wednesday to start talks on forming a broader government, based on a joint program that would include implicit recognition of Israel, officials said. However, it is doubtful quick agreement could be reached on a coalition between Hamas and Abbas's more pragmatic Fatah movement. Even if such an alliance were to be formed, it might not win the recognition the international community has refused to grant a Hamas-only government.
The West has said it will not do business with the Palestinian Authority unless it explicitly recognizes Israel, renounces violence and backs previous peace agreements. Hamas has refused to change its militant stance, and even a more moderate platform of a Hamas-Fatah coalition would likely fall short of these conditions.
Abbas met Wednesday with Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh of Hamas, and the two leaders decided to start negotiations on a coalition government. "We have agreed to start discussions to form this government, based upon the National Unity Agreement," Haniyeh said, referring to the joint political platform the two had worked out earlier. The joint program includes the implicit recognition of Israel.
Haniyeh suggested that a national unity government would ease the international isolation of the Hamas government. "This will help lift the embargo imposed on the Palestinians, ease their suffering," he said.
He said he also expected the release of several Hamas Cabinet ministers and legislators who have been detained by Israel in recent week. Ghazi Hamad, a spokesman for the Hamas government, said the release of the Hamas officials is a precondition for forming a broad coalition. Israel has given no sign it is willing to free the Hamas leaders.
Posted by: Fred ||
08/17/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
yeah, that'll last
Posted by: Frank G ||
08/17/2006 8:57 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Apparently April Fool's day fell yesterday on the muslim calendar!
BAE Systems, Lockheed Martin and Rafael Armament Development Authority, Ltd., have announced the arrival of the Protector Unmanned Surface Vehicle (USV) in the U.S. The companies will be demonstrating the USV's force protection capabilities to the U.S. Navy, Coast Guard and other maritime security agencies.
Protector is a remote-controlled USV that is equipped with a stabilized mini-Typhoon weapon system (MK 49 Mod 0), cameras, radar equipment and electro optics. Highly autonomous, the Protector can successfully operate with general guidance from a commander and operator in port, riverine, harbor and coastal waterways - making it an innovative solution for today's critical missions, including force protection, anti-terror, and surveillance and reconnaissance.
The Protector was developed by Rafael in response to emerging terrorist threats against maritime assets, and is the only operational USV that exists today. "The Protector has performed exceptionally well in the Persian Gulf and Mediterranean," said Steve Kelly, director of BAE Systems Naval Systems in Minneapolis. "This system is ready and available today to meet the needs of our maritime security and defense forces."
The Protector USV was featured at the U.S. Special Operations Command trade show in Tampa Bay, Fla., in June, and will be demonstrated in Little Creek, Va, San Diego, and Washington, D.C. in the coming months. The demonstrations will highlight the system's ability to be integrated with several different mission modules, showcase the boat's speed and stealthy maneuverability, and perform surveillance and intercept missions against realistic targets.
"We're excited to introduce this unmanned system to the U.S.," said Sean Patton, senior manager of Lockheed Martin's LCS Business Development team. "The Protector will provide Sailors with the capabilities they need to complete their missions more efficiently. The Protector can be the first line of defense, checking-out vessels of interest at arm's length, while our personnel and capital assets are held at a safe distance."
BAE Systems and Rafael are teamed for product production and all other program developments with Lockheed Martin leading the Protector team for Littoral Combat Ship and Deepwater programs and Combat System integration efforts.
#4
Interesting how you omit mentioning BAE's country of origin as well. Spacewar probably assumes its readership is already aware of the countries of origin of both those well known companies. Lose the chip.
Posted by: Frank G ||
08/17/2006 8:56 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Hmmm... British Aerospace.
BAE Systems has received a contract from Lockheed Martin to supply a second 57mm Mk 110 Naval Gun system. The company will deliver the system in the first quarter of 2008, which will be installed on the third Littoral Combat Ship (LCS 3) as its main armament. The first system was delivered in March for the U.S. Navys first LCS, Freedom (LCS 1).
The Mk 110 accurately fires automatic salvos of the highly lethal 57mm 3P ammunition at a firing rate of 220 rounds per minute and a range of up to nine miles. The naval gun is lightweight and compact, with minimal deck penetration, and operates in remote or local control.
For the mathematically challenged, 57 mm is 2-1/4 inches, and 220 rounds per minute is 3-2/3 rounds per second.
I want one.
Posted by: Bobby ||
08/17/2006 9:01 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Robot speedboats with machine guns. This must be the 21st century.
Posted by: Mike ||
08/17/2006 11:11 Comments ||
Top||
#8
The mini-Typhoon is a nice system amongst the class of larger remote weapon systems. By larger I mean those designed to accommodate the M2 and MK19. This vessel is neither small nor inexpensive. I think there is opportunity to go smaller for certain applications.
#10
Maybe they could linky with this? All electronic gun that can fire bursts of a 1/4 million rounds/minute. Someone sent me a video of this thing in action....Jeebus. Also make a larger version that can fire 40 mm grenades so rapidly it can pierce heavy armor. No mechanical parts, just electrical firing. LINKY
Posted by: BA ||
08/17/2006 15:25 Comments ||
Top||
#11
Nice anti-pirate ship, great for beachfront fire suppression, and pretty good as a suicide craft against very large unarmored targets (tankers, container ships, etc.). It does need some additional deck-level self-protection. I'd suggest a very large electrical charge and a deck grid.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
08/17/2006 17:41 Comments ||
Top||
#12
Yeah, but how many water-skiers can it tow? Gotta think about its end-of-life surplus marketability.
If you answered; "Three barefoot Islamists by their partially unwound turbans", you win the prize.
Groups in largely-Muslim Malaysia have launched a boycott of Coca-Cola drinks and Starbucks coffee in reaction to perceived US failure to stop Israeli military action in Lebanon and Gaza. Malaysians for Peace, the Muslim Consumers Association of Malaysia (PPIM) and the Malaysian Muslim Restaurant Owners Association said they would encourage thousands of members to join the boycott of the American products.
Speaking to reporters, Datuk Mukhriz Mahathir, head of Malaysians for Peace believed that the boycott would be effective in bringing more international pressure on Israel to stop bombing Lebanon and Palestine. These sentiments were similar to those of Jamarulkhan Kadir, president of the restaurant owners' association whose 4,000 members will be advised to stop serving Coca-Cola in their restaurants. "We think only by inflicting something on (US) economic activities, we could make them realize what they're doing is wrong," he told Agence France-Presse.
Mr Kadir said his group will also contact sister organizations in Indonesia, Sri Lanka, India and Pakistan to try to turn the campaign global. He commented that a similar three-month boycott against Coke in 2003 to protest at the US invasion of Iraq had made a dent in sales. In a final comment Mr Kadir added: "We have nothing against the American people, we love American people. We are only protesting the foreign policies which have a double standard."
#2
Heheh, There will a lot of agitated, moody and unemployed Malaysians if Intel and Motorola walks out!
Anyway, the educational system fitself or muzzies especially are replete with anti Western bias and pro Araby flavor, less you guys don't know. That's called 'love'.
#5
Datuk Mukhriz Mahathir, head of Malaysians for Peace Jihad believed that the boycott would be effective in bringing more international pressure on Israel to stop bombing Lebanon and Palestine....
Remind me to go out and get that Iced Vanilla Latte at lunchtime... Starbucks is 3 blocks down the street....
Protesters calling for an end to recent violence in Sri Lanka found themselves brawling with hardline Buddhist monks on Thursday, after a rally dubbed a "peace protest" turned unexpectedly violent.
Organisers said there were around 1,000 people in a park in the capital, Colombo, listening to a range of speakers when hardline saffron-robed monks opposed to concessions to Tamil Tiger rebels mounted the stage and erected banners.
Some more moderate Buddhist monks, protesting for peace, were already on the stage when punches were thrown. Soon, monks' robes and fists were flying, although no one was badly hurt, witnesses said.
"They were saying we should go to war," said pro-peace monk Madampawe Assagee. "We like to listen to other opinions so we let them do that but then they started fighting and we couldn't control some of our people. They tried to make it a big fight but we settled it in a few minutes."
Sri Lanka is currently embroiled in the worst fighting with the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) since a 2002 truce, with many believing a two-decade civil war has resumed. Hardline monks -- allies of President Mahinda Rajapakse -- say the government is too soft on the rebels and want military action.
The island is dominated by the Buddhist Sinhalese majority, but is also home to Muslims as well as minority Tamils -- some Hindu, some Christian. The hardline monks are violently opposed to Tiger demands for a separate Tamil homeland.
A Reuters photographer said the fight first erupted between a speaker at the rally -- a former government minister -- and a monk, and then turned into a wider brawl. Other religious leaders on the platform found themselves dragged into the melee.
"By force, they disrupted the protest," said Jehan Perera, head of the National Peace Council, who took part in a peace march earlier in the day but had gone by the time the fight erupted. "But I think they're the minority. Most of the people we walked past were very supportive."
#2
Hah! It's like Kyoto in the good old days, when everyone feared that the ungovernable monks would come swaggering down from the temples in the hills, looking for trouble & parading around like Orangemen commemorating the Boyne in Belfast's Catholic neighborhoods.
Posted by: Mitch H. ||
08/17/2006 14:11 Comments ||
Top||
#3
"I will teach you to interrupt our peace protest!"
Malaysia has said it wants to send peacekeepers to Lebanon despite Israel saying it might oppose the inclusion of nations that do not have diplomatic ties with the Jewish state. Malaysia and Indonesia have each offered to send 1,000 troops as part of a planned UN force for southern Lebanon. The two Muslim states have no diplomatic relations with Israel and strongly back the Palestinian cause. "There is no reason whatsoever to stop us from serving in southern Lebanon," Malaysian Defence Minister Najib Razak said. "We will definitely send our force pending a decision by the UN. "I do not see why they are using such a technical aspect to stop us from sending our men there," he told reporters. Objecting to Israel's very existence is a mere technicality??
Objections from Israel could complicate efforts by the United Nations to quickly assemble a force for southern Lebanon to enforce the ceasefire between Israel and Hizbollah that took effect on Monday. A UN Security Council resolution calls for the deployment of up to 15,000 troops. But a senior UN official said he doubted enough countries would come forward to reach that goal any time soon.
"Israel has informed the UN in no uncertain terms that it will not accept any countries in the force that do not have diplomatic relations with Israel," a senior Israeli official told Reuters in Jerusalem on Wednesday. He was speaking on condition of anonymity. Malaysia last week urged countries to cut diplomatic ties with Israel to protest against the war in Lebanon.
The European Union's Minister of Appeasement foreign policy chief, Javier Solana, over the weekend listed Malaysia and Indonesia among the non-EU countries prepared to join the international force, that France is expected to lead.
#3
So let's say they go, get cozy with their Hezbollah brothers while Hezbollah sends rockets into Israel post-cease-fire. Israel retaliates. Malaysian Muslim "peacekeepers" die.
Opens up the whole can of worms, finally, doesn't it? Might be just the thing to convince the world that we are in a war over how Islam can and must behave.
Posted by: Jules in the Hinterlands ||
08/17/2006 9:15 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Actually, I'd give them a benefit of the doubt. IIRC an Army observer at the Mog reported while the Paks were cowards, the Malaysian contingent fought just as hard as our guys trying to get to the Rangers. Took casualties and kept along side. They certainly had no problem dropping fellow muzzies. However, that's just the report I read.
#5
Hope you're right, GF. Course, with the leadership of Malaysia and the side they've chosen in the Pallie/Israeli conflict, we'll have to see, won't we?
Posted by: Jules in the Hinterlands ||
08/17/2006 10:35 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Article: "There is no reason whatsoever to stop us from serving in southern Lebanon," Malaysian Defence Minister Najib Razak said. "We will definitely send our force pending a decision by the UN. "I do not see why they are using such a technical aspect to stop us from sending our men there," he told reporters.
I wonder how Malaysia is going to accomplish a contested entry against one of the finest militaries in the world, thousands of miles away from home base. My feeling is that even if Malaysia had 15,000 men to put in place, the Israelis would massacre them as they were trying to deploy.
#9
Fascinating historical tidbit: British soundly defeated Malayan guerillas in the early 50's. Guerilla warfare can be countered...if the forces in question have the cajones...
Most of the commies in Malaysia were among the Chinese ethnic group which differed in appearance from the natives so isolating them from the rest of the population was the easy part. The Brits had a much harder problem with guerrillas when they couldn't tell a Orangeman from a Provisional based upon physical appearence.
The war in Lebanon has given France the chance to shine again on the world stage. Many see the French as natural mediators because of the strong historical ties between the two countries.
France's role in helping to negotiate the UN resolution allowed it to continue mending its relations with the US after the past divisions over Iraq.
You'd like to think so.
The good publicity helped both president and prime minister's opinion poll ratings rise by 5%. But the next stage may prove to be a far tougher test.
Sadly, all too often, the United Nations forces don't have the power that they asked for.
French troops have been called upon to form the backbone of the strengthened UN force in southern Lebanon. Speaking in Beirut, French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy said France was ready to participate as long as the Lebanese army was deployed in southern Lebanon beforehand.
Umm, no, you're supposed to help the Leb army, such as it is, deploy, so that the Hezbies can't move back in. We're speaking theoretically of course.
A survey for the newspaper La Croix found that seven French people out of ten supported the deployment of an international force. However only a small majority - 53% - were in favour of the French military getting involved.
Send in the mighty Uruguayans! Hell, send in anyone.
The poll for La Croix suggested relatively strong backing for a French troop deployment among young people. But some are afraid of negative consequences back in France.
French Defence Minister Michele Alliot-Marie voiced concern about deploying troops without clearly defined goals. "France wants the mission's rules of engagement to be clear and it to have real means," she told French TV. "Sadly, all too often, the United Nations forces don't have the power that they asked for."
Since your country helped write the resolution, perhaps the time to demand clarity was while you were writing it. Not that I'm a diplomatic expert or anything, but now the sucker is set in wet sand concrete.
The main political parties share such reservations. Jacques Myard, an MP in France's governing UMP party and a member of the parliamentary foreign affairs committee, told the BBC the last UN resolution did not make it clear how France can act. "I know that a lot of military, high-ranking officials in France are reluctant if this mandate is not very precise," he said.
You'd think a little wiggle room would be what they want, so that they can be tough or accomodating, whatever is required as the situation unfolds. The demand for specifics is just another way of saying 'non' without saying it.
The opposition socialists have also warned that "extreme vigilance" is needed, saying the UN resolution does nothing to address the conditions necessary for a political agreement that would guarantee the security of peacekeeping forces.
Read one way, that's a call to dismantle the Hezbies. I don't think the socialists meant that.
Above all, France wants to avoid a situation where its own soldiers find themselves having to disarm Hezbollah fighters.
In 1983, 58 French parachutists were killed in Beirut when the building in which they were staying was blown up. They too had been part of a multinational peacekeeping force.
And the building was blown up by the Hezbies. No one ever thinks to mention that.
France has been trying to obtain guarantees from the Lebanese government, Hezbollah and Israel. It does not want its troops to be powerless observers. But nor does it want to get dragged into taking part in a dangerous and potentially disastrous conflict.
The whole mission is dangerous. That's the point: it isn't peacekeeping, it's peace-enforcing and peace-making. I'm of the opinion that it can't be done, but if you're going to volunteer to lead the mission, you accept the fact that your soldiers will have their weapons unslung and ready for use with clear, stiff rules of engagement. If you can't accept that, stay home and avert your gaze while the Israelis (with a new PM) do what they should have done the first time.
Bolton and Condi strike again. Rather than oppose the arrogant French demand to run things they are allowing them to do just that.
In fact, they're encouraging and even DEMANDING they do it. From the front. Where the bullets are flying.
Heh.
Posted by: Steve White ||
08/17/2006 00:29 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#8
"But some are afraid of negative consequences back in France."
How quickly will the "youths" back home begin to seeth if French soldiers begin to cap some Hezzbies? Something tells me this corcerns them as much if not more then an "un-clear mandate".
#9
Jacques Myard, an MP in France's governing UMP party and a member of the parliamentary foreign affairs committee
Jacques Myard is known, in France, for being an ultra-catholic antisemite. One week after the beginning of the war in Lebanon, he asked, in his French Parliament's blog, the French government to send the army into Lebanon to... fight Israel ! (You're not dreaming, that's real)
In his blog, Jacques Myard accused too the IDF of sending in Lebanon helicopters that were deliberately firing on Lebanese children and killing them at a range of less than 10 meters...
I sent him a satirical email to congratulate him for his rabid antisemitism that, as I said to him, "was directly inspired by the European medieval antisemitism that lead to the killing of hundreds of thousands of Jews".
He answered that he wasn't at all antisemite, of course, and so on. I answered that he was indeed antisemite, with some more blunt commentaries on his blog, and he didn't answer.
France and Turkey's top diplomats held talks with officials here Wednesday on the deployment of international troops in south Lebanon as a huge rebuilding effort was underway and a fragile truce appeared to be holding. French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy, whose country is expected to lead the international force to shore up the UN-brokered truce, said Paris was willing to contribute troops but first wanted the Lebanese army to deploy. "France is ready to participate in a strengthened UNIFIL (UN Interim Force in Lebanon), but the Lebanese army should deploy in southern Lebanon first," he said after a meeting with Lebanese Foreign Minister Fawzi Sallukh.
"After you, monsieur."
"No, effendi, I won't hear of it. Please, you first."
France is also seeking guarantees on Hezbollah disarmament before moving in. UN Security Council Resolution 1701, which led to the ceasefire, stipulates that Lebanese and UNIFIL troops should deploy simultaneously. Hedi Annabi, the UN assistant secretary general for peacekeeping operations, said a quick deployment was needed to beef up the existing UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) as mandated by UN Security Council Resolution 1701 on Friday. "We would like to see 3,000 to 3,500 troops within 10 days to two weeks," Annabi told reporters at UN headquarters. The resolution mandates that the multinational UNIFIL will swell from its current level of 1,990 troops to 15,000. No precise timetable has been set for the deployment of the force, which is thought likely to include contingents from France, Italy, Malaysia, Belgium and another half-dozen countries.
UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan accepted a request from Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni on Wednesday to meet with the families of kidnapped soldiers Ehud Goldwasser, Eldad Regev and Gilad Shalit and send representatives to try to bring about the soldiers' release.
Livni came to New York for a 12-hour lightening visit in hopes of advancing Israel's interests in talks on implementing the cease-fire in Lebanon, expediting the deployment of international forces and bringing about the return of the kidnapped Israeli soldiers. "The fact that the kidnapped soldiers have not been released by Hizbullah is a clear violation of UN Resolution 1701 and I expect the international community to continue acting to bring about their immediate release," Livni told Annan.
Livni received a commitment from Annan that 3,500 international soldiers would be deployed in Lebanon within "seven to 10 days." She told the secretary-general that Israel expected the force to be made up of "quality soldiers with real military abilities who come from appropriate countries."
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Fred ||
08/17/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I hope they spit in his worthless face.
I'd suggest a good hard kick in the balls, but he doesn't have any.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
08/17/2006 0:02 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Unfortunately, Barbara, he does. That's how his son could make such a profit from the Oil for Bribes scandal.
Posted by: Eric Jablow ||
08/17/2006 0:23 Comments ||
Top||
#3
How bout this, kofi, what happens to Gilad Shalit happens to you?
#4
How about hanging out in a bomb shelter in Kiryat Shmonah for a month or so while terrorists take pot shots at you? How about meeting with the families of the soldiers killed? How about the families of the civilians killed? Now go over and hang out with some of the terrorists. And while you're at it, perhaps go sit in a house with some civilians while those same terrorists are shooting Katyushas at Israel from the courtyard? Now head back to Israel to visit with the children and other family members of those killed by those same rockets. Now go live under your desk until Galit et. al. come home. Just bread and water for you until then. Or if that's too harsh, trade places with Galit.
Now that you've had a good laugh at that, go set up whatever feeble wording you are planning for the next resolution after Israel has to go kick their butts again after the UN fails Lebanon and Israel again. Better get going, you've got a lot of spin to put on things before it happens again!
#7
The main difference of opinion between Israel and Annan is over who was given the obligation to disarm Hizbullah in Resolution 1701. Livni believes it is the international forces that must do the task but Annan believes it should be the Lebanese army.
I've got a third option that's most likely to work. Why don't we just let Israel finish what the Hezzies started and be done with it?
Posted by: BA ||
08/17/2006 15:14 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Moderator,
Thanks for fixing my doubled comment earlier. I am sorry; I will never do it again.
TW,
One of the least edifying features of the Washington Post in recent years was Tina Brown's column. I remember the one where she sat next to Kofi at a diplomatic reception; she wrote something to the effect that "Corruption was not in Kofi Annan's DNA." Really, Tina?
I'd buy the Times instead, but I will not support the Moonies.
Posted by: Eric Jablow ||
08/17/2006 16:24 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Annan and Carter should be bolted together, wrapped in chains, the chains welded to large steel plates, and the steel plates dropped into the Marianas Trench. It'll take three or four years or the difference to be felt, but it WILL be felt. Oh, and tack on that idiot Brown with them.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
08/17/2006 17:36 Comments ||
Top||
#10
If Annan's Nobel Prize was for Monumental Gall, I can understand.
#11
Why the hell would they want to meet with this useless lying bag of shit? What would it accomplish? I got a better chance of getting them out then he does.
NICOLE Kidman has made a public stand against terrorism. The actress, joined by 84 other high-profile Hollywood stars, directors, studio bosses and media moguls, has taken out a powerfully-worded full page advertisement in today's Los Angeles Times newspaper. It specifically targets "terrorist organisations" such as Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Palestine.
"We the undersigned are pained and devastated by the civilian casualties in Israel and Lebanon caused by terrorist actions initiated by terrorist organisations such as Hezbollah and Hamas," the ad reads.
"If we do not succeed in stopping terrorism around the world, chaos will rule and innocent people will continue to die.
"We need to support democratic societies and stop terrorism at all costs."
That's quite a statement.
A who's who of Hollywood heavyweights joined Kidman on the ad. The actors listed included: Michael Douglas, Dennis Hopper, Sylvester Stallone, Bruce Willis, Danny De Vito, Don Johnson, James Woods, Kelly Preston, Patricia Heaton and William Hurt. Directors Ridley Scott, Tony Scott, Michael Mann, Dick Donner and Sam Raimi also signed their names.
Other Hollywood powerplayers supporting the ad included Sumner Redstone, the chairman and majority owner of Paramount Pictures, and billionaire mogul, Haim Saban.
Posted by: Steve White ||
08/17/2006 00:21 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
In August 2001, James Woods reported to the FBI on a possible pre-911 trial exercise on a plane. Hopefully, he has been educating his co-workers, as have we of the informed-community.
#5
The directors are a bit of a surprise - wasn't aware that they were reasonable, especially the Scotts, who have historically struck me as probable Hollywood left material. Most of the actors listed are known Republicans (Hopper, Willis, Preston, Woods especially), although Kidman was unexpected.
Posted by: Mitch H. ||
08/17/2006 8:01 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Regarding the Scott brothers. Ridely worked on Blackhawk Down, he probably learned a thing or two about Islamic militants during the process.
Sam Raimi is of Persian decent. Religion is unknown though but I'm glad to see him on the list. Makes the messages in the Spider-man movies a bit clearer.
#8
I'm stunned! No mention of Sean Penn, Susan Sarandon or the Baldwin Bros. though, eh?
Stephen Baldwin, a born-again Christian who supported GWB in 2004 is probably there. Since I am in SoCal, I will go out at lunch and get a Times, and report back to y'all the full list.
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.
Countries with troops in Afghanistan as part of the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) are discovering that they need better protection from roadside bombs and land mines -- the weapons most commonly used by Taliban fighters.
MOGADISHU, Somalia (AP) - Mogadishu's Islamic leaders gave seven men 40 lashes each for using or selling marijuana, meting out the punishment in public Wednesday in a dramatic example of the region's new fundamentalist rule.
The Lahore High Court on Tuesday asked the Punjab government to respond to a petition challenging the detention of Jamaatud Dawa chief Hafiz Saeed. Justice Muhammad Akhtar Shabbir sought a report from the Punjab home secretary by August 23 in response to the petition, which was moved by Saeed's wife. Saeed's lawyer Nazir Ghazi said his detention was linked to his plan to stage a rally in Lahore on Independence Day. He said the home secretary issued a detention order on August 9 that was not even signed by the authority concerned. He claimed that Saeed had been detained on the wishes of a "neighbouring country". Jamaatud Dawa is believed to be a front for Lashkar-e-Taiba, which India says was involved in last month's bomb blasts in Mumbai.
(KUNA) -- Israel's Defense Forces (IDF) Chief of Staff Dan Halutz said Wednesday the decision to expand the armed incursion to the Lebanese Litani River was not endorsed because it was not expected the conflict would continue for longer than 48 hours.
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and the ruling Hamas agreed Wednesday to start talks on forming a broader government, based on a joint program that would include implicit recognition of Israel, officials said. However, it is doubtful quick agreement could be reached on a coalition between Hamas and Abbas's more pragmatic Fatah movement. Even if such an alliance were to be formed, it might not win the recognition the international community has refused to grant a Hamas-only government. 
BAE Systems, Lockheed Martin and Rafael Armament Development Authority, Ltd., have announced the arrival of the Protector Unmanned Surface Vehicle (USV) in the U.S. The companies will be demonstrating the USV's force protection capabilities to the U.S. Navy, Coast Guard and other maritime security agencies.
The war in Lebanon has given France the chance to shine again on the world stage. Many see the French as natural mediators because of the strong historical ties between the two countries.
France and Turkey's top diplomats held talks with officials here Wednesday on the deployment of international troops in south Lebanon as a huge rebuilding effort was underway and a fragile truce appeared to be holding. French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy, whose country is expected to lead the international force to shore up the UN-brokered truce, said Paris was willing to contribute troops but first wanted the Lebanese army to deploy. "France is ready to participate in a strengthened UNIFIL (UN Interim Force in Lebanon), but the Lebanese army should deploy in southern Lebanon first," he said after a meeting with Lebanese Foreign Minister Fawzi Sallukh.
UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan accepted a request from Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni on Wednesday to meet with the families of kidnapped soldiers Ehud Goldwasser, Eldad Regev and Gilad Shalit and send representatives to try to bring about the soldiers' release. 
NICOLE Kidman has made a public stand against terrorism. The actress, joined by 84 other high-profile Hollywood stars, directors, studio bosses and media moguls, has taken out a powerfully-worded full page advertisement in today's Los Angeles Times newspaper. It specifically targets "terrorist organisations" such as Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Palestine.
