Sitting cross legged on the floor of his air-conditioned quarters Major Ataullah, a burly Afghan army commander, listed the many influences of his peripatetic military career. "I've worked with Soviets, French, Canadians and, for the past year, the British," said Maj Ataullah, who uses only one name. He gestured at Major Martin David, a neatly pressed British officer sipping tea. "My third mentor," he said with a toothy smile.
There have been four attempts to forge a strong central army in Afghanistan since the 18th century. Each has failed, frustrated by war, invasions or the stubborn ways of conservative tribesmen. Now the west is making the fifth try, and the task is no less urgent, or complicated, than in the past.
On paper 46,000 recruits have joined the Afghan national army (ANA); President Hamid Karzai's government hopes to hit 70,000 by the end of 2008. America, anxious to ensure an exit strategy for its own troops, is footing the bill - $2bn (£1bn) so far with another $2bn promised for new M-16 guns, Ford trucks and bulletproof jackets.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/04/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
In one of the quieter areas, I would set up a camp full of US Marine trainers. Take only the poorest and greenest of young Afghans in it, especially orphans, and give them intense, almost cult-like training and discipline.
The idea is to create enlisted, NCOs and officers from the ground up as the nucleus of an elite force, trained and cross trained, literate and educated, and completely patriotic. No connection to religion, tribe, or any other affiliation other than their unit.
Their mission is to become a training brigade for their entire military. A brigade that will continue to only recruit the poorest, greenest young loners in their country. And once they are trained and become NCOs and officers, to spin them off into new military units as their new commands.
The idea is to create a secular military culture in the country that will slowly change civilian attitudes towards the military, until young men enter the military out of choice, with the expectation of performing up to their standards.
Eventually, hopefully, it will supplant their national differences, so that even after leaving the military, loyalty to the old unit and country will remain, above other affiliations.
#2
Extra added benefit, Moose: not all the young men, having been trained, will be lifers in the brigade. A fair number of them will eventually make their way into civilian life, where they'll be merchants, traders, politicans, teachers, etc.
In short: your plan not only builds an army, it helps build a country and a couple generations of leaders.
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/04/2007 1:22 Comments ||
Top||
#3
"21st-century barracks for a 16th-century army" > for some reason, this article reminds me of that infamous, post-9-11 JESSE JACKSON MSM cartoon, the one where heavily armed but befuddled Islamist Radics threatened to kill themselves unless Jesse stopped talking in riddles.
#4
This is an Al-Guardian article, replete with upper-class British snark and lacking in basic military reality. The Soviets/Russians were already replacing the AKM series of rifles with the AK-74 during the Afghan War : 5.45mm caliber, based on what they saw as the inherent values of the 5.56mm caliber of the West. The ChiComs now have a 5.8mm caliber of their own for their latest series of bullpup assault rifle. Everyone is moving to lighter caliber assault rifles since the ammo load is greatly increased when moving from 7.62mm to below 6.0mm.
The Afghani AKs are getting rather long in the tooth and the ANA wants to upgrade to Western equipment, especially after seeing the damage the Alliance has been inflicting on the Taliban with said equipment.
#5
The M-16 and 430 rounds of ammunition weigh the same as the M-14 and 100 rounds. Which would you rather have on your back?
Posted by: Bobby ||
05/04/2007 6:45 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Bobby, it depends what I'm trying to do. If I want to extricate myself from an ambush behind a curtain of projectiles I'll take the M-16. If I want to establish the ambush and inflict the maximum damage in the minimum time, with aimed shots I'll take the M-14.
#7
Desertion rates, estimated at 20%, remain unacceptably high.
Afghans refuse western military rations in favour of fresh lamb and rice. Others are more serious, such as a refusal to clean weapons or stores.
Many overstay their leave by weeks, facing no punishment on their return, or never come back.
So, no one else gets any sort of ominous feeling about the serious defeciencies cited above? For how much longer are we supposed to stick around pumping billions of dollars into these lackluster cretins in the hope that they'll finally grow a brain? Nothing of the sort has happened for many centuries, why is that suddenly going to change?
While I continue to support the Global War on Terrorism, I have increasing doubts that funneling untold billions of dollars into the Islamic shitholes is going to make much difference in the long run. The one single direct strategic advantage derived from this is making them dependent upon our military hardware. It can be argued that there is additional benefit from inculcating Western military thinking, but from what I cited above, not much seems to be trickling down in the form of soldierly conduct.
America and the West really need to reconsider their overall strategy. A policy of neutralization and containment may prove to be far more cost efficient and productive than squandering some projected trillions of dollars on attempts to install democracy throughout the MME (Muslim Middle East).
I think it was worth trying, as we have in Afghanistan and Iraq, but there is little promise that the lessons we are attempting to teach will actually take root. As noted in the article, plunking down 20th century military facilities in no way guarantees that a 16th mentality will rise to the challenge. From all indications to date, far from it.
#8
Zenster: There is a major difference between these people and typical peasants. These are warrior peoples. As such, they are much more likely to succeed if given some attention and exposure to a better way of doing business.
Certainly they have some atrocious habits and bad tribal customs; which is why I suggested taking boys who are societies outcasts and raise them on a completely new way of doing business.
The idea is to create a new social class, an "instant" respectable class of professional soldier of some means, that disdains the old ways and has secular nationalism as their sole prerogative.
Once such a class exists, then it becomes self-perpetuating, a magnet for ambitious young men willing to follow its rules to make good money and social status as a career. It breaks up the existing social order, as a poor orphan can attain a higher status than the son of a wealthy and powerful family.
I also suggested that the training is by US Marine training personnel, but DIs more on the Jack Webb model than the real American training model. That they don't hold back.
#9
The idea is to create a new social class, an "instant" respectable class of professional soldier of some means, that disdains the old ways and has secular nationalism as their sole prerogative.
Thank you for responding on this, 'moose. I agree that your above strategy is one of the few that holds any promise of deconstructing existing societal norms. There still remains doubt in my mind as to whether this is possible without Islam's prior elimination. Islamic traditions, and the clannish tribal mentality they perpetuate, thwart so many of the above objectives that they may not be otherwise obtainable. Secular nationalism is viewed as being in direct conflict with Islamic doctrine. I refer you to Khomeini's 1980 speech in Qom:
"We do not worship Iran, we worship Allah; For patriotism is another name for paganism. I say let this land [Iran] burn. I say let this land go up in smoke, provided Islam emerges triumphant in the rest of the world."
It is hard to believe that newfound professional status or even career potential can overcome such an ironclad rejection of secular nationalism. Islamic doctrine is simply too pervasive in this situation. As with so many Muslim majority countries, it is also difficult to imagine that even promises of economic success will overcome the inertia of religious tradition. Especially when Islam's clerical class reject material success and its comforts as being distinctly detrimental to the pursuit of personal jihad.
#11
I say let this land go up in smoke, provided Islam emerges triumphant in the rest of the world.
That's why they gotta be educated, Zenster. The more education they get, the more they will call BS on Khomeini. I think that's getting to be a big quandary for the mad mullahs in Iran now. They need educated people to be a nuclear power but educated people will see how phony they are. You have to be really ignorant to swallow all that crap about 72 virgins.
#12
Anything we do in the way of training and education helps. A person with military training (and a bit of discipline) is better not only at his military job, but at just about everything he tries to do, because he's learned that he CAN do things. Personally, I'd like Karzai to institute a draft, where every able-bodied Afghan male citizen is given 90 days of military training and returned to his home to help the standing army and the police maintain order. Give THEM the outdated AK-47s and ammo.
Training should consist of small unit weapons and tactics, how to set up an ambush, how to RESPOND to an ambush, defensive and offensive capabilities, setting up checkposts and strong points, constructing defenses, cleanliness and hygiene, weapons maintenance, etc. Try to teach all of them that can't to read and write. For those that will volunteer for it, give them additional training in vehicle maintenance, sanitation, basic construction, infrastructure maintenance, and logistics. Pay everybody during training. Allow those who choose to go into the Army after their 90 days.
We may not be able to count on more than 1% of those that go through the training to actually fight, but even those that don't will have learned something they can take home to their local village, and use to make everyone's life better. If we can get the villagers to understand that live WILL be better, then they may decide to defend themselves, and make our job easier.
We taught Vietnamese villagers to defend their villages, and it made life more miserable for the Viet Cong. I think the same tactic could prove highly beneficial in Afghanistan (and Iraq).
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
05/04/2007 15:51 Comments ||
Top||
#13
The Vietnamese weren't muzzies. That means that logic could take root. I share Zenster's concern about much positive being able to take root. Moose's idea is a good one, but I think the clerics would have the baby throttled in its crib as they would see the threat. We would need no less than 10 years of uninterrupted training to get an adequate number where they could protect themselves (hopefully by killing the clerics).
Until the clerics are dragged out of their mosques, shot and hung on a pole, not much good is going to take root.
#15
Whenever people talk about "modernizing" Muslims, I think of the effects of the British Raj on India vs Pakistan/Bangladesh. Also, on the degree of success in modernizing Muslims living (second generation) in Europe/USA.
Until we shut down the terrorist factories in Pakistan (madrassas) and decimate their logistics centers (tribal areas in Waziristan), it will not matter a damn bit how well trained the ANA is.
You cannot give your enemy ANY sanctuary or respite. Even if it means blowing the hell out of parts of Pakistan (because the Pakis refuse to handle it themselves).
Pakistani and Afghan officials agreed at a meeting in Kabul on Thursday to form a jirga (tribal council) of 300 to 350 people from each side to improve bilateral relations, Geo television reported.
According to the channel, the Pak-Afghan Jirga Commission meeting had been scheduled for two days, but later Afghan officials changed the schedule and reduced it to one day. Briefing the media about the meeting, both Pakistani and Afghan officials said that they had agreed to form a jirga of tribal elders, journalists, intellectuals and parliament members from both sides. The channel said that Pakistan had handed Afghan officials a list of people it wanted to include in the jirga.
To a question about the objectives of the jirga, officials from both sides said that the jirga would help improve people-to-people contact between the two countries and build trust between the neighbours, which had been trading allegations of cross-border terrorism amid surging Taliban insurgency. The channel also reported that both countries would make a working committee to formulate an agenda for the jirga. The Pakistani delegation, led by Interior Minister Aftab Ahmed Khan Sherpao, will call on Afghan President Hamid Karzai today (Friday), the channel said.
AFP adds: Sherpao also told reporters in Kabul late on Thursday that Afghanistan and Pakistan had finalised lists of about 350 people each to attend a joint jirga to tackle the Taliban insurgency. The two sides are now working on the details of the agenda for the meeting, the first of its kind.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/04/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
circle jirgoff?
Posted by: Captain America ||
05/04/2007 17:41 Comments ||
Top||
Sudan and Chad signed a reconciliation deal in Saudi Arabia on Thursday, pledging to cooperate with the United Nations to stabilize Sudan's Darfur region and the neighboring areas of Chad. "The two sides will adhere to working with the African Union and the United Nations to end the conflict in Darfur and east Chad to realize stability and peace for all," said a Saudi official, reading from the agreement.
The accord, signed by Sudanese President Omar Hassan al-Bashir and his Chadian counterpart, Idriss Deby, stipulated "respect for each other's territorial integrity, not to interfere in each others affairs or shelter opposition forces of each party ... and eject them immediately", he said.
Chad has repeatedly accused Sudan of backing rebels in Chad and of supporting attacks in Chad by Janjaweed militia based in Darfur. The Sudanese government calls the Janjaweed outlaws and says it has no ties to them. Officials from the African Union, whose peacekeepers have failed to ease violence in Darfur, say the conflict cannot be resolved unless hostilities cease on the Sudan-Chad border. Chad and Sudan have signed at least two previous peace deals in the last 18 months, brokered by northern neighbor Libya.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/04/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
Intelligence officials are yet to make any breakthrough in finding out those responsible for the near-simultaneous bomb blasts at three railway stations in Dhaka, Chittagong and Sylhet on May 1. Law enforcers in Chittagong are looking for a woman beggar, suspected to be involved in the Chittagong Railway Station bombing, and two Hizbut Tahrir members arrested on Wednesday in Dhaka were placed on a seven-day remand.
Meanwhile, law enforcers are on high alert in Bogra following information that an Islamist militant attack may be on the cards. The investigators of the railway station blasts could not make any headway to unearth whether any new militant organisation or Jama'atul Mujahideen Bangladesh (JMB) and their like-minded outfits were behind the explosions that left a rickshaw-puller wounded. "We are working on it seriously taking everything into our consideration and it is not possible to say anything before the investigation completes," Director General of Rapid Action Battalion (Rab) Hassan Mahmood Khandkar told The Daily Star yesterday.
Sources said the investigators are also trying to find out if any militant organisation in the country or outside has the record to circulate its identity as the new outfit Zadid al Qaeda did through inscription on aluminium plates. Besides interrogating militant leaders already detained, the investigators are focusing the probe on organisations that are against the Ahmadiyyas and NGOs. They have not also ruled out the possibility of the incident being sabotage, the sources added.
Intelligence sources said they recently had information that a new militant organisation will be floated soon and it will announce its presence by distributing leaflets in Dhaka, Rajshahi, Chittagong and Bogra regions. But the intelligence officials did not think that the militant outfit will circulate its identity through bomb blasts.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/04/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
The police yesterday submitted charge sheet against former deputy minister and BNP lawmaker Ruhul Quddus Talukder Dulu and 93 others in a case filed for arson and looting. Officer-in-Charge of Naldanga Police Station Arman Hossain placed two charge sheets--one for illegal gathering, arson and looting while the other for using explosive substances--before the Cognisance Court, Natore.
He said primary investigation found that Dulu led the arson in the village Ramshakazipur and Amtali Bazar to avenge his nephew Gama's murder on February 7, 2004. He got it all started by putting a match to the complainant's house. Asaduzzaman, president of Natore unit Jatiya Chhatra Samaj, filed the case on February 25 this year. The investigation of the case, treated as a matter of public interest, was completed in two months.
According to the charge sheets, Dulu's men in his presence set fire to at lest 37 houses and shops at Ramshakazipur village and Amtali Bazar, and looted valuables following the murder of Sabbir Ahmed Gama. They also blasted bombs and fired gunshots to create panic.
This is the first charge sheet against the former BNP lawmaker under the Emergency Power Rules. The other accused include Dulu's two bothers, three cousins, three nephews and one of his in-laws, and local leaders of BNP's student and youth wings. Police filed another case against Dulu for patronising the vigilante groups of the militant outfit Jagrata Muslim Janata, Bangladesh (JMJB). JMJB action in Rajshahi, Naogaon and Natore started after the outlaws popularly known as Sarbahara killed four relatives and friends of Dulu.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/04/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
PARIS (AFP) - The convicted Venezuelan terrorist known as Carlos the Jackal is to stand trial for a wave of 1980s bomb attacks in France that left 11 dead, legal officials said Friday. The Marxist-Leninist radical, who once boasted that his plots had killed more than 1,500 people, is already serving a life sentence in France for the 1975 murder of two French policemen and an alleged police informer.
Top French anti-terror judge Jean-Louis Bruguiere has now ordered him to stand trial for "complicity in killings and destruction of property using explosive substances" in relation to four bombings in France in 1982 and 1983 that killed 11 and injured more than 100 people, officials said. The charge sheet against Carlos, whose real name is Ilich Ramirez Sanchez, says the attacks were part of a "private war" waged by Carlos against France to try to obtain the release of two members of his gang who were arrested as they prepared an attack on the Kuwaiti embassy in Paris.
The charges relate to attacks on a train travelling from Paris to the southwestern city of Toulouse that left five dead; on the Paris office of the Arabic-language Al Watan magazine that killed one; on the Saint-Charles train station in the Mediterranean city of Marseille that killed two; and on a high-speed TGV train that killed three. The Paris-Toulouse train line was frequently used at the time by Jacques Chirac, France's outgoing rightwing president who was then mayor of Paris. According to Hungarian and East German archives cited in the case, Chirac was the target in the attack on that line. But attempting to assassinate Chirac is not one of the charges being laid against Carlos in this case, and he was not on the train when the bomb went off. Three other people, Christa Margot Frohlich, Ali Al Issawi and Johannes Weinrich, have also been ordered to stand trial in the case. Weinrich is currently serving a prison term in Germany. It was not immediately clear where the two others were. The trial is unlikely to start before next year.
Carlos, 57, rose to infamy in 1975 when he took 11 ministers hostage from the powerful OPEC oil cartel. There's a pic of him at the link. He looks a lot older then 57.
His commando group burst into the conference room where the OPEC ministers and their staff were meeting in Vienna, killing a Libyan delegate, an Austrian policeman and an Iraqi bodyguard. Saying he was acting for the "Arm of the Arab Revolution," a previously unknown group, Carlos demanded the broadcast of a text condemning Israel, the Palestine Liberation Organization, the oil monarchies of the Gulf and then Egyptian president Anwar Sadat. The siege at OPEC headquarters went on until the following morning, when Carlos's team took a DC-9 plane supplied by Austrian authorities to fly towards Algiers with 40 hostages.
After two decades on the run, Carlos was finally captured in Khartoum in 1994 by French secret service agents acting with the help of the Sudanese government. He is serving his life sentence in Clairvaux prison in eastern France.
#2
Damn, comment was purged because it contained the P word.
Ok, so again, IIUC, he is a muslim convert, though while he was living in karthoum he enjoyed a sleazy lifestyle (one vid has him dancing, all obese and drunk, in a nightclub with a creature of uncertain morality).
My memory is faulty, because my mind is rotten by Pr0n (see, with this spelling, it will be ok, I bet), but IIRC, his capture was a rather shoddy affair, he was shangaied by french agents while asleep for a liposuction, and there was credible evidence at the time that he was exchanged for aerial recon imagery of rebel forces in south sudan.
Also, while in jail, in addition to marrying his far-left lawyer (whoi struck me as crazy and hateful in a tv debate quite a few years ago), he wrote a book called "revolutionary islam", in which he identifies the Master Religion as the force that will finally annihilate the western world order. For this kind of unholy convergence, again I refer to this great article.
Right-wing politicians from Switzerlands largest political party on Thursday launched a campaign for a referendum to ban the construction of minarets on mosques, claiming they symbolised an Islamist bid for power. The group, including more than half of the Swiss Peoples Partys (SVP) parliamentarians, said in a statement that a ban would help stop attempts by Islamist circles to impose a legal system based on the sharia in Switzerland.
Some of the politicians said they did not oppose mosques or Muslims right to worship. The Swiss constitution guarantees religious freedoms and the legality of the initiative was questioned by one former judge. Parliamentarian Oskar Freysinger branded minarets lighthouses of jihad while his colleague Ulrich Schlueer claimed that they were Islamist buildings with an imperialist connotation. Schlueer said minarets were not a religious symbol but a sign of a political-religious bid for power. Under the rules of Switzerlands peoples initiative, the campaigners need to collect at least 100,000 signatures by November 2008 backing their call in order to trigger a national referendum on the issue, subject to legal checks.
'Lighthouses of Jihad', eh? There's a phrase I want to borrow.
The campaigners want to amend another constitutional article that upholds peace between members of religious communities, by inserting a clause explicitly forbidding the construction of minarets. The move follows at least four localised challenges by rightwingers to plans to build small minarets or even the principle, although the challenges have often been rejected by local authorities or courts. There are just two mosques in Switzerland with minarets, in Zurich and Geneva, built in the 1960s and 1970s. Swiss Roman Catholic bishops dealing with relations with Muslims said in a statement that they opposed the campaign for a blanket ban on minarets. Supporters of the anti-minaret initiative include 36 of the SVPs 63 parliamentarians and two from a small hard right party. The SVPs assembly is due to decide next month whether or not to grant the partys support to the initiative. The campaign will also coincide with general elections in October.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/04/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Let 'em build the minarets.
Use them as aiming points.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
05/04/2007 0:12 Comments ||
Top||
#2
What the western civilizations must come to grips with is this same idea expressed by the Swiss that Islam is a political movement couched in the protection of a religion. It is not a religion as much as a cult. Once the West can agree that Islam is a subversive political operation like Nazism or Communism, then it can be properly dealt with.
#4
I demand that a church or synagogue or Buddhist or Hindu temple be built in Saudi Arabia for every mosque built outside of it, or none should be allowed at all.
#5
Right-wing politicians from Switzerlands largest political party on Thursday launched a campaign for a referendum to ban the construction of minarets on mosques, claiming they symbolised an Islamist bid for power
(CBS/AP) Iran's foreign minister walked out of a dinner of diplomats where he was seated directly across from Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, on the pretext that the female violinist entertaining the gathering was dressed too revealingly.
"I don't know which woman he was afraid of, the woman in the red dress or the secretary of state," State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said Friday, regarding the actions of Iran's Manouchehr Mottaki.
Rice herself was questioned by reporters about the lack of a direct conversation with Mottaki, even though it appeared she was "chasing" him.
"Uh, well, you could ask him why he didn't make an effort," she replied. Then she laughed. "Look, I'm not given to chasing anyone."
So the face to face between Rice and Mottaki never happened, reports CBS News correspondent Charlie D'Agata. Instead, U.S. and Iranian delegations met at a lower, "expert" level, which while significant, is not a first.
"Our officials did, as they did in Baghdad, have an opportunity to exchange views about the substance of this meeting," Rice said.
So much of this Iraq summit has been about the U.S. and Iran, but with good reason, reports D'Agata. America blames Iran for violence in Iraq, Iran blames America, and the Iraqis have been urging both countries to put their differences aside and put Iraq first.
The dinner episode Thursday night amid a major regional conference on Iraq perfectly revealed how hard it was to bring together the top diplomats of the two rival nations.
#1
The dinner episode Thursday night amid a major regional conference on Iraq perfectly revealed how hard it was to bring together the top diplomats of the two rival nations.
Nope. It revealed that the Iranians feel no compunctions about treating the US Secretary of State with contempt.
#6
Who knows what would have happened if Secretary Rice had accompanied the violinist upon the piano. The Secret Service might have needed to intervene.
Posted by: Eric Jablow ||
05/04/2007 23:22 Comments ||
Top||
President Bush and congressional leaders began negotiating a second war funding bill yesterday, with Democrats offering the first major concession: an agreement to drop their demand for a timeline to bring troops home from Iraq.
Democrats backed off after the House failed, on a vote of 222 to 203, to override the president's veto of a $124 billion measure that would have required U.S. forces to begin withdrawing as early as July. But party leaders made it clear that the next bill will have to include language that influences war policy. Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.) outlined a second measure that would step up Iraqi accountability, "transition" the U.S. military role and show "a reasonable way to end this war."
"We made our position clear. He made his position clear. Now it is time for us to try to work together," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) said after a White House meeting. "But make no mistake: Democrats are committed to ending this war."
Bush said he is "confident that we can reach agreement," and he assigned three top aides to negotiate. White House Chief of Staff Joshua B. Bolten, national security adviser Stephen J. Hadley and budget director Rob Portman will go to Capitol Hill today to sit down with leaders of both parties. But a new dynamic also is at work, with some Republicans now saying that funding further military operations in Iraq with no strings attached does not make practical or political sense. Rep. Bob Inglis (S.C.), a conservative who opposed the first funding bill, said, "The hallway talk is very different from the podium talk."
While deadlines for troop withdrawals had to be dropped from the spending bill, such language is likely to appear in a defense policy measure that is expected to reach the House floor in two weeks, just when a second war funding bill could be ready for a House vote. Democrats want the next spending measure to pass before Congress recesses on May 25 for Memorial Day weekend.
Beyond that, Democrats remain deeply divided over how far to give in to the White House. House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (Md.) indicated that the next bill will include benchmarks for Iraq -- such as passing a law to share oil revenue, quelling religious violence and disarming sectarian militias -- to keep its government on course. Failure to meet benchmarks could cost Baghdad billions of dollars in nonmilitary aid, and the administration would be required to report to Congress every 30 days on the military and political situation in Iraq.
Benchmarks have emerged as the most likely foundation for bipartisan consensus and were part of yesterday's White House meeting, participants said. "I believe the president is open to a discussion on benchmarks," said Senate Democratic Whip Richard J. Durbin (Ill.), who attended the session. He added that no terms were discussed. "We didn't go into any kind of detail," Durbin said.
Just four Republicans supported the first version of the spending bill: Sen. Gordon Smith (Ore.), Sen. Chuck Hagel (Neb.), Rep. Wayne T. Gilchrest (Md.) and Rep. Walter B. Jones (N.C.). But a growing number of GOP lawmakers want language that would hold the administration and the Iraqi government more accountable. "The general sense is that the benchmarks are critical," said Sen. Olympia J. Snowe (Maine), a moderate who opposed the original bill but supports some constraints. White House officials are also looking to benchmarks as an area of compromise, but they want them to be tied to rewards for achievement, not penalties for failure.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/04/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The insurgent Dem leadership is now denying that they would ever dare surrender make any concession to the evil fascist infidel occupier Crusader Jewthe RethugliKKKan Christer scum who stole two elections Bush.
Posted by: Mike ||
05/04/2007 6:37 Comments ||
Top||
#2
"But make no mistake: Democrats are committed to ending this war."
It's not that they're committed to ending the war; we all are. But responsible, sane adults want to end the war by winning it. Democrats, on the other hand, seem committed to ending the war by giving up, and re-enacting their finest moment: our ignominious abandonment of Vietnam.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
05/04/2007 8:16 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Right - to the Dems what a few million dead - as long as they get to relive their glory days?
Wasn't it Allen Combs (sp?) the other day who said 'look - we pulled out of Vietnam and now its a flourishing economy!'. So a million or so is a small price to pay in the eyes of the left.
#4
"Beyond that, Democrats remain deeply divided over how far to give in to the White House."
The Democrat Leaderships strategy from the start of this circus was to get their friends in the media to consistently portray the Iraq war not as Americas or the Coalitions challenge but entrench in the minds of the masses that this is Bushs War. So now that their show pony is well fed, look for the type of center ring antics proven to garner applause from their constituents. It should be interesting to see if the Ring Master will effectively use his veto whip or turn out to be a Rodeo clown.
#6
Please, please, puhleeze, all you nutroots who are disappointed in the dems, donate to and vote for green party candidates next time, then the dems (and the greens) will lose and America can win...
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
05/04/2007 11:02 Comments ||
Top||
#7
As is often said liberalism is a mental disorder.
#8
The Donks are their own worse enemies, and even the nutroots are beginning to see it. The MSM doesn't have the 100% total control of the flow of news, and are beginning to find themselves on the receiving end of people "voting with their wallet" to dismantle them. As long as the donks and the msm continue to play this loser game, they will end up losing power. It couldn't happen to a more deserving bunch of a$$holes.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
05/04/2007 17:02 Comments ||
Top||
We will not be showing Loose Change 2 on our aircraft. We dont show movies or documentaries that cause mass offence and there is a danger with this movie that viewers, although they have the choice over what to watch and when on our flights, may be offended. Virgin Atlantic is known for showing the latest movies and media trends on its multi award-winning inflight entertainment system and we believe travellers have the right to choose from as wide a choice as possible.
Posted by: Mike ||
05/04/2007 06:41 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Odd choice of in-flight movie. What's next? Airport? Followed by Airport '77? How about La Bamba?
How about Outbreak? Oh wait... that actually was shown on a flight I was on. Yick.
#2
Heck, show it. In fact, show it as often as you can. Show it until the flight attendants shred the DVD. I want people to get sick of this and run to the other side. Now the media is playing it smart by keeping this stuff toned down, even thought I know they really want to show it! X-P
WASHINGTON (AP) - Presidential contender Hillary Rodham Clinton on Thursday sought to force another showdown with President Bush - and her Democratic rivals - over the Iraq war. Sens. Clinton, D-N.Y., and Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., announced they would introduce legislation that would require the president to seek a reauthorization from Congress to extend the military effort in Iraq beyond October 11, 2007. ``If the president will not bring himself to accept reality, it is time for Congress to bring reality to him,'' Clinton said in a speech on the Senate floor.
The two senators have not decided how they will seek to force a vote on the measure - whether through an amendment, a stand-alone bill, or a spending bill.
Got it all thought out, do they?
Her seemingly tough talk also contained a veiled jab at rival Silky Pony John Edwards, the former North Carolina senator who has been outspoken in criticizing his own vote and that of other lawmakers in 2002 authorizing the war. Clinton noted on Thursday that in 2002 she had also voted for an amendment offered by Byrd that would have limited the war authorization to one year. The measure was defeated, and Edwards voted against it. ``I supported the Byrd amendment on Oct 10, 2002 which would have limited the original authorization to one year and I believe a full reconsideration of the terms and conditions of that authorization is overdue,'' she said.
White House spokeswoman Dana Perino derided the proposal and attributed it to posturing for Democratic primary voters. ``Here we go again. The Senate is trying another way to put a surrender date on the calendar. Welcome to politics '08-style,'' Perino said.
The Democrats are not the first to suggest Congress vote whether to reauthorize the war. Sen. John Warner, R-Va., the former chairman of the Armed Services Committee, floated the possibility months ago, but it has gone nowhere.
Clinton's position on the Iraq war has been a subject of constant debate among Democrats as they weigh the candidates seeking the presidential nomination. She voted to authorize the war, but has long criticized the Bush administration's handling of the conflict. While others have called for an immediate withdrawal, Clinton has favored redeploying troops out of Iraq within 90 days. She also supports a goal of removing all combat troops except those needed for residual missions by March 2008.
Conveniently set up to let her do what she wants should she win in November 08. Just 'residual missions', that's all.
Edwards urged Congress to pass again a bill Bush just vetoed that would have begun troop withdrawals in October. ``Congress should stand its ground and not back down to him. They should send him the same bill he just vetoed, one that supports our troops, ends the war, and brings them home,'' he said.
How does it support the troops?
Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., said of the Byrd-Clinton plan: ``While I applaud this effort, sadly, it will not change the president's course in Iraq.''
Won't help your poll standings for President, either.
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/04/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
See also on FREEREPUBLIC.com. OTOH, THE HILL > interview wid CINDY SHEEHAN > MOTHER CINDY says HILLARY is "BAD" FOR AMERICA. There goes the reunion.
#2
This may well be unconstitutional, since the Separation of Powers inherent in the Constitution does NOT require congressional permission to wage war. Also, the War Powers Act that the Democrats like to cite has NOT been ruled on by the US Supreme Court which leaves its actual legality open to question.
I expect President Bush to veto anything this stupid like he did the other bill, but it may be necessary to fight this in the courts to discourage this sort of stupidity in the future.
#4
Perhaps now would be an opportune time to revisit what had been US Policy since 1998.
It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime.
The War Powers Act is indeed of at best dubious legality. So far it's not been flat out challenged, but it is very likely that were it to go in front of SCOTUS, it would die a quick and final death. As far as changing the original UMF resolution to add in a clause that convienently kills the UMF upon approval, that won't go anywhere either. It's veto-able, and nobody's going to override it.
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
05/04/2007 12:27 Comments ||
Top||
#9
This is the Democrat's partial birth abortion of the Iraqi democracy. Doctor Hillary is the abortionist.
Congress has the power to start or end a war, and it should be that way. The Founding Fathers had experience with executives who could start wars on their own.
The fact that the current Congress is in the hands of those who want short-term political advantage, regardless of what it does to the country, and out-and-out disloyal traitors, doesn't really change that.
Congress (effectively) declared war on Afghanistan and Iraq. They did not do so on Serbia or Haiti.
#12
Jackal, re-read the Constitution please. The President is Commander in Chief, not Congress. The two powers Congress has in regards to wars are : 1) Power of the purse - approve or deny funding; and 2) Power to formally declare war. Congress can declare war all day long and if the President refuses to commit troops, that is the end of it. Look at the law that Congress and Clinton passed in the 1990s about removing Saddam from power : Clinton signed it and then did NOTHING, even though the law made it a formal policy of the US government to remove Saddam by any means.
In war, the Congress can propose but the President can choose to not dispose.
#13
Will someone please put THAT WOMAN in a mental institution where she belongs, and throw away the key? I absolutely refuse to use her name, in any form, ever again. She makes her husband look like a saint.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
05/04/2007 18:26 Comments ||
Top||
#14
1) Power of the purse - approve or deny funding; and 2) Power to formally declare war.
#15
Oh No,No,No, She "Wants to build on Bill's Legacy" Didnchya know?
(First thing out of my mouth "WHAT LEGACY?'0
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
05/04/2007 19:23 Comments ||
Top||
#16
Technically speaking, this is what they did after the Senate refused to ratify the Versailles Treaty at the conclusion of WWI. Congress just repealed the declaration of war. Still doesn't alter that a state of war can still exist without one. The 19th century is validation of that with military operations against insurgents natives throughout the western territories being conducted without a declaration of any sort. When the Donks were in the 'punish the Army' mode after the Civil War, it took another incursion by the Apache out of Mexico to 'encourage' the Donk Texas delegation to put their constituents [and their need for reelection] ahead of party power politics to get the Army funded for a year.
#18
SW:
It's more of an AND function. While Congress can't force the President to actually attack somewhere, he is not allowed more than defensive measures without a DoW.
Remember that even after Pearl Harbor, FDR, certainly not one to believe in a weak Presidency, went to Congress for a DoW on Japan.
So I like the Constitution giving Congress the authority to enable or disable the President's use of the military. I also agree that it's a purely OFF/ON switch and it has no authority on how he conducts the war.
#19
FOX NEWS Pert > USA may see DOW as high as 18,000 by = circa Year 2010. Should be higher than that by my calcs/formulas, but what the hey - close enuff for Gubmint work, close enuff for me to celebrate wid for SUBWAY = QUIZNOS Hoagies.
#20
As a reminder, SPACEWAR etal. > IRAN will have a LR ICBM miiiiiiisssslllleee, very likely capable of carrying a nuclear payload, and also likely capable of striking the US of A, + Europe, by or circa Year 2010. *Also, NEWSMAX > DE BORCHGRAVE article > AL QAEDA/Terror "sleeper cells" inside USA + around the Weld, AWAIT OPPORTUNITY = ORDERS TO STRIKE.
#21
I sent what I thought was an interesting de Borchgrave article to James Taranto of The Best of the Web some years ago, and he wrote back explaining exactly why he didn't think much of the gentleman's opinions. I don't remember the details, JosephM, but it was quietly scathing.
Border security forces apprehended 30 illegal immigrants including three Bengali nationals under the Foreign Act in separate incidents here at the Pakistan-Iran border on Thursday. Khera Rifle personnel arrested three illegal Bengali immigrants named Muhammad Zafar, Abdul Manan and Muhammad Hussain at the Pakistan-Iran border.
In a second incident, border security forces arrested 18 Afghan nationals from buses bound for Taftan at Zach check post and handed them to the Taftan administration for investigation. Meanwhile, Iranian security forces captured nine Pakistanis and handed them over to the Taftan administration at Rahdari Gate. Iranian security claimed that these illegal immigrants wanted to enter Europe via Iran to seek employment there.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/04/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
WORLDTRIBUNE >GEOSTRAT DIRECT > US COMMANDOS ENGAGE IN FIGHT AGZ IRANIANS TRYING TO SNEAK ACROSS BORDER INTO IRAQ.
The government has prepared a strong action plan to close the Jalozai and Kacha Garhi camps for Afghan refugee in the NWFP and a high-level meeting will discuss the situation tomorrow (Saturday), a senior official of the Commissionerate for Afghan Refugees (CAR) told Daily Times on Thursday. Under the plan, all services within the two camps will be closed in coordination with UNHCR, all refugees who do not register with the government will be arrested and deported to Afghanistan, and their trucks, buses and machinery will be impounded, the official said. Police will set up pickets to restrict the movement of refugees from the Kacha Garhi camp towards urban areas, said the official, adding that all businesses established by refugees outside the camps would be closed in the second phase.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/04/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Add in mass sterilizations and it sounds pretty good...
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
05/04/2007 10:56 Comments ||
Top||
The Interior Ministry has requested the Supreme Court (SC) to stop Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry from going to Lahore by road because of possible suicide attacks on his rally, Geo television reported late on Thursday night.
In a letter to the SC registrar, the ministry said that according to intelligence reports several suicide bombers and vehicles packed with explosives had been sent to various areas in the Punjab to target VIPs and it feared that terrorists may target the CJPs rally on the GT Road, the channel reported. Later speaking in Geo programme Aaj Kamran Khan Key Saath, Interior Ministry spokesman Brig Javed Cheema said the government had received reports of possible terrorism and the CJP should travel to Lahore by plane to avoid an attack. He confirmed that the Interior Ministry had written to the SC registrar about its apprehensions and had requested him to bring the matter in the acting CJs notice.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/04/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
An investigative article by journalist Mahdi Mustafa, published March 31, 2007 in the Egyptian government weekly Al-Ahram Al-Arabi, featured photographs of documents indicating that Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki has ties with Muqtada Al-Sadr and with the Iranian Revolutionary Guards. The following are the main points of the article:
The first document, labeled "confidential, personal, and urgent," is a January 2007 letter from Al-Maliki's office to the Iranian Embassy in Baghdad, with copies to the presidency of the [Shi'ite party] Supreme Council of the Islamic Revolution in Iraq and to the Al-Shahid Al-Sadr organization." [2] In it, Al-Maliki requests that the commanders of the Mahdi Army, who have ties with the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, be pulled off the Iraqi frontlines, in order to protect them from being arrested or killed. The following is a translation of the document:
"Confidential, Personal and Urgent
"Based on a phone conversation with Mr. Muqtada Al-Sadr and [after] consulting with [Iraq's National Security Advisor] Dr. Muwafaq Al-Rabi'i, in order to preserve our great achievements and in light of what the present circumstances demand, we ask to temporarily conceal the commanders of the Mahdi Army, who are connected to the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, [and to remove them] from the front line [of battle] in order to protect them from being arrested or killed by the American forces. [The names of the commanders] are listed below. It would be best to send them to Iran for the time being, until the crisis passes.
"In addition, [we ask] to send the commanders from the second line [of battle] to the southern regions, since we know that intensive efforts are underway to persuade the Americans to leave the situation [there] as it is. All administrative and security arrangements for the transportation of these commanders have [already] been made.
"We ask you to implement [these orders] and report to us.
"[Signed,] Nouri Al-Maliki, Prime Minster [of Iraq]
"[List of commanders]
"Cc:
"The Iranian Embassy [in] Baghdad,
"The presidency of the Supreme Council of the Islamic Revolution in Iraq,
"The office of Al-Shahid Al-Sadr."
The two other documents presented in the article reveal that Al-Maliki ordered that Iranians who entered Iraq illegally be released from prison. The first of these documents is a letter from Al-Maliki to the presidency of the Iraqi Supreme Judicial Council, with copies to several Iraqi ministries, including the foreign ministry, which was asked to inform the Iranian embassy of the letter's content. In this document, Al-Maliki presents a list of Iranians accused of entering the country illegally, and orders to "release them [from prison] and suspend all judicial [proceedings against them]... except for those who have already been sentenced..."
In the second document, Supreme Judicial Council President Madhat Al-Mahmoud confirms that 442 of the Iranians on the list have been released in accordance with Al-Maliki's order.
#1
We are screwed.You cant trust anyone in Iraq whether Sunni or Shia!!!!!
Posted by: Paul ||
05/04/2007 13:06 Comments ||
Top||
#2
What will it take to get al-Maliki out? This SOB is getting our troops killed. If Iraq refuses to oust him for for treason, he needs to have an "accident".
#3
the whole country needs too have an accident . being a treasonous bastard has been driven into their brains so long now under saddam that they know no other way of life
#4
What else can one expect? Nearly the entire Iraqi Shia leadership spent their exile in Iran. Those who spent their exile in the west, upon returning, were murdered, driven out, or marginalized. This was a foreseeable consequence of open borders with Iran and the hands off policy with respect to Iranian based Iraqi returnees.
Posted by: ed ||
05/04/2007 13:26 Comments ||
Top||
#5
If true, he needs to be arrested and publicly shot in front of the parliament building.
#6
Please keep in mind that there is no real press freedom in Egypt, and no tradition of independent journalism. This could be a for-real, it could also be disinformation published by the Egyptian government for the purpose of undermining those pesky Americans and their foolish notion of consensual government, it could be something published by the Egyptians as a favor to the Iranians ("The enemy of my enemy . . . ."), it could be just another instance of Middle Eastern paranoia run amok (think Capitol Hill Blue or TruthOut.org, only in Arabic).
May I humbly suggest a certain amount of skepticism (48hr rule/grain of salt/independent confirmation from somewhere in the civilized world) is warranted.
Posted by: Mike ||
05/04/2007 14:30 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Not as a favor to the Iranians, but to stick it to the Iranians. But there is no doubt where much of the current Iraqi leadership spent their exile, as leaders of Iranian sponsored guerrilla groups.
Posted by: ed ||
05/04/2007 14:39 Comments ||
Top||
#8
No kidding, Mike. Folks, Egyptian "media", on a topic like the icky Persian Shi'a American puppets Iraq govt., is about as reliable as our press has become on, say, accurately reporting a State of the Union speech. That is, fuhgettaboutit.
Plenty of unsavoriness to Maliki and the whole situation, but I'd guess there's a better than even chance this particular item is fabricated.
#9
http://www.memri.org/bin/opener_latest.cgi?ID=SD157307
REVISED VERSION - PLEASE DISREGARD THE PREVIOUS SPECIAL DISPATCH #1573
Documents Exposed by Egyptian Government Weekly Allege Ties Between Iraqi PM and Iranian Revolutionary Guards
An investigative article by journalist Mahdi Mustafa, published March 31, 2007 in the Egyptian government weekly Al-Ahram Al-Arabi, featured photographs of documents indicating that Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki has ties with Muqtada Al-Sadr and with the Iranian Revolutionary Guards. [1]
The following are the main points of the article:
Al-Maliki Calls to Withdraw Iranian Revolutionary Guards Commanders from the Iraqi Front in Order to Protect Them
The first document, labeled "secret, personal, and urgent," is a January 2007 letter from Al-Maliki's office to the Iranian Embassy in Baghdad, with copies to the presidency of the [Shi'ite party] Supreme Council of the Islamic Revolution in Iraq and to the Al-Shahid Al-Sadr organization." [2] In it, Al-Maliki requests that the commanders of the Mahdi Army, who have ties with the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, be pulled off the Iraqi frontlines, in order to protect them from being arrested or killed. The following is a translation of the document:
"Secret, Personal and Urgent
"Based on a phone conversation with Sayyid Muqtada Al-Sadr and [after] consulting with [Iraq's National Security Advisor] Dr. Muwafaq Al-Rubai'i, in order to preserve our great achievements and in light of what the present circumstances demand, we ask to temporarily conceal the commanders of the Mahdi Army, who are connected to the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, [and to remove them] from the front line [of battle] in order to protect them from being arrested or killed by the American forces. [The names of the commanders] are listed below. It would be best to send them to Iran for the time being, until the crisis passes.
"In addition, [we ask] to send the commanders from the second line [of battle] to the southern regions, since we know that intensive efforts are underway to persuade the Americans to leave the situation [there] as it is. All administrative and security arrangements for the transportation of these commanders have [already] been made.
"We ask you to implement [these orders] and report to us.
"[Signed,] Nouri Al-Maliki, Prime Minster [of Iraq]
"[List of commanders]
"Cc:
"The Iranian Embassy [in] Baghdad,
"The presidency of the Supreme Council of the Islamic Revolution in Iraq,
"The office of Al-Shahid Al-Sadr."
Al-Maliki Orders Release of Iranians Who Entered Iraq Illegally
The two other documents presented in the article reveal that Al-Maliki ordered that Iranians who entered Iraq illegally be released from prison. The first of these documents is a letter from Al-Maliki to the presidency of the Iraqi Supreme Judicial Council, with copies to several Iraqi ministries, including the foreign ministry, which was asked to inform the Iranian embassy of the letter's content.
In this document, Al-Maliki presents a list of Iranians accused of entering the country illegally, and orders to "release them [from prison] and suspend all judicial [proceedings against them]... except for those who have already been sentenced..."
In the second document, Supreme Judicial Council President Madhat Al-Mahmoud confirms that 442 of the Iranians on the list have been released in accordance with Al-Maliki's order.
#11
Given the Arab penchant for intrigue at the drop of a hat, this could have been a sneaky way to get the Iranians to leave the country while the border was still open. It sounds like the border has tightened up considerably since the ROE change -- remember how some politician's son tried to sneak back from Iran not long ago and was stopped at the border? His father was furious and took it as a personal insult, as I recall.
#12
The whole thing smells like BS to me. Why write this stuff down? And why this level of detail? Surely a "Move so and so here", and not some unnecessarily detailed explanation as to why, would suffice.
And why does Sadr have an Al-Shahid in front of his name? He's not a martyr yet, nor does he ever plan to be.
#13
And furthermore, unless this reporter is dead, I don't believe he reported this against Egypt's will. Even if he were, I'd have to wonder . . . . This just indicates that much more collusion between Egypt and Iran.
#14
OK, so this was published in Egypt March 31st.
And I thought the Pony Express was slow!
Posted by: Bobby ||
05/04/2007 16:19 Comments ||
Top||
#15
May I humbly suggest a certain amount of skepticism
It really matters not. Al-Maliki has previously been party to a revolving door policy regarding Iranian operatives in Iraq. His actions have already cost our soldiers their lives and that represents sufficient reason by itself to nail this turd.
#19
What will it take to get al-Maliki out? This SOB is getting our troops killed. If Iraq refuses to oust him for for treason, he needs to have an "accident".
Oh goody. we get to reenact another part of the Viet Nam War...
#20
Pappy, are you satisfied with having more of our troops die just because some self-serving bastard wants to play Iranian footsie warlord with Sadr and his militias? After spending the better part of one trillion dollars on liberating these ingrates, we'd better start protecting our investment. Letting al-Maliki continue to betray us and allowing him to up our troop casualties doesn't fall into that category.
#21
All I can say is... I can neither confirm nor deny that some folks have been floating that for a while, but its serious as a heart attack.
Maliki and his Shiite buddies are why we are losing our attempts to professionalize and de-sectarianize the Iraqe police and Military - we are getting backstabbed by the Al-Maliki.
This may be CNN sourced, but its no BS from what I hear.
BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Iraq's prime minister has created an entity within his government that U.S. and Iraqi military officials say is being used as a smokescreen to hide an extreme Shiite agenda that is worsening the country's sectarian divide.
The "Office of the Commander in Chief" has the power to overrule other government ministries, according to U.S. military and intelligence sources.
Those sources say the 24-member office is abusing its power, increasingly overriding decisions made by the Iraqi Ministries of Defense and Interior and potentially undermining the entire U.S. effort in Iraq.
The Office, as it is known in Baghdad, was set up about four months ago with the knowledge of American forces in Iraq. Its goal is ostensibly to advise Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki -- the nation's new commander in chief -- on military matters.
According to a U.S. intelligence source, the Office is "ensuring the emplacement of (Shiite) commanders it favors and can control, regardless of what the ministries want."
Ali Dabbagh, spokesman for the Iraqi government, would not respond directly to questions about what authority the Office exercises within the Iraqi government. He denied allegations that the prime minister's advisers were trying to push a Shiite agenda.
However, a senior Iraqi army officer disagreed. The officer, who is seeking help from the senior U.S. command, said: "The Office is not supposed to be taking charge like this. It's overstepping its role as an advisory office. It's not a healthy thing to have. It's people with no power who want to have power."
A senior U.S. military official cited several cases in Baghdad in which (Sunni) Iraqi commanders considered capable by the United States were detained or forced out of their positions after cracking down on Shiite militias.
Among the cases, an Iraqi colonel in Baghdad, who had made strides in controlling the Shiite Mehdi militia, was removed from his job, the U.S. military official said.
The official also cited the case of an Iraqi National Police commander who was detained and then fired after ordering his men to crack down on Shiite militiamen. The same source said the Office is working to reinstate Iraqi officers the United States had successfully removed because the officers were frequently casting a blind eye to violence carried out by Shiite militiamen.
Every senior U.S. and Iraqi military official who spoke to CNN in Baghdad about the advisers asked not to be named due to the sensitive nature of the story and potential political or personal backlash.
#22
Pappy, are you satisfied with having more of our troops die just because some self-serving bastard wants to play Iranian footsie warlord with Sadr and his militias?
Listen, you self-proclaimed genius - did Maliki takes pills and turn into 'Mr. Dirtbag' over the past few months? Given the stories in the past about him, all this is some new revelation?
And I question the exposition by the Egyptian government. I've worked with them - and I don't trust them. They don't exactly go out of their way to be helpful to the US. They have their own priorities, especially if it a) advances the Arabs, b)involves taking Shiites down a peg and b) making Israel's existence more tenuous.
Maybe Maliki does need to be removed. But it better be done by Iraqis, on their own initiative.
A key international conference on Iraq security yesterday overwhelmingly adopted a five-year plan aimed at rescuing the war-ravaged country from chaos and bankruptcy. But the wide-ranging commitment to the so-called International Compact at the Egyptian resort was overshadowed by rare meetings between US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Syria and Iran foreign ministers.
Rice said she raised the issue of foreign fighters entering Iraq from Syria in talks with Syrias foreign minister yesterday, the first high-level meeting in years between the two countries. Rice described her half hour of talks with Syrias Walid Muallem as professional and businesslike. Before that Rice had a brief exchange with Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki over lunch, Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Abul Gheit said. There was an exchange of some words, yes. They are civilized people after all, said Abul Gheit.
There was an opportunity to talk about the problem of foreign fighters a major source of the suicide bombings. I thought it was a good opportunity to talk to the foreign minister about it, Rice told reporters after the meeting with Muallem. I didnt lecture him and he didnt lecture me, Rice said.
The top US diplomat said she was not seeking a similar meeting with Irans foreign minister. Despite yesterdays brief encounter being empty of political substance, it was believed to reflect a new willingness on the part of Washington and Tehran to engage in some form of dialogue.
Meanwhile. Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud Al-Faisal said the Kingdom has been watching the deteriorating situation in Iraq with deep concern. He said: Strengthening the pillars of Iraqs security and stability requires uprooting violence and terrorism besides the revival of the states institutions.
Prince Saud affirmed the Kingdoms commitment to provide $1 billion to aid Iraqs reconstruction. The Saudi Development Fund has been making contacts with the Iraqi officials in this respect. The Kingdom is willing to ease the repayment of debts by Iraq in view of the difficult time it is passing through currently, the prince said. Saudi Arabia will tackle the issue of debts in line with the principles agreed on at Paris International Club, the prince said.
The Saudi private sector has shown readiness to participate in the reconstruction of Iraq in concert with other countries as and when the suitable circumstances arise, the prince added. The prince underlined the importance of extricating Iraq from its turmoil so that it enables to preserve its unity, independence and sovereignty. Saudi Arabia has been maintaining its stand of keeping equal distance from all Iraqis with no discrimination or differentiation among them, irrespective of their religious and ethnic differences, and it has been adhering to the principle of nonintervention in its domestic affairs. We want the same policy from all others particularly its neighboring countries, he said. The prince assured that Saudi Arabia would continue to extend humanitarian assistance to Iraq, Saudi Press Agency reported.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/04/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The Saudis are like the large US corporations who hedge their bets by contributing to candidates from both major parties.
Iran will not bow to international pressure to halt its nuclear program, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said yesterday, after world powers told Tehran to halt uranium enrichment or face a third round of UN sanctions. If they (the West) think by using some organizations (UN) they can prevent Iran from obtaining (nuclear) technology ... they are mistaken, Ahmadinejad told a rally in the southeastern Kerman province, state television reported.
Senior officials from the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China warned Iran on Wednesday of fresh UN sanctions if it refused to halt uranium enrichment work which the West suspects could be used to build nuclear weapons.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/04/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
IRANIAN.com/ws [Wire Service] > MOUD: USA NEEDS IRAN'S HELP TO STOP IRAQ INSURGENCY. Methinks Moud will SSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHH stop helping the insurgency in return for "favors"???
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.
Pakistani and Afghan officials agreed at a meeting in Kabul on Thursday to form a jirga (tribal council) of 300 to 350 people from each side to improve bilateral relations, Geo television reported. 
Intelligence officials are yet to make any breakthrough in finding out those responsible for the near-simultaneous bomb blasts at three railway stations in Dhaka, Chittagong and Sylhet on May 1. Law enforcers in Chittagong are looking for a woman beggar, suspected to be involved in the Chittagong Railway Station bombing, and two Hizbut Tahrir members arrested on Wednesday in Dhaka were placed on a seven-day remand.
The police yesterday submitted charge sheet against former deputy minister and BNP lawmaker Ruhul Quddus Talukder Dulu and 93 others in a case filed for arson and looting. Officer-in-Charge of Naldanga Police Station Arman Hossain placed two charge sheets--one for illegal gathering, arson and looting while the other for using explosive substances--before the Cognisance Court, Natore. 
President Bush and congressional leaders began negotiating a second war funding bill yesterday, with Democrats offering the first major concession: an agreement to drop their demand for a timeline to bring troops home from Iraq.
WASHINGTON (AP) - Presidential contender Hillary Rodham Clinton on Thursday sought to force another showdown with President Bush - and her Democratic rivals - over the Iraq war. Sens. Clinton, D-N.Y., and Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., announced they would introduce legislation that would require the president to seek a reauthorization from Congress to extend the military effort in Iraq beyond October 11, 2007. ``If the president will not bring himself to accept reality, it is time for Congress to bring reality to him,'' Clinton said in a speech on the Senate floor.
Iran will not bow to international pressure to halt its nuclear program, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said yesterday, after world powers told Tehran to halt uranium enrichment or face a third round of UN sanctions. If they (the West) think by using some organizations (UN) they can prevent Iran from obtaining (nuclear) technology ... they are mistaken, Ahmadinejad told a rally in the southeastern Kerman province, state television reported.
