Source: Islam News, Translated By Jihad Unspun
In Khost, a new Islamic organization has been formed with the name of âSari ul Harkat Lashkarâ, against the American and coalition forces. The organizationâs aim is to [wage jihad] against the enemy. A pamphlet has also been published by the organization which says that the organizationâs Mujahideen have started their operations against Americans in every Afghan corner. The group has also accepted responsibility for the operations in Spin Boldak and Paktia. The brochure further calls the government under Hamid Karzai as a nation seller while the Americans are occupiers and offenders and it is against these both two that Jihad is an obligation on Afghan nation. More unemployed mullahs trying to go into business for themselves...
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
04/12/2003 11:15 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
British Muslims have called on Prime Minister Tony Blair to distance himself from US plans to set up a 'neo-Conservative-Zionist' led interim administration in Iraq. "The imminent announcement stating that pro-Israeli retired General Jay Garner is to head an interim Iraqi administration, coupled with crass threats against Syria and Iran, only serve to confirm the worst fears which assert the real objective of the war against Iraq was to promote US-Israeli geo-political interests," secretary general of Muslim Council of BritainIqbal Sacranie warned. Oh, dear! 'Neo-Conservative-Zionist' plots! How insidious!
The umbrella organisation from Britain's 1.8 million Muslims said it was crucial for Blair to ensure that the United Nations, and it alone, is empowered to administer Iraq for the shortest possible interim period before full control is returned to the Iraqi people. "We do not want to see Britain being viewed in the Muslim world and beyond as an accomplice to this neo-Conservative-Zionist design for a post-Saddam Middle East," Sacranie said. "We'd rather see it ruled by crooks."
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
04/12/2003 01:53 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
They reason that the UN has done such a great job takning care of the Arabs in the past. Why just look at the 'temporary' refugee camps that they set up in Lebenon, Gaza, and west bank. These people need new leadership.
#3
You are right on Cyber Sarge! The Paleos will always remain Paleos until they get rid of the trash at the top and have real, honest, leadership that can compromise and work out real solutions. Getting rid of the UN leeches will also help, instead of being wards of the court, so to speak.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
04/12/2003 16:03 Comments ||
Top||
#4
I think someone posted on the Command Post that the UN head of East Timor was quoted as saying that the UN is not capapble of overseeing a country.
#6
In terms of the administration of Iraq: This is non-sense, and more pointedly anti-Israel and more hate of Israel-a representative free government in their midst.
Its quite a description isn't it, a neo conservative and Zionist plan to govern Iraq.
Personally, It wouldn't hurt if it meant self rule, representative government and a free market economy for Iraq.
Something, I take it Mr. Sacrinie loaths.
NATO-led forces have detained a Muslim commander wanted by the Yugoslav war crimes tribunal for alleged atrocities against Serbs during the 1992-1995 war in Bosnia. Naser Oric, regarded as a local hero by many Muslims for fighting the Serbs, was detained in Tuzla and would soon be transferred to the Netherlands, said prosecution spokeswoman Florence Hartmann. Oric, whose image can been seen on posters revering him in Eastern Bosnia, is wanted for violations of the laws or customs of war, she said. He was indicted secretly, enabling authorities to make a surprise arrest. The indictment, which was to be released later Friday, accuses Oric of looting and torture of Serbs in the Srebrenica region of Bosnia. Oric will join 47 other suspects currently in proceedings at the UN court, including former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic.
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
04/12/2003 12:03 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
Leaders of fiercely anti-war Russia, France and Germany Saturday reiterated their call for a central UN role in the reconstruction of Iraq as they wrapped up a two-day summit here. But the encounter resembled more an academic discussion than a strategy session and ended without a joint declaration from Russian President Vladimir Putin, French President Jacques Chirac and German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder. Putin said in a speech at the Saint Petersburg Law Faculty that the three leaders, who strongly opposed the US-led drive on Baghdad without UN approval, agreed that only the United Nations can oversee the rebuilding of Iraq.
Send over a few bags of groceries, okay? We'll let you know if we need anything else.
Posted by: George ||
04/12/2003 06:42 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I love the term "axis of weasels", but now they're starting to look more like "The Three Stooges". Actually, I shouldn't insult Moe Howard, Larry Fine and Curly Howard with that remark!
Posted by: George ||
04/12/2003 7:14 Comments ||
Top||
#2
You're right, George. The Stooges were brilliant artists who brought laughter and joy to millions. Chiraq, Schroder, and Putin are merely laughable.
Posted by: Mike ||
04/12/2003 9:58 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Also posted to the Command Post as I think it is important.
In this week's Economist (print edition - no link) the head of the UN's operation in East Timor - effectively the UN's governor - Jarat Chopra head of the UN Office of District Administration in East Timor - is quoted as saying "The unavoidable conclusion may be that the UN despite its ability to monopolise the image of legitimacy is ill-suited to administering territories in transition."
This comment from a UN functionary who is actually responsible for transitioning (a fairly small place) to democracy is damming evidence against those who say the UN should run a post-war Iraq.
#4
I suspect if you replace the phrase "may be" in the above quote with the word "is", that it would neatly summarize the Administration's position with regard to the UN.
"Image of legitimacy", indeed. And that's all it is: an image.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
04/12/2003 10:36 Comments ||
Top||
#5
The whole weasel "summit" PR stunt was idiotic. The timing was exquisitely poor. The self-serving motives were laughably transparent. And the weasels still think that insulting GWB and Americans is going to advance their interests!
Chiraq, Schroder, and Putin are acting more like a bunch of reprimanded schoolboys than world leaders. It's beneath the dignity of their positions. They're just digging themselves into deeper holes, and taking the U.N. down with them. Irrelevant, one and all!
Posted by: Tom ||
04/12/2003 11:39 Comments ||
Top||
#6
You know George, Ott did not include Russia in the Axis of Weasels. What that an oversight? Does Putin get a pass because Bush gazed into his eyes? We may find that Russia is the arche of Weasels. We know they've been supplying Saddam with embargoed weapons. So have the French but follow the money, who had more to lose from with Iraq's fall, the Elf or the Kremlin?
Posted by: Scott ||
04/12/2003 13:41 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Leaders of fiercely anti-war Russia, France and Germany Saturday reiterated their call for a central UN role in the reconstruction of Iraq
Nyuk nyuk nyuk nyuk nyuk nyuk..........
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
04/12/2003 14:02 Comments ||
Top||
#8
UPDATE:
SAINT PETERSBURG (AFP) The leaders of France, Germany and Russia wound up a two-day "peace camp" summit on Iraq stressing the primacy of law as embodied in the United Nations as the means of resolving global crises.
Presidents Vladimir Putin of Russia and Jacques Chirac of France and German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder demanded a central role for the world body in the reconstruction of Iraq but implicitly acknowledged their powerlessness by ending their meeting without a joint declaration.
Posted by: George ||
04/12/2003 14:28 Comments ||
Top||
#9
What a surprise. It boggles the mind at the hypocrisy oozing out of these guys. Have they no honor at all? Even with a pro-US Iraq they are desperate to preserve their market for weapons in the mid-east.
Although I could not understand why Putin, of all people, is willing to forgive Iraq's debt, while the others are not.
#10
U.S. congress wants to bar French, Russian and Germany from taking part in the Iraq reconstruction.
Mr Wolfowitz asks France, Russia and Germany to write off all Iraqi debts
The UN security council needs to pass a formal resolution to lift the sanctions still in force. France and Russia could veto the lifting indefinitely.
Can you spell TRADE-OFF?
Btw Schroeder did not say he's not willing to forgive Iraq's debt: "There is no sense in discussing a possibility of Iraq's debt write-off until that country gets a legitimate government", he said. "The right place where to raise debt redemption issues is the Paris Club of Donor Countries that has special procedures for it. To do this, however, Iraq must have a legitimate government, which is does not have at the moment."
I don't think Putin has a different idea about this.
#11
the release of gases from this "summit" surely violated some, if not all, terms of the Kyoto treaty on Global warming
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/12/2003 16:50 Comments ||
Top||
#12
help! i was watching fox news and someone was interviewing a former amb to nato. he seemed very smug and said that we needed france and germany to pay for recontruction in iraq. does this ring true?
#14
This is called playing to the home audience. Even Kofi knows better than to get sucked in to their game at this point. There is still a lot of diplomacy to go before Chirac can steal the Iraqi UN accounts to cover Saddam's debts.
Posted by: john ||
04/12/2003 18:56 Comments ||
Top||
#15
If France and Russia refuse to initial (or at least not veto) a reasonable resolution for reconstructing Iraq in the Security Council, the U.S. should simply buy Iraq's oil and other products itself. If the Security Council doesn't like it, it can try to slap sanctions on the United States -- which the U.S. would thereupon veto. Where then, Germany, France, and Russia?
Posted by: Michael E. McNeil ||
04/12/2003 19:49 Comments ||
Top||
#16
Had errands to do today, and just got back. It's an hour before midnight, time for quiet reflection. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem much quiet reflection being done by the Axis of Weasels and their mouthy leaders.
There's more than one way to handle the "sanctions", the easiest being to just ignore them. The same for any pronouncements from the "Wobbly three". NOBODY has to go back to the United Nations for anything. The United Nations membership made it irrelevant and immaterial. The United States military made it obsolete in three weeks. The world has changed. It's time for the old to be swept out with the rest of the garbage, and the place cleaned and tidied up a bit.
The United States and the rest of the Coalition of those willing to step forward and DO SOMETHING instead of mouthing inane nonsense will take the lead and make whatever decisions need to be made. The involvement of any others will be at their discretion, not any idiotic demands from screeching nonentities doing whatever possible they can think of to appear "important", while trying desperately to force every movement into what their tiny imagination consideres the desired role of those involved. Now the appeasers, the twisters, the illusion spinners have nothing but empty words. The deed is done, without them. They have no part in it, and no control over it. It's about time they figured it out.
George Bush owned a baseball team. So what? He also flew supersonic jet aircraft, worked in big business, and learned that things don't always go as expected. He's learned to wear hobnail boots and carry a big stick. He's not going to be pushed around. He's also not going to be browbeaten into doing something he doesn't feel is the right thing to do. Get over it.
Europe is a hollow shell, slowly dying. They have built a socialist system that has no chance of withstanding the future, and have no way to crawl out from under the destruction they face. A few - very, very few - of its nations have managed to pull out of the nosedive they've been in since th end of World War II. Their birthrate has dropped below replacement levels, the number of innovative new ideas has similarly dropped, and the amount of original thought coming out of its vaunted universities can be held in a thimble. Their future is in decline, just as is their present. Their only hope of staving it off is to hold on tightly to what little power they have, and bring the rest of the world down to their level. It's not going to work. In fact, it's already failed.
September eleventh was a wake-up call, and most Americans woke up. We see the terrible disasters our school systems have become, we've watched the attempted neutering of our men, and the brutilization of our women. Most people are doing something about it. We saw a problem in Afghanistan, and went out to correct it. We saw a murderous regime in Iraq that had strong financial, political, and physical ties to terror, and destroyed the power involved with those ties. Today, intelligent, hardworking men and women are looking ahead to the next task, the next problem that needs to be solved, so we can live in peace, and without fear.
France has become a boat-anchor. Germany is rapidly following the path into oblivion. Russia made a gigantic effort to pull itself out of the morass of communism, but is slowly slipping back on the path of totalitarianism and self-destruction. They, and the other nations of the world whose leadership have a "me first" attitude, one-party or no-party politics, feel they can each claim small chunks of the United States, each diminishing it a bit at a time, until it's torn down to their level. NEVER do they ever seem to grasp the concept of building UP to the level of the United States. The United Nations and other world bodies are their grappling hooks, their means to tie down the United States, and bring it low. Only the United Nations has been punctured like an over-inflated balloon and is dying.
The future of Iraq doesn't belong to the United Nations. The future of Iraq belongs to Iraq, and to the tough friends that took the time, effort, and fortune to rid Iraq of its terrorist leader. Those same tough friends, and they alone, are worthy of being there when Iraq pulls itself back together. Only those tough friends should have a say in how Iraq accomplishes this, and then only as stern, reasonable, and nurturing advisors.
The United Nations wants to be boss. The Coalition of the Willing wants to be friends. What Iraq needs right now are friends, not another tyrant at the helm. The United Nations is not worthy of even advising Iraq in its forward progress. Neither is the "Axis of Weasels".
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
04/13/2003 0:32 Comments ||
Top||
#17
Regarding Old Patriot's comment above, I basically agree. I'd suggest, however, that there is a point in the U.S. staying in the UN and on the Security Council -- so the it can deflect (with its veto) attempts in the Security Council to put apparent legitimacy on anti-U.S. sanctions or actions.
Posted by: Michael E. McNeil ||
04/13/2003 10:16 Comments ||
Top||
With few illusions about immediate advantages but hoping future generations will benefit, Hungarians on Saturday were expected to approve their country's membership in the European Union. The referendum is valid if at least 50 percent of the 8 million eligible voters participate, or if either side gets at least 2 million ballots. The result is binding. In the latest poll, 78 percent of likely voters said they would vote yes to membership. The Gallup poll, performed March 7 to 12, surveyed 989 Hungarian adults and had a margin of error of 3.2 percentage points. When Hungary became a democracy in 1990 - after more than 40 years of communism - many saw EU membership as a panacea that could help right historic wrongs and improve living standards. But the long wait has dampened the enthusiasm. The government campaigned intensely for membership and will have spent $23 million promoting the EU by the expected May 2004 accession date. But opposition groups complained that citizens were not told about the potential drawbacks to membership. Far be it for me as an American to tell the Hungarians how to vote, but do they recall Mr. Chiraq's recent statements about how they're supposed to behave?
Posted by: Steve White ||
04/12/2003 02:56 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Perhaps Mr. Chiraq's recent statements are the cause for dampened enthusiasm.
#2
citizens were not told about the potential drawbacks to membership.
That's the understatement of the month. Once they see how decisions are made in Brussels they will get a sick feeling in their stomachs, literally. Goodbye good old-fashioned agriculture, hello chemically infested food products.
#3
There is talk about forming a NAFTA, like free trade association between the US, England, and European nations (The "New Europe,") who would not be partners in the European Union. A free trade zone with the US might be attractive to those European nations leery about turning their national soveranty over to the beaurocrats of Brussles.
Posted by: C F B Lagoon ||
04/12/2003 11:43 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Yeah but as of now, that's very few of them. Most of New Europe wants to join. And the reason is: there will now be 2 times in history where people with the foresight and a little bit of money, can become super rich. The first was when Communism collapsed. The second will be when they join the EU. How's this for an investment: you could have bought land (which was mostly stolen by ex-Communists) or a factory in 1990 for $10,000 and ten years later it's worth $1,000,000.
The folks who have a lot to gain are pushing hard for EU membership, to the point of telling people extraordinary things (such as if you become an EU citizen, you can travel to the US without a visa). The ones not fooled are voting yes in hopes of being able to find work in the west.
Western Europe is getting crowded, they need to expand, so they have to move east. This will change Eastern Europe, whether for the better remains to be seen.
#5
RW, not sure what you mean by "western europe is geting crowded". Fertility in the current EU states is in freefall, with imminent economic dire consequences(TM). Politicians in the East are highly motivated for EU entry as the average EU ambassarod/hack's salary is about 10x greater than their current remuneration.
The EU would be vastly improved if its rotten core was excised.
#6
Heck, everybody should join the EU -- it will help dilute the weasels!
As for fertility in freefall: no problem -- they can just keep importing more Turks to keep their numbers up. [Heads up, Murat: possible job openings!]
Posted by: Tom ||
04/12/2003 14:41 Comments ||
Top||
#7
What I meant is more "things", from land to small businesses, in Eastern Europe will be owned by Western Europeans, simply because it's still possible to do so without a huge bank loan. As the standard of living improves further (although it is already high if not on par), more westerners will move east. Case in point: western Poland (try and figure out where the "border" is nowadays).
Somebody please tell these 60's flashbacks to go away.....
Jane Fonda told a Canadian audience that she fears the U.S. military campaign in Iraq will turn people all over the world against America. "What it's going to mean for (America's) stability as a nation, for terrorism, for the economy? I can't imagine," Fonda said Tuesday.
Then why bring it up? (At least she's honest...)
"I think the entire world is going to be united against us." No, just France, Germany and Russia if they don't get any prime rebuilding contracts.
That frightens her, she said, but she isn't sure what Americans can do about it. "I don't know if a country where the people are so ignorant of reality France?
and of history, no, I think plenty of people here remember you and what you did
if you can call that a free world," she said. Fonda, 65, has been the target of well deserved criticism for decades for her opposition to the Vietnam War and for posing overseas with members of the opposition's military. When she was in North Vietnam during the Vietnam War, Fonda said she saw a small performance of a play intended to teach villagers that there were "good Americans and bad Americans" even as U.S. bombs fell on their country. She said she hopes Iraqis and others who might suffer from American attacks will feel the same as Vietnamese people she met, who told her "someday the war will be over and we're going to have to be friends again."
We do? Who told them that?
Fonda made her comments in Vancouver as part of the Unique Lives and Experiences lecture series. She also discussed Canada, the war, her acting career, and her three marriages and divorces.
Sounds like it was all about her...
Posted by: Baba Yaga ||
04/12/2003 02:49 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Three words: Don't Come Back
Posted by: Tom ||
04/12/2003 15:11 Comments ||
Top||
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
04/12/2003 15:40 Comments ||
Top||
#4
I remember Hanoi Jane, all too well. Her latest spew proves that wisdom doesn't necessarily come with age. The hippy butterfly blowhard needs to just shut up and go away. Canada isn't far enough - she should immigrate to France.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
04/12/2003 16:24 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Hanoi Jane's 65? Great! Hopefully, we'll only have to put up with her treason for another 15 years or so.
Posted by: Ned ||
04/13/2003 4:27 Comments ||
Top||
Thousands of appeasement peace campaigners have marched through the streets of central London in protest at the continuing war in Iraq. The Stop the War coalition believes public opposition to the conflict is still strong - in spite of scenes of jubilation this week as American tanks entered Iraqi cities. Organisers were initially hoping that up to 250,000 protesters would march through the capital, but Scotland Yard estimated that 20,000 people took part in the rally at Hyde Park - the final meeting point for protesters. So, for every 25 people the left-leaning loons expected to march, only two actually did. And compared with the march in February, at which an estimated 1 million attended, that's a drop of 98%. Credit to the majority of the left for realising when to stop shouting and start listening.
Former Pakistani cricket captain Imran Khan - who joined the march - said the numbers were irrelevant. "It doesn't matter how many people turn out, it's about registering a protest that a principle has been violated, international law has been violated and everyone who cares must register a protest," he said. "...Even if I was the only one marching, I'd still be right, and you'd still be wrong!"
Hundreds of anti-war protesters also took to the streets of Glasgow, in a march organised by the Scottish Coalition for Appeasement Justice not War.
The London rally, which started at Victoria and Waterloo stations and followed two routes through the city converged on Parliament Square on Saturday afternoon, where a two minutes' silence was held "for the war dead". Marchers were asked to bring flowers, cards, wreaths or whatever they felt appropriate to lay outside 10 Downing Street as they walked past. From Parliament Square demonstrators then progressed through Trafalgar Square, Haymarket and Piccadilly to attend a rally in Hyde Park. Speakers included MPs Tam Dalyell and George Galloway, who face having the Labour whip withdrawn because of their anti-war stance. The march, called by Stop the War with the Muslim Association of Great Britain and CND, is the third mass London rally to be held. The group's spokesman Chris Nineham said he believed "a great deal more problems" lay ahead for the British and US forces as they tried to take over Iraq's administration. *There are approximately 570,000 muslims living in London alone. Where were all the rest this afternoon?!
"I don't really believe the fighting is over - I think the invasion is sliding into a colonial occupation," he said. "Every day for the last week, innocent Iraqis have been shot by US and UK troops. Unfortunately the people in the Pentagon have made it clear that they want to extend this war into a list of other countries that they want to take on - including Syria and Jordan and Iran. We are demonstrating because we don't want that to happen." "Our mission is to protect vulnerable human rights abusers wherever we can."
Protests against the war also took place in around 40 other countries on Saturday, including New Zealand, Japan, South Korea, Italy, Greece and France. In New York, Sara Flounders, co-director of the International Action Center said: "It's more urgent and more important than ever that there be a mobilisation. Only now the focus is, 'No' to colonial occupation," she said. In Germany, a demonstration was planned in Berlin although organisers said they were aware their movement may be losing steam now that the Iraqi regime has fallen and the guns gradually fall silent. "We are well aware that few people will be mobilised as a result of developments," said Jens-Peter Steffen, a spokesman for the "Axis for Peace" group. So... time to demobilise your discredited movement?
Posted by: Bulldog ||
04/12/2003 11:02 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"Unfortunately the people in the Pentagon have made it clear that they want to extend this war into a list of other countries that they want to take on - including Syria and Jordan and Iran."
Yes indeed, that is why British and US warships are evn now steaming AWAY from the area back to their normal stations.
"Only now the focus is, 'No' to colonial occupation" - so tell France off, not the coalition.
Posted by: John Anderson ||
04/12/2003 14:26 Comments ||
Top||
Paul McCartney, Avril Lavigne, David Bowie, Moby, and others have all contributed tracks to a benefit album that will be released on April 18. Next month in Italy, Bono and Luciano Pavarotti will be performing at a benefit concert for Iraqi refugees. All seven of them will be really pleased!
Over 8400 Internet users, encouraged by liberal activism site Moveon.org have contributed $641,000 to Oxfam America's humanitarian relief fund. I don't see anything on Moveon.orgs website! Amazing how this org does so MUCH with so LITTLE effort....and so FAST! If Moveon.org is promoting OXFAM, then we have to wonder if OXFAM is just another money laundering gig or if they actually contribute a buck or two to the hungry.
Posted by: becky ||
04/12/2003 06:39 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Ah, don't be too hard. Assisting the people of Iraq would be a good first step to returning to sanity for a lot of the real out-there antiwar types, and for the others a demonstration that their opposition wasn't completely blind.
Posted by: John Thacker ||
04/12/2003 13:09 Comments ||
Top||
#2
It's a lot more productive than tromping through the streets with signs and breaking windows, isn't it?
Posted by: Fred ||
04/12/2003 13:19 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Cheaper to cut a track than pony up cash. See Bozo and the 25 wells.
And doesn't the head of Oxfam make 7 figures? and what's Oxfam's cut, 25% like the UN oil-for-food program?
#5
Anonymous, right-o! Only I suspect that if we looked closely enough, we'd find that these groups just move money around from foundation to foundation, each skimming off 25-50%, and that the majority of the money never makes beyond a donation line on a tax return to yet another foundation who also claimes to help homeless, starving, burned, children from war torn countries, with cleft lips and ricketts.
#6
Seen a report(years ago)that said 60%of UNICEF's donations go to administrative cost.The CEO of UNCIEF at the time was earning something on the order of $180,000(remember this was years ago so adjust for inflation and cost of living).When questioned on this his response was"If I was in the private sector I would be making twice as much."Evereyone should bare this in mind when donating to large,beurocratic charities.
My Aunt donated Tens of thousands of dollars to her church.She was on her death bed,her son ask the Pastor to go to the Hospital to give her comfort.His response"I can't,I have to get the church ready for my son's wedding"he said this standing next to his new Cadillac.
Then this slimeball had the unmittagated gall to lay claim to my Aunt's home,saying it was what she would have wanted.
(These ""are not exact quotes,ben to many years)
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/12/2003 01:23 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Pretty much everything is "incomprehensible" about Chretien, Canada's worst PM in history. However I don't hold much hope for improvement in relations as long as the Liberal goofs are in power. And looks like that will be the case for a long while, with a fractured right.
For a good summary of what came out of our Liberal government's mouths recently, going back to the "Bush is a moron" aphorism, see the globeandmail.com
Another rant from a Pak "expert"...
A member of the Pakistani Parliament on Saturday said a safe and secure Iraq was an open challenge to the United Nations and the world community. Dr. Syed Javid Hussain, in an interview with IRNA, said that the UN and world community should ensure that the Iraqis pick their own dictator there was no outside interference in carving out a new political order in Iraq. He emphasized that the UN should do all it can to stop America from meddling in the internal affairs of Iraq in order to retrieve its lost credibility as the body responsible for preventing global conflicts and helping find peaceful solutions to issues of international concern. Too late for that, Mr Expert...
In that context, he cautioned that the US was out to install a government of its choice and to deny the Iraqi people the central role in the future political set-up of their own country. "In the new Iraqi interim government, the world body should have a central role for a limited period prior to holding of elections for a political administration," he maintained. "How long a 'limited period' would that be?"
"Sixty, seventy years..."
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
04/12/2003 01:07 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
so when these "Pak experts" shower us with their wisdom, do they do that under real names, their fake names, their nom de guerre's? what?
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/12/2003 16:59 Comments ||
Top||
Central Vice President MMA and Amir of Jammat-e-Islami have said that Pakistan has no alternative than resistance against the US aggression. Addressing Juma prayer, Qazi Hussein Ahmed said that if US is not checked in Iraq and Afghanistan, it will certainly commit aggression against Pakistan. Qazi's working hard on making that happen...
He said that Muslims prefer to die rather than surrender before the infidels and the entire Muslim Ummah is facing worst kind of crisis due to the ravings of loons like Qazi the pro-western leaders. Qazi Hussain Ahmed said that Islamic Ummah is being threatened by the United States. It reminded us to see what action it has taken in Iraq. It is tightening the noose around us by implicating Pakistan in North Korean missile technology affairs. He said that history is evident that whoever tried to subjugate the weaker nations, he faced the angers of Almighty Allah. Hey, Qazi! "Secular state"! Harharharharharhar! (He always gets palpitations when you say that...)
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
04/12/2003 12:51 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
He said that history is evident that whoever tried to subjugate the weaker nations, he faced the angers of Almighty Allah.
Which is as good an explanation for the collapse of the whole region, colonization by French, British, Italian, and other powers as any other, right?
Posted by: John Anderson ||
04/12/2003 14:34 Comments ||
Top||
#2
"prefer to die rather than surrender before the infidels...."
Hey, look on the bright side. At least he's not saying victory is even a possibility.
Posted by: Baba Yaga ||
04/12/2003 15:16 Comments ||
Top||
#3
I trust these guys are learning the lessons of Iraq...I'm sure India has been following the military lessons closely.
Posted by: john ||
04/12/2003 19:11 Comments ||
Top||
Former ISI Chief Lt. General (Retd) Hamid Gul has said that after fall of Iraq, Muslim Ummah should be united, adopt a common strategy in order to foil the tactics of aggressor nations. Talking to NNI here on Friday, he said, "fall of Baghdad, which is the tragic incident of this century and a conspiracy against Islam." He said United Nations including Russia, Germany, France, USA and Britain are involved in this conspiracy. "Yes, by Gawd! It's a deep-laid plot against Muslims everywhere! And their little dogs, too!"
The illegitimate war against Iraq was merely a propaganda war against Islam and Iraqi regime to topple Saddam Hussein and to control the oil resources of that country, he added. The ex-ISI Chief said attack on Baghdad proves that it was the clash of civilizations, as President Bush said after 11 September incident that "we will wage a crusade against Islam". Oh, he did not...
He said after fall of Iraq, the threats of aggressor countries to Syria, Iran and even Pakistan shows that they started a war against Islam. If I had my druthers, I'druther Pakistan was moved up on the list ahead of the other two. Those people are crazy...
The threat of using veto power by Russia, France and Germany against the US-Britain sponsored resolution was to protect the crusade and misled the Muslims that it was not a war against Islam, but only to topple the regime of Saddam Hussain which is a big conspiracy against Muslim Ummah. "Yes! The Russers and the Frenchies were in on it from the start!"
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
04/12/2003 12:25 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
" The threat of using veto power by Russia, France and Germany... was to protect the crusade and misled the Muslims..."
And thus France achieves exactly what it feared: association with the "great satan" America in the eyes of the "arab street."
[whine]
And after all their efforts to appease and mollify the islamists, too! (snif!)
[/whine]
BWAHAHAHAHAHA!
Posted by: Old Grouch ||
04/12/2003 14:34 Comments ||
Top||
#2
4.5
Is he trying to compete with the former Iraqi Information Minister or with Kimmie? Either way, he's going to have to do better than this.
Posted by: Tom ||
04/12/2003 14:35 Comments ||
Top||
Posted by: john ||
04/12/2003 19:17 Comments ||
Top||
#5
""The ex-ISI Chief said attack on Baghdad proves that it was the clash of civilizations""
Well, he got THAT right, anyway. It IS a clash of civilizations. On the one hand, there is the civilization of terrorism and enslavement as well as subjugation to religious leadership. On the other hand stands the civilization of personal freedom, self-sufficiency, and progressive ideas.
The French and the Russians are trying to have it both ways, and finding themselves slowly sinking into the widening gap between these two civilizations. Let them go in peace...
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
04/13/2003 0:47 Comments ||
Top||
#6
THIS GUL PUTZ WAS THE MAJOR GUY IN SETTING UP THE TALIBAN WHEN HE RAN ISI----HE CALLED THEM "OUR BOYS"--THIS LITTLE PISSLAMIC SAVAGE IS RESPONSIBLE IN A MAJOR WAY FOR THE WHOLE THING--WHY THE C.I.A. DOESN'T TAKE HIM OUT WITH A PUB DART IS BEYOND ME--HE WANTS JIHAD--GIVE IT TO HIM--THE BIG 86--A DIRTNAP UNDER THAT USELESS PAKISTANI SAND--SPECIAL OPS--PLEASE!!
Source: NNI
The Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf has expressed concern over the recent terrorist incidents in Balochistan and the blowing up of the gas pipeline near Sadiqabad. Akbar S. Babar Central Information Secretary of the PTI in a statement issued here Wednesday said that the killing of scores of innocent people in a recent landmine explosion and random shooting incident in Loralai along with the bombing of the gas pipeline appears to be part of a well planned attempt to disrupt the peace. "Yes, that's it! It couldn't possibly be the acts of groups of local bloodthirsty primitives..."
He said there have been consistent reports about terrorist camps being set up in Afghanistan to train and arm terrorists for indulging in terrorist activities in Pakistan. Whoa! The old stun meter pegged on that one!
These reports also allege that the Indian government is actively involved in the training of terrorists in collusion with elements of the Northern Alliance government of Afghanistan. Oh. Yeah. Of course. It must be the Heathen Hindoos...
Babar stated the since Afghanistan is effectively under the control of the US troops, therefore, the US government must also bear responsibility for the terrorist activities being exported to Pakistan from Afghanistan. It called on the government to raise this issue with the US government and the interim Afghan set up to immediately put an end to the terrorist bases in Afghanistan. He demanded that the government should take the nation into confidence and expose all those who are involved in these latest attempts by the enemies of Pakistan to destabilize our country. Yeah. Right. It's gotta be the Merkins.... Though actually, when I think about it... It would be amusing, wouldn't it?
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
04/12/2003 11:32 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
-He said there have been consistent reports about terrorist camps being set up in Afghanistan to train and arm terrorists for indulging in terrorist activities in Pakistan.--
One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.
IT ALL BEGAN, SHE SAYS, one day in 1984 when she was huddled in her neighborhood bomb shelter, during one of the periodic shellings of her hometown of Basra during the Iran-Iraq war. One of the other women there took a dislike to her, and that woman was a paid informer for the mukhabarat, Saddam Husseinâs secret police. âThe bitch told them I tore down Saddamâs portrait,â she says. âIt wasnât even true.â The only thing they regime really had on Hashmia was the conduct of her brother, Abdul Karim Jassim, who had deserted from the Iraqi army after Saddam invaded Iran, and died in front of a firing squad in 1982 at the age of 21. In Saddamâs Iraq, guilt by posthumous association was practically an article of jurisprudence. That and the snitchâs report was enough to get Hashmia a seven-year prison sentence. Blindfolded, she never even saw which prison she was taken to. The male warders made her wear pants, an offense to Shiitesâ strict female dress codes; without a belt they often fell down. The low point of every day was the daily torture session; the high point, gruel in a bowl, the prisonersâ only meal. Even that was denied her if âI made some mistake.â Hashmiaâs jailors scored her back with a hot poker, beat the souls of her feet with sticks, made her pull up her baggy pants and whipped her legs. The sexual humiliation may have been even worse than the pain, but that was serious. âThey slapped me so hard that my neck hurts from it even now.â The torturers wanted her to confess to plotting against the Baathist regime, but she knew that would mean a death sentence. After a few months, her tormentors gave up on extracting a confession from her, and she was transferred to Baghdadâs notorious Al Rashidiya prison. The torture stopped, but not the torment. âThere were 46 women in a room this size,â she says. Itâs no bigger than a normal hotel room. âWe slept in the toilet, we lay in our own waste, there were rats and bugs and bats.â Whenever the authorities needed a rent-a-crowd to chant âLong live Saddam,â the prisoners would be bused out of the prison to take part. On his birthday, they were forced to honor him with dancingânot something decent Shiite women do. She says she canât recall a single kindness from her jailors in all those years. âEven the janitors were filthy to us,â she said. âWe were just bugs to them.â
US troops have discovered what they described as Saddam Hussein's "love shack" in Baghdad. Reports said the secret hideaway resembled "a playboy's fantasy straight from the 1960s". Troops said it reminded them of the Austin Powers spy spoofs. They yelled Powers' catchphrases "yeah, baaabeee" and "shagadelic" as they went from room to room. I love understated good taste...
Associated Press reporters with US forces said the split-level, one bedroom house in central Baghdad had a mirrored bedroom and lamps shaped like women. "Wow, man! Lookit the honkers on that lamp! An' she's got a clock in her belly, too!"
On the walls were air-brushed paintings of a topless blonde woman and another of a moustached hero battling a crocodile. "Hrowf! Take that, crocodile!"
Throughout the house were photos of Saddam and one of his known mistresses smiling at each other. Military officials suspect they found one of the paranoid Iraqi leader's many safe houses. "This must have been Saddam's love shack," said Sergeant Spencer Willardson as he searched the house. And it sounds like a really class joint...
The house is in a Ba'ath Party enclave in an upmarket neighborhood in central Baghdad, where generals and senior party officials lived. It was littered with beanbag chairs and had a bar stocked with 20-year old Italian red wines and expensive cognacs, brandies and Scotch whiskeys. The kitchen contained fine china of the Kuwaiti royal family, complete with the family seal and gold and maroon trim. Betcha he stole their silverware, too...
Upstairs was a television room with bright blue, pink and yellow throw pillows. The bathroom included a whirlpool bath. In the bedroom, the kingsize bed was fitted into an alcove, with mirrors on two sides and a fantasy painting on the third. Was there a trapeze?
The closets and drawers were empty except for a man's night shirt, two pairs of boxer shorts, two T-shirts and a bath robe - each item individually wrapped in plastic. One of the air-brushed paintings depicted a topless blonde woman, with a green demon behind her, pointing a finger at a mythical hero. From the tip of her finger came a giant serpent, which had wrapped itself around the warrior. It'd probably take somebody six or seven years to analyze the symbolism in that — mainly because they'd keep falling asleep.
Another showed a buxom woman chained to a barren desert mountain ledge, with a huge dragon diving down to kill her with sharpened talons. Where was Sammy with his sword?
The mistress in the photos was Parisoula Lampsos, who has publicly told of her life as his lover. She escaped to Lebanon in 2002 and was interviewed on US television about her relationship with Saddam. Her current location is unknown and she was last believed to be in hiding. Too embarrassed to come out now...
In the house next door, which had its windows sealed by iron sheets, troops found thousands of weapons. More than 6,000 Berretta pistols, 650 Sig Sauer pistols, 248 Colt Revolvers, 160 Belgian 7.65 mm pistols, 12 cases of Sterling submachine guns and four cases of anti-tank missiles all still in the unopened original boxes, were discovered. There were also tens of thousands of rounds of ammunition mortars and cases of old handguns and heavy machine guns. Sammy had some pretty heavy fetishes, I'd say...
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
04/12/2003 08:13 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
This story really calls for a comment from Bill Clinton. I don't know exactly why, it just feels that way.
Russia provided Saddam Hussein's regime with wide-ranging assistance in the months leading up to the war, including intelligence on private conversations between Tony Blair and other Western leaders.
Moscow also provided Saddam with lists of assassins available for "hits" in the West and details of arms deals to neighbouring countries. The two countries also signed agreements to share intelligence, help each other to "obtain" visas for agents to go to other countries and to exchange information on the activities of Osama bin Laden, the al-Qa'eda leader.
The documents detailing the extent of the links between Russia and Saddam were obtained from the heavily bombed headquarters of the Iraqi intelligence service in Baghdad yesterday.
#1
Lukoil? Forget it - you're screwed now. Same goes with Putin. This may finally break Bush and Blairs trust in him. If these documents are genuine, then it proves Putin is a duplicitous bastard.
At least now we know why he sided so hard with the froggies - his hand was in the cookie jar too.
#4
Given that the article is from the Telegraph, a publication with sophisticated experts on military and diplomatic affairs like John Keegan, it is most likely true. The actions described are not mere evidence of duplicity, but acts of war agains the US, UK and their allies: nothing less than reactivation of the Comintern by Putin, the former KBG thug.
The article states that British intelligence had been warning Tony Blair of increased Russian espionage. Rumors of a French agreement with Saddam involving protection from Islamofacist terror in exchange for diplomatic and military assistance have circulated on the Net.
This may well only be a foretaste of disclosures from the files of Baghdad that will trigger a earthquake in global affairs: the fall of govenments, collapse of alliances and fundamental realignment of the major powers.
For example, how would disclosure of an alliance of the new Comintern, Germany and France be viewed in the capitals of Eastern Europe with it's memories of the Nazi-Soviet Non-Agression Pact of 1939.
Posted by: George H. Beckwith ||
04/12/2003 20:24 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Maybe Putin already told Chirac some of the dirt and threatened to release it (which would have caused him to be removed). This would explain why Chriac appeared to be the head Toad, saving the Russians from having to visibly front this mess they clearly wanted to try to direct against the US.
#7
"...Russia kept Iraq informed about its arms deals with other countries in the Middle East. Correspondence, dated January 27, 2000, informed Baghdad that in 1999 Syria bought rockets from Russia in two separate batches valued at $65 million (£41 million) and $73 million (£46 million). It also says that Egypt bought surface-to-air missiles from Russia and that Kuwait - Saddam's old enemy - wanted to buy Russian arms to the value of $1 billion."
This part is going to hurt them too. Who's going to buy their inferior arms in the future, knowing they were squealing everything to god knows who?
#8
This probably WAS leaked on purpose, which means it probably was already used. Don't hold your breath till governemnts fall, but rather look for the AoW (incl. Russia - Don't you think Putin LOOKS like a cartoon weasel?) to start changing positions. This stuff is most valuable for diplomatic pressure - i.e. blackmail.
In fact, it might be the reason Putin contradicted his own Parliment on the subject of debt forgiveness.
Once more the adage proven, 'We'd rather be lucky than good.'
Posted by: Scott ||
04/12/2003 23:13 Comments ||
Top||
From an Arab News article about the fall of Mosul.
The sidewalk in front of the burning central bank building was littered with the shredded remains of photocopied Iraqi dinars, the only legal tender currency since Saddam banned the use of regular bank notes following his defeat in the 1991 Gulf War.
As gunmen fired into the air, people still risked their lives to get into the bankâs vault and carry out armfuls of the photocopied cash that is now virtually worthless.
This is the first time I have heard of a country that was so f***ked-up that it had to resort to photocopying its own money.
Posted by: Phil B ||
04/12/2003 06:36 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
American intelligence officials said today that they had intercepted communications in which former Iraqi officials said among themselves that they believed that President Saddam Hussein had been killed in a bombing raid in Baghdad. But the American officials said they were not certain that Mr. Hussein had been killed, citing the lack of physical evidence and the fact that forensic teams had not yet examined the site of an American bombing raid on Monday in the Mansur neighborhood of Baghdad, where intelligence reports indicated Mr. Hussein was meeting top aides. The officials who described the communications intercepts today have disputed reports from military officials in the field who said Mr. Hussein was seen Thursday at a mosque in Baghdad that was the site of a firefight later that day. "Dark-haired guy with a moustache, right? Yep. That was him..."
American officials warned that it is possible that the midlevel Iraqi officials discussing Mr. Hussein's death did not know the truth, or were passing on disinformation, convinced that the American intelligence agencies would be eavesdropping on their conversations. Likely they know about as much as we do, if that much...
Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said today that he had not seen enough intelligence information "that would enable me to walk up and say that I have conviction that he's dead." Even so, American officials said that there were two, and possibly more, intercepted communications involving different Iraqi leaders discussing Mr. Hussein's death. In the conversations, the Iraqis did not specifically refer to the circumstances in which Mr. Hussein was supposed to have been killed.
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
04/12/2003 05:31 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The Iraqi street already believes what we cant quite get ourselves to accept. That is, in the words of the great Dr. McCoy:
"He's dead Jim".
"Bunker Busters" are great advances in weaponry, but they dont leave a whole lot left to identify.
I suspect we will have to put up with years of storys of Saddam escaping to Argentina in a Uboat ( whoops, sorry, wrong despot!).
This sort of thing fits into human mythology as well, some people are never really allowed to die like normal mortals. Hitler, JFK, Elvis, Marilyn Monroe, and back in history it was Frederick the Great to whom German legend had it was 'just sleeping' and would arise when Germany was in great need. King Arthur also suffered the same fate, in legend anyway.
Alive or dead, his impact is the same. No country is going to take the risk of getting caught with him, thereby inviting the now demonstrated military strength of the US by doing such a thing. Saddam is(was)a cosmopolitan, not a bedouin who can just go back to goathearding if things go bad, like whats-his-name.
Quite frankly, Who would want to consort with such a loser? His best hope for maintaing any reputation at all is to find out he died early in the war, hence the reason he did so poorly.
Posted by: Frank Martin ||
04/12/2003 18:20 Comments ||
Top||
A source close to the Supreme Assembly of Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SAIRI), Mohsen Hakim, said in Teheran on Saturday that it will attend a summit of the Iraqi opposition scheduled for April 15 in Nassiriya if it is to map out plans to uphold the Iraqi people's interests. Hakim said the objectives and programs of the summit as well as the names of the participants must be announced before it will make the appropriate decision on whether to attend or not. Be there, or be square, buddy. Why should we kowtow to you?
He said SAIRI has not arrived at any decision. A number of 49 Iraqi officials, currently in Kuwait, are to attend the summit. Leading US Administration officials including the US special envoyto the region, Zalmay Khalilzad, Commander of US Forces General Tommy Franks and retired US General Jay Garner are to attend the Nassiriya summit. And I'll bet none of them are willing to kiss the SAIRI ass...
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
04/12/2003 01:34 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
The jubilant Iraqi people have responded to a call by the ulema and returned properties they looted during the recent chaos in Iraqi cities, the Qatari-based Al-Jazeera TV channel said on Saturday. Hey! It could happen...
Al-Jazeera further stressed that the response followed a fatwa (religious order) earlier issued by the Iraqi ulema urging the nation to return all private and state-owned properties they had looted during the first days of the fall of the Ba'athist regime. According to the network, thousands of people are heading towards mosques to return such properties. "Looting is wrong? Gosh. We didn't know that. Here, let's take all this stuff back..."
Residents in Baghdad criticized the US forces for being quick to provide security to Iraq's oil reserves but neglected to provide security to civilian and other government properties.
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
04/12/2003 01:25 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Like the US knew there was a refrigerator shortage? But we knew they would try and blow the wells.
Posted by: George ||
04/12/2003 14:09 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I hope our forces are not overrun when all the looters change direction suddenly.
Hey, Fred! Can we have a new category for this kind of article? Delusional Daily, Lala Land, Fatwa Fun, Weasel World, etc. It would be a central repository for stories from Al-Jazeera, the Iraqi Information Ministry in exile, Kimmie, Maureen Dowd, Jacques Chirac, etc.
Posted by: Tom ||
04/12/2003 15:08 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Ummm... Sounds like Rantburg.
Posted by: Fred ||
04/12/2003 15:31 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Hey, they are starting to make some relavant fatwas. That is a good sign!
Al-Aska Paul
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
04/12/2003 16:10 Comments ||
Top||
#5
They're not heading towards the mosques, they're heading towards the bazaars.(sp)
Jihad Al Khazen, Al-Hayat
We have finally reached the 'day after,' as in the day following Saddam's downfall. Who will rule Iraq and how? Where shall he derive his power from? The military victory over Iraq was already settled before the first bullet was even shot in the war, but handing Iraq's potentials to Lt. Gen. Jay Garner who comes from the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs is a complete victory to the Likudist Jewish in the American administration; it is a victory that goes far beyond Iraq and Saddam Hussein, towards the defeat of Arabs and Muslims all over the place, especially in Iraq's outskirts which shall be the vanquishers' next target. "Omigawd! Jews! Zionists! They're everywhere! Fatimah! Where's the gaspipe?"
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
04/12/2003 12:13 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The next target: they are still screaming that we intend to invade Syria and Jordan. Well, maybe we should, but they must have missed the news that the British and American warships are returning to normal duties elsewhere as supply ships start to arrive.
Posted by: John Anderson ||
04/12/2003 12:29 Comments ||
Top||
#2
John, they'll just see that as part of a clever infidel plot to do something against Islam......somewhere.....maybe the Jews are involved.....yeah, that's it......
Posted by: Baba Yaga ||
04/12/2003 15:29 Comments ||
Top||
#3
I propose we start publicly referring to Gen. Tommy Franks as "al-Mansour". Maybe they'll get the hint.
Maher Othman, Al-Hayat
Several days ago, the President of Iraq, the dictator and despot Saddam Hussein, was trying to pass for the new Saladdin defending Iraq and its sovereignty, its religion and might. He was trying to make people forget that he, along with his two sons Udai and Qusai and his tribe's closest members, represented a regime that was closer to an organized crime's mafia, than a regime that sought to preserve its people and national interests. Wonder why this guy didn't write this a month or two ago? Or a few years ago?
If Saddam's regime were democratic and just, and did not deal with most Iraqi people as if they were enemies, the Iraqi troops might have resisted the American and British invaders much longer, fought more ferociously to defend their country's land and resources. But it became clear that Iraqis, who have long suffered from the international sanctions supported by the U.S. and the UK, as well as from Saddam's tyranny, preferred to stop their quasi-desperate resistance before the great American might, so as to facilitate the toppling of Saddam's regime, even if this meant the entry of foreign occupation forces to the center of Baghdad, as well as all the other Iraqi cities. Starting to sink in, is it?
In parallel to Saddam's false pretense, we also saw George Bush's administration pretending that this war was one of "liberation" for the Iraqi people, aimed at bringing them on the path of democracy and self-rule, and that Iraq's oil resources would be treated as national reserves for the Iraqi people. Naturally, this is but a false pretense since the U.S. history is fraught with cases where it brought about the downfall of democratic regimes and supported dictatorships, just to suit Washington's interests. Oh, naturally. The U.S. can't simply be taken at it's word. There has to be another motive, something deeper and more sinister â something Arabs can understand. Pfui.
We should keep a close eye on how Americans will run this huge Arab country, and what they will make with its oil resources, for the implications will go well beyond Iraq's borders. Do that. It'll give you some idea of what to expect when a few other regimes go...
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
04/12/2003 12:09 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"But it became clear that Iraqis, who have long suffered from the international sanctions supported by the..." - whole of the UN, especially other Arab nations, even when it was obvious that only Saddam personally and France as a nation (well. Russia when France became too much even for Saddam and he started to do oil deals with Russia) were getting anything out of it. We could have had this thing done with a decade ago, but Bush I had promised Saudi Arabia and others in the area, to get their support, that he would not go for a complete regime change, and like his son he keeps his word.
Posted by: John Anderson ||
04/12/2003 12:36 Comments ||
Top||
#2
You know, if the US really pushed that trust idea like Alaska and Singapore have, that'll shake the foundations there more than anything else. The UN would really have to twist in knots to explain why a good part of the oil profits should not be put directly into Iraqis' bank accounts and the selling of the "national asset" must be legitimized by the UN. In one fell swoop it would shut up *the world.*
But again, putting money directly into the peoples' pockets makes me a renegade and a simplisme AmeriKKKan.
Those who have reservations about the American war may have valid reasons... But it is important to acknowledge the existence of Iraq and the Iraqi people. A country and a society. Almost 25 million people. We must ask their opinion before we speak on their behalf.
They survived Saddam. They deserve a big "congratulations," without 'buts' and 'ifs.' Unfortunately, the Arabs didn't say this to them. They urged the Iraqis to wage... a resistance... a resistance, to support a Baathist regime that lasted a third of a century, that drove its people to two major wars and to the death of one million Iraqis, in addition to the non-Iraqis, a regime that destroyed the economy and drove four million people to seek immigration.
Can any human be asked to wage a resistance after these experiences, or are we talking about imaginary ideological beings?
There are at least two reasons allowing us to say that, in dealing with Iraq, the Arabs saw only the "cause." They didn't see Iraq, because they don't see the world as made up of countries. Of peoples. They took advantage of the opportunity to renew their declaration of having the disease of resistance. Our resistance fighters.
First, "Arab resistance" is truly an Arab one. It is not Iraqi. It is an Arab in the sense that it is non-Iraqi. Also, it is Arab in the sense that it does not belong to any country. It is everything - meaning nothing...
Second, Saddam never appeared to be so openly Arab as when he failed to "resist"... The great sympathies were on his side. They remained with him even as they avoided him personally: they supported him in invading Kuwait... The Arab resistance mania is what created an environment that deplored the call for his "stepping down" before the war in order to avoid it. Why? Because it didn't want to miss the feast of the resistance.
Ah... Some are beginning to notice the difference between rhetoric and actions, theory and practice. But it's just a small beginning. Memories are short. A year from now, Arabs will be lining up to protect Syria or Yemen or whoever's next on the poop list, not because they're worth defending, but because they're part of the Resistance®...
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
04/12/2003 11:55 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
"I hope the U.S. Army will leave Iraq soon and we will have free elections, free government and a free future for the people of Iraq," Ambassador Mohammed Al-Douri said as he left to take a flight to Paris en route to the Syrian capital, Damascus. "I am leaving because I don't think there is a possibility for me to work as I want from a country that is militarily invading Iraq, destroying, ravaging and killing," he said. "I don't think that this occupied country (Iraq) will allow me to work with full freedom at the United Nations. Because I fear pressure to which I might be subjected, I have chosen to quit with honor and dignity... It's a country that occupies Iraq, from the North to the South, from East to West," he said on the Arabic-channel Al-Arabiya.
Al-Douri said his priority was to locate his family in Iraq, whom he had not heard from since the U.S.-led invasion began on March 20. "You know I have no information on my family from the beginning of the war," Al-Douri said just before he left his Upper East Side home with a police escort for New York City's John F. Kennedy Airport. Too bad about that. Maybe you should have thought about it before sticking your chin and and hollering "hit me, hit me!"
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
04/12/2003 11:41 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Get rid of the combover too Ahole. A turban, spray-on hair, anything, but what looks like ear-hair pulled all the way over your dome
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/12/2003 12:15 Comments ||
Top||
#2
And let's not forget the kind words and thanks and the hug he gave his friend the CNN reporter before he left.
Wonder why he didn't hug the FoxNew reporter who was there, too? (heh heh)
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
04/12/2003 12:58 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Good riddance to bad rubbish. Have fun in Latakia with the old pals, jerk. Careful starting cars...
Looks like the guy who turned himself in today is the 7 of Diamonds. The Ace of Spades is everybody's favorite Dictator with Mustache and Stupid Hat(TM).
There are three auctions for "Iraqi card deck" on eBay, but I think they're suspect. It's too soon; they're all by the same seller, although he does have a decent feedback rating (354); and the picture link is broken.
Posted by: Dar ||
04/12/2003 11:31 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
According to some intepretations, the Ace of Spades represents death.
Posted by: Patrick Phillips ||
04/12/2003 14:02 Comments ||
Top||
#2
So which character got on the "Dirty Dorah" card?
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
04/12/2003 16:18 Comments ||
Top||
Posted by: Dar ||
04/13/2003 0:15 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Probably home printed copies. The entire deck, in Adobe PDF format, can be downloaded from an open Defense Department archive. Two sizes, and the larger one (about 700-800 K) is of sufficient detail that if you can crack the PDF file (or just work patiently with a screen capture program), you can print out the entire deck with a good inkjet onto card stock.
Ed
Posted by: Ed Becerra ||
04/13/2003 3:52 Comments ||
Top||
U.S. officer at scene says two preliminary tests indicated traces of nerve agent on warhead found at air base near Kirkuk
More...
Coalition weapons experts were called to an occupied air base in northern Iraq to determine whether a warhead found there was loaded with chemical weapons, military sources told CNN. U.S. troops found the warhead, which is about as long as a baseball bat and as big around as a coffee can, during routine operations to secure the airfield in Kirkuk. It was marked with a green band which, military sources told CNN, is the universal symbol for chemical weaponry. Two separate "improved chemical agent monitor" (ICAM) tests showed trace amounts of a nerve agent in two spots on the warhead — at the rear and in the middle where there is a screwed-down circular area about the size of a quarter. A former Iraqi air force colonel, claiming to be the former base commander, came to Kirkuk on Friday and told military officials he knew of 120 missiles within about an 18-mile radius of Kirkuk — 24 of those carrying chemical munitions, according to an army intelligence posting at the airfield's military headquarters.
Posted by: Anonymous ||
04/12/2003 10:54 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Give me citizenship and I'll be happy to show you where they are.
#2
How misleading of CNN to bury this HUGE story underneath a human-interest blurb about Jessica Lynch...(CNN obfuscate a story? How could that be??)
To find the details in this article, hit pagedown a couple or three times after clicking the "More" link above. It's listed below the passing mention of Lt. Gen. Amir al-Saadi's surrender.
Former Iraqi police officers have offered their services to US troops in Baghdad, keen to co-operate in restoring a semblance of order, Al Jazeera correspondents confirm. One of the officers said, âIâve been a captain since 1985. I was one among those who were forced by the criminal Ali Hassan Al Majid to serve at the police Directorate-General. I guess that we, the Iraqi police officers, can restore security in the city within 72 hours, if the coalition forces provide us with badges, cars and loudspeakers.â And new uniforms. Iraqi police wore military uniform — and we don't want to even allow the appearance of the military and Baath coming back...
The officer added, âThe police are against the criminal Saddam Hussein. The police institute was despised by the Government. The criminal Saddam was supporting intelligence, special forces, military intelligence and his partyâs militias only. The police were treated with indifference. Each police directorate only ever had one car. We are ready to shoulder our responsibility if the coalition forces help us by supplying us with cars and badges. The security will prevail within 72 hours....â "I never liked him. I never joined the party..."
Another retired officer said, âThe former government is over. Now we are living in a state of chaos and looting. We, the retired police officers, for the sake of our nation and the protection of our people, volunteer to preserve our country and the people and their properties. We pledge a quick return of security if we get arms, cars, equipment and other sorts of assistance from the coalition forces. We can restore security in Baghdad if we get assistance.â Yeah. I think I'd have to take some time to think about that real hard, if I was running things... Brigadier General Mohammed Bandar pleaded for more volunteers to step forward, and for an end to the looting. âI call on brother citizens through Al Jazeera, to end the chaos and looting. These are not the characteristics of the honorable Iraqis. Armed criminals are now free in the streets. I urge them to arrest those criminals who steal the stateâs property and hospitals. I also call on the police and Coalition Forces to get involved to end this ordeal.â
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
04/12/2003 10:50 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I think this is a positive development and one we should welcome. Their assistance could do wonders to help defuse the rioting and reassure the Iraqi commoners that we're serious about leaving Iraq to be governed by Iraqis. They know the language, the customs, and they have the training.
The Iraqi police definitely needs different uniforms! Something is needed to offset them from the military and the old regime.
In any case, this is a much better option than using combat troops with machine guns and tanks to perform police actions, which is like performing brain surgery with a chainsaw.
Posted by: Dar ||
04/12/2003 11:09 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I don't much like this.
I know we will have to use some of them, but ranking officers (read: Ba'athist Party Officials) I don't like it. I'll take the Engrs who ran the power plants and the water plants, etc. - but the cops... it feels wrong.
I think I heard that in Kosovo we allowed anyone up to the rank of Major to come back to their old jobs - and it worked fairly well. Sounds reasonable for Baghdad and Basra. If it works, then Mosul, Kirkuk, etc.
Generals??? Feels wrong. I think they should be given shovels and brooms to clean the streets of rubble for a few years, before trusting them any further.
#3
Sounds like we need to get TV and radio up and running to broadcast warnings about curfews and crackdowns on looting, then stop this before it gets too far out of hand - some of it is letting the pressure vent, I'm sure
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/12/2003 11:14 Comments ||
Top||
#4
We need the police, but uniforms will be a problem. Some sort of visual recognition, not easily duplicated from cut-up bedsheets and dyes, must be arranged. Has anyone heard from the outfit in Kuwait that is supposed to be handling the transition state?
Posted by: John Anderson ||
04/12/2003 11:50 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Hmmm... Wonder if we could borrow some Kuwaiti cops? Not the ones who're nuts, though...
Posted by: Fred ||
04/12/2003 11:56 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Actually, using the existing police department is a good idea, as long as it's supervised at the top by someone outside the police department structure - preferably a Coalition military officer until we can get the Transition government in place, then turn it over to them. We NEED to get the Iraqi people engaged in governming themselves, and using their own police officers will help. To keep the "baddies" out, we need to allow Iraqi citizens who have had a bad time from the police to be able to say "Ahmed Ibrahim is a crook, and we don't want him on the police department". We need to coordinate such reporting, and eliminate the baddies.
There are going to be literally thousands of such decisions that will have to be made. The sooner the US Forces start making those decisions, the better life will be for everyone.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
04/12/2003 12:38 Comments ||
Top||
#7
I recall a comment or two by Salam Pax that the police didn't really care for the regime. They were actually trying to be professional.
#8
We better really watch who we install as the police there. They have had thirty years of some real nasty people in the police force in cozy relationships with the Ba'athists, and we could be in a problem if we make mistakes here. We are going to have to have a good system set up to work through the candidates, especially on the fast track.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
04/12/2003 16:27 Comments ||
Top||
#9
I agree, let the cops go back to work, certainly the rank and file. They can't all be bad, and the baddies will be known. I think they'll clean their own house if we let them.
Ship them some spare Air Force 'B' uniforms: dark blue trousers, short sleeved light blue shirts, dark blue "bus driver" hat, black low quarters. But no rank or collar brass, nor insignia. Only a badge.
That ought to be distinctive enough, but (no insult to the USAF intended) not all that "military". Plus its probably readily at hand for the AF - grab a pile of it from Lack-anookie AFB in TX, and fly it over to Baghdad International.
While they are at it, set up a Police training school at the airport, and let the SP's teach them the we we do it. Rotate police officers through there.
#12
They could get some of the left over cars and uniforms from the "Blues Brother 2000" (a movie that stunk but was done relatively cheaply compared to the earlier Blues Brothers movies).
US commanders say that even as the Iraqi military melts away around the country, remnants of a once huge army have been seen digging around a possible last line of defence, Tikrit. The town of 200,000 people, on the banks of the Tigris river north of Baghdad, is Saddam's hometown and stronghold. Many of those at the heart of his clan-based government and military rule were Tikritis. "We're certainly focused on Tikrit to prevent the former Iraqi government from being able to use it as a place to restore command and control, or to hide," U.S. Brigadier-General Vincent Brooks said on Friday.
Saddam's concentration of power in the hands of his closest family, and distrust of most people outside his own Al-Majid Al-Tikriti tribe, mean that this town forms the backbone of his most loyal military forces. Tikrit -- birthplace of the 12th century Muslim warrior Saladin and located 90 miles north west of Baghdad -- may provide stiffer resistance. Brooks said U.S. military leaders were not pretending Tikrit could be taken without a fight. "We're engaging them hard, hitting remnants of the Republican Guard," he said. The US Central Command in Qatar said Republican Guard and other Iraqi troops regrouping in Tikrit had been battered by air strikes for five days now. It's feared that Saddam ally, Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri, may have moved missiles to the area ahead of a potential battle. Defence officials in Washington said a "few thousand" Special Republican Guard remained in northern Iraq in the Tikrit and Bayji areas. Jazeera seems to be hoping against hope that the Iraqis will pull something out of their berets...
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
04/12/2003 10:43 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"...even as the Iraqi military melts away around the country, remnants of a once huge army have been seen digging around a possible last line of defence, Tikrit."
I have every confidence that our bombers will make the Iraqi military "melt away" around Tikrit too.
Posted by: Tom ||
04/12/2003 11:06 Comments ||
Top||
PRESIDENT Saddam Hussein imported hundreds of well-trained Islamic guerrillas before the war to spearhead his fight against American and British forces, The Times has learnt. Documents and captives seized by British troops in Basra reveal that the recruits were arriving in Baghdad from Muslim countries including Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Yemen as little as ten days before the war began. They came to wage jihad against the Western military, and provided some of the fiercest resistance as the coalition advanced northwards. Survivors are still mounting occasional attacks in Baghdad and other cities. US officials are seizing on the guerrillasâ presence as evidence of links between Saddam and Osama bin Ladenâs al-Qaeda terrorist organisation â links that the Bush Administration has long cited as a justification for the war. The foreign fighters provide a âdirect tie between Saddam Hussein and terrorist organisationsâ, a Pentagon spokeswoman said last night.
Posted by: Anonymous ||
04/12/2003 08:35 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
U.S. special forces have detained 59 terrorists men traveling toward the western border of Iraq carrying cash and letters offering rewards for killing U.S. soldiers, the U.S. military said on Saturday. "At a checkpoint in the west, coalition special operations forces stopped a bus with 59 military-aged men traveling west," U.S. Brigadier General Vincent Brooks told a news briefing at Central Command war headquarters in Qatar. "Among their possessions were letters offering financial rewards for killing American soldiers and 630,000 U.S. dollars in 100-dollar bills. The men and all their possessions have been taken into coalition control."
"Well, Mahmoud, you can start 'splainin' any time now. We're real interested in hearing what y've got to say. Are you making off with the head money you were supposed to hand out? Or did you earn it in Baghad? And where, pray tell, did the money came from?"
Several U.S. soldiers have been killed or wounded in a number of suicide bomb attacks on checkpoints in Iraq. Brooks said he did not have any information on the nationalities of the men nor any details on who the letters they were carrying were from. Arab volunteers from across the Middle East came to Iraq to pot a few Merkins help fight the U.S.-led invasion. "We've found people who were not Iraqis in a variety of places. We don't know in this case if they were or were not. We certainly know they were leaving Iraq to the west," Brooks said.
With the money...
On Friday, the U.S. military said Iraqi leaders were trying to escape to other countries, including Syria to the west, and said it had issued troops with a list of 55 key Iraqi figures to be captured or killed.
One of whom is reported by FoxNews to have turned himself in this morning...
Posted by: Spot ||
04/12/2003 08:08 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The Paleo influence is felt:
In Baghdad, where U.S. troops have been wary of suicide attacks, Marines showed reporters a cache of about 50 explosives-laden suicide-bomb vests in an elementary school less than 20 feet from the nearest home. At a nearby junior high school, seven classrooms were filled with hundreds of crates of grenade launchers, surface-to-air missiles and ammunition. Residents said Iraqi soldiers and militiamen had positioned weaponry throughout the neighborhood before U.S. forces moved in.
"We didn't imagine this much stuff here," said Lt. David Wright, of Goldsboro, N.C. "Every 200 meters we find something."
Searching for weapons, and for holdout pro-Saddam fighters, has been the primary task of American troops in Baghdad. But U.S. officials, criticized for doing too little to curtail the looting, say restoration of law and order will become a higher priority.
The State Department said it is sending 26 police and judicial officers to Iraq, the first component of a team that will eventually number about 1,200.
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/12/2003 8:54 Comments ||
Top||
A colonel in Iraq's Republican Guard says he received few orders from the country's leaders during the war. Speaking from his home in a prosperous area of Baghdad, he told the BBC's Andrew Gilligan that the coalition bombardment of Iraq badly affected troop morale, with soldiers wanting to desert every day. In one of the first insights into how the elite Republican Guard has acted during the war, he said Iraq's military leaders only agreed to fight the war in the first place because, if they had refused, they would have been killed. The colonel, whose unit was initially placed in the desert but then withdraw to defend the Iraqi capital, deserted about a week before Baghdad was taken.
The colonel, who commanded a force of about 600 men, said he had initially been told to stay in his position and "hide from the bombs". But it appears that once fighting started he was completely out of contact with Iraq's senior military leaders. "I didn't receive any order from the beginning," he said, adding that he was told that if the airport was still open, Iraq was still in the war.
The coalition bombing sapped the morale of his soldiers - some of whom had not seen that kind of bombardment before. "From the beginning, I think that the balance of the air power is not equal. Something hit us. The aircraft... destroyed our tanks and equipment," he said. He said he did not force anyone to stay with the unit. "Every day, one, two, three. Every day one, two, three. Everyone he want to go, leave his gun and go away," he said.
Speaking of the fear of Saddam Hussein he said in faltering English: "If they say to him we (do) not have power to face this army, it is not a good war, he maybe will kill him so they said 'yes' we will fight." He revealed that Iraqi soldiers had not wanted to fight in the streets of Baghdad because it was their city and home to their families. He added that in the Koran, God said soldiers had to win or die. "But when we see no one command us and tell us what's the planning, for what I will fight? I stay at home is better," he said.
In the end, he said, the officers gathered round a fire and decided it was not worth fighting. The unit's troops changed into civilian clothes which they had with them, and went home. Our correspondent says he increasingly believes Iraqi officers followed orders, but did not really want Saddam Hussein to win and so did not make any serious attempts to defend Iraq. THAT SAYS IT ALL
Posted by: George ||
04/12/2003 07:49 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Okay. So he didn't get orders - none of them did, apparently.
Okay. They didn't want to fight for Saddam and die. Smarter than we thought.
So. WTF did WE have to do this? Aren't there enough MEN in Iraq to do this from the inside? I have no respect for any Iraqi males. Sorry, but at least some Germans had the cajones to go after Hitler.
I can't help but wonder if they will respect and honor freedom without having earned it?
#2
There were iraqis who tried to whack Hussain... they're all in the cemetaries or multiple small plastic bags in the dump. The price was high and usually not just the men, but their extended families were tortured and put to death as examples. If Sammy could've been gotten easily the Mossad would've done it long ago
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/12/2003 11:22 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Sadsack Hasbeen was a monster, and ruled Iraq through terror. It wasn't just those who might say, "I don't like Saddam" that were killed, but their families were brought in in front of them and slowly, methodically tortured until they died. While there were probably many brave men that would have loved to murder Hussein, there were few willing to risk their families and their extended families to years of torture. Of course, that kind of government has earned no loyalty from the common citizen, and the army and other groups melted away as soon as the threat to their families disappeared.
One of the reasons our military performs at the level it does is because they KNOW their families will be cared for if anything happens to them. It is done through the military, and through hundreds of veterans' groups everywhere. You can see the difference on the battlefield.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
04/12/2003 12:48 Comments ||
Top||
#4
I think you are being too harsh on the Iraqis. Obviously there were those trying to kill Sammy. He had several body doubles, and never stayed in the same palace for long.
Have you forgotten the two missile strikes we launched specifically to get him? We couldn't have done them without someone betraying him. For all we know, the source(s) were there at the time of the attack, and basically signed their own death warrant by letting us know where Sammy was supposed to be.
Posted by: Baba Yaga ||
04/12/2003 15:50 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Also this, concerning insurrection against Hussein: He installed his Fedayeen within families' homes. This is the ultimate in intimidation down to the smallest societal unit, and it really affects a person's will to resist and reinforces the 'Saddam is everywhere' idea -- as much as or more than the damned murals and statues.
#6
I'd like to point out, Shana, that this was one of the final straws that broke the Revolutionary back in 1776 America. The British Army of the time had the same cute habit of quartering military personel in civilian homes.
Note that I'm NOT compairing the Brits to the Fedayeen, GOD no. But the "quartering" as it was called, was specifically mentioned by many people at the time as the item that made the Revolution "personal" for them. And intimidated them as they were often expected to play the part of servants to the quartered officers.
What the Brits did was annoying and offensive. What Saddam & his Fedayeen did goes beyond the pale.
Ed.
Posted by: Ed Becerra ||
04/13/2003 4:00 Comments ||
Top||
from newsworld.cbc.ca
As some of the last of Saddam Hussein's fighters fled one of the country's largest cities Friday, Iraqi civilians greeted U.S. troops with a question. "Why are you late? Why are you late?" bystanders shouted as a convoy of special forces trucks rolled into Mosul. Ask Murat:
Officials [Murat] said part of the delay was to give Saddam's forces time to surrender. But it turns out most of them had fled. Brig.-Gen. Vincent Brooks [Murat] told a media briefing in Qatar that the surrendering soldiers would be allowed to return home. U.S. Navy Capt. Frank Thorp, [Murat] a military spokesman at Central Command in Qatar wouldn't say how many U.S. forces were in the city, and had no estimate on the number of Iraqi soldiers who had surrendered. In addition:
Turkey [Murat] is concerned enough by Kurdish takeovers of key cities in northern Iraq that it is considering sending its own troops across the border. "If needed, we have every kind of plan, but for now we are not taking action."
Posted by: RW ||
04/12/2003 06:32 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Oops. Maybe [del] [/del] would have worked better.
#2
If needed, we have every kind of plan, but for now we are not taking action."
Too late now Turkies. It's just too darn late. You've oppressed the Kurds long enough. Now the world is watching and the Kurds are free. Your own population is 99% opposed to war. Any treachery you plan now to pursue your greedy ambitions, will be far more painful than cutting your losses and moving on.
#3
Well, gosh. It seems we just can't do anything right, eh? Or, perhaps, we just can't do anything that will please Arabs. I suggest we don't try - and toss it back: "Why didn't YOU do this 35 yrs ago, or 5 yrs ago. Why did WE have to come and die to set YOU free?" The blame society of Islam can kiss my hairy ass.
I am so phreaking proud to be an American, again, and happy for our troops and our relatively small losses - though I'm afraid even ONE of our people is worth the entire population of Mosul. No - more than Mosul - all of Iraq.
As for the Turkies, these gutless cowards had better keep their brave talk North of the line.
I am SO happy for the Kurds - maybe now they'll finally get a fair shake. A Federation would allow them to continue prospering - as they have done under the Northern No-Fly Zone.
Note that on the news just now, there is reported destruction (burning buildings, etc) and sniping in Basra and from Baghdad north - except Kirkuk, where the Kurds are... They are apparently smart enough not to burn down their own city, unlike the foolish Iraqis. In Baghdad, I'd bet they've done more damage in the last 3 days than the coalition bombing, which hit what it was supposed to.
The betrayal of the Turks should be treated as the worst possible act of an erstwhile ally - which is precisely what it was. I wonder how many of our troops have died because we couldn't execute the classic hammer & anvil pincer a Northern front would have permitted... not to mention DOUBLE the armored units & boots on the ground - which would definitely be saving American lives in Baghdad, today. Fuck Turkey, I spit in their general direction and hope they choke on the wishbone. I've added them to the AoW and will boycott ANYTHING coming from there, as well.
Why are you, who are always so full of bluster, so impotent to solve your own problems? Why are you, who are always so full of bluster, so impotent to solve your own problems?
Posted by: Tom ||
04/12/2003 11:22 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Since it appears that some of you folks care so little for Turkey, which has that whole democracy thing and actually votes on the issues rather than have them dictated from a throne by the local monarch or dictator, I cannot help but wonder what the reaction will be if and when the new and democratic Iraqi government votes against US interests. And per Michael Ledeen's article, they were pressured into it by France in any event. Yes, they did cave under pressure, but this is hardly an unforgiveable sin in the realm of international diplomacy.
That being said, I would note that Turkey did allow us access to their airspace as well as the transporting of food and non-military supplies to our troops. Would you prefer that none of that occur and the US cut off all ties with Turkey simply to sate your egos?
As far as the Kurds go, Turkey has full right to be concerned there, regardless of how much of an idiot Murat is. The PKK is still alive and well inside of northern Iraq and there have been any number of skirmishes lately along the border.
Read this:
In particular, this section is rather illuminating:
In mid-1997 it was announced that 20,822 terrorists have been killed by the security forces in the 13 years since the PKK launched its operations. Some 4,239 security officers have also been killed and 9,277 injured in that same period. The terrorists murdered 4,276 and injured 5,083 citizens. Together with the death of nearly 2,500 people in terrorist acts caused by the PKK prior to 12 September [1980 coup], the organization has been responsible for the deaths of 31,837 people in all.(1)
The other side effects of terrorism for the same period were as follows: Some 3,223 schools, attended by 166,000 students in 22 districts of two provinces, remained shut in 1996, and 156 teachers have been killed so far. According to June 1995 findings of the State Ministry for Human Rights Affairs, 809 villages and 1,612 hamlets have been evacuated in 19 provinces. Whereas, the State of Emergency Region Governorate announced that 753 villages and 1,535 hamlets were completely evacuated, and 235 villages and 141 hamlets partially evacuated.(2)
The PKK operations significantly lessened when the PKK lost logistic support with the evacuation of the villages and hamlets. At this time, the terror organization started using Palestinian Hamas-style suicide bombings. It organized suicide operations, waged mainly by women terrorists, in Tunceli, Adana, and Sivas.(4)
These folks are every bit as nasty as Hamas and have killed more Turkish citizens (just look at the figures posted above) than we lost on 9/11 and it goes without saying that Turkey has a lot smaller population than we do. Now do understand that whenever you say "Kurdish nationalism" or talk about a "Kurdish state" to a Turk, that is the immediate image that comes to mind. Saying that they have no right to be concerned about these guys is like saying that Israel would have no right to be concerned if it suddenly looked like Hamas was going to take over the West Bank or Gaza Strip.
The bottom line is that potential Turkish military action to deal with the PKK is just as justified as the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in the 1980s.
As far as claims of Turkish oppression of the Kurds goes, I can dig up any number of sob stories from Chechen, Palestinian, Kashmiri, Irish, or the Basques. Whether or not their grievances are justified is irrelevant because nothing justifies terrorism, especially the suicide bombing variety.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
04/12/2003 11:59 Comments ||
Top||
#6
RW,
That was great! That's the first time that ANYTHING relating to Murat has made me laugh!
Posted by: charlotte ||
04/12/2003 12:51 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Dan,
So you approve of destroying an entire civilization if it uses terror tactics to try to preserve itself? There are wrongs on both sides of the fence here, and Turkey's behavior is just as suspect as the PKK. Until ALL the factions are allowed to make decisions for themselves, instead of having them imposed upon them, there will be friction, and there's a good probability that friction will erupt in violence.
You can't put your foot on another's neck and be considered a "good guy" for very long. Turkey needs to find a different way of handling its Kurdish problem other than completely destroying Kurdish history, ethnic language, and culture. If you want to take a close look at how that works out in the long run, just read the history of the Balkan states.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
04/12/2003 13:08 Comments ||
Top||
#8
So you approve of destroying an entire civilization if it uses terror tactics to try to preserve itself?
Hardly. What I'm saying is that the last manifestation of Kurdish nationalism was quite bloody for the Turks and occurred less than a decade ago, so they have good reason to be on their guard against it.
There are wrongs on both sides of the fence here, and Turkey's behavior is just as suspect as the PKK.
How so? Other than being a pain in the ass to the US by refusing to grant us bases, the Turks are a democracy and can conduct their internal affairs as they see fit. Is the situation ideal in regards to Kurdish rights? Hell no. But to draw any kind of comparison between a real democracy and the last batch of Marxist thugs who tried to create an independent Kurdistan is an exercise in faux moral equivalency. It's like saying we're just as bad as al-Qaeda or Iraq because they lost as many or more civilian dead in bombing than we did on 9/11.
Turkey needs to find a different way of handling its Kurdish problem other than completely destroying Kurdish history, ethnic language, and culture.
The same can be argued for the Palestinians, Kashmiris, Chechens, Filippino Muslims, ad infinitum. Or even our own experiences with the Native Americans. However, the fact that the Turks were bad doesn't excuse any of what the PKK did, especially given that they were living within a democratic system. My point is, as I said, given the Turkish experience with Kurdish nationalism they are well within their rights to be apprehensive and many conservative Americans' blanket condemnation of them for it is in my opinion little more than reflexive anger due to the fact that they wouldn't grant us access to their bases for an invasion of Iraq.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
04/12/2003 14:43 Comments ||
Top||
Posted by: Tom ||
04/12/2003 15:30 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Dan: The Turkish "democracy thing" has become an Islamic thing. The Turkish military, which had earned its previously highly regarded status in NATO by guaranteeing a secular Gov't and full military cooperation for the last 50 years appears to have stuck its tail between its legs and whimpered off into a corner - in the face of the recently "elected" Islamic regime.
The Turks have been sitting at the big table all that time because they were a staunch and reliable ally. They have enjoyed major economic gains from their regard within NATO and the resulting ties with the West. They certainly would NOT have ever been considered for EU membership, were it not for their NATO standing and SECULAR government.
The installation of the Islamic-run government certainly puts the lid on their EU hopes - probably permanently - the EU is not interested in admitting a dogmatic Islamic regime, nor should they be.
As for Turkey and the US, we immediately came to their defense when France recently tried to sabotage NATO by denying Turkey defensive aid regards the looming war in Iraq. We even prepared a colossal aid package to make sure they did not suffer economically during the war. It was overly generous because the Turks whined about how they suffered from the loss of (mostly illegal) economic trade during and after the first Gulf War.
What was their response? An Islamic response. No use of OUR bases (Incirlik, in particular). No basing of troops. No right of passage for troops OR materiel. No overflights. Zip. Muslim BS regards infidels on Arab / Muslim soil and lots of sabre-rattling about the Kurds - one of the most maligned people on the planet.
"Sob stories"??? Your knowledge of the Kurds appears a bit thin. They have been repeatedly screwed. They were annexed by the Ottoman Empire in 1514. They lived under the heel of those upstanding Turks you have so much regard for until the end of WW-I - and just when it looked as though they would regain their nation, they were screwed by the British (Sykes-Picot). They were once an independent people - and throughout the last 500 years they have maintained an undeniable identity. They deserve their own country as much as any people you can name. Period.
The numbers you quote are these people trying to regain their freedom. Don't like it? Stay away - they will probably continue fighting for as long as they can muster the men to try. The perjorative use of the term "terrorist" is definitely in the eye of the beholder. In THIS case, I reject the term and I side with the Kurds, not the Turks.
Back to the Turks you seem so concerned with: Overflights (but still no use of OUR air bases) and medical / food overland shipment were finally allowed AFTER the damage was done: about 3 weeks of dithering and delays and rumors of new votes, etc. I do not think it was accidental - it was intended to foil or thwart the US, period, full stop. The 4th Inf Div is now coming online in Kuwait 3+ weeks late solely due to the Turks. Their delaying tactics were overt deliberate sabotage and made their eventual offers of piddling overflights worse than moot - they were insulting. This was an out and out betrayal - because of Islamic BS. You need to recite the entire sequence, not just what's convenient to your argument.
I return to the central question (for me) that you did not address: The Turks are responsible for some (or many) of the US casualties BECAUSE we had to fight and slog through a single-front war - and that fact lies like a pile of dog turds on the doorstep of the Turks. Any American lives lost due to this betrayal are unacceptable - and you can bet your ass that any US military officer in Iraq would agree (certainly in private) that they cost us American soldiers.
My ego has nothing to do with it, moron. American troops' lives and the fact that yet another nation has fallen under the spell of Islamofascism has everything to do with it.
The Islamic World View and the Western World View are in collision. The chief Mugwump of Saudi Arabia says the battle has already begun - obvious even to the blind since 9/11. He characterizes it as virtue vs. freedom (his words). I pick freedom.
Since the Islamic gig is implacable and can only be "sated" by converting the entire world to Islam, you may rest assured that only ONE of these World Views will emerge from the collision. If you don't know this, then you'd better get yourself up to speed, they're here already. I live and work in Saudi Arabia (finally leaving this shit hole in 6 days, forever) and know WTF I'm talking about.
We certainly agree on suicide bombers. That may be all, however.
#12
PD, how can write a post that is so right and make a statement that is so wrong? "The perjorative use of the term "terrorist" is definitely in the eye of the beholder. In THIS case, I reject the term and I side with the Kurds, not the Turks." Aaack! Wrong!! Wrong!! Wrong!! You are just plain wrong. Take it back and go take a shower to get the stench of such a terrible comment off yourself.
The truth is somewhere in the middle between you and Dan. I believe Dan is wrong to think of Turkey as the Turkey that he once knew: the Democratic Turkey; the Turkey on the road to civilization. But Dan is right to point out that the crimes of the Kurds can not be washed away or ignored by the Turks.
Think of it this way, the Turks miscalculated when they thought they could screw us, because they thought America would act like the America of Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton or Al Gore. But that is not the America of today. That was America under the leadership teams who brought out the worst nature of a self-absobed, spoiled me-generation. Of an America who thought the world was fair and who thought evil could be cured with a group hugs and a feel-good words. That America became history on 9-11. Likewise, I think Dan is still thinking of Turkey as the Turkey that was- but is no more. Turkey has been hijacked by treacherous Islamists now.
You are both right and wrong. The Kurds deserve a state, but only if they can rid the terrorists in their midst. The Turk leaders are no longer our friends, but Islamists...and should be treated as such.
#13
"...blanket condemnation of them ...due to the fact that they wouldn't grant us access to their bases for an invasion of Iraq."
It's also the timeliness of their decision. They should have said no the first time, and not dick everybody around for an eternity. Yes-No-Yes-No-Maybe-Yes-No-No-Yes-Yes,but-We-don't-know.
#15
The Turks watched the war too. Do we really think that they want their own "road of death" on the way to Kirkuk?
Posted by: john ||
04/12/2003 20:18 Comments ||
Top||
#16
Tom:
I am not currently registered at the New York Times website and as such cannot read the article you linked. If you want to summarize or transcribe it, that would indeed be helpful.
PD:
The Turkish "democracy thing" has become an Islamic thing.
Really? The last time I checked the sha'riah wasn't being implemented in Ankara.
The Turkish military, which had earned its previously highly regarded status in NATO by guaranteeing a secular Gov't and full military cooperation for the last 50 years appears to have stuck its tail between its legs and whimpered off into a corner - in the face of the recently "elected" Islamic regime.
Hardly. The Turkish military is constitutionally allowed to overthrow the government if it acts against the founding principles of the Turkish republic, not every time somebody makes a crappy political decision. If that had been the case, they would've overthrown the last government for its completely inept handling of the economy.
They certainly would NOT have ever been considered for EU membership, were it not for their NATO standing and SECULAR government.
If you have any evidence that the current government in Turkey is not secular, I would urge you to post it. Otherwise I'm going to dismiss it the same way I do liberal whining about some type of Christian theocracy forming in America every time a conservative Protestant gets elected.
The installation of the Islamic-run government certainly puts the lid on their EU hopes - probably permanently - the EU is not interested in admitting a dogmatic Islamic regime, nor should they be.
The Turks have abolished their death penalty in order to be accepted to the EU, which is one of the reasons why that monster Occalan has yet to be iced. This would tend to conflict with the goal of implementing the sha'riah that you ascribe to them. Their primary obstacle in joining the EU is what looks rather suspiciously like racism amongst the Euroleft elites.
As for Turkey and the US, we immediately came to their defense when France recently tried to sabotage NATO by denying Turkey defensive aid regards the looming war in Iraq. We even prepared a colossal aid package to make sure they did not suffer economically during the war. It was overly generous because the Turks whined about how they suffered from the loss of (mostly illegal) economic trade during and after the first Gulf War.
Not sure about the illegal trade before the Gulf War and I'm not defending Turkey's abysmal policy decision and acting against its own interests in refusing to grant us basing rights. My point is that their refusal does not transform them from extremely reliable allies into some kind of genocidal maniacs.
What was their response? An Islamic response. No use of OUR bases (Incirlik, in particular). No basing of troops. No right of passage for troops OR materiel. No overflights. Zip. Muslim BS regards infidels on Arab / Muslim soil and lots of sabre-rattling about the Kurds - one of the most maligned people on the planet.
You can talk a lot about how the Kurds have gotten the shaft and I would tend to agree with you. But simply dismissing Kurdish concerns about the PKK (which was only defeated less than 5 years ago) off-hand because they wouldn't give us basing rights is patently absurd. And if their refusal to grant us basing rights was all part of some gigantic Islamist strategy, then why the hell did Attaturk's party vote along with them in opposing a US military presence in Turkey? The answer lies not in Islamism, but in Paris.
Your knowledge of the Kurds appears a bit thin. They have been repeatedly screwed. They were annexed by the Ottoman Empire in 1514. They lived under the heel of those upstanding Turks you have so much regard for until the end of WW-I - and just when it looked as though they would regain their nation, they were screwed by the British (Sykes-Picot). They were once an independent people - and throughout the last 500 years they have maintained an undeniable identity. They deserve their own country as much as any people you can name. Period.
Given that you identify yourself as supporting the PKK, I sincerely hope that you are unaware of their activities. Have the Kurds by and large gotten the shaft at the hands of larger powers in the Middle East? Yes. So have the Irish, the Basques, the Palestinians, and the Kashmiris. But you can't justify what the last bout of Kurdish nationalism did to Turkey without admitting that same defense can be used for the Intifada.
The numbers you quote are these people trying to regain their freedom. Don't like it? Stay away - they will probably continue fighting for as long as they can muster the men to try. The perjorative use of the term "terrorist" is definitely in the eye of the beholder. In THIS case, I reject the term and I side with the Kurds, not the Turks.
Substitute "Kurd" for Palestinian and "Turk" for Israeli and that passage would look great for any supporter of the Intifada.
Back to the Turks you seem so concerned with: Overflights (but still no use of OUR air bases) and medical / food overland shipment were finally allowed AFTER the damage was done: about 3 weeks of dithering and delays and rumors of new votes, etc. I do not think it was accidental - it was intended to foil or thwart the US, period, full stop. The 4th Inf Div is now coming online in Kuwait 3+ weeks late solely due to the Turks. Their delaying tactics were overt deliberate sabotage and made their eventual offers of piddling overflights worse than moot - they were insulting.
Great. Consider us insulted. I'm hardly thrilled by these developments, but according to Michael Ledeen they were the result of Paris's manipulations, not Ankara's. The Turks got played by the French. That must make Chirac rather happy, but we should recognize that they were played and attempt to address their legitimate concerns in regards to the Kurds (the PKK, being Marxist, isn't too big a fan of the US) in an effort to help the new government to recognize that it screwed up royally and work it out from there. This is the same tactic that Mansoor Ijaz suggested in his recent article in the National Review.
The Turks are responsible for some (or many) of the US casualties BECAUSE we had to fight and slog through a single-front war - and that fact lies like a pile of dog turds on the doorstep of the Turks.
Ignoring that Iraq has hardly been the meat grinder that some predicted it to be, no American dead can be rationalized away through the sophistry you accuse me of (while ignoring your own?). However, Turkish actions need to be understood in the light of the larger French manipulations to thwart the US in Iraq, not as an independent action. If you want to be angry over US losses in Iraq, I suggest you direct your fury squarely towards Jacques Chirac.
My ego has nothing to do with it, moron. American troops' lives and the fact that yet another nation has fallen under the spell of Islamofascism has everything to do with it.
For someone who has yet to provide any evidence whatsoever that Turkey has become a second Iran, methinks you are a classic example of the pot calling the kettle black when you call me a moron.
The Islamic World View and the Western World View are in collision. The chief Mugwump of Saudi Arabia says the battle has already begun - obvious even to the blind since 9/11. He characterizes it as virtue vs. freedom (his words). I pick freedom.
I reject his entire paradigm. The battle is between Wahhabism/Khomeinism and the rest of civilization. These folks are the same in their mindset as barbarians who sacked Rome. The only difference is religion. You kill the barbarians, meaning those regimes and individuals who aid to them. Once that happens, the whole damn framework collapses.
Since the Islamic gig is implacable and can only be "sated" by converting the entire world to Islam, you may rest assured that only ONE of these World Views will emerge from the collision. If you don't know this, then you'd better get yourself up to speed, they're here already.
As I said, I reject the whole "clash of civilizations" spiel (ideologies is another matter entirely). The Wahhabis/Khomeinists want to kill/enslave all of us so this is a kill or be killed situation. I choose to kill.
I live and work in Saudi Arabia (finally leaving this shit hole in 6 days, forever) and know WTF I'm talking about.
I believe you. You have my sympathies for your current residence and I hope you stay safe.
The Kurds deserve a state, but only if they can rid the terrorists in their midst. The Turk leaders are no longer our friends, but Islamists...and should be treated as such.
While I disagree with you on the Turkish leadership as I regard the Turkish decision as a result of the larger French manipulation (as I said, the secular party of Attaturk also voted against us in the parliament), you articulated my position on a Kurdish state fairly nicely. If Kurdistan must rise out of the ashes of the Iraq war, I don't want to see it being yet another "People's Republic."
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
04/12/2003 20:47 Comments ||
Top||
#17
Dan,
Answer this:
Is Trukey really a free country?
If you claim it, then why is it legislators are in jail for speaking Kurdsih? whi is it a little boy had the police called on him for merely saying "I am proud to be a Kurd"?
The reason the PKK and terrorists like that exist is that there is so much oppression and genocide practiced by the Turks that terrorists have no trouble taking advanatage of the situation.
The Kurds saw the Armenians killed, and learned the lesson well - so the Turks continued erosion and unjust laws against the Kurdish minority have sown the seeds of rebellion deep.
Unlike a lot of traditional terror movements which funded by the Soviets to engage and slow the West, the Kurds are a truly indigenous movement that has been led astray by outside elements.
Had the Turks simply lived up to their obligations under the UN Charter of Human Rights, they'd not have this problem.
As it stands, the Turks deserve all the crap they are getting in terms of the repression and genocide they have used for generations going back to the Ottomans. Not the death, but the rebellion.
If you claim it, then why is it legislators are in jail for speaking Kurdsih? whi is it a little boy had the police called on him for merely saying "I am proud to be a Kurd"?
I would be careful with this question, because it raises a number of questions about America's own past. Was the US a free country before the emancipation of slaves? Was it a free country when it accepted the integration of immigrants from European Catholic and Southeast Asian countries into its society? Heck, if you talk to some gay rights advocates they'll tell you that the US isn't a free country because of some of the anti-sodomy laws we have still on the books in some states.
Is Turkey a utopia? Hell no. Do the Kurds likely suffer discrimination and oppression of some kind? I think it varies from place to place, but the overall answer is probably yes. But if you judge Turkey by the standards of other nations in the region (try being a Palestinian in Lebanon or a Berber in Algeria or a Copt in Egypt) it comes out light years ahead. More to the point, as a democracy, it has a built-in mechanism for positive change.
I have my own suspicions about the New York Times story that was posted here on Rantburg the other day. But if you'll notice the quote in that very same story by Muharrem Erbey, the Human Rights Association guy, this anti-Kurdish stuff is only 15 years old. And what happened about 15 years ago? The PKK started its antics according to ICT.
There are people here in the US who want every Muslim expelled from our shores or locked up internment camps because of 9/11. And that was just one terrorist attack. Try living through years of that crap and the Turkish position becomes a lot more defensible. Am I defending the Turkish policies in regards to the Kurds? No. I think a lot of the Israeli settlement stuff is crap too. But at the same time I understand why both are the way that they are. If al-Qaeda launches two or three more 9/11s our way, I don't think the Turkish stance is going to look so horrible to a lot of Americans.
The reason the PKK and terrorists like that exist is that there is so much oppression and genocide practiced by the Turks that terrorists have no trouble taking advanatage of the situation.
Read the ICT article I linked above. It provides a good explanation as to how the PKK formed and why.
The Kurds saw the Armenians killed, and learned the lesson well - so the Turks continued erosion and unjust laws against the Kurdish minority have sown the seeds of rebellion deep.
The Armenian genocide took place during World War 1. If one truly wants to compare, one can look at US policies towards blacks or Native Americans during the same period. The anti-Kurdish laws are a fairly recent reaction to the PKK.
As it stands, the Turks deserve all the crap they are getting in terms of the repression and genocide they have used for generations going back to the Ottomans. Not the death, but the rebellion.
I don't buy into the whole collective guilt thing, nor do I think that the current Turkish government has any responsibility for what the Ottoman sultan did back during World War 1. If a kind of legitimate Kurdish nationalist movement (like the way the East Timorese got their indepedence) were going on, this would be a completely different story. When a Turk thinks of Kurdish separatism the image that immediately enters their mind is that of the Marxist PKK and its suicide bombings. All I'm saying is, is it any wonder they're apprehensive about the situation given their last experience with Kurdish separatists.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
04/12/2003 21:40 Comments ||
Top||
#19
"Sorry, had some trouble gettin' the ol' Military Machine started."
#20
Dan Old Chap,
Let me see if I have this straight: 1.Turkish foreign policy is made in Paris. 2. The U.S. pursued a policy of intended starvation against blacks and indians in early 20th century. Sounds as if you recently graduated from a San Francisco public school.
tsk tsk
I recommend you read the Michael Ledeen article before ridiculing my position. Manipulating policy does not equal making it.
The U.S. pursued a policy of intended starvation against blacks and indians in early 20th century.
I would challenge you reproduce a statement on my part to that effect. What I said was:
If one truly wants to compare, one can look at US policies towards blacks or Native Americans during the same period.
That period being the early part of the twentieth century. And the comment was made in response to a statement that Kurdish terrorism was a reaction to what happened to the Armenians. You shouldn't throw stones if you want to live in a glass house.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
04/13/2003 0:12 Comments ||
Top||
#22
Dan / Becky -
Ok, lessee (I gotta rush this since I have a job and I'm already late) it seems that there are 4 points with substance:
1) My language in this sentence: "The perjorative use of the term "terrorist" is definitely in the eye of the beholder."
2) That you have identified the PKK as a terrorist group guilty of some serious atrocities against the Turks - and the Turks are, therefore, justified in, well, pretty much anything they choose to do.
3) That the Turks are mere tools of the French
4) The Turkish Military has a constitutional right to remove any regime for (unclear) reason(s).
Dan: There was no other substance to the tome, for half of it was quoting me.
Becky: I assume you are referring to the extremist PKK, like Dan, and not the majority of the Kurds (PUK & KDP)
Okay.
I stand by #1. Your objections are based upon a facile attempt to hang me with the PKK. This is obviously disingenuous as I named no party or splinter group - I talked about the people who have maintained their idenitity for almost 500 years in spite of the shit sandwich they have been handed.
On #2 I understand the Turks being nervous over such a fresh memory - but this is, again, the assumption that I'm some sort of PKK supporter, which I'm not. I do NOT support terror. If the PKK is nothing but a terrorist group, then they should be flushed by the Kurds, for they harm them far more than they help - your comments being a prime example of this. If the Kurds won't do this - then they are fools. If they CAN'T do this, then it's absurd to saddle them with blame for the acts of PKK. Don't shoot all the dogs cuz one of them has fleas.
On #3, you seem to be saying that the new Islamist Gov't in Ankara is a bunch of poofs incapable of handling their Int'l affairs - and were simply (simplisme') manipulated by the French. Are you suggesting that they acted against their own better judgment - and that the true wishes of their Islamic legislature and leadership were otherwise? I don't believe it. Do you actually think this somehow makes it OK and discharges them of responsibility for their actions? I would have to disagree in the extreme. My MAIN point was the war in Iraq and the fate of US soldiers. I don't give two shits WHY the Turks are French tools - I care about the people who step up and do their jobs when the US calls upon them. They undoubtedly suffered greater losses due to the single front - a direct result of Turkish decisions and duplicity. Period. That was my main thrust and point for responding. I'll grant you all sorts of latitude regards the PKK, but I cannot accept your dismissal of this point. I can't help but wonder if you've ever been in the Green Machine and had your ass on the line... if not, then you should to take my point. If so, then you have my sympathy because you have Alzheimer's. That the Kurds, the people, should get a break in this world was a sidelight, but one that would please my sense of fair-play. Truth is, your use of the phrase "sob stories" was the invitation to include this. I was suckered! I stand by my desire for the Kurds to get their chance.
As for #4, they're too late, now. Damage done and no amount of future squirming will bring back a single US soldier. In my perverse mode, I would LOVE to be a fly on the wall at the next NATO meeting to hear the ranking Turkish military rep explain to the US military rep all of the reasons for their betrayal. Sorry, but they fucked us and will be held to account. It's that simple / simplisme'.
Summary - keep your cool about the PKK. Go after their supporters - not me. And, BTW, I am not intimidated by volume.
The country of Turkey, no matter how sympathetic you are for their being relegated to simpletons and badly used by the French does not change anything. They are complicit at the same level as the French, but the truly galling (gauling?) aspect is that their betrayal was NOT expected.
Truth is always the action(s), or lack, and words play no part.
BTW, wasn't there a Barzani or Bardzini guy whacked by Vito's kid Michael during the christening?
A couple of things here. I never called you a member or a supporter of the PKK, I simply noted that your argument would make perfect cannon fodder for someone justifying the Intifada.
for half of it was quoting me.
I find that quoting a debate opponent is the best way to refute their arguments. A personal taste, I admit.
If the PKK is nothing but a terrorist group, then they should be flushed by the Kurds, for they harm them far more than they help - your comments being a prime example of this. If the Kurds won't do this - then they are fools.
The PKK has had a relative sanctuary in northern Iraq ever since 1999 when Occalan was captured and his little insurgency was crushed inside of Turkey proper. That is KDP/PUK turf. They sure didn't waste time when it came to Ansar al-Islam, yet they have ignored the threat posed by the PKK. This may be stupid on their part, but it is what they are doing.
Don't shoot all the dogs cuz one of them has fleas.
I agree. If the Turks move against the PUK/KDP, then they're the ones in the wrong. They want to wipe out the PKK, more power to them.
you seem to be saying that the new Islamist Gov't in Ankara is a bunch of poofs incapable of handling their Int'l affairs - and were simply (simplisme') manipulated by the French. Are you suggesting that they acted against their own better judgment - and that the true wishes of their Islamic legislature and leadership were otherwise? I don't believe it.
I would like to try to convince you otherwise on this one, as the secular party in the parliament also voted against the motion to allow in US, troops, but I think we can discuss this at another time.
Do you actually think this somehow makes it OK and discharges them of responsibility for their actions?
Unequivocally no. I thought I said as much above.
That the Kurds, the people, should get a break in this world was a sidelight, but one that would please my sense of fair-play. Truth is, your use of the phrase "sob stories" was the invitation to include this. I was suckered! I stand by my desire for the Kurds to get their chance.
I agree! They should get their chance, but not under some kind of Marxist rule that sees Stalin or Lenin as some kind of a warped visionary. I think the Palestinians deserve their chance to, but handing them a state only to see it become an Islamic theocracy or a military dictatorship isn't giving them freedom or a real country, as they'll have no say in how things work.
Damage done and no amount of future squirming will bring back a single US soldier. In my perverse mode, I would LOVE to be a fly on the wall at the next NATO meeting to hear the ranking Turkish military rep explain to the US military rep all of the reasons for their betrayal. Sorry, but they fucked us and will be held to account.
Fair enough. I'm not excusing Turkish actions or what they did for our war plans and the losses that were potentially inflicted on our troops as far as losing our bases there goes. My primary point was that them making a bad decision (which I think they were manipulated into, you don't, we can agree to disagree) does not prevent them from having entirely legitimate concerns about the Kurdish terrorists in the northern part of Iraq and I think a lot of the anger and support for Kurdish nationalism that has come about in the last several weeks since Turkey refused to grant us basing rights is a result of misdirected anger that would not exist had those basing rights been granted.
BTW, wasn't there a Barzani or Bardzini guy whacked by Vito's kid Michael during the christening?
I'll have to watch the movie again, but I believe so.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
04/13/2003 1:27 Comments ||
Top||
#24
Hah! I may be out of my league here in terms of historical facts, but that won't stop me from jumping in. I'm only going to address #3 (tools of the French) because I think there is actually more concensus than disagreement on the other points.
While I agree with Dan that the Turks desire to get into the EU was the primary factor that led the Turks astray, I completely agree with PD that, (despite Michal Leeden and other conventional wisdom), the Turks were NOT hapless victims but greedy opportunists who gambled (went "for broke", if you know the term) and lost.
Originally I based my belief simply on their actions, (I did call the fact that the Turks would screw us while everyone else was claiming they would eventually come on board) but since that time I now base it on two facts, though I may be somewhat alone in heralding them: First - back in June/July of 2002, Yipee Er' Dog[an] met with "business leaders" in Iraq and came back and told Turkish business leaders that Iraq was their number one trading partner and that he was Mister Somebody for opening trade deals with them. Why is this relevant? Because it meant that for several years he worked towards ..and had an personal, if not actual financial, investment in improving trade relations with Iraq. What were the deals, if any? I don't know. But the fact that he issued press releases at the time bragging about his efforts to expend personal capital in this regard should be considered.
Second, in mid January of 2003, Yippie met with leaders in China and ON THE SAME DAY that he issued a press release announcing improved trade relations in terms of BILLIONS of dollars between Iraq and China, he made the statement that he supported a "peaceful solution" to the conflict in Iraq.
My analysis is this: With promises of increased trade in the billions of dollars from China, he could make up the billions lost from the deal with the US. By denying us the front, he would gain favor with the French and thus increase his chances of obtaining admittance to the EU.
At the time, there was much made about how the Turkish Generals would force the political leaders open the front to US troops. But they delayed, promising that after the election, things would be better. When Yippie was elected supposedly it was a BIG SURPRISE that they voted against us. Hmmm..I'm not buying it. Yippies stance must have been known to them. Denying us the front was Yippies best dream come true. He would curry favor with France and gain admittance to the EU (so he thought) and he would curry favor with the Arab Street(tm) by denying the us the front, thus humilating George Bush. The loss of financial incentives from the US would be made up with new deals in China (and deals in Iraq?). Yippie would be the HERO! Also believed at that time was that Britian would not be able to join us, as 1441 did not provide "legal" justification for the war. That "problem" was resolved only hours before the announcement of the 48 hour ultimatum.
I think they believed that the inability of Britian to join us, and their denial of the front were unsurmountable problems for the US. With France's encouragement they believed they held the cards that could make George Bush tuck his tail and run.
I think that the Turkish Generals, for reasons unclear to me, felt that by denying us the front, they would have better control over the Kurds in Iraq and the oil fields (I'm not going into detail here ...this is already too long). That Yippie was the man elected...a man with a personal stake in improving trade relations with Iraq and a promise from China to open billions in new channels of trade (while promoting a peaceful solution)....Yippie was their man. There were no "surprises" after the election, as they would have us believe.
They gambled they lost. But it was calculated and cunning. It wasn't happless and misguided.
#26
Does Turkey have ligit concerns about the Kurds?
Most certainly.
Should the Kurds wipe out the PKK?
Absolutly.
Is Turkey complicit in the deaths of Allied personel and Iraqi civliians?
Damn straight,it was Turkey's haggling like a Souq merchant that kept the 4ID sitting around on ships for weeks.
Was Turkey played by the French?
Yep,Chiraq played Turkey like a virgin.
Should the Allies forgive Turkish duplicity,and make nice?
Hell no,the should be treated as the venal,money grubbing creatures they are.
Relieved families brought babies and beer to welcome back the first British pilots to return from duty in the Persian Gulf Friday. British officials said earlier that some naval and air forces would soon leave the Gulf region after completing their missions in Iraq. Well done, lads. Take a break and see your families.
Rolfie Dunne, leader of the Royal Air Force 111 Squadron, was among the first to return, arriving at an airfield in Fife on Scotland's eastern coast with a handful of other Tornado pilots who had been based in Saudi Arabia. He fell to his knees and held his infant daughter, Alice, up in the air. "She is about twice the size of when I last saw her and this is a very emotional moment," said Dunne, whose squadron had been gone since February. "It is great to be home and I'm looking forward to spending time with my family, having a drink and doing all the normal domestic things."
The Ministry of Defense didn't give a timeline for the other redeployments. Armed Forces Minister Adam Ingram told British Broadcasting Corp. television that some armed forces would be returning, "but our commitment to Iraq remains 100 percent. ... This is by no means the beginning of a full-scale reduction." Defense Secretary Geoff Hoon said planes, helicopters and ships, including Britain's flagship aircraft carrier HMS Ark Royal, would shortly withdraw from the Gulf region. Many British troops are now engaged in restoring order to Iraq's second city, Basra, the scene of mass looting in recent days. Ingram said the withdrawals wouldn't affect British efforts to maintain order, while other officials said the looting was not surprising. "We recognize the problems associated with civil disorder and looting, but there's nothing unusual in this," Ingram said. "It's graphic, it's not nice to see, and it's sometimes very dangerous. But it's typical of regime collapse."
Posted by: Steve White ||
04/12/2003 03:32 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Thanks for your help! Have a cold one (or, if you Brits prefer, a warm one) and enjoy being back home!
Posted by: Dar ||
04/12/2003 11:12 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Thanks for the help, friends!
Posted by: Baba Yaga ||
04/12/2003 15:57 Comments ||
Top||
U.S. forces reopened two strategic bridges Saturday in the heart of Baghdad and crowds of looters surged across - taking advantage of access to new territory that had not already been plundered. U.S. forces did nothing to stop them. Iraqis expressed increasing frustration over lawlessness in the capital city, which continued for a fourth straight day since the arrival of U.S. troops and the fall of Saddam Hussein's regime. Looters have ransacked hospitals and schools and set fire to several government buildings. ``The Americans have disappointed us all. This country will never be operational for at least a year or two,'' said Abbas Reta, 51, an engineer and father of five. ``I've seen nothing new since Saddam's fall. All that we have seen is looting. The Americans are responsible. One round from their guns and all the looting would have stopped.''
"I mean, they've been here all this time, and it's not like they have anything else to do. They just don't behave a bit like the Iraqi army would..."
On Saturday, looters swarmed over the Al-Rasheed and the Al-Jumhuriya bridges across the Tigris River, which divides Baghdad. They pushed into several government buildings, including the Planning Ministry, which sits on the edge of the old palace presidential compound on the river's west bank. U.S. army troops and armor blocked access to the main palace grounds. Looters entered some buildings within the presidential compound on Saturday, though most had been damaged during the coalition's air and missile campaign, and some were smoldering until as recently as Friday. Shots rang out at one point from inside the Foreign Ministry and looters were seen rushing out and running for cover. They went back in moments later. U.S. forces did little but watch. Soldiers stood by at the presidential compound as looters some 400 yards away hauled bookshelves, computers and sofas from the Planning Ministry. I can understand protecting the hospitals and ordinary citizens. But Saddam's apparatus and the old government? Why should we care?
Bands of men removed wheels from damaged cars surrounding the presidential compound - even cars that were charred and overturned. Others dragged cars away, or plundered them for parts. Al-Jazeera's correspondent in Baghdad, Maher Abdallah, described the situation as ``tragic,'' and suggested it could have been prevented. ``They have ousted the regime and the authority, and in such an urban area where there is no tribal authority or rule, chaos should have been expected to break in such a way,'' Abdallah said. So put on an armband and start directing traffic.
U.S. officials insist the restoration of law and order will become a higher priority. The State Department said Friday it was sending 26 police and judicial officers to Iraq, the first component of a team that will eventually number about 1,200. The officers will be part of a group led by Jay Garner, the retired general chosen by the Bush administration to run the initial Iraqi civil administration under American occupation.
Posted by: Steve White ||
04/12/2003 03:28 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
For the most part it looks like the looters are just a volunteer cleanup crew. Most of the stuff will end up in the Bazzar or E-bay. We just transfered a lot of public assets to private hands.
Posted by: john ||
04/12/2003 20:24 Comments ||
Top||
Britain and the United States have correctly bypassed the United Nations to establish a secret team of inspectors to resume the search for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. It is a sign of the cooperation desperation in London and Washington to find a "smoking gun" to justify the war that the Anglo-American team has already conducted three inspections in the past two weeks. No banned weapons have so far been found. None in two weeks, compared to Blixie's 0 for forever.
The decision to set up a new group of inspectors, dubbed US-movic because they are an American-led rival to Unmovic, will infuriate the UN. Blixie might postpone his retirement! Er, nah. Kofi Annan, the secretary general, pointedly reminded Britain and the US this week that Unmovic still has a mandate to carry out inspections. "Sure, boys, come right ahead. Travel where you like. We'll provide some Marines for your security, and you'll reimburse us (full retail) for that. And of course we're going to vet your people for our own security reasons, and we'll have cooperative observers working next to you."
Last night the chief weapons inspector, Hans Blix, added his criticism by saying that war against Iraq was a foregone conclusion months before the first shot was fired. In a scathing attack on Britain and the US, Mr Blix accused them of planning the war "well in advance" and of "fabricating" evidence against Iraq to justify their campaign. Well of course we planned it well in advance. You don't just move a quarter million superb soldiers halfway around the world in a week. And remember, Blixie, it was our pressure that got you anything from Saddam.
Mr Blix told the Spanish daily El Pais: "There is evidence that this war was planned well in advance. Sometimes this raises doubts about their attitude to the [weapons] inspectors inspections." He said Iraq was paying "a very high price — in terms of human lives and the destruction of a country" when the threat of banned weapons could have been contained by UN inspections. Back to that again, are we?
The role played by the new inspectors, who set up a base in Kuwait a week before the war began, was disclosed to the Guardian by David Kay, the former head of Unscom, the arms inspections team which left Iraq in 1998 after Iraq accused it of being infiltrated by spies. No mention has been made of the new group by ministers or military spokesmen, who have indicated that weapons inspections are carried out by military forces. But the group, headed by Charles Duelfer, a former deputy head of the Unscom weapons inspectors, has travelled extensively in Iraq. It is understood that Mr Duelfer's team was called in to inspect weapons and papers found at an airbase in Iraq's western desert two weeks ago. In the past week it has made two separate visits to sites on the road between Kuwait and Baghdad. So they hit the ground running. Good.
The failure to find any weapons of mass destruction after three weeks of war has raised questions about the casus belli. But British intelligence officials said it might be months before evidence was uncovered. A cabinet minister has told the Guardian that Saddam Hussein's failure to use chemical weapons was not an indication of their absence. They had been dismantled and their contents hidden around the country. "The regime has not had time to reassemble the things," a British official said. And fortunately won't have time in the future.
"You will not find a factory of gleaming missiles," a source said. "They would have been broken down ages ago." Mr Kay described the new inspectors as a "robust group of people". "There are special forces teams that carry out [immediate] inspections. But they are not as technically based as the Kuwait team, who are heavily science-based civilians." A spokesman for Mr Blix, Ewen Buchanan, said the US-led team had tried and failed to recruit some of his staff. Paul Rogers, professor of peace studies at Bradford University, said the existence of the expert out in the open secret team would lead to a major dispute. "You are more likely to find what you want if you do it yourself," he said. "If this team finds a smoking gun, people will not believe it." Screw 'em. If we find it we'll show it to the world except CNN. People can draw their own conclusions. Frankly this upsets me a great deal -- Mr. Rogers might well remember just how has credibility, and who doesn't, between us and Blixie.
I'm still trying to figure why we give a rat's patou about the opinions of a "professor of peace studies."
The disclosure is not likely to embarrass British ministers, who are officially committed to allowing Unmovic a role. Adam Ingram, the armed forces minister, would only say yesterday that Britain and the US had set up a "machinery" for resuming inspections. "It may take some time," he added. Which we now have.
Posted by: Steve White ||
04/12/2003 02:43 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Perhaps the Field Marshal and Generals wearing Baath Party uniforms who just surrendered to the Marines at the Palastine Hotel will have some info on the weapons and location/status of our POW's - just saw it live on Fox (yep RG, on Fox)
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/12/2003 8:36 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Reuters says it was Saddam's top scientific advisor - Al-Masadi? one of the 55
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/12/2003 8:40 Comments ||
Top||
#3
oops.... General Amer Al-Saadi
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/12/2003 8:50 Comments ||
Top||
#4
I'll bet Al-Saadi tells a different story to the US than the "We have no WMD's..." bit he used to parrot to the world press... He will have no special value to us if he doesn't come clean - and you can bet he knows it. To save his sorry ass, we'll get much if not all of the truth, whatever that turns out to be.
Regards Blix & El-Baradai - I suggest that absolutely NO UN personnel be permitted within the borders of Iraq. If found, they should be expelled. The UN is DEAD. They have no mandate or rights in Iraq and they convey no legitimacy to anything.
The US should do this alone, if necessary, and we'd better do it right. We get one shot. If we DO get it right, then it will unravel the whole M.E. collection of Dictatorships and Monarchies. This is a GREAT thing, IMHO. These guys are the main providers of funds, weapons, material, and bases of operations for terrorism. THIS must be done to win TWAT (The War Against Terror). Love that acronym...
Our stickiest problem, IMHO, will be our own slimy sneaky shit-for-brains politicians - many of them will attempt to hijack the post-war phase - for petty personal gain. Biden and others are already working on their PR game. Everyone needs to do their part to keep their own Senators and Reps honest. They fear US, for we give them their power. Let's use that to slap 'em down when they get in the way.
#5
We should allow UN people into Iraq only if they wear UN insignia. That way the Iraqis can show them the back of the foot and those images will reinforce the message that the weasels have yet to get.
#6
If I was Joe Iraqi, and I saw a UN insignia chap, I think that I would find the nearest knife or machete and start sharpening it in the UN-ik's presence and see what happens...
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
04/12/2003 21:19 Comments ||
Top||
#7
The UN has 12 years to find weapons, and didn't. Now they're bitching that we haven't found any that satisfies them in 3 weeks?
I dunno....maybe we could have found something if we weren't distracted by discoveries of torture chambers and kiddie jails.
Posted by: Baba Yaga ||
04/13/2003 0:40 Comments ||
Top||
#8
The many rumored-but-didn't-pan-out WMD reports we've already had should bolster the credibility of our present inspectors. If they were out to fake or plant evidence, they would have done so already. Instead, they spend their time shooting down overblown reports filed by embedded reporters and rumor mongers. The logic of why they would make stuff up after shooting down so much made-up stuff simply escapes me. Guess I'm unfit to be a Hollywood actor, Democratic politician or network newscaster. Sorry 'bout that.
Six months after terrorist bombs devastated two nightclubs and killed more than 200 people, the tourist island of Bali is still trying to get back on its feet. Nearly a third of people have lost their jobs. Resort restaurants remain eerily empty. Many hotels have so few guests that owners are using the lull for maintenance and renovation. Things are slowly getting better — the economy is growing again, manufacturing and exports were largely unaffected, and the peak tourist season is still ahead. But the last few months have been tough both emotionally and financially.
Just a little gift to the nation from its Islamists...
The Oct. 12 bombings were the world's deadliest terrorist strike since Sept. 11, 2001. Most of the victims were foreign tourists, mainly from Australia. In March, the last of their remains were cremated along with offerings of flowers and bamboo leaves, then scattered in the sea by Hindu priests. Authorities have correctly blamed the attack on Jemaah Islamiyah - an al-Qaida-related group operating across Southeast Asia. Authorities have netted 29 hard boysscumverminjihadis suspects from around the Indonesian archipelago, none of whom were from Bali. The fallout has been hard on Bali, which since the 1930s has been a premier destination for travelers seeking an exotic retreat, a place of mystery and beauty. The island had built an international reputation on its lush tropical jungles, elaborately carved temples, emerald green rice terraces and dramatic volcanic scenery. The United States and other countries slapped travel warnings on Indonesia, and tourism - which accounts for three-quarters of economic activity on the island - dropped by 80 percent in the first two months after the blasts. Exploding bombs tend to do that.
Visitor spending in Bali, which accounts for about half of the $4.5 billion that Indonesia earns annually from tourism, dropped to almost nothing before starting slow growth again in early 2003. That recovery has continued despite the war in Iraq, the outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome in Southeast Asia, and the fact that the January-May rainy season always draws the fewest tourists. War, terrorist attacks, unknown deadly viral illness and rain: everything I want in a vacation.
Australians, who had accounted for at least two-thirds of Bali's guests, have mainly stayed away. But Singaporeans, Taiwanese, Japanese, South Koreans, Germans, Russians, and other Europeans have been taking up some of the slack, attracted by special package promotions. The partial success of the police investigation into the bombing and pervasive security measures have helped reassure visitors. Island police are now being assisted by citizen groups that patrol their villages and perform spot identity checks. On Thursday, the U.S. State Department allowed its nonessential staff - but not their families - to return to the embassy in Indonesia.
Yeah. The next atrocity will probably be someplace else — likely the roving gangs of thugs in Djakarta will find a busload of foreigners and kill them all...
Investors say they are optimistic. One sector of Bali's economy - that of small, export-oriented manufacturing - appears not to have been affected by the attacks. Businessmen who run such companies say the drop in tourist revenues has barely had an impact on their bottom lines. Failure of the bombings to upset exports may even have persuaded foreign businessmen that Bali is the safest location in Indonesia for long-term investment, said John Hardy, who runs the U.S.-based John Hardy Collection, a maker of jewelry and housewares. The company employees about 600 local workers. ``Business is stable, we're not in a downward spiral, and I've never felt any apprehension about the future,'' Hardy said. Maybe because the locals don't explode themselves, unlike certain imports.
Maybe because the locals are honest, hard-working Hindus, instead of screaming, eye-rolling, spittle-spewing Islamists...
Posted by: Steve White ||
04/12/2003 02:59 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
Cities beget their own legends, and there is a legend of Baghdad, and its conquest by the Mongols in 1258--the end of the Islamic caliphate and the beginning of an age of decline and disorder. In the legend, the brilliant city of learning was thoroughly sacked; the books in its vast libraries were dumped in the Tigris, and thousands of the city's people were put to the sword. In the fevered imagination of the crowds chanting Saddam Hussein's name, in the Arab lands away from Baghdad, those men and women of the American-led coalition are the new Mongols. History does not always instruct, though; its analogies often go astray. It was in the nature of things that those crowds in Arab lands far from Saddam's great prison would raise the Iraqi dictator's banners. It was of a piece with the sorrows and retrogressions of contemporary Arab political culture that the muftis in Beirut and Damascus and Cairo would call on the believers to rise up in Iraq's defense and give the master of Baghdad religious cover. There was no way of conciliating the Arabs to this campaign, no public diplomacy that could still the fury of those crowds. A contrived sympathy for the Iraqi people suddenly crowds the airwaves and the printed media of Arab lands. Through the hard years of Saddam's rule, however, these same Arab media had nothing to say about the manner in which he and his fellow Tikritis shattered the autonomy of Iraq's Shiite shrine cities and executed or drove into exile countless ulema, or religious scholars. The Iraqi ruler tormented and deprived his country, and turned its political life into a private dominion of his clan, his sons and his retainers, but the crowds in Cairo and Casablanca and Amman had paid that tale of disinheritance and terror no heed.
Terror--and silence. In 1991, the Iraqi regime waged a brutal war against Iraq's Shiite majority: Tens of thousands perished in a campaign of unspeakable cruelty. "No more Shiites after today," the guardians of the regime proclaimed. Saddam wanted to administer an unforgettable lesson to his Shiite subjects, and thus it was that he sent into the Shiite centers his dreaded cousin, Ali Hassan al-Majid ("Chemical Ali" is his nickname, given to him after his use of chemical weapons on Iraqi Kurds three years earlier). Chemical Ali left behind him in the southern part of Iraq a searing memory of fear and terror. Yet no demonstrators flooded the streets of Arab cities back then, no Muslims took to the streets of France and Belgium. Cairenes paid not the slightest attention. The thing was written off as the age-old violence of Iraq, retribution handed out by a faithful son of the Araby determined to keep the "Arabism" (read Sunni Arab dominion) of Iraq, and its borders, intact.
The Arabs are clearly watching, and seeing, a wholly different war. No credit is given for the lengths to which the architects of this campaign have gone to make the blows against the Iraqi regime as precise as possible, to spare the country's civilians, oil wealth, and infrastructure. You can't convince the millions of Arabs who receive their truth from the satellite channel al Jazeera, or from the London-based Arabic dailies, that these Western commanders are no rampaging "crusaders" bent on dispossessing Iraqis of their oil wealth. Pity a people left to such craven victimology and willful denial. A thoughtful Saudi commentator, Abdul Rahman Al Rashed, has seen in the fevered way this war is covered a continuity with the old ways of days past. The new technology and satellite channels, he says, mimic the journalism of the West. But the borrowed technology is put at the service of an old and stubborn refusal to face and name things as they are.
The task of reforming the Arab world cannot be the overriding concern of the predominantly young men and women entrusted with fighting this war. But the promise of reform must be there to vindicate and redeem the campaign. In the latest dispatches, the holy city of Najaf was reported jubilant. It was like the "liberation of Paris," an American officer said of the throngs that gathered around their liberators. The redemption of this war will come on Iraqi soil, with the tales told by Iraqis finally let loose from a long, brutalizing captivity. In the end, it will not really matter what Cairo and Gaza think of this war.
#1
When Iraq is a country again there is a chance (although only a chance), that the new government will speak truth to their Arab neighbors in a way that will be understood. Odds against it but worth a try.
Source: 1924.org 1924.org is a British site, apparently affiliated with Hizb ut-Tehrir...
The Crusaders have marched into Baghdad after three weeks of merciless bombardment with bombs and missiles that have killed thousands. Those who were not killed or injured in the attacks suffered as the Crusaders knocked out vital infrastructure such as water and electricity works, in their bid to catch one man - Saddam. Was it any surprise then that the western "embedded" journalists - the Muslim ones having been murdered by US forces - painstakingly struggled to obtain angles that would show the streets full of jubilant people welcoming the US troops? Where were the five million people of Baghdad? Where were the scenes reminiscent of the fall of communism in Russia and across Eastern Europe? Hmmm... Yasss... Murdered by U.S. troops. I like that...
Of the five million inhabitants, only a few were seen greeting US troops. A few hundred were seen defiling anything related to Saddam, and hundreds more were busy stripping Saddam's palaces of whatever they could get their hands on. The remaining people - the majority - were out of sight, wary of the presence of those who have sought to starve and kill them for over a decade. They had not spent the previous weeks resisting the invasion of these forces because of any love for Saddam; the screams were "Allahu Akbar" not "Long live Saddam". They did it for Islam, and though they resisted bravely and many became Shaheed, they could not hold out with just rifles. Clearly the only people that are rejoicing are the Crusaders, and those few exiles who are besotted with the western way of life. There are many signs that this war has gone against the western interests, and has furthered the cause of the Muslims and Islam. Those signs are right there, you just have to look really, really close to find them...
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
04/12/2003 11:12 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
where? - I can't see them. Damn these glasses..
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/12/2003 11:16 Comments ||
Top||
#2
These delusional, sun baked Islamisist psychopaths insist on living in a fantasy world of revenge, denial, and cultural failure. Given a choice between freedom and oppression, they choose oppression every time. There is no point of trying to reason with these people. Just periodically kick them in the ass. It's what they deserve.
Posted by: C F B Lagoon ||
04/12/2003 11:37 Comments ||
Top||
#3
"There are many signs that this war has gone against the western interests, and has furthered the cause of the Muslims and Islam."
France is not the same as "the West", guy. And since Iraqis are Moslems, yes, their interests have been enhanced and will continue to be. But not Muslims, if I may make a distinction.
Posted by: John Anderson ||
04/12/2003 12:23 Comments ||
Top||
#4
What about Woolsey's assertion that WWIV has already begun? Actually on 9-11, and we STILL aren't awake. American lives were lost in Iraq bringing down a state sponsor of terrorism. We're euphoric, but still sleeping. The REAL enemy is not Assad, Musharrif or Saud, or any state leader, but those thousands of imams who are indoctrinating their children about 'The Great Satan'.
They haven't been touched.
Posted by: Scott ||
04/12/2003 13:15 Comments ||
Top||
#5
You're right, Scott. This is only one campaign in WW4 - low-hanging, but strategically placed fruit. Each success of going to make the subsequent campaigns easier, but it's still not going to be a snap. And it's not going to be over until the imams are either dead or agnostic.
Posted by: Fred ||
04/12/2003 20:25 Comments ||
Top||
SANA: Damascus Radio on Saturday stressed the necessity for achieving solidarity among Arab countries to stand by and help the Iraqi people in his crisis underlining Iraqâs right to a government which is reliable by the Iraqi people and able to manage the country affairs. Like Sammy's was...
The radio said that the Iraqi people is suffering the chaos and regretful practices resulting from absence of political and security forces. The radio indicated that peopleâs right to self-determination is a legitimate right and that Iraq, in spite of all suffering being exposed to, has sincere leaderships believe in home and nation. In Baathist ideology, rights reside with the state, in the person of the Leader, keep in mind. The People⢠is an abstract, which is personified by the Leader, kind of the vanguard of the hoi-polloi...
The radio concluded that Syria was and is still holding on the international legitimacy resolutions and will stand with the Iraqi people and continue her efforts for the establishment of the Arab solidarity with Iraqâs people in order to keep his unity, future and security. 'Nother words, Syria's efforts will be directed toward nudging the New Iraq back into the fold of Arab Solidarityâ¢. Just so we know.
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
04/12/2003 07:57 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Info Man's working at Damascus Radio now?
Posted by: Baba Yaga ||
04/13/2003 0:51 Comments ||
Top||
State Prosecutor Adnan Addoum said Friday that the number of suspects arrested in connection with last Saturdayâs bomb attempt targeting the McDonaldâs restaurant at Dora had reached 18. In a statement, Addoum said that the 18-member network, which was involved in other bomb attempts against other American restaurants, included two enlisted members in the countryâs compulsory military service. The two belong to the Salafi hard-line Islamic religious group, the statement said. I notice they don't say which one...
The state prosecutor said that the group was planning several acts of terrorism âagainst US business interests.â He also said four suspects had worked on placing the bomb in the McDonaldâs restaurant toilet. The bomb had exploded and wounded three people. The same network was also involved in placing explosives in a Renault 18 car in the restaurantâs parking lot. Other suspects had worked on changing the carâs color and wiping off the fingerprints on the carâs engine, the statement said. The car was supposed to explode when the customers ran outside, but it didn't go off... That's probably the way they knew they were Salafists.
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
04/12/2003 07:26 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
The Judicial Council postponed the trial session of Dinnieh clashes suspects Friday to May 16, due to the absence of suspect Nasser Ahmad. Suspect Haitham Saleh attended the session, which was presided over by Magistrate Tanios Khoury. The session was aimed at listening to the statements of both Nasser and Saleh, who were released pending investigations. Dinnieh suspects are facing trials on charges of undermining state security by participating in clashes that left several people dead and many others injured, including army personnel, in the northern area in 2000. They are believed to be headed by Ahmad Abdel-Karim al-Saadi, alias Abu Mehjan. Authorities have announced that the Palestinian Muslim fundamentalist is hiding in the refugee camp of Ain al-Hilweh near Sidon. The Dinnieh gang is protected by Jamaat al-Nour, which is a minigroup operating in Ein el-Hilweh that wants to be Ansar al-Islam. They were part of a group called Takfir wa al-Hijra, which consisted of 200-300 Sunni "militants" (read Krazed Killers), who had established themselves in the mountains of Dinnieh, east of Tripoli, in northern Lebanon. In 2000, 13,000 Lebanese army troops backed by tanks and artillery defeated them and broke them up. There are the usual Afghan connection, and financing by Osama bin Laden. The remaining leaders of the group are holed up in Hilweh.
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
04/12/2003 07:13 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
Party officials called Friday for the unity of Iraq and rejected US threats addressed to Syria. A statement issued by the Baath Party, after the visit of a Hentchak delegation, stressed the two partiesâ solidarity to preserve Iraqâs unity and âleave the Iraqi people to choose their own dictator fate.â The Hentchak Party delegation was led by secretary-general Sebouh Kalpakian and two members of the party. They met with the regional secretary of the Baath Party, Baalbek-Hermel MP Assem Qanso and other party officials. The statement asserted their âutter refusalâ for the threats against Syria and called upon the Lebanese to unify ranks and cooperate with Syria to face all regional and external threats. "Yes! Let us get on board with Syria and present a united front so we can be dismantled together, just like the Iraqis..."
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
04/12/2003 06:11 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
The National Liberal Party (NLP) said that it hoped the war in Iraq would be over soon, adding that Iraq should remain united no matter what the form of government selected for that country. In a statement issued by the party, after holding a meeting of its higher council headed by party president Dory Chamoun, the NLP said that it deplored the attacks that targeted journalists and civilians in Iraq. The NLP condemned last weekendâs attack against the McDonaldâs restaurant in Dora and praised the authoritiesâ efforts in finding the network behind the bombing. The NLP called for âhalting the random arrests that the authorities have been carrying out, with the aim of terrorizing, intimidating members of opposition groups and frustrating them enough to leave the country.â Tough, being a western-style liberal in Syrian-occupied Lebanon, isn't it?
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
04/12/2003 06:08 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
Palestinian police handed over to Israel weapons confiscated from militant groups, in an unprecedented confidence-building measure as the intifada continued to rage Friday with several wounded by Israel in the Gaza Strip. Yes. That's my jaw on the floor. Try not to step on it...
In one of the most tangible signs of Israeli-Palestinian cooperation in months, the Israeli Army said Friday that Palestinian police in the eastern West Bank city of Jericho had handed over weapons seized from armed militant groups. âThe Palestinians in Jericho handed over a stack of weapons, including 12 empty gas canisters filled with explosives, around 50 home-made grenades and an anti-tank rocket,â the army said in a statement. The move came just two months after the army lifted a blockade imposed on Jericho, the only major town to have escaped Israelâs reoccupation of the West Bank in June 2002. Jericho apparently wants to avoid being occupied. That must be where the Paleos keep their guys with 3-digit IQs...
The Israeli tabloid Maariv said Friday the deal had been approved by several Palestinian officials, including newly-appointed Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas. The US and Israel have pushed for the creation of Abbasâ power-sharing position, pinning their hopes on the dovish veteran to sideline Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat and take concrete steps to end the 30-month-old cycle of bloodshed.
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
04/12/2003 06:03 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Abbas may be the Gorbachev to Arafat's Brezhnev.
#2
That's the town where Arafat has a casino that used to operate until couple of months into the Intifada.
Posted by: marek ||
04/12/2003 20:42 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Now that Saddam's not around to hand out big fat checks to the families of suicide bombers, maybe we'll be seeing more cooperation from the Palestinians.
Posted by: Baba Yaga ||
04/13/2003 0:43 Comments ||
Top||
Senior Shiite cleric Sayyed Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah welcomed Friday the collapse of the Iraqi regime but urged the Iraqis to form a democratic government free of US control. "We've found Syrian control works ever so much better..."
Iraqi people âcelebrated the end of a nightmare witnessed by them and the whole Arab and Muslim nation, refusing to replace one nightmare with another and a tyrant with foreign occupation,â he said during a sermon at the Hasanein Mosque in Haret Hreik, Beirut. Not that any Arab or Muslim nation lifted a finger to replace the first nightmare. And lifting a finger to replace the second nightmare will have worse consequences...
The Iraqis should unite and create a âunified Iraq, open to the whole people with charity and fairness,â he said. âI urge you to preserve the security and wealth of people around you and I urge you to plan for the future, to be rational, to show the world that the civilized Iraqi people will not fall before the chaos that the occupation could exploit.â Maybe he should just just it a little bit of time and see what happens now that the civilized Iraqi people have been stopped from attaching auto batteries to each other's genitalia...
Although Fadlallah condemned the US-led war that left many civilians dead, he praised the fall of the regime âthat had regressed historyâ with its tyrannic methods. "Damn them Merkins for doing something good... I'm so confused. I think I'll go lie down..."
He also called on the Arabs to close ranks and put conflicts aside to face the delicate situation that could âshake our political, security, economic and cultural realityâ in light of American threats. âLetâs end many marginal disagreements and various types of fanaticism. US President George W. Bush said
before this war that he would spread death and terror throughout the Earth to protect his nation with preventive wars submitted by the Jews, who dominated the US administration and the president himself,â Fadlallah said. Oh, he did not. Mullah Fudlullah'd better watch it. His pants are going to catch fire.
He said US warnings to Syria, Iran and North Korea were based on an âillusion,â and he accused the United States of acting âas if it had tutelage over the whole world.â Only the most ignorant backwaters...
US officials have warned Damascus against supplying Iraq with weapons and called on Syria to halt its pursuit of weapons of massive destruction and its support for âterrorism.â Like "Islamic Jihad," which is headquartered in "Damascus." And "Hezbollah," which is headquartered in "Lebanon." Get the picture?
Fadlallah also warned the Iraqis not to be deceived by âattractive slogans.â "Don't believe those infidels! They'll lie to you!"
âThey should be aware of the future, during which the occupation might impose a new tyrannic regime on them, camouflaged under a democratic cover,â he said. "Just because you've got elections and representation and personal liberty and you're secure in your home doesn't mean you're really free. Real freedom comes only with rule by holy men, pious men with turbans, and automatic weapons..."
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
04/12/2003 04:57 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Looks like Saddam's enemy is also our enemy. No surprises here. No money for him or his ilk, and death for the people who help him organize terrorists attacks against us. (I always thought this campaign wasn't bloody enough; the great thing about killing millions of civilians during WWII was that the enemy knew they were defeated at the end of it). Setting this thing up as liberation may turn out to be a major mistake. I'm waiting for Iraqis to revert to their standard anti-American stances.
At the same time, not killing huge numbers of Iraqis did help us finish the job with fewer casualties. Of course, now that we control the place, we can pretty much do what we have to in order to ensure our security. Bush has shown no squeamishness about robust rules of engagement. I suspect Iraqis who think we're soft are going to find out they're making a mistake. We might not show the flag, but we will kill people who threaten our troops.
edited for length...
March 31, Villepin spoke with Libyan Foreign Minister Abd-al-Rahman Muhammad Shalqam. Had the BBC not monitored Libyan radio, the conversation might have gone unnoticed in the English-speaking world.
"During the contact," said Libyan radio, "they [Villepin and Shalqam] discussed the American-British aggression on Iraq, the need to stop this war, the massacres targeting the sons of the Iraqi people and their severe suffering, the need to launch an international initiative to put an end to the aggression, return to international legality and prevent America and Britain from persisting in this aggression."
Was France pretending in the English-speaking world to support the American cause and in the Arabic-speaking world to support the anti-American cause? I sent the BBC transcript to the French Embassy in Washington with two questions:
"Does the French government repudiate Libyan radio's characterization of Mr. Villepin's conversation with Abd-al-Rahman Muhammad Shalqam?"
"Did Mr. Villepin make clear to the Libyan minister in this conversation that France wants the United States and Great Britain to win the war against Saddam Hussein?"
A French spokeswoman e-mailed me a statement.
"Our Minister had a conversation with his Lybian (sic) counterpart on March 31," it said. "Indeed what the BBC reported is the way Lybian (sic) radio and media in general characterized this phone call.
"Our Minister recalled our position that we didn't favour the military action launched by the coalition forces without UN Security Council agreement. But at the same time, he emphasized the necessity to preserve the unique and central role of the UN. Thus, he stated that the proposal put forward by some members of the Arabic League before the UNGA [UN General Assembly] to declare the war illegal and illegitimate and to appeal to an immediate ceasefire would only contribute to the division of the international community where unity was needed to face the coming challenges in Iraq (reconstruction, democracy building, etc.). So he advised his Lybian (sic) counterpart to act cautiously and not present any counterproductive initiative."
France is keeping its powder dry. But for what?
The pattern of French diplomacy suggests an answer. France is seeking rapprochement with Libya. Jacques Chirac recently became the first French president in 40 years to visit Algeria. France coordinated its actions throughout the Iraq crisis with Syria. Chirac is promoting discredited Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, in anticipation of post-war action on the Israeli-Palestinian issue. He sent Arafat, anathematized by the Bush Administration, a friendly letter on March 20, and talked to him by phone March 25.
In October, Chirac attended a "Francophone Summit" in Beirut with many Arab leaders. Lebanese President Emile Lahhud opened it with a speech the National Post of Canada described as "a screed against Israel's existence." Sheikh Nasrallah, chairman of the terrorist group Hezbollah, sat in the front row. At the end of the event, reported Beirut's Tele-Liban TV, "Chirac congratulated President Lahhud again on his exceptional performance during the Francophone Summit."
The Arab press was ecstatic. Lebanon's As Safir credited France for promoting "an attitude of defiance toward U.S. hegemony." "Unquestionably," said the Omani newspaper Al Watan, "France has succeeded in using the summit for its political interests in the Middle East as it wants to build political and diplomatic strongholds in the region to confront the U.S. policy on the Middle East."
Opposing the Iraq war was but a prelude. France has mounted the world stage again using the Middle East as its footstool. It will now seek to lead willing reactionary Arab states against U.S. policy in post-war Iraq as well as in negotiations on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Posted by: Baba Yaga ||
04/12/2003 04:15 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Sorry, hit the enter key before I could sign this and clean it up a little.
Posted by: Baba Yaga ||
04/12/2003 16:27 Comments ||
Top||
#2
--massacres targeting the sons of the Iraqi people --
If the "sons" would put down their weapons, they wouldn't be targeted, would they?
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/12/2003 17:02 Comments ||
Top||
#4
The "sons of Iraq" already learned to put down their weapons...at least when the military is looking at them. Now they attack the journalists instead.
#5
Won't be long before Paris is the Beirut of Europe.
Posted by: Dick Saucer ||
04/12/2003 18:02 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Also sitting in that front row in Beruit was Jean Chretien, who immediately denied he knew who Nasrullah was. There is a pattern forming here (although it is entirely possible he does not know who Chirac is either).
Posted by: john ||
04/12/2003 19:25 Comments ||
Top||
This is significant...
Iran' former president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani on Saturday said Iran's resumption of ties with the US could be put to a referendum. Rafsanjani, talking to `Rahbord' weekly, said the problem of Iran's relations with the US could be resolved through a referendum once the Parliament (Majlis) and the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei approve it. Do y'think it could be that they've been watching, and may be coming to the conclusion that fighting it out with the U.S. might not be the best course to follow? If you've ruled out fisticuffs, then the next best thing is to try and talk sense to your adversary. Since Rafsanjani's the hardliner's hardliner, perhaps watching the next door neighbor getting beaten with a two-by-four sunk in at the highest levels...
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
04/12/2003 01:16 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
With some people like Raffy, speaking softly may not work, but he is certainly impressed by the big stick...Now we may start speaking softly to him and he may begin to listen.....
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
04/12/2003 14:06 Comments ||
Top||
#2
maybe the iranians are also realizing the US is not attacking Islam
Posted by: robert ||
04/12/2003 14:27 Comments ||
Top||
#3
This is anoher assault by the elected government on the pre-eminent power of the mullahs. They have been chipping away, mostly by publicizing what they are doing that the people want and then publicizing the immediate vetoes by the fanatics. It's slow, but I hope it works.
Posted by: John Anderson ||
04/12/2003 14:38 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Bravo, Mr. Rafsanjani! A step in the right direction!
Posted by: Tom ||
04/12/2003 14:56 Comments ||
Top||
#5
"Nobody but Nixon could go to China."
Having the hardliners propose it means it's legit. They want to talk. Talking is good. So is slowing and allowing inspections of their nuclear development program, which should be the first topic of conversation.
I think they're probably pinning a "kick me" sign on Pakistan's back this week, too...
#6
I think you people have to remember that the elected presidents of Iran are not the problem. They are usually the moderate, progressive forward thinking people. Unfortunately, all the power lies with the unelected Mullahs that like to champion 'Death to America'
#7
The thing is, the Mullahs power base is aging out of the population, kind of liek the hippies are aging out of ours. Just like the "aging hippies" desperate attmepts to motivate and capture young people ideaologically with protests on this war (which failed miserably as the were shown to be anit-Bush agitators in the pay of the Communist/Socialist left), so the Mullahs have failed to win over the students and many of thier formerly middle class parents with their opposition to what is clearly a liberation of Iraq and the removal of a threat to their nation.
The question remains, however, will it be a Soviet Union style coup from within, with Rafsanjani playing Gorbachev (and an as yet unknown Yeltsin to man the barricades), or will this simply be another sad Islamic devolution into self destructive civil war and strong-man government (Pakistan).
hopefully the example we set in Iraq by implanting and supporting a republican/federation democracy will plant similar seeds in Iran. Similar population in terms of intellectuals, natural wealth, and overseas refugees.
`Iran Daily' on Saturday wrote that the sudden disappearance of all the elements of the Baathist regime with no word of arrest of any high-ranking Iraqi official in the past few days has raised suspicion in the minds of the gobal community. Hmmm... Prob'ly insidious plots and conspiracies against Islam, I'd say. How 'bout you?
The incidents which have occurred in the past three days in the war-torn country suggest "behind-the-scene deals between the coalition forces and Saddam Hussein, the truth of which may never be revealed the same way the ugly incidents of the September 11 attacks in Washington remain unclear," added the English-language daily in its Perspective column. Toldja so.
Elements of Saddam Hussein's regime and the Iraqi Army's sudden disappearance from Baghdad on Wednesday made work for the American forces more easy as they entered the Iraqi capital with hardly any resistance. The widespread looting and plundering of government centers in Baghdad were the obvious evidences of a collapsing regime as TV screens showed pictures of Iraqis taking whatever things of value they could get their hands on—from computer chairs to cars, office furniture and air conditioners—the daily noted. What is surprising is that it took two weeks for the Iraqi Army's resistance to collapse in Basra but only two days for coalition forces to capture the Iraqi capital Baghdad. "How can Saddam's regime, infamous for its braggadocio, collapse so easily? How is it that the Iraqi Army has surrendered Baghdad without putting up any resistance?" asked the paper. Perhaps because there was nothing there but braggadocio? Naw, that can't be it...
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
04/12/2003 01:11 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Could be the fact that there wasn't much of an army left to fight had something to do with it, too.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
04/12/2003 13:47 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Their pride is hurting because they fought Saddam for years with nothing to show for it except heavy losses, and then we brought Saddam down in a few weeks. Such a mystery. Gives them something good to think about.
Posted by: Tom ||
04/12/2003 14:50 Comments ||
Top||
#3
This is exactly what one of the ME commentators said Thursday. If you have DISH, check out worldlink TV at 9410. I think this program's on about 12:30 AM CDT. Very interesting perspective.
#4
Achmed!, We fought Iraq for 8 years lost half a million men and only moved about 10 miles into iraq. The infidel Americans fought for 3 weeks and captured the entire country, losing less men than were killed by a washed up 80's band in a small night club.
Perhaps we should send the infidel american ambassador a fruit basket and an invitation to this weekends ice cream social so we might become better friends. We'd better do that before they take a right turn out of Bagdhad and kick our sorry asses all the way to islamabad.
and by the way, take down those damn "America is great satan" billboards on the highway, those things are gonna get our asses burnt big time.
Posted by: Frank Martin ||
04/12/2003 16:57 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Part of the Fox inter-segment graphics the other day was flash of a pair of grinning Iraqi men, both with what looked suspiciously like kitcen sinks slung over their shoulders, waving to the cameras...
President Mohammad Khatami on Friday stressed the need to "strengthen peaceful coexistence" among Shia and Sunni communities in Iran during a tour of southeastern Sistan and Baluchestan province which has a major Sunni population. Khatami's visit to the province follows that of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in February in which he warned of the enemies' "complicated plots" to stoke up tensions among ethnic and religious lines in Iran. "The enemy is very active behind the scene and by using many tricks, including by insulting Shiite and Sunni Muslims' beliefs, seeks to pit religious groups against one another," Ayatollah Khameneisaid. Oooh! Deep-laid plots, insidious conspiracies! I like it!
Like the supreme leader, President Khatami aims to meet local people and supervise the state of affairs in the province which borders Afghanistan and Pakistan. Sistan and Baluchestan suffers from infrastructural backwardness, bearing the brunt of a crippling drought for several years and drug trade in the province. Khatami cited "enormous potentials" in the province, saying "if necessary efforts are made to suitably exploit them, there will be a massive revolution in economic and cultural fields in the province". Illiteracy is a major problem in the province, where "a large number of women and girls are deprived of education because of wrong traditions and beliefs of families", the president added. I'm still not real clear on the difference between Baluchis and Pashtuns — I think it might be that they were different colored turbans. They act the same...
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
04/12/2003 01:02 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
'Illiteracy is a major problem in the province, where "a large number of women and girls are deprived of education because of wrong traditions and beliefs of families", the president added.'
Bet Khamenei just loved that statement. And the "massive revolution" tag is a way of warning the Ayatollahs that their power to shoot their own people is waning. The elected government keeps chipping away at the unelected fanatics...
Posted by: John Anderson ||
04/12/2003 14:50 Comments ||
Top||
Syrian President Bashar al-Assad called for US and British troops to withdraw from Iraq, during a telephone conversation with UN Secretary General Kofi Annan. "The withdrawal of occupation forces would allow the Iraqi people to pick their own dictator decide their own destiny, it's the only way to build a better future" for the country, al-Assad said. Syria "will do everything possible on a regional and international level to help the Iraqi people (ease) their suffering and preserve Iraq's unity and territorial integrity," he added. "I mean, we've got gunnies just waiting for the opportunity to get him there..."
In response to allegations by the US of helping Iraqis close to Saddam Hussein of escaping through its border, Syria has told the United States it has closed its border with Iraq to all but gunnies humanitarian traffic. The US military and intelligence agencies would be monitoring the frontier "quite closely." The state department has warned Syria that it âfaced a critical choice in its dealings with Iraq.â Think hard now, Mr Boy President...
"Syria has a choice to make and we hope Syria makes the right one," a US state department spokesman said. US Deputy Defence Secretary Paul Wolfowitz said that âthe Syrians are behaving badly, they need to be reminded of that and if they continue we need to think about our what our policy is. It's very dubious behaviour, and by calling attention to it we hope that in fact it will be enough to have them stop."
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
04/12/2003 10:58 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Syria needs a good kick in the ass sometime soon just for attitude adjustment. Powell needs to summon the Syrian ambassador, keep him waiting a bit, and then privately advise him that any provocation or any further aid and comfort to our enemies will be met with a very harsh, very non-diplomatic response that will shock and awe Syrians in the capital.
Posted by: Tom ||
04/12/2003 11:19 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Does anyone else find ironic the bleats from various Arab dictatorships and one-party Islamic Fascist states:
"Let the Iraqi people decide their own government"?
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/12/2003 11:29 Comments ||
Top||
#3
A side benefit of the Syrian stoopidity lately is that they will ineveitably be forced to draw down a large chunck of their troops in Lebanon to defend the Baathist regime in Damascus. Israel will probably take the opportunity to smack down hezbollah, who, I noticed this week was still lobbing mortars and missiles across the border. Lebanon needs to break free from outsiders...
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/12/2003 12:26 Comments ||
Top||
#4
He wants the coalition forces out of Iraq, so he calls the UN? I guess when George & Tony won't take your calls, Kofi will do in a pinch. Not that we'll LISTEN to Kofi.....
Posted by: Baba Yaga ||
04/12/2003 16:05 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Make sure no Iraqi oil flows in the two pipelines to Syria and see if they adjust their idle screw.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
04/12/2003 16:44 Comments ||
Top||
OK. We will move them West-NorthWest about 100 miles. And unlike Iraq, we have plenty of space to park the carriers off the coast, plenty of combat tested Marines to kick in the front door, and a large land route in from Iraq (screw turkey) for the 4th ID to test its new hi-tech toys, the Big Red 1 coming into theater with tons of heavy tanks, the 173rd Sky Soldiers to drop in for a surprise, along with the 101 and their helicopters. Not to mention a lot of very nice airfields in the region...
I was hoping to be the first one to use the new category :-)
One day selling cosmetics to Syrian women, the next packing his bags for home, Iraqi makeup vendor and AWOL soldier Hussein Dakhel is a man in a rush. ``I hope everything will be sold by tomorrow because I plan to go to Baghdad,'' the bearded, 30-year-old Dakhel said on Saturday. He left the Iraqi city of Qaddisiya for neighboring Syria two months ago, joining many Iraqis who fled ahead of the U.S.-British-led war that began March 20. ``I knew the war was going to break out and fled Iraq. I didn't want to fight with the al-Quds Army,'' said Dakhel, who was hawking products near the Shiite Muslim shrine of Sayda Zeinab, just outside the Syrian capital Damascus. Here's just the kind of guy who will help rebuild Iraq. He had enough common sense to understand cause and effect — fight in the al-Quds Army and you die.
Now that Saddam Hussein's power structure is in tatters, Iraqis like Dakhel feel it is time to go home. ``Thank God we are free of him (Saddam). Let us live with some freedom,'' Dakhel said.
Souaad Abdullah, who has been in Syria for about a year with her husband and children, has been making similar plans. ``It is safe to go back to Iraq now,'' said Abdullah, who is in her 40s. ``Had Saddam stayed in power we would have remained in Syria, but now we can go home.''
Standing nearby, a handful of Syrians responded angrily to Iraqi displays of relief, demonstrating the dismay felt by millions across the region at the swift collapse of an Arab government at the hands of U.S.-led forces. ``You get rice and food almost free in Iraq,'' jibbered screamed one Syrian man rolling his eyes. ``You should be thankful to your eyeball plucking government. Do you believe that the Americans are coming to give you freedom. Do you accept to be ruled by the Americans?''
An Iraqi replied angrily: ``I was not living as a human being in Iraq. The regime is giving me food and water, but this is not important. A man can be imprisoned when found listening to BBC.'' Hey! Another smart Iraqi!
Syria shares a long border with Iraq and hosts more than 500,000 Iraqis, most arriving in the past month to stay with friends or in rented homes until the war ends. A group of Iraqis gathered in a small Sayda Zeinab coffee shop to follow news of looting in the northern Iraqi city of Mosul, the latest city to come under control of U.S. troops and Iraqi opposition groups. ``I feel that the future of Iraq will be better because Saddam and the ruling gang were controlling the oil sector and everything else of value,'' said a tea-sipping Ali Majid, a 44-year-old veteran of the 1991 Gulf conflict and the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq war. ``Now, even if we get 15 percent or 20 percent of the wealth, our future will be better,'' said Majid, who left Iraq days before the war began to avoid being drafted into the army. Let's hope some guys like this end up in charge.
Posted by: Steve White ||
04/12/2003 03:23 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Shouldn't have problems getting the whole kahuna, Majid. However, I'd hold off heading back to Baghdad until the lootin's done.
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.
