WOMEN PAYING PRICE OF OCCUPATION
"... Women are paying a price for the occupation in all sorts of ways... Before the U.S.-led invasion and occupation of Iraq, women in Iraq had jobs and enjoyed civil rights they can hardly dream of any more... Women's lives have changed, and they are beginning to look different. They are now too afraid to wear anything but conservative dresses -- modern clothes could be a death warrant. The veil is particularly dominant in areas under the control of militias... "The principles of Islam are that a woman should cover her whole body including the face," said a local woman employee in a public office. "Uncovering the face is a sin."
http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=41016
Thursday, January 31, 2008
IRAQ WAR HAS KILLED A MILLION IRAQIS
"More than one million Iraqis have died as a result of the conflict in their country since the U.S.-led invasion in 2003, according to research conducted by one of Britain's leading polling groups.... Opinion Research Business (ORB)... The research covered 15 of Iraq's 18 provinces. Those that not covered included two of Iraq's more volatile regions -- Kerbala and Anbar -- and the northern province of Arbil, where local authorities refused them a permit to work... The margin of error in the survey... was 1.7 percent, giving a range of deaths of 946,258 to 1.12 million..."
http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSL3048857920080130
"More than one million Iraqis have died as a result of the conflict in their country since the U.S.-led invasion in 2003, according to research conducted by one of Britain's leading polling groups.... Opinion Research Business (ORB)... The research covered 15 of Iraq's 18 provinces. Those that not covered included two of Iraq's more volatile regions -- Kerbala and Anbar -- and the northern province of Arbil, where local authorities refused them a permit to work... The margin of error in the survey... was 1.7 percent, giving a range of deaths of 946,258 to 1.12 million..."
http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSL3048857920080130
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
BUSH "TREATY" WITH IRAQ UNCONSTITUTIONAL
"When is a treaty between two nations not a treaty? When the president doesn't call it a treaty and refuses to submit it to Congressional scrutiny... the Bush administration plans to sign a long-term agreement with the Iraqi government that would commit U.S. troops to stay in Iraq indefinitely.
It's called the "Declaration of Principles for a Long-Term Relationship of Cooperation and Friendship Between the Republic of Iraq and the United States of America." The first principle of the declaration is to support Iraq "in defending its democratic systems against internal and external threats."
But that principle, which implies that U.S. forces would defend Iraq against any external threat, makes this "declaration" a treaty, and according to the U.S. Constitution, that means it is subject to Senate ratification. But the Bush administration has rarely paid attention to the Constitution when it wants something. A White House official (said) it has no intention of submitting the deal to Congress -- a move that is unprecedented in American history..."
http://www.reformer.com/editorials/ci_8106645
"When is a treaty between two nations not a treaty? When the president doesn't call it a treaty and refuses to submit it to Congressional scrutiny... the Bush administration plans to sign a long-term agreement with the Iraqi government that would commit U.S. troops to stay in Iraq indefinitely.
It's called the "Declaration of Principles for a Long-Term Relationship of Cooperation and Friendship Between the Republic of Iraq and the United States of America." The first principle of the declaration is to support Iraq "in defending its democratic systems against internal and external threats."
But that principle, which implies that U.S. forces would defend Iraq against any external threat, makes this "declaration" a treaty, and according to the U.S. Constitution, that means it is subject to Senate ratification. But the Bush administration has rarely paid attention to the Constitution when it wants something. A White House official (said) it has no intention of submitting the deal to Congress -- a move that is unprecedented in American history..."
http://www.reformer.com/editorials/ci_8106645
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
BUSH AND ADMINISTRATION MADE FALSE STATEMENTS TO START WAR
President George W. Bush and seven of his administration's top officials, including Vice President Dick Cheney, National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, made at least 935 false statements in the two years following September 11, 2001, about the national security threat posed by Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Nearly five years after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, an exhaustive examination of the record shows that the statements were part of an orchestrated campaign that effectively galvanized public opinion and, in the process, led the nation to war under decidedly false pretenses.
On at least 532 separate occasions... Bush and these three key officials, along with Secretary of State Colin Powell, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, and White House press secretaries Ari Fleischer and Scott McClellan, stated unequivocally that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction (or was trying to produce or obtain them), links to Al Qaeda, or both. This concerted effort was the underpinning of the Bush administration's case for war.
It is now beyond dispute that Iraq did not possess any weapons of mass destruction or have meaningful ties to Al Qaeda."
http://www.publicintegrity.org/WarCard/
President George W. Bush and seven of his administration's top officials, including Vice President Dick Cheney, National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, made at least 935 false statements in the two years following September 11, 2001, about the national security threat posed by Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Nearly five years after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, an exhaustive examination of the record shows that the statements were part of an orchestrated campaign that effectively galvanized public opinion and, in the process, led the nation to war under decidedly false pretenses.
On at least 532 separate occasions... Bush and these three key officials, along with Secretary of State Colin Powell, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, and White House press secretaries Ari Fleischer and Scott McClellan, stated unequivocally that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction (or was trying to produce or obtain them), links to Al Qaeda, or both. This concerted effort was the underpinning of the Bush administration's case for war.
It is now beyond dispute that Iraq did not possess any weapons of mass destruction or have meaningful ties to Al Qaeda."
http://www.publicintegrity.org/WarCard/
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
MILITARY SAYS SURGE HAS NOT WORKED - MONEY HAS
"... military officers say that the American public should not be fooled: the relative quiet in Iraq - and it is, after all, only a "relative quiet" - does not mean the "surge" has worked... Quite the opposite. ... a senior defense official says. "The White House would like to have you believe the 'surge' has worked, that we somehow defeated the insurgency. That's just ludicrous. There's increasing quiet in Iraq, but that's happened because of our shift in strategy (to tribal payments) - the 'surge' had nothing to do with it."
"... During September of 2007 alone, US military officers dispensed well over $200,000 to (one tribes') leaders. The question remains, of course: what happens when the American money dries up? "The answer to that question is simple," this Iraqi says. And then he laughs: "When the money goes, they go."
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JA23Ak02.html
"... military officers say that the American public should not be fooled: the relative quiet in Iraq - and it is, after all, only a "relative quiet" - does not mean the "surge" has worked... Quite the opposite. ... a senior defense official says. "The White House would like to have you believe the 'surge' has worked, that we somehow defeated the insurgency. That's just ludicrous. There's increasing quiet in Iraq, but that's happened because of our shift in strategy (to tribal payments) - the 'surge' had nothing to do with it."
"... During September of 2007 alone, US military officers dispensed well over $200,000 to (one tribes') leaders. The question remains, of course: what happens when the American money dries up? "The answer to that question is simple," this Iraqi says. And then he laughs: "When the money goes, they go."
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JA23Ak02.html
Sunday, January 20, 2008
WHAT WE HAVE BOUGHT IN IRAQ
"If someone came to you six years ago and said that for only $2 trillion, you could have for your colony a burned out country, a failed state, and a semi-permanent incubator of terrorism and hatred against the US, would you have ponied up the money? That's what you've got, and that is what it cost you... At a time when the US military is paying 60,000 Sunni Arab Iraqis $300 a month each not to fight us, it is pretty hard to justify letting the US working class sink, without any government help, into penury and homelessness in the face of the mortgage crisis and the recession."
http://www.juancole.com/2008/01/iraq-is-still-bad-bargain.html
"If someone came to you six years ago and said that for only $2 trillion, you could have for your colony a burned out country, a failed state, and a semi-permanent incubator of terrorism and hatred against the US, would you have ponied up the money? That's what you've got, and that is what it cost you... At a time when the US military is paying 60,000 Sunni Arab Iraqis $300 a month each not to fight us, it is pretty hard to justify letting the US working class sink, without any government help, into penury and homelessness in the face of the mortgage crisis and the recession."
http://www.juancole.com/2008/01/iraq-is-still-bad-bargain.html
Friday, January 18, 2008
SURGE UTOPIA
The successes of the troop surge of 2007:
http://www.motherjones.com/commentary/fiore/2008/01/surgetopia.html
The successes of the troop surge of 2007:
http://www.motherjones.com/commentary/fiore/2008/01/surgetopia.html
Thursday, January 17, 2008
OPIUM POPPY FIELDS SPREADING ACROSS IRAQ
"The cultivation of opium poppies whose product is turned into heroin is spreading rapidly across Iraq as farmers find they can no longer make a living through growing traditional crops. Afghans with experience in planting poppies have been helping farmers switch to producing opium in fertile parts of Diyala province north-east of Baghdad.... The growing and smuggling of opium will be difficult to stop in Iraq because much of the country is controlled by criminalised militias. American successes in Iraq over the past year have been largely through encouraging the development of a 70,000-strong Sunni Arab militia, many of whose members are former insurgents linked to protection rackets, kidnapping and crime..."
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article3345186.ece
"The cultivation of opium poppies whose product is turned into heroin is spreading rapidly across Iraq as farmers find they can no longer make a living through growing traditional crops. Afghans with experience in planting poppies have been helping farmers switch to producing opium in fertile parts of Diyala province north-east of Baghdad.... The growing and smuggling of opium will be difficult to stop in Iraq because much of the country is controlled by criminalised militias. American successes in Iraq over the past year have been largely through encouraging the development of a 70,000-strong Sunni Arab militia, many of whose members are former insurgents linked to protection rackets, kidnapping and crime..."
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article3345186.ece
WHAT DOES WINNING IN IRAQ MEAN?
Does "win" mean we have a pro-U.S. government successfully running Baghdad without American military assistance?
Or does "winning" mean the U.S. stays in Iraq until 2018 or 2025 or 2085 or longer?
Or does "winning" mean the Iraqis accomplish some form of lasting "reconciliation" among the various political, tribal, religious, ethnic, and class factions?
Or does "winning" simply mean that more Iraqis die in the fighting than Americans?
What exactly has the United State accomplished in Iraq?
The Republican presidential candidates who advocate continuing the occupation of Iraq must define for the American people what their idea of "winning" means.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joseph-a-palermo/the-terrific-news-in-iraq_b_81814.html
Does "win" mean we have a pro-U.S. government successfully running Baghdad without American military assistance?
Or does "winning" mean the U.S. stays in Iraq until 2018 or 2025 or 2085 or longer?
Or does "winning" mean the Iraqis accomplish some form of lasting "reconciliation" among the various political, tribal, religious, ethnic, and class factions?
Or does "winning" simply mean that more Iraqis die in the fighting than Americans?
What exactly has the United State accomplished in Iraq?
The Republican presidential candidates who advocate continuing the occupation of Iraq must define for the American people what their idea of "winning" means.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joseph-a-palermo/the-terrific-news-in-iraq_b_81814.html
Monday, January 14, 2008
"AWAKENING FORCES" - A NEW U.S. TERROR FORCE
"The newly formed 'Awakening' forces set up by the U.S. military are bringing new conflict among people. For months now the U.S. military has been actively building what it calls 'Awakening' forces and "concerned local citizens" in an effort to reduce attacks on occupation forces. Members of the forces, which comprise primarily former resistance fighters and tribal groups, are paid 300 dollars monthly. There are at present about 80,000 recruits to these groups... 82 percent of the members are Sunni... 'Awakening' forces have been widely criticised for corruption and for brutal tactics. Many speak of them as "gangs", "criminals", "dogs of the Americans", and "thieves." But the Bush administration, and many media outlets in the west, credit the 'Awakening' forces with bringing stability to volatile areas."
http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=40781
"The newly formed 'Awakening' forces set up by the U.S. military are bringing new conflict among people. For months now the U.S. military has been actively building what it calls 'Awakening' forces and "concerned local citizens" in an effort to reduce attacks on occupation forces. Members of the forces, which comprise primarily former resistance fighters and tribal groups, are paid 300 dollars monthly. There are at present about 80,000 recruits to these groups... 82 percent of the members are Sunni... 'Awakening' forces have been widely criticised for corruption and for brutal tactics. Many speak of them as "gangs", "criminals", "dogs of the Americans", and "thieves." But the Bush administration, and many media outlets in the west, credit the 'Awakening' forces with bringing stability to volatile areas."
http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=40781
Monday, January 07, 2008
WHY IRAQI SOLDIER KILLED 3 U.S. SOLDIERS
"... in Mosel city a group of American soldiers among the occupying forces raided an area in Alsaha quarter (Hai Alsaha). The occupying soldiers then stormed a house in the right side of the city and beaten a pregnant women there. There was an Iraqi soldier there who first requested the arrogant occupying forces to stop hitting the woman. They answered him that they will do what ever they want to do and it is not his concern to request them to stop. He then had no choice but to stop them by using force... The occupiers should know that the more they stay in Iraq the higher the risk for them and the more the hate they will achieve."
http://hammorabi.blogspot.com/2008/01/why-iraqi-solider-killed-3-american.html
KILLER OF U.S. SOLDIERS A HERO
"... an Iraqi soldier opened fire on U.S. soldiers accompanying him during a joint military patrol in the northern Iraqi city Mosul. He killed the U.S. captain and another sergeant, and wounded three others, including an Iraqi interpreter..."
"... (witnesses said) the American captain and his soldiers raided a neighbourhood and started shouting at women to tell them where some men they wanted were.The women told them they did not know, and their men did not do anything wrong, and started crying in fear... the U.S. captain began to shout at his soldiers and the women, and his men then started to grab the women and pull them by their hair... Then the Iraqi soldier (Kaissar) shouted, 'Let go of the women you sons of bitches,' and started shooting at them... Kaissar was captured by a special joint Iraqi-U.S. force, and he is now being held and tortured at the al-Ghizlany military camp in Mosul.... One (Iraqi) army officer speaking on condition of anonymity described Kaissar's act as heroic. "Those Americans learned their lesson once more."
"... The U.S. and Iraqi military told a different version of the story... that Kaissar carried out the attack because he had links to "Sunni Arab insurgent groups."
http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=40691
"... in Mosel city a group of American soldiers among the occupying forces raided an area in Alsaha quarter (Hai Alsaha). The occupying soldiers then stormed a house in the right side of the city and beaten a pregnant women there. There was an Iraqi soldier there who first requested the arrogant occupying forces to stop hitting the woman. They answered him that they will do what ever they want to do and it is not his concern to request them to stop. He then had no choice but to stop them by using force... The occupiers should know that the more they stay in Iraq the higher the risk for them and the more the hate they will achieve."
http://hammorabi.blogspot.com/2008/01/why-iraqi-solider-killed-3-american.html
KILLER OF U.S. SOLDIERS A HERO
"... an Iraqi soldier opened fire on U.S. soldiers accompanying him during a joint military patrol in the northern Iraqi city Mosul. He killed the U.S. captain and another sergeant, and wounded three others, including an Iraqi interpreter..."
"... (witnesses said) the American captain and his soldiers raided a neighbourhood and started shouting at women to tell them where some men they wanted were.The women told them they did not know, and their men did not do anything wrong, and started crying in fear... the U.S. captain began to shout at his soldiers and the women, and his men then started to grab the women and pull them by their hair... Then the Iraqi soldier (Kaissar) shouted, 'Let go of the women you sons of bitches,' and started shooting at them... Kaissar was captured by a special joint Iraqi-U.S. force, and he is now being held and tortured at the al-Ghizlany military camp in Mosul.... One (Iraqi) army officer speaking on condition of anonymity described Kaissar's act as heroic. "Those Americans learned their lesson once more."
"... The U.S. and Iraqi military told a different version of the story... that Kaissar carried out the attack because he had links to "Sunni Arab insurgent groups."
http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=40691
Wednesday, January 02, 2008
RESULTS OF THE "SURGE" ESCALATION
"... By autumn, there were over 175,000 U.S. military personnel in Iraq. This is the highest number of U.S. troops deployed yet... During the surge, the number of Iraqis displaced from their homes quadrupled... (to) over 2.3 million internally displaced persons within Iraq, and over 2.3 million Iraqis who have fled the country... the total number of Iraqis killed so far due to the U.S.-led invasion and occupation (is estimated) to be 1,139,602.... This year 894 U.S. soldiers have been killed in Iraq, making 2007 the deadliest year of the entire occupation for the U.S. military... the U.S.-backed government in Baghdad remains more divided than ever, and hopes of reconciliation have vanished. According to a recent ABC/BBC poll, 98 percent of Sunnis and 84 percent of Shias in Iraq want all U.S. forces out of the country."
http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=40637
"... By autumn, there were over 175,000 U.S. military personnel in Iraq. This is the highest number of U.S. troops deployed yet... During the surge, the number of Iraqis displaced from their homes quadrupled... (to) over 2.3 million internally displaced persons within Iraq, and over 2.3 million Iraqis who have fled the country... the total number of Iraqis killed so far due to the U.S.-led invasion and occupation (is estimated) to be 1,139,602.... This year 894 U.S. soldiers have been killed in Iraq, making 2007 the deadliest year of the entire occupation for the U.S. military... the U.S.-backed government in Baghdad remains more divided than ever, and hopes of reconciliation have vanished. According to a recent ABC/BBC poll, 98 percent of Sunnis and 84 percent of Shias in Iraq want all U.S. forces out of the country."
http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=40637