This 'counter-culture' ad based in Bush Rhetoric is being displayed in the New York Times tomorrow. It's an attempt to raise money from the Bush Base. Just that simple. It's angry and "W"rong in only the way Republicans can be "W"rong. If I didn't feel so bad for the nation of people we are I might first feel sympathy for the general caught up in the middle of funding raising for the Republicans, but, thirdly I'd have a great deal of sympathy for the Republican Party and their inability to save themselves from themselves.
The obvious principle involved here is money and plenty of it. The General's testimony has little to do with effective government policy so much as party politics. We knew it would take on this characteristic and here it is.
The Iraq War isn't about national security, it's about money. It's about money for Republican cronies and it's about money for the Iraqi Central Government. It's time the Iraqis stand up and take care of themselves without gluts of American money and munitions. The more munitions in a country the size of Texas the more killing that will go on.
I am going to bring up 'one more time' the article that brings attention to the 'cherry picking' of information regarding Iraq that was presented by the General.
Just for the record, the Republicans Party at every turn has been verbose in putting forth their agenda in the face of a reality they refuse to address. I would remind anyone listening to Neocon Nonsense on the airwaves, radio or television, that the 'authorities' noted to be speaking as if they know more than the General or the Senate were never under oath. However, the listeners and viewers to this mess of 'spin agents' actually believe these people. Amazing.
The view from Baghdad: Mounting death toll which makes a mockery of US optimism (click here)
By Kim Sengupta
Published: 11 September 2007
By the time General Petraeus had finished speaking yesterday the slaughter in Iraq for the previous 24 hours could be tallied. It was not an exceptionally violent day by the standards of Iraq: seven US soldiers lay dead and 11 injured in the capital; other instances of sectarian violence included a suicide bomb which had killed 10 and wounded scores near Mosul while 10 bodies were found in Baghdad. Three policemen were killed in clashes in Mosul, and a car bomb outside a hospital in the capital had exploded, killing two and wounding six.
In Baghdad, on the surface the overt violence appears to have diminished. There are fewer loud explosions. But, the city is now being partitioned by sectarian hatred and fear; by concrete walls and barbed wire. Claims that the US military strategy is paving the way for a stable society bear little resemblance to the reality on the ground.
The US is accused of manipulating figures relating to violence to fit their case, ignoring evidence which shows that the influx of 30,000 troops has done little to end the continuing bloodshed.
The death of Omar al-Husseini in the Huriya district of Baghdad is one of many which does not even figure in the American reckoning. His killers, masked and carrying guns, dragged him away as his mother wept and his father pleaded for mercy. That was the last time they saw their son alive. Three weeks later they heard that he had been killed.
Omar was 20. His killers were Shia, he was a Sunni, the victim of a spree of murders which has ethnically cleansed neighbourhoods through the city. But both the US military and the Iraqi police have told his parents that as far as they are concerned the abduction and killings were purely criminal acts. This means, statistically, that his death is not included by the US in the calculations for sectarian killings produced yesterday.
The causes behind the daily death toll, if addressed at all, draw conflicting accounts. Mourners carried the coffin of a young mother along the streets of Sadr City yesterday. She had been killed, said the locals, along with her two daughters when US and Iraqi government forces had stormed four homes. The US military confirmed they had exchanged small-arms fire during the operation, but insisted they had no reports of civilian casualties. Also yesterday, attendants at the Baghdad morgue did their round of collecting bodies, nameless victims of faceless killers....
By Kim Sengupta
Published: 11 September 2007
By the time General Petraeus had finished speaking yesterday the slaughter in Iraq for the previous 24 hours could be tallied. It was not an exceptionally violent day by the standards of Iraq: seven US soldiers lay dead and 11 injured in the capital; other instances of sectarian violence included a suicide bomb which had killed 10 and wounded scores near Mosul while 10 bodies were found in Baghdad. Three policemen were killed in clashes in Mosul, and a car bomb outside a hospital in the capital had exploded, killing two and wounding six.
In Baghdad, on the surface the overt violence appears to have diminished. There are fewer loud explosions. But, the city is now being partitioned by sectarian hatred and fear; by concrete walls and barbed wire. Claims that the US military strategy is paving the way for a stable society bear little resemblance to the reality on the ground.
The US is accused of manipulating figures relating to violence to fit their case, ignoring evidence which shows that the influx of 30,000 troops has done little to end the continuing bloodshed.
The death of Omar al-Husseini in the Huriya district of Baghdad is one of many which does not even figure in the American reckoning. His killers, masked and carrying guns, dragged him away as his mother wept and his father pleaded for mercy. That was the last time they saw their son alive. Three weeks later they heard that he had been killed.
Omar was 20. His killers were Shia, he was a Sunni, the victim of a spree of murders which has ethnically cleansed neighbourhoods through the city. But both the US military and the Iraqi police have told his parents that as far as they are concerned the abduction and killings were purely criminal acts. This means, statistically, that his death is not included by the US in the calculations for sectarian killings produced yesterday.
The causes behind the daily death toll, if addressed at all, draw conflicting accounts. Mourners carried the coffin of a young mother along the streets of Sadr City yesterday. She had been killed, said the locals, along with her two daughters when US and Iraqi government forces had stormed four homes. The US military confirmed they had exchanged small-arms fire during the operation, but insisted they had no reports of civilian casualties. Also yesterday, attendants at the Baghdad morgue did their round of collecting bodies, nameless victims of faceless killers....
...Omar was 20. His killers were Shia, he was a Sunni, the victim of a spree of murders which has ethnically cleansed neighbourhoods through the city. But both the US military and the Iraqi police have told his parents that as far as they are concerned the abduction and killings were purely criminal acts....
...But both the US military and the Iraqi police have told his parents that as far as they are concerned the abduction and killings were purely criminal acts...
...purely criminal acts....
This is corruption. It is Iraqi corruption which illustrates clearly the USA has no control over the circumstances they find they are currently dying within. For a very long time, there has been corruption in Iraq. The 'primary' people coming forward to be Iraqi police and miltiary are Shi'ites. This so called crime noted in this article is a crime committed by Shi'ites. We already know the ease at which Baghdad has been cleansed of Sunnis dictates the corruption of the police within Baghdad and the fact there still exists, per the General's report, 'factions' of power within the Iraqi police that run their own game.
The reason this is corruption is because not all circumstances in Iraq are treated equally. The reason they are not treated equally is because there is more and more reason for the Iraqis to point to 'favoritism' by the USA military in arming Sunnis in An Albar while their Mosques are being destroyed and the Shia people being killed within them. It can be stated that the Sunnis are taking up arms against al Qaeda and that maybe true, however, that does not mean that is their only plan. Therefore, in arming the Sunni militias in hopes they will become Iraqi police and military only increases apprehension in the Shia and Kurdish sectors of the country.
Iraq 'clearly' is partitioning to 'separatist' societies. The General openly admits there are definately Sunnis areas of Iraq and the same holds true for Kurds and Shia. Iraq's Constitution calls for provincial authorities along sectarian and ethnic lines, in that the Constitution calls for equity in sharing the wealth of Iraq, namely the oil. However:
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: September 13, 2007
Filed at 3:25 p.m. ET
BAGHDAD (AP) -- Iraq's main political parties are deadlocked over a key oil law and the legislation has been sent back to party leaders to see if they can salvage it, an official involved in the talks said Thursday.
The Wednesday meeting failed after Shiite and Sunni Arab representatives were unable to agree with Kurdish negotiators, said the official, who represented a Shiite party in the talks and spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the process.
Deputy Prime Minister Barham Saleh, a Kurd, confirmed there were disagreements but refused to give details. ''There are problems but the negotiations are still going on,'' he told The Associated Press....
Published: September 13, 2007
Filed at 3:25 p.m. ET
BAGHDAD (AP) -- Iraq's main political parties are deadlocked over a key oil law and the legislation has been sent back to party leaders to see if they can salvage it, an official involved in the talks said Thursday.
The Wednesday meeting failed after Shiite and Sunni Arab representatives were unable to agree with Kurdish negotiators, said the official, who represented a Shiite party in the talks and spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the process.
Deputy Prime Minister Barham Saleh, a Kurd, confirmed there were disagreements but refused to give details. ''There are problems but the negotiations are still going on,'' he told The Associated Press....
One thing for sure, the Sunnis in An Albar are recognizing the Americans because the General is now willing to take over the same roll as others played in An Albar, al Qaeda in Iraq or not. I might add, the General is willing to take up this roll with the same folks that killed Americans and allied themselves with al Qaeda in Iraq to do so. In my opinion, Bush's strategy of 'The Surge' is simply a surrender to the will of militias. "IF YOU CAN'T BEAT 'EM, JOIN 'EM. And in all honesty, what choice did Petraeus have?"
This move by the USA has not only awakened the preceived threat of the Shia and the Kurds but also other ethic lines of authority, namely the leadership of Syria and Iran. The tensions that exist today in Iraq are directly related to the domination of Sunnis for decades over the Shia facilitated by the USA relationship with Arabia for oil. The hatred was there under Saddam of the Shia and Kurds exhibited by mass killings, the drought of the Shia wetlands and a battle for survival by the Shia of Southern Iraq as recent as 2002 whereby 50,000 died resisting the ravages of the Sunni dominated government under Saddam. The Kurds and Shia of Iraq are never going to trust a dominant central authority again. They want provincial authority to deal with their own people their own way and they will be backed by every surviving Shia authority from Lebanon to Syria to Iran forever.
The USA under BUSH, not Petraeus (the man is doing his job and dealing with Bush his testimony almost sounds like brainwashing) is causing too many problems. Wide spread problems across the region, exhibited by the desire of Saudi Arabia and Jordan to be interested in nuclear technology provided by Bush's India Dealings. That is ONLY the political picture. There is the humanitarian crisis that screams for the removal of USA troops while the neighboring countries provide protection and relief to the people there. In all honesty, with all the walls and partitioning currently underway and completed in Iraq I don't see more problems breaking out. How could there be more problems, Iraqis are leaving THEIR country at 100,000 per month?
If indeed Syria and Iran are involved with the Shia in Iraq; for one I am not surprised as I know from reading articles from the region there are humanitarian efforts coming across the border from Iran; the USA will never stop it so long as the fear of a greater conflict exists facilitated by the current strategy to arm Sunnis to control An Albar. The fear for the Shi'ite populous by these sovereign countries including networks of Shia throughout the region including Hezbollah in Lebanon will continue until the Shia are left in a peaceful existance on some of the most religiously precious land to them.
The 'quality of life' of these people is rarely addressed by any Bush report. The suffering that now exists in Iraq is secondary to any and all military objectives. And what exactly are those objectives? To 'instill' a foreign idea of democracy in a society that practices Sharia Law. The Iraqi Consitition recognizes Sharia Law, otherwise the populous would not vote for the Constution in Iraq. Where are we going with this? The USA is going to declare war on Syria? On Iran? I don't think so, because we already know if that is the case Russia is in the conflict and we are off to the races with any and all outcomes possible.
Basically, the best outcome for the country of Iraq will take on a path similar to that of Lebanon. The difference there being the humantarian needs of the Iraqis that have reached dangerous levels. I remind these people are in profound poverty with dangers of being pushed over the edge to complete collapse of their 'vital' infrastructure. We already know the delicate nature of the conditions that some support exists in Iraq. If a war expands as Bush would like to see happen, into Iran and Syria, there would easily be genocide of 8 million people and the USA would become the greatest enemy to the world of nations with blind ambitions to destroy anything in it's path to accomplish whatever desires are possible for wealth and control.
The control demanded by The Republicans is irrational and paranoid. It also serves the purpose for greater war and huge profits for the Republican political crony infrastructure.
The war the people of the USA need to fight is in Afghanistan and may very well be beyond those Afghan borders.
Entertain THIS thought. A stable and sustainable democray in Afghanistan among people like the Pashtun. The people that welcomed the arrival of American soldiers. Imagine the reality that exists for stabilizing the region Afghanistan is a member of when it has an infrastructure of cities, hamlets, medical facilities, clean water, sustainable energy, craftmen, shepards, farmers without a Poppy culture, teachers and schools. Ever hear of the Domino Effect? Want the people of Pakistan now suffering under Musharraf politically to have a 'safe haven?' Want the neighboring countries of Afghanistan to sustain their striving for peace? Do you want an ally in Afghanistan or more and more instability in a country that suffered the ravages of al Qaeda and the Taliban? How about a 2 mile runaway in Kabul hosting an International Airport?
The USA needs to leave Iraq. For a lot of reasons. Stability of the region does not rely on Iraq. The other side of Iran is Afghanistan. A country progressive in bringing quality of life to the Muslim society of Afghanistan will have the same exact outcome as anything in Iraq.
We have allies in Afghanistan holding their own and even seeing a margin of hope to dominating the conflict. If we 'need to end it' in the Middle East, stabilizing Afghanistan rather than abandoning it is a far more viable option than what is occurring in Iraq. I strongly suggest we redirect our efforts while political solutions and diplomacy are pursued with Iraq.
Enough.
