Inside Iraq

[Joemailman]

The following is a blog by an Iraqi journalist stopped bt a checkpoint In Iraq. I found it riveting.

ABOUT THIS BLOG

"Inside Iraq" is a blog updated by Iraqi journalists working for McClatchy Newspapers. They are based in Baghdad and outlying provinces. These are firsthand accounts of their experiences. Their complete names are withheld for security purposes.

Inside Iraq

July 14, 2007
'Go'

"Is the car registered in your name?"

"Yes."

"Papers." I give him my papers. He isn't looking at them. Why, then, did he ask for them??

Another walks up. "You're a doctor, aren't you? I remember you. You work at the Nursing Home. I know you because I used to work there." His eyes dark were looking straight into mine, but they were mocking, not serious.

Until he brought up the "doctor" matter, I was OK. Just another checkpoint. I took out my papers sixteen times on my way home the other day. But doctors were different. Targeted by kidnappers for ransom money, and sometimes killed. But more dangerous, they were targeted by people with an agenda that says "Harass Iraqi doctors until they flee; if they don't run, kill them."

"No, you must be mistaking me for someone else." Sweet smile. Heart pounding. "I'm a teacher, not a doctor." Keeping my hands steady and relaxed on the steering wheel was a feat.

"Why are you lying? I know you. Don't lie to us!!" His piercing eyes still mocking me, daring me to say what I wanted to say, that they were toying with their prey, that there was something very wrong here. The "us" worried me. Who were they?? Uniforms don't mean anything nowadays.

"Pull up to the side of the road" Trying to move my foot to comply with the "order," I realized the extent of my fear, my foot wouldn't budge. It was numb, dead.

Somehow I manage to move the car to one side of the road.

He took my papers and walked to the parked pickup vehicles a few meters away. It looked as if he were discussing the matter with his colleagues.

I looked up at the sky, the abode of the mighty Creator and prayed and prayed, and prayed.

If any digging was to take place into my identity and my profession, then I was dead anyway. NOT a doctor, no, a correspondent for an AMERICAN news agency!!

I was left there waiting to hear my sentence for more than twenty of the longest minutes of my life, when another vehicle arrived and stopped. Do not doubt it, these people held many a life in their slippery fingertips.

Someone dismounted. My tormentor went straight to him with my papers and they seemed to be debating the small matter of my fate. Their voices raised a little, but still I could understand nothing. They seemed not to agree, the younger man, who thought me a doctor was getting very angry and red in the face.

The newcomer, holding my papers in his hand, turned and walked towards me, reached me, handed me my papers and said one word, "Go."

Without a word, without a backward glance, I put the car into gear and slowly moved away then sped off, fearing the newcomer would revise his decision. He might change his mind, suddenly realize the value of the "prize" he had let go, but alhamdu lillah nothing happened, no one came after me, but I could feel two spots on my back, smoldering with the hatred and indignation of the young man with the gaze of a predator. A shiver ran down my back.

At long last I arrived to the sanctuary that was our office, barged in on the morning meeting that had started a few minutes before and sat down heavily on my chair.

One long breath; then another, trying to steady my erratic heartbeat, I try to focus on the present.

But those dark, piercing eyes would not let me go.

He was frustrated to lose his prize.

He feels cheated - and humiliated.

He will not forget me easily ... I will never use that route again.

[mraynrand]

The good thing is that as soon as the Americans leave his life will be much better.

[Joemailman]

I think the writer is a she but anyway...things may get better or they may not. I do think before Iraq can return to a sense of normality, we have to leave. There is a certain segment of the population that will regard as illegitimate the government as long as they are under military occupation by the U.S. I know there is a lot of hand wringing about how bad things will become when we leave. Well, things are bad enough now that about 2 million people have fled the country. Not just their homes, but their country. So let's not pretend that our presence there is allowing the Iraqis to live a fairly normal life. It is not.

[Freak Out]

We don't need another Iraq thread do we?

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/07/20070717-3.html

[Freak Out]

http://fusion94.org/images/missed_call.jpg

[Harlan Huckleby]

The good thing is that as soon as the Americans leave his life will be much better.

Some hell is going to break when we leave. Question is, does it matter when we leave? Is anything really gained by waiting a year?

I expect the surge will bring some stability in the next nine months. I fear it will all be for naught when we do leave. The sunni are reconciling with the U.S., but not with the Shia.

[Freak Out]

We don't need another Iraq thread do we?

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/07/20070717-3.html

Did anyone else read this yet?

[Harlan Huckleby]

ok, Freak Out, I read the executive order. And I expect some compensation for my efforts, it was a long, unpleasant read.

The significance was lost on me. It sounds like a predictable policy; just like people are prohibited from directly and indirectly supporting terrorist groups, they are prohibited from supporting insurgency groups in Iraq.

I give up: what did I miss?

[MJZiggy]

A soccer game that was, by comparison, spectacular.

[Harlan Huckleby]

what is this "soccer"? wait.... is it something sheepshead?

[MJZiggy]

It's a game with men with very nice legs chasing a ball...I know you're going to ask me why they're chasing the ball and the short answer is, who gives a shit. Remember the part about the nice legs...

[Freak Out]

ok, Freak Out, I read the executive order. And I expect some compensation for my efforts, it was a long, unpleasant read.

The significance was lost on me. It sounds like a predictable policy; just like people are prohibited from directly and indirectly supporting terrorist groups, they are prohibited from supporting insurgency groups in Iraq.

I give up: what did I miss?

Ok..first, I'll be in France in the end of September so I'll buy you dinner.

Now...

Section 1. (a) Except to the extent provided in section 203(b)(1), (3), and (4) of IEEPA (50 U.S.C. 1702(b)(1), (3), and (4)), or in regulations, orders, directives, or licenses that may be issued pursuant to this order, and notwithstanding any contract entered into or any license or permit granted prior to the date of this order, all property and interests in property of the following persons, that are in the United States, that hereafter come within the United States, or that are or hereafter come within the possession or control of United States persons, are blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported, withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in: any person determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense,

(i) to have committed, or to pose a significant risk of committing, an act or acts of violence that have the purpose or effect of:

(A) threatening the peace or stability of Iraq or the Government of Iraq; or

(B) undermining efforts to promote economic reconstruction and political reform in Iraq or to provide humanitarian assistance to the Iraqi people;

(ii) to have materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, logistical, or technical support for, or goods or services in support of, such an act or acts of violence or any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order; or

(iii) to be owned or controlled by, or to have acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order.

(b) The prohibitions in subsection (a) of this section include, but are not limited to, (i) the making of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services by, to, or for the benefit of any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order, and (ii) the receipt of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services from any such person.

WTF? We as a country needed this?

Here is the 5th:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

[Freak Out]

A soccer game that was, by comparison, spectacular.

What game was it?

[MJZiggy]

The MLS All-Star game against the Celtics. MLS dominated the game and won 2-0. It could also be said that their man crushes on David Beckham make Madden's love for Favre seem lukewarm at best...

[packinpatland]

The MLS All-Star game against the Celtics. MLS dominated the game and won 2-0. It could also be said that their man crushes on David Beckham make Madden's love for Favre seem lukewarm at best...


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Harlan Huckleby]

Freak Out, I expect it is constitutional. The president gets to do shit during war time. It's right there in the do shit clause.

REgarding France, I am really French in the same sense that Madtown is really Mexican.

"Is that a real poncho or a Sears poncho?" -Frank Zappa

"Madtown is a Sears Mexican." - Harlan Huckleby

[Freak Out]

Freak Out, I expect it is constitutional. The president gets to do shit during war time. It's right there in the do shit clause.

REgarding France, I am really French in the same sense that Madtown is really Mexican.

"Is that a real poncho or a Sears poncho?" -Frank Zappa

"Madtown is a Sears Mexican." - Harlan Huckleby

Dubya did way to much Cosmic Debris in is formative years to understand the constitution...

A Sears Mexican.. :lol: No Marquess of Queensberry rules here. :lol:

[mraynrand]

Dubya did way to much Cosmic Debris in is formative years to understand the constitution...



Really? Wouldn't that rule out most of the constitutional law professors as well?

[Freak Out]

Dubya did way to much Cosmic Debris in his formative years to understand the constitution...



Really? Wouldn't that rule out most of the constitutional law professors as well?

Probably! :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Freak Out]

Our friends are getting stretched a little thin....

Britain almost out of troops, memo reveals

By Thomas Harding, Defence Correspondent
Last Updated: 12:19am BST 21/07/2007

The head of the Army has issued a dire warning that Britain has almost run out of troops to defend the country or fight abroad, a secret document obtained by the Daily Telegraph has revealed.

The memorandum from the CGS: Click to enlarge

Gen Sir Richard Dannatt has told senior commanders that reinforcements for emergencies or for operations in Iraq or Afghanistan are "now almost non-existent".

In the memorandum to fellow defence leaders, the Chief of the General Staff (CGS) confessed that "we now have almost no capability to react to the unexpected". The "undermanned" Army now has all its units committed to either training for war in Iraq and Afghanistan, on leave or on operations.

There is just one battalion of 500 troops, called the Spearhead Lead Element, available to be used in an emergency, such as a major domestic terrorist attack or a rapid deployment overseas.

Gen Dannatt's comments will come as the first serious test of Gordon Brown's policy on defence.
advertisement

The new Prime Minister has already faced anger over the decision to give Des Browne, the Defence Secretary, the additional part-time role of Scottish Secretary with Tories labelling the move "an insult to our Armed Forces."

Military leaders have privately suggested that a defence review is essential to examine if more money, equipment and troops are needed.

With Britain's military reserve locker virtually empty, further pressure will mount on President George W Bush to review US troop levels in Iraq after fellow Republicans suggesting significant withdrawals.

It also comes at a time when more forces are needed to combat the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Liam Fox, the shadow defence secretary, said the lack of reserves was "an appalling situation and damning indictment" of the way the Government handled the Services.

Gen Sir Richard Dannatt
Gen Dannatt: Reinforcements for operations in Iraq or Afghanistan are 'now almost non-existent'

"They are being asked to carry out tasks for which they are neither funded or equipped for. There is an urgent need to review our strategic approach because we cannot continue over-stretching our Forces."

The document said that Britain's second back-up unit, called the Airborne Task Force formed around the Parachute Regiment, was unavailable. It was unable to fully deploy "due to shortages in manpower, equipment and stocks".

Most of the Paras' vehicles and weapons have stayed in Afghanistan with other units using them in intense battles against the Taliban.

Parachute Regiment officers are deeply concerned that with nearly all their equipment abroad they are unable to train properly for future operations.

The Paras also no longer have the ability to parachute as a 600-strong battalion because no RAF planes were available to drop then en-masse, the document said. The situation was unlikely to be resolved until late August.

With the Army significantly under-strength by 3,500 troops – many disillusioned with being constantly on dangerous operations and away from their families – it is now struggling to plug the gaps on the frontline.

"The enduring nature and scale of current operations continues to stretch people," Gen Dannatt wrote.

The Army now needed to "augment" 2,500 troops from other units onto operations in Iraq and Afghanistan to bring up the total force to 13,000 required. This remained "far higher than we ever assumed," the CGS said.

"When this is combined with the effects of under-manning (principally in the infantry and Royal Artillery) and the pace of training support needed to prepare units for operations, the tempo of life in the Field Army is intense."

The Army has also been forced to call up almost 1,000 Territorial Army soldiers for overseas operations. The general's concerns came after three RAF personnel were killed in a mortar or rocket attack on the main British headquarters five miles outside Basra bringing the total dead in Iraq to 162.

With the main force pulling out of Basra city to the air station in the coming months there is concern of increased attacks on the large base where some troops are forced to live in tented accommodation.

A lack of vehicles meant that "training is significantly constrained".

Gen Dannatt was also "concerned" that some equipment, particularly Scimitar light tanks that are vital to fighting in Afghanistan but are 40 years old, "may be at the edge of their sustainability".

More needed to be done on housing and pay in order to retained troops because "people are more likely to stay if we look after them properly".

The pressure on numbers was partially being alleviated by bringing in civilian firms to train soldiers and guard bases and by "adopting a pragmatic approach to risk where possible".

While the current situation was "manageable" Gen Dannatt was "very concerned about the longer term implications of the impact of this level of operations on our people, equipment and future operational capability".

It is not the first time Gen Dannatt has raised concerns on Britain's fighting ability. A few weeks into his job last year, Sir Richard said the military was "running hot" and urged for a national debate on defence.

The plain-speaking officer later suggested that the British presence in Iraq was "exacerbating the security problems" and warned that the Army would "break" if it was kept there too long.

Gen Dannatt, who said manning was "critical" in the Army, called for extra infantry units earlier this month following the devastating cuts inflicted by his predecessor Gen Sir Mike Jackson which saw four battalions axed.

"General Dannatt's appraisal means that we are unable to intervene if there is an emergency in Britain or elsewhere, that's self-evident," a senior officer said.

"But this is a direct result of the decision to go into Afghanistan on the assumption that Iraq would diminish simultaneously. We are now reaping the reward of that assumption."

[LL2]

http://fusion94.org/images/missed_call.jpg

Phew! Close one. Missed call.

[mraynrand]

Our friends are getting stretched a little thin....

Britain almost out of troops, memo reveals

"But this is a direct result of the decision to go into Afghanistan on the assumption that Iraq would diminish simultaneously. We are now reaping the reward of that assumption."

The size of Britain's armed forces (and France's) are dramatically reduced compared to the past. The thinking must have at least gone along the lines of: We have nukes as a deterrent, and the U.S. polices the international waters, opposes the Soviet Union for us, and opposes despots wherever they arise. Why should we spend money on the military? It's a far cry from post WWI when France had 5,000,000 men in a standing army (90,000 of whom were killed during the German invasion in WWII).

Reduction in troops is a political, cultural, societal decision by Britain and really has very little to do with Iraq and Afghanistan. What is worrisome is that there seems to be no urgency to increase troop levels given the challenges that radical Islamic terrorism poses.

[Scott Campbell]

So maybe we sit by and let all hell break loose in a couple of hot spots so the rest of the world realizes that they have to do their part too?

[Freak Out]

They bomb you when your walking to work, shopping for dinner, going to school and rooting for the home team. Plus you can get killed by "celebratory gunfire".

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/25/AR2007072501053.html?hpid=topnews

[Freak Out]

Always something going on in the region...no it's those pesky Kurdish friends of ours.

Bush's Turkish Gamble

By Robert D. Novak
Monday, July 30, 2007; A15

The morass in Iraq and deepening difficulties in Afghanistan have not deterred the Bush administration from taking on a dangerous and questionable new secret operation. High-level U.S. officials are working with their Turkish counterparts on a joint military operation to suppress Kurdish guerrillas and capture their leaders. Through covert activity, their goal is to forestall Turkey from invading Iraq.

While detailed operational plans are necessarily concealed, the broad outlines have been presented to select members of Congress as required by law. U.S. Special Forces are to work with the Turkish army to suppress the Kurds' guerrilla campaign. The Bush administration is trying to prevent another front from opening in Iraq, which would have disastrous consequences. But this gamble risks major exposure and failure.

The Turkish initiative reflects the temperament and personality of George W. Bush. Even faithful congressional supporters of his Iraq policy have been stunned by the president's upbeat mood, which makes him appear oblivious to the loss of his political base. Despite the failing effort to impose a military solution in Iraq, he is willing to try imposing arms -- though clandestinely -- on Turkey's ancient problems with its Kurdish minority, who comprise one-fifth of the country's population.

The development of an autonomous Kurdish entity inside Iraq, resulting from the decline and fall of Saddam Hussein, has alarmed the Turkish government. That led to Ankara's refusal to allow U.S. combat troops to enter Iraq through Turkey, an eleventh-hour complication for the 2003 invasion. As the Kurds' political power grew inside Iraq, the Turkish government became steadily more uneasy about the centuries-old project of a Kurdistan spreading across international boundaries -- and chewing up big pieces of Turkey.

The dormant Turkish Kurd guerrilla fighters of the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) came to life. By June, the Turkish government was demonstrating its concern by lobbing artillery shells across the border. Ankara began protesting, to both Washington and Baghdad, that the PKK was using northern Iraq as a base for guerrilla operations. On July 11, in Washington, Turkish Ambassador Nabi Sensoy became the first Turkish official to assert publicly that Iraqi Kurds have claims on Turkish territory. On July 20, just two days before his successful reelection, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan threatened a military incursion into Iraq against the Kurds. Last Wednesday, Murat Karayilan, head of the PKK political council, predicted that "the Turkish Army will attack southern Kurdistan."

Turkey has a well-trained, well-equipped army of 250,000 near the border, facing some 4,000 PKK fighters hiding in the mountains of northern Iraq. But significant cross-border operations surely would bring to the PKK's side the military forces of the Kurdistan Regional Government, the best U.S. ally in Iraq. What is Washington to do in the dilemma of two friends battling each other on an unwanted new front in Iraq?

The surprising answer was given in secret briefings on Capitol Hill last week by Eric S. Edelman, a former aide to Vice President Cheney who is now undersecretary of defense for policy. Edelman, a Foreign Service officer who once was U.S. ambassador to Turkey, revealed to lawmakers plans for a covert operation of U.S. Special Forces to help the Turks neutralize the PKK. They would behead the guerrilla organization by helping Turkey get rid of PKK leaders that they have targeted for years.

Edelman's listeners were stunned. Wasn't this risky? He responded that he was sure of success, adding that the U.S. role could be concealed and always would be denied. Even if all this is true, some of the briefed lawmakers left wondering whether this was a wise policy for handling the beleaguered Kurds, who had been betrayed so often by the U.S. government in years past.

The plan shows that hard experience has not dissuaded President Bush from attempting difficult ventures employing the use of force. On the contrary, two of the most intrepid supporters of the Iraq intervention -- John McCain and Lindsey Graham-- were surprised by Bush during a recent meeting with him. When they shared their impressions with colleagues, they commented on how unconcerned the president seemed. That may explain his willingness to embark on such a questionable venture against the Kurds.

© 2007 Creators Syndicate Inc.

[the_idle_threat]

They bomb you when your walking to work, shopping for dinner, going to school and rooting for the home team. Plus you can get killed by "celebratory gunfire".

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/25/AR2007072501053.html?hpid=topnews

This is why I try to keep my celebratory gunfire down to a minimum.

[the_idle_threat]

Always something going on in the region...no it's those pesky Kurdish friends of ours.

Bush's Turkish Gamble

By Robert D. Novak
Monday, July 30, 2007; A15

The morass in Iraq and deepening difficulties in Afghanistan have not deterred the Bush administration from taking on a dangerous and questionable new secret operation. High-level U.S. officials are working with their Turkish counterparts on a joint military operation to suppress Kurdish guerrillas and capture their leaders. Through covert activity, their goal is to forestall Turkey from invading Iraq.

While detailed operational plans are necessarily concealed, the broad outlines have been presented to select members of Congress as required by law. U.S. Special Forces are to work with the Turkish army to suppress the Kurds' guerrilla campaign. The Bush administration is trying to prevent another front from opening in Iraq, which would have disastrous consequences. But this gamble risks major exposure and failure.

The Turkish initiative reflects the temperament and personality of George W. Bush. Even faithful congressional supporters of his Iraq policy have been stunned by the president's upbeat mood, which makes him appear oblivious to the loss of his political base. Despite the failing effort to impose a military solution in Iraq, he is willing to try imposing arms -- though clandestinely -- on Turkey's ancient problems with its Kurdish minority, who comprise one-fifth of the country's population.

The development of an autonomous Kurdish entity inside Iraq, resulting from the decline and fall of Saddam Hussein, has alarmed the Turkish government. That led to Ankara's refusal to allow U.S. combat troops to enter Iraq through Turkey, an eleventh-hour complication for the 2003 invasion. As the Kurds' political power grew inside Iraq, the Turkish government became steadily more uneasy about the centuries-old project of a Kurdistan spreading across international boundaries -- and chewing up big pieces of Turkey.

The dormant Turkish Kurd guerrilla fighters of the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) came to life. By June, the Turkish government was demonstrating its concern by lobbing artillery shells across the border. Ankara began protesting, to both Washington and Baghdad, that the PKK was using northern Iraq as a base for guerrilla operations. On July 11, in Washington, Turkish Ambassador Nabi Sensoy became the first Turkish official to assert publicly that Iraqi Kurds have claims on Turkish territory. On July 20, just two days before his successful reelection, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan threatened a military incursion into Iraq against the Kurds. Last Wednesday, Murat Karayilan, head of the PKK political council, predicted that "the Turkish Army will attack southern Kurdistan."

Turkey has a well-trained, well-equipped army of 250,000 near the border, facing some 4,000 PKK fighters hiding in the mountains of northern Iraq. But significant cross-border operations surely would bring to the PKK's side the military forces of the Kurdistan Regional Government, the best U.S. ally in Iraq. What is Washington to do in the dilemma of two friends battling each other on an unwanted new front in Iraq?

The surprising answer was given in secret briefings on Capitol Hill last week by Eric S. Edelman, a former aide to Vice President Cheney who is now undersecretary of defense for policy. Edelman, a Foreign Service officer who once was U.S. ambassador to Turkey, revealed to lawmakers plans for a covert operation of U.S. Special Forces to help the Turks neutralize the PKK. They would behead the guerrilla organization by helping Turkey get rid of PKK leaders that they have targeted for years.

Edelman's listeners were stunned. Wasn't this risky? He responded that he was sure of success, adding that the U.S. role could be concealed and always would be denied. Even if all this is true, some of the briefed lawmakers left wondering whether this was a wise policy for handling the beleaguered Kurds, who had been betrayed so often by the U.S. government in years past.

The plan shows that hard experience has not dissuaded President Bush from attempting difficult ventures employing the use of force. On the contrary, two of the most intrepid supporters of the Iraq intervention -- John McCain and Lindsey Graham-- were surprised by Bush during a recent meeting with him. When they shared their impressions with colleagues, they commented on how unconcerned the president seemed. That may explain his willingness to embark on such a questionable venture against the Kurds.

© 2007 Creators Syndicate Inc.

Good thing we're keeping it a secret, and we aren't---say---leaking it to reporters who are unethical enough to go public with it right away. :roll:

[Joemailman]

The writer of the column, Robert Novak, is a conservative who was the one who originally reported that Valerie Plame was a CIA operative. I wonder who his source was this time.

[Joemailman]

Iraq: One in Seven Joins Human Tide Spilling into Neighbouring Countries

SULAYMANIYAH - Two thousand Iraqis are fleeing their homes every day. It is the greatest mass exodus of people ever in the Middle East and dwarfs anything seen in Europe since the Second World War. Four million people, one in seven Iraqis, have run away, because if they do not they will be killed. Two million have left Iraq, mainly for Syria and Jordan, and the same number have fled within the country.

Yet, while the US and Britain express sympathy for the plight of refugees in Africa, they are ignoring - or playing down- a far greater tragedy which is largely of their own making.0730 08

The US and Britain may not want to dwell on the disasters that have befallen Iraq during their occupation but the shanty towns crammed with refugees springing up in Iraq and neighbouring countries are becoming impossible to ignore.

Even so the UNHCR is having difficulty raising $100m (£50m) for relief. The organisation says the two countries caring for the biggest proportion of Iraqi refugees - Syria and Jordan - have still received “next to nothing from the world community”. Some 1.4 million Iraqis have fled to Syria according to the UN High Commission for Refugees, Jordan has taken in 750 000 while Egypt and Lebanon have seen 200 000 Iraqis cross into their territories.

Potential donors are reluctant to spent money inside Iraq arguing the country has large oil revenues. They are either unaware, or are ignoring the fact that the Iraqi administration has all but collapsed outside the Baghdad Green Zone. The US is spending $2bn a week on military operations in Iraq according to the Congressional Research Service but many Iraqis are dying because they lack drinking water costing a few cents.

Kalawar refugee camp in Sulaymaniyah is a microcosm of the misery to which millions of Iraqis have been reduced.

“At least it is safe here,” says Walid Sha’ad Nayef, 38, as he stands amid the stink of rotting garbage and raw sewage. He fled from the lethally dangerous Sa’adiyah district in Baghdad 11 months ago. As we speak to him, a man silently presents us with the death certificate of his son, Farez Maher Zedan, who was killed in Baghdad on 20 May 2006.

Kalawar is a horrible place. Situated behind a petrol station down a dusty track, the first sight of the camp is of rough shelters made out of rags, torn pieces of cardboard and old blankets. The stench is explained by the fact the Kurdish municipal authorities will not allow the 470 people in the camp to dig latrines. They say this might encourage them to stay.

“Sometimes I go to beg,” says Talib Hamid al-Auda, a voluble man with a thick white beard looking older than his fifty years. As he speaks, his body shakes, as if he was trembling at the thought of the demeaning means by which he feeds his family. Even begging is difficult because the people in the camp are forbidden to leave it on Thursday, Friday and Saturday. Suspected by Kurds of being behind a string of house robberies, though there is no evidence for this, they are natural scapegoats for any wrong-doing in their vicinity.

Refugees are getting an increasingly cool reception wherever they flee, because there are so many of them and because of the burden they put on resources. “People here blame us for forcing up rents and the price of food,” said Omar, who had taken his family to Damascus after his sister’s leg was fractured by a car bomb.

The refugees in Kalawar had no option but to flee. Of the 97 families here, all but two are Sunni Arabs. Many are from Sa’adiyah in west Baghdad where 84 bodies were found by police between 18 June and 18 July. Many are young men whose hands had been bound and who had been tortured.

“The majority left Baghdad because somebody knocked on the door of their house and told them to get out in an hour,” says Rosina Ynzenga, who runs the Spanish charity Solidarity International (SIA) which pays for a mobile clinic to visit the camp.

Sulaymaniyah municipality is antagonistic to her doing more. One Kurdish official suggested that the Arabs of Kalawar were there simply for economic reasons and should be given $200 each and sent back to Baghdad.

Mr Nayef, the mukhtar (mayor) of the camp who used to be a bulldozer driver in Baghdad, at first said nobody could speak to journalists unless we had permission from the authorities. But after we had ceremoniously written our names in a large book he relented and would, in any case, have had difficulty in stopping other refugees explaining their grievences.

Asked to list their worst problems Mr Nayef said they were the lack of school for the children, shortage of food, no kerosene to cook with, no money, no jobs and no electricity. The real answer to the question is that the Arabs of Kalawar have nothing. They have only received two cartons of food each from the International Committee of the Red Cross and a tank of clean water.

Even so they are adamant that they dare not return to Baghdad. They did not even know if their houses had been taken over by others.

Abla Abbas, a mournful looking woman in black robes, said her son had been killed because he went to sell plastic bags in the Shia district of Khadamiyah in west Baghdad. The poor in Iraq take potentially fatal risks to earn a little money.

The uncertainty of the refugees’ lives in Kalawar is mirrored in their drawn faces. While we spoke to them there were several shouting matches. One woman kept showing us a piece of paper from the local authority in Sulaymaniyah giving her the right to stay there. She regarded us nervously as if we were officials about to evict her.

There are in fact three camps at Kalawar. Although almost all the refugees are Sunni they come from different places and until a month ago they lived together. But there were continual arguments. The refugees decided that they must split into three encampments: one from Baghdad, a second from Hillah, south of Baghdad, and a third from Diyala, the mixed Sunni-Shia province that has been the scene of ferocious sectarian pogroms.

Governments and the media crudely evaluate human suffering in Iraq in terms of the number killed. A broader and better barometer would include those who have escaped death only by fleeing their homes, their jobs and their country to go and live, destitute and unwanted, in places like Kalawar. The US administration has 18 benchmarks to measure progress in Iraq but the return of four million people to their homes is not among them.


It's been reported that although Christians make up only about 2% of Iraq's population, they are 25-40% of the refugees. What a sad irony that these Christians are now forced to flee their country after our invasion, but did not need to do that when Saddam was in power. How grateful they must be that we have brought democracy to their country.

[SkinBasket]

yabba babba babba yabba yab

Boo hoo. Maybe if all these people would simply fight for what they claim to love so much, they wouldn't have to go live in tents, we wouldn't have to have so many troops chasing criminals through their empty homes, and some shit could get done over there. Instead they're all going to creep off to the edge of the desert and wait to die? Because 4 million people who don't want violence in their country couldn't possibly make a difference could they?

[Joemailman]

Yep, you're right. We wage aggressive war against a country, fail to provide the troop levels necessary to control the country, and then blame the people who are forced to flee. God Bless America.

[the_idle_threat]

The writer of the column, Robert Novak, is a conservative who was the one who originally reported that Valerie Plame was a CIA operative. I wonder who his source was this time.

Goes to show you that media folks of all stripes are sleazebags. Doesn't matter if they're conservative or liberal---their need for the scoop is placed before anything else, including the lives of our troops or the livelihood of a CIA agent.

[SkinBasket]

Yep, you're right. We wage aggressive war against a country, fail to provide the troop levels necessary to control the country, and then blame the people who are forced to flee. God Bless America.

05 JOEIQ=100
10 ILM=((RND*100) + BLAH00 + BLAH01 + BLAH02)
20 JOEIQ = JOEIQ-ILM
30 GOTO 10
40 END

[Freak Out]

Nice...beat by the Chinese again.

Iraqis to Pay China $100 Million for Weapons for Police
Experts Fear More Will Go to Insurgents

By Robin Wright and Ann Scott Tyson
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, October 4, 2007; A12

Iraq has ordered $100 million worth of light military equipment from China for its police force, contending that the United States was unable to provide the materiel and is too slow to deliver arms shipments, Iraqi President Jalal Talabani said yesterday.

The China deal, not previously made public, has alarmed military analysts who note that Iraq's security forces already are unable to account for more than 190,000 weapons supplied by the United States, many of which are believed to be in the hands of Shiite and Sunni militias, insurgents and other forces seeking to destabilize Iraq and target U.S. troops.

"The problem is that the Iraqi government doesn't have -- as yet -- a clear plan for making sure that weapons are distributed, that they are properly monitored and repeatedly checked," said Rachel Stohl of the Center for Defense Information, an independent think tank. "The end-use monitoring will be left in the hands of a government and military in Iraq that is not yet ready for it. And there's not a way for the U.S. to mandate them to do it if they're not U.S. weapons."

News of Iraq's arms deal came as Army Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, the top U.S. commander for day-to-day operations in Iraq, told editors and reporters at The Washington Post yesterday that he expects a U.S. troop presence will be required in the country for a minimum of "at least three to five more years" and will involve 25,000 to 50,000 troops, depending on security conditions.

Detailed planning is underway for the U.S. military to begin scaling back its primary mission from one of fighting a counterinsurgency to an advisory and training role, which will involve pulling U.S. troops out of Iraqi cities and closing some U.S. bases, Odierno said. Odierno and Talabani, who met separately with Post editors and reporters, said they expect their governments to finalize a long-term bilateral security pact in 2008.

The capabilities of Iraqi security forces are pivotal to the U.S. exit strategy in Iraq, with the creation of a viable police force critical to reconciliation. Talabani said only one in five Iraqi police officers is armed and called for faster weapons delivery from the United States to beef up Iraq's fledgling army.

Iraq's police force is noted for infiltration by militias and insurgents out to use national resources for their own ends, said William D. Hartung, director of the New America Foundation Arms and Security Initiative. "Besides, aside from possibly wanting newer models, there are piles of arms and weapons floating around in Iraq," he said.

The Chinese arms deal sheds light on the larger dispute between the United States and Iraq over rebuilding Iraq's armed forces and police. Iraqi officials have long complained about the supply of weapons and equipment for their personnel, noting that Iraqi security forces often patrol in pickup trucks without body armor along the same routes as U.S. troops wearing flak jackets and riding in armored vehicles.

"There is general frustration in the Iraqi government at the rate in which Iraqi armed forces are being equipped and armed," Iraqi Ambassador Samir Sumaidaie told reporters this summer. "This is a collaborative effort between the Iraqi government and the government of the United States, and the process is not moving quickly enough to improve the fighting capacity of Iraqi armed forces. A way must be found to improve this process."

Talabani yesterday expressed frustration with the delays. "The capacity of the factories here are not enough to provide us quickly with all that we need, even for the army. One of our demands is to accelerate the delivery of the arms to the Iraqi army."

Iraq has become one of the largest buyers of U.S.-made weapons. Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, told the Senate Armed Services Committee last month that Baghdad has signed deals to buy $1.6 billion in U.S. arms, with another $1.8 billion in possible weapons purchases.

Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said the United States is "working closely" to help Iraq obtain "appropriate and necessary" military equipment. But U.S. officials concede delivery problems.

"We haven't converted toaster factories to produce carbines and we're working hard just to supply our own troops," said an administration official involved with Iraq policy. "Our factories are working for our own troops. So it's true we don't have the ability to provide these rifles and other equipment they're looking for."

In 2004 and 2005, the United States bought 185,000 AK-47s from an Eastern European country -- after Iraqis rejected U.S.-made M-16 assault rifles -- as part of a $2.8 billion program to deliver military equipment to Iraq. But a recent Government Accountability Office report said that 110,000 of them were unaccounted for, with about 30 percent of all arms distributed to Iraqi forces by the United States since 2004 missing.

Nevertheless, Odierno said, recent improvements in Iraq's security since the U.S. troop buildup have exceeded his expectations, with attacks down in September to the lowest level since January 2006 and U.S. troop casualties declining since June. A major factor has been U.S. operations against al-Qaeda in Iraq, whose sanctuaries have been reduced by 60 to 70 percent since January, he said. He warned, however, that the group can regenerate.

Another factor has been the unexpected willingness of Sunni tribes to cooperate with U.S. and Iraqi forces, he said. But Odierno said he remains concerned over recent statements from Iraq's Shiite ruling faction demanding that the U.S. military stop recruiting Sunni tribesmen f0r Iraq's police force.

"That's uncomfortable to them, and I think that's part of why it's so important. This is about reconciliation," Odierno said. "We have to continue to move forward."

He said the U.S. military is shifting more of its resources to targeting Shiite militias, including what Odierno called "surrogates" who are trained, armed and funded by Iran, as well as "special groups" affiliated with the Mahdi Army of Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr.

"We are starting to see at low levels a split between those [Shiite militias] who have some relationship with Iran . . . and those who do not," Odierno said. He said the significance of the "fissures" is not yet clear.

Staff writer Dafna Linzer contributed to this report.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Iraq has ordered $100 million worth of light military equipment from China for its police force, contending that the United States was unable to provide the materiel and is too slow to deliver arms shipments, Iraqi President Jalal Talabani said yesterday.

You can't blame the Iraqis. In the big picture, this is good for the U.S., too. We don't want the police fighting with muskets.

China is just kicking our butts up and down. China is the emerging giant oil pig that REALLY needs mideast oil, and we're there fighting and dying to preserve their future.

Oh my God. While we're mortgaging the future on this endless war, the Chinese can focus on investment. They're pulling ahead in Latin America, for instance.

I'm not saying we can just pull out of Iraq, but boy are we taking it up the ass.

[Partial]

One of my childhood best friends recently lost a leg, a few fingers, and a portion of his skull in Iraq :(

[Kiwon]

It's been reported that although Christians make up only about 2% of Iraq's population, they are 25-40% of the refugees. What a sad irony that these Christians are now forced to flee their country after our invasion, but did not need to do that when Saddam was in power. How grateful they must be that we have brought democracy to their country.

I'm convinced now....liberalism is a disease.

Joe, you don't really believe what you're alluding to, do you? Is tyranny really superior to freedom and individual liberty in your mind?

Purple fingers, my friend.

[Deputy Nutz]

Another Pieced together war.

Worthless, absolutely worthless to put forth any effort if you don't give 100%. And this isn't a slant one way or another I am condemning both Doves and Hawks.

[Harlan Huckleby]

early in the war, you might say problem was a lack of effort/commitment. 250,000 ground troops could have kept things from spinning so far out of control.

I think the difficulties we see now are purely political, and will only be solved by the Iraqis over a 10 to 20 year period.

[Deputy Nutz]

Poor overall planning, in the beginning there was no long term goals that were presented to the American people and the World. The United States destroyed the Iraqi Army, that was a given, then toppled the Government, again that was a given. But no long term planing or contemplation about future hostile engagements. No long term training for urban commando warfare. The military has been put in a position to manage the situation instead of total destruction of the enemy at the minimum cost to American life.

[Freak Out]

The United States destroyed the Iraqi Army

Wrong, they went home.....with their weapons. Then the dipshit Bremmer disbanded it instead of paying them. The Viceroy really fucked the goat on that one.

Good article on IEDs and how difficult it is to combat them. It's a long one but worth it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/02/AR2007100202366.html

[Harlan Huckleby]

Freak Out, do you think I am insufficiently depressed?

[Freak Out]

Freak Out, do you think I am insufficiently depressed?

Sorry Dog.

I did get a kick out of the "Mother of all spreadsheets" though!

[Tyrone Bigguns]

The United States destroyed the Iraqi Army

Wrong, they went home.....with their weapons. Then the dipshit Bremmer disbanded it instead of paying them. The Viceroy really fucked the goat on that one.

Good article on IEDs and how difficult it is to combat them. It's a long one but worth it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/02/AR2007100202366.html

I think when he said destroyed he was alluding to what bremmer did.

If you guys get a chance read the interview with Colin Powell in this month's GQ. Pretty much confirms the lack of contigency planning by Rummy.

As I've said for a while, we are going to lose a leg in Iraq. The only question is whether you wanna amputate above or below the knee.

[Freak Out]

This is as good as place as any to post this.

October 7, 2007
Editorial
On Torture and American Values

Once upon a time, it was the United States that urged all nations to obey the letter and the spirit of international treaties and protect human rights and liberties. American leaders denounced secret prisons where people were held without charges, tortured and killed. And the people in much of the world, if not their governments, respected the United States for its values.

The Bush administration has dishonored that history and squandered that respect. As an article on this newspaper’s front page last week laid out in disturbing detail, President Bush and his aides have not only condoned torture and abuse at secret prisons, but they have conducted a systematic campaign to mislead Congress, the American people and the world about those policies.

After the attacks of 9/11, Mr. Bush authorized the creation of extralegal detention camps where Central Intelligence Agency operatives were told to extract information from prisoners who were captured and held in secret. Some of their methods — simulated drownings, extreme ranges of heat and cold, prolonged stress positions and isolation — had been classified as torture for decades by civilized nations. The administration clearly knew this; the C.I.A. modeled its techniques on the dungeons of Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the Soviet Union.

The White House could never acknowledge that. So its lawyers concocted documents that redefined “torture” to neatly exclude the things American jailers were doing and hid the papers from Congress and the American people. Under Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Mr. Bush’s loyal enabler, the Justice Department even declared that those acts did not violate the lower standard of “cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.”

That allowed the White House to claim that it did not condone torture, and to stampede Congress into passing laws that shielded the interrogators who abused prisoners, and the men who ordered them to do it, from any kind of legal accountability.

Mr. Bush and his aides were still clinging to their rationalizations at the end of last week. The president declared that Americans do not torture prisoners and that Congress had been fully briefed on his detention policies.

Neither statement was true — at least in what the White House once scorned as the “reality-based community” — and Senator John Rockefeller, chairman of the Intelligence Committee, was right to be furious. He demanded all of the “opinions of the Justice Department analyzing the legality” of detention and interrogation policies. Lawmakers, who for too long have been bullied and intimidated by the White House, should rewrite the Detainee Treatment Act and the Military Commissions Act to conform with actual American laws and values.

For the rest of the nation, there is an immediate question: Is this really who we are?

Is this the country whose president declared, “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall,” and then managed the collapse of Communism with minimum bloodshed and maximum dignity in the twilight of the 20th century? Or is this a nation that tortures human beings and then concocts legal sophistries to confuse the world and avoid accountability before American voters?

Truly banning the use of torture would not jeopardize American lives; experts in these matters generally agree that torture produces false confessions. Restoring the rule of law to Guantánamo Bay would not set terrorists free; the truly guilty could be tried for their crimes in a way that does not mock American values.

Clinging to the administration’s policies will only cause further harm to America’s global image and to our legal system. It also will add immeasurably to the risk facing any man or woman captured while wearing America’s uniform or serving in its intelligence forces.

This is an easy choice.

[Freak Out]

...and now Turkey is preparing to invade northern Iraq to go after Kurdish forces.

[Joemailman]

That's a coming storm that's been brewing for awhile.

[Harlan Huckleby]

...and now Turkey is preparing to invade northern Iraq to go after Kurdish forces.

no way.

[Harlan Huckleby]

way!

http://images.quizilla.com/B/briguyman/1040881711_ktopwayne2.jpg

(but i still don't think they will invade. too costly.)


BAGHDAD, Oct. 11 — A Kurdish lawmaker in the Iraqi Parliament today condemned preparations by Turkey’s government for potential cross-border military action against Kurdish rebels in Iraq, even as he reported that the Turkish military was mobilizing on the border and Turkish warplanes were flying close to Iraq.

The lawmaker, Mahmoud Othman, said he understood that there was some mobilization by the Turkish military on the Turkish side of the border and Turkish warplanes were flying close to the border but not crossing it.

Turkey’s prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, has suggested that a vote could be held next week in Parliament to allow military incursions into Iraq, and Sadullah Ergin, a senior government official, said today that the motion could come as early as Monday, according to the state-run Anatolian News Agency.

On Wednesday, the Associated Press reported from the town of Sirnak that Turkish warplanes and helicopters were attacking positions along the southern border with Iraq that are suspected of belonging to Kurdish rebels who have been fighting Turkish forces for years.

The prospect of military action by Turkey has been raised following a recent upsurge in violence blamed on Kurdish rebels. On Wednesday night, a policeman was killed and six others were injured in a bomb attack in the Kurdish city of Diyarbakir in southeastern Turkey, the Anatolian news agency reported.

Mr. Othman said the weakness of the Iraqi government was to blame for Turkey’s ability to make its threat of military action.

“The Iraqi government has a very weak position and I believe we have offered unofficial concessions,” he said. “The problem is that the American position is very weak also because they don’t like the P.K.K.,” he said, referring to the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, the separatist movement with bases in Iraqi Kurdistan.

The United States and many European government have classified the group as a terrorist organization. It is a known threat to a significant oil pipeline bringing Caspian basin oil to the Mediterranean, which passes through eastern Turkey.

In Kirkuk, an ethnically mixed city in Kurdistan, a suicide car bomber today targeted the convoy of a traffic police general, in the latest in a recent number of attacks by insurgents on police officials.

The bomb killed 9 people and wounded 45 others. The police chief was wounded but survived the attack.

In Baghdad, the American military refused to release further information about an attack today on Camp Victory, an American base near the Baghdad airport, that killed two members of the multinational force and wounded 38. The soldiers died after either a mortar or rocket attack, but the military would not give further details in case it gave away sensitive information about the camp. Attacks on Camp Victory had become rarer since the Mahdi Army announced a cease-fire.

[Freak Out]

Armenians win and the Kurds lose?

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/needtoknow/2007/10/kurds_armenians_win_we_pay_the.html

[Freak Out]

How dare the damn Iraqi government think for itself!

October 18, 2007
Iraq Awards Contracts to Iran and China
By JAMES GLANZ

BAGHDAD, Oct. 17 — Iraq has agreed to award $1.1 billion in contracts to Iranian and Chinese companies to build a pair of enormous power plants, the Iraqi electricity minister said Tuesday. Word of the project prompted serious concerns among American military officials, who fear that Iranian commercial investments can mask military activities at a time of heightened tension with Iran.

The Iraqi electricity minister, Karim Wahid, said that the Iranian project would be built in Sadr City, a Shiite enclave in Baghdad that is controlled by followers of the anti-American cleric Moktada al-Sadr. He added that Iran had also agreed to provide cheap electricity from its own grid to southern Iraq, and to build a large power plant essentially free of charge in an area between the two southern Shiite holy cities of Karbala and Najaf.

The expansion of ties between Iraq and Iran comes as the United States and Iran clash on nuclear issues and about what American officials have repeatedly said is Iranian support for armed groups in Iraq. American officials have charged that Iranians, through the international military wing known as the Quds Force, are particularly active in support of elite elements of the Mahdi Army, a militia largely controlled by Mr. Sadr.

An American military official in Baghdad said that while he had no specific knowledge of the power plant contracts, any expansion of Iranian interests was a concern for the military here.

“We are of course carefully watching Iran’s overall presence here in Iraq,” the military official said. “As you know, it’s not always as it appears. Their Quds Force routinely uses the cover of a business to mask their real purpose as an intelligence operative.”

“This is a free marketplace, so there’s not much we can do about it,” the official said.

At the same time, it is possible to view Iranian and Chinese investment as giving those countries a stake in Iraqi stability. The power plants could also boost a troubled reconstruction effort in Iraq. An American Embassy spokesman said, “We welcome any efforts to help develop Iraq’s energy infrastructure.”

“These proposals reflect the ongoing business opportunities that are arising in Iraq that American firms should be competing for,” said the spokesman, who asked not to be named because of standard protocol at the embassy.

It was unclear whether any American firms had tried to win the work, although Mr. Wahid said the projects had been submitted for bids. The embassy spokesman said, “We are unaware of any violations of principles of open and fair bidding.”

The agreements between Iraq and Iran come after the American-led reconstruction effort, which relied heavily on large American contractors, has spent nearly $5 billion of United States taxpayer money on Iraq’s electricity grid. Aside from a few isolated bright spots, there was little clear impact in a nation where in many places electricity is still available only for a few hours each day. Because the power plants are in largely Shiite-controlled areas, it is possible they may not face the same sectarian violence that crippled so many American rebuilding projects.

Mr. Wahid did not say how much the plant between Karbala and Najaf would cost, but at standard international prices a plant of the scale he described would be worth roughly $200 million to $300 million.

The outlines of all three agreements were confirmed by Thamir Ghadban, an expert on energy who is also director of the committee of advisers to Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki. But Mr. Ghadban said that the granting of the huge projects to rivals of the United States was not an indication that American companies were being excluded from consideration now that Iraqi oil revenues, which provide the basis for the Iraqi government’s budget, are largely paying for the reconstruction of the grid.

“There is no preference to the Iranians,” Mr. Ghadban said, citing the most obvious potential point of sensitivity for the United States. “There is no opposition or stance from the Iraqi government to bar American or Western companies. It is the other way around,” Mr. Ghadban said, indicating that he urged American contractors to bid for work in Iraq.

Of the two new projects Iraq has agreed to finance, Mr. Wahid said, the largest is a $940 million power plant in Wasit to be built by a Chinese company, which he said was named Shanghai Heavy Industry. That project would pump some 1,300 megawatts of electricity into the Iraqi grid. For comparison, all of the plants currently connected to Iraq’s grid produce a total of roughly 5,000 megawatts.

He said that Iraq had already spent $12 million leveling the ground in preparation for the Chinese plant. The Sadr City project, which will include a small refinery, will cost $150 million and be built by an Iranian company, Sunir, Mr. Wahid said. That plant is expected to produce about 160 megawatts of electricity.

The Iraqi Electricity Ministry, which Mr. Wahid heads, is one of the few in the central government that has received praise for successfully spending much of the money allocated to it in the Iraqi budget for reconstruction projects. Because of security problems, a shortage of officials who are skilled at writing and executing contracts, and endemic corruption, many of the ministries have either left their rebuilding money unspent or poured it into projects that have had a marginal impact on the quality of life for Iraqi citizens.

Asked how he had managed to make progress within the bureaucratic morass of much of the Iraqi government, Mr. Wahid said he had simply learned to go it alone. Aside from financing, his main need from the central government was guarantees that Iraqi security forces would protect his workers and the electricity infrastructure.

“Do not annoy me,” Mr. Wahid said was his main message to the government. “Let me do my work.”

Whether officials outside his government will be entirely pleased with the deals is a separate question. An international energy expert involved in Iraq’s electricity sector said he understood that the Sadr City project had originally been an Iranian initiative and that the Electricity Ministry had shown little interest at first.

The expert also said that the Iraqi Commission on Public Integrity, which investigates corruption, had already signaled that it would be investigating the project. Officials at the commission could not be reached for comment on Wednesday evening.

Mr. Wahid said the new power plants were part of a sweeping plan to increase electricity production on the grid, whose output has been creeping upward in recent weeks. He said that the ministry was in discussions on building another large power plant, one that would produce 600 megawatts, within the city of Karbala.

And the minister said that the first installment of another initiative he had long discussed, bringing diesel-powered generators into selected Baghdad neighborhoods, was close to having an impact.

Some 14 of the generators, each expected to produce 1.75 megawatts, should be arriving in the capital within weeks, Mr. Wahid said.

Alissa J. Rubin and Ahmad Fadam contributed reporting from Baghdad.

[Freak Out]

Heard on the BBC today that NATO intercepted a large weapons shipment in Afghanistan today and that all the evidence points right back to Iran. Supposedly there was some very serious firepower included in the shipment.

[Freak Out]

Lets fix an Iraqi dam!

Iraqi Dam Seen In Danger of Deadly Collapse

By Amit R. Paley
Washington Post Foreign Service
Tuesday, October 30, 2007; A01

AT THE MOSUL DAM, Iraq -- The largest dam in Iraq is in serious danger of an imminent collapse that could unleash a trillion-gallon wave of water, possibly killing thousands of people and flooding two of the largest cities in the country, according to new assessments by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and other U.S. officials.

Even in a country gripped by daily bloodshed, the possibility of a catastrophic failure of the Mosul Dam has alarmed American officials, who have concluded that it could lead to as many as 500,000 civilian deaths by drowning Mosul under 65 feet of water and parts of Baghdad under 15 feet, said Abdulkhalik Thanoon Ayoub, the dam manager. "The Mosul dam is judged to have an unacceptable annual failure probability," in the dry wording of an Army Corps of Engineers draft report.

At the same time, a U.S. reconstruction project to help shore up the dam in northern Iraq has been marred by incompetence and mismanagement, according to Iraqi officials and a report by a U.S. oversight agency to be released Tuesday. The reconstruction project, worth at least $27 million, was not intended to be a permanent solution to the dam's deficiencies.

"In terms of internal erosion potential of the foundation, Mosul Dam is the most dangerous dam in the world," the Army Corps concluded in September 2006, according to the report to be released Tuesday. "If a small problem [at] Mosul Dam occurs, failure is likely."

The effort to prevent a failure of the dam has been complicated by behind-the-scenes wrangling between Iraqi and U.S. officials over the severity of the problem and how much money should be allocated to fix it. The Army Corps has recommended building a second dam downstream as a fail-safe measure, but Iraqi officials have rejected the proposal, arguing that it is unnecessary and too expensive.

The debate has taken place largely out of public view because both Iraqi and U.S. Embassy officials have refused to discuss the details of safety studies -- commissioned by the U.S. government for at least $6 million -- so as not to frighten Iraqi citizens. Portions of the draft report were read to The Washington Post by an Army Corps official who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter. The Post also reviewed an Army Corps PowerPoint presentation on the dam.

"The Army Corps of Engineers determined that the dam presented unacceptable risks," U.S. Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker and Gen. David H. Petraeus, the U.S. commander in Iraq, wrote in a May 3 letter to Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. "Assuming a worst-case scenario, an instantaneous failure of Mosul Dam filled to its maximum operating level could result in a flood wave 20 meters deep at the City of Mosul, which would result in a significant loss of life and property."

Sitting in a picturesque valley 45 miles along the Tigris River north of Mosul, the earthen dam has one fundamental problem: It was built on top of gypsum, which dissolves when it comes into contact with water.

Almost immediately after the dam was completed in the early 1980s, engineers began injecting the dam with grout, a liquefied mixture of cement and other additives. More than 50,000 tons of material have been pumped into the dam since then in a continual effort to prevent the structure, which can hold up to 3 trillion gallons of water, from collapsing.

After the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, American officials began to study risks posed by the dam, which they said were underestimated by Iraqis.

"Iraqi government believes dam is safe," concluded a 32-page PowerPoint presentation prepared by the Army Corps and dated December 2006.

On a tour of the dam on a recent blistering afternoon, Ayoub, the manager, contended that the dam was safe but acknowledged the unusual problems with it.

Seepage from the dam funnels into a gushing stream of water that engineers monitor to determine the severity of the leakage. Twenty-four clanging machines churn 24 hours a day to pump grout deep into the dam's base. And sinkholes form periodically as the gypsum dissolves beneath the structure.

"You cannot find any other dam in the world like this," said Ayoub, a mustachioed man in a dark business suit who has worked at the dam since 1983 and has managed it since 1989.

About two years ago, Ayoub became concerned that the pressure of the water was putting the dam at risk of failure. So he ordered that the dam's water level, which can reach 330 meters above sea level, not exceed 319 meters.

But reports prepared by the Army Corps of Engineers began to raise new alarms.

"Mosul Dam is 'unsafe' in any definition," the PowerPoint presentation said. It added: "Condition continually degrading" and "Failure mode is credible." Under a section labeled "Consequences of Failure," it says: "Mass civilian fatalities."

Ayoub said U.S. officials spoke in person about the dam in even more apocalyptic terms. "They went to the Ministry of Water Resources and told them that the dam could collapse any day," he said.

The report so alarmed the governor of Nineveh province, where the dam is located, that he asked that it be drained of all water immediately, Ayoub said.

Ayoub said he agrees that the most catastrophic collapse of the dam could kill 500,000 people, but he said U.S. officials have not convinced him that the structure is at high risk of collapse. "The Americans may very well be right about the danger," Ayoub said. "I think it is safe enough that my office is in the flood plain."

In an interview Monday night, Abdul Latif Rashid, Iraq's minister of water resources, said that he believed the safety situation was not critical and that he was more inclined to trust his engineers than American reports.

"Is the dam going to collapse tomorrow?" Rashid said. "I can't tell you that. Let us hope that we avoid a disaster and focus now on a solution."

The Army Corps has recommended that a partially constructed dam at Badush, which lies between Mosul Dam and the city, be finished as a stopgap measure in case Mosul Dam collapses.

But Salar Bakir Sami, director general of planning and development at the Water Resources Ministry, said Iraqi government officials do not think it is necessary to spend the estimated $10 billion for such a project. Instead, he said, the ministry planned to spend $300 million to construct a smaller version of the Badush dam that would generate electricity and provide irrigation, but not serve as a safety valve in case Mosul Dam breaks.

Rashid said his top priority is to fix Mosul Dam by building a concrete wall at its foundation that should shore up the design and provide "a permanent solution." He said experts have just discovered cutting-edge technology that would allow such a wall to be built, perhaps with construction starting by next year at a cost of less than $1 billion.

In the report to be released Tuesday, the Office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, a federal oversight agency, found that little of the reconstruction effort led by the U.S. Embassy has succeeded in improving the dam. The office reviewed contracts worth $27 million, but an embassy official said the total cost of the project was $34 million.

The review found that a Turkish company, which was paid $635,000 for a contract awarded 19 months ago to build storage silos for cement, had done so little and such poor-quality work that its project may have to be restarted. One company contracted to design grout-mixing plants instead submitted plans for unusable concrete-mixing plants. High-tech equipment meant to help grouting is gathering dust because it won't work, according to investigators.

Embassy and Army Corps officials noted that it has been difficult to conduct oversight of the project because it is in a dangerous area. They said that contracts with the worst businesses have been terminated and that steps have been taken to ensure better management of the project in the future.

"Our focus is on whether the project that the Corps undertook got carried out and the answer to that question is no," said Stuart W. Bowen Jr., the special inspector general. "The expenditures of the money have yielded no benefit yet."

[woodbuck27]

Screw the F..ing British Army.

Remember Dieppe and the Canadian Armies slaughter. August 19,1942.

The Province of Newfoundland lost so many good men that to this day it is still recovering from the outrage that was Dieppe. Many towns lost nearly their entire male populations.Left behind were only women with children and men too old to serve.

Our young Canadian men were simply led to the slaughter without as much as proper air support and shelling of the beachhead cliffs, because the surveillance was outdated or not at all telling the real story of the german preparation to defend that beachhead and what lie behind it.

Most of YOU saw Saving Private Ryan.

Dieppe was REAL and far worse than that depicted in that movie.That movie was difficult to even watch as the Men landed on the beach but Dieppe was real.

No major objectives of the raid were accomplished. 3,623 of the 6,086 men who made it ashore were either killed, wounded, or captured.

Good young men swept away like wood chips after being encouraged into action as if it was going to be some cake walk. Hard up against all odds, almost ambushed by a superior well entrenched German force with heavy caliber machine guns and artillary that wasn't even identified by the F. .ing British as being in place to defend Dieppe and the secured French Vilages beyong the cliffs of Dieppe.

Slack ass no proper surveillance (out of date) to properly inform the planners of the raid and our boys were told that that it would be no problem, but it was more than a problem.

The Germans in sufficient numbers were set and above the beachhead and well dug in for the slaughter that was Dieppe.

As well,the Allied air forces failed to lure the Luftwaffe into open battle, and still lost 119 planes, while the Royal Navy suffered 555 casualties.

The catastrophe at Dieppe influenced future actions against the Germans protecting the beachheads of France but Canadians lost too much.

" The actual raid was undertaken without the approval of the Combined Chiefs of Staff and many elements in the planning suffered from the unofficial nature of the raid."

The then new Chief of Combined Operations, Louis Mountbatten was the culprit in this one and not someone that Canadians will soon forget or should necessarily forgive.It was a mess.

The previous Chief of Combined Operations, Roger Keyes, who had commanded the famous raid on Zeebrugge in 1918, had been ordered to organise raids on occupied Europe.

He was replaced by Mountbatten in 1941, through the direct intervention of Winston Churchill.Detractors of Mountbatten have contended that all the successful raids prior to Dieppe were originated under the leadership of Roger Keyes.

It was called Operation Jubilee. Almost all concerned believed that a raid on Dieppe was now out of the question; however, though Montgomery wanted it cancelled indefinitely, Mountbatten did not.

He began reorganising the raid from 11 July as Operation Jubilee. Despite not receiving Combined Chiefs of Staff authorisation, Mountbatten instructed his staff to proceed in late July.

This lack of top-level go-ahead resulted in certain dislocations in the planning. For example, the failure to inform the Joint Intelligence Committee or the Inter-Service Security Board meant none of the intelligence agencies were involved, consequently the operation was mounted on information that was months out of date.

Almost 252 ships left various ports on the night of 18 August and as they approached the French coast early on the 19th, things began to go wrong.

Edited fr:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dieppe_Raid

Left Flank, Yellow Beaches: No. 3 Commando

The mission of Lieutenant Colonel John Durnford-Slater's No. 3 Commando was to neutralise a German coastal battery (code named GOEBBELS), near Berneval, which could engage the landing at Dieppe some 6 km to the west.

The three 170 mm and four 105 mm of 2/770 Batterie had to be out of action by the time the main force approached the main beach.

The craft carrying No. 3 Commando, No. 5 Group, approaching the coast to the east were not warned of the approach of a German coastal convoy that had been located by British CHAIN HOME radar stations at 2130 hours.

German S-boats escorting a German tanker torpedoed some of the landing craft and disabled the escorting gun boat. The Group was dispersed, with some losses, and the enemy's coastal defences were alerted.

Only a handful of commandos under the Second in Command, Major Peter Young, landed and scaled the barbed-wire-laced cliffs. Eventually 18 Commandos reached the perimeter of the GOEBBLES Battery via Bernevall and engaged their target with small arms fire.

Unable to destroy the guns, their sniping of the German gun crews, however, prevented the guns from firing effectively on the main assault.

Thus, just a handful of determined British soldiers neutralised the most dangerous German coastal battery in the area of the raid for the most critical period of the operation.

Right Flank, Orange Beaches: No. 4 Commando

No. 4 Commando landed in force and destroyed their targets, providing the only success of the operation. Most of No. 4 safely returned to England. This portion of the raid was considered a model for future commando raids. Lord Lovat became famous as an officer here on Orange Beach.


Canadian main assault

The Canadians in the centre suffered greatly, at least in part due to the inexperience of Roberts, who unwisely committed the reserve force to the main beaches. Poor small unit leadership has also been blamed for failures once men went ashore.

The landing at Puys by the Royal Regiment of Canada was delayed and the potential advantages of surprise and darkness were lost. The well-placed German forces held the Canadians that did land on the beach with little difficulty. 225 men were killed, 264 surrendered and 33 made it back to England.

The beach was defended by just 60 Germans, who at no time felt the need to reinforce their position. Several platoons of the Black Watch were also employed at Blue Beach; some of their casualties were suffered in a grenade-priming accident on the transport ships during the channel crossing.

On the other side of the town at Pourville the South Saskatchewan Regiment and the Queen's Own Cameron Highlanders of Canada made it ashore with few losses.

The Saskatchewan advance on Dieppe was soon halted while the Camerons were halted just short of their objective. Both regiments suffered more as they withdrew; the bravery of the landing craft crew allowed 341 men to embark but increasing pressure meant that the rest were left to surrender. Another 141 had died.

The main attack was at three points: the 14th Canadian Army Tank Regiment (Calgary Tanks) in the middle with The Essex Scottish Regiment to the east and The Royal Hamilton Light Infantry to the west.

Attacking thirty minutes after the flanking assaults and onto a steep pebble beach all the groups were met with intense fire. The eastern assault was held at the beach. By the end of the raid, The Essex Scottish Regiment had suffered 121 fatal casualties, with many others wounded and captured. The western assault gained a hold in a shore-front casino but few soldiers made it across the road and they were soon held.

The tanks arrived a little late to discover their landing point was difficult. Twenty-nine of 58 tanks disembarked, 2 "drowned" in deep water, 27 made it ashore but only 15 managed to climb the chert pebbles of the beach and cross both the anti-tank ditch that the Germans were still digging, and the sea-wall onto the esplanade under fire from pill boxes and flanking cliff top positions.

However, they were completely stopped by anti-tank walls blocking exits from the Esplanade, were immobilized, or later returned to the beach to cover the withdrawal. The engineers whose job it was to clear such obstacles were unable to do so because of heavy fire which the tanks could not suppress.

Back on the beach, the tanks provided fire support, as best they could, and covered the withdrawal.

The supporting naval bombardment was supplied by six Hunt Class destroyers; these lacked an appropriate coastal bombardment round or sufficient weight of broadside, and did not have the range to destroy the German strongpoints without themselves coming under heavy fire. They were also unable to communicate directly with those on the shore to make their bombardment effective.

The debacle was compounded when, acting on fragmentary messages, the reserve were committed to the Dieppe beach at around 0700 hours.

The 584 men of Les Fusiliers Mont-Royal took fire all the way to the beach and on it. Only 125 made it back to England.

The other part of the reserve comprised 369 men of A Commando (later 40 Commando Royal Marines) were General Robert's reserve and, in their first action, were ordered to White Beach to support 'if possible'.

The first of their craft landed under withering machine gun fire and their commander, Lieutenant Colonel Joseph "Tiger" Phillips, put on white gloves to semaphore the order to his landing craft to withdraw. He was hit and killed in the process. All but one saw the signal and withdrew, although several craft were already hit. None of the Commandos who landed got more than a matter of yards up the beach.

At 1050 hours a general order to retreat was issued.

Aftermath

Heavy losses

Casualty figures vary: according to one source, of 6,090 men, 1,027 were killed and 2,340 captured.

The Official History of the Canadian Army: Six Years of War (Vol 1 2nd ed) gives the figures of 907 Canadians being killed, including while in captivity.

Some 2,210 Canadians of 4,963 that were sent made it back to England (it must be noted that nearly 1,000 of these never landed).

The total number of fatal and non-fatal casualties, some of whom were evacuated off the beach, is given as 3,367.

Overhead the Allied air forces lost 119 aircraft while the Luftwaffe lost just 46.

As well, only 11 of the 60 tanks that were sent made it back.

The German losses amounted to 311 killed and wounded missing soldiers.

I have seen a documentry of the dieppe raid and if you ever saw it I will bet you'll be in tears. The loss's were brutal.

All because of an over zealous Louis Montbatten on some glory hunt.

Idiot.

Note:

Dieppe, Television docudrama, 1993.

Critical of Mountbatten and another planner, General Montgomery, and based on Brian Loring-Villa's book, "Unauthorized Action: Mountbatten and the Dieppe Raid."

The film is an accurate portrayal of life for the common soldier of the Canadian Army in England. A low budget means only the attack on Blue Beach is depicted; however, the focus of the film is divided between the grand strategic aims of the high command, the operational aims of the division staff, and the personal lives of the soldiers.

This film really shakes me to the core.

I hate what the British Army Leaders allowed to happen to the Canadian soldiers that had little chance at Dieppe.

[Freak Out]

Looking on the bright side.....Burma and Somalia are more corrupt, WTF...send them a few more billion!

December 2, 2007
Nonstop Theft and Bribery Are Staggering Iraq
By DAMIEN CAVE

BAGHDAD, Dec. 1 — Jobless men pay $500 bribes to join the police. Families build houses illegally on government land, carwashes steal water from public pipes, and nearly everything the government buys or sells can now be found on the black market.

Painkillers for cancer (from the Ministry of Health) cost $80 for a few capsules; electricity meters (from the Ministry of Electricity) go for $200 each, and even third-grade textbooks (stolen from the Ministry of Education) must be bought at bookstores for three times what schools once charged.

“Everyone is stealing from the state,” said Adel Adel al-Subihawi, a prominent Shiite tribal leader in Sadr City, throwing up his hands in disgust. “It’s a very large meal, and everyone wants to eat.”

Corruption and theft are not new to Iraq, and government officials have promised to address the problem. But as Iraqis and American officials assess the effects of this year’s American troop increase, there is a growing sense that, even as security has improved, Iraq has slipped to new depths of lawlessness.

One recent independent analysis ranked Iraq the third most corrupt country in the world. Of 180 countries surveyed, only Somalia and Myanmar were worse, according to Transparency International, a Berlin-based group that publishes the index annually.

And the extent of the theft is staggering. Some American officials estimate that as much as a third of what they spend on Iraqi contracts and grants ends up unaccounted for or stolen, with a portion going to Shiite or Sunni militias. In addition, Iraq’s top anticorruption official estimated this fall — before resigning and fleeing the country after 31 of his agency’s employees were killed over a three-year period — that $18 billion in Iraqi government money had been lost to various stealing schemes since 2004.

The collective filching undermines Iraq’s ability to provide essential services, a key to sustaining recent security gains, according to American military commanders. It also sows a corrosive distrust of democracy and hinders reconciliation as entrenched groups in the Shiite-led government resist reforms that would cut into reliable cash flows.

In interviews across Baghdad, though, Iraqis said the widespread thieving affected them at least as powerfully on an emotional and moral level. The Koran is very clear on stealing: “God does not love the corrupters,” one verse says. And for average Iraqis, those ashamed of the looting that took place immediately after the fall of Saddam Hussein, the current era of anything-goes is particularly crushing because almost no one can avoid its taint.

For many, it is not a question of getting rich. Theft and corruption have become survival tools, creating a spiral of dishonest transactions that leave nearly everyone feeling dirty.

Abu Ali is a 23-year-old Sunni with a soft middle and a common tale. Identifying himself by only a nickname, which means father of Ali, he said that he, his wife, his elderly mother and six relatives fled their home in eastern Baghdad last year after receiving death threats from Shiite militias. First they rushed to Diyala Province, and when that turned violent, they moved back to a safer area of Baghdad — broke and desperate.

A major breadwinner for his family, Abu Ali needed a job. And like many Iraqis, he saw only one employer hiring: the government. A neighbor who was a police officer suggested joining the force. Abu Ali asked how, noting that recruits outnumbered positions. The answer was simple: a $500 bribe.

Abu Ali borrowed the money a few months ago and found his way to a cellphone shop downtown, where, he said, a man in his late 20s welcomed him inside. The man identified himself as a police captain and seemed at ease with the transaction. His wealth sparkled all around.

“He had a silver Mercedes,” Abu Ali said. “He was wearing a thick gold chain and a gold watch.”

Abu Ali tried to bargain for a lower fee, but failed, handing over the cash and filling out official forms. In return, he said, he received a blue card stamped “Ministry of the Interior,” which declared him an accepted member of the police force. The man with the gold chain told him to watch for an announcement in the local paper that listed the names of newly accepted recruits, and to bring the card to his first day of training.

“How do I know I’ll really get the job?” Abu Ali said he asked. “He told me, ‘I’ve put in 70 or 80 people already. Don’t worry about it.’”

Five months later, Abu Ali’s name appeared in the newspaper. At the police academy in September, he said, he discovered that most of his class was from Sadr City and that everyone paid $400 to $800 to join.

“There’s not a single person among the 850 people in my class who joined for free,” he said.

His commanders, he added, also now collect the salaries of recruits who quit, a payout of more than $100,000 a month. “No one can stop it,” Abu Ali said. “Corruption runs from top to bottom.”

The details of Abu Ali’s story could not be independently verified, but they fit a pattern of bribes and payroll schemes found in nearly every nook of Iraq’s government, according to government workers, Iraqi lawmakers and some American officials.

Many Iraqis speak from personal experience.

Mr. Subihawi, the Shiite tribal leader in Sadr City, said that when he recently tried to find a job for a young member of his tribe, he was told by local government officials that there was nothing available unless he was willing to pay.

Other Iraqis, in interviews, described similar encounters.

Cash is also often what leads to promotions — with the help of a fake college degree, purchased for about $40 — and theft is no less common. One government worker, who goes by the name Abu Muhammad, said a senior administrator at the ministry where he worked recently sold off computers, laser printers, office furniture and other supplies that appeared to have been paid for with American aid. The official was never caught or prosecuted, he said.

Haider Abu Laith, an engineer at the Ministry of Culture, said a close friend and fellow engineer at a government agricultural agency recently told him he was being pressured to inflate the cost of equipment purchased abroad so that senior officials could skim the surplus.

He said his friend quit, fearing that he would be killed if he refused.

And at the Ministry of Health’s main warehouse in Baghdad, American troops discovered this summer that two trucks full of medicines and medical equipment had disappeared while several guards on duty — young men in acid-washed jeans, with gel in their hair — said they saw nothing.

Even some Iraqi lawmakers admit that the free-for-all has become too extensive to stop easily. “The size of the corruption exceeds the imagination,” said Shatha Munthir Abdul Razzaq, a member of Parliament’s largest Sunni bloc. “Because there are no tough laws, no penalties for those who steal.”

Stuart W. Bowen Jr., who runs the Office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, said Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki actually undercut anticorruption efforts this year by requiring that investigators get permission from his office before pursuing ministers or former ministers on corruption charges.

Mr. Maliki has also not rescinded a law, opposed by the Americans, that lets ministers exempt their employees from investigation. “Those two legal positions within the fledgling Iraqi government are incompatible with democracy,” Mr. Bowen said in an interview. “My concerns about the corruption problem have risen.”

Ali al-Dabbagh, the prime minister’s spokesman, has said the government is determined to fight corruption. And at some gas stations, especially where American troops have concentrated their efforts, Iraqis report fewer demands for the bribes that once tripled or quadrupled the price of gas.

But for a large number of people, survival still depends on taking what they can, when they can. Some estimates put unemployment at 40 percent. For many Iraqis, minor theft seems justified because others take so much and because daily life in Iraq still feels precarious — a crust of calm resting on currents of sectarianism, poverty and anger.

Baghdad, in particular, is still marked by desperation, with more women begging at intersections and with many Iraqis barely getting by, even with a little cheating.

These are people like Sattar Alwan, 41, a taxi driver with a dark mustache who lives with nearly a dozen relatives in a makeshift, illegal house on government land in eastern Baghdad. He said his family built the squat brick structure because gunmen pushed them out of their own home and they had nowhere else to go.

Or Abbas Wadi Kadhim, 42, who uses a raspy air compressor to extract city water from broken pipes so he can earn money washing cars.

Mr. Kadhim acknowledges that he does not pay for the water, nor does he pay rent at the abandoned government building a few hundred yards away, where he often sleeps so he can be ready when customers arrive at 7 a.m.

He figures his government owes him. He was imprisoned by Mr. Hussein’s government and disabled in the Iran-Iraq war. His left forearm is as thin as a child’s, and crooked at the wrist.

“I have six kids,” he said, spraying down a silver sedan last week, “and all I get is 150,000 Iraqi dinar,” about $120 a month in disability payments. “It’s not enough.”

Mr. Kadhim said he was from Sadr City, a sprawling public housing project dominated by the Mahdi Army, Iraq’s most prominent Shiite militia. He suggested that he could make more money if he were less religious.

“The forbidden work is far away from us, as far away as the seven seas,” he said, looking east toward his old neighborhood.

He sounded proud. He spends long hours scrubbing cars for $4 each in an empty lot with a clear view of Baghdad’s main soccer stadium. His customers praise him for being thorough. But like many Iraqis who have made a choice to bend the rules, he seems still unsure of his moral footing: a little bit ashamed, a touch defensive.

“This job is better for us than doing things that are forbidden,” he said, his voice getting louder. “It’s better than stealing or using people.”“The more honest the job is and the harder we work, the better.”

Reporting was contributed by Anwar J. Ali, Diana Oliva Cave, Hosham Hussein, Qais Mizher and Abeer Mohammad.

[Freak Out]

Our tax dollars at work.

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=3977702&page=1

[Freak Out]

For those who may have never read it.

War is a racket.

http://lexrex.com/enlightened/articles/warisaracket.htm

[Freak Out]

AWOL military justice

Why the former chief prosecutor for the Office of Military Commissions resigned his post.

By Morris D. Davis

December 10, 2007

I was the chief prosecutor for the military commissions at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, until Oct. 4, the day I concluded that full, fair and open trials were not possible under the current system. I resigned on that day because I felt that the system had become deeply politicized and that I could no longer do my job effectively or responsibly.

In my view -- and I think most lawyers would agree -- it is absolutely critical to the legitimacy of the military commissions that they be conducted in an atmosphere of honesty and impartiality. Yet the political appointee known as the "convening authority" -- a title with no counterpart in civilian courts -- was not living up to that obligation.

In a nutshell, the convening authority is supposed to be objective -- not predisposed for the prosecution or defense -- and gets to make important decisions at various stages in the process. The convening authority decides which charges filed by the prosecution go to trial and which are dismissed, chooses who serves on the jury, decides whether to approve requests for experts and reassesses findings of guilt and sentences, among other things.

Earlier this year, Susan Crawford was appointed by the secretary of Defense to replace Maj. Gen. John Altenburg as the convening authority. Altenburg's staff had kept its distance from the prosecution to preserve its impartiality. Crawford, on the other hand, had her staff assessing evidence before the filing of charges, directing the prosecution's pretrial preparation of cases (which began while I was on medical leave), drafting charges against those who were accused and assigning prosecutors to cases, among other things.

How can you direct someone to do something -- use specific evidence to bring specific charges against a specific person at a specific time, for instance -- and later make an impartial assessment of whether they behaved properly? Intermingling convening authority and prosecutor roles perpetuates the perception of a rigged process stacked against the accused.

The second reason I resigned is that I believe even the most perfect trial in history will be viewed with skepticism if it is conducted behind closed doors. Telling the world, "Trust me, you would have been impressed if only you could have seen what we did in the courtroom" will not bolster our standing as defenders of justice. Getting evidence through the classification review process to allow its use in open hearings is time-consuming, but it is time well spent.

Crawford, however, thought it unnecessary to wait because the rules permit closed proceedings. There is no doubt that some portions of some trials have to be closed to protect classified information, but that should be the last option after exhausting all reasonable alternatives. Transparency is critical.

Finally, I resigned because of two memos signed by Deputy Secretary of Defense Gordon England that placed the chief prosecutor -- that was me -- in a chain of command under Defense Department General Counsel William J. Haynes. Haynes was a controversial nominee for a lifetime appointment to the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, but his nomination died in January 2007, in part because of his role in authorizing the use of the aggressive interrogation techniques some call torture.

I had instructed the prosecutors in September 2005 that we would not offer any evidence derived by waterboarding, one of the aggressive interrogation techniques the administration has sanctioned. Haynes and I have different perspectives and support different agendas, and the decision to give him command over the chief prosecutor's office, in my view, cast a shadow over the integrity of military commissions. I resigned a few hours after I was informed of Haynes' place in my chain of command.

The Military Commissions Act provides a foundation for fair trials, but some changes are clearly necessary. I was confident in full, fair and open trials when Gen. Altenburg was the convening authority and Brig. Gen. Tom Hemingway was his legal advisor. Collectively, they spent nearly 65 years in active duty, and they were committed to ensuring the integrity of military law. They acted on principle rather than politics.

The first step, if these truly are military commissions and not merely a political smoke screen, is to take control out of the hands of political appointees like Haynes and Crawford and give it back to the military.

The president first authorized military commissions in November 2001, more than six years ago, and the lack of progress is obvious. Only one war-crime case has been completed. It is time for the political appointees who created this quagmire to let go.

Sens. John McCain and Lindsey Graham have said that how we treat the enemy says more about us than it does about him. If we want these military commissions to say anything good about us, it's time to take the politics out of military commissions, give the military control over the process and make the proceedings open and transparent.

Morris D. Davis is the former chief prosecutor for the Office of Military Commissions. The opinions expressed are his own and do not represent the views of the Department of Defense or the Department of the Air Force.

[Freak Out]

I have always liked to listen to Ahmed Rashid...his voice is soothing in an English/Asian sub-continent sort of way....even when the news is bad. Yep...were defeating those terrorists..we have them on the run. Our allies are there with us every step of the way.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=17166101