Where are the Americans?

[Greyhawk]

First watch the video.

The folks at moveon.org could be taken seriously about supporting the troops - if anyone in the group even knew what one looked like. Best of the Web posted an email from an army captain who busted the phonies yesterday.

Here's the screen shot from the moveon ad:

As the captain noted, these guys are in British uniforms. He also pointed out the guy in shorts, noting that's not part of the US uniform. Actually, a GI could have a pair of shorts (though PT gear is the only authorized) making that guy the only one in the picture who could possibly be an American (but he's not.)

However, the moveon crowd must have read the "shorts" comment, then scrambled and put this picture on their web site:

A photoshop job that was instantly captured by this blogger. And as James Taranto noted, the pants are actually a photoshop duplicate of the other guy's in the picture.

Next, of course, they're going to have to give curly in the background a US-spec'd haircut.

Then change those uniforms to US issue, as in this example:

See the Brit? He's the one without a hat. That doesn't happen in Uncle Sam's Army.

Every Day Heroes

[Mrs Greyhawk]

How often do your hear heroic stories told of our troops... on say CNN or read about them in the New York Times?

Try searching "Hero" in any of the MSM's search window. Try searching "Hero" in Google News or Yahoo news and see what you find.

Can the everyday American (who hasn't been exposed to milblogs) name a single Hero of this war? No. Why? Because in the MSM's eye's, the epitome of a hero is ...a sports figure.

How is it, the headlines are filled with the casualties of our warriors but having none honoring their heroism?
They list them only as a veritable number. And if our warrior should so live thru a ferocious battle committing heroic deeds, they do not even get a mention of their valor.

Why does it take someone like Bruce Wllis to make a hero out of our heroes.

I'm astounded daily by the MSM's representation of our troops.

Here are just a few of our latest heroes, honor them by remembering their names :

Spc. Andrew “Doc” Suchanek

Spc. Suchanek provided immediate life-saving treatment for an Iraqi police officer under heavy enemy fire.

“I didn’t have time to think about it,” said Spc. Andrew “Doc” Suchanek, 1st Battalion, 87th Infantry, 1st Brigade Combat Team, 10th Mountain Division. “I just knew I didn’t want that guy to get hurt even worse. I just reacted.”

While on a routine patrol in west Baghdad, Suchanek and other Soldiers of C Company, 1/87 Infantry responded to assist Iraqi Police who had come under fire from automatic rifles and rocket-propelled grenades. Encountering a critically-wounded police officer, Suchanek began immediate life-saving treatment.

Then a terrorist suddenly fired an RPG at both of them. Without hesitation, Suchanek threw himself on the police officer, shielding him from danger. The grenade exploded harmlessly and Suchanek continued treatment to save the life of the policeman. As his fellow Soldiers secured the area, Suchanek coordinated evacuation for his patient to a local hospital.

Amazing that guys like this can perform life saving treatments under such dangerous conditions without hesitation.

Spc. Dean Levy

Gunner Goes Head-to-Head with a V-Bed, Saves Crew

Called ‘V-beds’ for short, vehicle-borne improvised explosive devices, are one of the deadliest weapons in the insurgents’ arsenal – mobile car bombs and tools of terrorism faced by Iraqis, Iraqi security forces and Coalition Forces in their fight against the insurgency.

Last May, Humvee gunner Spc. Dean Levy of Plymouth, Mass. went head-to-head with a V-bed and won - saving the lives of his fellow Humvee crewmen.

... “I waited for his left front tire to swerve onto the median,” Levy said. “At that moment he turned and drove straight at us. I put three to four rounds into the ground in front of him. It was still coming at us, so I put three to four more into the engine block of the vehicle.”

But the vehicle kept coming. Levy raised his 240 Bravo machine gun, fired seven to ten shots through the windshield, and the vehicle exploded - “a huge flame of smoke, body and car parts,” according to Flynn

***
Levy suffered second-degree burns to his face from the explosion, which also melted his goggles and damaged the Humvee.

Vigilance pays off.

Lance Cpl. John T. Shepard

Three-time Iraqi War Veteran Awarded Purple Heart

Lance Cpl. John T. Shepard, a 31-year-old boat mechanic formerly with Small Craft Company, Headquarters Battalion, 2nd Marine Division, and several members of his unit had been conducting a foot patrol through Ramadi’s streets in August when they were ambushed by several insurgents.

“One guy threw a grenade in our direction, and (the blast) threw me back,” explained Shepard, a former University of Georgia student, as he recalled the attack on his unit. “I took shrapnel in the face, lip and leg, and I suffered a concussion. My squad leader was also shot in the face that same day.”

Currently, Shepard, a Marine who has deployed to Iraq three times during his four-year-long enlistment, is recovering from periodic back pains and headaches that he claims are “no big deal.”

No big deal? Apparently the msm agree.

Can't imagine why this next story didn't make the headlines, plenty of blood and gore for the typical news story.

Seaman Nathaniel Leoncio

Corpsman continues to care for Marines after losing leg

It is unadulterated courage in the face of horrifying danger and risk. It is being able to perform under fire while knowing you are probably going to lose a leg. It is taking care of your Marines when everything is on the line. It is duty, courage and love all together. It is what Nathaniel Leoncio showed the Marines of Company L the morning of Oct. 4.

***
“I helped pull Hospitalman Leoncio into the medevac Humvee and personally saw him wince in pain as he rolled over, opened his medical kit and treated (the fourth Platoon commander’s) shrapnel wound,” said Watson. “When he saw that the bleeding had stopped, he gave Cpl. Bellmont and me instructions on how to best care for him. He was calm, alert and responsive the entire way to Ramadi Medical. The only thing he asked for was that someone hold his hand to keep him awake and give him sips of water.”

Unadulterated courage indeed.

This last story is of a fallen warrior from the battle of Fallujah. He was mentioned all over the blogosphere last year. However not so much in the MSM. The anniversary of his death was last week. He was buried a year ago, yesterday.

Captain Sean Patrick Sims

He was willing to make that sacrifice’

Sean served as a platoon leader and executive officer in the 101st Air Mobile Division in Kentucky for about three years before being assigned to Germany. After spending 10 months in Kosovo, his unit was tapped to go to Iraq.

Sean received the Silver Star

Sims planned and executed the task force's main attack against entrenched enemy forces, then held position under constant fire to establish a foothold in northeast Fallujah. He led a 14-hour house-to-house fight, frequently leaving the safety of his Bradley fighting vehicle, then led a fight to seize, then hold Highway 10 against constant enemy counterattack. His company killed more than 40 enemy fighters, destroyed 35 homemade bombs and a dozen weapons caches.

I'm in awe of these warriors every day that I do the Dawn Patrol.

But now I want you to meet another kind of hero, one that is facing a different kind of battle and showing immense bravery... Capt Sims wife.

Heidi Sims

She has been blogging about her new life as a widow and single mother. Her Blog is " Learning to Live". I've been reading her since she started her blog in October. I've hesitated in linking her only because it is a personal struggle she is going thru and I did not want to exploit her grief but she shares with us the experience so many of our fallen families are experiencing, and she does it with grace, courage and honor.

The Long War Continues

[Greyhawk]

No new posts today, but several updates to the Brief History of a Long War.

Many additions involve Osama bin Laden, whose war against America was inspired by our presence in Saudi Arabia enforcing UN sanctions against Iraq. Re-reading bin Laden's comments from 1996 and 1998 is a chilling exercise today - his words are frequently echoed (perhaps unwittingly) by the "anti-war" crowd today. Regardless of any connection Saddam Hussein had with bin Laden, the attacks of 9/11 were directly linked to our involvement with Iraq. Arguing Hussein's part in 9/11 has been a great distraction from the real issue. Declaring the last few years of the war in Iraq to be unrelated to the larger "war on terror" is an exercise in foolishness. And considering the two as distinct struggles will lead to a rude awakening for anyone who believes a withdrawal from Iraq will mark an end to the larger war.

That withdrawal will occur though. The question not yet asked is where will the next battleground be. Someone will answer.

Here's a brief excerpt from one of the bin Laden references, this from an interview with John Miller of ABC in May, 1998 (more in the extended section):

John Miller, ABC: The American people, by and large, do not know the name bin Laden, but they soon likely will. Do you have a message for the American people?

Osama bin Laden: I say to them that they have put themselves at the mercy of a disloyal government, and this is most evident in Clinton's administration ... . We believe that this administration represents Israel inside America. Take the sensitive ministries such as the Ministry of Exterior and the Ministry of Defense and the CIA, you will find that the Jews have the upper hand in them. They make use of America to further their plans for the world, especially the Islamic world. American presence in the Gulf provides support to the Jews and protects their rear. And while millions of Americans are homeless and destitute and live in abject poverty, their government is busy occupying our land and building new settlements and helping Israel build new settlements in the point of departure for our Prophet's midnight journey to the seven heavens. America throws her own sons in the land of the two Holy Mosques for the sake of protecting Jewish interests. ...

The American government is leading the country towards hell. ... We say to the Americans as people and to American mothers, if they cherish their lives and if they cherish their sons, they must elect an American patriotic government that caters to their interests not the interests of the Jews. If the present injustice continues with the wave of national consciousness, it will inevitably move the battle to American soil, just as Ramzi Yousef and others have done. This is my message to the American people. I urge them to find a serious administration that acts in their interest and does not attack people and violate their honor and pilfer their wealth. ...

John Miller, ABC: In America, we have a figure from history from 1897 named Teddy Roosevelt. He was a wealthy man, who grew up in a privileged situation and who fought on the front lines. He put together his own men - hand chose them - and went to battle. You are like the Middle East version of Teddy Roosevelt.

More:

Time For Heroes?

[Greyhawk]

"Heroes Abroad, Unknown At Home" - In today's New York Times David Brooks (a conservative columnist) describes the heroics of Marines in combat in Iraq, then bemoans the fact that Americans aren't getting the hero stories from the frontlines. He blames Americans.

Second, why aren't there more stories about war heroes like Christopher Ieva? The casual courage he and his men displayed is awe-inspiring, but most Americans couldn't name a single hero from this war. That's because despite all the amazing things people are achieving in Iraq, we don't tell their stories back here. That's partly because in the post-Vietnam era many Americans - especially those who dominate the culture - are uncomfortable with military valor. That's partly because some people don't want this war to seem like a heroic enterprise. And it's partly because many Americans are aloof from this whole conflict, and couldn't tell you a thing about Operations Matador and Steel Curtain and the other major offensives.

He partly has a point - and that's more evidence of failure on the part of those who are supposed to be informing the public - (newspapers, once upon a time, had that role) but if that was spelled out in the original piece then an alert editor excised it, leaving only the "stupid Americans" part behind. (Though that bit about "those who dominate the culture" may be an oblique and and self-aggrandizing reference.) We're left with a rather astounding example of those who have failed utterly in their responsibility to the public blaming that public for their failure. As noted, Brooks is not an "anti-war liberal" in the tradition of the majority of current Times staff, but hearing those with the power to "make heroes" complain about their failure to do so disturbs me even more coming from someone with "pro-war" credibility.

Readers might be a bit confused if they recall the similar New York Times story from August bemoaning the fact that there are no hero stories from the Iraq war. But the difference between it and this latest version is that in the earlier example the Times blamed the Pentagon for their lack of heroes.

Still, kudos to the Times for finally telling the story of a hero in Iraq. Definitely a baby step up from their normal efforts at changing the words of any quoted soldier to make them appear to say the exact opposite of what they really did. Too bad this story is only told in the context of a complaint, and worse that its only available to "Times Select" customers who are willing to pay an annual fee for this sort of stuff.

But don't give up hope. While Americans might be missing out, the British aren't, as the London Sunday Times reports for free today:

ANGERED by negative portrayals of the conflict in Iraq, Bruce Willis, the Hollywood star, is to make a pro-war film in which American soldiers will be depicted as brave fighters for freedom and democracy.

It will be based on the exploits of the heavily decorated members of Deuce Four, the 1st Battalion, 24th Infantry, which has spent the past year battling insurgents in the northern Iraqi town of Mosul.

Willis attended Deuce Four’s homecoming ball this month in Seattle, Washington, where the soldiers are on leave, along with Stephen Eads, the producer of Armageddon and The Sixth Sense.

The 50-year-old actor said that he was in talks about a film of “these guys who do what they are asked to for very little money to defend and fight for what they consider to be freedom”.

Unlike many Hollywood stars Willis supports the war and recently offered a $1m (about £583,000) bounty for the capture of any of Al-Qaeda’s most wanted leaders such as Osama Bin Laden, Ayman Al-Zawahiri or Abu Musab al- Zarqawi, its commander in Iraq. Willis visited the war zone with his rock and blues band, the Accelerators, in 2003.

“I am baffled to understand why the things I saw happening in Iraq are not being reported,” he told MSNBC, the American news channel.

He is expected to base the film on the writings of the independent blogger Michael Yon, a former special forces green beret who was embedded with Deuce Four and sent regular dispatches about their heroics.

Yon was at the soldiers’ ball with Willis, who got to know him through his internet war reports on www.michaelyon.blogspot.com. “What he is doing is something the American media and maybe the world media isn’t doing,” the actor said, “and that’s telling the truth about what’s happening in the war in Iraq.”

The film isn't even past the idea stage yet, but no doubt the New York Times movie review has already been written.

Update: For a hint of what the actual hero story was about, here's a Chicago Tribune report and here's a Marine Corps account of a Bronze Star award.

Open Post

[Greyhawk]

Rock in Iraq

[Greyhawk]

Speaking of GIs making music in Iraq, a lot more will have the opportunity to do so, thanks to country/rock legend Charlie Daniels:

CHARLOTTE, N.C. - A project sparked by North Carolina-bred singer Charlie Daniels has collected thousands of dollars in donated musical instruments for troops in Iraq.

Daniels donated one of his own instruments to "Operation Heartstrings" earlier this year when he learned that soldiers didn't have guitars for church services. He asked guitar manufacturers to do the same.

"We never envisioned this much stuff. I'm overwhelmed by the support out there for the troops," said Daniels. He said "only one company that will remain nameless turned us down."
<...>
Daniels, 69, even arranged transport of the donations to the Middle East, thanks to some help that he worked out with the Tennessee National Guard and the Tennessee Air National Guard.

He and his band were on a tour of the Middle East at the time, doing nine shows for 15,000 soldiers.

"We found that many of them played musical instruments of one kind or another and they wanted to sit in with the band. But they didn't have enough instruments to go around,"

More here (scroll to Nov 18 story) and here.

President Clinton's Extraordinary Snatches

[Greyhawk]

Tigerhawk reads to us from Richard Clarke's book Against all Enemies:

Snatches, or more properly "extraordinary renditions," were operations to apprehend terrorists abroad, usually without the knowledge of and almost always without public acknowledgement of the host government.... The first time I proposed a snatch, in 1993, the White House Counsel, Lloyd Cutler, demanded a meeting with the President to explain how it violated international law. Clinton had seemed to be siding with Cutler until Al Gore belatedly joined the meeting, having just flown overnight from South Africa. Clinton recapped the arguments on both sides for Gore: Lloyd says this. Dick says that. Gore laughed and said, "That's a no-brainer. Of course it's a violation of international law, that's why it's a covert action. The guy is a terrorist. Go grab his ass." (pp. 143-144)

"Rendition" is the handing over of suspects to "friendly" foreign governments for "interrogation".

"Grab ass" appears to have become the official policy.

Update: In case you missed the news, A suicide attacker steered a car packed with explosives toward U.S. soldiers giving away toys to children outside a hospital in central Iraq on Thursday, killing at least 31 people. Almost all of the victims were women and children, police said.

Here's a hypothetical question for the "anti-war" readers of this site. Suppose you have a terrorist in your custody. He tells you a similar attack is planned for tomorrow, but refuses to divulge additional information. Would you:

A. Bush lied!

B. Fire Cheney!!

C. The US used white phosphorus in Fallujah!!!

D. How dare you question my patriotism!?!!!

Write your answer on a 3x5 card and send it to someone who gives a damn. The rest of us have a war to fight.

More: A former Saddam Hussein torturer reminisces.

Iraq's Red Crescent donates $1M to Katrina Relief

[Greyhawk]

Wow:

Iraq's Red Crescent relief organization found its own way to mark the Thanksgiving holiday yesterday by announcing that it had sent a $1 million "thank you" donation to the victims of Hurricane Katrina.

The sum, transferred by wire on Sunday, amounts to 20 percent of the organization's annual budget.

"I wish we could have a billion dollars to give," Said Hakki, the organization's president, said by telephone from Baghdad. "Even then, it is not enough to show our appreciation for what the U.S. has done for Iraq and is still doing."

Rest here.

In other news, Cindy Sheehan returns to Crawford to protest the war.

(All this and lots more in the Dawn Patrol.)

Update: "The donation was made with the approval of the office of Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari and is thought to mark the first time that Iraq has sent aid to the United States."

Not quite. Remember these Iraqi soldiers?

Iraqi soldiers serving at Taji military base collected 1,000,000 Iraqi dinars for victims of Hurricane Katrina.

Iraqi Col. Abbas Fadhil, Iraqi base commander, presented the money to U.S. Col. Paul D. Linkenhoker, Taji Coalition base commander, at a Sept. 5 staff meeting...

"I was overwhelmed by the amount of their generosity," Goyne said. "I was proud and happy to know Col. Abbas, his officers, NCOs and fellow soldiers. That amount represents a month's salary for most of those soldiers."

..."I am Colonel Abbas Fadhil; Tadji Military Base Commander," Abbas wrote. "On behalf of myself and all the People of Tadji Military Base; I would like to console the American People and Government for getting this horrible disaster. So we would like to donate 1.000.000 Iraqi Dinars to help the government and the People also I would like to console all the ASTs who helped us rebuilding our country and our Army. We appreciate the American's help and support. Thank you."

Iraq Unplugged

[Greyhawk]

(Attention Christmas shoppers! This story from last summer is re-posted today with you in mind. The Mudvile Gazette gets no - none - zip - nada - proceeds from sale of these items. Buy a few for stocking stuffers, and enjoy.)

One day in Baghdad, Arkansas National Guardsmen Luke Striklin, Nick Brown, and JR Shultz found themselves with some time on their hands. They hooked a cheap microphone up to a laptop computer and recorded themselves playing guitars and signing songs they wrote while "over there". Some of those tunes have ended up floating around the internet, and onto radio stations in the US. One of them resulted in a record contract for Stricklin.

That song is called American by God's Amazing Grace, and if you haven't heard it yet you will. Here's one of the lines from the song:

You want to talk about it, you better keep it short
cause I got a lot of lost time I gotta make up for.

I've been there, come back, and I know that feeling. But I'm proud to note that JR Shultz, co-writer of that song, has decided to "talk about it" with us right here.

Despite being in Baghdad at the same time, I never met these guys. We've been fans of these guys for a while now, and have added a permanent link to their site from our sidebar. I first "met" JR when he emailed and thanked me for the link. That email led to this interview, and I thank him for his time.

He and Shultz have compiled their work onto a self-produced CD called Iraq Unplugged and are making them to order via their web site. Ten bucks and 2.95 s&h will get you your piece of history in the form of some fine music made under incredible circumstances. Don't expect Woodstock - these guys would be booed off the stage at any "support the troops - bring them home!" rally. Likewise these aren't multi-million dollar studio recordings by other folks "supporting the troops" - these are songs by the troops, live from Iraq. So besides being "real good" these guys are "real" the way most singers only wish they could be.

Without further ado...

GH: Greetings JR, welcome to Mudville. Where are you from originally? Where's home?

JR: I am from Arkansas, outside of Hot Springs.

GH: How did you end up in the National Guard?

JR: I joined mainly for the college money, I graduated in 2002 with a BS in Biology and currently work for the Fisheries Division of the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission.

GH: How long have you been in the Guard?

JR: I was at the end of my 6 years when we were activated, I was placed on stop-loss, but was happy to go with my unit instead of take my chances in IRR.

GH: Did the three of you know each other before going to Iraq?

JR: Luke and I met when he joined the guard about 5 yrs ago. We were in the same platoon until I was pulled to join a team of cadre training Iraqi National Guard Soldiers. We met Nick in Baghdad.

GH: What was your mission in Iraq?

JR: I was pulled from my squad to join a team of cadre who were responsible for training an Iraqi National Guard unit. At the beginning of our deployment, we were conducting training drills inside the perimeter of our FOB, and by the end we were accompanying elements from the ING unit on operations in the Haifa St. area of Baghdad. I can't speak for any other unit, but these guys made a lot of progress in the year that we worked with them.

Greyhawk notes: He's being modest. But I know about Haifa street. Here's a recent report:

An American-Iraqi military campaign, begun last year to retake the street, seemed to bear fruit as insurgents were captured, killed or driven out of the area. On Feb. 6, the American command handed over a cut of north-central Baghdad, including Haifa Street, to the 1st Brigade, 6th Division, of the Iraqi army.

This transfer made the 1st Brigade the first and only Iraqi army unit to control its own battle space, putting it on the leading edge of the Bush administration's plan to have Iraqi forces take responsibility for the country's security.

The good news for American officials is that the Iraqi troops have not lost ground on Haifa Street. Since the 1st Brigade took control, there have been only three insurgent attacks along the street, and those came in the first three weeks, commanders say.
<...>
Pro-Iraqi army graffiti has begun to appear on walls that for months had been adorned exclusively with anti-American slogans. Residents now socialize outside their buildings and say they feel safer walking along the street. People who fled their apartments have started to trickle back, and pedestrian and vehicular traffic, while still thin compared with other major thoroughfares, is slowly returning.

You can contrast that with this well-publicized story of some Pulitzer prize-winning photos from December of last year.

A brazen daylight attack in the heart of Baghdad with rebels executing election workers in cold blood served as a chilling reminder Sunday of the deteriorating security situation in the Iraqi capital with just more than a month before crucial parliamentary elections.

A series pictures taken by an AP photographer show three pistol-wielding gunmen, who had earlier stopped a car carrying the election officials and dragged them into the middle of Haifa Street in the midst of morning traffic.

But even while helping transform Haifa Street, J.R, Nick and Luke found time for other pursuits too.

GH: What's your musical background?

JR: I've played guitar for about 8 years, but only as a hobby. I only began writing songs in Iraq as a way to pass the time and vent a little.

GH: Did you plan to take guitars over there? How did you get them there? And how did you establish a recording studio in Baghdad?

JR: I packed my box on a shipping container at Ft. Hood that was sent by boat. I recovered it in Baghdad a few months later, surprised to find it still in tune!! So the three of us spent many hours playing guitar together. Nick and I had written a few songs and were urged by other soldiers to find a way to record them so I downloaded a program off of the internet. With my laptop, a plastic mic designed for internet chat, and an acoustic guitar, we began recording and passing out our music to soldiers in our battalion and it has spread from there. "Mortaritaville" and "I am a Patriot" have been widely shared over the internet, but we are equally excited about the other 11 tracks on our album, titled "Iraq Unplugged". Luke and I wrote "American by God's Amazing Grace" which was sent home and picked up by radio stations after we recorded it in Baghdad.

GH: Are you all involved in Luke Striklin's album project?

JR: No, Luke was picked up by an independent label out of Nashville, the only association I have with his album is being co-writer of "American...." However, he has been keeping in touch and Nick and I are hoping the best for him. Hopefully we can write together again sometime. Luke recorded several more songs with us but unfortunately they will not be available on this CD. We did not begin this project with the goal of someday selling a CD. We were merely writing songs dealing with our experiences and sometimes drawing off of the experiences of soldiers around us. However, once we recorded this music, the response from family and friends, as well as fellow soldiers, was overwhelming and they urged us to find a way to spread our music. Many soldiers serving in Iraq have heard about our music either through word of mouth or on the internet but virtually no one knows about our CD or our website.

GH: Well, the finished project is awesome, and it should be heard. Anything else you want to say to America or the world about your time over there?

JR: We are excited about sharing our music with America and hope that they not only enjoy what we have to offer, but we hope it can give them a sense of what is encountered by the American soldier in Iraq. When I wrote "I am a Patriot" I was expressing how it felt to be a soldier in a combat zone, where you could greet death any day. I hope that this song will serve as a reminder of the ultimate sacrifice that so many Americans have made. Others, such as "Mortaritaville" could be interpreted as Anti-war. However, it is not. Many times when things got rough, I'd wonder how I ended up in Iraq. This song is about a soldier going through the possibilities (blaming Rumsfeld, Cheney, and Bush) before finally deciding it was his own fault for enlisting in the first place. The song was meant to be comical and not a political statement of any kind, contrary to what I've read on many online discussions about it. Our country's leadership was merely a target of opportunity that fit to well with the scheme of the song. We are currently working on a page for our website complete with Lyrics and the inspirations behind each of our songs.

GH: You've got nothing to apologize for, your songs capture the reality, and they speak for a lot of GIs. So what's in the future?

JR: I will be leaving the guard in September, done with my 8 year obligation. I plan on working and raising my family, trying to spread the word about this CD in my spare time. If I have a future in music, it would be as a songwriter. Nick on the other hand has a lot of talent and hopefully this music from will launch a career for him as it did for Luke.

You can listen to samples from Iraq Unplugged at their site. (Click on the name tapes on the front page. Mrs Greyhawk's favorite is I am a Patriot - but we haven't heard them all yet.) A bit of advice from me, act fast on this one. I think once the big labels find these guys the originals might become rare...

Hey JR, thanks, and best of luck to you!

And if anyone wants to leave a comment here for him, I think he'll probably get the message.

2005-08-23 17:54:06

Looking For Good News?

[Greyhawk]

Try SAHA News from our great friend Holly Aho.

SAHA News began with a different approach, as I began with a few basic set of beliefs. The first is that the MSM is often negligent on reporting hardcore positive news. When they are not negligent they are often reporting a success with 1-2 small paragraphs followed by an essay on contrasting failures. This is annoying, but beyond that it diminishes the impact of the positive news and the general publics view of the truth. The second belief is that bloggers are a valid source of journalism, media and editorials. The last was this - people would prefer to read the unbiased truth, and whenever possible, hear good news.

So SAHA News began with the approach of providing readers a media resource to truthful, unbiased news that focuses on good news whenever possible but never strays from honesty....and never avoids hardcore news. This approach includes searching the MSM online news sources, press releases and blogs to find and link to stories of interest. Reader submitted stories and news tips are also welcome

. Sounds like a great place to start the day!

Pols and Polls

[Greyhawk]

Heartburn for some this Thanksgiving as the Wall Street Journal, under the headline "Bush's Approval Rating Falls Again, Poll Shows" details recent Harris Poll results - and the latest bad news for the administration.

Bush's current job approval rating stands at 34%, compared with a positive rating of 88% soon after 9/11, 50% at this time last year, and 40% in August.

That certainly is cause for concern. But those numbers could go lower - and if they fall a lot lower he'll have the same approval rating as the congressional Democrats:

At the same time, only a quarter of Americans polled give Democrats a positive rating in the latest poll.

Yep - another 9 percent fall and the President will be as low as his opponents, who now have positive ratings from only 25% of Americans. In fact, 34% is the highest approval rating they've had this year, and the last time they broke briefly above 40% was June 2003.

So they likely all have indigestion this Thanksgiving.

For the record, polls don't mean much to me. And most of the Democrats' problems seem to be related to chasing those numbers*. In fact, we're probably seeing early indicators of how their recent call for surrender resonates with those Americans who think the war in Iraq is not going well. But it's foolish to accept those sorts of raw numbers without additional details.

* Conversely, most of the Republican's problems can be attributed to ignoring public opinion.

(Hat tip: Rich Casebolt)

News from Iraq

[Greyhawk]

Haider Ajina sends his latest translation of Iraqi media reports:

Greetings,

The following is my translation of a headline and news from the November 24th edition of the Iraqi Arabic newspaper “Alsabah”

“Iraqi forces now implement 70% of the security operations.“

“Iraqi vice president Adel Abdulmehdi revealed that 90% of Iraq’s commercial debt has been extinguished reduced to 20 billion U.S. Dollars by the end of this year. He announced this in a press conference after his visit to Washington DC, London and his meetings with the World Bank. He added that Iraq has requested of the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council to eliminate the burden of reparations Iraq is paying for the Kuwaiti war. Which are 5% of all oil revenues and came to 1.5 billion U.S. Dollars.

“As to the effect of the Iraqi national reconciliation meeting in Cairo on the Iraqi street. Abdulmehdi said that the results will be constructive and will reflect positively on the security and political process of Iraq. He refers to the final statement which cam out of Cairo. The statement condemned terrorism and accepts opposition as being legitimate in and through a political process.

“As for the departure of the multi national forces from Iraq. Dr. Abdulmehdi clarified that during his visit to Washington DC he met with U.S. Defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld. He talked with him about handing over the security of Iraqi cities to the Iraqi national forces, as had happened in Nejaf and certain areas of Baghdad. They also agreed that the mission of the multi national forces in Iraq will not be complete until qualified Iraq forces are ready to fill the security roll. He also pointed out that a fundamental agreement wit the multi national forces does not contain a withdrawal time table. This agreement also acknowledges the larger roll of the Iraqi armed forces are taking. Over 70% of security operations are now done by Iraqi forces; this has grown from just 30%”.

Haider's comments:

Progress in Iraq is quite measurable and noticeable on weekly bases. Security is improving in the last two provinces. Iraqi security forces are taking a much larger roll in the security of their country. Sunni & Baathists are talking about laying down their arms and joining the political process, and some have already done so. All this is possible because of our & the Iraqis hard work sacrifices and tenacity.

Regards
Haider Ajina

Open Post

[Greyhawk]

For those that are having trouble with trackbacks, could you please give us the exact text of the error message.

Thanks

Who's Who In Iraq

[Greyhawk]

A great question from the comments on this post:

Can anyone tell me what the 150000+ troops are actually doing right now in Iraq?

I understand the direct combat operations in Anbar Province and the continued operations in the Mosul area, but where are the rest of the forces and what are they really doing? For example the figures for US forces in Operation Steel Curtain were I believe 2500 Marines. What is everyone else doing and is what they are doing important enough that it justifies the daily IED losses? Is there another way to keep the lid on things until Iraqi Units hit some sort of critical mass?

Is it the constant IED attacks which are the most discouraging ? Everyone understands when Marines are casualties in Offensive Operations, but is there no better way to use forces than expose them to bomb blasts while patrolling the same areas again and again? I just have the feeling that this is not very useful or at least not useful enough to warrant the negative side effects.

Just asking as I am a complete illiterate when it comes to counter-insurgency tactics.
- Doug F

An excellent question. I wouldn't use the term, but if you're a "complete illiterate" I don't doubt you represent a large segment of the population, and that's why I'm here. The quick answer is that the combat elements require a very large number of support units. Any military installation can be looked at as a city, providing all the necessary services - police, fireman, "banks" (finance specialists), construction crews, communications infrastructure and folks to repair it - on and on. Essentially most of the larger outposts in Iraq can be looked at in that manner.

Also there are civil affairs troops - those who are rebuilding Iraq. They are combat capable, but clearing the ville isn't their primary task.

And then you have the various levels of headquarters and requisite functionaries.

Add in the Air Force with the massive task of airlifting everything from point A to B. Several AF camps over there contain all the elements of the "small city" supporting lots of folks handling cargo and passengers, air traffic controllers, base operations managers, weather forecasters, aircraft maintainers, fire crews, security forces...

An army of personnel specialists is there to make sure all the paperwork is done. Annoying but essential.

Doctors and nurses - several hospitals full. Dentists. Chaplains. Supply folks. Heating and Air Conditioning repair guys. Computer repair guys. Vehicle maintainers. On and on and on.

These folks are all armed too - or at least each has a weapon nearby. Those who go "outside the wire" - combat, civil affairs, explosive ordnance teams - sometimes refer to their support elements as "Fobbits" - those who never leave the FOB, Forward Operating Base. But they are all at risk too - rocket and mortar attacks occur daily, and although rarely scoring a hit they sometimes do "get lucky". One way to look at it is that these are the folks who don't get to shoot back. Combat crew or not, incoming mortar rounds when you just hit your bunk - or worse, when you just stepped into the shower - can really ruin your day.

That's just a quick and partial answer to the question "What is everyone else doing and is what they are doing important enough that it justifies the daily IED losses?" Justify the losses? No - the end state justifies the losses (or not, if we cut and run), and that's the issue of the day.

Anyhow - give all due credit to the guys who "hit the streets". But take nothing away from the rest of the folks who are there, far from home, under fire, and getting the job done.

Past, Present, and Future?

[Greyhawk]

A must read from Newsbusters.

Then follow up with this thought-provoking post from Lex.

Take my word for it.

You'll notice a certain congressman with military experience making an appearance in both these posts - but his part isn't really necessary. Expunge him from the record and events today would likely be just as they are.

He's a role player, and that role is congressman with military experience. He struts and frets his hour on the stage and then is gone. If he didn't do it, someone else would.

Chap has an explanation of what that title means to veterans. Virtually everyone I know has military experience - therefore I evaluate other aspects of their character or their comments to determine their merit. This is obvious - and most veterans grasp it without a second thought. To reduce it to absurdity - Lee Harvey Oswald was once a Marine.

Veterans aren't prone to group think - folks in military service now more than ever represent "middle America" and all it's diversity - but in a world where only veterans voices mattered (and I oppose such a world) there would be no "Congressman"" Murtha, no "Senator" Kerry.

Do read all three of the links above. Lex hints that this blogging days may be limited. If this is his last hurrah it is indeed a good one.

*****

To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day
To the last syllable of recorded time,
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
-- Shakespeare, MacBeth

A Brief History of a Long War (Iraq, 1990-2003)

[Greyhawk]

The 2003 invasion of Iraq is likely to be a contested topic in the American discussion for many years to come. As with any fractious issue, opinions will vary and even individual opinions will shift and change with time. That's a part of the human condition, after all, and one that flourishes in free societies. However, much less admirable efforts by many to obscure their own positions now seem to occur with increasing frequency, as do misquotes of political opponents for personal or "party" gain. Sadly these sorts of things have become common practice among those who bear much of the responsibility for the current situation. Perhaps it has become too much for them to bear, this great and terrible burden of leadership, though stepping aside and letting those of stronger, more determined convictions carry on might be even less palatable to them. Thus history is being rewritten, and free speech is being cheapened by some who employ it the most and cherish it the least - even as Americans fight and die to uphold their rights to do so.

One of the most blatant - and most effective - examples has been the highly successful propagation of the idea that the war in Iraq began as a misguided result of the terrorist attacks on the US on September 11th 2001. To achieve this feat of near-universal denial requires the dismissing of over a decade of real history - years in which a handful of Americans drew a line in the sand on distant shores - a line crossed repeatedly and re-drawn too frequently by too many hands to be forgotten so swiftly.

And it's nearly forgotten they are, those warriors of just a few short years ago. But not just yet, at least not completely. This work in progress is dedicated to my fellow members of the US military, those who stand the "line in the sand" now and those have done so for so many years past.

Look, here is what happened. Listen, here's what they said when it did.

*****

Pre-1990

July 16, 1979: Saddam Hussein becomes president of Iraq.

Sept. 22, 1980: Iraq invades Iran, launching an eight-year war.

November 1980: US Presidential elections; Republican Ronald Reagan defeats incumbent Democrat Jimmy Carter.

June 7, 1981: Israeli Air Force destroys the French-built Osirak nuclear reactor near Baghdad. The surprise attack was launched in response to growing concerns that Iraq was planning to develop nuclear weapons to use against Israel.

January 1982: Javier Pérez de Cuéllar of Peru becomes Secretary General of the United Nations.

1983: Reports of Iraqi use of chemical weapons against Iranian forces.

November 1984: Republican Ronald Reagan re-elected as President of the United States, defeating Democrat candidate Walter Mondale.

October 7, 1985: Four Palestinian Liberation Front terrorists seized the Italian cruise liner Achille Lauro in the eastern Mediterranean Sea, taking more than 700 hostages. One U.S. passenger was murdered before the Egyptian Government offered the terrorists safe haven in return for the hostages' freedom. Years later the leader of the hijackers would be discovered in Baghdad following the 2003 invasion.

1986-1989: According to Islamic sources, Osama bin Laden participates in numerous battles during the Afghan war against the Soviets as a guerilla commander, including the fierce battle of Jalalabad which led the Soviets to finally withdraw from Afghanistan. After the Soviets pull out of Afghanistan, bin Laden returns to Saudi Arabia a hero. He becomes involved in opposition movements to the Saudi monarchy while working for his family construction firm, the Bin Laden Group.

1987: Reports of chemical warfore attacks on Kurdish villages and guerrilla fighters became more frequent and detailed. Clinical evidence as well as soil samples, confirmed the use of mustard gas and the nerve agent tabun against the Kurdish population. Although the exact number of casualties is not certain, it is generally believed that several thousand Kurdish civilians and Iranian soldiers in the area were killed and several thousands more injured.

May 21, 1987: Iraqi Mirage fighter jet attacks US Navy vessel USS Stark in the Persian Gulf, hitting the ship with two Exocet missiles and killing 37 crew members. The US increases it's naval presence in the Gulf, and begins escorting Kuwaiti oil tankers.

March 16, 1988: Iraq uses chemical weapons against Kurds supporting Iran in Halabja, killing 4000, an attack which begins the Anfal campaigns against Kurdish villages (formally continuing until 6 Sept, though attacks continued until 1989). Approximately 50,000 to 180,000 Kurds are killed in this campaign, and 1,276 villages are destroyed.

August 20, 1988: Iran-Iraq war ends in ceasefire. Death toll is unknown, estimates range from 500,000 to one million; numbers of killed and wounded are estimated as high as 2 million. UN monitoring force established for Iran-Iraq border. Confirmation by UN that Iraq did use mustard gas against Iranian civilians.

Although neither side achieved victory, Iraq retained one of the largest military forces in the world, with one million troops, more than 700 combat aircraft, 6,000 tanks, ballistic missiles and chemical weapons.

November 1988: Republican Vice President George Bush defeats Democrat candidate Michael Dukakis in US presidential elections.

1990 - 1991

Aug. 2, 1990: Iraq invades Kuwait and is condemned by United Nations Security Council (UNSC) Resolution 660 which calls for full withdrawal.

August 6, 1990: UN Security Council passes Resolution UNSCR 66, imposing economic sanctions on Iraq, banning the importation of Iraqi goods and creating the "661 Committee" to oversee sanctions. Saudi King Fahd meets with US Secretary of Defense Richard Cheney and requests U.S. military assistance.

August 7, 1990: US troops arrive in Saudi Arabia, launching Operation Desert Shield. Two naval battle groups, USS Dwight D. Eisenhower and USS Independence, are also in the area by August 8.

Osama bin Laden is outraged by the U.S. military presence in Saudi Arabia, considered the cradle of Islam, and begins to write treatises against the Saudi regime.

August 8, 1990: Iraq declares a "comprehensive and eternal merger" with Kuwait and annexes it as its nineteenth province.

August 9, 1990: UN resolution 662 declares the annexation of Kuwait has no legal validity.

August 25, 1990 UN resolution 665 strengthens the economic embargo against Iraq.

September 5, 1990: Iraq calls for the overthrow of leaders in Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

September 13, 1990: UN resolution 666 asks for continuous information on the humanitarian situation within Kuwait and Iraq.

September 16, 1990: UN resolution 667 condemns Iraqi violation of diplomatic compounds in Kuwait and demands the immediate release of foreign nationals removed from Kuwait.

September 24, 1990: UN resolution 669 imposes an air embargo on Iraq.

October 29, 1990: UN resolution 674 reiterates the condemnation of Iraqi treatment of foreign nationals and demands their release.

November 28, 1990: John Major (Conservative Party) becomes Prime Minister of Great Britain, replacing felow Conservative Margaret Thatcher, who had served since May, 1979.

November 29, 1990: UNSC Resolution 678 authorizes the use of "all means necessary" after January 15, 1991, to enforce previous UN resolutions, including that requiring Iraqi withdrawal from Kuwait.

January 12, 1991: Congress grants President Bush the authority to wage war. The Senate vote is 52-47 in favor.

January 17, 1991: Operation Desert Storm - the air war begins with more than 1,000 sorties launching per day. Saddam Hussein declares that "The great duel, the mother of all battles has begun. The dawn of victory nears as this great showdown begins."

January 18, 1990: Iraq launches Scud missiles at Israel in an attempt to broaden the war. Ultimately 39 Iraqi Scud missiles would strike Tel Aviv and Haifa.

February 24, 1991: The ground portion of the war in Iraq begins. On February 26 Iraqi troops began retreating from Kuwait, setting fire to Kuwaiti oil fields as they flee. One hundred hours after the ground campaign started, President Bush declared a ceasefire; Kuwait had been liberated.

US forces suffered 147 battle-related and 325 non-battle-related deaths. The UK suffered 24 deaths (nine of those due to friendly fire), the Arab countries lost 39 men (18 Saudis, 10 Egyptians, 6 from the UAE, 3 Syrians, and 1 Kuwaiti), and France lost 2 men. Estimates of Iraqi casualties range from tens to hundreds of thousands.

3 March 1991: At cease-fire talks with the Iraqis at Safwan, General Norman Schwarzkopf warns the Iraqis that coalition forces would shoot down any Iraqi military aircraft flying over the country.

March 10, 1991: (Media) The New York TImes:

After the War: Politics; Another Gulf War?

The question the American soldiers ask as they board planes for home after seven months in the desert is the same one that worries the politicians that live in the region as they turn from preoccupation with military problems to the concerns of civil life.

Will we have to do it all over again? Will we have to find the money and the will, they ask anxiously, to assemble half a million troops to turn back another of Saddam Hussein's attempts to push his neighbors around?

It is the biggest unanswered question among several that hang in the air after the allies' stunningly decisive triumph in the Persian Gulf war, and it casts an ominous shadow over the jubilation here and in the United States. The man who started it all, the villain of the piece, is still around.

President Bush and the other coalition leaders elected not to push through to Baghdad to destroy Mr. Hussein's Government. Authorized by the United Nations only to oust Iraq from Kuwait, the allies went farther, fighting on despite a series of frantic peace bids until they were confident that they had shattered Mr. Hussein's best divisions.

But with their armies at Nasiriya and the highway to Baghdad, 150 miles away and all but undefended, the coalition leaders called a halt. Despite President Bush's inclination to compare this war to the conflict of his youth, World War II, the allies chose not to hound Mr. Hussein to death in his bunker, as they had hounded Hitler, and not to demand total surrender.

The Saudis wanted to press on, and so did their Egyptian allies, high-ranking officials in Riyadh said, but the Americans, the British and especially the French feared that they would embitter Arab opinion if they seemed bent on revenge or on installing a government of their choice.
<...>
If Mr. Hussein were to make warlike noises again, he would not be told, as the State Department told him last year, that the United States was taking a neutral position. If he were then to take warlike steps, a counterattack would come at once, not after he had had months to dig in and ravage conquered territory. Or so American officials are promising.

So if the allies have not rid themselves of the Iraqi dictator, at least not yet, and if they had not engendered lasting stability in a region that has seldom known it, they appear to have done just about enough to make it unlikely that a second Persian Gulf war will erupt any time soon.

March 10 - 17, 1991: UN Secretary-General Javier Pérez de Cuéllar dispatches an inter-agency mission to assess the humanitarian needs arising in Iraq and Kuwait. The mission reports that "the Iraqi people may soon face a further imminent catastrophe, which could include epidemic and famine, if massive life-supporting needs are not rapidly met." Throughout 1991 the United Nations proposes measures to enable Iraq to sell limited quantities of oil to meet its people's needs. The Government of Iraq declines these offers.

20 March 1991: A US F-15C shoots down an Iraqi SU-22 flying over northern Iraq.

22 March 1991: A US F-15C shoots down another Iraqi SU-22 over northern Iraq. That same day, another US pilot intimidates the pilot of an Iraqi PC-9 (a training aircraft) to eject. Iraqi fixed-wing aircraft stayed on the ground for the next 12 months.

March/April 1991: Following the end of DESERT STORM in March, Shiite Muslims in southern Iraq and Kurds in Northern Iraq rebel against Hussein's regime. Most major American newspapers urge the US to stay out of the conflicts.

THE BOSTON GLOBE:

The reports of rebellion in Iraq resemble excerpts from a textbook on regime-toppling in the aftermath of a lost war. On the streets of Basra, a tank manned by returning soldiers turns its turret toward a gigantic poster of Saddam Hussein and, to the cheers of the populace, blows a hole in the tyrant's face....

The true war aims of of the coalition that defeated Saddam's army were, in ascending order of importance, the liberation of Kuwait, the destruction of Baghdad's offensive military capabilities, and the removal of Saddam. The first two have been accomplished by force of arms. The ultimate goal, Saddam's demise, cannot be achieved by foreign troops -- although the governments of Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia are frequently conspiring to back their favorite Iraqi exiles in the postwar struggle for power in Baghdad....

The recycled petrodollars of Kuwait may have been paramount to Bush, but to Assad, King Fahd and Ayatollah Khomeini's successors the real purpose of Desert Storm was to cut Iraq's military down to size and replace Saddam.

For them, the decisive phase of the war has just begun. The Americans took out Saddam's communications with smart bombs; they are now trying to take out his regime with Iraqi proteges, subsidized proxies and professional hit squads.

The present struggle for power in Iraq holds two dangers for the U.S.: that Saddam will prevail, or that he will be replaced by forces equally inimical to peace and human rights. Washington has little control over the battlefield on which this political war is fought.

THE LOS ANGELES TIMES:

In the wake of Iraq's military defeat has come urban turmoil. In Basra and other cities in southern Iraq anti- government demonstrators are challenging the iron grip of Saddam Hussein's Baath Party. Details are imprecise, and the partisanship of some of the sources claiming to know what is going on makes their information suspect. But some elements of the armed forces are involved, with units perhaps pitted against each other.

This political explosion was ignited by the anger and frustrations arising out of a costly, humiliating, and above all unnecessary war. To a significant but not yet fully measurable extent it is also a continuation of an ancient religious conflict. It pitted Iraq's majority Shiite Muslim population, which has never been permitted to share equitably in power, against an unyieldingly repressive regime dominated by Sunni Muslims....

If foreign armed forces must be sent into the cities to quell turbulence they should be provided by Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the other Persian Gulf states. In other words they should be unmistakably Arab and Muslim.... Not only would it expose ground forces to the possible risks of urban fighting but, far worse, it would give the appearance of the West butting into an Islamic religious conflict. That would be a no-win situation, to be avoided at all costs....

No conceivable good could come from an extension of Iranian influence in Iraq. Should that occur, the region would quickly find itself facing fresh threats to its stability, just as it appeared that the crushing of Saddam Hussein's expansionist ambitions had opened the way to a calmer future. Probably -- nothing is certain in the Gulf -- the deep nationalism of Iraqis of all religious persuasions would work to oppose the aims of their ancient Persian enemy. But if disorders should give way to chaos and foreign armed intervention does become necessary, U.S. and Western forces should make sure they stay well out of it.

THE WASHINGTON TIMES:

No sooner had the guns begun to fall silent in Kuwait than they started to chatter inside Iraq. This weekend the predominantly Shiite city of Basra erupted in bloodshed between pro-Iranian, anti-Saddam dissidents and Saddam's Republican Guard. The conflict may foreshadow the Iraqi strongman's end and possibly even the end of Iraq as a unified nation-state. But however welcome the first might be, the second would be a disaster, not only for Iraq itself but also for the Middle East and U.S. interests in it.

Like many of the states designed by European colonialists and diplomats, Iraq is a hodge podge of different and antagonistic ethnic and religious groups. In the Tigris- Euphrates valley, Shi'ite Arabs predominate, and Shi'ites constitute some 55 to 60 percent of the country's 18 million people. The valley area also contains several cities that the Shi'ites, a 95 percent majority in neighboring Iran, consider among the holiest in Islam. But despite its Shi'ite majority, Iraq long has been ruled by Sunni Muslims, and resentments have festered....

As in most such "multicultural" states, the only thing that has held Iraq together has been the strong (indeed, brutal) arm of Baghdad, but these days the muscles on the arm are beginning to wither.... The return soon of dispirited Iraqi prisoners and veterans won't help stabilize the country either.

The leading figure among Iraqi Shi'ites is Hojatolislam Mohammed Bakr Hakim, who inspires the faithful from his tastiness in Tehran, perhaps aided by the more mundane assistance of the Shi'ite government there. Iran, for religious as well as political reasons, would like to get its hands on southern Iraq, but Hakim might not be the man to help them do it after all. Unlike the Iraqi Shi'ites, he is Persian rather than Arab.

Iraqi dissidents would like U.S. and other allied forces, now occupying most of southern Iraq west of the Euphrates, to intervene on their behalf, but they won't and they shouldn't. The Joint Chiefs of Staff's Lt. Gen. Thomas Kelly says allied intervention can occur only if Iraqi unrest threatens allied troops. So far it doesn't, and it probably won't. If U.S. forces did step into the quarrel, they would have to side with one group or another of the dissidents or else wind up in the embarrassing position of supporting Saddam's regime.

Yet the chaos now threatening Iraqi unity could turn the whole country into a gigantic Lebanon, leaving it the plaything of regional poseurs such as Iran, Syria and Turkey, and removing its weight in the delicate regional balance of power. If Iran managed to control Basra, Iraq's access to the sea and its ability to export its oil through the Persian Gulf would be lost, making economic recovery much more difficult or impossible.

If the United States and its allies do nothing else in the Gulf, they can't allow Iraq to be dismembered. The Iraqis themselves can resolve their differences with Saddam and his clique as they will, but President Bush and the other leaders of the allied coalition must make it clear to Iran, the other regional states and to Iraq's own disgruntled fragments that the defeated country can't be carved up.

THE BALTIMORE SUN:

The overthrow of Saddam Hussein would be of great benefit, not only to this country but to his own. That means departure of the whole apparatus of tyranny: his kin, his cronies from Takrit, the Baath Party and the secret police. This would make possible a stable security arrangement in the gulf, reconstruction credit for Iraq, personal liberty for Iraqis and settlement of other Issues....

The dismemberment of Iraq would be a disaster not only for that country but for our own. It would open insoluble strife, unleash nationalisms in conflict with each other and with religious pinions. The anarchy might destabilize all Arab gulf states and require the presence of U.S. troops next door long after Americans wanted them gone. Small wonder that Mr. Bush and Mr. Baker emphasized that the U.S. did not seek the breakup of Iraq....

British influence invented Iraq in the breakup of the Turkish Empire following World War I, assembling a nation- state out of three provinces whose populations had little in common. With their classical leaning, the English were charmed at putting back together ancient Mesopotamia and guiding it to independence as Iraq.

In the north around Mosul, the people were Kurds, Muslims but not Arabs. Putting them in Iraq separated them from Kurds in Turkey, Iran, Syria and the Soviet Union. Ever since, when one of these countries wanted to make trouble for another, it stirred up the other's Kurds. All oppose an independent Kurdistan, for which Kurds hunger.

In the center around Baghdad, a great capital in medieval times, were Arabs who were Sunni Muslims, in the Arab mainstream. Though barely a third of the people, these would rule and hold Iraq together as an Arab nation. And so they have.

In the south, around Basra, were Arabs who were Shiite Muslims, opposed to secular authority, their clerics trained in schools with Iranian Shiites. Shiites are the fastest-growing segment and now more than half the population. During the Iran-Iraq war, the late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in Iran hoped -- and Saddam Hussein in Iraq feared -- that Shiites would detach the south from Iraq and join it to Persian Iran. They did not. Their Arab nationalism overcame their religion.

But now they are rebelling against hated tyranny. They are capable of ruling southern Iraq, but not the whole country. Saddam Hussein has sent a deputy prime minister to Tehran in a desperate bid for that regime's help in keeping Iraq and his power whole. The U.S.-led coalition has unleashed forces it cannot control. Wars do that.

Major cities in South & Kurdish areas come under rebel control but the southern revolt is crushed by 29 March and the Kurdish revolt by early April. By some estimates 1.5 million Kurds flee into Turkey and Iran.

The British newspaper The Guardian:

A monstrous crime is being perpetrated in Kurdistan. As the Kurdish people's brief springtime of freedom ends, they are, and will be, subject not only to the effects of a war waged in their own cities and towns without restraint or morality, but to the reimposition of Saddam Hussein's brutal rule and his revenge on those who have challenged him.
<...>
Yesterday Turkey's National Security Council said that more than 200,000 people fleeing Iraq, mostly women and children, were in danger of death near the Turkish border.

"Where is Bush?" was a question we must have heard a thousand times as we toiled on Monday up the slopes of the 8,000ft mountain passes that separate Iraq from Turkey. "Why did he start if he was not going to finish?" or "Why has he not finished Saddam?"

Sometimes all the bitterness and despair are compressed into the single word Bush, pronounced with a terrible resignation. The name of a man who was a hero to the Kurds only a few days ago has become almost a curse.

The Wall Street Journal would report in November, 1997:

In late March 1991, shortly after the Gulf War, Iraqis were in open revolt. Fighting erupted in all but three of Iraq's provinces, and Saddam's army was left with two days' worth of ammunition. A desperate Saddam sent one of his highest-ranking officers as a "defector" with information that Iraq's senior military leaders were on the verge of a coup but hesitated as long as they faced the threat of a revolution. Accordingly, the U.S. signaled to Saddam that he could use his air power, grounded under the terms of the cease-fire, to crush the revolt. No coup followed.

April, 1991: Osama Bin Laden flees Saudi Arabia, after being confined to Jiddah for his opposition to the Saudi alliance with the United States. He moves first to Afghanistan and then to Khartoum, Sudan by 1992 (Source: Newsweek 2/1/99). Sudan had begun to allow any Muslim into the country without a visa, in a display of Islamic solidarity. Allegedly, hundreds of suspected terrorists and ex-mujahedeen come to Sudan as a safe haven (Source: New York Times 9/21/98).

April 3, 1991: UN Security Council resolution 687 establishes the terms of the peace, including return of Kuwaiti property and prisoners, economic sanctions, and Iraqi disarmament. The resolution declares that Iraq shall unconditionally accept, under international supervision, the destruction, removal or rendering harmless of its weapons of mass destruction, ballistic missiles with a range over 150 kilometres, and related production facilities and equipment. It also provides for establishment of a system of ongoing monitoring and verification of Iraq's compliance with the ban on these weapons and missiles, and requires Iraq to make a declaration, within 15 days, of the location, amounts and types of all such items.

The U.N. Special Commission (UNSCOM) is established to monitor compliance. The International Atomic Energy Agency is authorized to document and destroy Iraqi efforts to develop nuclear weapons. Iraq accepts the resolution.

April 5, 1991: President Bush orders US European Command to assist Kurds and other refugees in the mountains of northern Iraq. Meanwhile, the Joint Chiefs of Staff order forces in Europe to airdrop essential supplies to displaced persons in northern Iraq by 7 April, and to prepare to deploy a US military medical unit to southern Turkey.

6 April 1991: Joint Task Force Provide Comfort formed and deployed to Incirlik Air Base, Turkey, to conduct humanitarian operations in northern Iraq. After the Kurdish revolt against the Iraqi government failed about 1.5 million refugees fled to the mountains along the border with Turkey and Iran.

7 April 1991: Combined Task Force Provide Comfort begins humanitarian operations from Incirlik AB, Turkey. The task force drops its first supplies to Kurdish refugees.

April 7, 1991: (Media) The New York Times:

Iraq Approval Starts Peace Schedule

Iraq's formal acceptance of the Security Council's Persian Gulf peace offer today meets the conditions for an immediate cease-fire and clears the way for the destruction of Iraq's most dangerous weapons, the establishment of a procedure for Iraqi reparations to Kuwait and the lifting of trade sanctions against Baghdad.

The 120-day timetable for carrying out the demands was spelled out in Security Council Resolution 687, which was adopted on Wednesday.
<...>
In accepting Resolution 687 today, Iraq has agreed never again to try to develop chemical, biological or nuclear weapons.
<...>
After Iraq has handed over its weapons of mass destruction as well as its dangerous nuclear material and agreed to the financial compensation plans, the Security Council will lift the prohibition against buying Iraqi oil, allowing Baghdad to resume normal oil exports.

It will also free Iraq's frozen foreign assets, which will revert to their previous owners.
<...>
Iraq is currently free to import food and medicine, and the Council has promised to approve all requests to ship essential civilian supplies, such as spare parts for water treatment and sewage plants. Arms Ban to Be Reviewed

The Council may also authorize it to sell enough oil to pay for these humanitarian imports.

April 10, 1991: US officials warn Iraq not to interfere with relief operations of Combined Task Force Provide Comfort. No Iraqi planes (fixed- or rotary-winged) are to fly north of the 36th parallel.

April 10, 1991 UN 'safe haven' established in northern Iraq for protection of Kurds.

April 11, 1991: The United Nations announced the formal end to the Persian Gulf War.

*****

Next:

1991-1997

1998-1999 2000-2003

*****

As noted at the outset, this is a work in progress. Events, links, and quotes will be added with time.

Many collections of quotes from are available around the web. My ultimate goal is to restore such comments to their full historical and contextual frame by providing links to source documents. Please forgive me for not having achieved this yet.

Sources/other timelines:

NPR

UNSCOM. (Thanks to Chris Kornkven for pointing us in that direction.)

BBC

BBC

CBC

Oil for Food

The Guardian

Mideast Web

The goal of this effort has been to provide a list of facts and quotes, without bias or interpretation. There are those who will see such things as exactly that, and those who will claim it's exactly the opposite. So it goes.

Open Post

[Greyhawk]

Still working bugs out of the system. Mudville has been upgraded to the latest version of Movable Type, and the site redesign you see is more than a tweaking of the previous html - we started with a blank page (not even a pre-set MT template) and re-built from scratch. Work continues.

In the meantime, problems exist with trackback. There are numerous posssible causes. Some trackbacks "get through" while others fail. Hundreds of spam trackbacks are entered into the system every day - they are automatically placed intomoderation and promptly deleted. So trackback "works".

But many trackbacks are failing, at a guess about half of those legitimately sent are not getting through. This seems to be a tech issue. It could be a communication barrier between platforms, or an issue with our server or the sending server, or numerous other things. It might be your trackback is sent at the exact moment the system is processing 50 spam trackbacks. Whatever the case, rest assured, we are working on it.

In the meantime, if you link a post here make sure you are linking via the "permalink" and using the "trackback" number only as needed (the Whizbang pinger).

Unspinning the Troop Rotations

[Greyhawk]

Last week's congressional shenanigans regarding American troops in Iraq successfully obscured the real news about that topic. In an under-reported story earlier this month the DoD announced the units designated to deploy in the next rotation for Operation Iraqi Freedom. DoD Press Release, 7 November 2005:

DoD Announces Units for Next Operation Iraqi Freedom Rotation

The Department of Defense announced today the major units scheduled to deploy as part of the next Operation Iraqi Freedom rotation. This announcement involves several combat brigades, headquarters elements, and combat support and combat service support units and approximately 92,000 service members as presently envisioned. The scheduled rotation for these forces will begin in mid-2006. Decisions made by the Secretary of Defense at the recommendation of military commanders in Iraq may result in changes to this rotation and may affect units now being identified and advised to prepare to deploy.

There's a key number in the above quote; "92,000 service members" - that's down significantly from this year's figure, approximately 140,000 with boosts to 160,000 for election periods (created by overlapping deployments).

But don't start thinking "drawdown" just yet. Because there's another key phrase that follows that number: "92,000 service members as presently envisioned". Here's what's happening. The DoD says they want to see how things go through December's elections in Iraq, then give commanders on the ground an opportunity to make deisions on who's needed where.

It's the obvious strategy, although it opens Don Rumsfeld to accusations of "passing the buck" from the same folks who accuse him of being a "micromanager". And if additional numbers are added later they will likely be labeled as an increase in the number of troops due to initial requirements being set too low - and the "no end in sight" argument will be invoked. Likewise there's always the possibility that if things go wrong the troop strength levels (Too high! Too low! Too late!) will be cited as primary cause. But conversely, if things go right they'll be declared wrong anyway - so the above arguments are essentially moot. And besides, torture is wrong!

Now back to the grown-up discussion. These numbers could result in a "drawdown". But the SecDef is cautioning any who will listen that that's not the correct interpretation. In fact, he chastised the AP reporting of the story, as they themselves noted here:

The number of troops in future rotations will depend on conditions, including the severity of the insurgency and the strength of Iraqi security forces, as well as the recommendations of U.S. commanders, Rumsfeld said.

"We know we're going to bulk up for the elections, and we know we're going to go back down to some level after the elections," Rumsfeld said in a telephone call to The Associated Press. During the call, Rumsfeld complained that an AP report gave the mistaken impression that the Pentagon has already decided to reduce troop levels below 138,000 next year.
<...>
"We're aware of the interest in the press in the mid-to-longer-term levels of U.S. forces and coalition forces in Iraq, but I would caution that it would be a mistake to draw conclusions about such matters when reviewing the force rotation announcements that will be made later today," Rumsfeld said.

"We continue to transition and transfer additional responsibilities to the Iraqi security forces, and the people of Iraq continue to meet the political milestones that they have established," he added. "As these and other conditions are met, Gen. (George) Casey will continue to assess the capabilities that he believes he will need and make recommendations as to the levels he believes will be needed in the period over the coming months."

On one level that can be labeled Pentagon doublespeak, but I'm inclined to take the report at face value - there might be less troops in Iraq next year, it's situationally dependent. Not very satisfying to those who want instant answers to tough problems, but this isn't a TV drama with neat solutions at the end of the hour.

There are good reason to be optimistic though. In the same AP article linked above, General David Patraeus cites indicators of progress in the development of the Iraq security forces - and expectations for the future.

Separately, a senior Army general said there is a growing momentum in the training of Iraqi security forces, which now total about 100,000 army soldiers and about 111,000 police forces. In a detailed briefing before a group organized by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a think tank, Lt. Gen. David Petraeus said the goal is to have a combined total of 230,00 army and police by the December election.

Petraeus left Iraq last summer after a year in command of training programs for the Iraqi security forces. His briefing charts said training and equipping of the Iraqi army should be done by January 2007, and by March 2007 for the Iraqi police services. The total number of forces is to reach 325,000 by July 2007.

Iraq's civilian leaders are expressing optimism too. You might have missed this recent quote from Iraqi Vice President Adel Abdul Mahdi:

The United States and coalition forces will likely reduce the number of troops in Iraq next year, Iraqi Vice President Adel Abdul Mahdi said on Saturday.
<...>
"I've discussed the pullout possibilities with Secretary Rumsfeld and we agree on the future course. We are optimistic about the buildup of Iraqi forces to cope with the situation," he said.

"We have been preparing ourselves, politically, for a pullout of the troops. We have a very solid political situation and we don't want to have a security vacuum of any kind," Mahdi added.

He was speaking in Detroit, Michigan at the time, but his words went mostly unreported in major media.

Likewise President of Iraq Jalal Talabani's comments in Britain received scant notice:

British troops could leave Iraq by the end of next year, Iraqi President Jalal Talabani said on Sunday. “We don’t want British forces forever in Iraq. Within one year – I think at the end of 2006 – Iraqi troops will be ready to replace British forces in the South,” Talabani told ITV’s Jonathan Dimbleby program.

Talabani also said, however, that an immediate withdrawal of foreign forces would be a “catastrophe” for Iraq and would lead to civil war. Iraqis are working on training their own soldiers and police to take full control of security of their country and fight a Sunni Arab insurgency that has killed thousands of people since 2003’s US-led invasion.

The Pentagon numbers and the AP report were released on November 7, Mahdi's remarks were quoted on the 12th and Talabani's on the 15th. So there you have it, the background situation against which last week's political drama was played. Given these developments it's not entirely surprising (although it is entirely disappointing) that there are those in congress who are in a bit of a panic over the possibility of upward trends in the situation in Iraq. Success there is far from assured, but that success is unfortunately political doom (or perhaps just a minor setback, if they're from the right district) for those who've chosen to oppose the effort. Seeing the possibility of light at the end of the tunnel has forced them to act.

We can each make our own determination as to exactly what they are acting like.

Related: Graphic Violence

One More for the Corps

[Greyhawk]

An interesting historical footnote found while compiling the Iraq war timeline, this one from December 1998. At the time a surprise attack dubbed "Operation Desert Fox" had been launched on Iraq - four days of aerial bombardment "to strike military and security targets in Iraq that contribute to Iraq's ability to produce, store, maintain and deliver weapons of mass destruction."

The attack was a response to years of obstinance and obfuscation on the part of Saddam regarding weapons of mass destruction and cooperation with UN inspections. However, it coincided with a key vote in the House regarding the pending impeachment of President Bill Clinton. The vote would be delayed until the conclusion of military ops, a nod to the acknowledged importance of a unified domestic front in time of war - even if there are no "boots on the ground".

Still, some could not resist the impulse to "question the timing" of the attack. Among them, an obscure congressman from New York:

Rep. Gerald Solomon (R-New York) issued a statement with the headline: "Bombs Away -- Save Impeachment for Another Day?"

"It is obvious that they're (the Clinton White House) doing everything they can to postpone the vote on this impeachment in order to try to get whatever kind of leverage they can, and the American people ought to be as outraged as I am about it," Solomon said in an interview with CNN.

Asked if he was accusing Clinton of playing with American lives for political expediency, Solomon said, "Whether he knows it or not, that's exactly what he's doing. When you put our troops in the air or on the ground, you are risking their lives. This president ought to know better. I don't know if he does or not, because he's so unpredictable."

Solomon complained that key congressmen had not been told of the military strike. He said Clinton should have briefed more members of Congress and delayed the attack until early next week.

"It would still be spontaneous," Solomon said. "He could still launch the attack, but it would not have been political the way it is today."

Solomon's remarks brought a rapid response from an obscure congressman from Connecticut - who expressed surprise that Solomon - a veteran of the Marine Corps - had spoken out:

Upon hearing Solomon's remarks, Democratic Rep. Sam Gejdenson of Connecticut went before CNN's cameras to rip into Solomon for his accusation.

"Gerry Solomon's spent a career here making outrageous statements, but as an ex-Marine, he ought to know better," Gejdenson said. "That was an outrageous, outrageous statement."

Gejdenson said the nation cannot tie a president's hands based on developments on Capitol Hill.

"Think of the message," Gejdenson said. "If we tell every country out there that might want to do harm to America's interests that every time there's a political squabble in Washington, the presidency has to be frozen, that's outrageous."

For the record, I was in the military back then too, and I don't recall this specific incident, nor do I remember the general flap in congress as being particularly notable to those of us just trying to do our jobs. Others have better memory than I do, of course. Now years later an obscure congressman (and ex-Marine) from Pennsylvania pulls a similar stunt (albeit with far more grave consequences likely for the GIs actually on on the ground).

Some will see a simple coincidence, others will surmise that political payback is a bitch.

A Welcome Home Heartbreak

[Mrs Greyhawk]

Some readers of the milblogs may be familiar with this case and if not let me introduce you to little Kelsey.

She was just two years old when she was brutally murdered in October of this year. She suffered nine months of abuse before her life was tragically stolen from her. And died couple of days before her father returned home from serving our country.

From Kelsey's Grandmother on her father's side:

My granddaughter Kelsey was born after her parents were divorced. I wondered why this child would be put on this earth after the two people who were not meant to be together had already gone their separate ways. I knew she had a purpose, but what could it be?

When my son was called to active duty and sent to Iraq I was sure that I knew. God was giving Kelsey to us because her father was not coming home.

I was wrong. Kelsey was the one who did not make it. She died just days before her dad was to return.

*****

My son had been injured in a truck accident in Iraq and with the news of his divorce he was allowed to return home one month early. He was only able to keep his spirits up with the thought of seeing Kelsey. He contacted DHS to let them know he was returning. Arrangements had been made for Kelsey to be at the airport. This was to be a big moment for us.

On October 11th, I received a call from a friend that Kelsey had been taken to the hospital. I contacted the CASA worker and asked her to check on the situation. I called her again and she told me Kelsey had a seizure and she would call me back. She never did. We heard from a friend at the hospital that Kelsey had died. My son called thirty minutes later from Ft. Benning, Georgia and I had to give him the news that would change his life forever.

Our family was never contacted by DHS. They did not make any effort to call the Red Cross to notify my son that his only child was gone. We made the calls necessary and got Lance home that night. A few days later we got the news, it was listed as a homicide.

The system that should have protected her, failed her. And now the same system is failing her father, who is seeking to get records from the DHS in OK.

Kelsey's was put here to make a difference - to make sure other children are protected.

Lost In Lima Ohio, has been following this story closely and keeping us updated.

MilBlogger in need of a Prayer

[Mrs Greyhawk]

A Storm In Afghanistan is in need for prayers for his wife who has recently been diagnosed with cancer. It is serious enough to have him sent home to be by her side in Germany. He is on his way home from Afghanistan now.
They have 3 young children, the youngest just a baby who had a rough start himself after inhaling some amniotic fluid due to a stressful birth . And now it is Mom that is in need of prayers.

A Soldier's Angel has recieved an email:

Dear_______

While I prefer not to make my identity public, I am also Reid's mother; he is my only child. As you have no doubt read today, the news is not good. I have them on every prayer list I can think of, but they still need all the prayer they can get.

Thank you for all your work with Soldiers' Angels (I logged on briefly) and for your faithful writing to Reid on his blog. It has meant the world to him to get so many "hits" and to see so many (usually) favourable comments. God bless you and all those who work to give our soldiers the uplift they need when they are thousands of miles from home and loved ones and when most of the news reports are negative. I just wanted to let you know you are appreciated.

Love in Christ,

_______

A Brief History of a Long War (Iraq, 1990-2003) / 1991-1997

[Greyhawk]

Previous:

Introduction (1990-1991)

1991

April 18, 1991: Iraq provides initial declaration required under UN resolution 687, declares some chemical weapons and materials and 53 Al-Hussein and Scud type long-range ballistic missiles. Iraq declares it has no biological weapons program.

April 27, 1991: In a second declaration regarding nuclear weapons, Iraq admits to having some nuclear materials in addition to those known by the IAEA.

May 7, 1991: In two separate incidents 10 minutes apart, an A-10 and an F-16 reported coming under antiaircraft artillery fire while over northern Iraq.

May 16, 1991: Iraq submits revised declarations covering chemical weapons and ballistic missiles, increasing the number of items declared.

June 6, 1991: The last Operation Provide Comfort border camp closed.

June 7, 1991: The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees assumes responsibility for the refugee camps constructed by Combined Task Force Provide Comfort in northern Iraq.

June 9, 1991: UNSCOM begins its first chemical weapons inspection.

June 27, 1991: As Provide Comfort ground units began their withdrawal from northern Iraq, US officials reiterated their earlier ban on Iraqi flights north of the 36th parallel.

Summer 1991: Iraq destroys WMD equipment and documentation in an effort at concealment of pre-war work.

June 17, 1991: Security Council resolution 699 confirms that the Special Commission and the IAEA have a continuing authority to conduct activities under section C of resolution 687.

23-28 June 1991: During the second IAEA inspection (22 June 3 July 1991), Iraq obstructs access to items prohibited under the terms of the cease-fire. UNSCOM/IAEA inspectors try to intercept Iraqi vehicles carrying nuclear related equipment (Calutrons). Iraqi personnel fire shots to prevent the inspectors from approaching the vehicles. The equipment is later seized and destroyed under international supervision.

June 28, 1991: Statement by the President of the Security Council deploring Iraq’s denial of access to an inspection site and asking the Secretary-General to send a high-level mission to Baghdad immediately (S/22746).

June 30, 1991 UNSCOM begins its first missile inspection.

July 7-18, 1991: The third IAEA inspection uncovers large stocks of natural uranium and 15 kilograms of highly enriched uranium, and reveals the existence of various uranium enrichment programs.

July 15, 1991: Combined Task Force Provide Comfort withdraws from northern Iraq. A residual force remains in Turkey to deter Iraqi reprisals against the Kurds.

July 24, 1991: Operation Provide Comfort ends; the task force had delivered more than 17,000 tons of supplies (6,000 tons airdropped, 6,500 tons by helicopter, and the rest by surface transport). Meanwhile, Operation Provide Comfort II commences as a show of force to deter Iraqi attacks on the Kurds, with only limited humanitarian aspects to its mission.

August 2-8, 1991: UNSCOM conducts its first biological inspection of Iraqi facilities and uncovers a major biological program. Iraq declares to the first biological inspection team that it had conducted "biological research activities for defensive military purposes". Seed stocks of three biological warfare agents are handed over to the team, and the team removes three further potential warfare strains.

August 8-15, 1991: Iraq discloses the existence of a supergun and other banned missile related materials.

August 15, 1991: Security Council resolution 707 demands that Iraq provide without further delay full, final and complete disclosures of its proscribed weapons and programs, as required by resolution 687. UNSCR 706 authorizes Iraqi to sell oil for humanitarian goods, but is not accepted by the Government of Iraq.

September, 1991: Former US Marine intelligence officer Scott Ritter is hired as an UNSCOM inspector. Over the next seven years he would take part part in more than 30 inspection missions, 14 of them as chief. He will become one of the most controversial figures in the story of the war.

September 6, 1991: The first UNSCOM inspection team which intended to use helicopters is blocked by Iraq.

September 19, 1991: UNSCR 712 allows for a partial lifting of the embargo and would enables Iraq to sell limited quantities of oil and use the proceeds for humanitarian purposes. In return, Iraq must consent to strict UN monitoring of the contracts and distribution of humanitarian goods bought with the oil revenues. Iraq refuses.

September 21-30, 1991: IAEA inspectors find large amounts of documentation relating to Iraq's efforts to acquire nuclear weapons. The Iraqi officials confiscate some documents from the inspectors. The inspectors refuse to yield a second set of documents. In response, Iraq refuses to allow the team to leave the site with these documents. A four-day stand-off during which the team remained in the parking lot of the site ensues.

September 23, 1991: President of the Security Council issues a statement concerning Iraq’s failure to provide unconditional acceptance of resolution 707 (SC/5306 - IK54). Iraq permits the team to leave with the documents following the statement, which threatens enforcement action by members of the Council.

October 1-9, 1991: UNSCOM destroys Iraq's supergun at Jabal Hamran and a start is made on the destruction of components of other superguns.

October 11, 1991: Responding to Iraq's consistent efforts to interrupt or block inspection teams, the U.N. Security Council passes Resolution 715. The resolution says Iraq must "accept unconditionally the inspectors and all other personnel designated by the Special Commission".

October 1991: Iraq states that it considers the Ongoing Monitoring and Verification Plans, adopted by resolution 715 to be unlawful and states that it is not ready to comply with resolution 715.

October 14, 1991: Iraq officially admits research and studies are under way on nuclear weaponization.

October 25 , 1991: Report by Executive Chairman of UNSCOM:

Iraq acknowledged possessing 46,000 filled chemical weapons stored at various sites throughout Iraq.

Conclusive documentary evidence was found at two Iraqi facilities showing Iraq had a program for developing nuclear weapons.

In the course of inspection of Tammuz (Al Taqqadum) Air Base, 200 aerial bombs filled with mustard agent were counted and recorded.

The team examined 30 chemical filled ballistic missile warheads declared by Iraq in the Dujayl area. 14 were binary type filled with isopropanol and cyclohexanol with only DF needing to be added to produce nerve agent prior to use. 56 plastic containers of DF were found. Iraq stated 16 warheads were filled with a mixture of GB and GF nerve agents.

At Al Bakr Air Base, 25 type 250 gauge aerial bombs and 135 type 500 aerial bombs filled with mustard agent were declared by Iraq.

At Al Taji, 6,000 empty aluminum containers intended for filling with nerve agent and inserted into 122-millimeter warheads were found.

At Al Fallujah Proving Ground, Iraq declared the storage of 6,394 mustard-filled 155-millimeter artillery shells. Analysis confirmed the presence of mustard agent.

Of the 14 warheads mentioned above as being filled with chemicals, just prior to their destruction, the senior Iraqi official present said 4 were filled with the nerve agent Sarin.

Iraq has declared 6,120 sarin nerve agent filled 122-millimeter rocket warheads and their attendant motors.

Iraq provided seed stocks of biological warfare agents to the team consisting of Clostridium botulinum, Clostridium perfringens and Bacillus anthracis. Iraq also possessed the following micro-organisms-Brucellus abortus, Brucella melitensis, Francisella tularensis and various strains of Clostridium botulinum.

At one undisclosed site, 30 SCUD warheads filled with chemicals were found.

November 18 - December 1, 1991: UNSCOM finds more than 100 items of chemical bomb making material hidden in a sugar factory in Mosul and undeclared material for SCUD missiles.

December 4, 1991: Second report of the Executive Chairman of UNSCOM:

Iraq's recent record in the nuclear area is consistent with, if less dramatic than, its actions over the last six months that included the concealment of evidence of plutonium separation, of uranium enrichment, and of nuclear weapons development, of refusal to permit inspection teams to enter some sites and exit others, and confiscation of documents from inspectors in the course of an inspection.

At Al Tuz, Khamisiyah, and Muhammadiyat numbers of munitions were discovered, including but not limited to 122 mm rockets, which were considered to be in too unsafe a condition to move and for which a drilling and draining (of nerve agent) would be very hazardous.

1992

January 1992: Boutros Boutros-Ghali of Egypt becomes UN Secretary General.

January 27 - February 5, 1992: UNSCOM verifies delivery of chemical bomb-making equipment to Al Muthanna and concludes additional tests are needed prior to destruction of nerve agents.

February 18, 1992: Special report of the Executive Chairman of UNSCOM regarding the visit of a special mission to Baghdad on 27 January 1991, recording that Iraq was rejecting any obligations imposed on it by Council resolutions 707 (1991) and 715 (1991) (S/23606).

February 19, 1992: Statement by the President of the Security Council approving the report of the special mission and expressing grave concern over Iraq’s failure to acknowledge its obligations under resolution 715 (1991) and the plans for ongoing monitoring and verification, and supporting a decision to despatch a further special mission to Baghdad (S/23609).

February 21 - March 24, 1992: The first chemical destruction team destroys 463 nerve agent filled rockets, i.e. approximately 2.5 tons of agent.

February 28, 1992 Statement by the President of the Security Council, upon receipt of the special Commission’s report, reaffirming that it is for UNSCOM alone to determine which items are to be destroyed under resolution 687, and condemning Iraq’s failure to provide full compliance with the relevant Security Council resolutions (S/23663).

March 19, 1992: Iraq declares having more previously undeclared ballistic missiles, chemical weapons and associated material, and says they unilaterally destroyed this material in the summer of 1991 in violation of resolution 687.

April 5, 1992: Iranian warplanes attack rebel bases inside Iraq. Iraq responds by scrambling fighters and (unsuccessfully) pursuing the intruders. Combined Task Force Provide Comfort does not interfere. The Iraqis continued to fly on succeeding days, effectively overturning the ban on all their flying which they had observed since 22 March 1991.

April 9, 1992: Iraq calls for a halt of UNSCOM's aerial surveillance flights, making reference to the possibility that the aircraft and its pilot would be endangered.

April 10, 1992: Statement by the President of the Security Council concerning Iraq’s threats to the safety and security of UNSCOM’s aerial surveillance flights over Iraq and reaffirming UNSCOM's right to conduct such flights (S/23803). Subsequently, Iraq affirms that it does not intend to carry out any military action aimed at UNSCOM's aerial flights.

May 1992: May 1992 Iraq provides its first Full, Final and Complete Disclosures for its prohibited biological and missile programs. Iraq admits to having had only a "defensive" biological weapons program.

June 1992: Iraq provides its first Full, Final and Complete Disclosure for its prohibited chemical weapons programme.

July 1992: UNSCOM begins the destruction of large quantities of Iraq's chemical weapons and production facilities.

July 6-29, 1992: Iraq refuses an inspection team access to the Iraqi Ministry of Agriculture. UNSCOM had reliable information that the site contained archives related to proscribed activities. On July 6 the President of the Security Council issues a statement regarding the refusal by Iraq to permit the UNSCOM inspection team entry into the Ministry of Agriculture and stating that Iraq’s denial constitutes a material and unacceptable breach of resolution 687 (S/24240). Access was thereafter obtained. Evidence gathered from the Ministry is consistent with the removal of items during the period the team was denied entry.

August 14, 1992: Pres. Bush orders the Pentagon to begin emergency airlifts of food to Somalia, a nation suffering from severe famine and factional warfare.

August 26, 1992: President George Bush announces a decision by a coalition of U.N. forces to begin surveillance operations in Iraq below the 32nd parallel. The goal was to ensure Iraq’s compliance with UNSCR 688. To facilitate the monitoring, the coalition barred all Iraqi fixed and rotary wing aircraft from flying over the surveillance area. With the president’s announcement, U.S. Central Command activated Joint Task Force Southwest Asia, a command and control unit for coalition forces monitoring the no-fly zone. The mission was dubbed Operation Southern Watch. The first Southern Watch sortie was flown Aug. 27, 1992 - less than 24 hours after the announcement. By early 2001 pilots had entered the southern "no-fly" zone in Iraq 153,000 times. Between February 2000 and February 2001 allied pilots entered the zone 10,000 times. The mission continues until the invasion of Iraq in 2003.

August 28, 1992: The U.S. government mounts two huge relief operations, rushing food and drinking water to hurricane-ravaged Florida while U.S. cargo planes land in Somalia with tons of food for African famine victims.

October 9, 1992: To protect the US food airlift, the first American forces arrive in Somalia.

October 15, 1992: Statement to the press by the President of the Security Council concerning a high-level statement made in Iraq which appeared to constitute a threat to the security of United Nations inspectors, expressing the Council’s concern for the safety of the inspectors and expressing the wish that Iraq cooperate fully with them (S/5484 - IK125).

November 1992: US Presidential elections - Democrat Bill Clinton defeats incumbent Republican George Bush.

November 23, 1992: Statement by the President of the Security Council concerning general and specific obligations of Iraq, including those in the weapons areas, under the various Security Council resolutions (S/24836).

November 24, 1992: Statement by the President of the Security Council concerning statements by the Deputy Prime Minister of Iraq and regretting threats, allegations and attacks made by him regarding the various United Nations operations in Iraq (S/24839).

December 3, 1992: The U.N. Security Council unanimously approves a U.S.-led military mission to help starving Somalia.

December 4, 1992: President Bush orders American troops to lead a mercy mission to Somalia, threatening military action against warlords and gangs who were blocking food for starving millions.

December 8, 1992: Americans see live television coverage of U.S. troops landing on the beaches of Somalia as Operation Restore Hope begins (because of the time difference, it was early December ninth in Somalia). The US Operations Restore Hope, Continue Hope and others will ultimately end on March 3, 1995. They cost $1.7 billion and left 43 US dead and 153 wounded.

December 27, 1992: A U.S. Air Force F-16 on patrol in the Southern Watch no-fly zone , encounters a MiG-25 Foxbat. When the MiG pilot locked his air-to-air radar on the F-16, the American pilot destroyed the Foxbat with an air-to-air missile. Shortly after the shoot down, Saddam Hussein positions surface-to-air missiles in Southern Iraq below the 32nd parallel. Since these missiles threaten pilots flying Southern Watch missions, the coalition orders Hussein to move them above the 32nd parallel. He ignores the ultimatum, even after warnings from the U.N.

December 29, 1992: A bomb explodes in a hotel in Aden, Yemen, where US troops had been staying while en route to the humanitarian mission in Somalia. The bomb kills two Austrian tourists; the U.S. soldiers had already left. Two Yemeni Muslim militants, trained in Afghanistan and injured in the blast, are later arrested. US intelligence agencies allege that this was the first terrorist attack involving Osama bin Laden and his associates.

1993

1993: Inspections are again held up when Iraq attempts to deny UNSCOM and the IAEA the use of their own aircraft in Iraq. The United States, France, and Britain launched several air and cruise-missile strikes against Iraq in response to provocations. In late 1993 Iraq accepts resolution 715. Meanwhile, Muhammad Atef, a top Osama bin Laden lieutenant, and 6 other al Qaeda operatives, set up training camps in Somalia to help Somali tribes oppose the UN peacekeeping operations.

January 6, 1993: Four U.N. allies, the United States, Russia, France and the United Kingdom, agree to work together in enforcing UNSCR 688. They issue a joint ultimatum to Iraq, demanding that Baghdad withdraw all surface-to-air missiles south of the 32d parallel.

January 7, 1993: Despite defiant rhetoric, the Iraqis begin removing some missiles from the southern no-fly zone.

January 8, 1993: Statement by the President of the Security Council, noting that Iraq's action in prohibiting the use of UNSCOM aircraft is an "unacceptable and material breach" of resolution 687 and warns Iraq of "serious consequences", were it to continue (S/25081).

January 10, 1993: Some 200 Iraqis force their way into ammunition bunkers located at the former naval base at Um Qasr and remove weapons and armaments slated for destruction.

January 11, 1993: Statement by the President of the Security Council reiterating the Statement of 8 January 1993 regarding Iraq’s prohibition on the use of UNSCOM aircraft, and again warning of serious consequences that would flow from continuing defiance (S/25091).

January 13, 1993: With Iraqi missile sites still operational south of the 32d parallel, and Iraqi troops making repeated forays across the newly demarcated border with Kuwait, President Bush orders punitive strikes against 32 Iraqi missile sites and air defense command centers.

January 15, 1993: Iraqi AAA fired on a pair of Provide Comfort F-111Fs in two separate incidents. Neither aircraft was hit; neither returned fire.

January 17, 1993: Iraqi AAA fired on two Provide Comfort F-16s. Neither plane was hit and neither returned fire. About an hour later, an F-4G attacked an air defense site that was targeting French reconnaissance planes. An hour and a half after that, a Provide Comfort F-16 shot down an Iraqi MiG over northern Iraq. In the south, US warships fire 45 cruise missiles against the Zarfaraniyah nuclear fabrication facility near Baghdad in response to Iraq's refusal to cooperate with UN inspectors. Eight buildings at the facility, located just outside Baghdad, are hit. One missile, apparently struck by Iraqi anti-aircraft fire, crashes into the Al Rasheed Hotel, killing two civilians.

President elect Clinton issues a statement: "Saddam Hussein's continuing provocation has been met by appropriate and forceful response. I fully support President Bush's actions. Saddam Hussein should be very clear in understanding that the current and the next administration are in complete agreement on the necessity of his fully complying with all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions."

January 18, 1993: Provide Comfort F-4Gs attack surface-to-air missile sites in northern Iraq after being fired on, and F-16s drop cluster bombs on Bashiqah airfield after being attacked by AAA fire. In the south, JTF Southern Watch sends 75 US, British, and French aircraft to attack Iraqi missile sites south of the 32d parallel.

January 19, 1993: In two separate incidents, Provide Comfort aircraft clash with Iraqi air defenses. An F-4G fires a missile at a SAM radar site east of Mosul after the radar "locked onto" the Weasel. About three hours later, two F-16s drop cluster bombs on a AAA site after being fired at. Iraq informs UNSCOM that it will be able to resume its flights (S/225172).

January 20, 1993: William J. Clinton becomes President of the United States.

January 21, 1993: A F-16 and an F-4G escorting a French Mirage reconnaissance plane over northern Iraq attack an Iraqi missile battery after the site's search radar began tracking them.

January 22, 1993: An F-4G fires two missiles at a SAM site in northern Iraq.

January 26, 1993: A Voice of America broadcast makes clear that a new US administration will continue the Iraq policy:

President Clinton stressed that United States policy on Iraq will not change. "It is the American policy," he said, "and that is what we are going to stay with."

Secretary of State Warren Christopher also stressed the continuity of U.S. policy toward Iraq. "The United States intends to protect our pilots in the 'no-fly' zone," he said. "The Iraqis know perfectly well what it takes to comply with the U.N. resolutions and with the establishment of the 'no-fly' zones." Secretary Christopher said the U.S. attack on the missile site shows the determination with which the Clinton administration will pursue its policy toward Iraq.

February 3, 1993: Iraqi gunners fire at Provide Comfort aircraft on routine patrol over northern Iraq.

February 26, 1993: World Trade Center bombing. Later (Feb/March 1995) Ramzi Yousef, "mastermind" of the attack, is captured in Pakistan and extradited to the United States. A search of his former residences leads investigators to believe he is financially linked to Osama bin Laden. Also, he had stayed at a bin Laden financed guest house while in Pakistan. Bin Laden himself would neither confirm nor deny a connection when asked in a 1998 interview, stating only that he did not know Yousef prior to the event.

April 9, 1993: Iraqi AAA sites fire on Provide Comfort aircraft near the Saddam Dam in northern Iraq.

April 18, 1993: An Iraqi radar site illuminates two Provide Comfort Wild Weasels flying north of the 36th parallel. The site was south of the parallel. One of the Weasels, an F-4G, fires an AGM-88 at the tracking radar and destroys it.

June - July 1993: Iraq refuses to allow UNSCOM to install remote-controlled monitoring cameras at two missile engine test stands.

June 18, 1993: Statement by the President of the Council, expressing deep concern over Iraq’s de facto refusal to accept UNSCOM installation of monitoring devices and warning Iraq of the serious consequences of material breaches of resolution 687 (1991) (S/25970). Subsequently, Iraq agrees to the installation of the monitoring cameras.

June 26, 1993: Retaliating for Iraqi complicity in an attempt to assassinate former President Bush, the US fired 23 cruise missiles at the headquarters of the Iraqi secret police in Baghdad.

June 29, 1993: A Southern Watch F-4G fires an anti-radar missile at a AAA site after the Iraqis illuminated it and another F-4G patrolling the southern no-fly zone.

July 29, 1993: In separate incidents, two US Navy EA-6Bs, part of Joint Task Force Southwest Asia, fired anti-radar missiles at Iraqi SAM sites after being illuminated by the sites' surveillance radars.

August 19, 1993: Two Provide Comfort F-16s report possible SA-3 launches west of Mosul and respond with cluster bombs. Two F-15s dropped four laser-guided bombs on the site an hour later.

September 16, 1993: Tripartite report by the Executive Chairman, the leader of the IAEA Action Team and the Director of the Iraqi Military Industrialization Corporation on measures to implement the plan for ongoing monitoring and verification (S/26451).

October 3, 1993: Somalia - "Blackhawk Down" - the most well known of several incidents resulting in loss of life in the humanitarian mission. Casualties and graphic images of Mogadishu residents desecrating the body of an American soldier would ultimately lead to withdrawal of US forces. Only years later would the role of Osama bin Laden's organization in Somalia become known.

October 12, 1993: Second tripartite report on steps to resolve outstanding issues and to implement ongoing monitoring and verification (S/26571).

November 26, 1993: Iraq accepts resolution 715 (1991) and the plans for ongoing monitoring and verification.

December 21, 1993: Iraqi troops fire on a patrol from CTF Provide Comfort's Military Coordination Center near Faydah in northern Iraq. The patrol was within the security zone established 22 May 1991; the Iraqis were over a mile away and outside the security zone. Baghdad denies Western reports of the incident as "fabricated and baseless."

1994

1994: UNSCOM completes the destruction of Iraq's known chemical weapons and production equipment. IAEA teams largely complete their mandate to neutralize Iraq's nuclear program, including the destruction of facilities Iraq had not even declared to inspectors. In Operation Southern Watch the first nine months of 1994 pass without incident. Due to this relative calm Joint Task Force - South West Asia (JTF-SWA) begins a force drawdown with the redeployment of fighter aircraft and other USCENTAF assets to the US from Saudi Arabia.

January 1994: Hungary, Romania, and Bulgaria grant overflight rights for 11 USAFE F-16s deploying from Spangdahlem Air Base, Germany, to Incirlik Air Base, Turkey, shaving 2 hours off of the normal flight time. The flight marks the first time US Air Force fighters had flown over these countries on an operational mission since World War II.

February 10, 1994: Joint statement dated 5 February 1994, by the Deputy Prime Minister of Iraq and the Executive Chairman of the Special Commission regarding significant progress made since July 1993 in both the political and technical areas, and expressing readiness to expedite the process establishing ongoing monitoring and verification (S/1994/151).

March 25, 1994: American troops complete their withdrawal from Somalia following a largely unsuccessful fifteen-month mission. 20,000 U.N. troops are left behind to keep the peace and facilitate "nation building." They too would withdraw in March 1995.

April 14, 1994: A pair of UH-60 Blackhawk helicopters are shot down by 2 US Air Force F-15's flying out of Incirlik, Turkey. The F-15s misidentified the Black Hawks as Iraqi Hinds violating the "no fly" zone. All 6 crew members aboard the helicopters are killed, along with 20 passengers, including UN observers in the Provide Comfort Zone and military officers from Britain, France and Turkey.

April 29, 1994: Joint Statement issued by the Chairman of the Special Commission, the Head of the IAEA Action Team and the Deputy Prime Minister of Iraq regarding progress made, in particular in regard to the establishment of the ongoing monitoring and verification, and recording Iraq’s assurances that it would respect the rights and privileges of the Commission and the IAEA and the Commission’s and the IAEA’s commitment to exercise their rights and privileges in a manner respecting Iraq’s legitimate concerns regarding sovereignty, independence, security and dignity (S/1994/520)

May 1994 Rivalry between Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) & Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK), coalition partners for 5 years, breaks out into open conflict in Northern Iraq. Fighting continues until September and intermittently thereafter.

June 1994: UNSCOM completes the destruction of large quantities of chemical warfare agents and precursors and their production equipment.

September/October 1994: Saddam Hussein, upset about continued U.N. sanctions, sets a deadline of 10 October 1994 for the implementation of paragraph 22 of resolution 687 and threatens to stop cooperation with UNSCOM. Iraq moves a significant number of armored vehicles and mechanized infantry troops to Southern Iraq and to the Kuwaiti border. The United States deploys a carrier group, warplanes and 54,000 troops to the Persian Gulf region (Operation VIGILANT WARRIOR).

October 8, 1994: Statement by the President of the Security Council, underlining the complete unacceptability of Iraqi statements threatening to withdraw cooperation with UNSCOM and grave concern over reports regarding the deployment of troops in Iraq in the direction of Kuwait (S/PRST/1994/58).

October 15, 1994: Security Council resolution 949 demands that Iraq "cooperate fully" with UNSCOM and that it withdraw all military units deployed to southern Iraq to their original positions. The resolution prohibits Iraq from using its forces to threaten neighboring countries or U.N. operations in Iraq, and from deploying units south of the 32nd parallel or from otherwise enhancing its military capabilities in Southern Iraq.

October 15, 1994: Letter from the Representatives of Iraq and of the Russian Federation, transmitting a Joint Communique containing Iraq’s announcement that it had withdrawn its troops to rearguard positions (S/1994/1173).

1995

March 1995: Iraq provides the second Full, Final and Complete Disclosures of its prohibited biological and chemical weapons programs.

March 2, 1995: The last U.N. peacekeepers are evacuated from Somalia.

April 14, 1995: The UN Security Council passes Resolution 986, which allows Iraq to buy food and medicine with money raised from the sale of its oil. Iraq will eventually accept the resolution - over one year later.

July 1, 1995: As a result of UNSCOM's investigations and in the light of irrefutable evidence, Iraq admits for the first time the existence of an offensive biological weapons program but denies weaponization.

July 1995: Iraq threatens to end all cooperation with UNSCOM and the IAEA if there is no progress towards the lifting of sanctions and the oil embargo by 31 August 1995.

August 1995: Iraq provides the third Full, Final and Complete Disclosure for its prohibited biological weapons program.

August 8, 1995: General Hussein Kamel, Minister of Industry and Minerals and former Director of Iraq's Military Industrialization Corporation, with responsibility for all of Iraq's weapons programmes, defects from Iraq to Jordan. Iraq claims that Hussein Kamel had hidden from UNSCOM and the IAEA important information on the prohibited weapons programs. Iraq withdraws its third biological Full, Final and Complete Disclosure and admits a far more extensive biological warfare program than previously admitted, including weaponization. Iraq also admits having achieved greater progress in its efforts to indigenously produce long-range missiles than had previously been declared. Iraq provides UNSCOM and the IAEA with large amounts of documentation, hidden on a chicken farm ostensibly by Hussein Kamel, related to its prohibited weapons programs which subsequently leads to further disclosures by Iraq concerning the production of the nerve agent VX and Iraq's development of a nuclear weapon. Iraq also informs UNSCOM that the deadline to halt its cooperation is withdrawn.

Kamil is Saddam Hussein's son-in-law; he fled Iraq with his wife, another of Saddam's daughters, and her husband - Saddam Kamil, brother of Hussein Kamil. Months later the Kamil brothers would return to Iraq and be shot dead. The most commonly reported story is that Saddam tricked them into returning by assuring them all was forgiven, but a former employee of the Defense Inteligence Agency wrote in response to a PBS broadcast of the story:

In the discussion of Hussein Kamil, it was stated that he provided important intelligence information on the Iraqi chemical and biological weapons programs. Actually, he provided us with very little information - he was demanding too much money for what he was willing to provide. Assuming that he was telling us everything, the Iraqi government decided to release over 10,000 documents on these programs to the United Nations Special Commission, detailing volumes not only on the chemical and biological programs, but their ballistic missile systems as well.

As far as the return to Iraq, Hussein Kamil and his brother Sadddam Kamil had no illusions about their fate. The message from Saddam Hussein was not that all was to be forgiven - this was merely a public relations ploy. They were told that unless they returned - with their wives (Saddam's daughters) - their entire extended families would be killed. Obviously, the two brothers believed that Saddam would do just that, and returned knowing full well what awaited them.

As you said in the program, the daughters were separated at the border by Saddam's oldest son. The two brothers were killed in a firefight with the Special Security Organization - not members of their family as reported by the Iraqi press. Their bodies were dragged through the streets of Baghdad as a warning to those who would defy Saddam.

August 20, 1995: Iraq gives UNSCOM 680,000 pages of printed documents, computer disks, videotapes, microfilm and microfiche relating to its banned weapons programs.

October 15, 1995: Referendum in Iraq - Saddam Hussein wins and will remain president for another 7 years.

November 1995: Iraq provides second Full, Final and Complete Disclosure of its prohibited missile program.

November-December 1995: UNSCOM: The Government of Jordan intercepts a large shipment of high-grade missile components destined for Iraq. Iraq denies that it had sought to purchase these components, although it acknowledged that some of them were in Iraq. UNSCOM conducts an investigation, which confirms that Iraqi authorities and missile facilities have been involved in the acquisition of sophisticated guidance and control components for proscribed missiles. UNSCOM retrieves additional similar missile components from the Tigris river, which had been allegedly disposed of there by Iraqis involved in the covert acquisition. (More: Washington Post report October 1998)

The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists Nov/Dec 1998:

Acting on an intelligence tip, on November 10, 1995 the Jordanian government intercepted a shipment of 240 Russian missile-guidance gyroscopes and accelerometers bound for Iraq. The next month, between December 16 and 30, a team of Iraqi scuba divers were directed by UNSCOM to dredge the Tigris River near Baghdad. They pulled out more than 200 additional missile instruments and components. These parts, many bearing clearly identifiable serial numbers in Cyrillic script, included gas pressure regulators, accelerometers, GIMBAL position indicators, and gyroscopes. (1) These items, like those recovered earlier in Jordan, had come from dismantled Russian submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SS-N-18s) designed to deliver nuclear warheads to targets more than 4,000 miles away.

UN inspector Scott Ritter is involved in this event. Some accounts credit Israeli intelligence with providing the initial tip. Note the date - 3 years later - of the news accounts of the investigations. By that time (November 1998) the situation in Iraq had deteriorated to the point that military action seemed imminent.

November 13, 1995: The Islamic Movement of Change plants a bomb in a Riyadh military compound that kills one U.S. citizen, several foreign national employees of the U.S. Government, and more than 40 others.

Zarqawi - Dead Again?

[Greyhawk]

Yet another report that Abu Zarqawi has bought the farm.

Meanwhile his family is reported to have condemned him following his claims of responsibility for a suicide attack last week on three hotels that left more than 60 people dead, including celebrants at a wedding party.

My guess? He's living in his mom's basement. Participating in a suicide bombing isn't his style.

Update: Iraq the Model with news from (where else?) Iraq.

Kevin Sites in Fallujah

[Greyhawk]

One year after the battle (and his own notorious part therein) Kevin Sites is back in Fallujah, where he recently interviewed U.S. Marine Col. David Berger, commander of the 8th Regimental Combat Team there:

A year ago, U.S. Marines were storming Fallujah in a fierce bid to wrestle the Iraqi city from insurgent control.

Today, Marines are training Iraqi forces to stand on their own. The top Marine commander in Fallujah predicts a large part of that task -- handing over the job of securing the city to Iraqi police -- could be done in six months.
<...>
BERGER: "No, not at all. It isn't at that kind of tipping point where if things don't improve in another month it's going to go south, no not at all. The two biggest reasons are the [Iraqi] army and the Iraqi police. We've spent a long time working with them -- especially the army. They're firmly entrenched here, people know, and they have a good confidence level.

"And the police are also a big factor here. ... There are a thousand, maybe 1,100 police and they are on the streets every day, 24/7. The people very much trust them and look to them for security, and I think in another six months [the Iraqi police] will be in control of the whole city themselves. And the army and the rest of the military forces will continue to push out."

SITES: "You're saying in six months the police will be able to control the whole city?"

BERGER: "If they keep on going like they're going, yes."

Many of his posts include video. Don't miss his look at Fallujah "then and now".

He's doing a great job conveying the cost of freedom too. Here he tells the story of Pvt. Carl Gaskin of Knoxville, Tennessee:

"I joined the Marines after seeing the Nick Berg execution," Gaskin says of the 26-year-old U.S. contractor who was beheaded in Iraq in 2004. "I saw it on the Internet and it just infuriated me. I thought the least I can do is give four years of my life."

Gaskin was a brick mason before he signed up a year ago. He says he didn't even tell his wife first. Though she was upset, he still feels he did the right thing.

"It was my duty," he says, "even beyond my family. God, country, family -- in that order."

But now he's learned his wife has melanoma. Six years earlier, he witnessed her go through another bout with cancer.

"I try not to think about my personal problems too much here. I can't think about it too much, otherwise I'll get people killed," Gaskin says.

When the shooting stopped last year the media abandoned Fallujah. It's great to see Sites return for the rest of the story. It can't be easy - he got a bad rap last year, but most of it was due to media interpretation of what he reported, not his actual report. (My initial response here and here and a more recent followup here). But with Michael Yon currently in the States, Sites is consistently producing the best reporting you'll find from the "Hot Zone".

Blogging News

[Greyhawk]

NPR's This American Life will present "Strangers In a Strange Land" this week - "stories about what happens when you land in a whole new world". Among other examples will be Colby Buzzell reading from his book My War.

They also make this recommendation on their home page:

To find more military blogs, we recommend: The Mudville Gazette's daily "Dawn Patrol" and Milblogging.com which features a database of military bloggers.

Nice to see Mrs. G's efforts getting that kind of notice.

Likewise the Milblogging.com site - a convenient utility for those looking for milblogs in specific categories. Also the home of the 2005 milbloggies, an opportunity for readers to recognize their favorite milblogs.

On the topic of awards, Wizbang has launched the 2005 Web Log Awards, with multiple categories including milblogs. Nominations are currently being taken. There's a "Best New Blog" category too - you don't have to be an established "big shot" to be in the show.

Open Post

[Greyhawk] And be sure to vist the good folks at No End But Victory!

A Brief History of a Long War (Iraq, 1990-2003) / 2000-2003

[Greyhawk]

Previous:

Introduction (1990-1991)

1991-1997

1998

1999

*****

2000 - 2003

With friends like this...

[Greyhawk]

The Honorable John P Murtha, D Pa, is concerned for me:

Because we in Congress are charged with sending our sons and daughters into battle, it is our responsibility, our OBLIGATION to speak out for them. That’s why I am speaking out.

Okay, he's concerned for all the troops, and because of that I'm willing to help him out.

In his speech demanding our immediate surrender in Iraq he cited this statistic on casualties over there: "Over 15,500 have been seriously injured".

He's been visiting them in the hospitals, and that's awesome. But he may have gotten that bit of numerical intel from British sources - specifically the UK's Telegraph, who recently claimed

While much was made of the US death toll recently reaching 2,000, little has been said of the 15,000 who have returned home mutilated.

You see, that's not quite right.

There have indeed been over 15,500 wounded. But of those, 8375 returned to duty within 72 hours - so although those wounds weren't funny perhaps those wounds weren't quite serious either. Still, 7347 troops have been wounded severely enough to require over 72 hours recuperation. Furthermore, 2,791 Soldiers were wounded seriously enough to require evacuation to Stateside Army Medical facilities. And 280 amputees have been treated in Army facilities as a result of the war. A lot of unscrupulous types who just want to pretend to "support the troops" ignore these facts in favor of the less correct (and more impressive) claim that 15,500 troops have been seriously wounded, or maimed, or mutilated. The real numbers are big enough - I just can't understand why some feel the need to pad them.

After learning and sharing accurate information, there's another great service The Honorable John P Murtha (D, Pa) can perform for those wounded heroes. It seems a lot of unscrupulous types are actually trying to use them for political gain. Shocking, but true, and you can read about it here. Given the amount of attention he gets in the press The Honorable Mr Murtha could certainly help expose these sorts of people for what they are.

Anyhow, I think it's important for serious guys like Representative Murtha of Pennsylvania who support the troops above partisan political gain to spend a few extra minutes every once in a while uncovering the readily available facts. Otherwise, unscrupulous opponents might level charges that they're manipulating those facts, or even lying to drag the country out of the war.

The Forgotten Decade

[Greyhawk]

I didn't realize that people were still using the term "boogie" in the late '90s - seems more like a '70s thing. But hey, that was a long time ago and my memory for such details isn't all that great.

A lot of folks are having memory troubles these days.

An Unexpected Headline...

[Greyhawk]

...can be found over this surprising story from Knight-Ridder:

BAGHDAD, Iraq - U.S. troops' discovery of 173 mostly Sunni Arab men beaten and malnourished in a secret Interior Ministry jail has sent a jolt of optimism through Baghdad's disaffected Sunni minority.

"This is like a dream - the American forces free Iraqi prisoners tortured by the government?" said Huthayfa Mohammed, 20, a Sunni Arab who can't find his brother after Iraqi police detained him. "This is brand new."
<...>
Like Mohammed, much of the Sunni Arab minority has taken heart in the recent discovery, which was announced Tuesday. The idea that the U.S. military may be trying to help the Sunnis has given them an instant boost in confidence that the parliamentary elections in December could make them players in the next government.
<...>
The U.S. military's discovery of the men is "an indication that the Americans would like to show the Iraqis how they are really trying to handle the whole situation in an even-handed policy and make them feel more confident in the American policy," said Dr. Hassan Bazzaz, a Sunni professor of political science and international affairs at Baghdad University.

CNN reports:

Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari said Tuesday the prisoners were found malnourished and possibly tortured by government security forces at a Baghdad lockup. He has launched an Iraqi-led investigation with U.S. assistance.
<...>
Meanwhile, Iraq's acting human rights minister, Nermin Othman Hassan, said the ministry was aware of a number of claims of torture and abuse at detention centers and that a number of investigations had already been launched

"It was not only shocking for us -- it made me angry, its not only a surprise, its a danger, they must do something very quickly to punish those that are involved," she said.

"We are focusing on building a new Iraq -- this is opposite to our strategy, when we are speaking about democracy and human rights, those things must not be done."

From the Front

[Greyhawk]

From Sgt Hook:

I received an email from a mother whose son is currently fighting in Iraq with the 101st Airborne Division. He and his platoon have penned a message to the American public that is a little different from the message we are getting via the MSM. He asked his mom to help get this message out and she asked me. Here it from the soldiers on the ground…

Read the rest here.

War of the Words

[Greyhawk]

You might have missed this quote from Iraqi Vice President Adel Abdul Mahdi last weekend:

The United States and coalition forces will likely reduce the number of troops in Iraq next year, Iraqi Vice President Adel Abdul Mahdi said on Saturday.
<...>
"I've discussed the pullout possibilities with Secretary Rumsfeld and we agree on the future course. We are optimistic about the buildup of Iraqi forces to cope with the situation," he said.

"We have been preparing ourselves, politically, for a pullout of the troops. We have a very solid political situation and we don't want to have a security vacuum of any kind," Mahdi added.

He was speaking in Detroit, Michigan at the time, but his words went mostly unreported in major media.

Likewise President of Iraq Jalal Talabani's comments in Britain this week received scant notice:

British troops could leave Iraq by the end of next year, Iraqi President Jalal Talabani said on Sunday. “We don’t want British forces forever in Iraq. Within one year – I think at the end of 2006 – Iraqi troops will be ready to replace British forces in the South,” Talabani told ITV’s Jonathan Dimbleby program.

Talabani also said, however, that an immediate withdrawal of foreign forces would be a “catastrophe” for Iraq and would lead to civil war. Iraqis are working on training their own soldiers and police to take full control of security of their country and fight a Sunni Arab insurgency that has killed thousands of people since 2003’s US-led invasion.

Don't worry if you hadn't heard these statements before, you're still getting half the story. Because unlike the leaders of that war-torn land, the Honorable John P. Murtha's (D Pa) comments on Iraq have been well publicized:

I believe before the Iraqi elections, scheduled for mid December, the Iraqi people and the emerging government must be put on notice that the United States will immediately redeploy.
<...>
Our military has done everything that has been asked of them, the U.S. can not accomplish anything further in Iraq militarily. IT IS TIME TO BRING THEM HOME.

Many feel Murtha's words are especially significant because he voted for the war - before he turned against it. Others around the globe (including most terrorists) might interpret that call for surrender as confirmation of the al Qaeda gamble that Americans can't endure a long war. If so we can only hope that validation won't encourage those who are killing people who are guilty only of attending wedding receptions.

Meanwhile, according to the AP, Bill Clinton also has a message for the world:

Former President Clinton told Arab students Wednesday the United States made a "big mistake" when it invaded Iraq, stoking the partisan debate back home over the war.
<...>
"Saddam is gone. It's a good thing, but I don't agree with what was done," Clinton told students at a forum at the American University of Dubai.

A message to which Iraqi blogger Hammmorabi responds - harshly:

The world without Saddam is not only better place for the Iraqis but for the whole world. Those who are fighting the changes towards democracy in Iraq are Al-Qaeda terrorists and the other extremists and their supporters in Syria. BC is no different from them. BC certainly failed to remove Saddam and failed to prevent the terrorists but was successful in killing more Iraqis by his rockets and by Saddam hands. BC is a supporter of the dictator regimes in the Middle East indeed.

Strong words - but it's his country at stake, after all. And the Iraqis have seen the result of premature America withdrawal once already - they are more than entitled to be wary.

Of course, what quotes like these really remind us is that the first Wednesday in November is the traditional day when certain politicians stop pretending to be "moderate" and start seriously pandering to the base. Further clarification of their positions (what they "really meant", or apologies for being "tricked") can come later - for now the campaign funds need replenishment, fast, and consequences be damned.

There is a difference this year - those words will be noted worldwide, and remembered.

Speaking of remembering, Here's a notable quote from Iraqi blogger Alaa, from immediately prior to last January's elections there:

Moreover, no one should expect that the security situation and strife would somehow improve after the elections; it is more likely to intensify. This is an unfinished war; the Saddamists and their allies have fully regrouped and rearmed and are being very well financed and supported. The brave American people have given President Bush the mandate to finish this war despite the painful sacrifices and material cost. The Iraqi people are up in arms through the political groupings, new army, N.G. and various security forces and are suffering the greater part of the sacrifice. Despite all the snags and faltering, these forces are getting bigger and stronger and should be supported and nurtured until they can bear the full responsibility; this is the only viable "exit strategy" available. In fact, we do not like this phrase, for what is required is a "victory strategy". This war must be fought to the bitter end, and there is only one outcome acceptable both to us and to you: Total and Complete Victory. Anything else is completely unthinkable.

I recall that one because I first read it while I was in Baghdad, and it will always stand as a reminder to me of who's on my side.

Rolling On Down the Road

[Greyhawk]

Stephen Spruiell reports from a forum bringing together Marines and media representatives. Well worth a read for many reasons. But those who recall last week's 60 Minutes story on Route Irish (Debunked here.) will especially appreciate Stephen's relay of this comment from a CBS producer in attendance:

To be fair to the CBS and NBC guys, they were both good panelists and gave the Marines useful suggestions for dealing with the press. The CBS guy admitted that he was outraged by a recent "60 Minutes" piece about Route Irish, the once-deadly road to the Baghdad airport which the military has since secured. "60 Minutes," which had videotaped the segment prior to the security improvements, didn't bother to report in depth on the recent progress.

Admittedly it's easy to express "outrage" about media undermining the military when you're addressing a group of Marines. How this producer channels his outrage will reveal whether or not this is simply an example of adjusting your message for the current audience. (Or "pandering" if you prefer a harsher tone.) As I've noted here before in several examples of media types admitting they have a problem, that's a great first step, not the end of the road. In this case, that audience likely expects actions beyond words.

Or maybe that's something they can only expect from fellow GIs.

Read it all.

TA DA !!!!

[Mrs Greyhawk]

There are some issues we're still working on. Load time is still an issue because we have a lot of ... well... stuff.
But what to get rid of? The Art, if so which ones are your favorites or least favorite.

Or the blogroll, should we move MilBlog Ring to the MilBlog page only? MilBlog home page will soon have it's own sub-blog soon anyways.

Those are the main causes we can think of. Any other suggestions?

We're still working with trackback issues. We have gotten some good advice though, Thanks.

So what do you think? Honest opinions only.

Mudville Construction - Hard hats only! Updated!

[Mrs Greyhawk]

Greyhawk and I will have a rare occasion where we can sit at the computer at the same time, so we're going to take this opportunity to put on our geek hats and pretend we know what the heck we are doing and do some construction on Mudville. We'll be upgrading, changing the site a little bit, playing with things we probably shouldn't (CSS) but this will hopefully help with load time issues, trackback issues and a few others I'm sure we'll find along the way.

I can just hear us now; G - Aaack! What did you do, MG - I don't know, I don't know... but I'm sure I saved before.
This should be as fun as taking sharp sticks with splinters and violently jabbing them into my eyes.

I'm sure most of you are shocked and amazed to find out that Greyhawk and I are not web designers nor technicians. I know, I know it's hard to believe, we had you all fooled. So this is a warning that you may see some weird and funky things happening.

So grab a chair, a beer and just sit back and have a good laugh.

UPDATE 1: For those with trackback issues: Those that are not getting an error message but still are not seeing your track back, it's because for some reason they are going in to the "junk" folder and waiting to be approved. You should see them now. We're hoping to find a config for this in the MT Static File. Anyone with info on this, pease email.

Those that are recieving and error message "sending trackbacks too quickly" we're still clueless on this. Anyone with insight on this will be greatly appreciated. We're using MT 3.2.

UPDATE 2: We've temporarily removed the Blogrolls. Trying to find out what is making Mudville load so slow. Next goes the Art.

Queen of Hearts

[Mrs Greyhawk]

When you think of queen of hearts, who comes to mind? Holly Aho of course. She has the biggest heart and is the queen at getting things done.

So go to Aaron's Deck O Bloggers and give her a vote.


She even designed her own card. A Holly Aho original

Open Post

[Mrs Greyhawk]

Still much construction work ongoing. This post is a test of trackback system.

Jarhead

[Greyhawk]

Glenn Reynolds rounds up reviews of the movie Jarhead. The verdict is not good for the filmmakers.

I haven't seen the movie, but some Marine milbloggers have, and they mostly liked what they saw.

Doc Russia : "It is the most accurate portrayal of life in the Marine Corps as a Marine grunt that I have ever seen. Bar none."

Daniel, USMC: "It's probably the best depiction of Marine Corps life that I've seen on film"

Courtesy of Grim's Hall, where in another post we're reminded that life is harder if you're stupid.

Bruce Willis, Michael Yon, and the Deuce-Four in Iraq

[Greyhawk]

From The Corner, Bruce Willis and Michael Yon on Iraq, the media, and a possible movie version of the Deuce-Four story. The two appeared on MSNBC's "Rita Cosby: Live and Direct" - I've added hyperlinks to the transcript below.

COSBY: Getting stories out of Iraq is not easy. Bruce Willis found that out firsthand when he went over to visit U.S. troops serving in Armed Forces.

Tonight, we are rejoined by an independent blogger who is bringing back some amazing pictures and stories from Iraq, Michael Yon. And also again with us is actor Bruce Willis, who is back with us on the phone.

It's great to have both of you here. You know, Bruce, I want to start with you. Last night, we talked a little bit about what's happening over in Iraq. You said the media isn't covering the full story. What are we missing?

BRUCE WILLIS, ACTOR: I am baffled to understand why the things that I saw happening in Iraq, really good things happening in Iraq, are not being reported on.

Michael has been over there, was embedded with the members of the Deuce Four, you know, the battalion that actually won the battle for Mosul, that -- Michael, correct me if I'm wrong -- these are the guys who allowed the election to take place, the election that happened just, you know, a couple months ago, to take place, which is, you know, just a monumental thing. And it's not being reported on.

COSBY: You know, Bruce, you know, let's face it. A lot of celebrities have not been over there. A lot of folks in Hollywood have been very critical of what's happening in the war. Do you think, if a lot of your colleagues in Hollywood went over there, saw it for themselves, they'd have a different opinion?

WILLIS: I absolutely think that. I think we live in a global world. And I think that -- I think America is just too isolationist.

And a lot of big choices are being made. You know, to say this is not our fight, when this is the same fight that this country fought 60 years ago and the entire world fought 60 years ago, for the same kind of terrorism, the same kind of thing.

This is not a new war. This is not a new kind of fighting. This is the same fight. And it's back. And it's time for it to stop.

COSBY: You know, we've seen some of these amazing pictures that we're showing here.

You know, Michael, there's a photo I want to show of a soldier and a baby girl, in particular. Here it is. Why is this photo so meaningful, Michael?

MICHAEL YON, EMBEDDED BLOGGER: Well, I shot that photo on a day when a suicide or homicide car bomber ran into one of our Stryker vehicles, injured a couple of our soldiers, and, unfortunately, there were a lot of children who had crowded around to wave at our people.

And the attackers had every opportunity to just wait a couple of blocks and attack our guys later, without the children being around, but instead chose to attack straight through the children.

And Major Bieger, who is in the photo, found the little girl -- her name is Farah -- and decided he wanted to get her to the hospital as quickly as possible.

And so he picked her up, wrapped her in a blanket, and loaded her into one of our vehicles and started to take her to the hospital as fast as possible. And unfortunately, little Farah died en route.

We went back to that neighborhood the next day, and the people there actually welcomed us with open arms. They welcomed us into their homes.

We got into a firefight there again the next day. And the people in that part of the city began to give us more and more information about the terrorists until it got to the point where -- it's very dangerous to be a terrorist now in Mosul, because...

COSBY: You know, it's incredible to hear these stories, Michael. I mean, it's amazing what you went through firsthand.

And, you know, Bruce, you know, as you're hearing these stories from Michael, I understand why your jaw just dropped when you saw these pictures.

Are you thinking, maybe at some point, you know, playing a role with the Deuce Four? Is that something maybe you'd consider?

WILLIS: We are talking about that right now. But it's not really about the film. It's about these guys.

It's about these guys who do what they are asked to do for very little money to defend and fight for what they consider to be freedom.

And it's not just for this country. It's for the world. It is time for terrorism to stop. And the United States is the country that can stop it. And that's what they're doing over there.

And there is -- I have no idea why this country is not getting the information that Michael Yon has, you know, access to, is, you know, showing people. It's just not getting out, and it's baffling.

COSBY: You know, Bruce, in 2003, you admirably offered $1 million for the capture of Saddam. I have to ask you, because just last night we had on our show so many of those pictures, those horrific pictures of what happened in Jordan.

And right now, we've got three thorns in our side. We've got Zawahiri, of course, who is Osama bin Laden`s right-hand guy. You've got Osama bin Laden himself. And then you've got al-Zarqawi, the Iraqi who everyone believes is behind the mastermind of the attack, just those horrible attacks on three hotels just last night.

Are you prepared even right now to maybe offer $1 million for one of them?

WILLIS: Well, that was a conversation I was having with members of the military. I've since been told that military men and women cannot accept any reward for the job that they're doing. It was more about my passion for trying to stop Saddam Hussein.

COSBY: Would you offer that if somebody else, let's say a civilian, is willing to turn one of them in and finally put this to an end?

WILLIS: Yes, I would. Yes, I would.

I want to live in a world, and so do the Iraqi people want to live in a world, where they can move from their homes to the market and not have to fear being killed. And, I mean, doesn't everybody want that? Who doesn't want that?

COSBY: You bet.

And, Michael, I'm going to give you just a few seconds. What are you most proud of? I mean, your pictures just really show the heart and soul there.

YON: I'd actually like to say something about Bruce Willis. He's one of the men who has had the courageous to stand behind the troops. And the troops absolutely respect and love Bruce Willis.

He came out to the Deuce Four redeployment ball in Seattle. And I wonder if he realizes just how much they appreciated that. And it's just so good to see a man of his stature throwing his entire weight behind our people who are in harm's way.

COSBY: It's terrific.

WILLIS: Thank you so much, Michael.

COSBY: And hats off to both of you guys, not just Bruce. And, Bruce, thank you so much for being with us.

And, Michael, keep up the great work you're doing. Those pictures are amazing. And please come back, both of you, anytime. Thank you.

WILLIS: Thanks very much. Keep it up, Mike.

YON: Thanks, Bruce.

WILLIS: OK, buddy.

COSBY: Thank you guys very much.

YON: Bye, Rita.

COSBY: Thank you.

Willis spoke at the Deuce-Four's redeployment, an event Yon has promised will be covered soon on his blog.

Desecration Day

[Greyhawk]

Flags of our fathers?

The town of Waterville Maine celebrated Veteran's Day this year by throwing five of it's veterans in jail. The group was attempting to remove 2,000 white flags planted at the Veterans Memorial Park there. Waterville Police Chief John Morris said "I warned them, very carefully, that they were not allowed to do destructive behavior on these flags. If they did, we would have to ask them to leave the park. If they refused to leave the park then we'd have to arrest them, and that's what happened."

A white flag is internationally known as a symbol of surrender. Arne Springorum, 33, a local geologist, acted as spokesperson for the "peace group" that planted the flags:

''That was an interpretation we never anticipated," Springorum said. ''We thought of several different colors, but black seemed drastic and represented death. Red seemed like it represented a bloody memorial. A white flag seemed appropriate, because it was the color of truth."

''I thought we needed something permanent to remind people about the cost of war," Springorum said. ''I thought the really appropriate place for it would be the veterans park, but I understood that [the veterans group] feel some ownership of that park."

The five veterans were booked at police headquarters and released after paying $40 to the bail commissioner.

''Frankly I'd be embarrassed if my son saw it like that," said Michael Williams Sr., an Air Force veteran whose son is a sergeant in the Army. ''They don't need to remind me with 2,000 flags that 2,000 soldiers are dead."

Williams was one of five arrested Thursday evening and charged with trespassing after they attempted to rip the flags from the ground, despite repeated warnings from police.

...Williams, 58, a retired bus driver, looked out over the flags yesterday afternoon, he had to look down. Not because he was having trouble keeping his emotions in check, but to make sure his feet didn't cross from the sidewalk onto the grass. Williams said the police chief warned him that if he stepped foot in the park, he would be arrested again. Williams said he and the others were released, and they are scheduled to appear Jan. 11 in Waterville District Court.

The veterans altered the route of their annual parade this year, ending at the local American Legion rather than the park.

Meanwhile, in Boston, the Veteran's Day parade was cancelled altogether:

For the first time in decades - even with soldiers dying abroad daily - Boston had no Veterans Day parade because organizers feared neither crowds nor marchers would come.

?It?s sad to say they?re at the Veterans Day sales and the movie theaters,? said Boston Veterans Services Commissioner Eugene Vaillancourt.

But a group calling itself "Veterans for Peace" claims it was their efforts that killed the parade

The parade was canceled. In its place was a ceremony on City Hall Plaza that quickly turned into a political spat about US military involvement in Iraq. And, just as that war has polarized civilians, it split the American Legion and a veterans' antiwar group, who offered sharply differing accounts of why the parade was called off.

Officials from the American Legion, which hosts the parade each year, said they canceled this year's march because fewer and fewer people have lined the parade route in recent years.

''We have been marching around Boston for years and people have not really shown up," said Jake Comer, a past national commander of the American Legion and one of the parade's organizers. ''We are seeing more people here than we have in years."

But representatives of Veterans for Peace, an antiwar group, said the parade was canceled to keep them from protesting.

''The American Legion does not want us to be in the parade, so they canceled it," said Tony Flaherty, a former naval officer. ''No one wants to hear about peace."

Attendance at the Boston ceremony, however, supports the parade organizer's claim. Only 150 people showed up.

Protesters stood in the back of the crowd, carrying signs that read ''Support our troops, bring them home" and ''No War."
<...>
While American Legion officials tried to downplay tensions, Veterans for Peace members grew increasingly hostile and began booing speakers midway through the ceremony.

The "Veterans for Peace" group had less success in Milwaukee:

MILWAUKEE -- Organizers of the Milwaukee Veterans Day Parade scheduled Saturday have banned the local Veterans For Peace chapter from the event, saying the group's political activism violates the spirit of the parade to honor veterans.

''I will not allow anything political,'' Mary Ann D'Aquisto, president of Veterans Day Parade of Milwaukee Inc., said Tuesday.

She appeared at a news conference called by John Zutz, a leader of the local peace group, to denounce the action.

''You're trying to use our parade to further your political agenda,'' D'Aquisto told Zutz. ''It's a political organization; not a veterans organization.''

The "peace group" leader then revealed more than he might have wanted to about his agenda:

Zutz then grabbed an American flag and suggested that veterans carrying the flags in the parade also would be making political statements.

Kudos to Mary Ann D'Aquisto who responded: "I don't care what you think about the war, President Bush or gays in the military, all we want to do is honor the veterans."

And that is what most Americans did yesterday, as they have for years. But the last word in this story belongs to the father of one of the veterans arrested in Maine:

Malcolm E. Williams, 87, said he wished the police who arrested his son had taken him into custody, too. ''I'm beginning to feel ashamed I even fought for my country," said the World War II veteran, a medic in the Army Air Corps who recalled the many surrender flags he saw in Germany.

Update: The Globe didn't make this clear - the "memorial park" is a cemetery. The "peace group" is called Waterville Area Bridges for Peace and Justice", their web page is here.

Willy Pete

[Greyhawk]

(Note: updated and expanded from original post 2005-11-08 15:47:17)

October, 2004:

Iraq's government yesterday offered the leaders of rebel-held Fallujah a "last" chance to negotiate as an American military commander described the city as a cancer that had to be dealt with.

Iyad Allawi, the Iraqi prime minister, indicated that time was fast running out for those who were harbouring insurgents there.

"This chance could be the last," he said in a statement, imploring "the leaders and notables of Fallujah to use it to find a political solution".

But with military preparations at an advanced stage and American officials suggesting a major offensive could begin next week, there appeared little hope of a deal.

"Fallujah is a cancer," said Maj Gen Richard Natonski, commander of the 1st Marine Division, who would lead any ground attack. "We can't have a sanctuary for the enemy and expect to make progress."

November 2004:

FALLUJAH, Iraq: The U.S. and Iraqi forces who entered this militant stronghold on Monday were prepared for days of fierce street fighting with insurgents who have been building defenses for months.
<...>
Interim Iraqi Prime Minister Ayad Allawi said he had given his approval for the operation, which is being waged by an undisclosed mix of U.S., Iraqi and international forces. He also announced a round-the-clock curfew in Fallujah and in Ramadi, another insurgent stronghold about 40 miles west of here. Iraq is also temporarily closing its borders with Syria and Jordan. Only trucks carrying food and other emergency supplies will be allowed to cross those borders.

"The people of Fallujah have been taken hostage ... and you need to free them from their grip," Allawi told Iraqi soldiers on Monday during a visit to the main U.S. base outside Fallujah.

"May they go to hell!" the soldiers shouted. Allawi replied: "To hell they will go."

"Insurgents" respond:

Falluja's defenders says they will use chemical weapons

Insurgents in the rebel Iraqi city of Falluja claimed yesterday that they had added chemicals to mortar rounds and missiles that they intend to fire at American forces preparing for an all-out assault.

Cell commanders said some of the weapons could cause high-temperature fireballs and others were filled with cyanide.

A Marine speaks:

Summary executions are common. Think about that. Summary executions inside Fallujah happen with sobering frequency. We have been witness to the scene on a number of occasions. Three men are taken from the trunk of a car and are made to walk to a ditch where they are shot. Bodies are found in the Euphrates without heads washed downstream from Fallujah. To date we have been allowed to do nothing.

I have no idea the numbers of beheadings that have occurred in Fallujah since I have been here. I have no idea the number of hostages that have ended up in Fallujah since we have been here. I just don't know that Americans would be able to comprehend the number anyway. Unfortunately, the situation has only gotten worse. There is no hope for any type of reasoned solution with an enemy like this.

Once again, we are being asked by citizens who have fled the city to go in and take the city back. They are willing for us to literally rubble the place in order to kill the terrorists within. Don't get me wrong, there are still many inside the town that support the terrorists and we cannot expect to be thanked publicly if we do take the city. There is a sense of de ja vu with the refugees telling us where their houses are and asking us to bomb them because the muj have taken them over. We heard the same thing in April only to end up letting the people down. Some no doubt have paid with their lives. The "good" people who may ultimately buy into a peaceful and prosperous Iraq are again asking us to do what we know must be done.

In the city:

The battle was an intensely personal, face-to-face fight inside individual rooms where the screams often muted the gunfire and the crawl spaces muted the American technological edge. This meant that a Marine had to burst into a room with his rifle shouldered, steady his barrel on a concealed target, then break the trigger before the screaming lunatic trying to ambush him could manage an aimed shot and a proper "Allahu Akbar!"

If anything, the madness of it just made the Marines angrier. Everything in Fallujah was upside-down. Religious leaders demanded violence. Stray cats feasted on fallen men. Zarqawi had constructed a torture chamber twenty-five feet away from a small amusement park.

December, 2004:

FALLUJAH, Iraq - U.S. Marines have almost completely cleared this former insurgent stronghold of insurgents and weapons, setting the stage for the return of the civilian population before next month's elections, a senior commander said yesterday.
<...>
Sattler cited the Iraqi commander of Fallujah, Lt. Gen. Abdul Khadar, as saying he would like to start bringing some of the 250,000 displaced people back by Dec. 24. By then, measures will be in place to guard against insurgents slipping back into the city, Sattler said.

In the city:What really happened in Fallujah (Complete with slideshow).

Rebuilding

As I traveled through the slowly repopulating city - about half of the original 250,000 are believed to have returned - I saw awesome scenes of destruction. But I also saw thriving markets, stores selling candy and ice cream, and scores of children delighted to see Americans. I did more waving than the beauty queen in the 4th of July parade and the kids squealed with delight when I took their picture - or pretended to.

"We're mostly known for killing the bad guys" says Lt. Col. Harvey Williams, a reserve officer with the Marine 5th Civil Affairs Group. But killing alone can't defeat the insurgency. Win over the populace or lose the war.

November 2005:

Powerful new evidence emerged yesterday that the United States dropped massive quantities of white phosphorus on the Iraqi city of Fallujah during the attack on the city in November 2004, killing insurgents and civilians with the appalling burns that are the signature of this weapon.

Ever since the assault, which went unreported by any Western journalists, rumours have swirled that the Americans used chemical weapons on the city.

Where to begin?

How about with "Ever since the assault, which went unreported by any Western journalists".

The November 2004 attack on Fallujah was undoubtedly the most widely telegraphed punch ever thrown in the history of warfare. I collected and posted links to virtually every major media story done on the events of those days in a series I called "All Eyes on Fallujah" given the intense media scrutiny the battle received. I think you'll have a tough time finding a more comprehensive round up. As I noted at the time

As we've seen in the week since, stories and photos from those many journalists were delivered rapidly and regularly from the frontlines throughout the battle for Fallujah. Regardless of your thoughts on the results of their efforts, the risks taken by these individuals were real, and their results were often outstanding and always worth noting.

Here's the introduction to the series.

Here are links and quotes from 17 articles in the New York Times.

Here's the same for 13 articles in the Washington Post.

When you've finished those check out these 17 stories from the LA TImes.

And then finish with 18 stories from the London papers - The Times, Financial Times, and Telegraph.

As for the rest, the BBC debunks many of the instant myths surrounding this story, noting that White Phosphorous is an incendiary weapon (also used to create smoke screens), not a chemical weapon, and that although the US is not a signatory to any international treaty restricting the use of white phosphorus devices the military has stated they were used to illuminate combat areas at night.

(Update: Thanks to Nicholas in comments - the State Department has this response to accusations of "chemical weapon" use by US forces in Fallujah, pointing out that WP is not classified as a chemical weapon by any treaty. However, the BBC claim that the military said WP was used only for illumination may be in error - I've seen no source specified for the BBC claim. In fact, the updated State Dept link notes the US military has stated long before this Italian documentary story that WP rounds were used against entrenched enemy forces, an authorized use for military purposes.)

And finally, here's your white phosphorous scandal trivia question of the day. Ready?

Which of these quotes comes from Jeff Englehart, the ex-soldier now starring in the Italian documentary about White Phosphorous use in Iraq?

a) ...a former US soldier who served in Falluja, tells of how he heard orders for white phosphorus to be deployed over military radio - and saw the results.

"Burned bodies, burned women, burned children; white phosphorus kills indiscriminately... When it makes contact with skin, then it's absolutely irreversible damage, burning flesh to the bone," he says.

b) "White Phosphorous was used, which is definitely, without a shadow of a doubt a chemical weapon".

c) When I joined the United States Army I swore an oath to "serve and protect the Constitution of the United States", not an ignorant greedy little fuck like George Bush or any of his court jesters in the White House. And by writing and speaking against his policies and his war and his grossly high death tolls, I know in my heart that I am still, to this day, fighting to protect all the constitutional rights that his administration is robbing from us everyday.

d) The Iraqi insurrection, in itself, is what I believe to be an honest rebellion. Because it is a guerrilla war against an illegal occupation enforced by our conventional military force, with far superior weapons and technology, it seems obvious that acts of terrorism are also acts of desperation.

The answer is "all of the above".

You'll find the first two here via the BBC (see the video), and the last at his blog, where he posted under the name hEkLe.

You can find even more quotes in his interview with Socialist Worker Online.

(See also Dennis Edwards and Jimmy Massey)

Open Post

[Greyhawk]

A Brief History of MilBlogs

[Greyhawk]

Veteran's Day 2005 marks the second anniversary of the formation of the MilBlogs Ring, a group that has since had over 500 members join (some, unfortunately, no longer online). For good or bad, the past two years has seen an explosion in first-person accounts of life on the front lines and life on the home front told by those who live it. Besides that notable contribution, in just a few years time military bloggers - whether a part of the ring or not - have helped raise funds for Iraqi children and wounded veterans alike, brought attention to efforts to support the troops, inspired songs, helped launch film projects, and signed book deals.

Still, most simply want to tell the story of their war. But by design or happenstance, in doing so they've written their part of the history of these times, documenting a war that many feel the traditional media has failed to capture, denying others the opportunity to speak falsely "for the troops" without concern of being exposed.

None of that has come without controversy. As the military struggles with the idea of open and instant communication from the battlefield the number of milbloggers choosing to shut down their sites is growing almost as swiftly as the number of those starting new ones. As might be expected, the Army's scrutiny of the bloggers in their midst has resulted in attention to them from other sources - media coverage of milblogs has exploded worldwide.

This Veteran's Day seems an appropriate time to begin documenting the history of the milblogs. I'm proud to have played a part in the above story, but although I was on the scene fairly early Mudville was by no means the first. Several got started before me, and two of those fine folks recently took some time out to help me set the record straight. Sgt Mom of The Daily Brief - the first widely read milblog (originally known as "Sgt Stryker's Daily Brief"), and Smash from Citizen Smash, the first widely read milblog from the war zone (then known as "LT Smash"), graciously contributed their stories to launch this effort.

This is just the start. This history will grow, and will find it's place on the original milblogs page - the page linked via the milblogs banner by every member of the ring. If you're a milblogger, I'll be contacting you.

More about that later, for now, here's Sgt Mom on the early days of The Daily Brief:

*****

Sgt Stryker did an interview about how he got started; basically, he was a Star Wars geek, and liked to play around with the up and coming thing, and after 9/11 got so annoyed with the way the military was portrayed in the media, that he began blogging about it.

Like I said, it was initially supposed to be about Star Wars, but after September 11th, it changed. I was disappointed by the media coverage, and especially the opinion I was hearing, because it seemed anachronistic compared to what had just happened. As I was surfing the web, I happened upon Instapundit. I figured I could do what he was doing, so my blog changed from a Star Wars geek site to Sgt. Stryker's Daily Briefing. I created Stryker to be a purposefully over-the-top character reminiscent of a few people I had seen on Usenet and in the movies. I thought most people would get the joke (and they did), but some actually took it seriously. They didn't realize that the whole Stryker persona was intentionally made to make fun of the mouth-breather types in the military who couldn't rub two brain cells together to spark the fire of intellect. Given that, the content of what I was saying was close to what I actually felt, because I was angry and disappointed at how these professional opinion people, and the media itself, kept going through the same motions as if nothing had happened.

Four years--- it makes it seem like ancient history, doesn't it?

I've only been in it for three years, and I am not a techno geek, in the least. Computers and the internet are tools for me. I'm a writer, with a background in public affairs, (and a total news junkie); I use the tools available. I didn't even know about blogging, or usenet or any of the other internet fora. I started going to the internet for news on 9/11. I spent all day at work reading the updated postings at Slate and Salon, and wandering amongst the comment threads. I started to notice that the Slate "fray" took about six comments before descending into name-calling, inanity or just plain insanity. I think there was a regular commenter who I really thought to be insightful, and he posted that he was starting his own web log, and gave a link... which led to Instapundit...which had Stryker on his blogroll... which I began reading because he was as funny as hell, and wrote about all the stuff that I had put up with for 20 years. After I had been following for a couple of months, Stryker put out an audition call early in August 2002, and I posted for the first time on 8/16/2002. Sparkey, Lionel Mandrake (who already had a blog, and still does) Grognard and a couple of others signed on. Kevin Connors liked my nostalgia stuff about growing up in California, and he asked to be a contributor, six or eight months after that. I looked back in the archives, at who was on our blogroll then as a military blog: DavidMSC, Citizen Smash, Lionel Mandrake (now at Across the Atlantic) and Weck Up To Thees (Fusilier-Pundit).

I carry on with it, because I think the military world has been too insulated from the various media and political elites, and the larger American scene is too damn ignorant about what the military is like. Do you remember what it was like to be in the military in the mid-80ies--- it was like we were freaking invisible. It was even worse in the 1970ies. Ah, well, I think we're making a difference, now!

*****

Anyone who's been around the blogosphere a while needs no introduction to Citizen Smash. In the weeks leading up to the invasion of Iraq and for quite a while thereafter he was the information pipeline for those who were plugged in to blogs. Take it away, Smash:

*****

Was I the first? No. Sgt. Stryker's Daily Briefing was around long before "LT SMASH." There were others, as well.

I haven't verified this, but I've heard that others were blogging from Afghanistan as early as 2002. Military LiveJournals have been around for a while. And before the blogging explosion, many military folks had simple do-it-yourself personal websites.

Prior to that, mass e-mails were circulated. I had a mailing list that included about 25 people when I served on the Nimitz '97-'98. My father forwarded my messages to probably 50 or so of his active duty friends, and they made the rounds at the Pentagon.

So it's not really a new thing, so much as an evolution of publishing technology. But I think LT SMASH was the first widely-read blog from a war zone -- which is somewhat ironic, because I was really "back in the rear with the gear." Yeah, we had some close calls with a few Iraqi missiles, but basically we had it pretty easy where I was living.

Here's a basic outline of how I got started. I discovered the world of blogging via Glenn Reynold's "Instapundit" in May of 2002, while surfing through some Internet bulletin boards. I immediately thought, "what a cool site!" Which was quickly followed by, "Hey, I could do this!"

With some help from my wife, we launched "The Indepundit" in June, 2002. It enjoyed a moderate degree of popularity, maybe 500 readers per day. I got a big boost early on when I broke a story about Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney receiving a big influx of campaign contributions on 9/11. But I mostly avoided mentioning my affiliation with the Navy Reserves.

Around November of that year, we started hearing rumors that my unit might get mobilized for an overseas mission. Of course, we all knew that meant we were getting geared up for a possible invasion in Iraq, but nobody said as much in public -- and I certainly didn't mention it on my blog.

We got word in early December that we would be receiving orders soon. A fellow military blogger, Kevin of "Primary Main Objective," volunteered to join our unit for the deployment, but we didn't have an open billet for him.

Kevin and I did talk, however, about whether we should continue our blogs if we went on deployment. There were obvious OPSEC issues, of course. I had to be particularly circumspect, as our unit's primary mission was anti-terrorism, and I didn't want any terrorists to be able to use my blog as an intelligence asset to plan a strike against the port we would be protecting. But I had been blogging for six months under my real name, so I was faced with a real dilemma.

When the orders to mobilize came down, I decided to put "The Indepundit" on hiatus. My "farewell post" made no mention that I was being mobilized, but only hinted at it in a very subtle way:

"MY EMPLOYER has offered me a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to take on a leadership role in a major international venture. This project would bring a significant increase in pay and benefits, but would also involve incredibly long working hours and extensive travel; in other words, I would be 'living out of my luggage' for the next several months."

The entire post can be found here:

Surprisingly, the only person who guessed what was going on was Meryl Yourish. She would later become my primary "confidential" lifeline to the blogging world.

Within a few days of learning that we definitely would be mobilized, we had a new site up and running. I kept it basic, for a quick upload. I stole the name "L.T. SMASH" from a Simpsons episode, featuring an unscrupulous Navy recruiter/musical producer who sticks subliminal messages into the tracks of a boy-band fronted by Bart.

Once I got into the Sandbox, however, I ran into a sticky problem: extremely limited Internet access. For the first month, I basically had nothing. Then we set up a headquarters building, where I was able to piggy-back off of their network drops.

Since the military didn't have any regulations that specifically addressed blogs, I decided to set up my own very strict guidelines. I didn't use real names. I didn't name my unit, describe our mission, or even say what branch of the service I was in. I didn't say what country I was in, although it wasn't hard to guess. Mostly, I wrote about day-to-day life in a military camp.

My "fame" happened very quickly. I sent a note to Meryl, saying that my new blog was up and running. Glenn saw the post at Meryl's site, and linked to me. He was quickly followed by CNN, MSNBC, Reuters, the Washington Post, Time, etc. Rush Limbaugh crashed the server -- over 200,000 hits in a single day.

It was, in a word, unreal.

Most people assumed that I was a Marine. I refused to answer requests for more information about myself, and would not talk to the media at all. From this, some people accused me of being a fraud, perhaps in an effort to get more information about my identity. I didn't bite.

Early on, my Dad told me that Mom worried when I didn't post for a day or two, so I promised him that I would post every day, if I could. That helped to keep my readership up, and my popularity high. Sometimes I only had time for a couple of lines, but that was usually enough to keep them coming back.

Eventually, things calmed down for me when I moved from a watch officer position to a staff job. Then I was able to really start writing longer stuff. Blogging was a good way for me to maintain a lifeline with the world back home.

It wasn't long before other people started following my lead. Some of them were less careful about violating OPSEC, and got shut down rather abruptly. But most managed to walk the fine line between telling a good story and giving away valuable information.

When I came home, I decided to keep the "SMASH" persona, but go back to my old "Indepundit" format. Thus, "Citizen SMASH" was conceived.

*****

Thanks again to Smash and Sgt Mom - two trailblazers who still lead the way.

The Mudville Gazette was launched in March, 2003, as war in Iraq was looming. Here are some links to fellow milbloggers from those days:

Andrew Olmsted, 19 Mar 2003, Stateside: It would appear that the liberation of Iraq has begun.

Greyhawk, 18 Mar 2003, Germany: A united world could have, just maybe, brought down Saddam without firing a shot. We will never know. 19 Mar: We'll never know what a united world could have achieved... the UN could not agree on anything, the situation degenerated, and here we are. Status quo was not working. The French were too desperate for oil and trade at any cost. Well-intentioned Americans were led into the streets by Communists (and others) with an agenda. The media distorted the split. Many in America and abroad thought they could manipulate the situation to their personal gain. They miscalculated. The fire is lit.

Pontifx ex Machina, 18 Mar, undisclosed location: Rolling out the gate, the guard gets a quick "hook-em, horns" sign as we weave through the barricades. Then we're off, cruising through the desert in a battered-up SUV. On the eve of war, only one thing passes through our minds: is there going to be any appropriate music on the radio?

Lt Smash, 19 Mar, undisclosed location: Read the President's speech today. The clock is ticking.

Chief Wiggles, 22 Mar, Kuwait: The war started Wednesday morning for us right after the president gave a speech to the American people that lasted about 4 minutes. We were all very anxious for this whole thing to be either over or get it on its way.

Will, 22 Mar, en route: I am going to Baghdad to personally shoot that paper hanging son of a bitch!

Lt Smash 20 Mar, undisclosed location:
From: Public Works Department
To: Saddam Hussein
Subj: BLASTING OPERATIONS IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD

Sgt Stryker, 20 Mar, Stateside: Iraq to File U.N. Complaint About Attack

Primary Main Objective, 30 Mar, undisclosed location I Dare Kofi to Come Get Me.

*****

(The following tribute to deployed milbloggers from the first year of OIF was originally posted in August, 2004. Some may have since vanished from the web.)

The Ghost Battalions

A reminder found while housecleaning the blog this weekend: Just Another Soldier. Interesting in light of this week's discussion on the fate of military blogs in general.

Closing Blogs is nothing new. So many site's owners just give up on their own. They come and go, you know, these MilBloggers do. Like any other sort of blogger. Many post in the lonely down hours far from home, spill their guts for the world, then abandon their spots when the tour of duty is up. They have lives again somewhere in the world, and no need to share the details. So it goes.

Many are truly gone - no site left at all. "The page cannot be found." Other blogs remain, like abandoned defensive positions in shifting desert sands. Once some bold soldier was here, now no more. The ghost battalions of the web. How you doin', Major Pain? And look, here was Thor. And here stood Moja. Farewell, Will.

They are more than the thoughts they left behind, but now only those orphaned thoughts remain, left for any to see. Museum pieces, like tombs, offering something to the scholar or the scavenger, or enjoyed in passing by the casual traveler.

Here Tim waited for Patti. Is Chromedome's Zone next?

Zeros and ones you know. On one level that's all they ever were. Enjoy them while you can.

*****

(The following acknowledgement of the earliest members of the MilBlogs Ring is from April, 2005. Some may have since joined the Ghost Battalions... or vanished altogether.)

The First Platoon

Looking back at the earliest days (and by the way, we're still in the early days) I'm happy to note the number of folks who are still going at it. I tend to focus on new blogs and newly deployed bloggers here these days, but I want to take a minute and acknowledge the early adopters that made the MilBlogs Ring what it is today. The Ring started on Veteran's Day 2003 - and now without further ado, here's the gang that joined in the first month of ops (and who continue blogging to this day):

Blackfive

Weck up to Thees!

Chromedomezone (hurry - going fast!)

Bloodletting

Trying to Grok

An Army Wife Life

Citizen Smash

Grunt Doc

Baldilocks

Argghhh!!!

A Collection of Thoughts

Love in War

Backcountry Conservative

Dogtulosba

JB's Sanctuary

Musings From the Imperial Senate

Countercolumn (formerly Iraq Now)

Pinwheels and Orange Peels

Andrew Olmsted

Sgt Hook

All in all, a pretty good start. Thanks gang.

*****

As noted, this is a growing document. If you're a milblogger you're invited to contribute - whether you're in the ring or not, you've already earned your way into history. Send me your blog's name, date began, and what blogs inspired you to begin. Tell us where you've been; Iraq, Afghanistan, elsewhere - especially if you've blogged from there. Include a couple links to posts that you think best represent your work. Format it all in an html pragraph or two - it will be my pleasure to add it here.

Valour-IT

[Greyhawk]

A huge salute to the Gunn Nutt, who matched 2,500 dollars in contributions to the Marine Team for this effort.

Today marks the completion of the campaign. As such, it's your last chance to get some great items from the auctions, including this bit of original art from Cox and Forkum.

Likewise, you have very little time left to become part of a Day by Day cartoon.

Winners of the above two auctions will be able to choose which team gets credit for their donation.

If you'd rather simply donate, please do so. Click the button below to donate via Team Air Force. But because the bottom line is what matters, here's where you can give to the team of your choice.

It's Veteran's Day - what better way to say "thanks"?

Update II: Thank you all who donated, your generosity during this fundraiser has helped more soldiers than we anticipated. You have brought Hope to the soldiers who will be using these new laptops, and to their families. They will never forget it.
The competition is over but Project Valour-IT is ongoing, and will continue to accept donations at the main website:
www.soldiersangels.org/valour/donate.html.
The announcement of the Team winners will be soon (checks still being tallied) at www.valour-it.blogspot.com. There's hope for the Air Force yet.

I also want to take this oppotunity to thank those that coorinated this effort, The Valour- IT staff:

Project Team Leader
FbL - Fuzzilicious Thinking

Coordinator
Kat - The Middle Ground

Project Webmaster
Holly Aho - Soldiers' Angel - Holly Aho

Online/Blogger Public Relations & Graphics/Design Coordinator
Fusileer 6 - John of Castle Argghhh!

Veterans Organizations
Bill T - cw4billt at Castle Argghhh!

Project Blog Editor
Sgt. B. - Gun Line

Update: A big thanks to the Air Force Team!

Speed of Thought

Jawa Report

Conservative Thinking

Ugly American

Small Town Veteran

Euphoric Reality

My Side of the Puddle

The Air Force Pundit

Banter In Atlanter

The Middle Ground

Confessions of a Jesus Phreak

Kicking Over My Traces

Ipso Facto Cartoon Blog

The Flomblog

No Angst Zone

Decision '08

ViewFromTonka

Family Matters

baldilocks

T. Longren

Cool Blue Blog

A Rose By Any Other Name

Pirates! Man your Women!

The Daily Brief

Can I Have Some Whine With That Cheese?

TMH's Bacon Bits

Jennifer's Musings

Old School Gamers

Slashdot Journal: ncc74656

Photon Courier

Resurgemus

Muzo Soup

lometa

Jennifer's Musings

The Common Room

Wounds of War (Part I)

[Greyhawk]

At first glance, this Washington Post column by Uwe E. Reinhardt, James Madison professor of political economy at Princeton University, looks like a catch-up effort on the part of the Post - a late attempt to follow the NY Time's lead. (Recall both the recent Times story claiming that troops are demanding that Americans suffer more in the war on terror and the op-ed from Stanford professor David Kennedy decrying the distance between the military and the population it defends while simultaneously describing that military as the new Hessians.)

The Post's headline is the first hint: Who's Paying for Our Patriotism? And a little bit of reading confirms the suspicion:

Moral hazard also can explain why the general public is so noticeably indifferent to the plight of our troops and their families. To be sure, we paste cheap magnetic ribbons on our cars to proclaim our support for the troops. But at the same time, we allow families of reservists and National Guard members to slide into deep financial distress as their loved ones stand tall for us on lethal battlefields and the family is deprived of these troops' typically higher civilian salaries.

But, perhaps noting the response to the recent Times entries (American academia in general is more out of touch with the public than the military is) the Post has found an author with a claim to more credibility on the topic. Reinhardt's son joined the Marines in 2001:

When our son, then a recent Princeton graduate, decided to join the Marine Corps in 2001, I advised him thus: "Do what you must, but be advised that, flourishing rhetoric notwithstanding, this nation will never truly honor your service, and it will condemn you to the bottom of the economic scrap heap should you ever get seriously wounded." The intervening years have not changed my views; they have reaffirmed them.

As an aside, I think I would send any of my children off to pursue whatever lives they chose with more positive words - though admittedly less well crafted. But this is Reinhardt's real topic, so his spontaneous speech to his son (apparently delivered in the wake of 9/11) is an appropriate inclusion here - flourishing rhetoric notwithstanding.

Interesting that the professor would consider a person with some physical disability as condemned to the bottom of the economic scrap heap. While such impediments may result in an individual being denied consideration for tenure at Princeton, there are actually many wounded veterans and others with disabilities who are able to achieve great things in other endeavors.

But in spite of that poor choice of phrasing, Reinhardt's accusations of government (and popular) apathy towards the plight of America's wounded defenders bears further examination.

*****

Let's not deny facts. Nothing can make war less ugly than it is. Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, the "clearing house" for nearly all military medical evacuees from Iraq and Afghanistan recently treated it's 25,000th patient from the war on terror. However, a very small percentage of those are combat wounds. Many were evacuated for illnesses. Many are returned to duty after brief inpatient treatment. Statistics for Army hospitals treating Operation Iraqi Freedom casualties can be found here. From March 19, 2003, through May 31, 2005 there were 18,729 total evacuations to Army facilities, broken down for cause as follows:

Wounded in action (WIA): 2,527
Non-battle injuries (NBI): 5,444
Disease: 10,758

The number of amputations may be surprising to those who've never seen them reported before.

188 Army soldiers, 28 of whom are multiple amputees
60 Marines, 10 of whom are multiple amputees
4 Navy sailors, no multiple amputees
2 Air Force amputees, 1 of whom is a multiple amputee
Total of 254 service member amputees treated in Army hospitals

The numbers from Afghanistan are smaller:

Wounded in action (WIA): 122
Non-battle injuries (NBI): 408
Disease: 1,046

Total of 28 service member amputees treated in Army hospitals

There is nothing to celebrate in the numbers of injured - but it's interesting that media references are generally limited to unspecified "higher than expected" numbers of wounded. Others claim "cover-up" of the totals, or report "human interest" stories of individuals most grievously wounded that frequently mention the total number of medical evacuations from Iraq. Here's one example from 60 Minutes last year.

*****

Part II is here.

(Original post: 2005-08-02 21:58:44)

Raw Numbers

[Greyhawk]

The UK's Telegraph offers up a Big Lie on the Iraq war:

Two and a half years after the fall of Saddam Hussein the Iraq war is proving no exception. While much was made of the US death toll recently reaching 2,000, little has been said of the 15,000 who have returned home mutilated.

There are actually two lies in one in the above claim regarding the wounded - one is the total number, and the second is the implication that they've been discarded and forgotten. We debunked them both here.

As we noted then regarding the actual count of wounded troops, There is nothing to celebrate in the numbers of injured, nothing can make war less ugly than it is. In spite of that, folks like those who write for the Telegraph feel compelled to toss out outlandishly exagerated claims of "15,000 mutilated" - we are left to make our own assumptions as to why the truth isn't good enough for their purposes.

To update the real numbers on Iraq:

The columns on the right represent wounded in action, returned to duty (WIA RTD) and wounded in action not returned to duty (WIA not RTD). The total is most likely the source of the frequently misused 15,000 number. The distinction between the two categories is made at the 72 hour point - anyone not able to return to duty in that time is classifed as "not RTD". 7,250 GIs have been thus classified - a number less than half of the total.

We can look still deeper into the numbers. The Army provides monthly updates of numbers of soldiers actually evacuated from Iraq as a result of wounds. Since the start of Operation Iraqi Freedom, 2,791 soldiers have been wounded in action seriously enough to require evac to Army medical facilities. (Note: this figure does not include other branches of service.)

That same report doesn't shy away from presenting numbers of amputees from all branches of service treated in Army hospitals:

These numbers represent persons treated in Army hospitals. They represent numbers of persons sustaining the loss of hands, feet, arms and/or legs; they do not include the loss of fingers and/or toes.

214 Army soldiers, 34 of whom are multiple amputees
68 Marines, 10 of whom are multiple amputees
4 Navy sailors, no multiple amputees
3 Air Force amputees, 1 of whom is a multiple amputee
Total of 280 service member amputees treated in Army hospitals

So there you have it - the real numbers. As noted, nothing to celebrate, but certainly a far cry from "15,000 who have returned home mutilated".

As for the Telegraph's claim that the wounded have been forgotten - you have an opportunity to make sure that's not true of you.

Project Valour IT is an effort to get voice-activated laptop computers to those GIs whose wounds prevent them from operating the types you and I likely take for granted. These put them back in touch with the world - and enable guys like Captain Chuck Ziegenfuss to tell the real story of what it's like to be a recovering soldier at Walter Reed.

Make a difference, give all you can.

(Original post: 2005-11-04 20:11:19)

Open Post

[Greyhawk] Happy birthday!

A Brief History of Paris (Part II)

[Greyhawk]

Part I is here. A prologue is here.

Let's pause a moment on our trip through the past to visit Paris today, and salute some under appreciated heroes - for they are certainly no less than that.

The police and firefighters of Paris - sheepdogs in the finest tradition. There's a large gallery of photos here.

Wish them well.

*****

We've turned around at the Arc de Triomphe and are returning along the Champs Elysee back towards the Place de la Concord. In the distant haze we can just make out the obelisk from Luxor. Along the way we note streets with familiar names - Avenue Franklin D Roosevelt and Avenue Winston Churchill both intersect Paris' most well known boulevard. Between the two you'll find the Grand Palais

And in front of that strides Charles de Gaulle

As allied armies approached Paris in 1944, the situation in the city was chaotic. French partisans were fighting the Germans in the streets, but factions within the resistance were far from united. Communists vied with De Gaulle's supporters to claim the role of liberators of Paris, and to declare themselves the rightful new government of France.

Back in the capital, the head of the Communist resistance, "Colonel Rol," was doing his best to disrupt the truce his Gaullist rivals were managing to impose. Issuing orders to his men to attack Germans at every opportunity, he denounced the cease-fire as a ruse to "exterminate the working classes of Paris," and permit "those stirred by hatred and fear of the people to work their dirty deals." Rol was uninterested in sparing the city from destruction; he wanted only to establish his faction as the ruling government. "Paris," he declared, "is worth 200,000 dead."

He was paraphrasing King Henri IV, a Protestant who converted to Catholicism to take the crown in 1594, claiming Paris vaut bien une messe (Paris is worth a mass). But in 1944, it was de Gaulle and not Rol who would march in triumph down the Champs Elysee into history.

But he would hold the title of provisional president only until 1946, then resign and be replaced by Socialist F鬩x Gouin. This was the beginning of the French Fourth Republic - an era that would last only until 1958.

*****

During the Fourth Republic the French Empire died a violent death. In 1954 the debacle at Dien Bien Phu would mark the end of "French Indochina" (and the beginning of increased US involvement in Vietnam.) And one year later would see the beginning of the Algerian War of Independence, a conflict noted for acts and accusations of terrorism, massacres, and atrocities committed by all sides. Launched by the Algerian Front de Lib鲡tion Nationale (FLN) the war became a complex struggle, with the Mouvement National Alg鲩en (MNA) forming a third faction in the struggle for wresting control of the nation

In the early morning hours of All Saints' Day, November 1, 1954, FLN maquisards (guerrillas) launched attacks in various parts of Algeria against military installations, police posts, warehouses, communications facilities, and public utilities. From Cairo, the FLN broadcast a proclamation calling on Muslims in Algeria to join in a national struggle for the "restoration of the Algerian state, sovereign, democratic, and social, within the framework of the principles of Islam." The French minister of interior, socialist Fran篩s Mitterrand, responded sharply that "the only possible negotiation is war."

And so war it was - and not limited to Algerian soil. Guerilla battles between the FLN and MNA in France would result in 5,000 deaths.

By 1958 the war had destabilized the French government, and the Army feared a repeat of the humiliation of Dien Bien Phu. A coup d'鴡t was planned to return de Gaulle to power - if other methods failed. French paratroopers from Algeria were positioned on Corsica, awaiting orders to seize Paris. Those orders never came; the French Parliament affirmed de Gaulle as leader of France:

De Gaulle immediately appointed a committee to draft a new constitution for France's Fifth Republic, which would be declared early the next year, with which Algeria would be associated but of which it would not form an integral part. All Muslims, including women, were registered for the first time on electoral rolls to participate in a referendum to be held on the new constitution in September 1958.

De Gaulle's initiative threatened the FLN with the prospect of losing the support of the growing numbers of Muslims who were tired of the war and had never been more than lukewarm in their commitment to a totally independent Algeria. In reaction, the FLN set up the Provisional Government of the Algerian Republic (Gouvernement Provisionel de la R鰵blique Alg鲩enne, GPRA), a government-in-exile headed by Abbas and based in Tunis. Before the referendum, Abbas lobbied for international support for the GPRA, which was quickly recognized by Morocco, Tunisia, and several other Arab countries, by a number of Asian and African states, and by the Soviet Union and other Central-European states.

ALN commandos committed numerous acts of sabotage in France in August, and the FLN mounted a desperate campaign of terror in Algeria to intimidate Muslims into boycotting the referendum. Despite threats of reprisal, however, 80 percent of the Muslim electorate turned out to vote in September, and of these 96 percent approved the constitution.

At that same time the French military had gained effective control of Algeria, so politically and militarily the situation seemed to be improving. Faith in de Gaulle appeared to be well placed.

But other factors would ultimately influence a different result.

Among them:

The FLN had cultivated staunch allies in the United Nations - specifically gaining support of Arab and communist nations. Meanwhile, France's commitment of a large faction of it's army to Algeria was cause for concern among it's NATO allies. And on the home front,

...opposition to the conflict was growing among many segments of the population. Thousands of relatives of conscripts and reserve soldiers suffered loss and pain; revelations of torture and the indiscriminate brutality the army visited on the Muslim population prompted widespread revulsion; and a significant constituency supported the principle of national liberation.

Of course, the FLN saw lack of popular support as no reason to reduce acts of violence. Meanwhile, de Gaulle's political opponents (who's policies had led to the crisis in the first place) were waiting in the wings to resume their control of the government.*

*****

More to come...

* The suspicious-minded reader might note that these conditions by which defeat was snatched from the jaws of possible victory in Algeria seem eerily similar to the narrative the media attempts to construct today regarding US involvement in Iraq. (A narrative we debunk on a regular basis here.) Indeed, essential elements are virtually identical, (torture, suffering soldiers and their families, conscription) but we are sure this is merely an amazing coincidence.

Who Is Lying About Iraq?

[Mrs Greyhawk]

A much needed history lesson from Norman Podhoretz

Open Post

[Greyhawk]

"In France, we call it a Royale with cheese..."

Caption contest is open. Enter below.

A Brief History of Paris (Part I)

[Greyhawk]

Let's continue our photo tour of Paris - our own Tour de France, if you will. Today we'll look a bit beyond the scenic beauty and perhaps learn a bit of the story behind the glory.

What better place to start than the Seine - the river that flows like life's blood through the city, it's very raison d'괲e. Paris was once confined to a small island on the river, the easily defended spot of land now dubbed the Ile-de-la-Cite and still considered by many to be the very heart of France. The Cathedral Notre-Dame de Paris rises majestically there, on a spot once occupied by a Roman temple to Jupiter. Home also to the Palais Royale, the island was the center of government and religious life of France.

The bridge at Pont Saint Michel connects the island to the left bank of the Seine.

Other bridges are more spectacular, and offer more scenic views, but St Michel is of obvious importance to the city. A succession of bridges have spanned the river at this location - this one dates to 1857. Nearby you'll find the latest addition to the area...

The words on this plaque, dedicated in October, 2001, translate to "In memory of the numerous Algerians killed during the bloody suppression of the peaceful demonstration on 17 October 1961."

Note the unspecified number - "numerous". There's controversy involved on many levels, but as the Mayor of Paris noted in the dedication 40 years after the event, "There are parts of Paris's history which are painful, but which have to be talked about."

Which is why the story is so familiar to one and all.

You hadn't heard?

Well, pull up a chair...

*****

It's always tough to decide where to begin a story with so much history behind it. Beginning this tale at any point in time will reveal a bias, because some point a few years earlier justifies the actions of that later time, and provide needed context, and so on to the dawn of history, which is controversial itself...

Perhaps if we continue with our tour we'll find some agreeable starting point...

*****

Ahhh, welcome to the Place de la Concorde...

This is as fine a place as any to begin our tale - much history here. This is where the guillotine claimed King Louie XVI, Marie Antoinette, and ultimately even the leaders of the French revolution. And there in the center, where once stood a statue of the King, is the "oldest monument in Paris".

Old because it's Egyptian - an Obelisk from Luxor - a gift from the Ottoman Viceroy of Egypt to France in 1829. An interesting point in history; as the Ottoman empire was fading Viceroy Mohammed Ali was acting increasingly independent of the Turks. He obviously had admiration for the French, having hired French Army officers to train his own forces.

The French, of course, were looking to cut their own slice of that Ottoman pie...

Let's move backwards in time again, to a period when that obelisk was only a bit over a thousand years old. Caesar conquered Gaul - including the area now known as Paris - in the first century B.C., one of the earliest of many campaigns that would eventually turn the Mediterranean into a Roman sea. North Africa was a part of that empire, but after the fall of Rome the spread of Islam would result in a majority Arab population there. Ultimately Spain would also fall to the sword of Allah, but that would prove to be the high water mark of Arab dominance of Western Europe. The age of Charlemagne and Roland had come to France, an age of legends, of chivalry, and brutality and war. Let's credit them with saving the remnants of Rome, rightly or wrongly, and move forward a few hundred years...

Under the Ottomans, North Africa becomes a pirate stronghold - the Barbary States, a part of the Turkish Ottoman Empire. Originally begun as a facet of the war against the lost territory of Spain, over a span of hundreds of years the actions of the pirates became more commercial in nature - or, from the European point of view, perhaps "anti-commercial" is the better term. But by the early 19th century the age of the Ottomans was waning, and European empires were on the rise. In 1830 the French began the conquest of the pirate state of Algeria. In 1881 France added Tunisia to it's North African empire, and in 1911 claimed Morocco as the final jewel in that crown.

*****

Take a look down the Champs Elysee from the Place de la Concorde. In the distant haze rises the Arc de Triomphe, Napolean's monument to conquest, a place to march his victorious armies bringing home the spoils of war. What finer welcome home from the work of expanding the empire than a hero's welcome to rival that of the Roman Legions of ages past?

Here's a photo of the Nazis using it for their victory parade in 1941:

And here are the Americans a few years later.

In between those days France was allowed to survive as a diminished puppet state - though Paris was for most purposes a German city. Vichy France continued to hold it's north African colonies, and there the Americans and British would strike first against the Axis powers. Landing in Algeria and Morocco, Americans would fire their first shots of the "war in Europe" against French troops. For a few days the battles raged, and then a prepared deal was struck. The French would maintain their territory and join the allies against German and Italian forces in Tunisia. Many were outraged that the Vichy traitors were allowed to survive, much less thrive, but the requirements of war were such that deals with the devil could be made to expedite victory over the Huns.

After months of bloody combat, Tunis fell, and the North African territories were liberated - or at least back in the hands of the French government in exile.

The entire story can be found in Rick Atkinson's excellent account An Army at Dawn: The War in Africa, 1942-1943, including this recap of the aftermath of German occupation of Africa:

The French high command wasted no time embarking on what the OSS described as "a ruthless campaign against Moslems and, to a lesser extent, Italians" in Tunisia. The six-month occupation had won widespread Arab allegiance with effective propaganda, anti-Semitic edicts, and economic measures, including some land redistribution and a doubling of wages, paid with stolen Bank of France notes. In retribution for suspected Arab perfidy during the occupation, "a general reign of terror was instituted, in which arbitrary arrests and torture of Moslems became frequent occurrences," the OSS disclosed. Detention camps on the island of Djerba allegedly held 3,000 Arabs, with beatings, killings, and mass executions reported; gendarmes and other rogue officials were "running amuck in the interior and... beating and imprisoning personal enemies."

Such was often the fate of collaborators in those days. C'est la vie. Or more appropriately, c'est la guerre.

*****

More to come...

All Your Innernets belongs to Us

[Greyhawk]

Top intelligence officials discover innernets:

WASHINGTON, Nov. 8 - Top intelligence officials announced on Tuesday the creation of a new agency, the Open Source Center, to gather and analyze information from the Web, broadcasts, newspapers and other unclassified sources around the world.

The premise of the center, announced as part of the restructuring of the nation's intelligence agencies by the director of national intelligence, John D. Negroponte, is that some critical information to understand threats to national security requires neither spies nor satellites to collect.

This "open source" information can include anything from sermons broadcast from radical mosques in the Middle East to reports in the provincial Chinese press of possible avian flu outbreaks. Such material has often been undervalued by government policymakers, in part because it lacks the cachet of information gathered by more sensitive methods, intelligence officials said.

I once tried to get some Intel guys in Iraq to read Iraqi blogs but they weren't interested. But now I'd like to be the first to welcome all readers from the Intel services to the 20th century. Keep up the good work guys!

(BTW, check out ebay.com - you can get some cool stuff. It's at http://www.ebay.com)

Update: This is still Gr3yhaWK posyting, not a CIA hacKerZ. The CIa is good On innernets and I was kiddingz (LOL).

Whose War?

[Greyhawk]

The New York Times:

Joel Turnipseed, a former marine who wrote "Baghdad Express," a memoir of the first gulf war, was sitting in Minneapolis watching "Monday Night Football" with his wife last week when a commercial for the film "Jarhead" came on the television.

"Jarhead" was directed by Sam Mendes and is based on Anthony Swofford's memoir of the first gulf war. The commercial showed marines in the desert hurrying to don their chemical protection gear. One of the characters, Troy, played by Peter Sarsgaard, put on his hood and turned to another, Swoff, played by Jake Gyllenhaal, and in his best Darth Vader voice invited him to "come to the dark side."

Mr. Turnipseed said he was shocked. "I turned to my wife and said, 'Honey, there is something funny about that,' " he said in a phone interview. "That scene is in my book, not Tony's," he added, referring to Mr. Swofford.

A little later on in the game there was another commercial for the film, this one depicting a scene in which a marine colonel gives a motivational speech to soldiers under his command. Much of the scene and some of the dialogue, Mr. Turnipseed recalled, seemed to come directly from the opening pages of "Baghdad Express."

The milblog reviews of the movie I've read so far have been negative.

Damn Navy!!!

[Greyhawk]

I should probably be shot for pointing this out, but this is a cool item.

MilBlogs in the Senate

[Greyhawk]

Andi has the details.

Auctions

[Greyhawk]

Holly Aho has created a web page where you can auction items to raise funds for Valour-IT, or bid on items already up for auction. Holly's art, an original Cox and Forkum cartoon, and all sorts of other cool stuff available. Details here.

Jeff Englehart

[Greyhawk]

Here's your white phosphorous scandal trivia question of the day. Ready?

Which of these quotes comes from Jeff Englehart, the ex-soldier now starring in the Italian documentary about White Phosphorous use in Iraq?

a) ...a former US soldier who served in Falluja, tells of how he heard orders for white phosphorus to be deployed over military radio - and saw the results.

"Burned bodies, burned women, burned children; white phosphorus kills indiscriminately... When it makes contact with skin, then it's absolutely irreversible damage, burning flesh to the bone," he says.

b) "White Phosphorous was used, which is definitely, without a shadow of a doubt a chemical weapon".

c) When I joined the United States Army I swore an oath to ?serve and protect the Constitution of the United States?, not an ignorant greedy little fuck like George Bush or any of his court jesters in the White House. And by writing and speaking against his policies and his war and his grossly high death tolls, I know in my heart that I am still, to this day, fighting to protect all the constitutional rights that his administration is robbing from us everyday.

d) The Iraqi insurrection, in itself, is what I believe to be an honest rebellion. Because it is a guerrilla war against an illegal occupation enforced by our conventional military force, with far superior weapons and technology, it seems obvious that acts of terrorism are also acts of desperation.

The answer is "all of the above".

You'll find the first two here via the BBC (see the video), and the last at his blog, where he posted under the name hEkLe.

You can find even more quotes in his interview with Socialist Worker Online.

(See also Dennis Edwards and Jimmy Massey)

Valour-IT

[Greyhawk]

Cpt Chuck Z writes:

Mkay... I dragged my drugged and temporarily one-handed body out of the hospital bed to tell ya'll about something most important.

Carren is gonna be on national TV (and live national TV at that) to let everyone know about Project Valour-IT. She will represent me (the nerd who thought of this project), and the many people who have made this project a success.

She is going to be on "Connected coast to coast" a show run by MSNBC. Don't know how long she'll be on, but for the love of god, please tune in, put your hands on the top of your TV, and talk to Jebus when the show is over. The show runs from 1200-1300 (noon to one fer ya civlians out there)(and that's eastern time) My beloved is supposed to be on around 1240, but I will rest assured that her looks, personality, and general charm will either get her on early, or the show will go into extra rounds like Rocky and the Big Ruskie in Rocky IV.

Open Post

[Greyhawk] Sheepdogs of Paris

The Road to Victory

[Greyhawk]

(Update/bump from 2005-11-04 22:31:54)

The Washington Post describes conditions along Baghdad's airport road. Dubbed "Route Irish" by the US military, the highway connecting Baghdad Airport to the city proper - and the rest of Iraq - is a crucial artery for the nation. It's importance can't be overstated - and the terrorists know it.

For 2 1/2 years, the road was, in many ways, a symbol of the U.S. failure to secure Iraq. Military convoys roared past in a frantic attempt to escape the looming dangers of suicide bombers, grenades, rockets and booby-trapped litter. But insurgents' relentless attacks claimed a steady toll.
<...>
Between April and June, 14 car bombs went off along the airport road, called Route Irish by the military. There were 48 roadside bombs, officially known as improvised explosive devices, or IEDs, and 80 small-arms attacks. Sixteen people were killed.

That was then - this is now:

Then, two months ago, the killings stopped. In October, one person was wounded on the road and no one was killed, according to the U.S. Army, which also calculated the April deaths. The turnaround was owed to simple, boots-on-the-ground military tactics, Army officials said.
<...>
The men said they had been afraid of this route before they arrived in Iraq. They had heard the news reports about the dangers. But in 10 months, the only enemy fire they have seen on the airport road came after one of the civilian trucks they were escorting broke down, leaving them exposed for three hours. Someone in a passing vehicle fired at the troops, but no one was injured.

"It's pretty much one of the safest roads in Baghdad now. It didn't used to be," Carter said.

Beckett said he felt safe, "as safe as you can feel in Baghdad."

"They used to label this the one most dangerous road in Iraq," Zotter said, waving a white-paper report with all the significant activity from the last 24 hours. "It doesn't say that anymore."

And this is how. Many factors contributed to that success - but the one that can't be overemphasized is the presence of trained Iraqi troops on the street.

The Iraqi soldiers, with a handful of U.S. troops by their side, walked the dusty dirt roads of the neighborhood. Weapons drawn, they searched alleys and courtyards. But mostly, they just walked, calling out greetings to Iraqis gathered outside their homes before the breaking of the fast during the holy month of Ramadan. The sweet scent of spice-infused meat and vegetables filled the night air, as women in black cloaks scurried home with stacks of piping-hot flat bread.
<...>
Ali said the Iraqi soldiers had been influential in helping control the neighborhood, keeping the potential attackers from using side streets to reach the airport road. "We are Iraqis, and we know strangers from their faces," Ali said. "We can stop them, and we know if they lie to us. The Americans don't know."

Pay attention to that "strangers" quote - it's not the locals who are the enemy.

From my own time in Iraq I can attest to this, the battle for Route Irish was significant, and securing it is a victory on two fronts. On one level it's battle won and ground gained in a very different kind of war. But it's not just the ground gained that matters. It's the successful deployment of Iraqi forces that makes this a victory on a second front for the good guys. The key to a successful return from Iraq for coalition forces is the assumption of responsibility for security by the Iraqis - and real progress is being made.

And efforts are ongoing to make sure those gains aren't lost. Back in the States, the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force is readying to return to Iraq in February. The training they are getting isn't how to fight - it's how to train the Iraqi forces:

When the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force resumes responsibility for volatile Anbar province in Iraq in February, the Marines will be bolstered by 18 battalions from the new Iraqi army, plus a large number of Iraqi police and border security forces, Lt. Gen. John Sattler said.
<...>
A key part of the Camp Pendleton Marines' preparation for their third tour in Iraq since March 2003, Sattler said, was training the teams that would be embedded with the emerging Iraqi units. They are preparing 45 teams, each with 10 Marines and a Navy hospital corpsman, which will be responsible for an Iraqi army battalion or a similar-size unit of the border security forces that will try to stem the flow of insurgents, money and weapons from Syria and Jordan.

The "ultimate goal," he said, is to turn over areas of Anbar to the Iraqis as their forces become more capable.

The road to victory is clear.

*****

8 Nov Update: This post from 4 November was originally intended as nothing more than a quick look at progress in Iraq. But on 7 November 60 Minutes aired a report describing their view of conditions along Route Irish, and their conclusion:

"Despite making the road somewhat safer, attacks continue and there is no clear victory in sight."

challenges the validity of the Washington Post report. But the 60 Minutes story appears to have been compiled last summer - the unit profiled returned to the US in September. That "no clear victory in sight" claim illustrates the perils of defeatist reporting, and of approaching the story of the Iraq war from a pre-conceived failure narrative. (Or perhaps the foolishness of betting against the US Army.) I'll refrain from further speculation as to why the CBS report wasn't updated with more recent information, or questioning the validity of the term "news".

Besides, USA Today had a much more up to date quote from Lt. Col. Geoffrey Slack, the battalion commander profiled on the 60 Minutes' broadcast. This one's from only two months ago - September 19, 2005:

"Route Irish is definitely not the most dangerous road in Iraq any longer, and everyone who uses it knows it," says Lt. Col. Geoffrey Slack, commander of the New York National Guard's 1st Battalion, 69th Infantry Regiment.

USA Today also noted

There hasn't been a suicide car bombing on the road since April, according to U.S. military statistics through August.

U.S. officers attribute the decline to an influx of Iraqi troops who have been stationed at key points along Airport Road, which goes by the military designation Route Irish.

Lt. General David Petraeus also detailed the improved conditions along Route Irish and the progress made in training Iraqi troops on his recent return to the US after his second tour in Iraq.

Let's salute Lt. Col. Geoffrey Slack and the 69th Infantry Regiment of the New York National Guard, a unit with a proud history. Their efforts in the face of a determined foe have brought about real results. It's easy to declare failure, quite another thing to achieve success amidst such declarations - especially coming from sources ostensibly "on your side."

*****

Update 17 Nov 05: CBS producer expresses outrage here.

Related recent posts on progress in Iraq:

Iraq: The Vision

Operation Steel Curtain

Graphic Violence

The Other Iraq

On media coverage of Iraq:

2003

Lying Times

Recruiting Spin - Again

Raw Numbers

Lies...

Update: Lying Times

Prayer Request

[Mrs Greyhawk]

Correction Update:

This prayer request is an old request from 2004. I thought it sounded familiar, Thanks Soldier's Angel Germany for the tip.

But here's an update: Via Snopes

In May 2005, the Hood County News reported that Chad's injury was fortunately less severe than initially thought, and that he was making a rapid recovey:

Six months after Army Specialist Chad Snowden received a near fatal head wound fighting in Fallujah, Iraq, he is making plans to enter the University of Texas in Austin. Six months ago, Nov. 13, 2004, a sniper's bullet hit Snowden just above and behind the left eyebrow. It exited the right side.

Because only a small part of the brain was damaged or destroyed, Snowden did not lose his mobility, nor senses, only some of his mental capabilities.

Recovery continued to be rapid. In weeks he was ready to be transferred to a military rehabilitation trauma brain injury hospital. His transfer from Walter Reed Hospital to the needed rehabilitation center was being delayed, possibly for months, by the overload of paperwork required for transfers. Snowden?s mother, Vicki Field, was in Washington with her son. The prospect on his needed treatment being delayed ignited her into action.

Because of Field?s driving concern for her son, she has been employed by the Department of Defense in a new operation to see that no severely wounded and disabled veterans or survivors are not [sic] lost in the paper shuffle. She is the Texas Advocate for Support of Severely Injured Military Residing in Texas. What she does is seek out wounded and injured veterans and families needing available assistance from government agencies and communities.

Undoubtedly Ms. Field would appreciate continued prayers on her son's behalf as his recovery progresses.

------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Vicky - Granbury, TX

My son has been shot in Falujah..I wanted to get everyone to pray for my son Chad. Today, Sunday, I got a call from the Army that my son had been shot in the head. I am asking for all your prayers. He was in a Humvee going through Falujah fighting and a gang of militia fighters fired on the Humvee and hit Chad in the head. The driver got him out of the city and took him to Baghdad. He was in critical condition, but now has been upgraded to stable critical. His dad and I are on standby to fly to Washington then on to Germany as soon as the military calls us to go. The Army is trying to stabilize him enough to fly to Germany and at that time we will leave. Please pray that my son will not have brain damage and that he will be restored and healed !
By the blood of Jesus, and the grace of God. I ask for you to pass this prayer request on so there will be many prayer warriors praying for him. Thank you so much and I will try to keep you updated on his condition.

God Bless
Vicky ~ Granbury, Texas

HT: Pebble Pie

Valour-IT Blogging Fundraiser Competition

[Mrs Greyhawk]

(New)IMPORTANT UPDATES:

Thanks Cox and Forkum

Update II:
Carren, wife of Chuck Ziegenfuss, the inspiration for Valour-IT, has an important update:

We met the Secretary of the Army, Dr. Fran Harvey, today. He was a very nice man and happens to be a fellow Pennsylvanian!!! Not sure if he's Steeler fan, though... forgot to ask. Anyway, Chuck told him about V-IT and I printed off some info from the Soldier's Angels website. He seemed impressed with the project and Chuck told him, "I think either the Army or the Department of Defense should support this project." Dr. Harvey said he would look into it further and took the info I gave him. After Dr. Harvey left the room his Aide de Camp gave me his card (he's an Army Major) and told me if we didn't hear anything in two weeks I was to contact him. So guess what.... in 14 days I will be contacting him if no one (i.e. Me and Chuck and/or Soldier's Angels) don't hear something. Who knows where this could lead V-IT!!!!

Read the rest

Update I:
We now have A designated page for bloggers to join the team of their choice (subliminal message ; AIRFORCE):
Project Valour-IT Competition Blogger Sign-Up

You can choose any branch you like. Here's where you can go to donate.


Air Force, the Best Team, whos logistics systems based on this mission is the most sophisticated, is flown by me (Mrs G), go here.

Army, lead by BlackFive, who's boots are smelly, go here.

Navy, manning the ship is Mrs Smash, who everyone knows cuss like a sailor, go here.

Marines, who all drink puppy juice before a mission, is headed by Holly Aho, go here.

Ok that's just some fun rivalry, please, don't anyone get offended. Blackfive's boots are not smelly, they smell like roses. I'm proud to stand with everyone of these guys so choose the team best for you, we're on the same mission here. To get team credit for a donation, you must donate via the "To Donate" button on the website of your team leader (This takes you to the proper Valour-IT PayPal donation page). Donations made via the regular Valour-IT website will not be part of your team's official competition total, though they will still go to the Valour-IT program. Any blogger (military or civilian) can join any team. Just visit the websites linked above, cough Air Force.

And on a serious note...

For those that believe the Air Force is not in the thick of things in this war and those who are under the false pretenses that they're only in secure locations, let me introduce you to a few people:

Injured Airman Fights His Way Back to Iraq

U.S. Air Force Senior Airman Douglas Batchelder

Although a rocket attack cut his time short on his first deployment, an airman with the 64th Helicopter Maintenance Unit here pledged to himself that he would endure whatever pain was necessary to get back in the fight.
Following a year-and-a-half recovery from serious injuries to his hand, which could have ended his Air Force career, Senior Airman Douglas Batchelder, an armament systems journeyman, is back in Iraq.

And

03/10/05 KNXV: Airman Brian Kolfage has great attitude despite huge losses

Senior Airman Brian Kolfage

Senior Airman Brian Kolfage is one of the most seriously wounded soldiers to date to survive the war in Iraq. He is one of three soldiers in Iraq who are triple amputees, and he was almost a quadruple amputee.

And

Gannett: Three receive Purple Hearts

Airman first class Josh Rohrbacher, Staff Sgt. Duane Collins and Tech Sgt. Charles Hiser received the award, the 11th highest in the Air Force, Thursday at a ceremony for the RED HORSE at Port Clinton High School.

SO AIR FORCE STEP UP! Where at the bottom of the pole!

---------------------------------------------------------------------

What is a "Valour-IT Blogging Fundraiser Competition" you ask?

Project Valour-IT is a Soldiers Angels project dedicated to provide voice-controlled software and laptop computers to wounded Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines recovering from hand and arm injuries or amputations at major military medical centers. Operating laptops by speaking into a microphone, our wounded heroes are able to send and receive messages from friends and loved ones, surf the 'Net, do on-line banking and communicate with buddies still in the field without having to press a key or move a mouse. This can be instrumental in their recovery and help eliviate frustrations an injured soldier may endure.

The goal of this competition is to have a fun rivarly amongst the branches of service, so there will be 4 teams, Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines. Each team will have a blogging leader (not necessarily affiliated with that branch). For instance I've been assigned to the Air Force team and I'm not in the Air Force and Holly Aho the team leader for Marines is most certainly not a Marine, she's just too damn sweet. However BlackFive is team leader for the Army and he represents. And for the Navy, Mrs Smash is leading the charge.

Each team will compete through blogging about project Valour-IT in order to raise donations. Whichever team raises the most money for project Valour-IT between 11/2 and 11/11 is the winner of the competition. While teams are divided along military lines, you need not have been in the military in order to help or join a team. So pick the best Air Force team.

If you are interested in joining Mudville, which has been assigned to the Airforce team, leave a trackback or comment to this post, or send me an email to let me know you'd like to be on our team. We'll welcome you as a member. Uno Ab Alto !(One over all)

Regardless which team you choose to donate thru, all monies goes to one pot to help all soldier's wounded no matter what branch they are in.

Those that are not bloggers can also help project Valour-IT by telling friends and family as well as by email. Flyers are available for whoever would like to distribute them, bloggers and non-bloggers alike.

There are a few incentives such as receiving a Soldiers' Angels Coin which will be given to each donor during the competition. They are beautiful (I know I have one) Bloggers in the competition are also free to offer their own incentives for donations. Here at Mudville, every donation of $100.00 or more will get you free advertising for the time alloted for this competition. The fundraising competition will run from November 2 until Veteran's Day, November 11.

Need some motivation? Read this or this.

And a few tax issues to add:

1. It's a tax-deductible donation and eligible for
matching funds from companies who do that sort of
thing (see:
http://soldiersangels.org/valour/irsinfo.html for
proof for the cautious)

2. The snail mail address for those who'd rather
donate that way (scroll down at:
http://soldiersangels.org/valour/donate.html). We
will credit donations to the team competition if they
arrive during the competition days.

Our goal is to raise enough money to purchase 30 laptops. That's about $21,000, or roughly $5250 per team over a 10-day span.

SO JOIN OUR TEAM TODAY! AIM HIGH! UNO AB ALTO ! - (One over all!)

USAF No One Comes Close!

Links to learn more about Project Valour-IT:

The Valour-IT website

The Valour-IT blog

UPDATE

Blogger Team Recognions :

   Speed of Thought
   Jawa Report
   Conservative Thinking
   Ugly American
   Small Town Veteran
   Euphoric Reality
   My Side of the Puddle
   The Air Force Pundit
   Banter In Atlanter
   The Middle Ground
   Confessions of a Jesus Phreak
   Kicking Over My Traces
   Ipso Facto Cartoon Blog
   The Flomblog
   No Angst Zone
   Decision '08
   ViewFromTonka
   Family Matters
   baldilocks
   T. Longren
   Cool Blue Blog

Non blogger Team Recognitions :

Mr. & Mrs. Greyhawk, First of all I want to thank you both for being a part of Project Valor IT. The work that Soldier?s Angels is doing is truly amazing and any support they receive is well worth it. Thank you!

I also wanted to ask to be a part of your team, although I do not have a blog. I have printed flyers and have them posted in my building. I also wanted to pass on that I made a donation through your website and I wanted to be sure the money went to the right team! J If there is anything else I need to do please let me know.

A Peek into the Chamber

[Greyhawk]

Monday - a new week begins, and everyone is eager to get back to work.

Let's see what the kids in the Senate are up to.

The New York Times:

With Democrats stepping up their attacks over prewar intelligence on Iraq, the Republican leader of the Senate Intelligence Committee said on Sunday that the panel's initial work had found no evidence of "political manipulation or pressure" in the use of such intelligence.
<...>
As part of a report released last year by his committee that found widespread intelligence failures on Iraq's weapons capabilities, "we interviewed over 250 analysts and we specifically asked them: 'Was there any political manipulation or pressure?' Answer: 'No,' " Mr. Roberts said on "Face the Nation" on CBS.

Studies by the independent Robb-Silberman commission, appointed by the president, as well as the similar Butler commission in Britain reached the "same conclusion," said Mr. Roberts, who has been a staunch supporter of the administration's policies on Iraq.
<...>
Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, said on "Meet the Press" on NBC that Karl Rove, the senior presidential adviser, "should leave" the White House because he was found to have had discussions with reporters about the C.I.A. operative, Valerie Wilson.

The Washington Times:

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld looked forward to a fresh start this year in getting the Senate to approve his handpicked staff.
<...>
But 2005 has not turned out to be the breakthrough year for Mr. Rumsfeld.

His deputy secretary remains "acting." Two senior policy advisers got their seatings only through recess appointments by President Bush.

Mr. Rumsfeld has tried twice to win approval of a chief spokesman, but both times ran into trouble.

"It's just business as usual," said a frustrated senior administration official who asked not to be named. "In a time of war, in the department leading the war on terrorism, it is unconscionable."
<...>
Most anger at the Pentagon is directed at Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Mr. Levin has been conducting an investigation into Iraq prewar intelligence assessments at the Pentagon. He has requested reams of confidential documents, some of which the Pentagon says do not exist.

In what one official calls "extortion," Mr. Levin has pressured the Pentagon by blocking the nominations of former Ambassador Eric Edelman to be undersecretary of policy and Peter Flory to be his top deputy on European security matters. As the impasse hardened, Mr. Bush resorted to recess appointments.

Mr. Levin's press office did not respond to questions.

The Washington Post:

We were so stupid that we let our idiot president and an Arab con man fool us on a life-and-death issue.

As a campaign theme for elections in 2006 and 2008, that proposition may lack a little something. Yet Democrats who supported the invasion of Iraq but now cannot support the consequences of their vote are flirting with it. To them, good night, and good luck.

I doubt that swing voters will buy an admission of faux gullibility as a rationale for supporting Democrats over Republicans. Even when stated in slightly more elegant form, as it must be, that argument trivializes and falsifies the serious debate that did occur over Saddam Hussein's capabilities and intentions. Making President Bush's alleged "lies" on prewar intelligence the campaign focal point also underlines the failure of the Democrats to come up with convincing alternative policies for Iraq and the Middle East.

Worse: A backward-looking strategy obscures the political progress that Iraqis are making against terrorist bombings and assassinations.

The Philadelphia Inquirer:

The Democratic party appears to have finally come up with a way to explain why so many of its elected leaders gave President Bush the authority to wage war in Iraq.

Three simple words: "We were duped."

A parade of top Democrats have contended in recent days that they would have been antiwar in 2002 had they known then what they now believe to be true: that the Bush administration manipulated the intelligence in order to build a bogus case for war. In pursuit of that theme, Senate Democrats on Tuesday successfully demanded that their GOP colleagues quit stalling and finish a long-promised investigation that could determine whether the war planners were dishonest.

Many Democrats believe it's good politics these days to say that they were lied to. This message, actually a rite of confession, is designed to help their erstwhile pro-war politicians get back in sync with the party's liberal antiwar base. That's especially important for some of the original pro-war Democrats who want to run for president in 2008. After all, liberal voters tend to dominate the Democratic primaries, and they're expecting to hear apologies.

Hence, Sen. John Kerry (who wants to try again) said in a speech on Oct. 26: "The country and the Congress were misled into war. I regret that we were not given the truth... knowing what we know now, I would not have gone to war in Iraq." Hence, Tom Daschle (the deposed Senate Democratic leader, who is weighing a campaign) said in a speech Wednesday that senators voted incorrectly because "on so many fronts, we were misled."

At least four other Democratic senators who voted to authorize war have use the dupe argument in recent days, including Christopher Dodd of Connecticut (who periodically voices White House ambitions) and Tom Harkin of Iowa (who now calls his war support "one of the biggest voting mistakes of my career"). And once having confessed, these Democrats believe they have sufficient credibility to call for the phased withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.
<...>
[Liberal antiwar activist and organizer David] Sirota said Thursday: "Obviously, the [dupe] message needs to be played properly. But most Americans already believe that Bush misled the country" - polls support his contention - "so it makes perfect sense for Democrats to say they too were misled... . They followed tradition and gave the benefit of the doubt to a president on a national security issue, and they were lied to. That doesn't mean they were stupid. They were being patriotic.

"And rather than just apologize for being misled, Democrats need a message of outrage. Make the argument that this administration deliberately manipulated the intelligence."

That message is dismissed by critics as paranoid; [Marshall Wittmann, a senior fellow at the Democratic Leadership Council] calls it "Michael Moore territory."

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette:

The president went on television to announce: "Earlier today, I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors."

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years," the vice chairman of the Intelligence committee told the Senate.

The president was Bill Clinton (Dec. 16, 1998). The senator was Jay Rockefeller, a Democrat from West Virginia (Oct. 10, 2002).

Meanwhile, USA Today reports that one Senator actually in the military may have to give up his job:

WASHINGTON ? In a case that could help determine whether citizen-soldiers have a place in Congress, a federal court on Tuesday will weigh whether a U.S. senator who helps make Pentagon policy and has spoken out on issues such as Iraqi prisoner abuse can also serve as a military judge.

The case before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces here involves Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., an Air Force Reserve colonel appointed two years ago to the lower Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals.

*****

Meanwhile, back in Iraq, the AP reports

U.S. and Iraqi troops battled insurgents house to house Monday, the third day of an assault against al-Qaida-led insurgents in a town near the Syrian border.

Commander in Chief?

[Greyhawk]

She's an aerobics instructor, mother of six, and now she's been elected to represent her conservative western district in the national assembly. Is this the plotline of a mid-season replacement series on network TV? No - it's the latest news from Herat, Afghanistan:

HERAT, Afghanistan -- Fauzia Gailani is an unlikely election winner in this conservative, western city: an aerobics instructor, a mother of six and, most obviously, a woman.

But somehow Gailani won 16,885 votes in the recent parliamentary race, more than any other candidate in Herat province and more than any other woman in Afghanistan. Only 20 men nationwide won more votes than Gailani. Her campaign posters hang in living rooms and stores. Women talk about how she has helped them lose weight and how she's better than any man. Men talk about her as if she's a sex symbol.

"I love her," said Nazer Ahmad, a police officer who voted for Gailani.

Her victory is all the more shocking because it happened in Herat, the province where the one-time conservative governor oppressed women almost as much as the Taliban officials he replaced. It's just one sign of how life has changed for women since strongman Ismail Khan was removed as provincial governor in September 2004.
<...>
"The presence of women, whatever reason they got in, makes me happy," said Qassim Akhgar, a political analyst in Kabul. "It's a statement against fundamentalism and the ways of the past. Instead of any of these warlords, if a woman won, I'd be even more happy. Even if Fauzia Gailani replaced President Hamid Karzai, I would be very happy."

Read it all - it might be a long wait for the movie.

First Blood

[Greyhawk]

Rioters near Paris claim their first victim:

PARIS, Monday, Nov. 8 - France's urban unrest claimed its first victim today when a 61-year-old man beaten by a hooded youth in the Parisian suburb of Stains last week died of his injuries.

According to the story, 1,400 vehicles were burned in 274 towns across the country on Sunday night. The Times speculates that the violence may be spreading beyond France:

An apparent copycat attack took place outside France for the first time, with Belgian police reporting today that five cars had been burned outside the main train station in Brussels.

As of this writing the mainstream media apparently hasn't heard about the riots in Denmark.

Update: Lying Times

[Greyhawk]

The latest from the New York Post:

The girlfriend of a Marine killed in Iraq said she was devastated when she saw how The New York Times cherry-picked a letter her "first love" intended her to read in case he died.

"It was sad that we had to go through this some more. I was upset about what they took out of that letter," said an emotional Emmylyn Anonical, 22, whose boyfriend Cpl. Jeffrey Starr died in Iraq earlier this year.

In her first public comments since the letter scandal erupted, Anonical told The Post that going public with the private letter was one of the hardest decisions of her life.

Seeing it used by The Times to misrepresent her boyfriend's beliefs about the war stung deeply, she said.

"The reason I chose to share that letter was the paragraph about why he was doing this, not the part about him expecting to die. It hurt, it really hurt," she said by phone from Seattle.

I'm saying read it all, but you're probably already there.

Michelle Malkin's update to the story she originally broke included this response from the New York Times reporter to an email from a reader:

Have you been to Iraq, Michael? Or to any other war, for that matter? If you have, you should know the anxiety and fear parents, spouses, and troops themselves feel when they deploy to war. And if you haven't, what right do you have to object when papers like The New York Times try to describe that anxiety and fear?

Previous posts: Lying Times and 2003.

Lies...

[Greyhawk]

...and the lying liars who tell them.

Jimmy's also been testifying at legal hearings. Are there laws covering that?

During one 48-hour period, Massey said under oath, his platoon set up roadblocks and killed "30-plus" civilians.
<...>
The testimony of Massey, who was honorably discharged six months after his medical evacuation from Iraq, is the main surviving thrust of the strategy by Hinzman's attorney to put the Iraq war on trial at the refugee hearing.

All thrust, no vector.

Every Day Heroes...

[Greyhawk]

...can be found Stateside too.

They Were Soldiers

[Greyhawk]

As we approach the 40th anniversay of the Ia Drang battle Jules Crittenden offers profiles of two veterans of the campaign. A must read.

This quote caught my attention:

Iraq has meant both pride and anguish for them. They worry about the new generation of combat vets. Eade said, ?What happens when Iraq is over? What happens to these guys? Somewhere, you?re going to end up on your own.?

You can help delay the dawn of that day. After you read the whole thing please consider a contribution to Project Valour IT.

Graphic Violence

[Greyhawk]

There's always grim news from Iraq - as the latest Iraq Index from the Brookings Institute confirms.

The number of daily attacks by insurgents trends upwards:

As do the numbers of multiple fatality bombings:

These statistics will be cited by some to support claims of a "growing insurgency". Others will counter that the terrorist attacks are confined to a very few provinces in Iraq:

But few will note one of the key results of those acts of terror:

As complete independence appears tantalizingly closer the people of Iraq grow increasingly angry at those who use terror to end that dream and prolong their agony. As more Iraqi forces replace Americans, expect to see those numbers presented in the final chart climb even higher. This is how the "insurgency" will be defeated.

And consider what tale the attack numbers also tell. A real count of terrorist fighters in Iraq, if such a thing were possible, would likely reveal their numbers are small - perhaps a few thousand - and their organization above small "squad level" non-existent. Al Qaeda in Iraq, probably the most formidable component of a fractious opposition, can accomplish little beyond sporadic (admittedly sometimes spectacular) violence. Their most "successful" attacks involve suicide bombers creating large numbers of casualties - and larger numbers of enemies to their cause. And the majority of their most "highly coordinated" suicide attacks fail, insofar as the attackers invariably die short of their goals.

They have succeeded in slowing progress in part of the country, but elsewhere they are non-entities. As prosperity fattens the pocketbooks of the Kurds in northern Iraq those in the south will notice; they will know why they lack the same, and have more reason to despise those who send human bombs into their markets.

I've been to Iraq - I've seen vulnerabilities. I know what an organized group numbering in the tens of thousands could do. That such things haven't happened can't be attributed to fear or reluctance on the part of the proven suicidal opponent in Iraq. They simply lack the numbers to carry out any truly effective tactical strike.

But a small but violent insurgency will always be able to replenish it's ranks - the presence of the foreign invader will always be sufficient incentive to attract at least enough fanatics to assure the numbers in the first two charts will be maintained. The tipping point in the war in Iraq will not come from killing off insurgents - it will be achieved by replacing the Americans who are killing them with Iraqi forces capable of doing the same.

Open Post

[Greyhawk] A sunset in Paris.

UN-Funded

[Greyhawk]

The UN is issuing urgent pleas as it's attempts to provide earthquake relief appear to be headed for disaster:

Reserves of supplies for the victims of the Pakistan earthquake are dwindling dangerously low as winter closes in and donations are slow, officials said yesterday.

The United Nations said last Wednesday that it needed $550m (?312m) to get emergency aid to people stranded by landslides in the mountainous area of northern Pakistan.
<...>
The UN's World Food Programme has only enough money ? $10m (?5.6m) ? to rent one-third of the helicopters it needs for a round-the-clock operation into the winter, said spokesman Simon Pluess. "If we don't get the money, there's a danger that in about two weeks we'll have to ground these helicopters."

Byrs said other agencies had similar shortfalls: the World Health Organisation has received 35% of its appeal, UNICEF 27% and the International Organisation for Migration 12.7%.

It's not clear if results of this year's Trick or Treat for UNICEF fundraiser have been included in the totals.

In other earthquake relief news this week

U.S. HELICOPTER RELIEF FLIGHTS TOP 1000 IN PAKISTAN

Disaster Assistance Center Pakistan ? U.S. military helicopter crews delivering relief aid to earthquake survivors in Pakistan?s remote mountain ranges have flown more than 1000 trips since beginning flight operations here Oct 11.

When helicopter flight operations ended for the day on Nov. 3, U.S. military pilots had flown 1,056 missions into Pakistan?s Kashmir and Northwest Frontier Provinces, a rugged mountainous region.

There are 24 U.S. military helicopters supporting Pakistani-led relief efforts. The U.S. Army has 17 CH-47 Chinooks and three UH-60 Blackhawks providing aid, while the U.S. Navy has two MH-53 Sea Stallions and two MH-60 Knighthawks.

More than 3,200 injured Pakistanis have been evacuated to medical facilities aboard U.S. military helicopters in the past 25 days. In addition, the amount of relief supplies delivered by U.S. military helicopters totaled more than 4 million pounds.

In other UN news this week:

An auditing board sponsored by the United Nations recommended yesterday that the United States repay as much as $208 million to the Iraqi government for contracting work in 2003 and 2004 assigned to Kellogg, Brown & Root, the Halliburton subsidiary.

The work was paid for with Iraqi oil proceeds, but the board said it was either carried out at inflated prices or done poorly. The board did not, however, give examples of poor work.

In other Iraq funding news this week, the Brookings Institute's newly updated Iraq Index reveals that of 13.6 billion in aid to Iraq pledged from non-US sources, two billion has been disbursed. My own projections based on their graph indicate the goals should be met within one to three thousand years.

Operation STEEL CURTAIN

[Greyhawk]

From CENTCOM:

U.S. AND IRAQI FORCES LAUNCH OPERATION STEEL CURTAIN

CAMP BLUE DIAMOND, AR RAMADI, Iraq ? Approximately 2,500 Marines, Sailors and Soldiers with Regimental Combat Team-2 and 1,000 Iraqi Army Soldiers began Operation Al Hajip Elfulathi (Steel Curtain) in western Al Anbar Nov. 5.

The objectives of Operation Steel Curtain are to restore security along the Iraqi-Syrian border and destroy the al Qaeda in Iraq's terror network operating throughout Husaybah.

The operation follows on the heels of Operations Iron Fist and River Gate. During Operation Steel Curtain, elements of the 1st Brigade, 1st Iraqi Army Division and specially trained scout platoons recruited from the Al Qaim region will take part in this operation.

Since early summer, the combat capabilities of the Iraqi forces have grown in Al Anbar province. Iraqi security forces now include almost two full infantry divisions of Iraqi Army Soldiers. During the past six months, two division headquarters have formed in the province, four brigade headquarters and ten infantry battalions have deployed to the Al Anbar to join the fight against al Qaeda in Iraq led insurgency. Operation Steel Curtain marks the first large-scale employment of multiple battalion-sized units of Iraqi Army forces in combined operations with Coalition Forces in the last year in al Anbar Province.

Terrorists have used the region?s porous borders to smuggle foreign fighters, money and equipment into Iraq to be used in their ongoing attacks against the Iraqi people and Coalition Forces. Terrorists continue to influence the local population of Husaybah through murder and intimidation and have vowed to prevent the citizens of western Al Anbar Province from participating in the democratic process.

The offensive is part of Operation Sayaid (Hunter) designed to deny al Qaeda in Iraq the ability to operate in the Euphrates River Valley and to establish a joint permanent security presence along the Syrian border. By eliminating terrorist influence in and around Husaybah, Coalition and Iraqi security forces are providing a safe and secure environment to allow the Iraqi people in that region to vote in the upcoming Dec. 15 national elections.

Additional information concerning the progress of Operation Steel Curtain will be provided as it becomes available.

"Operation Steel Curtain marks the first large-scale employment of multiple battalion-sized units of Iraqi Army forces in combined operations with Coalition Forces in the last year in al Anbar Province". As we noted in our look at the situation along Route Irish in Baghdad, this will be

...victory on two fronts. On one level it's battle won and ground gained in a very different kind of war. But it's not just the ground gained that matters. It's the successful deployment of Iraqi forces that makes this a victory on a second front for the good guys. The key to a successful return from Iraq for coalition forces is the assumption of responsibility for security by the Iraqis - and real progress is being made.

Prior to the attack coalition airsrikes took out three terrorist safe houses:

TERRORISTS KILLED IN HUSAYBAH AIR STRIKE IDENTIFIED

BAGHDAD, Iraq ? Coalition Forces identified five al-Qaida leaders killed by an air strike in Husaybah Oct. 29.

Coalition Forces conducted a series of raids on suspected terrorist and foreign fighter safe houses to capture or kill terrorists operating in the town of Husaybah. During the raids, Coalition forces destroyed three safe houses with air strikes using precision guided munitions.

One of the safe houses destroyed was the location of an apparent meeting between al Qaida in Iraq (AQIZ) terrorist leaders from the Husaybah and Al Qaim areas.

Coalition Forces now confirm the deaths of five key al Qaida in Iraq (AQIZ) terrorist leaders who were killed in that meeting. They are:

? Abu Asil, a North African terrorist, was the senior AQIZ foreign fighter facilitator in the Al Qaim region and an associate of Zarqawi. His influence stretched across Al Anbar province and he was relied upon to provide foreign fighters and suicide bombers to AQIZ terrorist cells in the region. Asil had contacts throughout the Middle East who were involved in the recruiting, transportation, training and smuggling of foreign fighters and suicide bombers into Iraq.

? Abu Raghad, a senior AQIZ foreign fighter terrorist cell leader who operated in the Husaybah area. He was responsible for planning, coordinating, and executing attacks against coalition forces. Those attacks include the emplacement of IEDs and mines and the facilitation, production and use of VBIEDs.

? Abu Talha, an AQIZ terrorist cell leader in the Ubaydi area. Talha directed, planned, coordinated and executed terrorist attacks in and around Ubaydi. Specifically, Talha?s cell was responsible for the production, and emplacement, and implementation of IED and VBIED attacks in the area.

? Abu Usama and Abu Salman, AQIZ terrorist cell leaders in the Husaybah area who were active in carrying out local terrorist attacks. Besides planning and conducting terrorist attacks, they procured weapons such as rockets, anti-aircraft missiles and mines for use against coalition forces. The weapons then would be distributed to their terrorist cells to be used in attacks against Iraqi Security and Coalition forces.

Bill Roggio has more, and analyzes the battle in the context of the wider conflict in western Iraq.

Other news from Iraq details strategy changes on the part of the terrorists. Their latest innovations include dressing as women:

Rebels Dressed as Women Attack Iraqi Police Station

BAGHDAD, Iraq, Saturday, Nov. 5 - Insurgent attacks across central Iraq, including one in which the guerrillas disguised themselves as women, left at least 16 dead on Friday as Shiite Arabs across the country began celebrating the end of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan.

In the deadliest assault, insurgents dressed in women's clothing attacked a police checkpoint in the town of Buhriz, 35 miles north of Baghdad, killing at least 6 police officers and wounding at least 10 others, American and Iraqi officials said. The guerrillas were armed with Kalashnikov rifles, rocket-propelled grenades and mortars, and pulled up in five cars, an Interior Ministry official said. The police officers killed at least two of the gunmen, he added.

And an ongoing effort to win hearts and minds:

Iraq's most feared terror group warned foreign diplomats yesterday to flee the country after announcing it will put to death two kidnapped Moroccan Embassy employees.

Insurgents killed 11 Iraqi security troops and an American soldier in separate attacks.

The warning came in a statement posted on an Islamist Web site in the name of al Qaeda in Iraq, which also claimed responsibility for the July kidnap-slaying of two envoys from Algeria and one from Egypt as well as the abduction and beheading of many other foreigners.

On Thursday, another Internet statement attributed to al Qaeda said the two Moroccans had been condemned to death. There was no indication yesterday they had been killed.

"We are renewing our threat to those so-called diplomatic missions who have insisted on staying in Baghdad and have not yet realized the repercussions of such a challenge to the will of the mujahideen," yesterday's statement said. "Let them know that there is no difference in our judgment between the head of a diplomatic mission and the lowest-level employee."

Make that "win cold hearts and deranged minds".

France:

[Greyhawk]

the two-state solution. (via Papa Ray)

The Other Iraq

[Greyhawk]

Earlier this week we looked at the incredible success of northern Iraq - a story virtually ignored in light of the ongoing terrorist attacks elsewhere in the country.

The Kurds are eager to build on that success. Next week will bring the launch of a new campaign to introduce the world to the opportunities available in the Kurdish regions of Iraq.

It's not politics - it's business. But even coming in the form of advertising it will be a big change to see a peaceful and prosperous Iraq on television and in newspapers. Opportunities abound in Iraq, and the immediate potential for growth in the Kurdish regions should prove attractive to investment. An economic boom is likely, and that growth will inevitably spread. Prosperity is contagious.

Take a first look at The Other Iraq, the web page that will launch in conjunction wih the campaign. A great collection of videos - be sure to look beyond the front page.

Open Post

[Greyhawk]

Recruiting Spin, Again

[Greyhawk]

The Washington Post spins recruiting data in an interesting way:

As sustained combat in Iraq makes it harder than ever to fill the ranks of the all-volunteer force, newly released Pentagon demographic data show that the military is leaning heavily for recruits on economically depressed, rural areas where youths' need for jobs may outweigh the risks of going to war.

Many of today's recruits are financially strapped, with nearly half coming from lower-middle-class to poor households, according to new Pentagon data based on Zip codes and census estimates of mean household income.

If you read that with the onoff switch in your head in the off position you might be inclined to think that's an unfair burden for the poor to bear. But if "nearly half" of recruits come from one group, then over half come from another - in this case, that group would be people with higher incomes.

I haven't had time to look at that actual report yet, and the Washington Post doesn't offer the full document - we'll just have to take their word for what it says. But that passage above isn't the only oddly revealing quote in the Post's coverage. Here's their description of Martinsville, Virginia, a town with higher than average recruiting rates:

Tucked into the Piedmont foothills of southern Virginia, where jobs in the local economy are scarce as NASCAR fans are plentiful,

I stopped reading there.

Odd that the impoverished NASCAR fans of Martinsville don't simply riot. No one in the media would blame them. It worked for the "French youth" in Paris, after all.

Those interested in actual facts and numbers on recruiting might find this GAO report useful.

And in a post last month we noted a few other facts that should be obvious to anyone considering recruiting numbers without trying to "spin" them to their own gain:

Secretary of the Army Francis J. Harvey, in a letter to the Washington Post:

On Oct. 11 the Defense Department released its recruiting figures for fiscal 2005. Much attention has been given to the Army missing its goal of 80,000 recruits by 6,600. Despite some alarmist rhetoric, the Army is not in a recruiting crisis or considering a draft.

To put this year's shortfall in perspective, the total of 73,400 people recruited is within 2 percent of the average recruitment each year for the past 10 years.

A notable point - that 2 percent figure. Recruiting has been nearly steady-state for a decade over all branches of the military - we recently looked at facts and figures here. While one fact remains undeniable - the Army did fall short of it's raised recruiting goal this year - a corollary is false, that being "because of the war".

Although in fact, one group of recruits was undoubtedly deterred from joining for just that reason - those who enlist solely "for an education" or "for the benefits". No doubt that incentive is still weighed as a major factor by those considering a future in uniform in any branch of service, but 4 years of the war on terror has now eliminated any expectation that such benefit comes at no cost to those who choose it. Having seen much media coverage of those who decided to bolt at the first sound of the guns while admitting their motive for enlisting was only for personal gain, we can assume many such people exist. You can also take my word for it based on personal experience - I've met several over the past two decades. Now of course, they must find other avenues to achieve their goals.

The unappreciated fact is that based on the real numbers, any loss of such potential troops has been offset by a like number of new recruits who are willing to move towards the sound of the guns. I've met several of them over the past two decades too - and many more over the last four years. I prefer their company to that of the other sort.

Theodore Roosevelt:

It is war-worn Hotspur, spent with hard fighting, he of the many errors and valiant end, over whose memory we love to linger, not over the memory of the young lord who "but for the vile guns would have been a valiant soldier."

*****

Here are the reports on demographics from recent years: 1997 - 1998 - 1999 - 2000 - 2001 - 2002 - 2003

Those who've answered the call come from all walks of life, all races, economic backgrounds, and regions of the US. It's past time to stop distorting numbers to define this new generation of heroes as losers with no other options in life.

Open Post

[Greyhawk]

There was a problem with trackbacks - but I think it's fixed.

Don't forget to

Support Valour-IT!!

Is Paris Burning?

[Greyhawk]

As allied forces ground their way across France in 1944 Hitler issued orders to his commanding general in Paris: the city was to be destroyed rather than surrendered by the Germans. In preparation for that apocalypse, tunnels beneath the city were filled with explosives. General Dietrich von Choltitz, the man who would carry out Hitler's orders, had already earned the Fuhrer's trust by destroying other cities in Europe during the course of the war. For extra incentive, von Choltitz knew his wife and children in Germany would likely be killed as punishment should he fail.

As the allies approached, partisan fighters in Paris rose up against the occupiers. But the situation was not simple; communists vied with De Gaulle's supporters to claim the role of liberators of Paris, and to declare themselves the rightful new government of France.

Back in the capital, the head of the Communist resistance, "Colonel Rol," was doing his best to disrupt the truce his Gaullist rivals were managing to impose. Issuing orders to his men to attack Germans at every opportunity, he denounced the cease-fire as a ruse to "exterminate the working classes of Paris," and permit "those stirred by hatred and fear of the people to work their dirty deals." Rol was uninterested in sparing the city from destruction; he wanted only to establish his faction as the ruling government. "Paris," he declared, "is worth 200,000 dead."

The events of those days were later dramatized in the movie Is Paris Burning? - the question Hitler is said to have asked on receiving the news of it's fall. But in the end von Choltitz couldn't destroy the City of Lights - Paris was spared - the city even the Nazis couldn't burn. (An excellent brief overview of the events, including the quoted passage above, can be found here.)

*****

Paris is a city of the world. It's been my good fortune to have visited a few such places during the course of a globe-trotting military career. And for me Paris is a few hours drive from home - a worthwhile drive, and one I look forward to making again. It's a weekend getaway. We can simply hop in the car and go, find a hotel once we get there, get Metro passes and do as we please. If there is any ill will towards Americans on the part of the population of Paris I have never seen a hint of it. Fluent in English, most are truly pleasantly surprised when I sputter a few words of high school French. Good times - we will return.

And everywhere you point your camera you are well rewarded. Many sights are instantly familiar...

...while many of the sights that aren't are what make Paris Paris...

Michael Moore owns Halliburton!

[Mrs Greyhawk]

New book debunks claims of celebrity activists

From World Net Daily:

"I don't own a single share of stock!" filmmaker Michael Moore proudly proclaimed.

He's right. He doesn't own a single share. He owns tens of thousands of shares ? including nearly 2,000 shares of Boeing, nearly 1,000 of Sonoco, more than 4,000 of Best Foods, more than 3,000 of Eli Lilly, more than 8,000 of Bank One and more than 2,000 of Halliburton, the company most vilified by Moore in "Fahrenheit 9/11."

Read the rest

I find this hilarious.

Open Post

[Greyhawk]

Support Valour-IT!!

Lying Times

[Greyhawk]

Michelle Malkin has a follow up report on the storm brewing over the New York Times' use of selective quotes from a final letter home from an American GI.

For those who might not have known, the Times took these words from US Marine Corporal Jeffrey B. Starr:

"Obviously if you are reading this then I have died in Iraq. I kind of predicted this, that is why I'm writing this in November. A third time just seemed like I'm pushing my chances. I don't regret going, everybody dies but few get to do it for something as important as freedom. It may seem confusing why we are in Iraq, it's not to me. I'm here helping these people, so that they can live the way we live. Not have to worry about tyrants or vicious dictators. To do what they want with their lives. To me that is why I died. Others have died for my freedom, now this is my mark."

And edited them down to this:

Sifting through Corporal Starr's laptop computer after his death, his father found a letter to be delivered to the marine's girlfriend. "I kind of predicted this," Corporal Starr wrote of his own death. "A third time just seemed like I'm pushing my chances."

In her update she notes that although the Times refused to respond to her inquiries, the "reporter" did attack at least one of the readers who had responded to this hatchet job:

Have you been to Iraq, Michael? Or to any other war, for that matter? If you have, you should know the anxiety and fear parents, spouses, and troops themselves feel when they deploy to war. And if you haven't, what right do you have to object when papers like The New York Times try to describe that anxiety and fear?

I've been to Iraq. And I characterized the Times disgraceful use of the words of an American hero as intellectually vacant moral cowardice. I was being generous.

Because I've seen numerous examples of such behavior on the part of the New York Times over the past several months. All involve selective quoting, misquoting, or simply claiming a GI said something without actually quoting them at all. Most range in repugnance from mildly annoying to grossly reprehensible - but in what I believe is the worst case they appear to attempt to frame a soldier for murder.

Let's look back on a few examples of New York Times attacks on American GIs, shall we?

*****

Last year the Times edited a quote from reporter Kevin Sites about a then-notorious shooting incident in Fallujah, and changed a remorseful young man into a cold-blooded killer concerned only that his actions had been caught on film:

Kevin Sites describes the immediate aftermath of the shooting of one of the thousands of insurgents in Fallujah (emphasis added):

For a moment, I'm paralyzed still taping with the old man in the foreground. I get up after a beat and tell the Marines again, what I had told the lieutenant -- that this man -- all of these wounded men -- were the same ones from yesterday. That they had been disarmed treated and left here.

At that point the Marine who fired the shot became aware that I was in the room. He came up to me and said, "I didn't know sir-I didn't know." The anger that seemed present just moments before turned to fear and dread.

Clearly the Marine is responding to Sites belated identification of the individuals as having already been treated and disarmed (a point which the Marine need not accept as Gospel anyway). But now watch the NY Times work it's "magic", making the key quote disappear:

BAGHDAD, Iraq, Nov. 21 - A marine who appears to shoot and kill an unarmed and wounded Iraqi prisoner in an NBC News video was not aware that the incident was being recorded, and moments later approached the cameraman with seemingly remorseful words - "I didn't know, sir, I didn't know" - according to the first public description of the events by the cameraman, Kevin Sites, since his brief and somewhat ambiguous initial report.

There are no clarifying remarks to follow, and no verbatim quotes from Sites' web page. (A feat I was able to accomplish with ease.) Sites was clear on what it was the Marine didn't know - but that didn't fit the Times' storyline. Pathetic.

*****

Earlier this year the Times doctored an op-ed piece written by milblogger and Army Reserve Captain Phil Carter, who had just been notified he was going to Iraq.

I'll let them explain, without changing any of the words:

The Op-Ed page in some copies of Wednesday's newspaper carried an incorrect version of the below article about military recruitment. The article also briefly appeared on NYTimes.com before it was removed. The writer, an Army reserve officer, did not say, "Imagine my surprise the other day when I received orders to report to Fort Campbell, Ky., next Sunday," nor did he characterize his recent call-up to active duty as the precursor to a "surprise tour of Iraq." That language was added by an editor and was to have been removed before the article was published. Because of a production error, it was not. The Times regrets the error.

They explained it further afterwards:

"Within 10 minutes" after receiving the changes, he recalled, "I said, 'No way.' Those were not words I would have said. It left the impression that I was conscripted." His call-up was "not a surprise," he told me, because he had actually "volunteered" for mobilization. (It's not clear when the editors first learned that he had volunteered for active duty.)
<...>
This sort of give-and-take is standard practice on the Op-Ed pages. "We try to clarify and improve copy," said Mr. Shipley. "We do this for the benefit of our contributors, many of whom are not professional writers.

That time I added emphasis - making the last line bold. It's curious, that not writers bit - considering that Phil has a great, well written blog, has been published in Slate (more than just that one link), and also at least once previously in the New York Times. So since "not a writer" doesn't apply they must have had some other reason for changing his words.

We can only guess what that might be.

I once noted that "There are two types of Iraq war veterans that have a tremendous appeal to the anti-war crowd - the fictional and the dead. Both types have a common, irresistible trait - others can claim to speak on their behalf." Phil is a living person, so they were forced to correct their "error".

*****

One of the oddest examples of the Times manipulation of quotes seems inexplicable at first glance. Following the US presidential elections last year they published a story on the reaction to the results from the troops in Iraq - in this case troops who were preparing for the assault on Fallujah. The Times reporter apparently found this quote to be essential to his story:

One soldier, Sgt. First Class John Hankins, said he thought that the election results would make little difference to the troops in combat, given the immensity of the challenges in Iraq and in the worldwide war on terror.

One domestic issue resonates with many troops, he said, because it angers them: gay marriage. But on many other issues, troops tend to be too busy or too far from home to pay close attention.

Note this isn't a direct quote - and because it's in the New York Times we have no way of knowing whether it's fabricated. And a careful read reveals we are left to determine on our own exactly what stance the troops take on the gay marriage issue - although the answer seems to be implied - they're against it.

However, it also seems a bit of a stretch to accept that this somehow reveals the thoughts of all GIs on the eve of battle in Fallujah: The war doesn't matter - we voted on gay marriage. But it does reveal a theme the Times and most other media sources were attempting to push after their defeat at the polls last November - their man lost not because Americans didn't trust him on national security, but because fundamentalist Christians and others among the unenlightened masses had voted based solely on "morals" issues.

A misrepresentation of soldier's thoughts on the eve of battle isn't the worst example of contempt the Times feels for military people, but it's certainly an indication that there's nothing they won't twist to their own purposes.

*****

Other examples of the contempt the New York Times feels for the American GI can be found in the stories where they insist they're speaking for the troops without ever actually quoting one supporting their claims. Last summer they concocted a story declaring that the troops were complaining that Americans aren't suffering enough as a result of the war:

WASHINGTON, July 23 - The Bush administration's rallying call that America is a nation at war is increasingly ringing hollow to men and women in uniform, who argue in frustration that America is not a nation at war, but a nation with only its military at war.

From bases in Iraq and across the United States to the Pentagon and the military's war colleges, officers and enlisted personnel quietly raise a question for political leaders: if America is truly on a war footing, why is so little sacrifice asked of the nation at large?

Once again - the exact opposite of the truth. I've never met a GI who wasn't proud of the fact that because of his or her service Americans are able to live lives of peace and prosperity - it's fundamental to what we do. And, in fact, in this case the Times was unable to provide a single quote from a GI supporting this accusation. The false characterization of troops complaining about this topic is absolute character assassination - and it's unforgivable.

*****

One thing should be obvious - you can't trust anything you read in the New York Times. They once proudly boasted of "all the news that's fit to print." It's a shame the honest truth is something they now find unfit for their pages. They are reduced to waging a war based on lies.

*****

With that in mind, this email from a soldier addressing the NY Times reprinted at Michelle's site offers damn good advice:

Should I die in Iraq, on this, my third tour, my wife will have in her possesion, a letter from me to be released to the press, should some slimy dirtbag like you try to make it look like I served in anything other than an honorable manner.

*****

I'm cruising through the archives, will post more examples soon. If you're aware of any other cases of the Times misquoting GIs please feel free to add them to the comments.

Open Post

[Mrs Greyhawk]

Iraq: The Vision

[Greyhawk]

Chaos reigns in the Iraq you read about on the front pages of your newspaper, see on your television, or hear of on your radio - there's no denying with each passing day the news seems ever more grim. More death, more bombs, more wanton destruction, and descriptions of soul-numbing atrocity piled on atrocity that force us to question our very humanity. Here's a report that terrorists used a 10 year old child as a human bomb. Here's news that October was the "fourth deadliest month for US troops thus far". Small wonder that poll results indicate an increasing numbers of Americans believe the war was not worth the cost. The pre-invasion vision of a peaceful, prosperous, democratic nation standing as a beacon of hope in the desert seems little more than a pipe-dream, at best the result of self-delusion of a few spread briefly to many - an illusion that never had a chance in a cruel and dangerous world...

...except for in those areas where it's actually happening. In the northern regions of Iraq, the dream of post-Saddam prosperity is becoming reality:

ON THE ground, Dream City looks like nothing more than another walled compound in a country full of ruined army bases.

It is only when watching the promotional film that the future of this particular site is revealed as a complex of 1,200 luxury homes, a shopping mall, parks and schools: in short, a slice of Western suburbia grafted on to an Iraqi city.

The $300 million (?170 million) project, the brainchild of an Iraqi exile businessman, is quickly rising on the outskirts of Arbil, one of the boom towns of the Kurdish region of Iraq. The skyline of the region?s other main city, Sulaymaniyah, is also a web of cranes and semi-built apartment blocks, the main street a long building site of hotels, offices and houses rapidly shooting up to accommodate the sudden flood of workers to the area.

It may seem fantastic, but it's not a fantasy. This is not Iraq without America, it's Iraq without "insurgents":

In Sulaimaniyah alone, there are 48 Turkish and 30 Iranian companies, as well as contractors from China, Singapore, the Gulf States and several European countries. They blast new roads through the mountains, build bridges, tunnels and underpasses and create the endless housing developments.

About one hundred Arab companies have moved here from other parts of the country. The fact that the region ? impoverished and attacked under Saddam Hussein, then racked by civil war after gaining de facto independence in 1991 ? has no infrastructure provides investors with a blank sheet for vast building projects. The surge of investment is lifting the rugged region out of poverty and rushing it into the 21st century.

Next to the ancient souk in Arbil, where merchants sell honeycombs and goats? cheese and pistachio nuts in a hive of crumbling alleyways, a vast shopping precinct of four 30- storey buildings is going up, with 6,000 retail spaces. On the road between the boom towns, peasants still live in Iron Age villages of stone and mud-brick huts, grazing sheep and travelling by donkey. Even in the centre of Arbil, people live in hovels carved from the ruined facades of Ottoman mansions on the Qalal, a hilltop fortress that has been lived in for 7,000 years ? the world?s oldest continuously inhabited site.

There is little trace of sentimentality for the passing of the old ways. ?We feel really happy watching our city being rebuilt,? said Ahmed Abdelhadi, a retired teacher working at his son?s shoe shop in the winding alleys of Arbil?s souk. ?It used to be just sewage in the streets.?

Read the whole thing. This is what the efforts of terrorist forces in the southern regions of Iraq have prevented for those portions of the country - thus far.

But be assured that the Kurds see themselves as citizens of Iraq - part of a nation with a future, moving on from the horrors of the past. That vision was recently shared with Americans by Massoud Barzani, president of the Kurdistan region of Iraq:

In recent weeks Iraq has passed three important milestones. The constitutional referendum on Oct. 15 was a powerful demonstration of Iraqis' desire to establish democracy and save a country still recovering from its disastrous history. Two days later the remains of 500 of my kinsmen were returned from a mass grave in southern Iraq for reburial in Iraqi Kurdistan. Another 7,500 of my kin are still missing after "disappearing" from a Baathist concentration camp in 1983 in the first phase of the genocidal Anfal campaign, which caused the death of 182,000 Kurdish civilians during the 1980s. Then, on Oct. 19, Saddam Hussein finally went on trial.

None of this would have been possible without the U.S.-led liberation of Iraq, an operation in which Kurds were proud partners. After the U.S. armed forces, our pesh merga was the second-largest member of the coalition. Today the security forces of Iraqi Kurdistan remain highly capable and reliable allies of the United States. By consistently working with the United States and reaching out to our fellow Iraqis, we have been at the heart of a political process based on equality and inclusion, on consensus and compromise.

Above all, we have taken the path of engagement because, like the United States, we need Iraq to succeed and avoid a repetition of the horrors of the past. We have therefore been engaged in Iraqi national politics and governance. Kurds have joined the new Iraqi military in large numbers. We have made unprecedented sacrifices. Time and again we have pursued political settlements by encouraging flexibility and consensus.
<...>
In Iraqi Kurdistan we have, for the past 14 years, accepted the idea that we are a diverse society. Ethnic and religious minorities -- Assyrian and Chaldean Christians, Yazidis and Turkomans -- all serve in the Kurdistan regional government and all have the right to educate their children in their mother tongues and to broadcast in their own languages. We firmly believe that the Middle East must accommodate all of its peoples and all of their languages and religions. Nor is Kurdistan alone in this regard. In the new Iraq, the Kurds see their role as bridge builders, as a community that has every interest in an inclusive political process that gives Iraq a better future while addressing the injustices of the past.
<...>
The restraint of the victims, the defiance of the millions who vote -- refusing to be drawn into the civil war fantasies of the terrorists -- vindicate the courage and vision of the United States and its coalition partners. Backing this fundamentally sound vision has been President Bush's moral understanding of the healing and dignity that democracy confers upon all men and women, an understanding that the Kurds share.

The United States has never wavered in its quest to help Iraqis build a democracy that rewards compromise and consensus. The ever-generous American people have paid a tragic price, the lives of their finest men and women, to advance the banner of freedom and democracy, a sacrifice for which we are profoundly grateful. We all know that democracy is the only solution to political problems, the only method by which grievances can be addressed. In this war and for these principles, the Kurds are true friends of the United States.

These thoughts will be dismissed, this bright light will be ignored by those whose eyes are fixed on the darkness. Indeed, to rebuild is much more difficult than to destroy, and to turn and run may seem the easiest option of all. I'd like to say that these are crucial days in the history of Iraq - and by extension the world - but the truth is that every day in Iraq is a turning point in history, another day closer to the future, another step towards a world shaped by those with the will to make their visions and dreams become reality.

And another day of struggle between light and darkness.

I revisited some words I wrote from Baghdad on the day following the January elections - and I found there's nothing that doesn't still apply to every one of the days since, and the days to come:

So amidst the triumph, I saw yesterday as a Memorial Day, of a sort, for those many who fell to make it possible. Some might try and use those deaths for their own ends, or to justify their belief that we should never have walked this path. Such people don't believe in heroes. They can't even comprehend this simple fact; no one is more opposed to war than the soldier. He knows the cost and has seen the carnage. But as I wrote at the top of the sidebar long ago: The Mudville Gazette is the on-line voice of an American warrior, who prefers to see peaceful change render force of arms unnecessary. Until that day he stands fast with those who struggle for freedom, strike for reason, and pray for a better tomorrow.

Today we re-build broken things. Grab a hammer or get out of the way.