Letters to the Editor
susan sunflower
Published Letters: 1373 Editor's Choice: 29
-
yes, I had an oh-oh moment yesterday ...
[Read the article: Everyone we fight in Iraq is now "al-Qaida"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I noticed the amount of military activity in cities outside of Baghdad -- the city we have having the surge to stabilize ... so that the government can proceed with "reconciliation" by bringing Sunnis into the tent and that pesky oil revenue sharing bill.
Then I remembered that "we had been warned " that those rascals were likely to create just such "diversions" ...
Then I read we were going to clear Fallujah again ... which reminded me of just how devastating "clearing" has been.
I had noticed that our reported use of airstrikes was increasing -- particularly since we insisted on entering Sadr City (which was doing rather well without our help and was now subject to airstrikes, the rationale for which varied (we were searching for some missing news people the last time ... and then there were alquada ... but notice, we never seem declare these airstrikes to have succeeded)
With so much of our force concentrating on Baghdad, what's left is airstrikes ....
wollcott at Vanity Fair has links to 3 articles on our ramped up airstrikes, one of which includes news that we "took out" a train station -- yes, infrastructure.
url: http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/blogs/wolcott/2007/06/william_s_lind_.html
If this surge results in high levels of civilian casualties, I think we may enrage iraqis to terrifying new levels of insurgency -- by all parties. Hell, we might even bring down the government.
p.s. One of the reasons Afghanistan is going to hell in a handbasket right now is the number of recent "collateral damage" civilian deaths ... while cvilian deaths seems to play just fine in Peoria ... in the Muslim world they are just further evidence of just how racist and anti-muslim our motives are.
-
Hick's article very interesting and scary ....
[Read the article: Everyone we fight in Iraq is now "al-Qaida"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]click on my name for URL // WaPo registration required.
Remember that plan to deploy units into neighborhoods to stabilize them ... uh, that's not mentioned.
What we're doing to stabilize "the capital" -- apparently -- is stabilizing (aka - attacking, clearing, etc.) outlying areas that we believe attacks on the capital come from ... many of which -- the article mentions -- we have not engaged much, if at all, in years.
There's more and it's worse ... The plan is dependent on Iraqi forces and the news on the Iraqi is unchanged ....
Oh, and:
A senior commander in Iraq, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue, said that U.S. plans do not call for holding cleared areas. Rather he said, the "Battle of the Baghdad Belts," as some in the military call the new offensive, is a series of raids designed to reduce attacks on the capital and thus support the main effort, which is to improve the security of Baghdad's population.
we don't plan to stick around to hold these area ... man, these flashbacks are getting worse ...
-
The plan to build the various WALLS between neighborhoods in Baghdad was scuttled April 23, 2007 ...
[Read the article: Everyone we fight in Iraq is now "al-Qaida"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]http://select.nytimes.com/search/restricted/article?res=F40610FB3C5A0C708EDDAD0894DF404482
... i.e., after the Surge had already (largelybeen green-lighted.
I wonder if the neighboring policing plan died with the scuttling of the walls ... or it just lost steam -- it may be ongoing for all I know ... but.... I thought the surge was meant to be in-support of THAT effort.
(I do wonder sometimes about those bridges that were blown up ...)
-
It occurs to me that it may also be a way to transform this occupation INTO a WAR ....
[Read the article: Everyone we fight in Iraq is now "al-Qaida"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]One of our "problems" with having "won" the invasion and becoming an occupying force so quickly -- all those years ago -- is that we were then expected by international law to behave like an "occupying force" ... a burden the neocons never planned for and which we have managed ... well, you know.
Obviously this democratically elected monstrosity of a government isn't getting us anywere --but maybe if we declared "war" against al-Qaeda ... an old-fashioned honest-to-gosh WAR (with US and our pals the Sunnis and the Shiia standing up against evil-incarnate al-Qaeda) we might be able to gain operational latitude, iykwim. You know, sorta like the Jessica Lynch rescue story ....
I often imagine Cheney and ilk thinking wistfully back to the OLD DAYS, when our CIA-backed military strong men would formally ask our "help" in controlling their unruly domestic problems. It was so much simpler then ... when we had a strong man... If we only had a strong man we might be able to get out from under this "occupying force" yoke of obligation permanently ... let them clean up their own mess. Sigh, it WAS so much easier when we just had to deal with our "guy" .... Sigh, I guess some people just aren't ready for democracy ... (sarcasm)
-
Murphy -- yes -- while I cannot find a cite beyond the one below which is inadequate ...
[Read the article: Everyone we fight in Iraq is now "al-Qaida"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I recall reading shortly after the conclusion of the seige of Najaf (Al-Sadr taking on the USA and the coalition) that the Spanish (whose troops were stationed near Najaf -- Najaf was their town, as Basra was/is British) were so appalled by our heavy handed tactics that they threatened to essentially mutiny -- walk off the job -- and I cannot find a cite now, damn it.
Robert Fisk's portait from 04/05/2004 of the Spanish's part in coalition is of interest -- http://www.counterpunch.org/fisk04052004.html) -- includes:
When bombs killed almost 200 people in Madrid last month, Shi'ite clerics visited the Spanish troops in Najaf to express their condolences. That is unlikely to happen again.
As I recall, the Madrid bombers (another frontline, irrc) were likely Spanish/Morrocan Al-Qaeda wannabes ... behaving stupidly... attacking a "coalition country" already on its way home, for effect, because they could...
Did you see last week's Frontline?
It was presented "authoritatively" that following Najaf, we "bought back" arms from Al Sadr amounting to a couple million dollars or more as part of the "peace settlement" brokered by Al-Sistani?