Iraq: Where Was the Plan? - L. Paul Bremer III, New York Times
Iraq: Too Heavy a Hand - Richard Perle, New York Times
Iraq: Das Loot - Anne-Marie Slaughter, New York Times
Iraq: So Much for Good Intentions - Kenneth Pollack, New York Times
Iraq: There’s No Freedom Gene - Danielle Pletka, New York Times
Iraq: Worries Over Being ‘Slimed’ - Nathaniel Fick, New York Times
Iraq: Congress in Recess - Paul Eaton, New York Times
Iraq: The Army Grew Into the Job - Frederick Kagan, New York Times
Iraq: Worse Than Lyndon Johnson’s Team? - Anthony Cordesman, New York Times
Iraq: A Crude Case for War? - Steven Mufson, Washington Post
Iraq: War's Price a Burden for Decades - Joseph Stiglitz, Philadelphia Inquirer
Iraq: Public Suffers War Fatigue - Dick Polman, Philadelphia Inquirer
Iraq: Mess will Snare Next President - Trudy Rubin, Philadelphia Inquirer
Iraq: Mistakes, but Just War - Richard Perle, London Daily Telegraph
Iraq: Prolonging the Horror - Simon Jenkins, London Times
Iraq: War's Price Tag - Los Angeles Times editorial
Iraq: Five Years Later - Philadelphia Inquirer editorial
Patton, Iraq, and the 2008 Vote - Jeff Jacoby, Boston Globe
Full Version: IRAQ
After Iraqby Jed BabbinRegardless of what happens in Iraq, the war will not be over.Today's Top Headlines
Tales of Winter Soldier II
by Katie O'MalleyUp close and personal at the anti-war bash.
On the Fifth Anniversary of the Iraq War
by Stephen Soldz / March 17th, 2008
As we contemplate the fifth anniversary of the unleashing of this horror which has cost so many their lives, let us also remember the considerable psychic toll of this act of aggression and destruction. Millions of Iraqis suffer the agonies of loss of loved ones. Uncounted numbers suffer the loss of their homes and communities which, more even than lodging, provide anchors of stability in life. And virtually all Iraqis have lost that sense of progress and hope that makes life’s pains and agonies bearable. Long after the brutal contests for power between rival factions have been resolved through dialog or wound down through exhaustion, Iraqis will be struggling to put together their lives, to create a world in which daily life is not unimaginable, and in which hope for the future exists. (Full article …)
US-IRAQ: Rules of Engagement “Thrown Out the Window”
by Dahr Jamail / March 15th, 2008
SILVER SPRING, Maryland, Mar 15 (IPS) — Garret Reppenhagen received integral training about the Geneva Conventions and the Rules of Engagement during his deployment in Kosovo. But in Iraq, “Much of this was thrown out the window,” he says. (Full article …)
Bush to hail prospect of Iraq "strategic victory": As he marks 5 year anniversary mark
Baghdad Museum Will Not Open: Was ruined in aftermath of invasion
Pentagon admits no Saddam-Qaeda link: US administration tries to bury release of Pentagon study confirming that Saddam had no link to Bin Laden
Stuck in the Iraq Loop - Fareed Zakaria, Newsweek
What Has the Surge Really Achieved? - Jonathan Foreman, Pajamas Media
Security Gains Reverse Iraq's Spiral - Gary Langer, ABC News
Poll: Iraqis See Progress - Tom Bevan, Real Clear Politics
War Issue Waning - Linda Chavez, Washington Times
What Has the Surge Really Achieved? - Jonathan Foreman, Pajamas Media
Security Gains Reverse Iraq's Spiral - Gary Langer, ABC News
Poll: Iraqis See Progress - Tom Bevan, Real Clear Politics
War Issue Waning - Linda Chavez, Washington Times
How Could So Many People Buy into Bush's "Patriotism Sweepstakes" War?Robert Parry, Sam Parry, Nat Parry, Consortium News
War on Iraq: The Iraq War represents a systemic failure of American political and journalistic institutions.
Five Years Later
Spencer Ackerman
March 19, 2008 | web only
According to interviews with detained members of al-Qaeda in Iraq, the most powerful recruitment tool for Islamic extremists is ... the war itself.
Our stated enemy in Iraq appears to be a nightmare of our own miscalculated creation.
Residents of Buhriz, a former Saddam Hussein stronghold about 35 miles north of Baghdad, stand around the body of a suspected al-Qaeda fighter on Aug. 15, 2007. (AP Photo)
New York Times to America:
Stay the Course in Iraq
by David Bromwich
Stay the Course in Iraq
by David Bromwich
THE ROVING EYE
Shocked, awed and left to rot
US Vice President Dick Cheney is spot on when he talks of "phenomenal changes" in Iraq. Millions of Iraqis have lost their homes, their jobs, their families, their dreams and in countless cases their own lives because of a pre-emptive war. And anti-American Muqtada al-Sadr will ultimately be the lord of what remains of Iraq. - Pepe Escobar (Mar 19, '08)
DISPATCHES FROM AMERICA
Already counting to six
When it comes to the American position in Iraq, short of an act of God, the sixth anniversary of George W Bush's war of choice is going to dawn much like the fifth one, no matter who's elected US president in November. - Tom Engelhardt (Mar 19, '08)
Shocked, awed and left to rot
US Vice President Dick Cheney is spot on when he talks of "phenomenal changes" in Iraq. Millions of Iraqis have lost their homes, their jobs, their families, their dreams and in countless cases their own lives because of a pre-emptive war. And anti-American Muqtada al-Sadr will ultimately be the lord of what remains of Iraq. - Pepe Escobar (Mar 19, '08)
DISPATCHES FROM AMERICA
Already counting to six
When it comes to the American position in Iraq, short of an act of God, the sixth anniversary of George W Bush's war of choice is going to dawn much like the fifth one, no matter who's elected US president in November. - Tom Engelhardt (Mar 19, '08)
IRAQ
Five Years Of War
Today marks the fifth anniversary of the U.S. invasion of Iraq, a preventative war of choice whose purpose, according to President Bush, was "to disarm Iraq, to free its people, and to defend the world from grave danger." Five years later, it is clear there were no weapons of mass destruction to disarm in Iraq and no grave danger from which to defend. In 2006, a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) concluded that the war in Iraq had become "the 'cause celebre' for jihadists, breeding a deep resentment of U.S. involvement in the Muslim world and cultivating supporters for the global jihadist movement" faster than the United States and its allies can reduce the threat. The 2007 NIE concluded that "al-Qaeda [had] reorganized to pre-9/11 strength," largely as a result of the United States turning its attention away from Afghanistan and Pakistan in order to focus on Iraq. Also, al Qaeda's association with insurgents in Iraq helped "energize the broader Sunni extremist community, raise resources, and...recruit and indoctrinate operatives." Far from making the United States safer, the Iraq war has made the world much more dangerous.
A FAILED RECONSTRUCTION: A recent World Health Organization and Iraqi health ministry report estimated that 151,000 people were killed between the start of the invasion on March 20, 2003 and June 2006. In a March 17 report, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) said that millions of Iraqis are still deprived of clean water and medical care, describing Iraq's health care system as "now in worse shape than ever." Iraqis endure intense heat in the summer and freezing cold in the winter because of a lack of electricity, even though more than $6 billion, mostly in American money, has been devoted to improving supply. The New York Times reported that "typical daily peaks are around 4,500 megawatts." According to a recent report by the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, "that's only about 500 megawatts more than what it was shortly after the start of reconstruction five years ago -- before the completion of thousands of American-supported projects." Garbage collection is notoriously unreliable, with refuse often piling up "for days, sometimes weeks, emanating toxic fumes." In a new report, the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees stated that, five years after the U.S.-led invasion, Iraqis are still fleeing in large numbers. Iraqis topped the list of asylum seekers in industrialized countries for the second year running, accounting for more than 10 percent of the total with 45,200 applications last year. "It is important to bear in mind, however, that Iraqi asylum seekers in industrialized countries represent only one percent of the estimated 4.5 million Iraqis uprooted by the conflict," the report said. Amnesty International reports that Iraq continues to be "one of the most dangerous countries in the world, with hundreds of Iraqi civilians killed every month."
A FAILING POLITICAL RECONCILIATION: In the latest blow against progress toward political accommodation between Iraq's ethnic and sectarian factions, a conference to reconcile Iraq's political groups began to unravel even before it got under way on Tuesday, as members of the Sunni Iraqi Accordance Front said "they would not participate in the conference until Shiite lawmakers address their political demands." The Shiite bloc led by cleric Moqtada al-Sadr and some smaller groups also boycotted the conference, revealing the deep and persistent divisions between and within Iraq's main sects. Over the past few months, several legislative accomplishments that were first seen as signs of progress turned out to be much less favorable on closer inspection, or were simply reversed. In January, a de-Baathification reform law, initially "billed as the first significant political step forward in Iraq after months of deadlock," was "riddled with loopholes and caveats to the point that some Sunni and Shiite officials say it could actually exclude more former Baathists than it lets back in." In February, the passage of a package of three laws (addressing amnesty for detainees, budget allocations, and provincial powers) was hailed by conservatives as a significant political advance. Days later, the provincial powers law was struck down by Iraq's three-member presidency council, breaching the compromise that had enabled the passage of the three laws.
WAR ARCHITECTS STILL IN DENIAL: The individuals who devised and supported the Iraq war still refuse to admit error. President Bush insists that the war was worth the "high cost in lives and treasure." On separate surprise visits to Iraq this week, Vice President Dick Cheney and Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) seemed oblivious to the tragedy that their policy had unleashed upon the people of Iraq. Cheney preposterously claimed that the Iraq war has been a "successful endeavor" and blithely "warned against losing the gains the surge has produced," even as Baghdad was again wracked by explosions. On the same day that a suicide bomber killed over forty people in the Shia shrine city of Kerbala, McCain repeated his mantra that "the surge is working." Here at home, the war architects frantically cast blame on each other, and even on the Iraqis themselves. American Enterprise Institute (AEI) scholar Richard Perle still maintains that invading Iraq was "the right decision," but blames Iraq proconsul L. Paul Bremer for "underestimat[ing] the task" of nation-building. Douglas Feith, the former director of the Pentagon's Office of Special Plans, has also blamed Bremer for "mishandling...the political transition" in Iraq. AEI analyst Danielle Pletka blamed the Iraqi people for not embracing the opportunity afforded them by the American invasion and occupation. Alas, Pletka laments, "there is no freedom gene."
A WAY FORWARD: The Iraq invasion has wrought a fractured, dysfunctional government, a disunified largely militia-controlled state closely allied with Iran to the east and in simmering conflict with Turkey to the north, an open-source training ground for terrorists and a cause around which global jihadists have rallied. American standing is at a low point in the Middle East and Arab world, with Arab democrats and reformers isolated and frustrated. It not enough to simply stay the course. The United States must reset its strategy by looking beyond the deteriorating situation in Iraq in order to counter the threat from global terrorist groups and ensure stability in the entire Middle East and Gulf region, using the credible promise of withdrawal from Iraq to encourage Iraqi leaders to come to a sustainable political accommodation. This is an essential first step in order to correct the tragic policy mistakes of the last years, of which the decision to invade Iraq is the most obvious and profound.
Five Years Of War
Today marks the fifth anniversary of the U.S. invasion of Iraq, a preventative war of choice whose purpose, according to President Bush, was "to disarm Iraq, to free its people, and to defend the world from grave danger." Five years later, it is clear there were no weapons of mass destruction to disarm in Iraq and no grave danger from which to defend. In 2006, a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) concluded that the war in Iraq had become "the 'cause celebre' for jihadists, breeding a deep resentment of U.S. involvement in the Muslim world and cultivating supporters for the global jihadist movement" faster than the United States and its allies can reduce the threat. The 2007 NIE concluded that "al-Qaeda [had] reorganized to pre-9/11 strength," largely as a result of the United States turning its attention away from Afghanistan and Pakistan in order to focus on Iraq. Also, al Qaeda's association with insurgents in Iraq helped "energize the broader Sunni extremist community, raise resources, and...recruit and indoctrinate operatives." Far from making the United States safer, the Iraq war has made the world much more dangerous.
A FAILED RECONSTRUCTION: A recent World Health Organization and Iraqi health ministry report estimated that 151,000 people were killed between the start of the invasion on March 20, 2003 and June 2006. In a March 17 report, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) said that millions of Iraqis are still deprived of clean water and medical care, describing Iraq's health care system as "now in worse shape than ever." Iraqis endure intense heat in the summer and freezing cold in the winter because of a lack of electricity, even though more than $6 billion, mostly in American money, has been devoted to improving supply. The New York Times reported that "typical daily peaks are around 4,500 megawatts." According to a recent report by the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, "that's only about 500 megawatts more than what it was shortly after the start of reconstruction five years ago -- before the completion of thousands of American-supported projects." Garbage collection is notoriously unreliable, with refuse often piling up "for days, sometimes weeks, emanating toxic fumes." In a new report, the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees stated that, five years after the U.S.-led invasion, Iraqis are still fleeing in large numbers. Iraqis topped the list of asylum seekers in industrialized countries for the second year running, accounting for more than 10 percent of the total with 45,200 applications last year. "It is important to bear in mind, however, that Iraqi asylum seekers in industrialized countries represent only one percent of the estimated 4.5 million Iraqis uprooted by the conflict," the report said. Amnesty International reports that Iraq continues to be "one of the most dangerous countries in the world, with hundreds of Iraqi civilians killed every month."
A FAILING POLITICAL RECONCILIATION: In the latest blow against progress toward political accommodation between Iraq's ethnic and sectarian factions, a conference to reconcile Iraq's political groups began to unravel even before it got under way on Tuesday, as members of the Sunni Iraqi Accordance Front said "they would not participate in the conference until Shiite lawmakers address their political demands." The Shiite bloc led by cleric Moqtada al-Sadr and some smaller groups also boycotted the conference, revealing the deep and persistent divisions between and within Iraq's main sects. Over the past few months, several legislative accomplishments that were first seen as signs of progress turned out to be much less favorable on closer inspection, or were simply reversed. In January, a de-Baathification reform law, initially "billed as the first significant political step forward in Iraq after months of deadlock," was "riddled with loopholes and caveats to the point that some Sunni and Shiite officials say it could actually exclude more former Baathists than it lets back in." In February, the passage of a package of three laws (addressing amnesty for detainees, budget allocations, and provincial powers) was hailed by conservatives as a significant political advance. Days later, the provincial powers law was struck down by Iraq's three-member presidency council, breaching the compromise that had enabled the passage of the three laws.
WAR ARCHITECTS STILL IN DENIAL: The individuals who devised and supported the Iraq war still refuse to admit error. President Bush insists that the war was worth the "high cost in lives and treasure." On separate surprise visits to Iraq this week, Vice President Dick Cheney and Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) seemed oblivious to the tragedy that their policy had unleashed upon the people of Iraq. Cheney preposterously claimed that the Iraq war has been a "successful endeavor" and blithely "warned against losing the gains the surge has produced," even as Baghdad was again wracked by explosions. On the same day that a suicide bomber killed over forty people in the Shia shrine city of Kerbala, McCain repeated his mantra that "the surge is working." Here at home, the war architects frantically cast blame on each other, and even on the Iraqis themselves. American Enterprise Institute (AEI) scholar Richard Perle still maintains that invading Iraq was "the right decision," but blames Iraq proconsul L. Paul Bremer for "underestimat[ing] the task" of nation-building. Douglas Feith, the former director of the Pentagon's Office of Special Plans, has also blamed Bremer for "mishandling...the political transition" in Iraq. AEI analyst Danielle Pletka blamed the Iraqi people for not embracing the opportunity afforded them by the American invasion and occupation. Alas, Pletka laments, "there is no freedom gene."
A WAY FORWARD: The Iraq invasion has wrought a fractured, dysfunctional government, a disunified largely militia-controlled state closely allied with Iran to the east and in simmering conflict with Turkey to the north, an open-source training ground for terrorists and a cause around which global jihadists have rallied. American standing is at a low point in the Middle East and Arab world, with Arab democrats and reformers isolated and frustrated. It not enough to simply stay the course. The United States must reset its strategy by looking beyond the deteriorating situation in Iraq in order to counter the threat from global terrorist groups and ensure stability in the entire Middle East and Gulf region, using the credible promise of withdrawal from Iraq to encourage Iraqi leaders to come to a sustainable political accommodation. This is an essential first step in order to correct the tragic policy mistakes of the last years, of which the decision to invade Iraq is the most obvious and profound.
Links at:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-naima...ry_b_92350.html
On the Fifth Anniversary, What Could We Cautiously Say About the Iraqi
Death Toll?
Today thousands of Americans will gather in hundreds of vigils across
the country sponsored by MoveOn and United for Peace and Justice,
among others, to mark the fifth anniversary of the illegal and unjust
war in Iraq. These vigils will note the 3990 U.S. deaths and 29,314
wounded, and will note the terrible toll the war has taken on Iraq.
But what is a cautious, conservative, responsible thing to say about
the Iraqi death toll? No accurate count can be given, and the question
has been further clouded by poor reporting in the U.S. media, and
misleading commentary by the Bush Administration and its supporters.
There are two scientific studies that have used standard techniques
for estimating the death toll.
The first, generally referred to as the "Lancet study," estimated that
just over 600,000 Iraqis had been killed as a result of the invasion
as of July 2006.
The second, generally referred to as the WHO study or the Iraq Health
Ministry study, estimated that 151,000 Iraqis had been killed over
essentially the same period. There is some reasonable basis for
questioning whether this study underestimates the death rate - indeed,
some Iraqi officials indicated that they thought that it did - but it
was a scientific study, using generally accepted methods.
If we assume that the tally of deaths reported by Iraq Body Count,
while not giving us an accurate picture of the overall scale of death
(no tally could, in such a situation), does give us an rough picture,
when compared to itself over time, of changes in the death rate, then
we can extrapolate these two numbers forward to the present.
The Lancet study would suggest an Iraqi death toll today of about
1,190,000. This is how we arrive at the Just Foreign Policy estimate
of Iraqi deaths. This is also broadly consistent with the death toll
of 1.2 million estimated by Opinion Research Business in Britain in
September 2007 (as of August 2007).
The WHO/Iraqi Health Ministry Study, based on the same extrapolation,
would suggest a death toll today of about 300,000.
Note that the WHO study also uses Iraq Body Count trends to
extrapolate, suggesting that this is a reasonable approach, in the
absence of better information.
Thus, a cautious, balanced appraisal based on available scientific
information would suggest an Iraqi death toll today of between 300,000
and 1.2 million since March 2003.
Note that, if you look for estimates of war dead in past wars - for
example, Vietnamese dead in the Vietnam War - you will also see what
appears at first to be a wide range. The exact death toll will never
be known. More studies - and certainly such an important question
deserves to be further studied - will give us more information. But as
of today, a responsible, cautious, conservative thing to say is that
between 300,000 and 1.2 million Iraqis have died, and the statement
"hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have died" has very strong support.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-naima...ry_b_92350.html
On the Fifth Anniversary, What Could We Cautiously Say About the Iraqi
Death Toll?
Today thousands of Americans will gather in hundreds of vigils across
the country sponsored by MoveOn and United for Peace and Justice,
among others, to mark the fifth anniversary of the illegal and unjust
war in Iraq. These vigils will note the 3990 U.S. deaths and 29,314
wounded, and will note the terrible toll the war has taken on Iraq.
But what is a cautious, conservative, responsible thing to say about
the Iraqi death toll? No accurate count can be given, and the question
has been further clouded by poor reporting in the U.S. media, and
misleading commentary by the Bush Administration and its supporters.
There are two scientific studies that have used standard techniques
for estimating the death toll.
The first, generally referred to as the "Lancet study," estimated that
just over 600,000 Iraqis had been killed as a result of the invasion
as of July 2006.
The second, generally referred to as the WHO study or the Iraq Health
Ministry study, estimated that 151,000 Iraqis had been killed over
essentially the same period. There is some reasonable basis for
questioning whether this study underestimates the death rate - indeed,
some Iraqi officials indicated that they thought that it did - but it
was a scientific study, using generally accepted methods.
If we assume that the tally of deaths reported by Iraq Body Count,
while not giving us an accurate picture of the overall scale of death
(no tally could, in such a situation), does give us an rough picture,
when compared to itself over time, of changes in the death rate, then
we can extrapolate these two numbers forward to the present.
The Lancet study would suggest an Iraqi death toll today of about
1,190,000. This is how we arrive at the Just Foreign Policy estimate
of Iraqi deaths. This is also broadly consistent with the death toll
of 1.2 million estimated by Opinion Research Business in Britain in
September 2007 (as of August 2007).
The WHO/Iraqi Health Ministry Study, based on the same extrapolation,
would suggest a death toll today of about 300,000.
Note that the WHO study also uses Iraq Body Count trends to
extrapolate, suggesting that this is a reasonable approach, in the
absence of better information.
Thus, a cautious, balanced appraisal based on available scientific
information would suggest an Iraqi death toll today of between 300,000
and 1.2 million since March 2003.
Note that, if you look for estimates of war dead in past wars - for
example, Vietnamese dead in the Vietnam War - you will also see what
appears at first to be a wide range. The exact death toll will never
be known. More studies - and certainly such an important question
deserves to be further studied - will give us more information. But as
of today, a responsible, cautious, conservative thing to say is that
between 300,000 and 1.2 million Iraqis have died, and the statement
"hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have died" has very strong support.
Iraq's regional ambitions to take decades to recover
Baghdad (AFP) Mar 19, 2008 - Iraq's once-lofty ambition to be a major power lies in tatters five years after the US-led invasion, with Turkish forces crossing its northern border with impunity and former bitter foe Iran now the preeminent force in the region. What will it take for Iraq to recover is unknown but an end to ethnic strife and a sense of national unity are prerequisites. Observers say that can be best reache ... more
iraq
+ US military growing weary in Iraq
Washington (AFP) Mar 19, 2008 - Five years after the US-led invasion of Iraq, the US military is flagging under long and repeated deployments that have taken a toll on troops and hurt its readiness to deal with other crises. "People are tired," is the way Admiral Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, summed it up at a congressional hearing last month. The third longest war in US history ... more
iraq
+ Cheney: Iraq security boost won't speed US withdrawals
Baghdad (AFP) Mar 19, 2008 - US Vice President Dick Cheney said on Monday he had seen significant security improvements in Iraq but warned that this would not automatically yield more American troop withdrawals after July. "No, it does not," Cheney said during a surprise visit to Baghdad, stressing that troop levels would be guided by "conditions on the ground in the months ahead". ... more
iraq
+ America's smallest allies bolster shrinking Iraq coalition
Mosul, Iraq (AFP) Mar 19, 2008 - The commando peered down the long barrel of his sniper rifle, scanning the battle-scarred Iraqi houses in front of the sandbagged firing position protecting the gate of a huge US military base. But the bird emblazoned on his shoulder flash wasn't the "Screaming Eagle" of the US airborne. It was the double-headed eagle of Albania, one of the small allied contingents still fighting alongside ... more
Baghdad (AFP) Mar 19, 2008 - Iraq's once-lofty ambition to be a major power lies in tatters five years after the US-led invasion, with Turkish forces crossing its northern border with impunity and former bitter foe Iran now the preeminent force in the region. What will it take for Iraq to recover is unknown but an end to ethnic strife and a sense of national unity are prerequisites. Observers say that can be best reache ... moreiraq
+ US military growing weary in Iraq
Washington (AFP) Mar 19, 2008 - Five years after the US-led invasion of Iraq, the US military is flagging under long and repeated deployments that have taken a toll on troops and hurt its readiness to deal with other crises. "People are tired," is the way Admiral Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, summed it up at a congressional hearing last month. The third longest war in US history ... moreiraq
+ Cheney: Iraq security boost won't speed US withdrawals
Baghdad (AFP) Mar 19, 2008 - US Vice President Dick Cheney said on Monday he had seen significant security improvements in Iraq but warned that this would not automatically yield more American troop withdrawals after July. "No, it does not," Cheney said during a surprise visit to Baghdad, stressing that troop levels would be guided by "conditions on the ground in the months ahead". ... moreiraq
+ America's smallest allies bolster shrinking Iraq coalition
Mosul, Iraq (AFP) Mar 19, 2008 - The commando peered down the long barrel of his sniper rifle, scanning the battle-scarred Iraqi houses in front of the sandbagged firing position protecting the gate of a huge US military base. But the bird emblazoned on his shoulder flash wasn't the "Screaming Eagle" of the US airborne. It was the double-headed eagle of Albania, one of the small allied contingents still fighting alongside ... more
Analysis: Iraq, 5 years and gaffes later
Washington (UPI) Mar 19, 2008 - This Wednesday will mark the fifth anniversary of the invasion of Iraq. Five years during which time America has been at war; make that wars, in the plural. While Iraq, due to the sheer scale of the conflict, seems to take center stage, there are two other wars being fought simultaneously. One is in Afghanistan against the resurgent Taliban who simply refuse to be beaten, and the other is the ... more
iraq
Commentary: Fox Fallon's fall
iraq
<li>Five years on, Iraq still a nation at war
iraq
<li>Iraq: a three trillion dollar war?
iraq
<li>Iraq to hang over Bush successor
iraq
+ Britain's Brown struggles to turn page on Iraq
London (AFP) Mar 19, 2008 - British Prime Minister Gordon Brown wants to turn a page on Iraq by pulling out troops controversially sent in by his predecessor Tony Blair, but his hands are tied politically, experts say. Brown has increasingly put the focus on Afghanistan since succeeding Blair last year, repeatedly warning that fighting the Taliban is now the frontline in the US-led "war on terror" triggered by the Sept ... more
iraq
+ Life goes on behind Baghdad's concrete walls
Baghdad (AFP) Mar 19, 2008 - Baghdad, for centuries a beacon of culture in the Arab world, is today a capital under occupation divided by grim concrete walls. Yet life bustles on and the city's spirit refuses to die. Residents daily ignore the ever-present threat of bombs and gun attacks. They brave checkpoints, roadblocks and traffic gridlock to head to school or work, go shopping, frequent coffee and juice bars, play ... more
iraq
+ Outside View: Iran upstages U.S. in Iraq
Washington (UPI) Mar 19, 2008 - They say a picture is worth a thousand words. And the image of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad glowing - radiating a Bush-like smugness, some might say - during a red-carpet welcome in the American-occupied "Green Zone" in Baghdad last week was no exception. That picture was more powerful than a thousand pages in illuminating who has emerged as the big winner after the United States ... more
iraq
+ Post-Saddam Iraq a new front for violent jihad
Baghdad (AFP) Mar 19, 2008 - US President George W. Bush's claim that Saddam Hussein was linked to Al-Qaeda has been debunked but Iraq after the invasion has become the new frontier for violent Islamist terrorism. The war has allowed Osama bin Laden's terror network to "gain a foothold in Iraq where it was totally absent before March 2003", said Jean-Pierre Filiu, an analyst at the Institute of Political Studies in Pari ... more
Washington (UPI) Mar 19, 2008 - This Wednesday will mark the fifth anniversary of the invasion of Iraq. Five years during which time America has been at war; make that wars, in the plural. While Iraq, due to the sheer scale of the conflict, seems to take center stage, there are two other wars being fought simultaneously. One is in Afghanistan against the resurgent Taliban who simply refuse to be beaten, and the other is the ... moreiraq
Commentary: Fox Fallon's fall
iraq
<li>Five years on, Iraq still a nation at war
iraq
<li>Iraq: a three trillion dollar war?
iraq
<li>Iraq to hang over Bush successor
iraq
+ Britain's Brown struggles to turn page on Iraq
London (AFP) Mar 19, 2008 - British Prime Minister Gordon Brown wants to turn a page on Iraq by pulling out troops controversially sent in by his predecessor Tony Blair, but his hands are tied politically, experts say. Brown has increasingly put the focus on Afghanistan since succeeding Blair last year, repeatedly warning that fighting the Taliban is now the frontline in the US-led "war on terror" triggered by the Sept ... moreiraq
+ Life goes on behind Baghdad's concrete walls
Baghdad (AFP) Mar 19, 2008 - Baghdad, for centuries a beacon of culture in the Arab world, is today a capital under occupation divided by grim concrete walls. Yet life bustles on and the city's spirit refuses to die. Residents daily ignore the ever-present threat of bombs and gun attacks. They brave checkpoints, roadblocks and traffic gridlock to head to school or work, go shopping, frequent coffee and juice bars, play ... moreiraq
+ Outside View: Iran upstages U.S. in Iraq
Washington (UPI) Mar 19, 2008 - They say a picture is worth a thousand words. And the image of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad glowing - radiating a Bush-like smugness, some might say - during a red-carpet welcome in the American-occupied "Green Zone" in Baghdad last week was no exception. That picture was more powerful than a thousand pages in illuminating who has emerged as the big winner after the United States ... moreiraq
+ Post-Saddam Iraq a new front for violent jihad
Baghdad (AFP) Mar 19, 2008 - US President George W. Bush's claim that Saddam Hussein was linked to Al-Qaeda has been debunked but Iraq after the invasion has become the new frontier for violent Islamist terrorism. The war has allowed Osama bin Laden's terror network to "gain a foothold in Iraq where it was totally absent before March 2003", said Jean-Pierre Filiu, an analyst at the Institute of Political Studies in Pari ... more
Press is free, but danger aplenty in Iraq
Baghdad (AFP) Mar 19, 2008 - Press freedom flourished after the US-led invasion shattered Saddam Hussein's iron grip on the media, and news outlets abounded, yet Iraq remains the most dangerous country to report from. Scores of newspapers and magazines and at least 17 satellite television channels sprouted up in the weeks after the 2003 invasion. Some were independent media outlets, while others were organs of the ... more
Baghdad (AFP) Mar 19, 2008 - Press freedom flourished after the US-led invasion shattered Saddam Hussein's iron grip on the media, and news outlets abounded, yet Iraq remains the most dangerous country to report from. Scores of newspapers and magazines and at least 17 satellite television channels sprouted up in the weeks after the 2003 invasion. Some were independent media outlets, while others were organs of the ... more
5 Years Ago, as War Neared, Hillary Clinton Was Silent, 'NYT' Archives Show
Wherever you stand on the Obama/Clinton race, one thing nearly everyone agrees on is this: She voted for the war resolution in 2002, but now says the resolution did not really authorize the war -- and she calls the 2003 invasion a mistake. But what did she do in attempting to halt the war in the two weeks before it began?
By Greg Mitchell
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/co...t_id=1003726268
Wherever you stand on the Obama/Clinton race, one thing nearly everyone agrees on is this: She voted for the war resolution in 2002, but now says the resolution did not really authorize the war -- and she calls the 2003 invasion a mistake. But what did she do in attempting to halt the war in the two weeks before it began?
By Greg Mitchell
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/co...t_id=1003726268
March 20, 2008 Why Did the US Invade Iraq?
by Jim Lobe So why, exactly, did the US invade Iraq five years ago this week?
The official reasons – the threat posed to the US and its allies by Saddam Hussein's alleged programs of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and the possibility that he would pass along those arms to al-Qaeda – have long since been discarded by the overwhelming weight of the evidence, or, more precisely, the lack of evidence that such a threat ever existed.
Liberating Iraq from the tyranny of Hussein's particularly unforgiving and bloodthirsty version of Ba'athism and thus setting an irresistible precedent that would spread throughout the Arab world – a theme pushed by the administration of President George W. Bush mostly after the invasion, as it became clear that the officials reasons could not be justified – appears to have been the guiding obsession of really only one member of the Bush team, and not a particularly influential one at that: Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz.
Then there's the theory that Bush – whose enigmatic psychology, particularly his relationship to his father, has already provided grist for several book-publishing mills – wanted to show up his dad for failing to take Baghdad in 1991. Or he sought to "finish the job" that his dad had begun in 1991; and/or avenge his dad for Hussein's alleged (but highly questionable) assassination attempt against Bush I in Kuwait after the war.
Because Bush was the ultimate "Decider," as he himself has put it, and because no one who ever served at top levels in the administration has ever been able to say precisely when (let alone why) the decision was made to invade Iraq, this explanation cannot be entirely dismissed as an answer.
Then there is the question of oil. Was the administration acting on behalf of an oil industry desperate to get its hands on Mesopotamian oil that had long been denied it as a result of UN and unilateral sanctions prohibiting business between US companies and Hussein?
Given both Bush's and Vice President Dick Cheney's long-standing ties to the industry and former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan's assertion in his recent memoir that "The Iraq war is largely about oil," this theory has definite appeal – particularly to those on the left who made "No Blood for Oil" a favorite mantra at antiwar protests in the run-up to the invasion, just as they did – with much greater plausibility – before the 1991 Gulf War.
The problem, however, is that there is little or no evidence that Big Oil, an extremely cautious beast in the global corporate menagerie, favored a war, particularly one carried out in a way (unilaterally) that risked destabilizing the world's most oil-rich region, especially Saudi Arabia and the emirates.
On the contrary, the Rice University Institute that bears the name of former Secretary of State James Baker – a man who has both represented and embodied Big Oil throughout his long legal career – publicly warned early on that if Bush absolutely, positively had to invade Iraq for whatever reason, he should not even consider it unless two conditions were met: 1) that the action was authorized by the UN Security Council; and 2) that nothing whatever be done after the invasion to suggest that the motivation had to do with the acquisition by US oil companies of Iraq's oil resources.
That is not to say that oil was irrelevant to the administration's calculations, but perhaps in a different sense than that meant by the "No Blood for Oil" slogan. After all, oil is an absolutely indispensable requirement for running modern economies and militaries. And the invasion was a forceful – indeed, a shock- and awe-some – demonstration to the rest of the world, especially potential strategic rivals like China, Russia, or even the European Union, of Washington's ability to quickly and effectively conquer and control an oil-rich nation in the heart of the energy-rich Middle East/Gulf region any time it wishes, perhaps persuading those lesser powers that challenging the US could well prove counterproductive to long-term interests, if not their supply of energy in the short term.
Indeed, a demonstration of such power could well be the fastest way to formalize a new international order based on the overwhelming military power of the United States, unequaled at least since the Roman Empire. It would be a "unipolar world" of the kind envisaged by the 1992 draft Defense Planning Guidance (DPG) commissioned by then-Pentagon chief Dick Cheney, overseen by Wolfowitz and Cheney's future chief of staff, I. Lewis Libby, and contributed to by future ambassador to "liberated" Afghanistan and Iraq, Zalmay Khalilzad and Bush's deputy national security adviser, J.D. Crouch.
It was that same vision that formed the inspiration for the 27 charter signatories – a coalition of aggressive nationalists, neoconservatives, and Christian Right leaders that included Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Libby, Khalilzad, and several other future senior Bush administration national-security officials – of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) in 1997. It was the same project that began calling for "regime change" in Iraq in 1998 and that, nine days after the 9/11 attack on New York and the Pentagon, publicly warned that any "war on terror" that excluded Hussein's elimination would necessarily be incomplete.
In retrospect, it seems clear that Iraq had long been seen by this group, which became empowered first by Bush's election and then supercharged by 9/11, as the first, easiest and most available step toward achieving a "Pax Americana" that would not only establish the US once and for all as the dominant power in the region, but whose geostrategic implications for aspiring "peer competitors" would be global in scope.
For the neoconservative and the Christian Right members of this group, who were its most eager and ubiquitous war boosters, Israel would also be a major beneficiary of an invasion.
According to a 1996 paper drafted by prominent hard-line neoconservatives – including some, like Douglas Feith and David Wurmser, who would later serve in senior posts in Cheney's office and the Pentagon in the run-up to the invasion – ousting Hussein and installing a pro-Western leader was the key to destabilizing Israel's Arab enemies and/or bending them to its will. This would permit the Jewish state not only to escape the Oslo peace process, but also to secure as much of the occupied Palestinian (and Syrian) territories as it wished.
Indeed, getting rid of Hussein and occupying Iraq would not only tighten Israel's hold on Arab territories, in this view; it could also threaten the survival of the Arab and Islamic worlds' most formidable weapon against Israel – OPEC – by flooding the world market with Iraqi oil and forcing the commodity's price down to historic lows.
That's how it looked five years ago anyway.
(Inter Press Service)
by Jim Lobe So why, exactly, did the US invade Iraq five years ago this week?
The official reasons – the threat posed to the US and its allies by Saddam Hussein's alleged programs of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and the possibility that he would pass along those arms to al-Qaeda – have long since been discarded by the overwhelming weight of the evidence, or, more precisely, the lack of evidence that such a threat ever existed.
Liberating Iraq from the tyranny of Hussein's particularly unforgiving and bloodthirsty version of Ba'athism and thus setting an irresistible precedent that would spread throughout the Arab world – a theme pushed by the administration of President George W. Bush mostly after the invasion, as it became clear that the officials reasons could not be justified – appears to have been the guiding obsession of really only one member of the Bush team, and not a particularly influential one at that: Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz.
Then there's the theory that Bush – whose enigmatic psychology, particularly his relationship to his father, has already provided grist for several book-publishing mills – wanted to show up his dad for failing to take Baghdad in 1991. Or he sought to "finish the job" that his dad had begun in 1991; and/or avenge his dad for Hussein's alleged (but highly questionable) assassination attempt against Bush I in Kuwait after the war.
Because Bush was the ultimate "Decider," as he himself has put it, and because no one who ever served at top levels in the administration has ever been able to say precisely when (let alone why) the decision was made to invade Iraq, this explanation cannot be entirely dismissed as an answer.
Then there is the question of oil. Was the administration acting on behalf of an oil industry desperate to get its hands on Mesopotamian oil that had long been denied it as a result of UN and unilateral sanctions prohibiting business between US companies and Hussein?
Given both Bush's and Vice President Dick Cheney's long-standing ties to the industry and former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan's assertion in his recent memoir that "The Iraq war is largely about oil," this theory has definite appeal – particularly to those on the left who made "No Blood for Oil" a favorite mantra at antiwar protests in the run-up to the invasion, just as they did – with much greater plausibility – before the 1991 Gulf War.
The problem, however, is that there is little or no evidence that Big Oil, an extremely cautious beast in the global corporate menagerie, favored a war, particularly one carried out in a way (unilaterally) that risked destabilizing the world's most oil-rich region, especially Saudi Arabia and the emirates.
On the contrary, the Rice University Institute that bears the name of former Secretary of State James Baker – a man who has both represented and embodied Big Oil throughout his long legal career – publicly warned early on that if Bush absolutely, positively had to invade Iraq for whatever reason, he should not even consider it unless two conditions were met: 1) that the action was authorized by the UN Security Council; and 2) that nothing whatever be done after the invasion to suggest that the motivation had to do with the acquisition by US oil companies of Iraq's oil resources.
That is not to say that oil was irrelevant to the administration's calculations, but perhaps in a different sense than that meant by the "No Blood for Oil" slogan. After all, oil is an absolutely indispensable requirement for running modern economies and militaries. And the invasion was a forceful – indeed, a shock- and awe-some – demonstration to the rest of the world, especially potential strategic rivals like China, Russia, or even the European Union, of Washington's ability to quickly and effectively conquer and control an oil-rich nation in the heart of the energy-rich Middle East/Gulf region any time it wishes, perhaps persuading those lesser powers that challenging the US could well prove counterproductive to long-term interests, if not their supply of energy in the short term.
Indeed, a demonstration of such power could well be the fastest way to formalize a new international order based on the overwhelming military power of the United States, unequaled at least since the Roman Empire. It would be a "unipolar world" of the kind envisaged by the 1992 draft Defense Planning Guidance (DPG) commissioned by then-Pentagon chief Dick Cheney, overseen by Wolfowitz and Cheney's future chief of staff, I. Lewis Libby, and contributed to by future ambassador to "liberated" Afghanistan and Iraq, Zalmay Khalilzad and Bush's deputy national security adviser, J.D. Crouch.
It was that same vision that formed the inspiration for the 27 charter signatories – a coalition of aggressive nationalists, neoconservatives, and Christian Right leaders that included Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Libby, Khalilzad, and several other future senior Bush administration national-security officials – of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) in 1997. It was the same project that began calling for "regime change" in Iraq in 1998 and that, nine days after the 9/11 attack on New York and the Pentagon, publicly warned that any "war on terror" that excluded Hussein's elimination would necessarily be incomplete.
In retrospect, it seems clear that Iraq had long been seen by this group, which became empowered first by Bush's election and then supercharged by 9/11, as the first, easiest and most available step toward achieving a "Pax Americana" that would not only establish the US once and for all as the dominant power in the region, but whose geostrategic implications for aspiring "peer competitors" would be global in scope.
For the neoconservative and the Christian Right members of this group, who were its most eager and ubiquitous war boosters, Israel would also be a major beneficiary of an invasion.
According to a 1996 paper drafted by prominent hard-line neoconservatives – including some, like Douglas Feith and David Wurmser, who would later serve in senior posts in Cheney's office and the Pentagon in the run-up to the invasion – ousting Hussein and installing a pro-Western leader was the key to destabilizing Israel's Arab enemies and/or bending them to its will. This would permit the Jewish state not only to escape the Oslo peace process, but also to secure as much of the occupied Palestinian (and Syrian) territories as it wished.
Indeed, getting rid of Hussein and occupying Iraq would not only tighten Israel's hold on Arab territories, in this view; it could also threaten the survival of the Arab and Islamic worlds' most formidable weapon against Israel – OPEC – by flooding the world market with Iraqi oil and forcing the commodity's price down to historic lows.
That's how it looked five years ago anyway.
(Inter Press Service)
Patrick Cockburn: This is the war that started with lies, and continues with lie after lie after lie
RAMZI HAIDAR/AFP/Getty Images
Wednesday, 19 March 2008
It has been a war of lies from the start. All governments lie in wartime but American and British propaganda in Iraq over the past five years has been more untruthful than in any conflict since the First World War.
The outcome has been an official picture of Iraq akin to fantasy and an inability to learn from mistakes because of a refusal to admit that any occurred. Yet the war began with just such a mistake. Five years ago, on the evening of 19 March 2003, President George Bush appeared on American television to say that military action had started against Iraq.
This was a veiled reference to an attempt to kill Saddam Hussein by dropping four 2,000lb bombs and firing 40 cruise missiles at a place called al-Dura farm in south Baghdad, where the Iraqi leader was supposedly hiding in a bunker. There was no bunker. The only casualties were one civilian killed and 14 wounded, including nine women and a child.
On 7 April, the US Ai r Force dropped four more massive bombs on a house where Saddam was said to have been sighted in Baghdad. "I think we did get Saddam Hussein," said the US Vice President, Dick Cheney. "He was seen being dug out of the rubble and wasn't able to breathe."
Saddam was unharmed, probably because he had never been there, but 18 Iraqi civilians were dead. One US military leader defended the attacks, claiming they showed "US resolve and capabilities".
Mr Cheney was back in Baghdad this week, five years later almost to the day, to announce that there has been "phenomenal" improvements in Iraqi security. Within hours, a woman suicide bomber blew herself up in the Shia holy city of Kerbala, killing at least 40 and wounding 50 people. Often it is difficult to know where the self-deception ends and the deliberate mendacity begins.
The most notorious lie of all was that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction. But critics of the war may have focused too much on WMD and not enough on later distortions.
The event which has done most to shape the present Iraqi political landscape was the savage civil war between Sunni and Shia in Baghdad and central Iraq in 2006-07 when 3,000 civilians a month were being butchered and which was won by the Shia.
The White House and Downing Street blithely denied a civil war was happening – and forced Iraq politicians who said so to recant – to pretend the crisis was less serious than it was.
More often, the lies have been small, designed to make a propaganda point for a day even if they are exposed as untrue a few weeks later. One example of this to shows in detail how propaganda distorts day-to-day reporting in Iraq, but, if the propagandist knows his job, is very difficult to disprove.
On 1 February this year, two suicide bombers, said to be female, blew themselves up in two pet markets in predominantly Shia areas of Baghdad, al Ghazil and al-Jadida, and killed 99 people. Iraqi government officials immediately said the bombers had the chromosonal disorder Down's syndrome, which they could tell this from looking at the severed heads of the bombers. Sadly, horrific bombings in Iraq are so common that they no longer generate much media interest abroad. It was the Down's syndrome angle which made the story front-page news. It showed al-Qa'ida in Iraq was even more inhumanly evil than one had supposed (if that were possible) and it meant, so Iraqi officials said, that al-Qa'ida was running out of volunteers.
The Times splashed on it under the headline, "Down's syndrome bombers kill 91". The story stated firmly that "explosives strapped to two women with Down's syndrome were detonated by remote control in crowded pet markets". Other papers, including The Independent, felt the story had a highly suspicious smell to it. How much could really be told about the mental condition of a woman from a human head shattered by a powerful bomb? Reliable eyewitnesses in suicide bombings are difficult to find because anybody standing close to the bomber is likely to be dead or in hospital.
The US military later supported the Iraqi claim that the bombers had Down's syndrome. On 10 February, they arrested Dr Sahi Aboub, the acting director of the al Rashad mental hospital in east Baghdad, alleging that he had provided mental patients for use by al-Qa'ida. The Iraqi Interior Ministry started rounding up beggars and mentally disturbed people on the grounds that they might be potential bombers.
But on 21 February, an American military spokes-man said there was no evidence the bombers had Down's. Adel Mohsin, a senior official at the Health Ministry in Baghdad, poured scorn on the idea that Dr Aboub could have done business with the Sunni fanatics of al-Qa'ida because he was a Shia and had only been in the job a few weeks.
A second doctor, who did not want to give his name, pointed out that al Rashad hospital is run by the fundamentalist Shia Mehdi Army and asked: "How would it be possible for al-Qa'ida to get in there?"
Few people in Baghdad now care about the exact circumstances of the bird market bombings apart from Dr Aboub, who is still in jail, and the mentally disturbed beggars who were incarcerated. Unfortunately, it is all too clear that al-Qa'ida is not running out of suicide bombers. But it is pieces of propaganda such as this small example, often swallowed whole by the media and a thousand times repeated, which cumulatively mask the terrible reality of Iraq.
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/comme...lie-797788.html
RAMZI HAIDAR/AFP/Getty Images
Wednesday, 19 March 2008
It has been a war of lies from the start. All governments lie in wartime but American and British propaganda in Iraq over the past five years has been more untruthful than in any conflict since the First World War.
The outcome has been an official picture of Iraq akin to fantasy and an inability to learn from mistakes because of a refusal to admit that any occurred. Yet the war began with just such a mistake. Five years ago, on the evening of 19 March 2003, President George Bush appeared on American television to say that military action had started against Iraq.
This was a veiled reference to an attempt to kill Saddam Hussein by dropping four 2,000lb bombs and firing 40 cruise missiles at a place called al-Dura farm in south Baghdad, where the Iraqi leader was supposedly hiding in a bunker. There was no bunker. The only casualties were one civilian killed and 14 wounded, including nine women and a child.
On 7 April, the US Ai r Force dropped four more massive bombs on a house where Saddam was said to have been sighted in Baghdad. "I think we did get Saddam Hussein," said the US Vice President, Dick Cheney. "He was seen being dug out of the rubble and wasn't able to breathe."
Saddam was unharmed, probably because he had never been there, but 18 Iraqi civilians were dead. One US military leader defended the attacks, claiming they showed "US resolve and capabilities".
Mr Cheney was back in Baghdad this week, five years later almost to the day, to announce that there has been "phenomenal" improvements in Iraqi security. Within hours, a woman suicide bomber blew herself up in the Shia holy city of Kerbala, killing at least 40 and wounding 50 people. Often it is difficult to know where the self-deception ends and the deliberate mendacity begins.
The most notorious lie of all was that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction. But critics of the war may have focused too much on WMD and not enough on later distortions.
The event which has done most to shape the present Iraqi political landscape was the savage civil war between Sunni and Shia in Baghdad and central Iraq in 2006-07 when 3,000 civilians a month were being butchered and which was won by the Shia.
The White House and Downing Street blithely denied a civil war was happening – and forced Iraq politicians who said so to recant – to pretend the crisis was less serious than it was.
More often, the lies have been small, designed to make a propaganda point for a day even if they are exposed as untrue a few weeks later. One example of this to shows in detail how propaganda distorts day-to-day reporting in Iraq, but, if the propagandist knows his job, is very difficult to disprove.
On 1 February this year, two suicide bombers, said to be female, blew themselves up in two pet markets in predominantly Shia areas of Baghdad, al Ghazil and al-Jadida, and killed 99 people. Iraqi government officials immediately said the bombers had the chromosonal disorder Down's syndrome, which they could tell this from looking at the severed heads of the bombers. Sadly, horrific bombings in Iraq are so common that they no longer generate much media interest abroad. It was the Down's syndrome angle which made the story front-page news. It showed al-Qa'ida in Iraq was even more inhumanly evil than one had supposed (if that were possible) and it meant, so Iraqi officials said, that al-Qa'ida was running out of volunteers.
The Times splashed on it under the headline, "Down's syndrome bombers kill 91". The story stated firmly that "explosives strapped to two women with Down's syndrome were detonated by remote control in crowded pet markets". Other papers, including The Independent, felt the story had a highly suspicious smell to it. How much could really be told about the mental condition of a woman from a human head shattered by a powerful bomb? Reliable eyewitnesses in suicide bombings are difficult to find because anybody standing close to the bomber is likely to be dead or in hospital.
The US military later supported the Iraqi claim that the bombers had Down's syndrome. On 10 February, they arrested Dr Sahi Aboub, the acting director of the al Rashad mental hospital in east Baghdad, alleging that he had provided mental patients for use by al-Qa'ida. The Iraqi Interior Ministry started rounding up beggars and mentally disturbed people on the grounds that they might be potential bombers.
But on 21 February, an American military spokes-man said there was no evidence the bombers had Down's. Adel Mohsin, a senior official at the Health Ministry in Baghdad, poured scorn on the idea that Dr Aboub could have done business with the Sunni fanatics of al-Qa'ida because he was a Shia and had only been in the job a few weeks.
A second doctor, who did not want to give his name, pointed out that al Rashad hospital is run by the fundamentalist Shia Mehdi Army and asked: "How would it be possible for al-Qa'ida to get in there?"
Few people in Baghdad now care about the exact circumstances of the bird market bombings apart from Dr Aboub, who is still in jail, and the mentally disturbed beggars who were incarcerated. Unfortunately, it is all too clear that al-Qa'ida is not running out of suicide bombers. But it is pieces of propaganda such as this small example, often swallowed whole by the media and a thousand times repeated, which cumulatively mask the terrible reality of Iraq.
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/comme...lie-797788.html
The Only Lesson We Ever Learn Is That We Never Learn
by Robert Fisk
by Robert Fisk
How Could So Many People Buy into Bush's "Patriotism Sweepstakes" War?
Robert Parry, Sam Parry, Nat Parry, Consortium News
War on Iraq: The Iraq War represents a systemic failure of American political and journalistic institutions.
5th Anniversary of Invasion
Brutal war on Iraq enters sixth year: Baghdadis say US invasion brought Iraq types of killings, terrorism country never knew before
'We live in a nightmare. Death and carnage is everywhere': Ali, Baghdad resident
A war of utter folly: Responsibility for this spectacular tragedy must lie with those who ignored the facts five years ago - Author is Hans Blix, UN Weapons Investigator who repeatedly warned Bush that Saddam did not have WMD
5 Years Later: Is Iraq War Only Half-Over?
The Long War: National Review Editorial
Obama says he can end Iraq war: Fort Bragg speech seen as start of campaign in N.C.
Iraq War: Dems use anniversary to pitch withdrawal
Protests mark Iraq war's 5th anniversary: In Washington, New York, Los Angeles and other cities, thousands turn out to express their opposition
Five Years of Suicide Bombings in Iraq
By Robert Fisk, The Independent UK
War on Iraq: An account of the most widespread campaign of self-liquidation in human history.
Five Years Later
Spencer Ackerman
March 19, 2008 | web only
According to interviews with detained members of al-Qaeda in Iraq, the most powerful recruitment tool for Islamic extremists is ... the war itself.
Our stated enemy in Iraq appears to be a nightmare of our own miscalculated creation.
Residents of Buhriz, a former Saddam Hussein stronghold about 35 miles north of Baghdad, stand around the body of a suspected al-Qaeda fighter on Aug. 15, 2007. (AP Photo)
Fantasies on Iraq - Washington Post
Petraeus Politics - Washington Times
Mission Still Not Accomplished - New York Times
Bush and the Broader War - Jerusalem Post
Petraeus Politics - Washington Times
Mission Still Not Accomplished - New York Times
Bush and the Broader War - Jerusalem Post
Five Years of Genocide
By Zuheir Kseibat
In the long night and the epic of forgotten genocide, only Bush hallucinates about victory….All the politicians of Iraq hallucinate about democracy-deception. It is the long night of genocide. Continue
By Zuheir Kseibat
In the long night and the epic of forgotten genocide, only Bush hallucinates about victory….All the politicians of Iraq hallucinate about democracy-deception. It is the long night of genocide. Continue
"Today, I Weep For My Country"
The speech given by Sen. Robert Byrd
Exactly five years ago, on the afternoon of March 19, 2003, mere hours before bombs began falling in Baghdad, Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., gave a speech on the floor of the U.S. Senate condemning the use of military force in Iraq. As soon as Byrd was finished speaking, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., delivered a response defending the Bush administration's decision to go to war. Continue
The speech given by Sen. Robert Byrd
Exactly five years ago, on the afternoon of March 19, 2003, mere hours before bombs began falling in Baghdad, Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., gave a speech on the floor of the U.S. Senate condemning the use of military force in Iraq. As soon as Byrd was finished speaking, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., delivered a response defending the Bush administration's decision to go to war. Continue
There Must Be A Reckoning For This Day Of Infamy
By Seumas Milne
Those who insist that the immolation of Iraq was the consequence of errors in the execution of an otherwise defensible policy are simply evading their own responsibility and culpability. Continue
By Seumas Milne
Those who insist that the immolation of Iraq was the consequence of errors in the execution of an otherwise defensible policy are simply evading their own responsibility and culpability. Continue
'We Live in a Nightmare. Death and Carnage is Everywhere'
By Ghaith Abdul-Ahad in Baghdad
"We came, his friends, me and Hassan and Hadi, and washed him and put him in a shroud. You know I am too emotional. I cry very quickly. For six months I didn't talk to anyone, I was just sad and silent. Continue
By Ghaith Abdul-Ahad in Baghdad
"We came, his friends, me and Hassan and Hadi, and washed him and put him in a shroud. You know I am too emotional. I cry very quickly. For six months I didn't talk to anyone, I was just sad and silent. Continue
Quiet Victory - Rich Lowry, National Review
Iraq Plus Five: What Went Right - Amir Taheri, New York Post
Surge of Optimism - Richard Nadler, National Review
If Iraq is Better, it's Because of John McCain - Con Coughlin, London Daily Telegraph
The Long War - Clifford May, National Review
Iraq and Unintended Consequences - Washington Times editorial
Democratic Fantasy Foreign Policy - National Review editorial
Key Decisions on Iraq that Still Haunt Us - Trudy Rubin, Miami Herald
Iraq: The Real Story - Oliver North, Human Events
Iraq Plus Five: What Went Right - Amir Taheri, New York Post
Surge of Optimism - Richard Nadler, National Review
If Iraq is Better, it's Because of John McCain - Con Coughlin, London Daily Telegraph
The Long War - Clifford May, National Review
Iraq and Unintended Consequences - Washington Times editorial
Democratic Fantasy Foreign Policy - National Review editorial
Key Decisions on Iraq that Still Haunt Us - Trudy Rubin, Miami Herald
Iraq: The Real Story - Oliver North, Human Events
Corporate Media's Virtual Blackout on Iraq Atrocity Hearings
Appalling Spread of False Information Requires Stronger Media Accountability: Mass Media exercised no restraint or objectivity in the run-up to Iraq War
Counting the human cost in Iraq: Studies suggests that the now-dismissed one million death estimate from the recent Opinion Research Business poll may be accepted
Five years on, Bush pleads for Iraq
Five Years Into War, Iraq Still Lives in Fear
Marchg 20, 2003: There must be a reckoning for this day of infamy
US military deaths in Iraq officially near 4,000
Time Running Out for Iraqi Leaders: UN warns
Sunni militia labor strike could derail US strategy against al-Qaida: Not being paid regularly
Building peace in Iraq harder than expected: British Foreign Secretary Miliband
Gates Meets Top US Commanders to Prepare Iraq Report: Planning for next phase
Bin-Laden: 'Free Palestine' Via Iraq
A War Of Utter Folly
By Hans Blix
Responsibility for this spectacular tragedy must lie with those who ignored the facts five years ago. Continue
By Hans Blix
Responsibility for this spectacular tragedy must lie with those who ignored the facts five years ago. Continue
Hopeful Milestone in a Troubled War - The Australian editorial
Iraq: The Real Story - Oliver North, Real Clear Politics
End Support for Sunni Militias - Katulis and Moss, Philadelphia Inquirer
Iraq a Minefield for Candidates - Carl Leubsdorf, Real Clear Politics
Iraq & Afghanistan: Message from McCain - London Times editorial
Saddam, The Terrorist's Friend - Greg Sheridan, The Austalian
Iraq: The Real Story - Oliver North, Real Clear Politics
End Support for Sunni Militias - Katulis and Moss, Philadelphia Inquirer
Iraq a Minefield for Candidates - Carl Leubsdorf, Real Clear Politics
Iraq & Afghanistan: Message from McCain - London Times editorial
Saddam, The Terrorist's Friend - Greg Sheridan, The Austalian
Intense Fighting Erupts In Iraq - Freeman and Raghavan, Washington Post
Iraq: Crackdown Sets Off Fighting - Kanber and Glanz, New York Times
Battles Erupt with Mahdi Army - Sam Dagher, Christian Science Monitor
Basra is the Test - London Daily Telegraph editorial
Anatomy of the Surge - Peter Feaver, Commentary
Unshared Sacrifice in Iraq - Mark Shields, Toronto Star
Voices From Iraq - Robert McFarlane, Wall Street Journal
The 'Emboldenment Effect' - James Taranto, Wall Street Journal
Iraq: Crackdown Sets Off Fighting - Kanber and Glanz, New York Times
Battles Erupt with Mahdi Army - Sam Dagher, Christian Science Monitor
Basra is the Test - London Daily Telegraph editorial
Anatomy of the Surge - Peter Feaver, Commentary
Unshared Sacrifice in Iraq - Mark Shields, Toronto Star
Voices From Iraq - Robert McFarlane, Wall Street Journal
The 'Emboldenment Effect' - James Taranto, Wall Street Journal
19 Tense Hours in Sadr City - Sudarsan Raghavan, Washington Post
U.S. Airstrikes Aid Iraqi Army in Basra Siege - Erica Goode, New York Times
Bush Sees Iraq 'Defining Moment' - Jon Ward, Washington Times
U.S. Has Little Influence, Few Options - Karen DeYoung, Washington Post
British Warplanes Fire on Basra - Hider and Evans, London Times
Iraq and the Election - Daniel Gallington, Washington Times
Through Iraq, Path to the Presidency - Daalder and Gordon, Boston Globe
McCain's Views on the U.S. in Iraq - Charles Krauthammer, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Justice for Iraq - Rivkin and Casey, Wall Street Journal
Untold Disaster of Iraqi Refugees - International Rescue Committee, Miami Herald
Curveball Revisited - Wall Street Journal editorial
U.S. Airstrikes Aid Iraqi Army in Basra Siege - Erica Goode, New York Times
Bush Sees Iraq 'Defining Moment' - Jon Ward, Washington Times
U.S. Has Little Influence, Few Options - Karen DeYoung, Washington Post
British Warplanes Fire on Basra - Hider and Evans, London Times
Iraq and the Election - Daniel Gallington, Washington Times
Through Iraq, Path to the Presidency - Daalder and Gordon, Boston Globe
McCain's Views on the U.S. in Iraq - Charles Krauthammer, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Justice for Iraq - Rivkin and Casey, Wall Street Journal
Untold Disaster of Iraqi Refugees - International Rescue Committee, Miami Herald
Curveball Revisited - Wall Street Journal editorial
US Lead in Baghdad Offensive - Raghavan and Freeman, Washington Post
Militias Resist Iraqi Forces in Basra - Glanz and Meyers, New York Times
Bush's Risky Mission to Basra - Boston Globe editorial
The Basra Surprise - New York Post editorial
Iraq: The Battle for Basra - London Times editorial
Beyond the Battle of Basra - Matthew Mainen, The Guardian
Smallest States Suffer Most in Iraq - Al Neuharth, USA Today
Militias Resist Iraqi Forces in Basra - Glanz and Meyers, New York Times
Bush's Risky Mission to Basra - Boston Globe editorial
The Basra Surprise - New York Post editorial
Iraq: The Battle for Basra - London Times editorial
Beyond the Battle of Basra - Matthew Mainen, The Guardian
Smallest States Suffer Most in Iraq - Al Neuharth, USA Today
Basra Paralyzed As Fighting ContinuesMahdi militiamen are holding key points around Basra, according to the BBC, and the city appears to be paralyzed after Maliki's extended deadline and the arrival of U.S. forces. In Baghdad, the Mahdi Army is still fighting and firing rockets into the city center.
Maliki Extends Surrender Deadline<li>Bush: "Normalcy Returning Back to Iraq"<li>U.S. Planes Attack Militia Strongholds
Rapid Reaction: Trouble Brewing in Basra 
by Paul J. Saunders Violence is escalating in Basra and Baghdad. What will it mean for the much-vaunted surge and wider American involvement in Iraq?
by Paul J. Saunders Violence is escalating in Basra and Baghdad. What will it mean for the much-vaunted surge and wider American involvement in Iraq?
http://www.counterpunch.org/patrick03272008.html
The Rising of the Mehdi Army
Basra Erupts
By PATRICK COCKBURN
The Iraqi army is fighting the Mehdi Army Shia militia in the streets of Basra after the government launched its most serious offensive to gain control of the southern oil city.
Clouds of dark smoke rose over Basra 340 miles south of Baghdad as Iraqi soldiers tried to take control of the main roads while black-clad militiamen fought back from the alleyways. "There are clashes in the streets," said Jamil, a resident of the city. "Bullets are coming from everywhere and we can hear the sound of rocket explosions."
The fighting was spreading across Shia areas of Iraq as the radical cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, the leader of the Mehdi Army, called for a campaign of civil disobedience in which shops, businesses, schools and universities would close down.
In the Sadrist stronghold of Sadr City, home to two million people in Baghdad, police and army checkpoints were simply abandoned and militiamen took over. In a statement read out by a senior aide yesterday, Mr Sadr called on Iraqis to stage sit-ins all over the country and added that he would declare "a civil revolt" if attacks by US and Iraqi security forces continued. Civil disobedience is different in Iraq from most countries, since most protesters are armed or have weapons available.
The Iraqi Prime Minister, Nouri al-Maliki, has moved to Basra, where he is said to be supervising the operation, in which 22 people have been killed and over 100 wounded so far. It is unlikely, however, that the Iraqi army assault would have been launched without the support of the American military, whose jets and helicopters are providing air support.
The Sadrist headquarters in the Shia holy city of Najaf has ordered the Mehdi Army field commanders to be on maximum alert and prepare "to strike the
occupiers", which means attacking US forces. If they do so it would mean the end of the ceasefire declared by Mr Sadr on 29 August last year and renewed in February.
It is this truce which US commanders have said contributed significantly to the fall in violence in Iraq over the past six months. Rockets fired from Shia areas of Baghdad pounded the American-protected Green Zone yesterday.
Basra has been increasingly controlled by Shia militias since the fall of Saddam Hussein in 2003. British forces were never able to establish their authority over the city and finally handed over security control to Iraq on 16 December last year, saying that the British presence was provoking rather than reducing violence.
Mr Maliki has declared that the government is intending to restore law and order in Basra but the Sadrist movement, the most powerful Shia mass movement, will see the offensive as an attempt by its Shia rivals in the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq to displace them. If there is an all-out confrontation, the Iraqi army might well look to support from the United States and Britain, initially through air strikes. So far British forces have not been involved in the fighting.
The US has been eager for the central government to regain control of Basra, which sits on top of Iraq's oil reserves and is also close to the American army's main supply line that runs west of the city up the main highway from Kuwait to Baghdad. Basra has hitherto been run by competing local warlords, each of whom has been seeking to gain control of valuable local concessions and rackets such as fuel and the ports of Basra and Umm Qasr. One Iraqi businessman who dispatched a container from Umm Qasr port to Arbil in Iraqi Kurdistan says he paid $500 (£250) in transport costs and $3,000 in bribes to ensure safe passage.
Mr Sadr has been keen to avoid an all-out military confrontation with the US army or Iraqi units backed by the Americans ever since he fought the US Marines in Najaf in 2004. Although his Mehdi Army militiamen suffered heavy losses because of the American force's superior arms, they showed that they were prepared to fight to the end. In the warren of slums in Basra, they could do the same and they could also spread the fighting across the overwhelmingly Shia south of Iraq.
Patrick Cockburn is the author of 'The Occupation: War, resistance and daily life in Iraq', a finalist for the National Book Critics' Circle Award for best non-fiction book of 2006. His new book 'Muqtada! Muqtada al-Sadr, the Shia revival and the struggle for Iraq' is published by Scribner.
The Rising of the Mehdi Army
Basra Erupts
By PATRICK COCKBURN
The Iraqi army is fighting the Mehdi Army Shia militia in the streets of Basra after the government launched its most serious offensive to gain control of the southern oil city.
Clouds of dark smoke rose over Basra 340 miles south of Baghdad as Iraqi soldiers tried to take control of the main roads while black-clad militiamen fought back from the alleyways. "There are clashes in the streets," said Jamil, a resident of the city. "Bullets are coming from everywhere and we can hear the sound of rocket explosions."
The fighting was spreading across Shia areas of Iraq as the radical cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, the leader of the Mehdi Army, called for a campaign of civil disobedience in which shops, businesses, schools and universities would close down.
In the Sadrist stronghold of Sadr City, home to two million people in Baghdad, police and army checkpoints were simply abandoned and militiamen took over. In a statement read out by a senior aide yesterday, Mr Sadr called on Iraqis to stage sit-ins all over the country and added that he would declare "a civil revolt" if attacks by US and Iraqi security forces continued. Civil disobedience is different in Iraq from most countries, since most protesters are armed or have weapons available.
The Iraqi Prime Minister, Nouri al-Maliki, has moved to Basra, where he is said to be supervising the operation, in which 22 people have been killed and over 100 wounded so far. It is unlikely, however, that the Iraqi army assault would have been launched without the support of the American military, whose jets and helicopters are providing air support.
The Sadrist headquarters in the Shia holy city of Najaf has ordered the Mehdi Army field commanders to be on maximum alert and prepare "to strike the
occupiers", which means attacking US forces. If they do so it would mean the end of the ceasefire declared by Mr Sadr on 29 August last year and renewed in February.It is this truce which US commanders have said contributed significantly to the fall in violence in Iraq over the past six months. Rockets fired from Shia areas of Baghdad pounded the American-protected Green Zone yesterday.
Basra has been increasingly controlled by Shia militias since the fall of Saddam Hussein in 2003. British forces were never able to establish their authority over the city and finally handed over security control to Iraq on 16 December last year, saying that the British presence was provoking rather than reducing violence.
Mr Maliki has declared that the government is intending to restore law and order in Basra but the Sadrist movement, the most powerful Shia mass movement, will see the offensive as an attempt by its Shia rivals in the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq to displace them. If there is an all-out confrontation, the Iraqi army might well look to support from the United States and Britain, initially through air strikes. So far British forces have not been involved in the fighting.
The US has been eager for the central government to regain control of Basra, which sits on top of Iraq's oil reserves and is also close to the American army's main supply line that runs west of the city up the main highway from Kuwait to Baghdad. Basra has hitherto been run by competing local warlords, each of whom has been seeking to gain control of valuable local concessions and rackets such as fuel and the ports of Basra and Umm Qasr. One Iraqi businessman who dispatched a container from Umm Qasr port to Arbil in Iraqi Kurdistan says he paid $500 (£250) in transport costs and $3,000 in bribes to ensure safe passage.
Mr Sadr has been keen to avoid an all-out military confrontation with the US army or Iraqi units backed by the Americans ever since he fought the US Marines in Najaf in 2004. Although his Mehdi Army militiamen suffered heavy losses because of the American force's superior arms, they showed that they were prepared to fight to the end. In the warren of slums in Basra, they could do the same and they could also spread the fighting across the overwhelmingly Shia south of Iraq.
Patrick Cockburn is the author of 'The Occupation: War, resistance and daily life in Iraq', a finalist for the National Book Critics' Circle Award for best non-fiction book of 2006. His new book 'Muqtada! Muqtada al-Sadr, the Shia revival and the struggle for Iraq' is published by Scribner.
Sadr Urges Support For 'Resistance'
By Al Jazeera
Muqtada al-Sadr, the Shia leader, has called on Arab countries to support his militia's battle against "US occupation" as clashes between Shia groups and Iraqi government troops entered their fifth day. Continue
By Al Jazeera
Muqtada al-Sadr, the Shia leader, has called on Arab countries to support his militia's battle against "US occupation" as clashes between Shia groups and Iraqi government troops entered their fifth day. Continue
AlJazeera Video Report From Bastra
In one of the latest offensives, eight people died, including two women and a child, in an air raid.: Continue
In one of the latest offensives, eight people died, including two women and a child, in an air raid.: Continue
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.