NEWS SERVICE … DECEMBER 8, 2004

August 25, 2004

by anna missed

Pentagon officials today indicated that the current deployment of an additional 90,000 troops to Iraq is proceeding according to plans that were revealed three weeks ago. Forces that were deactivated from Korea, Germany and other European military bases have received their one week reorientation training and are currently in route to Kuwait to await final orders. Following the two Shiite uprisings in October and the joint Sunni- Shiite revolt in early November outgoing Bush administration officials say that in order to keep the promised January 30 election schedule on track additional security was needed.

President Bush was quoted yesterday, at the Crawford ranch, “I made a promise to the Iraqi people and I´ll keep that promise, they will have democracy before I leave office”. Former Iraqi defence minister and now acting Prime Minister Hazem Shaalan, also at the Crawford ranch, expressed the need for more security “If we don´t receive the security there will be nobody left to vote”.

The new Iraqi government and their US supporters have been plagued in recent months by the growing anti-Iraqi movement that has seen an advance in both in their numbers and the flood of sophisticated weaponry that has been spirited into the country from Iran and Syria. The controversy over the origin of the surface to air missile launchers that has created so much tension with the Russians, perhaps bringing back some unpleasant memories of the Soviet Afghan war, with the US supplying high tech weapons to the Afghan rebels.

Russia’s Putin has also lashed out at the US for the alleged deployment of two nuclear equipped submarines into the Persian Gulf. Washington has denied these allocations. China, also has weighed in on the Iranian question with significant foot dragging on the upcoming talks with N. Korea.

The new troop deployment for Iraq has generated some controversy here in Washington with some on the democratic side claiming “I told you so” arguing that 90,000 will not do the job so late in the game. While the general opinion on the hill is supportive of the “augmentation” some also worry that plans are being laid out to provide a “cover force” for a withdrawal, others in the minority, complain that this is an escalation for the eventual invasion of Iran.

Both Bush and president elect Kerry express the mantra “we cannot lose this war, we must stay the course”.

Related news:

President elect Kerry has endorsed the Bush administrations reinstatement of conscription laws, vowing to use the new recruits in stateside duty only. Kerry has called out the duty as “holding down the fort”, here at home.
Another anti-Iraqi attack on the green zone has led ambassador Negroponte to advocate another wall to be built a half mile out around the green zone creating a no-man zone perimeter to prevent the “pickup truck” mortar barrages that have become a nightly event.
26 US peace keepers were killed yesterday in various engagements around Iraq, bringing the total to 1, 687 killed in action since the beginning of hostilities.
Unnamed pentagon sources disclosed yesterday that satellite images indicate that the increase in Iranian troop movements have continued unabated.

Posted by b on August 25, 2004 at 17:49 UTC | Permalink

Comments

In other developments, Ariel Sharon has said that the 20,000 new houses being built in the West Bank are part and parcel of the Gaza Pullout Plan, scheduled to commence after the next General Election which Sharon is betting his electorial life on.

Posted by: Cloned Poster | Aug 25 2004 18:37 utc | 1

The Fatwa issued by Sistani on June 3, 2004
“Even so, if this government hopes to establish its worthiness and probity and its unwavering determination to shoulder the immense burdens now facing it, it must:
1. Obtain a clear resolution from the United Nations Security Council on the return of complete sovereignty over their country to the Iraqis, unconstrained in any regard, whether political, economic, military, or security-related. Every effort must be made to efface all signs of occupation in every way.
2. Provision of security in every part of the country and putting an end to organized criminal activities, as well as all criminal actions.
3. Provision of public services to the citizens and reducing the effort necessary for them to pursue their everyday lives.
4. First-rate preparation for general elections, and keeping to the appointed date, which is at the beginning of the coming new year according to the Christian calendar, so that a national assembly can be formed that is not bound by any of the decisions issued in the shadow of the Occupation, including what they call the Law for the Administration of the Transitional State [i.e. the Interim Constitution].
The new government will never obtain popular acceptance save if it demonstrates through actual and practical steps that it is striving with earnestness and sincerity to fulfill the above mission. May God enable all to do as He wills and as pleases Him.
14 Rabi II, 1425
The Office of Sayyid Sistani”

Posted by: Cloned Poster | Aug 25 2004 18:43 utc | 2

We need a betting pool here at MoA, don’t we?
Escalation, yes. Iran, no. January elections, no. Conscription, no.

Posted by: Pat | Aug 25 2004 19:53 utc | 3

your use of newspeak is disgusting. and i would have preferred these “related news”:
* another anti-iraqi attack on the green zone has left about 30 dead and over 100 wounded. among the dead were the 10 bodyguards of ambassador negroponte. while many bodies have yet to be identified, the whereabouts of ambassador negroponte are unknown.
* crude oil jumped $14 to $86/barrel overnight after iran warned the US about continued airspace violations, and gave 7 days to the US to reposition its 3 carrier battle groups currently deployed in the persian gulf away from the area.
* Chaotic scenes seen in front of the german embassy in Tel-Aviv, where thousands of descendants of German jews are applying for passports for them and their families.
* In another setback to US foreign policy in the region, North and South Korea have announced their intention to hold talks aimed at a normalization in the relations between the two countries. The US Dept of State issued travel warnings after two US soldiers were killed in Seoul and several American citizens were beaten up by angry mobs after a scheme involving US troops to abduct and traffic Korean minors for prostitution and child pornography became known. A Pentagon speaker would not comment the case. Japan expressed fears that a reunified Korea with nuclear armament could further destabilize the region and threaten its own interests.
* Various Internet sites have uncovered evidence that the current death toll among US and coalition troops is bordering the 8000 mark. Details to be released soon.
* Protests have broken out in Germany and Italy after civilian hospitals in towns near US bases were closed to the public due to the heavy load of wounded US soldiers. Halliburton has been commissioned to build 3 major hospitals for the US military, but they would not enter service before late 2006. The Pentagon is currently in talks with Congress to authorize a supplement of $20 BN to the defense budget for their construction and operation.

Posted by: name | Aug 25 2004 19:56 utc | 4

OK, not a future news (though I may come with something soon), but a real current one:
In-law of Defense Minister Shaalan kidnapped
This may be very interesting…

Posted by: Clueless Joe | Aug 25 2004 20:08 utc | 5

@CJ
Kidnapping finished Carter. The Iranians and Shi’ites know that already,
however, Defense Minister for Iraq?

Posted by: Cloned Poster | Aug 25 2004 20:25 utc | 6

Wishful Thinking:
A day after his inauguration president Kerry announced to withdraw all troops from Iraq by April 1, 2005. He called on international forces and the UN to guarantee the inviolableness of the Iraqi borders and statehood.
In his speech he also announced that he would veto any future financial support for the state of Israel as long as the Israeli Prime Minister and parliament would not agree to a complete trackback to the 1967 boarder and the total controlled disarmend of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons.
He announced to achieve a reduction of 50% of the budget of the Pentagon and the Department of Energy (the holder of the US nuclear arms) within two years and to invest the estimated 300 billion reduction per year into open source, license free research on and development of alternative energy sources and energy preservance technology.
In a further step he proposed new tax, social security and medical support legislation that would narrow the spread of income clusters in the US from currently 1,000 p.y. up to 1,000,000,000 per year to 10,000 p.y. up to 1,000,000 per year.
To repay the unprecedented debt the US has accumulated against foreign savers, he called on the FED to increase interest rates to a level where saving would again be felt as virtue and debt as vice.

Posted by: b | Aug 25 2004 21:53 utc | 7

future news II
here some stuff from the gossip columns of june/2005 which i forgot to post:
* while the daughter of former president bush, barbara, has been touring US bases in kuwait and qatar, her sister jenna has reportedly been admitted to a hospital in bethesda in urgent condition. medical personnel dismiss rumors that she is in coma due to a heroin overdose while describing her condition as “worrying but stable”. Former cabinet member Dr. Rice was seen at the hospital during a visit.
* the husband of ana marie cox, who is widely known as “wonkette”, has filed for divorce after discovering that ms. cox entertained a covert romance with jessica cutler a.k.a.”washingtonienne”. ms. cox has described ms. cutler as a “queen of the strapon” in her usual lighthearted manner.
* a speaker for theresa heinz, wife of president kerry, denied that ms. heinz had punched a reporter in the nose during a brawl which reportedly ensued after several reporters asked the first woman off the mark questions about her family life. the secret service had no comment.
* former head of the department of homeland security tom ridge has recovered after having been shot in what has been described as an accident during a hunting excursion with former AG ashcroft and the just retired justice scalia.

Posted by: name | Aug 25 2004 22:10 utc | 8

Posted by: name | Aug 25 2004 22:10 utc | 9

Future news
Washington August 25th 2005: Porter Goss, the head of the American Citizen Surveillance Unit (formerly known as the CIA), told a press conference today that he has received ‘pretty solid information’ about a plot to assassinate Abraham Lincoln.
He added that as a security precaution armed guards are to be placed on all hospital operating theaters…

Posted by: Nemo | Aug 26 2004 0:19 utc | 10

@name
Your right, my bone in the soup here is in all likelyhood a little on the small side, But, considering the trajectory the US occupation is currently on, and its progressive spiral out of control, major escalation seems the only alternative(to regain control), My question then, does escalation provoke a strong Iranian reaction first, a Russian and then perhaps a Chinese reaction? Would the sense of (of being in) really deep water transform the occupation into something altogether different?If the US runs up against a buried Russian/Chinese wall? How would these stakes play to the US public?
And b,
Could J.F.Kerry as the president elect, not find himself so very poetically, atop the 1965 LBJ horns of a dilemma (can’t leave cant stay) and actually have the power, this time, to stop it before all those thousands are led off the cliff? To see the echo from the past return, this time, with authority?
But then again like that old Steve Martin SNL skit:
Naaaaaaaaaah.

Posted by: anna missed | Aug 26 2004 3:21 utc | 11

I dont’ think there will be escalation if Kerry is elected.
But I’m a simple minded guy.
I don’t see Iraq as an intractable morass.
To get out you just get out.
I suspect the solution that Kerry’s Cabinet will come upon will look something like this:
Put a retired General with lots of world-wide good will in charge of an overarching program called “Operation Iraqi Freedom II.”
(A General with the moral weight of say…General George Marshall–yeah I am thinking of Wes Clark here.)
Cut out the Halliburton middle men from the $upply chain of cash going to actual Iraqis.
The idea is to create a new Iraq army that pays well. Real well. So well that families and lots of relatives can live off the salary.
Establish a policy that for every 1000 new Iraq troops that go on duty, 1000 American troops come home.
Insist that Prince Allawi, or whoever is in charge, pledge an oath to future elections even as you empower him to run a martial state.
(That’s a dilemma we are just going to have to live with.)
Continue to train Iraqi soldiers and siphon off Americans on a 1-for-1 basis as fast as possible.
Whatever happens after the last American soldier leaves is an issue between the UN and the current Iraqi leadership.
It is that simple.
Do it.

Posted by: koreyel | Aug 26 2004 3:59 utc | 12

But…but…Koreyel, we don’t WANT Iraqis or the UN in charge of all those scrumtious oil reserves and desert real estate that Israel needs for expansion.
So the answer is NO, I will not DO IT.
–Yours Truly, Sen and Prez hopeful John Kerry

Posted by: rapt | Aug 26 2004 13:32 utc | 13

Jeeeez, What if Vietnam had had oil?

Posted by: beq | Aug 26 2004 17:00 utc | 14

Jean-Marc Mojon reports from Najaf: Thousands of Shiites end Najaf siege

Tears ran down his wrinkled face and his feet barely touched the ground as the elated crowd squeezed through the gates and into the shrine’s courtyard.
He and the others were greeted like heroes by the 300 besieged Sadr militiamen inside.
“This is democracy”
“God is great. This is democracy, this is the new Iraq, this is the greatest defeat we could have inflicted on the Americans. It’s the most beautiful day in my life,” he shouted, hurrying inside the main mausoleum to pray.
…
Further up the stream of at least 20 000 demonstrators, in the Al-Jadida neighbourhood outside the Old City, a surreal scene unfolded as bewildered American soldiers trapped in their tanks watched as posters of Sistani and Moqtada posters were waved in their faces.

Al-Sadr is back into the underground, his people are going home for now and Sistani is in control of the Shrine. The interim Iraqi government and The US have lost their face big time and the US troops are bewildered. Some thousand people are dead, more wounded and the old city of Najaf is bombed to rubble.
The big question – who organized this and why?
Even if the whole mess was started, as the NYT had reported, by local US commander without higher approval, the US could have stopped this any time. As there was no positive solution in sight – killing Al Sadr would have started a bigger insurgency – why wasn´t this done?
Sistanis leaving in time and hurrying back shortly after the occupation powers have reached the gate of the shrine is somehow fishy. What was his role?
There are some interesting books waiting to be written about The Siege of Najaf

Posted by: b | Aug 26 2004 18:22 utc | 15

Indeed, Bernhard. I could see 2 main explanations. The first is that Allawi and co knew Sistani had to leave soon to get treated in London, so they timed the attack in the hope Sadr and his boys would all be field fertilizer by the time Sistani came back. The other is that Sistani preferred to go out until things were heated enough and a complete catastrophe was at hand, to reappear as a saviour. I suppose his quick return has even increased his already massive influence on Shia Iraq, given the situation.
Then, as I said in Kos, I can’t rule out that he’s not that estranged from Sadr and that they’re playing the classic good cop / bad cop stint to Negroponte and Allawi.
We may have a clearer view in 24 hours, after negotiations, when the truce is theoretically over.
If I can’t say if Sadr or Sistani is the biggest winner, or if both actually win, the US and the puppet Iraqi govt are on the losers’ side big time; people won’t forget that the old city has been half destroyed, the cemetery bombed to smithereens, and the shrine itself damaged.

Posted by: Clueless Joe | Aug 26 2004 18:50 utc | 16

…people won’t forget that the old city has been half destroyed, the cemetery bombed to smithereens, and the shrine itself damaged.
Nice post Cluefull Joe.
I just want to comment on the above snip.
It is something we all understand– nevertheless is worth repeating.
The greatest disaster to ever befall a people was 9/11.
The second greaest disaster to befall a people was the most recent Florida hurricane.
Western media has no memory, and little recognition of bombs falling in the old city of Najaf.
Najaf is a “no place” of “nobodies”.
It is not on anybody’s radar screen (save the air forces).
Doesn’t matter if Najaf was a world heritage site.
Doesn’t matter if 200 children got blown to bits.
Doesn’t matter if vital archeological sites got destroyed.
Doesn’t matter. Doesn’t matter. Doesn’t matter.
Najaf and its Iraqis are “no place important” –they are the new invisibles and the latest untouchables.
Truly–the stone relics of Najaf matter less than the flimsy trailers of Florida.
It’s all about the media. Who controls the media and what the media thinks is important.
And that my friends… is the quintessential sin of the times we live in.
It is enough to make a grown man vomit.

Posted by: koreyel | Aug 26 2004 20:25 utc | 17

according to GlobalSecurity.org Iraq: US Dead Tops 1000

Posted by: b | Aug 26 2004 21:35 utc | 18

@beq what if Viet Nam had had oil
were you being sarcastic?
‘cos umm, it does — potentially. it did, potentially. you can bet the French knew that when they were renaming it “Indochine”. some of that potential is being developed right now.
what did you think that whole Indochine/Vietnam thing was about, anyway? a sudden obsession with high-quality rice? how soon they forget…
look, the divvying-up of the world’s petroleum fields by the old colonial powers has been going on since at least the 1920’s, starting when far-thinking corporadoes and pols realised some of the implications of the automobile, natural gas extraction, petro-based synthetic chemistry (WWI nerve gases among other nifty products), air power in warfare and so forth.
the British weren’t in Iraq (they called it Mesopotamia at the time) for the great cuisine (more fools they), they were there for the oil. the Iraqis kicked them out rather decisively in 1916, siege of Kut.
why’d you think CIA got rid of democratically-elected Mossadegh and put the boy-prince Shah on the throne in ’53, condemning Iranians to 20 years of suffering under Reza and his pet torturers and assassins of SAVAK? because British Petroleum asked them to, as a favour — Mossadegh was talking about nationalising the Iranian oil fields, and the old colonial masters weren’t having any of that uppity-wog talk.
and of course, 20 years of SAVAK paved the way for the revolution of the ayatollahs… all that “Muslim extremism” that made the US find it advisable to hire a strictly secular strongman called Saddam Hussein circa ’63 to prevent similar occurrences in, ahem oil-rich Iraq…
anyway, for anyone who really has forgotten: it’s not “what if Viet Nam had had oil” — it’s “wouldn’t Viet Nam have been way luckier if it hadn’t had any oil,” ‘cos then the French might not have been in such a fever to acquire it and the Amis in such a fever to steal it from the French.
my $.02 — ymmv.

Posted by: DeAnander | Aug 27 2004 7:29 utc | 19

@koreyel – good point. People that do not already know that they need to find more perspective will not find it spontaneously in today’s media (or very erratically).
@DeAnander – I am skeptical that Vietnam was in any way about oil, even for the French. However, it might trigger a future conflict with China, as both countries claim waters in the South China Sea where big offshore deposits are expected to be found (it’s Vietnamese territorial waters, but it’s the South China Sea, which is big enough claim for them….) See previous skirmiches re Spratley Islands – this is smoldering and could blow up in the not so distant future.

Posted by: Jérôme | Aug 27 2004 9:45 utc | 20

@koreyel – good point. People that do not already know that they need to find more perspective will not find it spontaneously in today’s media (or very erratically).
@DeAnander – I am skeptical that Vietnam was in any way about oil, even for the French. However, it might trigger a future conflict with China, as both countries claim waters in the South China Sea where big offshore deposits are expected to be found (it’s Vietnamese territorial waters, but it’s the South China>/i> Sea, which is big enough claim for them….) See previous skirmiches re Spratley Islands – this is smoldering and could blow up in the not so distant future.

Posted by: Jérôme | Aug 27 2004 9:47 utc | 21

Back to Main