Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
November 12, 2004

Iraq Thread

Please post news/comments on the current Iraq situation here.

Posted by b on November 12, 2004 at 15:35 UTC | Permalink

Comments
next page »

For starters three buried facts from todays general reporting:

The population (100,000) that is still in the city is driven away, but the men can not leave.

US traps rebels as fighting spreads

Tank crews said they had forced rebels to a southern area of the city the Americans believe is a stronghold for foreign militants led by Jordanian militant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

But hundreds of people trying to flee the assault have been turned back by US troops. The military has issued orders that no males aged 15 to 55 should be allowed to leave, arguing that insurgents could mingle with refugees to avoid being killed or captured.

"We assume they'll go home and just wait out the storm or find a place that's safe," said an officer of the 1st Cavalry Division.
...
Once the battle ends, military officials say all surviving men of military-age can expect to be tested for explosive residue, catalogued, checked against insurgent databases and interrogated about ties with militants.

Go find a place that's save?

New rebel tactics emerge in Fallujah

But Thursday night, casualties appeared to mount. Coalition forces have been targeted from mosques. They have uncovered unarmed sleeper cells that they believe have been seeded throughout the city and primed to strike after the initial assault.
Now are you in a save place or are you an unarmed sleeper cell? This is a naked "justification" to kill all male, unarmed civilians. War crime No. 1,345?


Meanwhile - are you sure there are enough troops when you pull your reserves out of one battle to fill a hole at another battle?

Insurgents Attack Fiercely in North, Storming Police Stations in Mosul

Mosul, the third largest city in Iraq, has been torn by deadly violence throughout the occupation, with car bombings and assassinations becoming almost a routine part of daily life.

But the assaults have grown so incendiary over the last two days, the Stryker Brigade, the light-armored mobile unit charged with controlling the region, is pulling its battalion out of the Falluja operation to send it north. Three Stryker battalions are already in the Mosul area.


Posted by: b | Nov 12 2004 15:46 utc | 1

Eyewitness Reporting by an Iraqi journalist/Fallouja resident for the BBC. I hope bloody nightmares haunt Bush for the rest of his life.

Posted by: ego | Nov 12 2004 15:53 utc | 2

Four brigades from the Iraqi National Guard have been ordered to Mosul from their bases near Syria. The units consist of Kurds who used to be in the Kurdish peshmerga militia before being incorporated into the government's security force.


Guess Civil War now inevitable.

Posted by: Cloned Poster | Nov 12 2004 15:56 utc | 3

What to say?! This is some information from August, but I have not been aware of it before.

Iraqi Farmers aren't Celebrating World Food Day

A new report [1] by GRAIN and Focus on the Global South has found that new legislation in Iraq has been carefully put in place by the US that prevents farmers from saving their seeds and effectively hands over the seed market to transnational corporations. This is a disastrous turn of events for Iraqi farmers, biodiversity and the country's food security. While political sovereignty remains an illusion, food sovereignty for the Iraqi people has been made near impossible by these new regulations.

"The US has been imposing patents on life around the world through trade deals. In this case, they invaded the country first, then imposed their patents. This is both immoral and unacceptable", said Shalini Bhutani, one of the report's authors.
...
In 2002, FAO estimated that 97 percent of Iraqi farmers used saved seed from their own stocks from last year's harvest or purchased from local markets. When the new law - on plant variety protection (PVP) - is put into effect, seed saving will be illegal and the market will only offer proprietary "PVP-protected" planting material "invented" by transnational agribusiness corporations. The new law totally ignores all the contributions Iraqi farmers have made to development of important crops like wheat, barley, date and pulses. Its consequences are the loss of farmers' freedoms and a grave threat to food sovereignty in Iraq. In this way, the US has declared a new war against the Iraqi farmer.


Posted by: Fran | Nov 12 2004 17:37 utc | 4

Has anyone reported on where all the Fallujah civilian refugees supposedly went before the battle? Did they just disappear, go to a relative's home in another city, congregate in a refugee camp, cross a border, what? Judgeing by the media account, they just disappeared!

Posted by: gylangirl | Nov 12 2004 17:44 utc | 5

Let's just do everything we can to insult and enrage Muslims worldwide shall we?

http://www.underthesamesun.org/>Under the Same Sun today documents US troops camping out in a mosque -- on the prayer rugs -- in their heavy boots, laying dirty guns and packs down on the rugs, etc.

as Zeynep sputters in disbelief: Those "plush red carpets", by the way, are prayer rugs, or "sajjade." And you don't step on them with your combat boots, especially inside a mosque, and smile for the cameras unless you really want to fight to the death with up to a billion people.) Seriously, this is either the most arrogant, incompetent, ignorant occupation, ever, or the most clever, insidious, skillful effort towards bringing about an apocalyptic world war. Are they asleep at the awheel, drowning under their own ignorance, or simply want to end life on earth as we know it?

I'm trying to remember the last time an invading army pissed and shat on the altars of Europe's cathedrals. Genghis Khan, was it? Either this is a demented attempt at psyops -- i.e. "seeing their sacred spaces profaned will break their spirit" -- or it's sheer incompetence... and either way, it's imho a symptom of the kind of solipsistic madness that brings Empires down.

Posted by: DeAnander | Nov 12 2004 18:09 utc | 6

Posted by: Sic transit gloria USA | Nov 12 2004 20:20 utc | 7

Washington The US-led postwar government in Iraq awarded business to two multinational banks fined for violating U.S. sanctions against Iraq during the regime of ousted dictator Saddam Hussein, records show.

The U.S.-appointed interim Iraqi government awarded one of the first foreign banking licenses in Iraq to British bank HSBC — the only firm fined twice for transactions with Saddam's Iraq by the U.S. Treasury Department.

A CIA report last month said Saddam's regime also stashed illicit oil profits in accounts at an HSBC branch in Jordan. And an Iraqi bank under Saddam was one of five investors in a London bank controlled by HSBC. The deal gave one of Saddam's bankers a seat on the board of directors of the British Arab Commercial Bank until last year.

JPMorgan Chase & Co., the American bank chosen by U.S. officials to manage the Trade Bank of Iraq, paid a fine four years ago to resolve allegations its Chase Manhattan Bank allowed a $50,000 funds transfer involving Saddam's Iraq....

Saddam-linked banks given business by US-appointed interim ‘Iraqi Government’

Posted by: Sic transit gloria USA | Nov 12 2004 21:06 utc | 8

Thanks for the Martin van Creveld article on Dayan's experience of vietnam, it's fascinating.

I'll just quote the conclusion again:

he third and most important reason why I think Vietnam is relevant to the situation in Iraq is because the Americans found themselves in the unfortunate position where they were beating down on the weak. To quote Dayan: “any comparison between the two armies… was astonishing. On the one hand there was the American Army, complete with helicopters, an air force, armor, electronic communications, artillery, and mind-boggling riches; to say nothing of ammunition, fuel, spare parts, and equipment of all kinds. On the other there were the [North Vietnamese troops] who had been walking on foot for four months, carrying some artilleryrounds on their backs and using a tin spoon to eat a little ground rice from a tin plate”.

That, of course, was precisely the problem. In private life, an adult who keeps beating down on a five year old—even such a one as originally attacked him with a knife—will be perceived as committing a crime; therefore he will lose the support of bystanders and end up by being arrested, tried and convicted. In international life, an armed force that keeps beating down on a weaker opponent will be seen as committing a series of crimes; therefore it will end up by losing the support of its allies, its own people, and its own troops. Depending on the quality of the forces—whether they are draftees or professionals, the effectiveness of the propaganda machine, the nature of the political process, and so on—things may happen quickly or take a long time to mature. However, the outcome is always the same. He (or she) who does not understand this does not understand anything about war; or, indeed, human nature.

In other words, he who fights against the weak — and the rag-tag Iraqi militias are very weak indeed — and loses, loses. He who fights against the weak and wins also loses. To kill an opponent who is much weaker than yourself is unnecessary and therefore cruel; to let that opponent kill you is unnecessary and therefore foolish. As Vietnam and countless other cases prove, no armed force however rich, however powerful, however, advanced, and however well motivated is immune to this dilemma. The end result is always disintegration and defeat; if U.S troops in Iraq have not yet started fragging their officers, the suicide rate among them is already exceptionally high. That is why the present adventure will almost certainly end as the previous one did. Namely, with the last US troops fleeing the country while hanging on to their helicopters’ skids.

If you go look at the details of the recent deaths of US soldiers, the most striking fact is how few are listed with "Fallujah" as location. A big majority is in "al anbar" province, where Fallujah is, but also the rest of the Sunni triangle, if I am not mistaken. Where's the fighting?

Posted by: Jérôme | Nov 12 2004 21:13 utc | 9

He asked what the difference was between what is occurring in Fallujah now to what Saddam Hussein did during his repression of the Shia Intifada which followed the ’91 Gulf War. “Saddam suppressed that uprising and used less awful methods than the Americans are in Fallujah today.”

…..Of course the flames of resistance have now engulfed other parts of Baghdad and Iraq alike. Here in Baghdad, the Amiriyah, Abu Ghraib and al-Dora regions have fallen mostly under the control of the resistance.

A friend of mine who lives in al-Dora said, “The resistance is in control here now, they are controlling the streets.”
What few US patrols still roam the streets are attacked often. This fact underscored earlier as several large explosions nearby shook the walls of my hotel this afternoon.

Abu Talat was once again trapped in his neighborhood and we were unable to conduct an interview when fighting broke out nearby his home. He called me and said, “The Iraqi Police found a car bomb, and when they were warning people about it US troops showed up and were immediately attacked with RPG’s. The fighting raged for at least half an hour, and several soldiers were wounded and taken away. Now fighter jets are flying so low over our neighborhood, using their loud voices to terrorize people.”

Huge areas within the cities of Ramadi, Fallujah, Baquba and Mosul are now controlled by the resistance. Will the slash and burn tactics of the US military in Fallujah be applied to those areas next?

Meanwhile, over near the Imam Adham mosque a huge demonstration organized by the Islamic Party (which just withdrew from the so-called interim government and recently called for a boycott of the elections), broke out. It was comprised of well over 5,000 angry people denouncing Ayad Allawi and demanding his resignation.
They also demonstrated to show that they were unafraid of the US military.

And they called for jihad against Allawi.

‘’Iraq is burning with wrath, anger and sadness…’’

Posted by: Sic transit gloria USA | Nov 12 2004 22:00 utc | 10

"…They can't go north because that's where we are. They can't go west because of the Euphrates river and they can't go east because we have a huge presence there. So they are cornered in the south," Marine Master Sergeant Roy Meek told Reuters. ….

…..Just hours after U.S. Marines said insurgents were penned into the south of Falluja, a battle erupted in the northwest of the city, a Reuters correspondent with Marines in the area said. …

U.S. battles for control of Falluja

Posted by: Sic transit gloria USA | Nov 12 2004 22:03 utc | 11

De,

Just some of those faithful followers of the Old Testament...

Having conquered these nations, you must utterly destroy all the sanctuaries where they honored their gods -- on the mountain heights, on the hills, and under every leafy tree. Topple their altars, smash their pillars, burn their sacred groves, and hew down their idols, and thus blot out all memory of them from these places.
Deuteronomy 12: 2-3

Posted by: Kate_Storm | Nov 12 2004 23:01 utc | 12

Bernhard, as a European, you should know very well what that means: "no males aged 15 to 55 should be allowed to leave, arguing that insurgents could mingle with refugees to avoid being killed or captured"
It means this and nothing else, and it has always meant this in every war everywhere:

12 July 1995
Buses arrived to take women and children to Muslim territory, while the Serbs begin separating out all men from age 12 to 77 for "interrogation for suspected war crimes". It is estimated that 23,000 women and children were deported in the next 30 hours. Hundreds of men were held in trucks and warehouses.

16 July 1995
Early reports of massacres emerged as the first survivors of the long march from Srebrenica began to arrive in Muslim-held territory. In the five days after Bosnian Serb forces overran Srebrenica, more than 7,000 Muslim men are thought to have been killed.

Posted by: Clueless Joe | Nov 12 2004 23:10 utc | 13

More from Kate's quote.

And when thou comest nigh over against the children of Ammon, distress them not, nor meddle with them: for I will not give thee of the land of the children of Ammon any possession; because I have given it unto the children of Lot for a possession.

Religion............. I give up.

Posted by: Cloned Poster | Nov 12 2004 23:12 utc | 14

from link (U.S. battles for control of Falluja) posted by sic transit:

""We want to get this over with as quickly as possible, because right behind those coalition forces are reconstruction teams, are hospital teams, and ambulances, and food, and humanitarian equipment and supplies to help the people of Fallujah," he said in a transcript released by the State Department Friday."

"So shalt thou feed on Death, that feeds on men,
And Death once dead, there's no more dying then.

(sonnet 146).

Posted by: slothrop | Nov 12 2004 23:44 utc | 15

Let them eat cake.

"...'We call it the wedding cake. It's layered all the way up,' said Air Force Lt. Col. David Staven, who leads the ground targeting effort on a U.S. base outside Fallujah."

Let them fill up at the trough.

"...Filings to the US justice department show that Mr Allawi has, since summer 2003, paid between $50,000 and $100,000 a month to a constellation of Washington political consultants."

And then, to the Hague with the lot of them.

Posted by: RossK | Nov 13 2004 0:58 utc | 16

All mankinde is of one Author,
and is one volume; when one Man dies, one chapter is not torn out of the book, but translated into a better language; and every chapter must be so tranlated; God emploies
several translators; some peeces are translated by age, some by
sicknesse, some by warre, some by justice, but God's hand is in every translation, and his hand shall binde up all our scattered leaves againe, for that Librarie
where every booke shall lie open to one another.

No man is an iland intire of itselfe; every man is a peece of the Continent, a part of the maine; if a clod bee washed away by the Sea, Europe is the lesse, as well as if a promontorie were, as well as if a mannor of thy friends or of thine owne were;
any man's death diminishes me,
because I am involved in Mankinde; and therefore, never send to know for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for thee.
John Donne 1623

Posted by: possum | Nov 13 2004 1:22 utc | 17

…I want them to know about conditions inside this city - there are dead women and children lying on the streets. ..

Eyewitness - Smoke and corpses

Whenever a neo-colonial power - or a puppet politician like interim Iraqi Premier Iyad Allawi - orders the widespread bombing of civilian areas, as in Fallujah, the rationale invoked is "regrettable necessity". What is never mentioned is the real objective: collective punishment….

Collective punishment, regrettable necessity

In Iraq it's hard to tell who's ahead - As applied to specific battlefields like Fallujah, the Kissinger lesson shows the American dilemma for what it is: they can't win, even if they win

British Marine shot as his convoy is attacked by panic-stricken American troops

U.S. troops raid Baghdad mosque and homes of influential Sunnis critical of Falluja offensive

Posted by: Sic transit gloria USA | Nov 13 2004 1:24 utc | 18

Sorry to be off-topic again, but things are brewing in regards to the election challenge, too -- they need funds for this, so give if you can. The clock is ticking!

A Legitimate Recount Effort in Ohio

An effort led by Common Cause and the Alliance for Democracy is underway in Ohio to conduct a statewide recount.

Efforts to launch an official statewide recount of the Ohio presidential vote are underway. While it's unclear if a recount will result in a Kerry victory, it's likely to highlight many flaws in Ohio elections that may have tilted results toward Republicans and against Democrats.

Common Cause of Ohio and the Alliance for Democracy, a progressive coalition, Thursday announced they were launching a recount campaign for Ohio. Columbus, Ohio attorney Cliff Arnebeck, who represents both groups, said both the Green Party and Libertarian Party presidential candidates would seek a recount if the $110,000 filing fee could be raised. "Common Cause and the Alliance for Democracy are not partisan. The purpose of the recount is to verify the honesty of the process," Arnebeck said. "That is in the interest of anyone who would be declared the winner."

A coalition of progressive groups will hold a public hearing on election abuses this Saturday in Columbus calling on the Kerry campaign to pay for the recount. Meanwhile, they have created a Web page to collect donations at the Alliance for Democracy site. The Kerry campaign reportedly was sending lawyers to Ohio to look into election irregularities, but Arnebeck said only the public interest groups were now committed to a recount. ...

Posted by: JMF | Nov 13 2004 3:23 utc | 19

From the Guardian, Naomi Klein.

Die, then vote. This is Falluja - Iraqi elections were postponed to save Bush. That led to today's carnage

With all the millions spent on "democracy-building" and "civil society" in Iraq, it has come to this: if you can survive attack by the world's only superpower, you get to cast a ballot. Fallujans are going to vote, goddammit, even if they all have to die first.
...
That would defeat the purpose of the invasion, and it would threaten President Bush's re-election chances. At that meeting, a revised plan was hatched: elections would be delayed for more than a year, and in the meantime, Iraq's first "sovereign" government would be hand-picked by Washington. The plan would allow Mr Bush to claim progress on the campaign trail, while keeping Iraq safely under US control.

In the US, Mr Bush's claim that "freedom is on the march" served its purpose, but in Iraq, the plan led directly to the carnage we see today.
...
So it turns out that all of the excuses were lies: if elections can be held now, they most certainly could have been held a year ago, when the country was vastly calmer. But that would have denied Washington the chance to install a puppet regime in Iraq, and possibly would have prevented George Bush from winning a second term
...
In another demonstration of their commitment to freedom, the first goal of the US soldiers in Falluja was to ambush the city's main hospital. Why? Apparently because it was the source of the "rumours" about high civilian casualties the last time US troops laid siege to Falluja, sparking outrage in Iraq and across the Arab world. "It's a centre of propaganda," an unnamed senior American officer told the New York Times. Without doctors to count the dead, the outrage would presumably be muted - except that, of course, the attacks on hospitals have sparked their own outrage, further jeopardising the legitimacy of the upcoming elections.
According to the New York Times, the Falluja general hospital was easy to capture, since the doctors and patients put up no resistance. There was, however, one injury: "An Iraqi soldier who accidentally discharged his Kalashnikov rifle, injuring his lower leg."

I think that means he shot himself in the foot. He's not the only one.


Posted by: Fran | Nov 13 2004 6:35 utc | 20

Thanks Fran,

Ms Klein keeps on hitting the nail on the head.

Her story on the Plan For A Neandercon Utopia (as opposed to the 'no plan' excuse) for post-war Iraq has been spot on, regardless what waterheads like Christopher Hitchens have to say.

Posted by: RossK | Nov 13 2004 6:42 utc | 21

Could Mosul be the birthplace of total civil war?

Ten guardsmen were killed in Mosul, said U.S. Brig. Gen. Carter Ham, the commander of the army battalion in charge of the city in an interview on CNN. The police chief was fired by the Interior Minister amid accusations that the police were conspiring with the insurgents.....

.....Meanwhile Sunni preachers at three key mosques called for jihad.....

....."U.S. forces have dishonored us, killed our sons and detained our women, therefore it is every Muslim's duty to go to jihad," said one preacher. "All of us should assist our Jihadi brothers with money and weapons. The time has come to avenge our brothers in Fallujah and Samara."

Posted by: RossK | Nov 13 2004 6:50 utc | 22

Curfews as Iraq rebellion spreads

US troops stretched to limit as insurgents fight back

Posted by: Sic transit gloria USA | Nov 13 2004 7:47 utc | 23

RossK

Meanwhile Sistani watches from the terraces in total glee, and the Kurds are getting Israeli promises of independence.

YES.

Posted by: Cloned Poster | Nov 13 2004 8:46 utc | 24

@ Cloned
I doubt that Sistani is gleeful, but the Israeli
promises of independence seem to me to be right on
the mark. In fact, for the Likkudniks it's really a case of "the worse, the better". With Kurdistan already "split off", the only thing necessary for splitting Iraq into 3 mutually hostile mini-states is to incite a fitna between Sunnis and Shiites, not
an easy task while the Americans are killing Moslems
independent their views on Imam Ali, but surely something that will not be difficult once the Yanks
are gone.
It seems (a question and conjecture really) that the U.S. is using Kurdish auxiliaries to "maintain order" after "restoring order" via the "wedding cake" of bombers, helicopters, and AWACS control posts, together, of course, with the blood of marine infantymen. This harks back to the 20-th centuries first well-publicized genocide, when the Kurds performed a similar service for
the Turks in suppressing the Armenians. Since by now my news tends to be viewed through "Moon"light (& thanks to the habitue's all the illuminating and horrifying links), I can't help wondering what the
at home Yanks are thinking about these events. It's just as easy to click a link from the U.S. as it is from Europe but I have the distinct impression the Yanks at home don't have any idea of how totally this war has immersed the name of the U.S. in shit.

Posted by: Hannah K. O'Luthon | Nov 13 2004 9:09 utc | 25

HKOL

Do you ever go here?

http://dailywarnews.blogspot.com/

There's a poster there called ThePaper and he calls the Sistani position like I do.

Remember Iran and Chalabi?

Ohhhhhhhhh and the Americans are only killing Sunnis.

Posted by: Cloned Poster | Nov 13 2004 9:21 utc | 26

@ Cloned
I have "visited" but not really looked carefully.
I'll try a more serious visit, and in particular will
look at ThePaper. I repeat my earlier comments - with
folks like you and the other "Moonatics" to point out worthwhile links it's easy to get non-authorized and non-official views of this tragedy. How could my erstwhile compatriots have returned that sadistic shithead to office?

Posted by: Hannah K. O'Luthon | Nov 13 2004 9:32 utc | 27

"How could my erstwhile compatriots have returned that sadistic shithead to office?"

I really don't think they did. It's the blokes at the top who did.

Whoever they are.

Posted by: Cloned Poster | Nov 13 2004 9:44 utc | 28

Regarding the "Israel giving the Kurds a free state" idea above, yesterday I read an article that I can't find now that discussed a plan Turkey is preparing to send 20,000 troops into Northern Iraq in a month or two to battle Kurdish insurgents. Anybody else see this or hear anything about this? Could be another very ugly situation.

Posted by: maxcrat | Nov 13 2004 13:42 utc | 29

Found it. It was an RFE/RL report that I saw at The Agonist website. Excerpt:
RFL/RE - Turkish newspapers this week are reporting that the Turkish government has formulated a contingency plan that would place at least 20,000 Turkish troops inside northern Iraq in an effort to prevent Kurdish leaders from changing the demographic structure of the highly contested city of Kirkuk.

The plan ostensibly calls for the reentry of Turkish forces into northern Iraq to rout out Turkish-Kurdish militants from the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), and also calls for Turkish troops to prevent further Iraqi Kurdish migration to Kirkuk.


Posted by: maxcrat | Nov 13 2004 13:45 utc | 30

"How could my erstwhile compatriots have returned that sadistic shithead to office?"

"I really don't think they did. It's the blokes at the top who did.

Whoever they are."

Those erstwhile compatriots did because they don't care. I have been told on many occasions by "seemingly rational people":

"I don't care what's going on over there as long as it's not happening here."

"I just couldn't stomach having Kerry for President. I know Bush will do what is right."

"We should just kill them all. They don't care about us, so why should we care about them."

My personal favorite: "I voted for Bush because I like Laura and Kerry's wife was such a twat."

Posted by: aw | Nov 13 2004 14:54 utc | 31

Somewhat OT: I'm back here, thanks to Jerome. I had lost the link.

In re Iraq, two random observations.

Last Monday night (I think) I turned on the news (CBS, first time I watched the news since Black Tuesday) and they were interviewing some US soldiers pre-Falluja and (to my ears at least) they sounded just like Nazis from bad WWII movies. I've never felt so ashamed.

Yesterday, I listened to the chirpy report on CBS News again and the disconnect between their optimistic "victory is near" and what looked to my untrained eye as a total fuck-up and, yes, a net loss for the US, blew my mind.

6 months ago, I thought we'd moved quickly to a Vietnam endgame national mood, but in fact, we haven't. The idiots don't realize we've lost. Dead men walking, all.

Posted by: Lupin | Nov 13 2004 15:47 utc | 32

Iraq says Fallujah offensive over but Zarqawi slips the net

"Operation Fajr (Dawn) has been achieved and only the malignant pockets remain that we are dealing with through a clean-up operation," Qassem Daoud, secretary of state for national security, told a Baghdad press conference.
I don´t think this will have any consequences for the US military action.

Posted by: b | Nov 13 2004 17:03 utc | 33

HannahKOL--

Does maxcrat's catch re: the Turks change your equation?

To my naive eye it would suggest that things could be much, much worse re: escalation.

Posted by: RossK | Nov 13 2004 17:22 utc | 34

I was at the rugby match today......... we beat the boks!

As I never watch TV I am just a radio news junky........... I'm dismayed at the BBC Blair spin for a long time now.

Can anyone recommend a streaming English (speaking that is) radio channel?

Posted by: Cloned Poster | Nov 13 2004 19:18 utc | 35

" but I have the distinct impression the Yanks at home don't have any idea of how totally this war has immersed the name of the U.S. in shit."

Hannah, don't despair totally - yet. There is still hope for over-turning fraudulent election results here. In case you missed the map that flew around web right after the election - United States of Canada & Jesusland - that was actually taken very seriously. Don't believe appearances now - MUCH brewing beneath.

As far as Fallujah, many of us having nightmares that down the road American cities could be sacked in retaliation...some day, perhaps soon, when America reduced to a shell of himself. In history, this week - the election & Fallujah - will probably mark a historic turning point for this country.

For those still wondering why the bloody hell the USgov ever invaded Iraq to begin w/, Confessions of an Economic Hit-Man has the answer. Finally, after all these years... U.S. invaded Iraq 'cuz they wouldn't agree to the Saudi solution for their oil revenues after their war w/Iran ended. After '73 War, when Saudi revenues sky-rocketed, they agreed to re-invest them in US treasuries. The interest would go to US oligarchs - Bechtel, et. al - to build "a modern country". US would guarantee leaders would stay in power; in exchange, said country would guarantee US oil supplies. Saddam, for some reason, said NO. No one says no to the empire and lives.

"Confessions" says empire worked as follows. First try to bribe them, then try to assasinate non-compliant leader. If all else fails, send the Marines. They couldn't assasinate Saddam, so the Marines are in Fallujah.

P.S. Things are almost as bad at home - or rapidly heading that way. U.S. Army now practicing for deployment to our cities, although it's totally illegal. Cheney & Co. Very Dangerous. They're following the ibn Saud model for building of Saudi Arabia here - A WarLord & His Woman-Hating Theocrats.

Posted by: jj | Nov 13 2004 19:44 utc | 36

US War Crime No. MCCXIL

Cambridge Solidarity with Iraq has a report (pdf) about the denial of water by US troops to Iraqi citizens.

Water supplies to Tall Afar, Samarra and Fallujah have been cut off during US attacks in the past two months, affecting up to 750,000 civilians. This appears to form part of a deliberate US policy of denying water to the residents of cities under attack. If so, it has been adopted without a public debate, and without consulting Coalition partners. It is a serious breach of international humanitarian law, and is deepening Iraqi opposition to the United States, other coalition members, and the Iraqi government.
...
On 16 October the Washington Post reported that: ‘Electricity and water were cut off to the city [Fallujah] just as a fresh wave of strikes began Thursday night, an action that U.S. forces also took at the start of assaults on Najaf and Samarra.’

Residents of Fallujah have told the UN’s Integrated Regional Information Networks that ‘they had no food or clean water and did not have time to store enough to hold out through the impending battle’xiii. The water shortage has been confirmed by other civilians fleeing Fallujahxiv, Fadhil Badrani, a BBC
journalist in Falluja, confirmed on 8 November that ‘the water supply has been cut off’.
In light of the shortage of water and other supplies, the Red Cross has attempted to deliver water to Fallujah. However the US has refused to allow shipments of water into the Fallujah until it has taken control of the city.
...
Legal implications

The denial of water to civilians is illegal both under Iraqi and international law. Article 12 of the Transitional Administrative Law, which serves as a constitution
during the interim period, states that: ‘Everyone has the right to life, liberty, and the security of his person’
International law specifically forbids the denial of water to civilians during conflict. Under article 14 of the second protocol of the Geneva Conventions, ‘Starvation of civilians as a method of combat is prohibited. It is therefore prohibited to attack, destroy, remove or render useless for that purpose, objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population such as food-stuffs, agricultural areas for the production of food-stuffs, crops, livestock, drinking water installations and supplies and irrigation works.’

Posted by: b | Nov 13 2004 20:56 utc | 37

I'm in favor of turning over fraudulent election results JJ, but only if the perps are hanged without undue delay. Under existing law this would be quite legal I think. Traitors, etc.

Unless this happens, and I doubt that it will or could, then we are into a civil war. I expect some argument on this.

Posted by: rapt | Nov 13 2004 21:01 utc | 38

Iraq: The Unthinkable Becomes Normal
by John Pilger

Edward S. Herman's landmark essay, "The Banality of Evil," has never seemed more apposite. "Doing terrible things in an organized and systematic way rests on 'normalization,'" wrote Herman. "There is usually a division of labor in doing and rationalizing the unthinkable, with the direct brutalizing and killing done by one set of individuals ... others working on improving technology (a better crematory gas, a longer burning and more adhesive napalm, bomb fragments that penetrate flesh in hard-to-trace patterns). It is the function of the experts, and the mainstream media, to normalize the unthinkable for the general public."

On Radio 4's Today (Nov. 6), a BBC reporter in Baghdad referred to the coming attack on the city of Fallujah as "dangerous" and "very dangerous" for the Americans. When asked about civilians, he said, reassuringly, that the U.S. Marines were "going about with a Tannoy" telling people to get out. He omitted to say that tens of thousands of people would be left in the city. He mentioned in passing the "most intense bombing" of the city with no suggestion of what that meant for people beneath the bombs.

As for the defenders, those Iraqis who resist in a city that heroically defied Saddam Hussein; they were merely "insurgents holed up in the city," as if they were an alien body, a lesser form of life to be "flushed out" (the Guardian): a suitable quarry for "rat-catchers," which is the term another BBC reporter told us the Black Watch use. According to a senior British officer, the Americans view Iraqis as Untermenschen, a term that Hitler used in Mein Kampf to describe Jews, Romanies, and Slavs as subhumans. This is how the Nazi army laid siege to Russian cities, slaughtering combatants and non-combatants alike.

Normalizing colonial crimes like the attack on Fallujah requires such racism, linking our imagination to "the other." The thrust of the reporting is that the "insurgents" are led by sinister foreigners of the kind that behead people: for example, by Musab al-Zarqawi, a Jordanian said to be al-Qaeda's "top operative" in Iraq. This is what the Americans say; it is also Blair's latest lie to parliament. Count the times it is parroted at a camera, at us. No irony is noted that the foreigners in Iraq are overwhelmingly American and, by all indications, loathed. These indications come from apparently credible polling organizations, one of which estimates that of 2,700 attacks every month by the resistance, six can be credited to the infamous al-Zarqawi.

In a letter sent on Oct. 14 to Kofi Annan, the Fallujah Shura Council, which administers the city, said: "In Fallujah, [the Americans] have created a new vague target: al-Zarqawi. Almost a year has elapsed since they created this new pretext, and whenever they destroy houses, mosques, restaurants, and kill children and women, they said: 'We have launched a successful operation against al-Zarqawi.' The people of Fallujah assure you that this person, if he exists, is not in Fallujah ... and we have no links to any groups supporting such inhuman behavior. We appeal to you to urge the UN [to prevent] the new massacre which the Americans and the puppet government are planning to start soon in Fallujah, as well as many parts of the country."

Not a word of this was reported in the mainstream media in Britain and America.

"What does it take to shock them out of their baffling silence?" asked the playwright Ronan Bennett in April after the U.S. Marines, in an act of collective vengeance for the killing of four American mercenaries, killed more than 600 people in Fallujah, a figure that was never denied. Then, as now, they used the ferocious firepower of AC-130 gunships and F-16 fighter-bombers and 500-lb. bombs against slums. They incinerate children; their snipers boast of killing anyone, as snipers did in Sarajevo.

Bennett was referring to the legion of silent Labour backbenchers, with honorable exceptions, and lobotomized junior ministers (remember Chris Mullin?). He might have added those journalists who strain every sinew to protect "our" side, who normalize the unthinkable by not even gesturing at the demonstrable immorality and criminality. Of course, to be shocked by what "we" do is dangerous, because this can lead to a wider understanding of why "we" are there in the first place and of the grief "we" bring not only to Iraq, but to so many parts of the world: that the terrorism of al-Qaeda is puny by comparison with ours.

There is nothing illicit about this cover-up; it happens in daylight. The most striking recent example followed the announcement, on Oct. 29, by the prestigious scientific journal, the Lancet, of a study estimating that 100,000 Iraqis had died as a result of the Anglo-American invasion. Eighty-four percent of the deaths were caused by the actions of the Americans and the British, and 95 percent of these were killed by air attacks and artillery fire, most of whom were women and children.

The editors of the excellent MediaLens observed the rush – no, stampede – to smother this shocking news with "skepticism" and silence. They reported that, by Nov. 2, the Lancet report had been ignored by the Observer, the Telegraph, the Sunday Telegraph, the Financial Times, the Star, the Sun, and many others. The BBC framed the report in terms of the government's "doubts" and Channel 4 News delivered a hatchet job, based on a Downing Street briefing. With one exception, none of the scientists who compiled this rigorously peer-reviewed report was asked to substantiate their work until ten days later when the pro-war Observer published an interview with the editor of the Lancet, slanted so that it appeared he was "answering his critics." David Edwards, a MediaLens editor, asked the researchers to respond to the media criticism; their meticulous demolition can be viewed on the alert for Nov. 2. None of this was published in the mainstream. Thus, the unthinkable that "we" had engaged in such a slaughter was suppressed – normalized. It is reminiscent of the suppression of the death of more than a million Iraqis, including half a million infants under five, as a result of the Anglo-American-driven embargo.

In contrast, there is no media questioning of the methodology of the Iraqi Special Tribune, which has announced that mass graves contain 300,000 victims of Saddam Hussein. The Special Tribune, a product of the quisling regime in Baghdad, is run by the Americans; respected scientists want nothing to do with it. There is no questioning of what the BBC calls "Iraq's first democratic elections." There is no reporting of how the Americans have assumed control over the electoral process with two decrees passed in June that allow an "electoral commission" in effect to eliminate parties Washington does not like. Time magazine reports that the CIA is buying its preferred candidates, which is how the agency has fixed elections over the world. When or if the elections take place, we will be doused in clichés about the nobility of voting, as America's puppets are "democratically" chosen.

The model for this was the "coverage" of the American presidential election, a blizzard of platitudes normalizing the unthinkable: that what happened on Nov. 2 was not democracy in action. With one exception, no one in the flock of pundits flown from London described the circus of Bush and Kerry as the contrivance of fewer than 1 percent of the population, the ultra-rich and powerful who control and manage a permanent war economy. That the losers were not only the Democrats, but the vast majority of Americans, regardless of whom they voted for, was unmentionable.

No one reported that John Kerry, by contrasting the "war on terror" with Bush's disastrous attack on Iraq, merely exploited public distrust of the invasion to build support for American dominance throughout the world. "I'm not talking about leaving [Iraq]," said Kerry. "I'm talking about winning!" In this way, both he and Bush shifted the agenda even further to the right, so that millions of antiwar Democrats might be persuaded that the U.S. has "the responsibility to finish the job" lest there be "chaos." The issue in the presidential campaign was neither Bush nor Kerry, but a war economy aimed at conquest abroad and economic division at home. The silence on this was comprehensive, both in America and here.

Bush won by invoking, more skillfully than Kerry, the fear of an ill-defined threat. How was he able to normalize this paranoia? Let's look at the recent past. Following the end of the cold war, the American elite – Republican and Democrat – were having great difficulty convincing the public that the billions of dollars spent on the war economy should not be diverted to a "peace dividend." A majority of Americans refused to believe that there was still a "threat" as potent as the red menace. This did not prevent Bill Clinton sending to Congress the biggest "defense" bill in history in support of a Pentagon strategy called "full-spectrum dominance." On Sept. 11, 2001, the threat was given a name: Islam.

Flying into Philadelphia recently, I spotted the Kean congressional report on Sept. 11 from the 9/11 Commission on sale at the bookstalls. "How many do you sell?" I asked. "One or two," was the reply. "It'll disappear soon." Yet, this modest, blue-covered book is a revelation. Like the Butler report in the UK, which detailed all the incriminating evidence of Blair's massaging of intelligence before the invasion of Iraq, then pulled its punches and concluded nobody was responsible, so the Kean report makes excruciatingly clear what really happened, then fails to draw the conclusions that stare it in the face. It is a supreme act of normalizing the unthinkable. This is not surprising, as the conclusions are volcanic.

The most important evidence to the 9/11 Commission came from General Ralph Eberhart, commander of the North American Aerospace Defense Command (Norad). "Air Force jet fighters could have intercepted hijacked airliners roaring towards the World Trade Center and Pentagon," he said, "if only air traffic controllers had asked for help 13 minutes sooner. ... We would have been able to shoot down all three ... all four of them."

Why did this not happen?

The Kean report makes clear that "the defense of U.S. aerospace on 9/11 was not conducted in accord with preexisting training and protocols. ... If a hijack was confirmed, procedures called for the hijack coordinator on duty to contact the Pentagon's National Military Command Center (NMCC). ... The NMCC would then seek approval from the office of the Secretary of Defense to provide military assistance... "Uniquely, this did not happen. The commission was told by the deputy administrator of the Federal Aviation Authority that there was no reason the procedure was not operating that morning. "For my 30 years of experience ..." said Monte Belger, "the NMCC was on the net and hearing everything real-time. ... I can tell you I've lived through dozens of hijackings ... and they were always listening in with everybody else."

But on this occasion, they were not. The Kean report says the NMCC was never informed. Why? Again, uniquely, all lines of communication failed, the commission was told, to America's top military brass. Donald Rumsfeld, secretary of defense, could not be found; and when he finally spoke to Bush an hour and a half later, it was, says the Kean report, "a brief call in which the subject of shoot-down authority was not discussed." As a result, Norad's commanders were "left in the dark about what their mission was."

The report reveals that the only part of a previously fail-safe command system that worked was in the White House where Vice President Cheney was in effective control that day, and in close touch with the NMCC. Why did he do nothing about the first two hijacked planes? Why was the NMCC, the vital link, silent for the first time in its existence? Kean ostentatiously refuses to address this. Of course, it could be due to the most extraordinary combination of coincidences. Or it could not.

In July 2001, a top secret briefing paper prepared for Bush read: "We [the CIA and FBI] believe that OBL [Osama bin Laden] will launch a significant terrorist attack against U.S. and/or Israeli interests in the coming weeks. The attack will be spectacular and designed to inflict mass casualties against U.S. facilities or interests. Attack preparations have been made. Attack will occur with little or no warning."

On the afternoon of Sept. 11, Donald Rumsfeld, having failed to act against those who had just attacked the United States, told his aides to set in motion an attack on Iraq – when the evidence was nonexistent. Eighteen months later, the invasion of Iraq, unprovoked and based on lies now documented, took place. This epic crime is the greatest political scandal of our time, the latest chapter in the long 20th-century history of the West's conquests of other lands and their resources. If we allow it to be normalized., if we refuse to question and probe the hidden agendas and unaccountable secret power structures at the heart of "democratic" governments and if we allow the people of Fallujah to be crushed in our name, we surrender both democracy and humanity.

Posted by: Cloned Poster | Nov 13 2004 21:23 utc | 39

cp

where was the pilger article from - as usual it is very, very precise?

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Nov 13 2004 22:16 utc | 40

RAPT, no argument from me. Last night I asked myself who would I rather fight for: Canada, a beautiful democracy where they don't lock their door in cities & everyone has medical care, or Jerry Fallwell, DeLay, Frist, Thune, Hagel, Cheney & the Mob? Scary stuff, huh?????

(Tho since, say late '01, I will admit to you I've had this fantasy - I guess since Chimpy's so obviously a puppet - of them hanging like puppets from beams & strings atop the Washington Monument!! Anyone have friends up to speed w/computer graphics?? If so, we urgently need an update to the American Flag. I saw an upside-down one on DU. Good Start. But it needs to be rimmed in black, torn, stained w/blood, perhaps dollar signs for stars......Anyone know anyone who could get on it?????)

But back to reality, if we could be more modest, we might get them to resign before they can run out the clock. Digging around in my yard yesterday for a twig as it were, anything, w/which we could exert sufficient leverage to make the powers that be think better about allowing another theft, I think I struck pay-dirt. I mean we can't stand around like fucking sheep & let them blithely toss the republic over the abyss. Does anyone want to do that? Surely we cannot be that powerless - somewhere we have some leverage...we are, after all the majority of citizens & the entirety of those not blinded by greed & Murdoch.

While I check out my idea, Everyone Else Has To Go Digging in their Own Gardens. What Can We Do To Force Their Resignation? Maybe Bernhard will give us a thread tomorrow to float ideas. Or perhaps you or your children want to Get Mutilated & Die for Frist, DeLay & Falwell or the Empire.

Ultimately though, they must resign, because those who make peaceful change at the ballot box impossible make Civil War inevitable.

Posted by: jj | Nov 13 2004 22:39 utc | 41

IMPORTANT PS to last post. I am not advocating illegal activity of any kind. This is our country, we won the election. Let's legally find ways to insure the President-elect actually takes office this time.

Posted by: jj | Nov 13 2004 22:51 utc | 42

For my part, I've already put the wheels in motion to move to France in the New Year; for details see my Daily Kos diary.

Posted by: Lupin | Nov 13 2004 23:04 utc | 43

Posted by: Sic transit gloria USA | Nov 13 2004 23:58 utc | 44

Lupin! Godspeed and good luck! But please find a way to keep posting here and at Kos.

Can I come visit? ;-)

(I cashed out too, last year. But have no plan to leave, unless they come for my 20 year old son. For now, I will stay and fight. I'm working on my own very small plan to raise awareness and hopefully raise money for progressive causes....)

All the best....

Posted by: semper ubi | Nov 14 2004 0:03 utc | 45

'Catastrophic conditions' in Falluja

Romanian patrol attacked in Iraq

Posted by: Sic transit gloria USA | Nov 14 2004 0:04 utc | 46

@DM -- still out there? http://www.newscentralasia.com/modules.php?name=News&file=print&sid=798>Here is an article that makes the connection between the US occupation of Iraq and the British occupation and plundering of India. I don't know the author, or his slant or background. I do know that the facts he outlines here, and the way he connects them, are familiar to me from other reading. Still can't find the book or article in which I most recently encountered this well-known story. I'm wondering if it was something by Arundhati Roy.

The death toll from British mismanagement and looting of the Bengali economy, during the famine of 1770, was 10 million persons or one third of the population. Here's http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Parthenon/2104/guardian_article.html>another data point, a critique of the ghastly whitewash job the British power establishment is still doing when it looks back at the crimes of the Raj.

This is the kind of thing I mean when I ask rightists who talk about the crimes of Stalin and Mao -- how many mio people killed, etc. -- why they never stop to add up the mios of people killed by capitalist greed. Somehow it seems many people honestly believe that killing people out of blatant greed, dishonesty, and general mafiosism is somehow OK, whereas killing people out of a demented insistence on some idealist ideology (or to hang on to power in a society shaped by same) is Mad and Bad.

Looking at the state of the world today, I'd have to agree with http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1112-20.htm>Derrick Jackson that natural human greed and covetousness can reach a scale and an awfulness where they become truly Mad and Bad, and as dangerous as any of the more heady ideologies of the last century or two.

Posted by: DeAnander | Nov 14 2004 0:16 utc | 47

No "general thread" this weekend?

Latest updates at Black Box Voting -- see site for more details:

BREAKING -- SATURDAY NOV 13 2004: Black Box Voting has launched a fraud audit into Florida. Three investigators (Bev Harris, Andy Stephenson, and Kathleen Wynne) are in Florida right now. We will initiate hand counts on selected counties that have not fully complied with our Nov. 2 Freedom of Information request by Monday (Diebold counties) or Tuesday (other counties).

BREAKING -- SATURDAY NOV 13 2004: We have reports that both David Cobb (Green Party) and Michael Badnarik (Libertarian Party) will be filing for official recounts in Ohio. Black Box Voting is also launching a fraud audit in Ohio. ...

BREAKING -- SATURDAY NOV 13 2004: Black Box Voting is implementing fraud diagnostics on the state of New Mexico. Information we recently received is indicative of widespread vote manipulation. ...

BREAKING -- SATURDAY NOV 13 2004: Black Box Voting is requesting legal assistance for a specific county in Georgia. Indications of corrupt voting processes, with possible criminal actions by local officials.

BREAKING -- SATURDAY NOV 13 2004: Black Box Voting is launching a fraud investigation on Pima County Arizona.

BREAKING -- SATURDAY NOV 13 2004: Black Box Voting is launching a fraud investigation on the state of Nevada. Pro bono legal help certified to practice in Nevada, needed immediately. Multiple irregularities. Need people to take affidavits from election workers, statewide.

BREAKING -- FRIDAY NOV 12 2004: Ralph Nader to audit Diebold machines in New Hampshire. According to Nader, the current situation with voting machines warrants investigation. Several elements make voting machines "probative" for investigation, according to Nader, a consumer affairs lawyer: proprietary ownership, secret code, vested interests, a high-value reward, and lack of any real consequences, or likelihood of getting caught, for vote manipulation. ...

DON'T JUST GET MAD, GET EVEN!!
(And get ACTIVE!)

Posted by: JMF | Nov 14 2004 0:23 utc | 48

deanader

we have here the black capitalism - which details all this & more - also hobshawn is very good. i think the numbers you gave are correct or evenb conservative

still steel

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Nov 14 2004 0:57 utc | 49

Sic transit...

You're doing a herculean thing with the listing of all the military dead by US states. Thank you.

I wonder also ... how many people are doing this for the civilians dead in Fallujah, and Mosul and Iraq in general...

Someone if they haven't all ready bought it should buy "collateraldamage.org" or .net or .com... We could use a regular update there too. And I know about the one site doing it, but I think we need MORE sites doing it.

Are US soldiers worth more than Iraqi children, women and men?

Posted by: Kate_Storm | Nov 14 2004 1:04 utc | 50

that is the black book of capitalism - livre noir - there is of course the writings of nehru there is another magisterial history of india & the genocide of indians by the british by - i think a ardit roy - it's a long time since i've read - but it is a colleague of hobshawn at cambridge

still steel

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Nov 14 2004 1:08 utc | 51

….The first aid convoy has arrived, amid fears of a humanitarian crisis.

But a relief agency spokeswoman told the BBC that US forces had refused to let them distribute the supplies.

An American military spokesman* said the distribution had been prevented for security reasons. ….

Battle 'almost over' in Falluja - US still denying aid to civilians

*The heartless psychopath who defended the blocking of aid is named Lieutenant Colonel Steve Boylan

Posted by: Sic transit gloria USA | Nov 14 2004 1:20 utc | 52

Bonne chance Lupin!

And I'm with Kate, I wanna see the Iraqi list, with names, with faces, with stories....with loved ones.....all of it.

Because I want to know who died because hospitals, first-aid stations and ambulances were targeted.

And I want to see the pictures.

And I want to see it all archived in the pages of the goddamned Washington Post and the New York Times. And I want to see the footage on CNN.

And then I want to see it talked about in sermons in every church in every state on every Sunday from now until judgement day.

Because this is what we've wrought and this is what we must all know has been done in our name.

Then there will be no excuse for anyone to say a generation from now.....'I didn't know.'

Posted by: RossK | Nov 14 2004 1:25 utc | 53

Kate Storm

The Iraqis who are dying in handfuls, in dozens, in hundreds on any given day in Iraq do not seem to exercise the indignation or the sympathy of many Americans. Their names, their lives, their loved ones, their cities, towns, villages and farmsteads are not things that seem to impact in any way upon America's political discourse on Iraq.

When they are prevented from leaving their homes and trapped without shelter, food or water they are easily designated as 'terrorists' when they are atomized in their homes under American bombs or cut to pieces in their streets and gardens by chain-guns, artillery fire and tanks shells. Those who are too weak, too poor, too young, too old or simply too proud to flee the 'might' of the USA are easily designated as 'sympathizers', as 'die-hards' and even, as I have noted here, as 'runners', 'couriers', supply mules', 'scouts', 'spotters' and 'transporters of munitions'. The process whereby they become transformed from living, loving people trying to hold onto life in their own land into 'legitimate targets' seems to be a thing that some Americans have mastered with enthusiastic alacrity. Perhaps it helps them to justify and celebrate the pulping of Iraqi children to a bloody mess and the disintegration of Iraqi housewives, husbands, uncles, aunts, brothers, sisters, cousins, grandparents and neighbors into bloody, mutilated chunks. If they are labelled 'terrorists' or 'terrorist-helpers' in advance then why bother with their names?

As racist and blood-crazed US troops rampage through Falluja butchering every living soul that they catch sight of until only those caught cowering in the rubble are permitted to live, with appropriate numbers being designated as 'terrorists' of course and dragged, kicked and punched away to incarceration, Americans who support 'their troops' seem stubbornly closed to the idea that said troops can possibly be killing and maiming innocent people.

That being so, and given the hierarchy of deserving and undeserving dead that many Americans choose to totemize or demonize according to their level of zealous support for 'their troops', there seems little point in posting the names of dead Iraqis as their details do not seem to impact upon minds that are primarily concerned with how 'their troops' are doing.

Thousands of Iraqis are going to die in the years before us and their names, lives, loved ones, cities, towns, villages and farmsteads will be as uninteresting and irrelevant to the Americans who see an American life as worth any number of Iraqi lives. Perhaps when a sufficient number of American lives lost has registered upon their minds, a number that they deem insufficiently 'worth it' - whatever 'worth it' is being spun as at any given moment - they will transform their unswerving support for 'their troops' into something approximating thoughts of extracting them from the land they are butchering nonentities in.

I am mindful, always, that there are decent people in the USA, but in truth I see more than enough of the disgusting racist ranking of the dead in Iraq and the demonizing of innocents - and the uncritical acceptance of same by a great many 'nice people' - to be convinced that it is a pointless exercise to put the names of Iraqi dead before people who care nothing for them whether they live or die and who are happy to see 'their troops' killing them daily.

We are in for years of it, and it would take some convincing to make me believe that it will be the dead of Iraq who bring about any change of mind or heart in the USA.

Posted by: Sic transit gloria USA | Nov 14 2004 2:02 utc | 54

sic transit gloria usa

i thank you for your clatiy & concur with almost all that you have said

it is why i have pointedly made references to the einzatsgruppen because i think their 'holy crusade' against jews & bolsheviks is being replayed in iraq - against "terrorists' & 'foreign combatants'

the germans required the famous commisar order to juridicially slaughter people & the americans use the phantom al zaqarwi for the same reasons. it is a means to widen the slaughter, the liquidations & the assinations of the people of the sovereign nation, iraq

as you, the elections showed that this country has no shame nor the reflective capacity to understand the immorality of their actions

still steel

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Nov 14 2004 2:22 utc | 55

Sic transit gloria USA--

Apologies for not acknowledging your efforts during my outburst of blind rage earlier.

My thanks to you also.

Posted by: RossK | Nov 14 2004 2:42 utc | 57

WASHINGTON, Nov. 12 - Human rights experts said Friday that American soldiers might have committed a war crime on Thursday when they sent fleeing Iraqi civilians back into Falluja.
Citing several articles of the Geneva Conventions, the experts said recognized laws of war require military forces to protect civilians as refugees and forbid returning them to a combat zone.

"This is highly problematical conduct in terms of exposing people to grave danger by returning them to an area where fighting is going on," said Jordan Paust, a law professor at the University of Houston and a former Army prosecutor.
James Ross, senior legal adviser to Human Rights Watch, said, "If that's what happened, it would be a war crime…..

GENEVA CONVENTIONS - Rights lawyers see possibility of a war crime

Posted by: Sic transit gloria USA | Nov 14 2004 2:53 utc | 58

http://www.counterpunch.org/goff11132004.html>Stan Goff, film critic -- Goff takes on Hollywood, using Man on Fire as his starting point for an analysis of the connection between fantasies of masculinity, revenge, and vigilante "justice" and imperial violence abroad and at home.

Posted by: DeAnander | Nov 14 2004 4:30 utc | 59

U.S. says aid convoy can't go Into Falluja today

Posted by: Sic transit gloria USA | Nov 14 2004 13:38 utc | 62

Posted by: Sic transit gloria USA | Nov 14 2004 14:06 utc | 63

dea

as usual goff writes a fine blast

sic transit gloria - thank you for your precision

still steel

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Nov 14 2004 14:33 utc | 64

“…and what will their faces tell them
when they look in the mirror
when they look on their dressers
and see the pieces of metal they were given
for killing us in our own homes, in own cities, in our own mosques and churches,
what will their eyes say,
what will they say when their twisted lies are uncovered,
when the rest of the world speaks of their massacres of women and children, of old men,
of bombing hospitals,
what will they do when they see the smirking face of their presidents,
their senators, their leaders
who have allowed them to do this,
have ordered them to do this”….

Excerpt; 'This Night in Falluja' by Sam Hamod


Falluja and the erosion of American power

Posted by: Sic transit gloria USA | Nov 14 2004 15:53 utc | 66

From the Healing Iraq blog:

Nobody is following the situation in Fallujah anymore since the whole country seems to have plunged into chaos. There has been fighting in Ramadi, Khaldiya, Hit, Haditha, Garma, Abu Ghraib, Qaim, Mosul, Kirkuk, Hawija, Baiji, Tikrit, Samarra, Tarmiya, Balad, Muqdadiya, Salman Pak, Jurf Al-Naddaf, and most likely in dozens more areas that go unreported. Attacks on pipelines supplying power stations in Baiji have caused the lack of electricity for the last few days. Any other talk about 'collective punishment' is pure nonsense and the ramblings of lunatics.

Also, if one reflects for a moment on the abovementioned areas that are now supposedly in rebellion we come to a realisation that not one bullet was shot against the advancing US forces in these areas during the war. Why is that? The deadliest resistance to occupying forces was
in Umm Qasr, Basrah, Abu Al-Khasib, Nasiriya, Kut, and Karbala. In fact we all heard during the war about banquets for US special forces thrown by tribal Sheikhs in Haditha and other areas of the Anbar governorate. The 'resistance' only started after the de-Ba'athification and the disbanding of the army and security forces which tells us a lot about the mentality of the 'freedom fighters' who claim to be fighting to end occupation.

Posted by: b | Nov 14 2004 18:49 utc | 67

She weeps while telling the story. The abaya (tunic) she wears cannot hide the shaking of her body as waves of grief roll through her. “I cannot get the image out of my mind of her foetus being blown out of her body.”

Inside Falluja - one family’s diary of terror

Iraqi Shia leaders condemn Falluja attack

Humanitarian aid barred from Falluja

AP photographer flees Falluja – tells of US troops slaughtering civilians

US strategy maximizes Iraqi civilian deaths

Posted by: Sic transit gloria USA | Nov 14 2004 21:18 utc | 68

From the icasualties website, I note 51 dead US soldiers in 5 days.

That means, with the current rules of thumb:

- 1500 dead Iraqi civilians in 5 days - 300 per day - the equivalent of a 9/11 EVERY DAY
- 500 wounded US soldiers - 100 a day. See the previously posted links (and below) to the evacuations to Germany, which fit with that number.

Left unsaid:

- how many Iraqis now hate America with their life?
- how long befroe the draft if you lose 3% of your soldiers every month (and who knows what the proportion is for frontline soldiers)??

Where's the outrage?

(At least, the media is starting to mention this. CNN.com's headline is currently Military hospital's workload doubles, with the following lead:

Battle casualties received by doctors at an American military hospital in Germany have more than doubled since the Falluja operation in Iraq began, the facility's commander told reporters Sunday. "Normally, we average 32 patients a day. In the last week, we've had an average of 70," Col. Rhonda Cornum said.

Posted by: Jérôme | Nov 14 2004 22:06 utc | 69

Iraq civilians stranded far from relief camps

Conflicting accounts of the exact extent of ‘occupation and control’ in Falluja.

Falluja rebels 'make last stand'

U.S. military death toll in Falluja raised to 38

Insurgents fire on Poland's embassy in Baghdad

Attacks spread throughout Iraq’s ‘Sunni areas’

Posted by: Sic transit gloria USA | Nov 14 2004 23:16 utc | 70

Sic transit: Frankly, if the US anti-war people were serious about it, they should decide to drop the "support our troops" thingie and go for the real deal: "Support our stormtroopers".

And US troops MAY have committed a war crime? Fuck these idiots, this IS a war crime. The kind of crap we saw in ancient times, like when Vercingetorix sent the population of besieged Alesia outside the walls because they couldn't feed both the Gaul army and the civilians; Caesar refused to let them pass and go outside because he didn't want trouble and any risk of backstab, so he let them in the no man's land between the city's walls and his own fortifications; they begged to be let back into the city, or to go outside, but both sides let them there do die of hunger (or be crushed during various attacks, for those who survived long enough). Granted, here it was just a matter of days, but there was a heavy bombing going on everywhere in the city, so instead of starving to death, they just were bombed or left bleeding.

"'I see the little kids in the cars and I feel sorry for them, but when they turn 16 they're evil.'"
I said it a lot on various blogs and other boards back in early 2003, but it's worth repeating. This is completely suicidal. What kind of objections will there be when the Chinese, Muslim, European, Congolese, Russian or Argentinian armies invade the US and do the same on mass-scale to US civilians? Will the "but they're not legitimate military targets, they're just peaceful peace-loving defenseless civilians" argument hold? Did these stupid fundies forget that one of the key teachings of Christianism (and many other religions) is that you shouldn't do to others what you wouldn't want to happen to you?

Posted by: Clueless Joe | Nov 15 2004 0:58 utc | 71

I have noted something that others might have noted to. At icasualties.org the number of dead coalition soldiers has so far each month of the second year of the occupation (march 2003 should be counted as war rather then occupation) been larger than the number same month the first year.

Just an extremely clear indication of things not settling down in Iraq. Not that anybody here thought otherwise.

Posted by: A swedish kind of death | Nov 15 2004 2:29 utc | 72

@jerome every 10 days, no?

Posted by: DeAnander | Nov 15 2004 2:57 utc | 73

DeA - i realise I was not clear. Relative to population (10 fewer people in Iraq than in the US), it is indeed each day. In absolute terms, it is of course not the same.

Posted by: Jérôme | Nov 15 2004 7:05 utc | 75

@jerome -- ah, I see. I knew you would never err by an order of magnitude :-) thought it might be a typo though. btw I liked the windfarm thread :-)

Posted by: DeAnander | Nov 15 2004 7:11 utc | 76

Why, Clueless, "Support our stormtroopers". that's kinda catchy!! Seriously, relieved to see it. I've been gagging all weekend at the prospect of reading yet more stories of the suffering of "our soldiers". Maybe Stan Goff will write about it. Regardless, we're stuck paying the bills for "our soldiers" forever, just as the poor Iraqis are stuck w/the bastards fighting on their behalf. As Arundhati Roy noted, this isn't the soil from which a secular sensitive feminist opposition grows. MaleChristian Fascism begets MaleMuslim fascism.

At least anyone who donates their body from now on has no excuse for not knowing. And applications to Military Academies off ~20%!

Posted by: | Nov 15 2004 8:36 utc | 77

Aargh, open tag.

Posted by: Hannah K. O'Luthon | Nov 15 2004 9:45 utc | 79

I want your opinion. Do you think that the Americans will give power to the Shia, as they have promised to do? Or they will try to cheat Sistani and prevent the Shia from controling the Iraqi state?

I suspect that Sistani has overestimated his power. Now he is happy with the Americans doing the job for him, crushing the Sunnis, but if they are successful, they could start pressing the Shia to accept limits to their power or not transering power at all.

Posted by: Greco | Nov 15 2004 11:56 utc | 81

Grim

http://cryptome.org/fallujah-kill9.jpg

Posted by: Cloned Poster | Nov 15 2004 13:43 utc | 82

"Frankly, if the US anti-war people were serious about it, they should decide to drop the 'support our troops' thingie and go for the real deal: 'Support our stormtroopers.'"

I totally concur, Clueless. As the majority of anti-war activists and those who share their sentiments are on the Left, this might do much, at least in the short term, to drive more people into the arms of the Right. But the principle of it, the logical and moral consistency, are far more important than interim electoral concerns.

I suggest bumper stickers and t-shirts. And lots and lots of television ads.

I was listening to a radio show a few weeks ago in which an angry middle-aged caller described with much satisfaction how, coming upon a couple of men in uniform on a sidewalk, she rolled down her window to shout, "Why don't you go kill some more women and children?!" This fury, this anguished awareness, deserves a wider voice, a reinvigorated movement from which it can draw hope and through which it can call attention to...itself, mainly. This is no time for restrained discourse or gentle pleading. This is no time for Kerry-esque equivocation and circumspection. This is a time for the unstinting expression of outrage - for the necessary villification and righteous rejection of George W. Bush's willing executioners.

It grows quite late, but there is opportunity yet to impress an entire country with the uncompromising, unqualified abhorrence of every agent, every instrument, of this war. It is not enough to gloat over or revel in perceived military failures. However pleasant and justified this may be, it is merely reactionary. Seize the initiative; alter the discussion; rouse a nation.

In the end you will be thanked for your courage and conviction, just as, after the fall of Saigon, a weary nation extended its hand in gratitude to the brave men and women who dared stand up and shout "Baby Killer!" on a crowded Mall in Washington. John Kerry is not there to help this time, to lend the combat veteran's imprimatur to the cry. He is a wary polititian now, a member of the corrupt and corrupting Establishment. You needn't reject that Establishment; it has already rejected you. You must go your own way, find your own voice, make yourself heard. You have nothing to lose but an unproductive caution.

Posted by: Pat | Nov 15 2004 16:12 utc | 83

Raedhas pictures and Riverbend is getting more and more angry. If I look at what I feel about the situation in Iraq, I can only imagine how it must be for her and all the other Iraqis.

Posted by: Fran | Nov 15 2004 16:23 utc | 84

Pat, it's nice to see you come out of your fascist closet from time to time, you know.
And you actually said something very true: Americans are now willing executioners and the last elections just showed to everyone that the American people, for both failing to repudiate Bush then failing to take arms and wage open civil war to oust the GOP indeed is guilty of collective responsibility for all the crimes its government has done and will do in the next 4 years.

And since you seem to like Bush taking on the whole world, the Moon denizens should get together and pay you one of these posters.

Posted by: Clueless Joe | Nov 15 2004 18:34 utc | 85

CJ

You've just changed my desktop wallpaper.

Posted by: Cloned Poster | Nov 15 2004 18:59 utc | 86

Cj and CP - it is le Mont Blanc, seen from the French side...

Posted by: Jérôme | Nov 15 2004 19:04 utc | 87

Sic transit gloria USA - crucial info. thank you

Posted by: b real | Nov 15 2004 19:28 utc | 88

Pat ! Your advocacy, while (darkly) amusing, is I think a flight of wishfull thinking. While some lady yelling "baby killer" out her car window may seem to you like a start, I dont think you should put to much hope in it. After all, it so aberant in comparison to the spitting on all returning vets, not to mention the violent upheaval on campuses, the SDS, the Weathermen, the Panthers, and all those vets throwing medals (or were those ribbons? what-ever). Now I can see that you would really like to have a better showing, but I think at this point, it's futle to wish for a Susan Saranden covorting erotically arm in arm with Muqtada al-Sadr.

And then even old John Kerry did surely disappoint, with all that "I'm tougher than you" , " I coulda, woulda, shoulda", pathetic limp wristed impotent opposition. I mean good grief, you call this political resistance? This guy, unfortunatly for us makes George McGovern look like Che Guvera.

And so Pat, as a fellow vet, I also see the impending dread. Unlike our last little swan dive into the heart of darkness, this time we will be left naked -- no political wrangling and interference and bungling tying the hands of the military, no screaming and whinning from the effete snobs, no banks and police headquarters being blown up by crazed rich kids, no kidnapping of Patty Hearst under terrorist banners with six headed snakes, And most importantly and most tragically no Jane Fonda, that even today, in the lockers and on dartboards of the military elite day rooms across America still serveing that essential function of scapegoat par excellence.

It looks like this time around there will be no excuses, no blameing, no passing the buck, no hiding evading or pointing of fingers. Im afraid that this time the whole wretched failure will descend with, pristine indoubitablity, squrarely upon the shoulders of the government first, then without a doubt, the military, and finally after the recent election, the American people. This time, the denial will have be absolute and total, and most likely Divine.

Posted by: anna missed | Nov 15 2004 21:19 utc | 89

Helen Thomas reminds us that here in the U.S. we already know we're wrong.


She seals the case with this:
To understand the Iraqi resistance, I suggest reading the Scottish poet Sir Walter Scott. He wrote: "Breathes there a man with soul so dead who never to himself has said this is mine own my native land."


All my friends, including the one's who have never read or heard this quote, know exactly what it means. We are not ignorant of the human heart, we are pointedly ignoring it.

Those who commit the crime directly will inevitably blame themselves and everyone who made or let them do it. Those who did not stop them from the crime but then criticize it will receive the rage of all our unconfessed self-loathing, and will be purged - wetly or dryly. This will feel like relief only in the moment, and will need to be repeated again and again for the next brief moments of false reprieve. We will walk with our eyes open but our hearts too crooked and pinched for vision, straight in to hell.


An actual Christian would know that sin is real, would know that to kill, maim or starve an Iraqi man, woman or child is to kill, maim or starve Christ. But we are not a Christian nation. We are Pharisees and hangers on who think you have to be an American to count. But this non-Christian church is only fulfilling prophecy.

The Church of America is the whore of Babylon.

Posted by: Citizen | Nov 15 2004 21:22 utc | 90

"It looks like this time around there will be no excuses, no blameing, no passing the buck, no hiding evading or pointing of fingers. Im afraid that this time the whole wretched failure will descend with, pristine indoubitablity, squrarely upon the shoulders of the government first, then without a doubt, the military, and finally after the recent election, the American people. This time, the denial will have be absolute and total, and most likely Divine."

Bye bye world.

No heaven BTW.

I wish there was a hell for the fuckers that caused this.

Posted by: Cloned Poster | Nov 15 2004 21:29 utc | 91

Who needs The Guardian or the NY Times or the BBC or CNN (or Pepe Escobar) when one has the Baghdad Bob-like pronouncements of the Resistance itself?

Resistance issues communiqué on US losses in al-Fallujah. Discrepancies with Abu Sa‘d interview noted.

In a dispatch posted at 7:03pm Mecca time, the office of Mafkarat al-Islam in al-Fallujah reported that it had received a short while before a communiqué issued by the Consultative Council of the Mujahideen of al-Fallujah which discussed the number of American, British, and puppet ‘Allawi Army dead, wounded, and captured.

The communiqué stated that in the operations of the last few days, the Iraqi Resistance had shot down two F-16 fighter bombers, 11 helicopters, 5 unmanned spy planes, and one Chinook helicopter with some 60 US troops aboard.

The communiqué said that 136 US troops, 15 British soldiers, and 123 members of the ‘Allawi Army (i.e., puppet so-called “Iraqi national guardsmen”) had been captured by the Resistance. About 400 American troops and 140 ‘Allawi troops have been killed, the statement reported.

The communiqué confirmed that the Iraqi Resistance had commandeered seven tanks and had destroyed a large number of other tanks, armored personnel carriers and other armored vehicles.

Mafkarat al-Islam noted that the figures cited in the communiqué differed from those cited in a telephone conversation to al-Jazeera satellite TV by the Abu Sa‘d ad-Daylami, the official spokesman of the Consultative Council of the Mujahideen of al-Fallujah on Saturday (see this report, below) in which he also mentioned that US forces had taken the major streets in al-Fallujah. Informed sources explained the discrepancies by observing that it was obviously much easier for the different Resistance organizations to coordinate their fighting activity than it was for them to coordinate their information gathering techniques and reporting.

The sources did express surprise at the relatively low numbers attributed by al-Jazeera to ad-Daylami, considering that there were reports from many sources that confirmed that 30 tanks and 12 other vehicles had been destroyed by the Resistance and that the Resistance had blown up the ice factory where the Americans had parked a large number of their military vehicles and where dozens of US troops were killed or wounded.

The Resistance sources repeated that the main streets of al-Fallujah – like ar-Ramadi Street, ath-Tharthar Street, al-Hadrah Street, and al-Jumhuriyah Street had been cleared of US troops, but that fighting was still underway on al-Wahdah Street and in the al-Jawlan neighborhood.

Spokesman for al-Fallujah Resistance denies US claims.

Abu Sa‘d ad-Dulaymi, the official spokesman of the Consultative Council of the Mujahideen of al-Fallujah, announced that the military situation of American forces in al-Fallujah had not changed for three days. He made the remarks in reply to US claims to have completely seized control over al-Fallujah.

Speaking by telephone to al-Jazeera satellite TV Abu Sa‘d said that the occupation troops have not been able until now to get near the al-Jawlan neighborhood; all they control are the main streets in al-Fallujah, backing up their presence with fierce air strikes.

Abu Sa‘d ad-Dulaymi said that when the Americans refer to “pockets of resistance” they mean the whole neighborhoods of al-‘Askari, ash-Shuhada’, al-Jaghifi, al-Wahdah, al-Jumhuriyah and the industrial zone – if they mean all these areas when they talk about “pockets of resistance,” then I tell you these “pockets” are al-Fallujah; these neighborhoods don’t exist outside of al-Fallujah.

The US forces are in a big public relations bind, Abu Sa‘d said, since they’ve declared an end to military operations at a time when US forces are facing the Resistance on the inside and are surrounded on the outside of the city, being hit by rockets and mortars. In fact the proof that they are in a bind is the very fact that they have announced the end of the military operation.

Abu Sa‘d denied claims that 1,000 Resistance fighters had been killed. He confirmed that 100 Resistance fighters had been killed. The remainder of the casualties are civilians He also said that the Chairman of the Consultative Council of the Mujahideen of al-Fallujah, ‘Abdallah al-Janabi, still leads the Resistance from within the city.

Posted by: Pat | Nov 15 2004 21:53 utc | 92

Who needs The Guardian or the NY Times or the BBC or CNN (or Pepe Escobar) when one has the Baghdad Bob-like pronouncements of the Resistance itself?

Resistance issues communiqué on US losses in al-Fallujah. Discrepancies with Abu Sa‘d interview noted.

In a dispatch posted at 7:03pm Mecca time, the office of Mafkarat al-Islam in al-Fallujah reported that it had received a short while before a communiqué issued by the Consultative Council of the Mujahideen of al-Fallujah which discussed the number of American, British, and puppet ‘Allawi Army dead, wounded, and captured.

The communiqué stated that in the operations of the last few days, the Iraqi Resistance had shot down two F-16 fighter bombers, 11 helicopters, 5 unmanned spy planes, and one Chinook helicopter with some 60 US troops aboard.

The communiqué said that 136 US troops, 15 British soldiers, and 123 members of the ‘Allawi Army (i.e., puppet so-called “Iraqi national guardsmen”) had been captured by the Resistance. About 400 American troops and 140 ‘Allawi troops have been killed, the statement reported.

The communiqué confirmed that the Iraqi Resistance had commandeered seven tanks and had destroyed a large number of other tanks, armored personnel carriers and other armored vehicles.

Mafkarat al-Islam noted that the figures cited in the communiqué differed from those cited in a telephone conversation to al-Jazeera satellite TV by the Abu Sa‘d ad-Daylami, the official spokesman of the Consultative Council of the Mujahideen of al-Fallujah on Saturday (see this report, below) in which he also mentioned that US forces had taken the major streets in al-Fallujah. Informed sources explained the discrepancies by observing that it was obviously much easier for the different Resistance organizations to coordinate their fighting activity than it was for them to coordinate their information gathering techniques and reporting.

The sources did express surprise at the relatively low numbers attributed by al-Jazeera to ad-Daylami, considering that there were reports from many sources that confirmed that 30 tanks and 12 other vehicles had been destroyed by the Resistance and that the Resistance had blown up the ice factory where the Americans had parked a large number of their military vehicles and where dozens of US troops were killed or wounded.

The Resistance sources repeated that the main streets of al-Fallujah – like ar-Ramadi Street, ath-Tharthar Street, al-Hadrah Street, and al-Jumhuriyah Street had been cleared of US troops, but that fighting was still underway on al-Wahdah Street and in the al-Jawlan neighborhood.

Spokesman for al-Fallujah Resistance denies US claims.

Abu Sa‘d ad-Dulaymi, the official spokesman of the Consultative Council of the Mujahideen of al-Fallujah, announced that the military situation of American forces in al-Fallujah had not changed for three days. He made the remarks in reply to US claims to have completely seized control over al-Fallujah.

Speaking by telephone to al-Jazeera satellite TV Abu Sa‘d said that the occupation troops have not been able until now to get near the al-Jawlan neighborhood; all they control are the main streets in al-Fallujah, backing up their presence with fierce air strikes.

Abu Sa‘d ad-Dulaymi said that when the Americans refer to “pockets of resistance” they mean the whole neighborhoods of al-‘Askari, ash-Shuhada’, al-Jaghifi, al-Wahdah, al-Jumhuriyah and the industrial zone – if they mean all these areas when they talk about “pockets of resistance,” then I tell you these “pockets” are al-Fallujah; these neighborhoods don’t exist outside of al-Fallujah.

The US forces are in a big public relations bind, Abu Sa‘d said, since they’ve declared an end to military operations at a time when US forces are facing the Resistance on the inside and are surrounded on the outside of the city, being hit by rockets and mortars. In fact the proof that they are in a bind is the very fact that they have announced the end of the military operation.

Abu Sa‘d denied claims that 1,000 Resistance fighters had been killed. He confirmed that 100 Resistance fighters had been killed. The remainder of the casualties are civilians He also said that the Chairman of the Consultative Council of the Mujahideen of al-Fallujah, ‘Abdallah al-Janabi, still leads the Resistance from within the city.

Posted by: Pat | Nov 15 2004 22:23 utc | 93

Sorry about that, b.

[OTOH, it's so good, everyone should read it twice.]

Posted by: Pat | Nov 15 2004 22:26 utc | 94

pat

you neither responded to my question 1) who are your divin miltary strategists, 2) do the lives of 2,000,000 dead vietnames not enter you moral ledger

so now a very simple & banal question
3) for you, is the murder of innocents in iraq a laughing matter & something with which to supply you with ridicule mixed with a sense arabophobia that i shouldn't find surprising but i do

still steel

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Nov 15 2004 22:31 utc | 95

Hi Pat. Concerning your post at 11:12 AM: Are you serious? Or is this a sendup of the peacenik lefties? I honestly can't read it either way, and remembering that you worked as a linguist, I thought I'd better make sure.

Posted by: teuton | Nov 15 2004 23:31 utc | 96

"I think [it is] a flight of wishfull thinking"

No, not wishful thinking, anna missed. The anti-war (or anti-Bushitlerwar) industry is a sickening and painful spectacle, with enough fevered propaganda, vented spleen, and dark, insensible rumination to make the pages of World Net Daily. It's as disappointing, alarming, and obnoxious as National Review, but half as sane and probative.

(My mother said to me in the spring of 2003, "You know this is going to tear us apart." By 'us' she meant the country. We've been torn apart before, going back well beyond living memory. It's not a pretty sight. It is also unavoidable. One more thing that is not to be undone, but that must take its course.)

I have seen the Resistance, in a manner of speaking, and I don't like what I see.

The 'Other' which is with some frequency spoken of here at MOA - the Other that is said to be currently the object of a progrom in Mesopotamia - is not the Iraqis. It never was. The 'Other' is the immoderate Left, that confused, chemical-free, vegan-Progressive paradise of perpetual pique and postmodern piety, a source of boundless mirth and anthropological curiosity and, ah yes, unconcealed revulsion.

The Left, too, has its Other. No one here needs this described for him.

Posted by: Pat | Nov 16 2004 0:07 utc | 97

the Other that is said to be currently the object of a progrom in Mesopotamia - is not the Iraqis. It never was. The 'Other' is the immoderate Left

huh?

Posted by: slothrop | Nov 16 2004 0:14 utc | 98

Teuton

I do not recommend to serious opponents of this war the inevitably counterproductive demonization of the military. Nor spitting upon soldiers. Nor marching with signs that read, "No blood for oil." Nor sending checks to the headquarters of the Glorious Baathist Resistance.

But that's just me. My criticism of and regrets about this war are very different from the standard fare.

Posted by: Pat | Nov 16 2004 0:29 utc | 100

next page »

The comments to this entry are closed.