Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
August 11, 2005
Shia Autonomy

A recipe for desaster: Shi’ites demand autonomy as Iraq awaits charter

With four days left until
Iraq’s leaders have promised a draft constitution, powerful Islamist leaders made a dramatic bid on Thursday to have a big, autonomous Shi’ite region across the oil-rich south.

The head of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI) spelled out his demands to tens of thousands of chanting supporters in the Shi’ite holy city of Najaf.

But minority Sunni and secular opponents, as well as rival Shi’ite Islamists in the coalition national government, swiftly poured cold water on an idea that fueled fears about sectarian battles over oil and Iranian-style religious rule in the south.

This would result in a landlocked Kurdish province in the north, with the not-so-friendly neighbors of Turkey, Syria and Iran, all of these suppressing their Kurdish minorities. In the south the new united Shia provinces would be more or less an annex to Iran and in the middle the Sunni provinces and the multi ethic capital of Baghdad would depend on small trickles of oil revenue from the north and the south or, more probable, fight the other entities.

This may have been the wet dream of some Neocon planers who would like all bigger Middle East countries splittered into small, powerless statelets. But as the situation looks now, this will dramatically increase the strategic role of Iran and there seems to be no workable plan to deny it that role. Or is there?

Comments

[Debs is Dead posted this on another thread. It is a good piece and relevant here.]
Tom’s dispatch is definitely posing situation from US viewpoint and it doesn’t really condemn Iran for the way it is going about what it is doing but it does point out that the US is being played there. Why should Iran bother to follow non-proliferation treaty when the US has given India a free pass on getting access to nuclear technology in breach of the treaty because India does have nuclear weapons.
The real point that Tom’s Dispatch is trying to make is the US doesn’t have a hope in hell of getting any meaningful resolution through the security council when China doesn’t want sanctions against Iran cause it wants Iranian oil.
Russia will ask why Iran when India gets a free pass?
The unrest in Iraq would make unilateral action against Iran difficult to say the least and there’s bugger all chance of multi lateral action through the UN.
Therefore BushCo can do all the pissing and moaning they want but they won’t be able to do jack shit if Iran did bother to go for nuclear weapons.
Something which is by no means certain.
The only motive they would have for doing it would be if Iranian public opinion which deeply resents the US attitude on this co-incides with their government considering that N Korea has made itself pretty much invulnerable to US interference by kitting up with nukes.
It probably won’t even come to that though.
Imagine for a minute what would happen if the US behaved belligerantly toward Iran. Lets not forget that the new Iraq administration is pretty much in Iran’s back pocket. Iran has more control over them than the US does.
Sure the Kurds may hang back a bit if the Iraqi forces decide to support Iran against the US. The Kurds would need to consider afterwards if both the Shia and the Sunni would be somewhat upset if the Kurds sided with the US. The US may be agreeing to some sort of Kurdistan at the moment but no one else thinks it a good idea. If the US lost all sway over the Iraqi Shia then bye bye Kurdistan.
The Poms are carrying on today about weapons getting into Iraq from Iran but you get the feeling that its more about distracting the sheeple from yet another heavy body count from an ambush. The incident happened two weeks ago and the Brits are only bringing it up now hours after four American soldiers were killed and six were wounded as a patrol was attacked near Baiji.
They probably wouldn’t have said anything except they had egg on their face after the failure of the “EU Initiative”.
Even when they did they qualified the criticism with “The British official said he thought such smuggling from Iran was infrequent and trivial compared with the weapons going into Iraq from Syria.”
Yeah it is stupid and unjust for BushCo to be sabre rattling at Iran over something that probably isn’t in breach of non-proliferation treaty.
Once again the Bush administration is trading off the US long term advantage for short term domestic political gain.
They won’t attack Iran as they couldn’t even if they wanted to since Iraq appears to big a cookie to swallow.
They will use this issue to crack up a bit of fear in the US to try and keep the sheeple too distracted to notice that things aren’t what they are meant to be.
While they do this the Chinese will stitch up the Iranian oil reserves and since easy access to Iraqi oil is by no means guaranteed; in essence BushCo will have blown their chance for rapprochment with Iran, and probably never get their sticky fingers on the Iraqi oil long term. Particularly when you consider the Iraqi-Iran pipeline that has been proposed.
In the meantime BushCo took their eye off the ball in Venezuela so they are losing a lot of their access there to the Chinese who have also got first dibs on the Darfur fields that are being developed in Sudan.
BushCo’s eyes were just too big for the stomach.
They went after the jackpot and got jack shit. If they had moved to protect the Africans in the Sudan they could have called themselves heroes and got the oil. Now because they didn’t manage to protect Darfur or guarantee southern victory for the other rebels, the Chinese have done a deal with Khartoum for oil and they will make sure that the UN do not pass any measures that hit Sudan too badly.
This whole corner the oil move has been cocked up from beginning to end and the US will be lucky to hang on to Saudi oil for long now that the mid east has become so unstable.
Don’t imagine that I support US hegemony over oil but it must be said that this administration’s attempt at imperialism has not been a resounding success.
So sad when you consider that up until the Iraqi invasion the liberal forces in Iran were looking to the US to change their society. Now they wouldn’t change their jocks with the US around.
If the US had become a major influence in Iran again they would also have ended up being a major player in Iraq without having to fire a shot. Iran was always going to end up with a huge say in Iraq post Saddam. Post Saddam was coming without too much effort. All that was needed? Just a bit of patience.
The slaughter in Sudan could have been prevented and the US would have reaped the reward.
Actually exactly the sort of lightening up of Islamic regimes that the repugs reckoned they were after, would have happened if they hadn’t been overwhelmed by arrogance and greed.
Karma will get you everytime but I don’t suppose the Iraqis and Darfurites feel very karmic about any of this.
If there was any sort of real opposition in the US this would be the ‘talking point’. When an administration is shown to be incompetent no one hears them if they cry the patriot thing.
These ‘patriots’ have not only destroyed the economy with their deficits, they have also blown all the assets with their naive stupidity.

Posted by: b | Aug 11 2005 21:39 utc | 1

This will be yet another horror story if it comes to pass. All of the murders and torure that were carried out in the name of ‘nation building’ will now be copied as Shia attempt to dissolve the nation of Iraq. For what? Another band of power hungry sociopaths to consolidate enough power to repress their own people?
Although this might appear to be the way to go for those Shia leaders who have spent most of their lives in Iran one can’t help but wonder if the reality of this will really appeal to ordinary Shia Arabs on the ground.
The Shia may be philosophically closely related to the Iranians but ethnically they are closer to Iraqi Sunnis and the other Arab nations.
The Persians and Arabs have a bit of a history of conflict and one can’t help but wonder whether it could possibly be in anyone but the leadership’s long term interest to change from being a majority ruled by a minority as they were in Saddam’s Iraq to a minority ruled by a majority as they would be in any sort of Iranian religious alliance.
The only practical reason I can think of for the Iraqis wanting this is that they have decided it is the only way they can get rid of the US and the rest of the coalition of the reluctant.
One thing is for sure BushCo better do their business or climb off the crapper with the Iranians pretty quickly, else they will really be caught short on any ME oil outside of Saudi.
The silly unfounded hubris of the ex-trot neo-cons means that achieving any real understanding of the forces at play in this situation is unlikely.
They still think they can click their fingers and those brownfellas will do their bidding despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. If things go wrong they hit the brownfellas with superior whitefella weaponry and all will be well. Heh… Meanwhile the Chinese have managed to grab the oil with no navy, an army trained only for domestic repression, and an airforce that relies on mid 20th century technology!
Every dollar the US spends on the military must have the Chinese hooting up their sleeves as they watch the US commit the same error that Amerika claims caused the demise of the Soviet Union; that is overspending on ‘defense’ at the cost of domestic infrastructure.
Is the sudden sharp spike in oil prices a result of the penny finally dropping in the commodities market?
The US is far more exposed to oil shortages now than it was prior to its great Middle East adventure.
All it would take would be for the insurrection in Saudi to reach ‘Tipping Point’ that is for the unemployed Saudi youth to group with the disenfranchised ‘guest workers’ from Bangladesh, Palestine, Pakistan and Malaysia. Then getting out the oil would become a major problem. There seems no viable fall back reserve for the US.
One can’t help but feel that the brokers have realised that this needless confrontation the US is determined to have with Iran will cost US access to oil big time. Especially if the Shia Iraqis side with Iran.
You’d have to say things don’t look good in the medium term for Chavez and the poor old Venezualans. That makes me mad because the people of South and Central America have been paying the cost of American consumerism with their lives for over a century. Yet everytime they look like being able to get a bit of fairness and equity into their society, international geo-politics seems to conspire against their quite reasonable intentions.
The Chilean coup happened around the time of the first energy crisis and following the Vietnam debacle. If either one of those events hadn’t happened Chile just might have been left alone. The thought of some free thinkers running around the bottom of the back yard at the same time as the little kid round the corner gave you a fat lip and the brown fellas in the next block over actually wanted to be paid for their oil, virtually guaranteed the free thinkers were going to get the treatment that all ‘geeks’ deserve.
BushCo incompetence needs to be laughed at with the contempt it has earned. But nothing good will come out of this for the people of the world if US control of the world’s resources is replaced by Chinese control of the same. How long before we realise that the joint works better with NO ONE in charge!

Posted by: Debs is dead | Aug 11 2005 22:01 utc | 2

Oh god sorry! Honestly I’m not trying to dominate the conversation. I wrote the last post b4 I realised Bernhard had transferred the previous one across. I’ll shuttup for a while now I think.

Posted by: Debs is dead | Aug 11 2005 22:04 utc | 3

Here’s another argument for partition.
My arguments predicting partition (even expressed in confederacy or federacy and not necessarily outright secession) also included the prediction partition might favor US geostrategic interests (bases enduring and econ exploitation). I believe this is still the case, and I believe, based on the extensive support for partition by the foreign policy establishment, this was a favored result.
Now, the question is whether Southern Iraq would be caught in the orbit of Persian hegemony. Also, can Kurdistan emerge as a viable client state of the US? Regardless whether Dawa and SCIRI pay diplomatic homage to Iran’s mullahs, the fact remains a long historic animus divides the interests of arab shia and persians. I’m unconvinced any longterm alliance of arab shia and persians can survive. As I’ve said elsewhere arab shia have suffered centuries-old oppression by persian elitism. There is no natural convergence of interests, even in matters of religion. The US is hardly excluded as political actor in the South. As for Kurdistan, it is likely the US will have much to gain there, Israel too.
I don’t support partition, btw. Perhaps the partition of czechoslovakia is the only partition success story. Elsewhere, it has been a recipe for disaster (pakistan, eritea, korea, etc.)

Posted by: slothrop | Aug 12 2005 0:44 utc | 4

I want to stress I’m in no way claiming my prediction is unique. Even a short time spent researching iraq partition in lexis and firstsearch and dissertation abstracts show just how deeply the policy of participation was pursued by the policy establishment over the previous 20 years.
Really, no prediction by me, merely an acknowlegment of the policy trajectory.

Posted by: slothrop | Aug 12 2005 0:52 utc | 5

policy of partition

Posted by: slothrop | Aug 12 2005 0:53 utc | 6

What’s wrong with semi-independent regions (let’s call them States or provinces) United by a central government, with a constitutional seperation of powers?

Posted by: doug r | Aug 12 2005 1:14 utc | 7

doug r
Because sunni will always demand unification, and also because, contrary to the popular view, partition/strong (con)federacy improves unilateral domination by US. Also, the refugee problem especially in north will be tragic.

Posted by: slothrop | Aug 12 2005 1:19 utc | 8

Slothrop, you are being quite vague about dismissing doug rs idea about a central government overseeing things, All factions can make claims but the will has to be thier for unification for all and the sharing of resources.
the Sunnis will want in because regardless of minority status they are guaranteed a equal slice of the pie as are the Kurds, etc.
The real question is not U.S.(you are talking about big business i’m assuming) unilateralism but whether the different groups wanting autonamy can withstand the manipulations of U.S. interests.
U.S.unilateralism is rapidly becoming an issue for all the world.

Posted by: Anonymous | Aug 12 2005 1:59 utc | 9

I love discussions about the motives and grand strategy of evil-doers–and we’ve got to call them that–who could not find magnetic north with the aid of a GPS and Kit Carson’s guides.
Utter incompetence does not have a “grand strategy”.

Posted by: Groucho | Aug 12 2005 2:07 utc | 10

there is said to be a sniper in baghdad – this was cited on common dreams but seems to have dissapeared – a sniper – who has already taken the lives of at at least a dozen american soldiers – who waits for them to rise above their protection – who sites his rifle on the only unprotected parts of their bodies & has been succesful each time
this is the growing reality for the american armed presence. better intelligence. the use & development of skills that were already there in the endless iran iraq war
i will say what i have said befre – this is now a killing ground where the resistance in whatever form it takes – wins
& that it is winning is clearer each day – the facts are absolutely clear – whatever the corporate media whores would like to tell
while the monster will get more lost in its use of force – & in its inability & its condemned incapacity to understand the real nature of resistance – in that the resistance is overwhelmingly supported by the people – we are beginning to see what precision the guerrilla is bringing to the war
the more they are succesful – the more i think the u s will generalise the war & will attack iran – it seems it is also condemned to do that – in response to unfavourable reaction at home – the iranisation of the iraq puppets & the ferocity of the resistance
these are dark days for us but they are also dark days for american military power

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Aug 12 2005 2:09 utc | 11

I’m merely pointing out both Kurds/Shia in a partition arrangement will depend on US guarantee of security. That’s what I mean about unilateral. Of course, this situation insinuates economic hegemony by US in the fractured state as well. It seems to me to be the best option for US and a continuing means to exclude other players.
I didn’t mean to discount the possibility federalism might actually work. Who knows? IMO, sunni will be terminally marginalized, and the central authority will be the Green Zone for the next 30 years.

Posted by: slothrop | Aug 12 2005 2:10 utc | 12

rgiap
Iran? Oh yes. Maybe soon, too, as UN crisis unfolds. Bolton will move things along nicely.

Posted by: slothrop | Aug 12 2005 2:13 utc | 13

i think that anybody that believes a ‘real & independant’ iraq in the future is dreaming & of these dreams we can only speak of horro & of terror. & we must speak of the very real menace of an enlargement of that war & that seems to me to be a far more real possibility
whatever form of phony federalisation will last a moment in the breath of this war
a ‘central government’ in baghdad – these are the hallucinations of someone who cannot get out of the warroom & has eaten too many mars bars
the only credible solution for all iraquis is to accelerate & accentuate the war – there is no real political solution & force is the only thing imperialism has ever understood

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Aug 12 2005 2:15 utc | 14

slothrop
my friend – you are jesting of course – when have the us in iraq been able to guarantee security for the iraquis – even within the green zone – they have made a mockery of ther own power, the limits of that power, the nakedness of that power, the utter brutality that power depends on & the deceitful way that power treats its proper subjects
if i was american – i would expect the draft quite soon – & this time when people resist that draft – they will not just a night in the clink but they will dissapear into the american achipelego of incarceration – with abaundant support of all patriot acts & a corrupted congress & collaborationist media

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Aug 12 2005 2:19 utc | 15

“for all iraquis”
the problem is this exactly: “the iraquis”–what is this after two years of occupation, a decade of sanctions, and thirty years of sunni totalitarianism? Where is there proof of a mobvement for national liberation? Who is Iraq’s Uncle Ho?
lucky for the US.

Posted by: slothrop | Aug 12 2005 2:19 utc | 16

Whether the US planned the catastrophe of security is debatable and presently unknowable. Yet, the chaos, whose solution is now feted as partition, benefits US. To be sure, the Kurds, and shia whether they like it or not, will depend on US military to assure the statelets are not wrecked by sunni “insurgency.”

Posted by: slothrop | Aug 12 2005 2:23 utc | 17

there is ample proof of a movement of national liberation
more has happened in these last two years than in a decade in vietnam.
uncle ho no giap nor le duc tho were the leadership od the war of national liberation; ther viet cong for example provided a leadership from the people of both astounding invention & intelligence & even you war colleges give them credit for that
this is not bourgeois history, comrade. people & the people alone are the motive forces of history. it was true in vietnam – it is & will be true in iraq
because the nationalist nature of the struggle may be more to the tastes of the left – the actual reality on the ground in iraq – is that it is islamic fighters who are showing the greates courage & the greatest capacity to inflict damage – whatver you or i may think of them & their ideology
white skin privilege brings its own sins & its own habits

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Aug 12 2005 2:27 utc | 18

ô slothrop
i think the you have been watching too much wolf blitzer. the u s can assure nobody of nothing. least of all themselves & their puppets
they are not capable of anything except prolonging an immoral & illegal war
& i think you need to be reminded of its illegality. whatever & i mean whatever response by the resistance is justified & is just – whatever way you want to look at it

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Aug 12 2005 2:31 utc | 19

where’s the proof? The sunni “jihadists” are killing shia civiliuans, Kurds are cleansing Kirkuk, Mosul of ethnic turkmen and arabs, shia, now led by the cleric Hakim, are demanding autonomy. No. No movement of national liberation, imo.

Posted by: slothrop | Aug 12 2005 2:32 utc | 20

jihadists in this context is a very blitzerian term. the picture you pain of shi sunni tension is obliterated by the facts on the ground. the form of resistance being taken in iraq is only possible with the actual & implicit involvement of the two populations. that is truer each day. as for the kurds – they are digging their own grave

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Aug 12 2005 2:35 utc | 21

rgiap
don’t get me wrong. I’m not extolling virtues of imperialism. I contend only the US is not yet fated to Vietnam style defeat.
In any case, no way US can give up now. The stakes much too great. Those swingin dicks can pull 3, 4 tours. We’re there for good.

Posted by: slothrop | Aug 12 2005 2:35 utc | 22

facts on the ground? Show this, please.

Posted by: slothrop | Aug 12 2005 2:37 utc | 23

slothrop
i think the defeat will be greater than vietnam & more total. i think it will mark the end of the empire in the form it has taken
& yes they will try to delay that day & so we agree they will not move out of the midlle east until that reality is visited on them in its most implacable & irrevocable form

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Aug 12 2005 2:38 utc | 24

the resources for these facts can be found in both le monde & liberation. they can also be found in ever increasing detail on both truthout & commondreams
the facts are the increasing velocity, precisions, subtlety & their ability to tarfet both within the supposedly secured perimeters & all over iraq at any point of their choosing
to believe this is the work of a cadre – ‘jihadist’ or otherwise – beggars belief. slothrop read any history on the vietnamese & tho there existes sophisticated political formations – the war on the ground in iraq as seen by them – would seem very favourable indeed – the great giap has so recently in an article reprinted in lemonde

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Aug 12 2005 2:43 utc | 25

I hope so, comrade. Let live. They deserve a place to go to in their own direction.

Posted by: slothrop | Aug 12 2005 2:44 utc | 26

The U.S. can’t even guarantee thier own safety.
They have no hope of ever containing the monster they have created.That is why Dick is in the basement at the White House mixing up the medicine and George is busy presidenting with that sick look on his face. they are going to up the ante soon, or cut loose. They have no choice.
The move for National liberation will come from the politicians but they are presently co-opted by the American Influence
I think the Neocons like all who are swindled, were led to certain extent by thier Masters, They actually believed it would be easy.(think The Congo coup attempt).
Nobody likes war(Iraq, what twenty of the last twenty five years at war and don’t tell me being starved by the entire world is not war) and very soon after America leaves and the U.N. takes over there will be peace but not without will.
There has to be compromise, commitment and the same effort put into peace as there is to war.

Posted by: Anonymous | Aug 12 2005 2:46 utc | 27

Slothrop, What are the “stakes”

Posted by: Anonymous | Aug 12 2005 2:50 utc | 28

stakes. The wrong word?
Confrontation w/ Iran is number one. And syria. Control over the future of resource extraction. Favorable positioning for the “great game” of access to central asia resources. Protection of Israel. Bush-Doctrine pucsh for “democratization” in the kingdom and egypt.
Basically, quit the ME and kiss your superpower ass goodbye.

Posted by: slothrop | Aug 12 2005 2:56 utc | 29

hat super power ass ig getting kicked now & while it is being kicked – the peopl of latin america are tasting for the first time in a very long period – some real & concrete forms of democracy

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Aug 12 2005 2:59 utc | 30

rgiap
Well, as much as Jim S annoyed me w/ the hyperpragmatism of war argument, all we need is the will to unleash the destructive power of US militarism. We could rape a million carthages by noon tomorrow. We just need a pretext. A terrorist incident ostensibly traced to Iran might do. or a putsch in SA. Or….

Posted by: slothrop | Aug 12 2005 3:05 utc | 31

…6$ per gallon gas. How many brown people will soccer mom sanction the murder of when she needs a c-note a week to pickup tommy and suzie (nathan and kaya) from school?

Posted by: slothrop | Aug 12 2005 3:07 utc | 32

We could rape a million carthages by noon tomorrow.
I think you better take a megadose of Viagra there, slothrop, and some Visine. and call Dr. Giap in the morning.

Posted by: Groucho | Aug 12 2005 3:21 utc | 33

@slothrop
How many brown people will soccer mom sanction the murder of when she needs a c-note a week to pickup tommy and suzie (nathan and kaya) from school?
Exactly. This is what I find really scarey. Resource hunger is not going to affect only the US, but US society is perfectly configured for a self-righteous march into barbarism. Look at the level of misery the US military is capable of inflicting when it is acting with restraint. Things could get much, much worse.

Posted by: Jape | Aug 12 2005 3:23 utc | 34

I don’t know when, I don’t know how, but every sign points to the US facing a megaperfect shitstorm of near-apocalyptic proportions within — my guess — the next 5 years.
Military defeat(s) combined with military crumbling, spreading rot of corruption, economic hard times — I picture a combination of the Fall of the USSR post-Afghanistan with Argentinian economic meltdown and unprecedented oil shortages.
Not to mention some form of civil war on the domestic front.
Twenty years ago I’d have dismissed as utter lunacy a prediction that Ukraine might one day leave the bosom of Mother Russia to seek to join Europe.
What fools these mortals be. Similarly, today we can barely predict the cataclysmic changes that will tear America apart in the next decade.

Posted by: Lupin | Aug 12 2005 5:55 utc | 35

r’giap,
you know me better that to stoop to sarcasm, I’m genuinely interested.
You say above that
‘to believe this is the work of a cadre – ‘jihadist’ or otherwise – beggars belief’.
Do you mean that you can’t this is the work of jihadis, or you don’t believe? If the latter who is doing it then, and why are they apparently becoming so proficient?

Posted by: theodor | Aug 12 2005 6:21 utc | 36

It won’t take that long for the people of the US to work out they are swimming against the tide if these fools make any attempt to escalate the mess. Going into Iran would have to be unilateral because there is no way the UN would support it. You’d have to say the Poms wouldn’t be keen unless they can persuade Gemany and France to come in as well. Somehow I don’t see that happening so the only nation whose support the US could be sure of would be Israel and if they joined in that would bring the House of Saudi down.
As far as the ethnicity of the resistance in Iraq goes, who can tell from this distance. It suits the invaders to write off this Iraqi nationalism as secterianism but I suspect that is just too simple.
There are Sunni main chancers who have decided to back the US game as it seemed to be the only one in town. Similarly there are plenty of Shia who have no great love for the Sunni but whose loathing of Western, resource and cultural imperialism far exceeds their antipathy towards Sunni.
The fact that arms and bombs were coming into a Shia province from Iran when the Brits intercepted them tells us that for whatever reason the Iranians give the Iraqi resistance a hand. It may just be to keep the pot simmering away so that the US has no time to be thinking about taking on Iran. It could easily just be that the Iranians are covering their asses in case the Sunnis do get back in the drivers seat.
The only thing I can deduce from all of this is that prior to the invasion of Iraq oil was at about $25/bbl now it’s about $65/bbl and the US had reserves in Venezuela, North Africa and Central Asia in their sights. Virtually all those reserves have been snaffled by others while the US bullies its way around the M.E. and you’d have to say that the chances of Amerika extracting oil outta Iraq long term are slim.
BushCo has created the worst of all possible worlds for US citizens. The economy is a disaster about to happen. Amerika’s much vaunted military might has been called into question which means that any heavying they want to do they will have to actually do, cause bluffing just won’t cut it. And just as ‘peak oil’ is becoming a critical factor for economists BushCo have worsened Amerika’s access to oil which will certainly encourage trading partners to tread warily lest they get burnt.
That why I say a credible opposition wouldn’t be pissing around wringing their hands at the morality of any of this.
They should be saying this mob have screwed the pooch bigtime and you need us to sort it out. Not because it’s the right thing which it is but because if BushCo get the opportunity to ‘save’ us again oil will be $100/bbl and we’ll be sending our resumes off to Mumbai in the hope that they will give us a green card to work there for less than the locals.
Nothing has crystallized the huge mess these incompetents have created more than what’s currently happening in Iran.
The penny has dropped and the Iranians have worked out that Bush/Cheney are nothing more than stale piss and hot air. Even if they do develop nukes themselves which actually isn’t that likely, cause they are smart enough to recognise that if they can replace the bulk of their energy generation with nuclear, it will free up more oil to sell at these great prices. And Amerika won’t be able to do a thing about it.
I was reading an article somewhere the other day (might’ve been Fisk I can’t remember) anyway it said that the new Iranian president probably had more in common with BushCo than anyone previously. That means these guys will happily thumb their noses at the west as long as they are sure nothing can come of it. That way the Iranian sheeple won’t notice that democratisation has stopped and slipped into reverse. The sheeple will be too busy patting the govt on the back for standing up to the US.
Anyone concerned that BushCo might feel so cornered that they try and push back with nukes or somesuch should be thankful for once that major corporations have Emperor Cheney in the back pocket.
Armaggedon is bad for business.

Posted by: Debs is dead | Aug 12 2005 7:42 utc | 37

I was reading an article somewhere the other day (might’ve been Fisk I can’t remember) anyway it said that the new Iranian president probably had more in common with BushCo than anyone previously.
Juan Cole made a similar point on the day the Iranian election results came out, I think.

Posted by: Jape | Aug 12 2005 8:05 utc | 38

Some great points Debs, especially “armaggedon is bad for business”.
Attacking Iran, while not armaggedon, would play havoc to business across the west through crude oil inflation (big time), not to mention the totally unpredictable blowback in Iraq. I think the rosetta stone of whats happened in the Bush administration is essentially a business transaction gone south. and I mean way south. Simply put, the idelogues (neo-cons) have sold the elected administration a huge parsel of of swamp-land or oil- land prompted by the real paranoia of a commodity literally drying up. So before us now is a government locked into an Enron style meltdown, of not only failure (to deliver the goods) but fraud. If Ken Lay had a military at his disposal, he’d be not a little bit like our own damaged W goods.

Posted by: anna missed | Aug 12 2005 9:08 utc | 39

I still think something sneaky is going on with Iran. Always has been. Iran and Iraq could be a budding love.

Posted by: jm | Aug 12 2005 10:22 utc | 40

I think the rosetta stone of whats happened in the Bush administration is essentially a business transaction gone south.
Well put. They wanted to level the country in record time and immediately put their reconstruction contracts to work. Then the elections would establish the tax free unregulated status of their companies and they would be singing. So they thought.
No one knows exactly what’s happening there but it looks like it is so lawless that the reconstruction is worse than stalled and money is being stolen in gargantuan amounts. Too much to keep up with.
Big business loser.

Posted by: jm | Aug 12 2005 10:36 utc | 41

am redux : ‘ Some great points Debs, especially “armaggedon is bad for business”.’
Yes, I hope you are both correct.
But I remember the US “selling” Israel, was it $350 million worth of “bunker busters”? and I really have trouble imagining the Cheney administration admitting that they’ve broken everything they’ve touched since seizing power.
I’m afraid that they will find an excuse to roll the dice again, taking on Iran this time. When they fail there too… what the hell, they’re independently wealthy, they’ll just “retire”.

Posted by: John Francis Lee | Aug 12 2005 10:56 utc | 42

theodor
no, i cannotbelieve the scale of the war today carried out by the resistance is veing carried out by a cadre – jihadist or otherwise
for some time the scale of the war is a great deal wider than the bourgeois press or the cheney bush junta would have us believe
the u s has already massacred tens perhaps even hundred of thousands of people in this war; they have announced repeatedly the death of this or that leading figure – & not only is the resistance not stppoing – it has accelerated beyond the scale – that i discussesd in vietnam with slothrop
this can only suggest – that while – thos who are fighting ths war from the front have enormous courage & some of that courage may come rom the so called jihadist but it would seem far more likelier that the war has gne far beyond this or that group
while theire is not the political formation of elements that existed in vietnam – it is till early – & many will have to prove themsemeves in the war against the occupiers – it is clear that that united front will emerge
the precision was already there – while the us may have bulldozed tens of thousands of iraquis in 1991 in their massacre of them – their military is one of the hardies of the middle east – & i imagine much entrainement is being done by the old army & that recent recruits are passing on what they have earnt spying on the americans
again it is the scale of this war that tells the real story & u s force with its pantd down can not only not do carthage or kursk – what it is capable however is of doing what the nazis did in lidice – or as they did in so many owns & villages in the east
you can kill a freedom fighter but you cannot stop freedom fighting

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Aug 12 2005 11:26 utc | 43

Testing the same balance :
1 they’ve gotten so far ahead of their patrons they now will be reined in
Why is Cheney Lobbying for a Boost in China’s Nuclear Capability?
vs
2 having broken everything they’ve touched since seizing power the lame ducks now will go for broke
The Coming 9/11 for Dummies.

Posted by: John Francis Lee | Aug 12 2005 13:18 utc | 44

They won’t attack Iran as they couldn’t even if they wanted to since Iraq appears to big a cookie to swallow.
Dropping nuclear weapons on Iran doesn’t take much in the way of otherwise tied-down resources or manpower. They’d need something to “justify” it, like, oh, I dunno, a dirty bomb in Times Square.

Posted by: mats | Aug 12 2005 15:20 utc | 45

mats: I’ve been reluctant to put it so bluntly for a very long time, but if you assume a new attack is on its way, and if you assume it’s partly designed to scare US people into total wat and to convince the rest of the world the US has every right to genocide pretty much everyone in retaliation, then why go for a *dirty* bomb? Wouldn’t kill that much more people than 9/11 or be that impressive, you know…

Posted by: CluelessJoe | Aug 12 2005 15:27 utc | 46

CJ, understood, though I figure maybe wrongly that it would at least have to *look* like the kind of thing AlQ might be able to pull off.
As for convincing the rest of the world, I doubt anybody in this admin cares.
If they can use 9/11 to “justify” invading Iraq, they can pretty much stretch things however they want.
Of course, living within 10 blocks of what must be 15 well-known potential targets in NYC, and knowing my wife and daughter walk by those places every day, I’m more than a little on edge over what might be coming, so it’s likely best just to ignore me.

Posted by: mats | Aug 12 2005 19:24 utc | 47

Mats It must be f**kin white knuckle stuff living so close to a potential target and from this distance its a lot easier to rationalise your situation than for you to live it, but consider for a moment the divided state the rethugs are actually in.
It is easy to see them as this great monolith full of good germans that follow orders unhesitatingly, however that has become as much of a myth as Iraq weapons of mass destruction. The truth is they are bankrupt for ideas and tactics to get themselves out of the mess they are in and if any effective opposition put the blow torch to em we would all see it plain as day.
In this situation the repugs are desperate and capable of anything, but it must be anything that they believe is achievable. The once idolised operators like Rove and the ‘unerring’ Rumsfield have been shown to have feet of clay. Rats like Wolfewitz have been fleeing the ship for over a year. Probably as soon as Bremer’s scam failed in the face of intense resistance from Iraqis many of the carpetbaggers would have realised realised the jig was up.
The smart ones have been putting distance between themselves and potential indictments.
In these circumstances it is difficult to believe that there are sufficient rethugs prepared to take the sort of gamble that setting up NY for dirty bomb or nuking Iraq would require.
When things start falling apart with a crew like this no one can be trusted. It’s everyman for himself as what had previously been angling everything for Repug advantage goes back to finding the best angle for personal advantage.
In addition staff close to W won’t want to be near anything like this as it leaves them on a hiding to nothing. He doesn’t have another election to win and any potential gain from putting together another attack is easily outweighed by the disaster that would occur if something went wrong.
They also can’t be sure that a terror attack wouldn’t backfire in the sense that their claim to fame has been that fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan is keeping NY safe. If NY or anywhere else is hit big time the sheeple might try and blame them for ‘cranking up the ragheads’.
I would also question New York as a target since the heightened security there means that the chance of some cock up a la Watergate Hotel burglary is greater and if the job can only be done with the participation of ‘friends in high and low places’ the odds of a leak or someone getting a dose of conscience is far greater.
Of course there is no way that anyone can be sure about any of this but we have to reassure ourselves with the notion that this mob isn’t omnipotent, they make mistakes even when they aren’t under the sort of pressure they are feeling right now. The other issue is that not only is doubt spreading through the formerly unified structure of the war lovers (eg Air Force colonel apprehended spraying F**K Bush on rethug cars), it would be a mistake to believe all of em to be complete a**holes. Can’t see a plot such as that being kept small enough and tight enough to guarantee the sort of infallibility these guys need.

Posted by: Debs is dead | Aug 12 2005 21:33 utc | 48

debs
what you underestimate – is the degree of their stupidity & the utter shor term nature of their venality
these people are so corrupt they defy imagination – they make an andreotti seem ‘political’ – they even make a mafiosi like berlusconi seem like a businessman
the thinker for this criminal crew are not of the capacity of the brezinski or kissinger school & even those two are highly overated in a century of dunces
realpolitics is how to get the tanks oving or the planes in the air
it wouldn’t surprise me in the least if these people were absolutely unfamiliar with the notion of maps – certainly they have absolutely no sense of history. history for them is last week & even then it is sufficiently flexible to be turned on its head
karl rove being the epitome of that – a man so evil – i have not enough air to breathe his name – but he has in my dreams an uncanny resemblance to micky dolenz of the monkkees on some really terrifying hallucinagenics. evil as they are – there is some sense – in which it is very difficult to take them seriouslly
sometimes i i even go to the rapt position – that perhaps they are another species entirely – somewhere where stupidity & venality are cultivated in the same way others are in etiquette
debs, it seems sometime we are all guilty of trying to see sense where there is none. absolutely none whatsoever. tamurlain & genghis khan at least had some ideas in their heads

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Aug 13 2005 1:05 utc | 49

debs, it seems sometime we are all guilty of trying to see sense where there is none.
And, of course, competence where there is none.

Posted by: Groucho | Aug 13 2005 1:19 utc | 50

As the designated war monger, I’ve got to repeat when the lifers take the 3rd and 4th tour of Iraq, the US Army will collapse just like it did in Vietnam. Staying the current coarse will result in a slow motion defeat since there is not the manpower to pacify the Sunni Triangle. Either start the draft now and place grunts in every kook and corner and partition Iraq or withdraw immediately.
Liberals and Conservatives who don’t support an immediate withdrawal or the alternative, a strategic plan to pacify Iraq, don’t give a damn for the US Army or the soldiers being killed and maimed right now. This includes the GOP who will destroy the US Army in order to stay in power.

Posted by: Jim S | Aug 13 2005 1:22 utc | 51

If there was any lihop or mihop justification required for an attack on Iran, Iraq is a lot closer than NYC.

Posted by: DM | Aug 13 2005 1:23 utc | 52

competence went out the window with the archduke ferdinands brains

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Aug 13 2005 1:30 utc | 53

Now that’s a revisionist historical thought, there, RG.

Posted by: Groucho | Aug 13 2005 1:35 utc | 54

Jim S :
I don’t think it’s possible to effect that situation much, at this point.
Why give theseclowns more kids, with a draft, to waste.
This clusterfuck is over, even if no one will call it.

Posted by: Groucho | Aug 13 2005 1:41 utc | 55

@Jim S
I follow you, to a point. I don’t see how adding troops, in any numbers, would help. To serve as something other than peripatetic targets, they would need Arabic language skills, at the very least. The US military doesn’t have people like that, and recruiting lag time aside, it isn’t going to get them through a draft.
Maybe isolationism wasn’t such a bad doctrine after all?

Posted by: Jape | Aug 13 2005 1:42 utc | 56

groucho/flasharry
these bastards play so loose with history & chronologies – hell it’s hard not to want to be a little bit revisionist
according to some it would seem the american century was above all a benolavant one – the spreading of goodd cheer to one & all – regardless of continent or class
it is merely my mad maoism which makes what was clearly a virtous country capable of such kindnesses as hiroshima & nagsaki & seeing in that something malignant
i a completely prepare to believe now that the american indians welcomed the newcomers with an offer of their lands & lives, the sanish american war – a quarrel amongst friends, the belated intervention in ww 1 as merely allowing the european fellows a bit of breathing space, the second world war won completely by american military genius assisted ably by the good fieldmarshall montgomery & his love of holland, the cold war i have completely misunderstood & now know it was & remains about th betterment of humanity & its more angelic instincts, that korea vietnam, honduras, indonesia, phillipines, greece were simply the efforts of an elder brother guiding his younger & more immature kind
i have also completely misunderstood that the famille bush like the great & grand predecessors margaret thatcher & ronald reagan had only goodness in their hearts & they are overwhelming us with their generosity & it simply the archaic nature of arab culture which does not allow those fellows to see what the u s is really doing – establishing peace love & goodwill to one & all
i’m a foolish kind of guy but intelligent design will help me in the end

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Aug 13 2005 1:51 utc | 57

arab language skills are not going to help you when you are in the sites of an shiite snipers rifle – better to learn some modern choreography

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Aug 13 2005 1:53 utc | 58

i’m a foolish kind of guy but intelligent design will help me in the end.
I don’t know RG, but confusing me with that neer-do-well is insulting.
If slothrop, has not, in the meantime, slaughtered a million Carthaginians, perhaps we are safe this day.

Posted by: Groucho | Aug 13 2005 2:06 utc | 59

@r’giap
I am more accustomed to these teasing little forays into the no-man’s-land between witticism and threats of physical violence from folks on the right. But if you insist on exercising your inalienable right to be not taken seriously as well, you’re free to do so.

Posted by: Jape | Aug 13 2005 2:10 utc | 60

what i am saying jape – perhaps in different words than groucho/flash – is that it is far too late for a bit of remedial arab language learning to mean anything at all
what they need to do – simply – is to get out & stay out – & the hands of the empire must leave all the countries where it wears it heavier hands – what i am saying is that even the grea military force of this empire will do it no good – in chess – you have a movement which is in essence a self encerclement & that is precisely what is happening today
& jape i say what i say – i am not skilled in evangalism – my own views are what they are & are presented here in posts in the frame of mind i am able to place theme – i mean no dsrespect unless it is intended & i think i make that very, very clear
my clumsy attempts a humour are just that – clumsy – for in fact i see no humour of any kind there at all – least of all in our times
but as i have repeated the solution for the iraq resistance is armed & not political. & it will need to be expressed with great ferocity for it is only in ferocity that empires clearly understand the stakes. the political processes of the empire are themselves so debased & degraded – it is an obscen & pornographic joke to expect a sovereign people to take it seriouslly
& groucho – go tell the spartans that slothrop is coming

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Aug 13 2005 2:21 utc | 61

Giap you won’t get any argument from me on their stupidity or venality but the tide has turned.
Their most loyal supporters are questioning their strategy. It seems from the outside that more repugs are questioning current strategy than dems who still want to throw a few more soldiers at the problem.
In that circumstance BushCo’s employers will be casting around for an alternative where they can get away from the shitstorm and preferably still be able to make a dollar. Those sort of guys only risk all on one throw of the dice if they know the game is fixed. There are just too many imponderables in recreating fear and loathing in NYC so even if Cheney wants to roll the dice, his bosses are unlikely to believe the percentages are good.
When a team takes a big risk on the way up eg Itan/Contra they’re on a fairly safe call. Things are just beginning and the team has much more to gain than lose.
When a team is on the way down, some of the players will want to take silly risks exactly the same way a high roller does when he/she is trying to convert a losing streak. But the money boys have seen it all before and if they don’t feel they own the house they won’t risk their money.
Jeb may think he’s got a chance, Cheney will undoubtedly feel the same but at the moment the boys who write the checks must be lookin round for a safer bet. The repug establishment will also be concerned about not haemorraging too much power in the mid terms so they’ll be wanting to play it safe also.
As was said before nothing can be certain in any of this cause there are serious lunatics involved but the team has a feel of moving into extreme dysfunction.
The dedicated main chancers will run a mile from anything too risky if the team can’t all be counted on.
I reckon they’ve done their dash and now is the time to react with ridicule not fear.
Fear is something they are old hands at managing. However pompous assholes like Bush and Cheney fall apart if they think people are laughing at them.
Finally no one outside of the rethugs has any control over what they might or might not do but the shared belief some outrageous slaughter is inevitable can make it inevitable since they’re likely to think “wtf may as well go for it”.
Much better (imo) to take the tack that is more likely to throw them off their gameplan and have them too unsure and divided to organise a bonk in a brothel.

Posted by: Debs is dead | Aug 13 2005 2:35 utc | 62

As for it being too late, we’re agreed. If the US military had depth in Arabic, it would have been brought to bear much earlier — and very likely the invasion would not have taken place, and neither country would be suffering from the side effects of this fiasco.
Separately, though, I do think that you may be inducing a false clarity for yourself by focusing so specifically on imperialism of US origin. As Richard Stallman once pointed out to me, “‘The enemy of my enemy is my friend’ is a heuristic, not a principle.”
… and what Debs is dead said.

Posted by: Jape | Aug 13 2005 2:51 utc | 63

To understand what is happenning and what has happened, sometimes it helps to work backwards. If you assume that the plan was to actually break up Iraq into three parts, (with US bases and a client state in Kurdistan, a hot bed of geo-political intrigue involving Iran and Saudi Arabia in Shia’Land, and absolute mayhem involving AlQaeda, PsyOps/BlackOps operatives, and Mosad in the SunniLand), what is happening now should be clear enough.
We went in there to break up the country, thus there was no need for a large enough force to control the country after the governing structure fell apart. Looting and lawlessnes guaranteed ethnic rivalries and religious tensions (Shias are less likely to loot/rob/kill shias in the absence of a legal authority). Rumsfeld said, “freedome is messy!”. We did not need a reconstruction plan because we had no plan to reconstruct, hence state dept’s reconstruction plan was tossed aside, if somebody knows of an alternate reconstruction plan please enlighten me(the one cited here and there is actually an arabic/english translation of the post WWII reconstruction of Germany!). I remember talking to a lefty after the invasion and he was concerned that things were going so well in Iraq that Bush will be hailed as a hero and everybody else will look like a loser, that was until Bremer decided to fire the entire Iraqi army (BTW they were allowed to keep their weapons!). Then came the torture and abuse shitstorm which provided the final nail in the coffin of a united Iraq. Reconstruction was a facade, a way to line the pockets of wealthy Bush contributers. Reports from Jordan talked of brand new materials showing up in scrap heaps from Iraq. First we blow the place to smithereans, then we sell big reconstruction contracts with lots of building materials and labor, then we take the same building material and sell it as scrap to some Jordanians, what a scam! Of course nothing got built but we did paint a lot of schools, on the outsides only! AlQaeda is inserted there to rob the Sunni populaton of any legitimate leadership. Do you see why we didn’t take care of Zarqawi’s group (Ansarul Islam) when he was openly training cadres in the Kurdish areas under our watch!!!??? There is a concerted effort to destroy Sunni intelligentsia and middle class by both, AlQaeda and US operatives.
Mo Mowlan, a very bright Irish MP, said that the real aim of this war is Saudi Arabia and its oil. The problem with this thesis is that Saudi oil is already ours. Under an agreement Saudis are bound to purchase US treasury bills with the oil proceeds and the interest on these bills is used for construction projects in Suadi Arabia (guess who gets all the construction projects?). I think the real game is to draw Iran into a long and bloody skirmish, with our Saudi pawns, in the Shia and Sunni lands (since we can’t take them out in an all out war) and meanwhile create another client state in Kurdistan which is surrounded by enemies and fully depends on us for protection, just like Israel.
So rest assured, if the constitution does appear it will only delay the inevitable by a few years, which maybe our plan. This way we can escape the blame of breaking up Iraq and point the finger at somebody not living up to the constitution or some such garbage.
Remember this about Iraq,
-a majority of Saddam’s ruling click was Shias not Sunnis.
-the most well known face of Iraq in the world, after Saddam, was a christian Tariq Aziz.
-women could vote, drive, go to college and universities in Saddam’s Iraq.
-Dr. Germ, the famous Iraqi microbiologist dubbed a chemical weapons experts by the US, is a woman and there were many more successfull women.
Saddam was and is a butcher and deserve what come his way, but he is safe and secure in his little bungalow, while poor Iraqis are dying by the hundereds everyday. And what we are creating in place of a secular Iraq is a religious/fascist state not much different from Saudi Arabia.
Don’t tell me that this wasn’t the plan from the beginning! Years ago in my Statistics class we studied a technique called “The decision tree”, where you take a situation and map all outcomes, then you assign a numerical probability to every outcome and then you map all possible outcomes of the earlier outcomes and assign them probabilities. The probability of an end event is then calculated as the multiple of all up stream outcomes. If you already familiar with this then I apologize but if not, then you may want to look it up. Pentagon lives and dies with numbers, simulations, and model building. Don’t tell me that nobody did a decision tree on invading Iraq, not stopping the looting, laying off the entire army, not guarding the weapons depots and all other crossroads which we have crossed and so badly screwed up. It is time to realize that things are going as planned and that is why nobody has lost their job or is proposing a change in direction. It is all part of the plan, it just gets messy sometimes!

Posted by: Max Andersen | Aug 13 2005 3:52 utc | 64

@ Max Andersen:

I really, really hope that people who are saying things like that—that the whole Iraq mess was part of the scheme to begin with—are wrong. (I think I’ve already demonstrated that I don’t have much of a connection with the people here, with whom I generally agree, so I’m doubly far away from being able to read the minds of the neocons. But I can still hope, right?)

If it is all part of a plan, then there must be some goal in mind. If there is a plan, then these people—and I use the word hesitatingly—have thought all this through. They know that they will not be safe in any other country in the world after what they have done. That means that they believe they will somehow be able to pull America’s chestnuts out of the fire, and do it in such a way that nobody will be able to attempt revenge. (Or that nobody will want revenge, but I think that we can safely dismiss that by now.)

The only thing I can think of is that they are waiting for an excuse to start a nuclear war, probably on multiple fronts (it doesn’t particularly help, from their perspective, to knock out the middle east if you don’t get China, too—looks like Ahnuld has been hung out to dry by the GOP in the warmth of the incoming ICBMs). Of course, we all knew that nuclear war is part of the Republican dream at the moment; it’s hardly a big secret; but if they’re smart enough to think all this out in advance, that puts a very different complexion on the situation than if they are just a bunch of thugs sitting around dreaming.

Posted by: The Truth Gets Vicious When You Corner It | Aug 13 2005 4:36 utc | 65

The Truth:
You need to realize that the American population is also a victim in this game. These people have no fatherland, no motherland, no shame, or conscience. Just like they used the 9/11 tradgedy to further their economic and political agenda, they’ll use the next tradgedy to further strengthen those. Do you believe that people who have gotten 1800+ American kids and hundereds of thousands of Iraqis killed really give a rats ass about what might happen next? There is a huge gap in the military and intelligence capabilities of China and the US, we played the game of mutually assured destruction (MAD) with the Russians for 70 years and ended up winning, why won’t we win against the Chinese or North Koreans or Iran? If you are looking at the news of US being kicked out of Uzbek bases remember that they are only symbols of our presence to the Russians and the Chinese. The reall threat is our ability to attack these countries with sub-space aircraft travelling at Mach 5+ and being able to deliver nuclear warheads with pinpoint accuracy. Thus the reduction in conventional forces and increased emphasis on special forces, where a medic is a sniper also. F117s (stealth airplanes) existed and operated for ten years before we acknowledged their existence, there is capability which has not been acknowledged yet. This is not the old roman empire, it is high-tech juggernaut.
Max

Posted by: Max Andersen | Aug 13 2005 5:07 utc | 66

All I can say is that if this was all part of a plan, then the first step must have been to remove the intelligence from Intelligent Design.
The methods of Jackson Pollock do not make for very attractive painting; they don’t seem to work very well in the foreign policy field, either.

Posted by: Jape | Aug 13 2005 5:12 utc | 67

Quips aside, Max, maybe you could explain exactly how the United States is going to exploit the resources of Central Asia without actually going there to pick them up? The game of mutually assured budgetary burnout requires access to raw materials. And a sound, er, fiscal policy.

Posted by: Jape | Aug 13 2005 5:20 utc | 68

A sanctions regime against Iran will not work with crude oil at $66/barrel. Saudi Arabia does not have sufficient swing capacity to offset Iranian supply. The futures market will price oil up sharply if there is even a hint of further supply constraints. That could seriously impact the current global economic environment and could even tip the precariously positioned US & European economies into recession. The fallout of that could have serious negative consequences for the US with its enormous debt service payments both at a consumer and governmental level. And it could break apart whatever remaining consensus is there in the muli-lateral trading system. Many European countries, China and India will not support sanctions. All it will accomplish will be further isolation of the US.
I believe the US has no choice but to negotiate with the Iranians. The Iranians know they have the US over a barrel (pun intended). A proactive US stance from a diplomatic perspective will be welcomed by Europe, China, Russia and India. This would be an excellent opportunity for the US to start the real process of stablization of the Middle East leading a true multi-lateral coalition. However, it will require eating some crow by the neocons as their hubris has caused the current situation. Can they do it?

Posted by: ab initio | Aug 13 2005 5:25 utc | 69

@ Max Andersen
I think you’re giving a bunch of greedheads too much credit but more to the point conceeding them omnipotence leaves the rest of us nowhere else to go.
If insensitive stupid and stubborn sociopaths like Bush and Cheney really do have a handle on whats what and who is who in the zoo, we may as well pack up and go home.
I don’t believe they do though they are just deeply flawed humans and while their single minded determination to put their own needs ahead of the rest of the planets can make them tough to beat it certainly doesn’t make them all knowing and all seeing. Quite the reverse in fact because their insensitivity makes em incapable of insight into the human condition. This means that when they try and manipulate people on any basis other than shared greed they are unable to confidently predict any outcome.
Rove was the only one that had an understanding of ordinary human’s hopes and fears and he’s blown it big time.
There is no way that Karl Rove expected a grand jury breathing down his neck to be the eventual outcome of a few phone calls to sort out a minor thorn in the side. Not only will the rest of the gang start to doubt turdblossom’s infallibility, even worse Rove himself will be wondering about his proficiency right at the time when he is feeling exposed and isolated.
I’ve had dealings with enough of this type of asshole to know that there is no loyalty amongst thieves. W the poor little rich boy would be the worst. He may have a hail fellow well met attitude towards his ‘friends’ but the moment any odour comes off anyone especially if the stink may be catching W will be out the door looking for a new playmate.
These guys are the scum you scrape off yer shoes after you put yer foot where you shouldn’t. Don’t be putting tickets on people whose source of strength comes from dark little secrets slyly thrust away from view. Their strength comes from weakness and now the chinks have been exposed the only path for these creeps is down the drain.

Posted by: Debs is dead | Aug 13 2005 5:27 utc | 70

I thought a large part of the so called plan was control of the oil under the Caspian Sea and the pipelines headed out.

Posted by: jm | Aug 13 2005 5:32 utc | 71

Jape;
Quips aside is right! When the Chinese and the Saudis hold most of our notes and we are the single larget market of Chinese produced materials why would they want to get into a tangle with us to begin with? This is about funneling money to the military industrial complex which has to generate reasons to stay in business. Don’t worry about the resources in the Central Asia, if they are there, they haven’t been developed yet. When we are good and ready we’ll go get them one way or the other. Chinese are making a lot of deals with oil producing countries but with US controlling nearly all of the shipping lanes in and out of there it will be hard to get this oil home for the Chinese. As for the budgetery melt down, if 7 trillion dollars of debt hasn’t melted the US economy why would 10 or 14 trillion melt it? Remember what Castro did to debts owed to US after the revolution, “can’t pay, won’t pay”. Hell, we don’t even have to say that, we’ll just tell’em to come get it if they want it.
Max

Posted by: Max Andersen | Aug 13 2005 5:35 utc | 72

I believe the US has no choice but to negotiate with the Iranians. The Iranians know they have the US over a barrel (pun intended). A proactive US stance from a diplomatic perspective will be welcomed by Europe, China, Russia and India. This would be an excellent opportunity for the US to start the real process of stablization of the Middle East leading a true multi-lateral coalition. However, it will require eating some crow by the neocons as their hubris has caused the current situation. Can they do it?
I think this might be close. But I don’t think it will be the neocons and that’s why they might be set up to pack it up and move on out. I think Iran holds some high cards. The Trilateral commission publically denigrated the Iraqi War and this must be for a reason since they are calculated to the max. It would appear that the fix is in for a Democratic regime in ’08, possibly a majority in ’06, so taxes can be raised and some of this negotiation done. The game has to be adjusted as it plays out.
I also read a very interesting article about the difficulty the Saudis are having extracting their oil and it is taking increased amounts of water to create pressure. So it’s back to water, and control of trade routes.

Posted by: jm | Aug 13 2005 5:46 utc | 73

Deb;
I am not packing up or telling others to pack up. I am an active member of DFA (Dean for America) and do whatever I can in addition to working and raising two kids but what bugs me is the incredible shotsightedness of the left in this country. We stumble from one asshole to the next, for a political leader. I had hope for Dean, all be it slim, but what happened to him only confirmed my thoughts. And the biggest part of that was the job done on him by his democratic friends. After the mayhem created by the Bush-Cheney team who do you think will put this country on the right track, Hillary “we can’t pull out now” Clinton? Or Joe “MBNA” Biden? No matter who you chose, I can assure you that the corporate juggernaut wins, and this will continue for many years to come. Do you realize how much ammunition is left in their guns, another terror attack here or overseas, another high value AlQaeda arrest, another jittery stupid move by Iran, the possibilities go on an on. They’ll all work in their favor, it doesn’t even have to happen here anymore, a bombing in London or Rome, or somewhere else will be used to scare the crap out of the populace and they win again. Just a few days ago Billmon had a line about how Democrats will be the only pro-war party left in this country, I think that is about to happen and I hope that you have all picked out alternate groups to join in that case?
Anyway, its Friday night and I really need to go find a better use of my time now. But if you guys think that what has happened was not the plan then please describe to me the neo-con plan/endgame as you understand it. But, please do not ignore history and common sense. Remember, empires don’t have conscience they have interests.
Max

Posted by: Max Andersen | Aug 13 2005 6:02 utc | 74

As for the budgetery melt down, if 7 trillion dollars of debt hasn’t melted the US economy why would 10 or 14 trillion melt it?
This is bubble reasoning. People were building country clubs with gold-lined bathtubs in Japan in 1990 because they couldn’t keep up with the demand for new memberships. But the party can’t go on forever, and nations have the same limitations as companies and individuals, it just happens on a much bigger scale. Eventually somebody blinks. We already know that the US political system is broken and has an insatiable appetite for borrowing. Eventually China panics, decides enough is enough, and stops underwriting new issues. I’m not an expert, but you can imagine what might happen next. The US maybe cuts back the federal budget immediately and drastically, causing massive dislocation and breakdown of public services? It maybe keeps borrowing by selling bonds at ever higher interest rates?
The Chinese government certainly has no incentive to agitate for a hard landing, but when markets start going against you, you can’t call time out. Ask Nick Leeson.

Posted by: Jape | Aug 13 2005 6:05 utc | 75

Like all corporatists the Bushites have no end game beyond the next quarter’s bottom line. They’ve blown that and are coming undone. They won’t be brought undone by anyone in the Dems however whose nakedly opportunistic attempt to turn the Iraqi invasion and murders into a political ‘opportunity’ for themselves will so sicken ordinary people that it may well extend the reign of the greedheads for a little longer.
The US needs to move forwards not backwards. Handing the keys over to a bunch of plump blowdried combovers in suits would be a backward move. Already tried and proven not to work.

Posted by: Debs is dead | Aug 13 2005 7:03 utc | 76

Yeah, I’ll vote for the skinny one.

Posted by: jm | Aug 13 2005 7:08 utc | 77

Jape;
If I borrow a $100 from you and know, for sure, that you’ll never ask me to payback, should I consider it a loan? Will I curtail my spending and start saving to pay you back, I don’t think so. Reminds me of a story gramps used to tell us:
A mom sends her two young sons out to the side walk with a pitcher of lemonade. She says, “go sell this lemonade and make some money so you will learn something about hardwork and making a living.” So, these two boys go out, sit in hot sun for a while but no buyers show up. So the younger one says to other, “I am thirsty give me a cup of lemonade”. But the older, and wiser, says “you know what mom said, we have to sell this stuff. You pay me and I’ll give you a cup.” So the young boy goes through his pockets and finds a nickle and says “here, give me one”. So the older one gives him a cup of lemonade. After a while the older one gets thirsty and says “give me a cup, I am thirsty”. Younger one says, “you are supposed to pay for it”. The older one gives him the nickle. Well, this happens a few times through out the afternoon and the lemonade is all gone. So the boy walk back home, mom sees the empty pitcher and is really excited, she exclaims, “Good job boys, you sold it all. Let me see how much you guys made” so one of the boys hands her the nickle.
The moral of the story, to me, is that money is a symbol resources are real. We’ll keep printing paper and Chinese will keep buying it as long as there is lemonade to go around. But when the lemonade is gone, that is when shit hits the fan. Thats when the guns come out and whoever is got the bigger gun wins.
You know there were happy and healthy societies before the concept of private ownership of land and paper money showed up. Think outside the box…..
BTW I have a business degree and run a small corporation as the majority owner, so I know what I am talking about.
Max

Posted by: Max Andersen | Aug 13 2005 7:09 utc | 78

To add to Jape’s comments the Chinese have never been that worried about next years bottom line. The long term situation is always far more important. When I was a renter I always used to prefer Chinese landlords because generally speaking if you paid your rent and caused no trouble with the neighbours they left you alone. One place I rented for 5 or 6 years right in a time of accommodation shortages and skyrocketing rents. These guys didn’t consider putting my rent up a deal was a deal and as long as I kept my end of it so would my landlord. Having regular money and no hassles beats a quick buck everytime.
The Chinese government won’t willingly write off billions of dollars in loans but on the other hand what is money? For people with a long term view money is a tool not an end and if the Chinese lose big mobs but gain long term power and influence in the West that will work for them just fine.
The development of the world trade authority means that no one not even the US can confidently ignore the rule of law. The US would never be able to get away with the asset theft that Carter pulled on Iran nowadays. That’s even if they could try it don’t forget how hard it is to maintain a united front when all around is turning to shit.
So much of the executive, legislative and judicial decison making in the US is tilted towards who’s got the most bucks do you really think that real smarties like the current R.O.C. government couldn’t push a hole somewhere through any attempt to freeze them out.
On the other hand how long do you think any country no matter how rich and/or powerful would last trying the same thing on the largely hidden machinations of Chinese power?
If the US assets that are held by China have been managed by smart people their holdings will be spread throughout the nation. When that happens it doesn’t matter what the total book value of a nation’s assets are. If you own 20% and its worth zillions great but if the nation’s book value falls to just millions so what? You still own 20% of it. It’s not as if the Chinese have been laying off anywhere. There’s no one holding their paper. Even better they haven’t floated their currency at all despite Greenspan’s entreaties so their money and assets are worth whatever it is convenient at the time for them to be worth.
Nothing to be paranoid about most countries have been vassals of the US for the last 50 years and you hardly notice unless you get a bit uppity then you better be prepared to cop one upside the head. It’s in no-ones interest to squeeze the goose too hard and at least the Chinese don’t have to answer to a few hundred million sheeple ticking a box every few years so they are pretty unlikely to get uneccessarily carried away by what they believe to be ‘principled and correct’.
This is an issue that has taxed the leadership of US vassal states considerably.
I mean R.O.C. is unlikely to declare a ‘war on drugs’ and crank up the rural dwellers by poisoning their crops and machine gunning the agrarian workers.
They are equally unlikely to confuse bribes and backhanders for the leadership with healthcare for the citizenry. That means they probably won’t cut the payment stream to the mob in charge off just because the poor are terminating their pregnancies once they have too many mouths to feed.
In other words like my old landlord they’ll probably leave everyone alone as long as they pay the rent and don’t piss on the carpets.

Posted by: Debs is dead | Aug 13 2005 7:37 utc | 79

Deb;
So, with Wolfowitz running the World Bank and Bolton in the UN should we be concerned that the the legal bodies of the world are about to be hollowed from the inside? Oh, and we just won’t issue a visa to the Iranian President so he can’t attend the UN meetings, how cool is that? World bodies indeed. And don’t even start about IMF and WTO. The effing mobsters don’t usually rob a weak party in broad daylight in the middle of a street. Somebody said that “internation law is like a cobweb, small nations, like bugs, get stuck in it and die, big nations like lizards just walk right through!” But I agree with the part about paying rent and note pissing on the carpet.
After this I am really gone, I need to think of something better to do with my time. Now think,,,, think ,,,,,
Max

Posted by: Max Andersen | Aug 13 2005 7:59 utc | 80

You know there were happy and healthy societies before the concept of private ownership of land and paper money showed up.
Sure. If you’re looking at population densities like that of Outer Mongolia, all you need is sheep and children and a bit of rain once in awhile to keep things going. But to support cities or higher density agricultural communities, you need a more complex system of promises, and that’s why money, commercial practices and rights relating to land use emerged in places like China, Japan and Western Europe. Edo (Tokyo) grew to be the largest city on the planet in the 18th and 19th centuries on the strength of market practices so well developed that even human shit had an FMV. They didn’t do it for show; under the right conditions, economic exchange is, as you know, a very efficient means of allocating scarce resources. (Under the wrong conditions, of course, you get the US Congress.)
Your parable is interesting and useful, but neither it nor the example of the $100 “loan” is responsive. The parable is an example of abuse of trust, but the consequences are hidden by the fact that moms are (oftentimes) forgiving and the losses are so small. In the “loan” example, if you don’t expect to repay, and I don’t expect to collect, that’s a gift.
I think that the central banks of China and Japan would be very surprised to learn that they have been supplying outright gifts to the US treasury all these years. Those bits of paper represent a promise convertible into real resources at some point in the future. When the promise starts looking like a lie, that’s when things fall apart and, once people end up facing starvation and Xbox withdrawals, the guns come out as you say. But the breach of promise is the triggering event. And rightly so, because it represents much more than some individual oil field in Kazakhstan.
Don’t feel compelled to answer this, Max. Your family and your business deserve your attention more than I, or we, do. For my part, I will pledge give it a rest for a couple of days.

Posted by: Jape | Aug 13 2005 8:25 utc | 81

When the Romans go to war but pretend to still be in Rome, they loose:
G.I.’s Deployed in Iraq Desert With Lots of American Stuff

First Lt. Taysha Deaton of the Louisiana National Guard went to war expecting a gritty yearlong deployment of sand, heat and duress, but ended up spending her nights in a king-size bed beneath imported sheets and a fluffy down comforter.
She bought the bed from a departing soldier to replace the twin-size metal frame that came with her air-conditioned trailer on this base in western Baghdad. She also acquired a refrigerator, television, cellphone, microwave oven, boom box and DVD player, and signed up for a high-speed Internet connection.

Lately, Specialist Foster has done much of his Xbox playing in the trailer belonging to Cpl. Andrew Smith, 23, a guardsman from La Place, La.
In addition to their Army-issued beds and wardrobe, Corporal Smith and his roommate outfitted the room with an entertainment center, a beanbag chair and custom-made shelves and a desk.
Their belongings include three guitars, a laptop computer with speakers and a 30-inch flat-screen TV with surround sound – a gift from Specialist Foster, who gave Corporal Smith his entire video-game complex in part to try to curb what he calls his “Halo 2 addiction.”

Is anybody wondering why the Iraqis do not have electricity?

Posted by: b | Aug 13 2005 8:30 utc | 82

Jape;
You misunderstood the story, the boys really thought they were doing good business. But being kids didn’t realize that while they were moving a piece of silver back and forth the real resource, lemonade, was dwindeling fast. Kapish! I’ll pick up the rest later.
Nighty night!
Max

Posted by: Max Andersen | Aug 13 2005 8:53 utc | 83

Kapish. Lemonade = trust

Posted by: Jape | Aug 13 2005 8:57 utc | 84

@b
Is anybody wondering why the troops are not spending more time studying Arabic?

Posted by: Jape | Aug 13 2005 9:01 utc | 85

@Max
You will already have guessed that I missed the point of your parable because we don’t have kids. 😉

Posted by: Jape | Aug 13 2005 9:05 utc | 86

Thanks to Max for giving the full-monty Straussian notion of perpetual war to the events in Iraq, as a retro — active intent, all things apparently having gone acording to plan. I like the reliance on facts to explain events, but to ascribe to these events an intention that is so in the face of both the pronounced intentions, and much of the real efforts of the Bremmer gang to create from the dust of ignorance, a free market utopia — is to give credit to fools for being free. Literally everything the CPA and the legions of their republican glassy eyed and clueless advocates swarming all over every municipality in Iraq did, bringing to the heathen (& socialists) ragheads their newfound freedom in the form of directive#39 (which privitized all Iraqi assets) — was on the elemental level, a theft of the country. And this theft came to be felt by all Iraqis as the true intention of the occupation, hense, at least in part, the legitimization and growth of armed resistance.
If the generation of a lethal resistance from the failure to anticipate or control the results of a whole host of actions can be looked back upon as generating the desired effect, well then you’re cooking shit and serving it as steak.

Posted by: anna missed | Aug 13 2005 10:07 utc | 87

Bush warns Iran on nuclear plans

US President George W Bush says he still has not ruled out the option of using force against Iran, after it resumed work on its nuclear programme.
He said he was working on a diplomatic solution, but was sceptical that one could be found.
The UN’s atomic watchdog has called on Iran to halt nuclear fuel development.
Iran, which denies it is secretly trying to develop nuclear arms, restarted work at its uranium conversion plant at Isfahan on Monday.
“All options are on the table,” said Mr Bush, when asked about the possible use of force during an interview for Israeli TV.
“The use of force is the last option for any president. You know we have used force in the recent past to secure our country,” he said.

I don’t know what their intentions are. But I’m afraid the US/Israel is going to attack Iran and demonstrate that things can always get worse.

Posted by: John Francis Lee | Aug 13 2005 12:27 utc | 88

This man is fucking delusional. Jesus wept.

Posted by: Jape | Aug 13 2005 12:42 utc | 89

Germany asks US withdraw Iran attack comment.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4149090.stm
There you go! With oil prices steadily rising there will be no consensus for either sanctions or military attacks against Iran.
The Iranians have the US over a barrel. And unless they feel their security concerns are addressed they will not seriously negotiate anything.

Posted by: ab initio | Aug 13 2005 16:58 utc | 90

Anna,
Is there are question in there or are just getting stuff off your chest? Are you saying that when Bremmer privatized everything in Iraq (BTW oil is still controlled by the Ministry of Oil run by none other than our friend Mr. Chalabi), the people who told him to do that were unaware of what it might entail, and did not considered the results as a part of the scenario? Jay Garner is going around telling everybody that he was replaced by Bremmer because he wanted to follow the State Dept’s reconstruction plan. It is curious that you are willing to believe everything they said they wanted to do in Iraq, have you forgotten what Spanish said they wanted to do in The Americas. Every empire has robbed their subjects blind and killed them dead in the name of bringing them civilization or salvation or some other crap… Or are you having trouble with the concept the US is really an empire representing corporate interests?
The difference between the rivaling theories of evolution and creationism is that only evolution explains, consistently and near accurately, the current state of species. It does this by examining evidence from the past. You give me a consistent narrative which explains what has happend and what is happening and I’ll go with it. Wether it is shit or stake, you’ll have to taste it to find out!!!
Max

Posted by: Max Andersen | Aug 13 2005 18:01 utc | 91

No Max, I’m not willing to believe everything they say, but I am willing to believe that when they say something, and then follow it up with some consistant action — that this represents their intention. The fact that their intention then carried out, would produce a result contrary, or a mirror opposite of stated intention, to me, is simply an intention grounded, at best, in wishful thinking, rather than some kind of rigorous statistical thinking. And yes the Garner mission of limited (upheaval) restructuring, similar to the French plan floated at the time perhaps stood a shadow of a chance of working — in so much as it limited the restructuring to a political coup de- tat. But they had to have the whole 9 yards and set about breaking into ever smaller pieces what was already broken. My contention is that this is what (in significant measure) what generated sympathy for the armed resistance. It makes about as much sense to think this was the desired result, as to think the 12 years spent in Viet-Nam (with all of those deep thinkers, planners, and staticians) was really about maintaining the upheaval of some kind of perpetual war. It would seem that your analysis follows creationist thinking more than mine, in that you’re seeing the results on the ground in Iraq as the result of some mysterious and divine plan as opposed to the results of catastrophic failure.

Posted by: anna missed | Aug 13 2005 20:26 utc | 92

@Anna;
I disagree with your characterization of the Viet Nam debacle. We took the fight to the Russian’s backyard and we bled them white, we learnt a lot and created and tested many new weapons systems and whatever comes with that. I do accept that the hawks did not expect to loose the ground as they did in public’s eye, and for that anti-war movement and liberals are forever willified. The same hawks wanted to get in a nuclear battle with the Russians during the cuban missile crisis also, because they believed that they could win such a confrontation. Now the same people are back, they believe that as long they stick to the plan, with minor adjustments, they will outlast their detractors and enemies. This is their chance to prove themselves. The perpetual war is the only way for the military industrial complex to survive and a nuclear Iran is the only thing that will make the Saudi’s sit up and take notice. They have too much inside info on AlQaeda for it to be a real threat, Iranians on the other hand are crazy and only the good old USA can protect the Saudis from the crazy shias. Hey, and the new ruler may actually be more liberal then the old dead guy!
But history and interpertations aside, don’t you think that we are headed towards a devided Iraq, nuclear Iran, and a dead-on-arrival token Palestinian state in the middle east?
The only reason I keep looking back to history is to understand what is around the bend. If we know what these people are about to do next then we can pre-empt them. I think we are ready to break up Iraq and pull back to the Kurdish and Shia areas and substantially reduce the number of personnel. While the democrats are stuck on “he didn’t send enough troops, and we can’t pull out now”, Cheney is preparing to declare victory and pull out. Everybody will get what they want and dems will be left, once again, looking like schmuks. So let us start raising the shouts of “pull ou now” a little louder, and when these guys do pull out, we’ll ask “what took’em so long?” We need to hit this “can’t pull out now” crowd over the head with a 2×4 and run them out of the party. But then I am not a democrat, just a Deaniac (who btw is also “can’t pull out now”, but that is a different story).
Max

Posted by: Max Andersen | Aug 13 2005 21:49 utc | 93

Al Neuharth calls for troops to be brought home. link Wonder if this is first paper to do so, though he’s retired so it’s not clear if this is official. Then again, I notice that it’s largely the retired or unemployed who are speaking truth to power, non-anonymously.

Posted by: jj | Aug 14 2005 0:18 utc | 94

let me tell you max – that there was no “bleeding white” of the russians in vietnam. the vietnamese followed what i think you call in music an epenthesis between both moscow & peking. theirs was a struggle of national liberation which went from being nationalist to being socialist of its own accord & true to its own history. they were the puppets of no one.
you devalorise the heroism of their struggle against the empire & in doing so you credit theoretician & strategist of the empire who should have never left the safety of their schools
3,000,000 vietnamese 60,000 americans are blood & blood only
anna missed who knows a thing or two about this is correct in seeing the same debacle, the coming catastrophe & their very real & concrete costs. annna missed has also drawn the same conclusion about how a resistance is constituted & we will witness that consolidation while at the same time the puppet govt of baghdad will prove that it has no legitimacy at all. that it is in the end like the current american govt – a collection of interests
this sorry & sad empire will continue causing untold damge to the middle east, to us & to itself

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Aug 14 2005 0:31 utc | 95

from truthout
    How Can the US Ever Win, When Iraqi Children Die like This?
    By Robert Fisk
    The Independent UK
    Saturday 13 August 2005
    There’s the wreckage of a car bomb that killed seven Americans on the corner of a neighbouring street. Close by stands the shuttered shop of a phone supplier who put pictures of Saddam on a donkey on his mobiles. He was shot three days ago, along with two other men who had committed the same sin. In the al-Jamia neighbourhood, a US Humvee was purring up the road so we gingerly backed off and took a side street. In this part of Baghdad, you avoid both the insurgents and the Americans – if you are lucky.
    Yassin al-Sammerai was not. On 14 July, the second grade schoolboy had gone to spend the night with two college friends and – this being a city without electricity in the hottest month of the year – they decided to spend the night sleeping in the front garden. Let his broken 65 year-old father Selim take up the story, for he’s the one who still cannot believe his son is dead – or what the Americans told him afterwards.
    “It was three-thirty in the morning and they were all asleep, Yassin and his friends Fahed and Walid Khaled. There was an American patrol outside and then suddenly, a Bradley armoured vehicle burst through the gate and wall and drove over Yassin. You know how heavy these things are. He died instantly. But the Americans didn’t know what they’d done. He was lying crushed under the vehicle for 17 minutes. Um Khaled, his friends’ mother, kept shouting in Arabic: “There is a boy under this vehicle.”
    According to Selim al-Sammerai, the Americans’ first reaction was to put handcuffs on the two other boys. But a Lebanese Arabic interpreter working for the Americans arrived to explain that it was all a mistake. “We don’t have anything against you,” she said. The Americans produced a laminated paper in English and Arabic entitled “Iraqi Claims Pocket Card” which tells them how to claim compensation.
    The unit whose Bradley drove over Yassin is listed as “256 BCT A/156 AR, Mortars”. Under “Type of Incident”, an American had written: “Raid destroyed gate and doors.” No one told the family there had been a raid. And nowhere – but nowhere – on the form does it suggest that the “raid” destroyed the life of the football-loving Yassin al-Sammerai.
    Inside Yassin’s father’s home yesterday, Selim shakes with anger and then weeps softly, wiping his eyes. “He is surely in heaven,” one of his surviving seven sons replies. And the old man looks at me and says: “He liked swimming too. ”
    A former technical manager at the Baghdad University college of arts, Selim is now just a shadow. He is half bent over on his seat, his face sallow and his cheeks drawn in. This is a Sunni household in a Sunni area. This is “insurgent country” for the Americans, which is why they crash into these narrow streets at night. Several days ago, a collaborator gave away the location of a group of Sunni guerrillas and US troops surrounded the house. A two-hour gun-battle followed until an Apache helicopter came barrelling out of the darkness and dropped a bomb on the building, killing all inside.
    There is much muttering around the room about the Americans and the West and I pick up on this quickly and say how grateful I am that they have let a Westerner come to their home after what has happened. Selim turns and shakes me by the hand. “You are welcome here,” he says. “Please tell people what happened to us.” Outside, my driver is watching the road; it’s the usual story. Any car with three men inside or a man with a mobile phone means “get out”. The sun bakes down. It is a Friday. “These guys take Fridays off,” the driver offers by way of confidence.
    “The Americans came back with an officer two days later,” Selim al-Sammerai continues. “They offered us compensation. I refused. I lost my son, I told the officer. ‘I don’t want the money – I don’t think the money will bring back my son.’ That’s what I told the American.” There is a long silence in the room. But Selim, who is still crying, insists on speaking again.
    “I told the American officer: ‘You have killed the innocent and such things will lead the people to destroy you and the people will make a revolution against you. You said you had come to liberate us from the previous regime. But you are destroying our walls and doors.'”
    I suddenly realise that Selim al-Sammerai has straightened up on his seat and his voice is rising in strength. “Do you know what the American said to me? He said, ‘This is fate.’ I looked at him and I said, ‘I am very faithful in the fate of God – but not in the fate of which you speak.'”
    Then one of Yassin’s brothers says that he took a photograph of the dead boy as he lay on the ground, a picture taken on his mobile phone, and he printed a picture of it and when the Americans returned on the second day they asked to see it. “They asked me why I had taken the picture and I said it was so people here could see what the Americans had done to my brother. They asked if they could borrow it and bring it back. I gave it to them but they didn’t bring it back. But I still kept the image on my mobile and I was able to print another.” And suddenly it is in my hands, an obscene and terrible snapshot of Yassin’s head crushed flat as if an elephant had stood upon it, blood pouring from what had been the back of his brains. “So now, you see,” the brother explains, “the people can still see what the Americans have done.”
    In the heat, we slunk out of al-Jamia yesterday, the place of insurgents and Americans and grief and revenge. “When the car bomb blew up over there,” my driver says, “the US Humvees went on burning for three hours and the bodies were still there. The Americans took three hours to reach them. Al the people gathered round and watched.” And I look at the carbonised car that still lies on the road and realise it has now become a little icon of resistance. How, I ask myself again, can the the Americans ever win

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Aug 14 2005 1:30 utc | 96

You must admit that if these guys could speak Arabic, there would be less of this. That is not to justify it, mind, nor to justify the presence of US forces on Iraqi soil. But the utter disregard of local knowledge is what I have found particularly, how do you say, sick-making about this from the start.

Posted by: Jape | Aug 14 2005 2:06 utc | 97

Pentagon still fighting the release of Abu Ghraib II:
It is “probable that al-Qaeda and other groups will seize upon these images and videos as grist for their propaganda mill,” the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, Gen Richard Myers, argues in court papers. (HTML)
Not to be inflammatory or anything, but wouldn’t the Nazis have said the same thing about Auschwitz? What makes this different, I wonder?

Posted by: Jape | Aug 14 2005 2:13 utc | 98

jape
they don’t care – they don’t care at all
never a tear for the 3,000,000 vietnamese or those slaughtered in latin america
i’m afraid their langage skills would not really have transformed this absence of both attention & care. even o responsibility

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Aug 14 2005 2:21 utc | 99

Both aspects of the same moral disease. Presumably the French forces in Algeria were not that strong in Arabic and Berber, either.

Posted by: Jape | Aug 14 2005 2:31 utc | 100