Lots Of News About Iraq Today

[molson_golden2002]

Barzan Ibrahim Hassan al-Tikriti and Awad Hamel al-Bandar were hanged this morning. Ibrahim's head was detached from his body in the process one government official has reported. Another has said that this was an act of God. Hopefully, there are no videos of this on YouTube...

 

_____________________

 

This from the Times. A real good read and if you follow it you can see where the casualties will come from, namely the supply convoys that will have to drive right through Baghada to these new green zones.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/15/world/mi...artner=homepage

BAGHDAD, Jan. 14 — Just days after President Bush unveiled a new war plan calling for more than 20,000 additional American troops in Iraq, the heart of the effort — a major push to secure the capital — faces some of its fiercest resistance from the very people it depends on for success: Iraqi government officials.

 

American military officials have spent days huddled in meetings with Iraqi officers in a race to turn blueprints drawn up in Washington into a plan that will work on the ground in Baghdad. With the first American and Iraqi units dedicated to the plan due to be in place within weeks, time is short for setting details of what American officers view as the decisive battle of the war.

 

But the signs so far have unnerved some Americans working on the plan, who have described a web of problems — ranging from a contested chain of command to how to protect American troops deployed in some of Baghdad’s most dangerous districts — that some fear could hobble the effort before it begins.

 

First among the American concerns is a Shiite-led government that has been so dogmatic in its attitude that the Americans worry that they will be frustrated in their aim of cracking down equally on Shiite and Sunni extremists, a strategy President Bush has declared central to the plan.

 

“We are implementing a strategy to embolden a government that is actually part of the problem,” said an American military official in Baghdad involved in talks over the plan. “We are being played like a pawn.”

 

 

_______________________________________________

 

Bush is accused by top general of playing politics with soldiers lives:

 

http://washtimes.com/national/20070114-014416-3480r.htm

 

The military architect of the Iraq troop "surge" plan is criticizing the Bush administration, claiming the Pentagon is watering down the proposal for political reasons.

"You cannot try and do this piecemeal. We have to implement the whole package," retired Gen. John M. Keane told the Sunday Telegraph. The former Army vice chief of staff co-authored the "Choosing Victory" strategy paper, the main points of which were adopted by President Bush for his Iraq war plan.

Gen. Keane expressed his alarm after Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates testified on Capitol Hill that the troop buildup was expected to last "a matter of months" -- rather than the 18 months proposed by Gen. Keane.

Mr. Gates also said the full deployment of 21,500 additional troops, announced by Mr. Bush last week, might not be implemented. He suggested that only two or three of the five brigades proposed for Baghdad could be deployed initially, while the rest are held in reserve.

"That makes no military sense, although it might seem to make political sense," Gen. Keane said. President Bush has been criticized in the past for not listening to the advice of his top generals.

"We need all five brigades in Baghdad as soon as possible. It will take three to four months to clear neighborhoods of death squads and insurgents, and at least the rest of the year to establish proper security for the population," Gen. Keane said. "If you only wanted to stage a clearance operation, you could do that in a few months. But if we left then, the militia would just return as they have in the past."

______________________________

 

Corruption, corrution, corruption!

 

BAGHDAD, Jan 14 (Reuters) - Iraqi militants are taking most of the $1.5 billion a year that is stolen from Iraq's main oil refinery through smuggling and corruption, the government told parliament on Sunday.

 

Speaking at the second reading of the 2007 budget, Deputy Prime Minister Barham Salih said crime was behind the crisis in the oil industry, which is struggling to meet Iraq's own fuel needs despite having the world's third biggest reserves.

 

"We have a system and an administration which encourage corruption," said Salih, who has oversight over the economy.

 

"We are losing $1.5 billion at Baiji refinery alone and most of this money is channelled to terrorists who are using it to target us and target our nation."

 

Baiji, 180 km (115 miles) north of Baghdad, provides most of Iraq's domestically refined fuel. It lies in Saddam Hussein's home province of Salahaddin, where insurgents from the Sunni Arab minority are strong.

 

This year's budget foresees government spending of $41 billion. Officials have estimated that smuggling of Iraq's main resource, as well as other corruption, has cost the country several billion dollars a year since the U.S. invasion.

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/RAS445332.htm

[Wacka]

I guess the guy's head wasn't attached tight enough!

[pdh1]

wow, a couple of thugs who created mass graves and had "rape rooms" get what coming to them from their own people and you liberals get your panties in wad.

 

I didn't hear so much concern over Daniel Pearl.

Why was that?

[Bill from NYC]

wow, a couple of thugs who created mass graves and had "rape rooms" get what coming to them from their own people and you liberals get your panties in wad.

 

I didn't hear so much concern over Daniel Pearl.

Why was that?

 

Judging from his recent posts, care to guess?

[pdh1]

Judging from his recent posts, care to guess?

 

 

Let me guess...something to do with the star of David?

[KD in CA]

Ibrahim's head was detached from his body in the process one government official has reported.

 

 

 

Billy, I don't think Charlie wants to hear about Red Smitty!!

 

--Jack Baur

 

 

I didn't hear so much concern over Daniel Pearl.

Why was that?

 

Haven't you been listening? Jews BAD!!!

[molson_golden2002]

wow, a couple of thugs who created mass graves and had "rape rooms" get what coming to them from their own people and you liberals get your panties in wad.

 

I didn't hear so much concern over Daniel Pearl.

Why was that?

I have a great deal of admiration for reporters like Pearl who go to dangerous places to get the truth. Those reporters who have been killed and wounded covering Iraq are deserving of equal admiration, even as they are dismissed by the American right as a major reason we lost Iraq. So goes the world

[pdh1]

I have a great deal of admiration for reporters like Pearl who go to dangerous places to get the truth. Those reporters who have been killed and wounded covering Iraq are deserving of equal admiration, even as they are dismissed by the American right as a major reason we lost Iraq. So goes the world

 

 

Totally different. Pearl was targeted via e-mails by the Jihadist before he even went over seas. It was total set-up. They pretend to be interested in talking with him about conditions in their country, and at one point even talked about "their sick child". That was done to play with his emotions since he too was a parent. When Pearl arrived, he went to meet them for an interview, and was kidnapped.

 

It was a hate crime. He wasn't killed running around with a camera into fire fight.

 

And it still doesn't change the fact that no liberals took up his cause as an injustice.

 

The enemy of your enemy is your friend, I guess.

[IDBillzFan]

I have a great deal of admiration for reporters like Pearl who go to dangerous places to get the truth. Those reporters who have been killed and wounded covering Iraq are deserving of equal admiration, even as they are dismissed by the American right as a major reason we lost Iraq. So goes the world

We lost Iraq?

 

Damn, I've been scanning all the news agencies and I haven't seen word that we've surrendered yet. I mean, I know the entire left says this is what we should do, but I had no idea it was done already.

 

Wow. You guys work fast. Did you wave white flags or just wear your Ted Kennedy in '08 t-shirts?

[molson_golden2002]

Totally different. Pearl was targeted via e-mails by the Jihadist before he even went over seas. It was total set-up. They pretend to be interested in talking with him about conditions in their country, and at one point even talked about "their sick child". That was done to play with his emotions since he too was a parent. When Pearl arrived, he went to meet them for an interview, and was kidnapped.

 

It was a hate crime. He wasn't killed running around with a camera into fire fight.

 

And it still doesn't change the fact that no liberals took up his cause as an injustice.

 

The enemy of your enemy is your friend, I guess.

He went into a dangerous area of the world and was killed. He was a brave guy who took a chance. I'm not sure liberals can take up every death in the world and scream bloody murder. Seems rather absurd of you to even suggest they should.

[molson_golden2002]

We lost Iraq?

 

Damn, I've been scanning all the news agencies and I haven't seen word that we've surrendered yet. I mean, I know the entire left says this is what we should do, but I had no idea it was done already.

 

Wow. You guys work fast. Did you wave white flags or just wear your Ted Kennedy in '08 t-shirts?

Was that fast? Not as fast as 'Mission Accomplished,' though

 

Put a fork in Iraq, its finished. No need sending more of our troops to die to prop up a pro-Iranian government in Baghdad

[pdh1]

He went into a dangerous area of the world and was killed. He was a brave guy who took a chance. I'm not sure liberals can take up every death in the world and scream bloody murder. Seems rather absurd of you to even suggest they should.

 

No, the point was how ironic it was that liberals got up in arms about the death of Saddam and his half-wit brothers, because "oh joy" it helps to make Bush look bad some how.

 

But when some much less deserving gets murdered in cold blood, they don't care to make fuss about itm because, "gasp", it might help make the point that people we are fighting are really bad and dangerous guys, and not some just neocon plotted scheme to take over the world.

[IDBillzFan]

Was that fast? Not as fast as 'Mission Accomplished,' though

 

Put a fork in Iraq, its finished. No need sending more of our troops to die to prop up a pro-Iranian government in Baghdad

It's amazing to me that someone like yourself who spends so much time referring to the past thinks they know exactly what is going to happen in the future.

[molson_golden2002]

No, the point was how ironic it was that liberals got up in arms about the death of Saddam and his half-wit brothers, because "oh joy" it helps to make Bush look bad some how.

 

But when some much less deserving gets murdered in cold blood, they don't care to make fuss about itm because, "gasp", it might help make the point that people we are fighting are really bad and dangerous guys, and not some just neocon plotted scheme to take over the world.

Not really sure too many liberals were 'up in arms' over Saddam's death. Or do you mean this liberal:

 

 

http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial/20070117/1019221.asp

 

Saddam's death took on a life of its own through the internet and has been an international story.

 

And Pearl's death was tragic and well reported. Do you think each individual soldier who gets killed in Iraq deserves more press? Many Conservatives think the medias wastes too much time on that.

[pdh1]

Not really sure too many liberals were 'up in arms' over Saddam's death.

 

Well, Charlie Wrangle calling it a "lynching" would be one example.

 

Let's see, someone who attack all of the countries in the area, and who personally ordered the death of hundrends of thousands of people, in addition to torture and rape.. is compared to some one who gets hung because he has a different skin color.

 

Good job Charlie!

[chicot]

No, the point was how ironic it was that liberals got up in arms about the death of Saddam and his half-wit brothers, because "oh joy" it helps to make Bush look bad some how.

 

But when some much less deserving gets murdered in cold blood, they don't care to make fuss about itm because, "gasp", it might help make the point that people we are fighting are really bad and dangerous guys, and not some just neocon plotted scheme to take over the world.

 

I would have thought it was blatantly bloody obvious why "they don't care to make a fuss about it". The people that murdered Daniel Pearl are terrorists - they are answerable to no one and don't give a damn about western opinion. To protest against them is a completely futile act.

 

By contrast, the "government" of Iraq is heavily influenced by the US (some would say propped up by it). It is not a great start when they invite along sectarian hecklers to Saddam's execution and then have someone's head fall off in the next one. And no, the excuse that Saddam was worse (he was) is not valid - the whole point is that this Iraqi government is supposed to be different and not repeat the mistakes of the past.

[Wacka]

"Are you retarded? No. I mean seriously, are you retarded?"

 

 

(before anyone complains, this is a movie quote)

[Orton's Arm]

I would have thought it was blatantly bloody obvious why "they don't care to make a fuss about it". The people that murdered Daniel Pearl are terrorists - they are answerable to no one and don't give a damn about western opinion. To protest against them is a completely futile act.

 

By contrast, the "government" of Iraq is heavily influenced by the US (some would say propped up by it). It is not a great start when they invite along sectarian hecklers to Saddam's execution and then have someone's head fall off in the next one. And no, the excuse that Saddam was worse (he was) is not valid - the whole point is that this Iraqi government is supposed to be different and not repeat the mistakes of the past.

Inevitably, someone in Saddam's position will have many enemies. These enemies will have been tempted to make as many accusations against him as possible; whether true or false. In a postwar environment, tempers will flare due to the blood that's been shed. The enemies of the old regime will be eager to find opportunities to discredit it. Under those circumstances, it's tempting for those conducting trials to allow questionable accusations to be accepted as cold, hard fact. I don't know the extent (if any) to which this has happened in Hussein's trial. But the possibility of false accusations being made during or after a war is something of which we should all be aware. Consider the fact that the U.S. entered and fought WWI based largely on false atrocity accusations leveled against the Germans. (Hence, the strongly isolationist mood that pervaded this country after WWI was over.)

 

I'm not saying the Iraq war is another WWI, where we were misled into war based on false propaganda about enemy atrocities. But I am saying that it's in the interest of the Bush administration and Hussein's other enemies to make Hussein look as bad as possible. For that reason, the trials should be looked at very closely, instead of being accepted without critical scrutiny.

[pdh1]

I would have thought it was blatantly bloody obvious why "they don't care to make a fuss about it". The people that murdered Daniel Pearl are terrorists - they are answerable to no one and don't give a damn about western opinion. To protest against them is a completely futile act.

 

By contrast, the "government" of Iraq is heavily influenced by the US (some would say propped up by it). It is not a great start when they invite along sectarian hecklers to Saddam's execution and then have someone's head fall off in the next one. And no, the excuse that Saddam was worse (he was) is not valid - the whole point is that this Iraqi government is supposed to be different and not repeat the mistakes of the past.

 

 

sorry, but when you have the man who murdered your father and rape your mother, or gassed your village, tempers are gonna flair.

I would think it would be a lot more troubling to people that an innocent person was murdered, and his beheading video used to help attract other like minded goons on the internet, than Saddam getting heckled before he was hung.

 

how funny that sunni arabs were 'outraged' when Saddam's half-brother lost his head. after all, they have been doing that on camera for years.

[chicot]

sorry, but when you have the man who murdered your father and rape your mother, or gassed your village, tempers are gonna flair.

I would think it would be a lot more troubling to people that an innocent person was murdered, and his beheading video used to help attract other like minded goons on the internet, than Saddam getting heckled before he was hung.

 

how funny that sunni arabs were 'outraged' when Saddam's half-brother lost his head. after all, they have been doing that on camera for years.

 

The point is that the hecklers should not have been present in the first place. I don't give a damn about Saddam. He was an evil dictator who got what he deserved. However, the way it was done - convicted by a kangaroo court in a trial that was quite obviously a sham and then executed while being heckled does nothing for Shiite-Sunni relations in Iraq. Shiite-Sunni violence in Iraq is bad enough without adding fuel to the fire, which is exactly what this has done. The manner of Saddam's execution is quite likely to increase tensions leading to the deaths of many more people, who (unlike Saddam) do not deserve to die and that is what concerns me.