2005-05-06
2005 Early May Thoughts
Please add your thoughts from 2005 May 1-15. Please check the groundrules before posting. They are unusual. If you make personal attacks against me or other posters, your comments will be deleted. If you, don't like the groundrules, you can debate me in the alt.politics.bush newsgroup.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Iraqi president Jalal Talabani's letter
You have to understand who this man is. He is the head collaborator, a traitor to his country. Of course he will write a letter sucking up to Blair and Bush. One of Bush's underlings probably wrote it for him.
If you dig in history you can probably find a similar letter praising the German invasion of France signed by collaborator Maurice Papon.
Nearly everyone is glad Saddam has gone, but he was captured in 2003. The butchery went on even more fiercely since. The invasion is not about Saddam. It is about oil.
Didn't you notice that Bush has wangled Chalabi, a convicted embezzler and author of fake intelligence, in as oil minister? This is a puppet government. Chalabi was Bush's original choice for president prior to Allawi, a former Saddam crony.
President Jalal Talabani and the rest of the Iraqi Government
There are numerous differences between the establishment of the Vichy Regime and the government of Iraq. Let me count the ways...
1) Vichy France was the remnants of France after they surrendered [link] to the Germans.
In contrast, the current Iraqi government was formed as the result of 8.5 million Iraqis that voted in elections that formed the 275-member Iraqi National Assembly, which in turn, is forming the rest of the government.
2) Marshal Petain, Prime Minister of France after Paul Reynaud resigned over the surrender, consolidated the Constitutive, Legislative, Executive, and Judicial powers underneath him, suspending the Constitution of the Third Republic of 1875 and transferring all of the powers of Parliament to himself. Although given the power to write a new Constitution, he never did so. [link]
In contrast, the current Iraqi government consists of three separate Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches. The Presidency Council of Iraq, consisting of the President and two Vice Presidents and elected by a two-thirds majority of the Iraqi Natinoal Assembly, must unanimously agree on all decisions the Council makes. It can veto legislation passed by the National Assembly, although the veto can be overridden by a two-thirds majority in the Assembly. [link]
The Presidency Council in turn selects the Prime Minister and the Council of Ministers, sworn in on 3 May, including Ahmed Chalabi, the acting Oil Minister who reportedly gave US state secrets to Iran in April 2004 [link] I'm sure he's a US puppet. By the way, he also happens to have the support of most of the elected members of the United Iraqi Alliance, which won 140 seats in the National Assembly after winning 4 million votes. [link to information on the Council of Ministers] [link to election results by electoral alliance]
The Legislative body, the Iraqni National Assembly, used to consist of appointed members under Saddam Hussein (all of which came from Hussein's Ba'ath Party and was largely a figurehead that would rubber stamp Saddam's decrees). However, the newly elected National Assembly contains members from twelve different Electoral Alliances and includes 85 women (31%). [link] After forming the National Assembly, the parties began the process of forming the government, including approving the selection of the Prime Minister and his cabinet. [link to information on the Iraqi Natinoal Assembly]
Although I haven't been able to find detailed information on the Judicial branch, I do know that the Iraqi court system has been moved from the Ministry of JUstice to the jurisdiction of hte Higher Judicial Council [link] to remove the influence of the executive branch under Saddam, when it was fully controlled by the executive branch.
So... compared to the remnants of a surrendered nation with all powers consolidated under one person, the Iraqi government was formed as a result of elections and has a similar structure to many democratic governments, such as those in North America or Europe. All of this and you still maintain that Talabani is a collaborator, a traitor to his country? Well, I guess that makes 8 million Iraqis traitors to their country.
I don't know about you, but personally I have faith in the ability of the Iraqi people to form their own government. What's the alternative - do you think the Iraqi people incapable of governing themselves?
How do you justify labeling their president as a collaborator when he was chosen as President by a democratically-elected legislative body?
Collateral Damage
Looks like the insurgents are having some collateral damage problems of their own - a recent article on CNN [link] reported that 22 people were killed in a bomb attack in a busy central square. Of the 22 killed, only two were American (contractors). In fact, a Boston Globe article on the same attack [link] says that "one of the bombs ripped into a minibus full of schoolgirls, among the 36 wounded."
In fact, both articles say that over 300 Iraqi civilians have been killed in the past nine days, compared to - what? Around twenty US soldiers? So around 90% of the deaths caused by these bomb attacks end up killing the wrong people. Now if that's not collateral damage, I don't know what is.
Oppressors or Liberators?
And that's a very good question - do US forces really intent to establish an independent Iraq, or are we just over there to occupy them because "[the invasion] is about oil" (see Roedy's first post for this thread)
Well, for one, US forces are actually planning to hand over security to the Iraqi army and police forces by December [link]
Besides the fact that the US military is planning to withdraw its troops, the Iraqi people (all of those "collaborators") have been very supportive of the coalition. For instance, a unit in Baghdad gets roughly 60 tips a day on a counterinsurgency hotline, of which about 15 deliver some type of result. [link]
In another instance, an Iraqi saved the lives of several soldiers when he pointed out an IED to soldiers of TF Baghdad before the insurgents could detonate it. [link].
Another one of those "collaborators?" They seem to be everywhere!
What could possibly make Iraqis willing to go out of their way to save US soldiers, who are supposedly bloodthirsty, have no regard for human life, and are the dregs of society? [link] Maybe it's because, even when a suicide bomber's vehicle failed to detonate and catches on fire, US soldiers rushed to save the man's life. [link] That doesn't sound like the bloodthirsty, atrocity-making soldiers some people have portrayed them as - why save a man's life if he just tried to bomb your position?
It turns out the suicide bomber had been forced to do it by insurgents - the insurgents kidnapped his family and he was only trying to save his family.
Those sound like real nice insurgents - again, they must obviously be kidnapping only "collaborator" families. Earlier, in February, another insurgent who was captured admitted on Iraqi television, "They told me I had to fight a holy war against the Americans. Abdullah told me my children would be killed if I did not obey." [link] Another confessed that he was paid $500 to steal $30,000 and kill the person who owned the money. Sounds just like freedom fighters defending their homes, right? Hiring mercenaries and threatening the lives of wives, sons, and daughters if someone doesn't want to cooperate with them.
These insurgents have killed 570 Iraqis (and wounded 668) in bomb attacks since April. [link] Of these, "civilians made up the vast majority of the dead, with 98 policemen and 41 soldiers among those killed."
And it doesn't lend the insurgents any credit that they're still using mosques as arms caches [link], a clear violation of the Geneva Conventions (Protocol II, Part IV, Article 16 [link] which states that "...it is prohibited...to use them [historic monuments, works of art, or places of worship which constitute the cultural or spiritual heritage of peoples] in support of the military effort.")
For all of the atrocities committed by individual soldiers, as a whole the coalition in Iraq is not an occupying force - if that were truly the case, then why would the Iraqis be risking their own lives both to give information to the Coalition about the insurgents and, in this case, act to save the lives of US soldiers?
Al Qaeda and Matador
Operation Matador [link] marks another defeat for Al Qaeda and the Iraqi insurgents in more than one respect. Besides their losses of 125 killed and 39 captured, this offensive also reveals a lot about Al Qaeda's stsanding among the Iraqi people.
Let's start at the beginning: how about the city of Qiam? Why did US forces even enter that city to begin with? An Iraqi official stated that "the offensive was triggered by local tribal leaders' complaints that about 300 foreign fighters had overthrown the town and were attacking residents who didn't offer them refuge." [link] The Deputy Defense Minister of IRaq, Bruska Noori Shaways, said "They said, 'We are citizens of Qaim and are now being attacked by non-Iraqi people coming from Syria. They are shelling us with mortars.'" Shaways goes on to add that "Until this time, they had never asked Iraqi or American forces to help them."
Isn't that odd - local Iraqis actually asking Iraqi and US forces to help fight the insurgents? But aren't the insurgents noble freedom fighters trying to liberate their country from the tryranny of an oppressive puppet regime and its imperialistic masters?
Or how about an incident that took place New Ubaydi, in which a taxicab was fired upon when it failed to stop at a checkpoint. [link] It turns out that the vehicle actually contained civilians fleeing New Ubaydi, and the driver was killed and a woman and her child were wounded. A Marine at the checkpoint said that, "We were just sick to death when the lady got out of the car with her baby." Despite this accident, one of the passengers who was unharmed told the Marines that insurgents had taken hold of the town and were threatening to kill any men who didn't fight the Americans. The woman also urged the Marines to reenter New Ubaydi to fight the guerillas.
Imagine that - even after accidentially opening fire on their vehicle, the passengers still want US forces to fight the guerillas. Looks like Al Qaeda and the insurgents have a long way to go towards winning the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people.
So the invasion is about oil. Roedy, you are aware that the United States has some of the most respected and brightest Oil Deal Negotiators in the world. The American Oil Corporations could have sent a team over to Iraq and brokered a deal for oil. It would have been a lot cheaper, taken two weeks at best, no one would have died, and we'd be getting vast amounts of cheap oil right now.
Saddam was already involved in illegal oil deals with numerous countries, if America is as nefarious as you seem to think, it would have brokered an illegal deal. Further,if America is as sinister as you also seem to think then why didn't America uncover the Illegal Oil deals that were going on (oil for food etc.). Then America could have told Saddam we were not going to persue the WMD so long as he agreed to stop dealing oil to the nations who were involved in this scam. This would have freed the USA to make a great legal oil deal with Saddam; that is of course if it were about oil.
But its not about oil, we will never recoup the amount of money spent on freeing Iraq from the tax proceeds of the oil we get from Iraq.
I am also curious about your opening paragraph where you state Talabani is a "collaborator, a traitor". Then two paragraphs later you claim, "...nearly everyone is glad Saddam has gone...." If we are glad he is gone, then he MUST have been a problem worth going. If you justify Saddam as having to go, how does an elected official now become a traitor? You can't have it both ways.
This "having it both ways" happens when an argument begins to fail, one cannot help to be honest even when they are trying to hold on to the original idea which is unraveling.
Well in closing, you are doing FINE work for the GOP. The more people who think the USA is criminal that speak out, the more the truth will seep through. NEWS WEEK/CBS Rather are perfect examples of this!
Hi,
I found this new software:
http://www.best-blog-link-generator.com
This is perfect for free traffic, high ranking, backlinks etc.
Check it out!
You don't want to miss this one.
Post a Comment