find and destroy Hussein's WMD. Look at it today.
It is here,if anyone cares.
I did not write this;I just share the views.
OCCUPATION
We most definitely are occupying Iraq, though doing a dreadful, shameful job of it. Most Iraqis are afraid to leave their homes because of the uncontrolled looting and violence all around them. Just one example of the
ew plan is the Spartan Brigade (Second Brigade of the Third Infantry Division) which, instead of going home as originally planned, (wink, wink) has now be reassigned to the troubled Iraqi town of Falluja, where anti-American protests have become violent, including deaths on both sides. Not only are the soldiers exhausted after their march to Baghdad, but their vehicles are badly in need of repair with parts they do not have. This one unit put 2,000 miles on its vehicles, an incredibly long distance for an armored unit. Nevertheless, these weary soldiers, with their battered equipment, have had their tour of duty extended by 60 days. In and out, huh?
The same is true of other units all over Iraq. Looting, lack of law and order, lack of clean water, lack of power - and so much more - are what these unfortunate troops are up against. Trying to fix this mess was not part of their marching orders. Washington has admitted that it did not anticipate the total collapse of the Iraqi administration. Say again? What the hell did they expect? Instant democracy? Love and kisses for the American soldiers who killed and wounded their loved ones? Bush may not be the only stupid high-roller in D. C.
DEMOCRACY
As June 2003 opens up it seems there's been a slight change of plans. Seems the US is going to appoint the new Iraqi leadership. (I know, I know, the same thing happened here in the debacle known as Election 2000. But it was the first time, and hopefully the last time, ever.) Instead of an interim administration being elected by a national conference of Iraqi groups, the US is going to appoint 25-30 Iraqis after consulting with political and religious groups. My, my. Aren't we ever the ones. But there's an urgency, you see. The Iraqis are becoming more and more resentful of us Americans, although I can't see why. Just because we bombed their already sanction-ravaged country into rubble, killed and maimed a couple thousand of their citizens, eliminated electricity and water from their lives, and made their streets the province of looters, and their hospitals hopeless, meaningless symbols, they're mad at us. I guess they're touchy.
If you surf you find things.I found this:
But because the natives are getting restless, we have decided to install a government of our choosing. Remember, though, that is not to be considered an occupation. 'Cuz we weren't going to do that. We'll call it something else - aiding, enabling, whatever. But something has to be done to get basic services restored for these people. All we were able to do with speed and efficiency was seize and secure Iraq's abundant oil fields. We had those under control before we had finished knocking down statues of Saddam. Oil fields. Hospitals. Oil fields. Hospitals. I think there's a priority problem here.
LIGHTS, CAMERA, ACTION!
Private Jessica Lynch was the victim of more than the Iraqis. She was further victimized by her own Commander in Chief and his warmongering cabal. When her Maintenance Unit was ambushed on March 23 she was injured and taken to an Iraqi hospital. That much is certain. What happened after that was murky at best, but the media stepped up to the plate on this one. Hey, the rescue of a female soldier! This stuff sells! Problem is, they found out more than they, or the Bush Administration, wanted to discuss. The official story involves a daring nighttime rescue behind enemy lines, with guns ablaze and a helicopter screeching away through the night skies to save this damsel in distress. During the ambush Lynch had suffered both gunshot wounds and stab wounds, but was finally whisked to safety. It's good stirring stuff, but it didn't happen that way. Some hard-nosed reporting uncovered what did happen. The BBC show, Correspondents aired a segment titled, War Spin on May 18. Here's what really happened.
On April 2, a group of US Special Forces stormed the hospital and rescued Lynch. The assault was filmed by a US military night vision camera. Within hours the military forces in Qatar had edited the film and made it available to news organizations. On the film it all looks like I described it above. Men running, the sounds of gunfire, men crying, Go, go, go! and so on. All dramatic as hell. Subsequent interviews of the hospital personnel, however, revealed that there were no Iraqi soldiers anywhere in the area at that time, and the Americans knew it. The rescuers refused a key and instead broke down doors and went in with guns drawn. Lynch had broken bones but suffered no gunshot or stab wounds. The US forces could simply have walked in and taken her away; the overworked, unarmed hospital staff would have put up no resistance.
Lynch says she has no memory of any of it, which is probably the wisest thing she could say. She was put in an impossible situation. Her own government used her pain and suffering to further their own self-serving agenda: increase public interest in an increasingly unpopular war. NBC is already fast-tracking a two-hour TV movie to be called, Saving Private Lynch. You can even buy Jessica Lynch fridge magnets. She deserved none of this. She served her country bravely and well, as a soldier, not a rock star. She deserves better.
But for sheer audacity you can't beat George W himself, making a total ass of himself and wasting nearly one million tax dollars doing it. On Friday, May 2, Bush made a dramatic landing on the US aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln to film a speech announcing the war was over, and to congratulate the returning troops on the ship. But he couldn't just land in a helicopter and make his speech. Oh, no, this was a Hollywood production all the way. Bush landed in a US Navy S-3B Viking jet. And he was wearing a flight suit. For a man whose own military career consisted of a huge chunk of AWOL, with no record of any flying time at all, this flagrant bravado was an insult to any real pilot. Making it worse, the carrier had to position itself for the cameras so you couldn't see the San Diego shoreline in the shot. That's how close they were to shore, and that's why a helicopter would have been the way to go.
Such stunts demean the presidency and all it should stand for. People died in this damn war, but Bush is having the time of his life acting like John Wayne. What makes it all worse is that unless you take the time to really dig through news sources, and have access to other than the spewed out Party Line now called news in America, you won't find these stories. You'll see what the Administration wants you to see and that's it. It's also very scary. The FCC's recent ruling will allow even more corporate merging - meaning that even in large cities, one company (and the Big Five have right-wing slants) could own your TV station, your newspaper, four or five of your radio stations, and your cable station as well. Paul Joseph Goebbels, Hitler's propaganda minister, made just such arrangements for the Third Reich. And it worked like a charm. Be afraid.
A very intelligent and thought provoking post. Thankyou.
It seems absurb that in the name of "democracry" a country is invaded and occupied "for the good of the people of Iraq" and they will have next to no say in the appointment of their "democratically elected leaders" majority groups such as the sunni muslims who harbour anti-us feelings will have almost no representation although they make up over 60% of the population. The Kurds will get screwed again as they always do and we will be complaining about the price of petrol!
Countries such as the US and Britain and their lap dogs (see. Australia et all) perpetuate free speech but whilst undertaking these overseas actions are gagging their own people from voicing their rights to protest etc. shame shame shame.
I think what's really sad is that there is so much potential for good to be done - but it never seems to end up that way. If the world rallied around trying to set up a truly democratic government for the people of Iraq it would a fantastic thing - sure, they would probably flirt with the idea of an Islamic government, but maybe they could develop a new synthesis of Islamic rule with democratic values, and really help the people in that country.
Western civilization is capable of truly improving the lives of many who live under repressive regimes (all too often set up by those same powers to protect economic interests) but doesn't do so. I don't know why. Maybe a unified Europe will lead the way. There's always hope.
-mike
Originally posted by legionnaireWe need more of you Mike.
I think what's really sad is that there is so much potential for good to be done - but it never seems to end up that way. If the world rallied around trying to set up a truly democratic government for the people of Iraq it would a fantastic thing - sure, they would probably flirt with the idea of an Islamic government, but maybe they could develop a ne ...[text shortened]... . I don't know why. Maybe a unified Europe will lead the way. There's always hope.
-mike
A bit of sanity in a crazy world.
Dyl would know as an Australian too how much furore the whole Iraqi conflicy caused in Aus.
Keep hoping.
Martin:'(🙂🙂
after the UN gave britain and america permision to go in to Iraq i was still skeptical but more supportive (mainly of our troops who had signed up to defend our country not threats marked out by the US). i did however give a warning that i was happy for the coalition to go in to Iraq and set up a new government as long at it was DONE PROPERLY, as the was has subsided and the Iraqi people have had there freedon declared i have been disipointed by the post war actions, I had hoped that the UN would be taking over for the rebuilding of the country and installing a provisional government as with Auganistan (no idea about the spelling).
I now feel let down by the promises made not to us but to the people of Iraq, the only quotes i hear from the iraqi public about america is "thankyou now go home."
i am less concerned about Basra the city in British contole as we had ellected a mayor beffore the the war had been won and were on the US's back about aid and supplys, but am becoming increasingly woried that the US is moulding the country how it wants not how the people of Iraq would like and deserve.
Originally posted by Super SpiffyAlong with royalchicken I question when the UN gave Britian and the US permission to enter Iraq. In fact the Secretary General warned both countries plau Australia that such action was potentially illegal under international law.
after the UN gave britain and america permision to go in to Iraq i was still skeptical but more supportive (mainly of our troops who had signed up to defend our country not threats marked out by the US). i did however give a warning that i was happy for the coalition to go in to Iraq and set up a new government as long at it was DONE PROPERLY, as the wa ...[text shortened]... t the US is moulding the country how it wants not how the people of Iraq would like and deserve.
there was a big thing about it but in the end the UN declared that any action would be legal, this was after the US and Britain provided proof of weapons of mass destruction, and that they were liberating not invading.
oh thats now debatable now, could the US be done for providing false information to invade a country, or will the "smoking gun" be found in sadams cold dead fingers? wherever that is!!
Weapons of mass destruction may yet appear in further investigations of research facilities in Iraq - however, their availability and number were vastly overstated in making the case for invasion. It remains to be seen whether their use in justification for the war will be simply the result of exaggeration or of outright lies and false documentation (like the imaginary shipments of uranium from Nigeria to Iraq). However, reading the UN charter every nation must agree to before becoming a member, it would seem clear that both the US, Britain and Australia have all been party to a military action that was not defensive in the least, which would seem to violate that treaty.
The question is - what will be the fallout of this treachery? In the UK it may be end for Tony Blair - his parliament doesn't flinch at the prospect of accusing their PM of wrongdoing. On my side of the pond, however, the media, Congress, and the Senate have all but abdicated their role as any sort of opposition, and given the president a "pass" on whatever wrongs he may have done in Iraq.
-mike
Originally posted by nook7Indeed I do. I even had to avoid talking about the war at all with certain friends because of conflicting views.
We need more of you Mike.
A bit of sanity in a crazy world.
Dyl would know as an Australian too how much furore the whole Iraqi conflicy caused in Aus.
Keep hoping.
Martin:'(🙂🙂