• Hi Guest: Welcome to TRIBE, Toronto's largest and longest running online community. If you'd like to post here, or reply to existing posts on TRIBE, you first have to register on the forum. You can register with your facebook ID or with an email address. Join us!

Iraq Updates

Ditto Much

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by luvslife
I'm in total agreement with you Jeff. Wouldn't the world be a much better place if everyone stopped spending on Military, and started spending on education and healthcare.

Hell yeah!! this whole arms and weapons and military thing isn't working for anybody. The countries that have the lowest spendings on military are amongst the most peaceful in the world.

Heres to nice places which don't need armed men on the street corners.
 

Boss Hog

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by Ditto Much
Hell yeah!! this whole arms and weapons and military thing isn't working for anybody. The countries that have the lowest spendings on military are amongst the most peaceful in the world.

Heres to nice places which don't need armed men on the street corners.

that's why I'm heading to Costa Rica this Christmas.
 

Boss Hog

TRIBE Member
U.S. killings spark 'revenge' attacks
Top general says Washington taking steps to 'take care' of victims' families


TAREK AL-ISSAWI
ASSOCIATED PRESS

BAGHDAD - The commander of the U.S.-led coalition in Iraq said in an interview published today that U.S. forces, already under pressure from a guerrilla-style resistance, now face revenge attacks from ordinary Iraqis angered by the occupation.

North of Baghdad, there were at least three separate attacks on U.S. forces with roadside bombs in less than 90 minutes Wednesday morning.

Witnesses said U.S. forces suffered casualties, but details were unclear. The attacks hit U.S. Humvees about 20 kilometres north of Baghdad near al-Taji.

While U.S. forces increasingly patrol Iraqi hotspots with American-trained local militiamen, citizens voice growing anger with tactics that are seen as heavy-handed and insensitive to Iraqi social and religious customs.

"We have seen that when we have an incident in the conduct of our operations, when we killed an innocent civilian, (then) based on their ethic, their values, their culture, they would seek revenge," Lt.-Gen. Ricardo Sanchez told the British newspaper the Times.

Coalition forces were seeking "to ensure that when a mistake has been made and when we have inadvertently wound up killing someone that we go and do the right thing culturally to take care of those families," he said.

The Times' report did not elaborate on those steps, although it generally means the payment of so-called blood money to relatives of the victims.

Sanchez's remarks came after the friendly fire killing late last week of eight Iraqi policemen by American soldiers near Fallujah, 50 kilometres west of Baghdad. The military and the U.S. administrator for Iraq, L. Paul Bremer, have apologized.

Meanwhile, six people claiming to be Americans and two who say they are British are in U.S. custody on suspicion of involvement in attacks on coalition forces, an American general said Tuesday. They would be the first westerners reported held in the insurrection against the U.S.-led occupation.

Brig.-Gen. Janis Karpinski, who is in charge of coalition detention centres in Iraq, said they were considered security detainees, meaning they were suspected of involvement in guerrilla attacks. She did not identify them but said they were being interrogated by military intelligence in Baghdad.

"We actually do have six who are claiming to be Americans, two who are claiming to be from the U.K.," Karpinski said Tuesday. ``We're continuing the interviewing process. The details become sketchy and their story changes."

She said there were "several ... hundred third-country nationals in custody."

She declined to give more details on those being held.

"We're not trying to withhold information from you: some information remains classified for security reasons," Karpinski said during a tour of Abu Ghraib prison, where Saddam Hussein once locked up his political opponents.

Asked about the detainees at a Pentagon news conference, U.S. Defence Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said: "The truth is that the folks that we've scooped up have, on a number of occasions, multiple identifications from different countries. They're quite skilled at confusing people as to what their real nationality is or where they came from or what they're doing."

The British government said it was investigating the claims.

"We are urgently following up the reports," a Foreign Office spokeswoman said on condition of anonymity. She would not confirm whether the United States had informed British officials of the arrests.

If westerners are actively involved in the resistance, it would deepen confusion about what groups are involved. Initially, the guerrilla fighters were thought to be Saddam loyalists, but in recent weeks U.S. officials have said foreign fighters, possibly Al Qaeda members, are joining them.

The revelation recalls the capture of John Walker Lindh in Afghanistan, where the American fought alongside Taliban and Al Qaeda fighters following the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.

Lindh was sentenced last year to 20 years in prison after pleading guilty to supplying services to the Taliban militia, which ruled Afghanistan and was ousted by a U.S.-led coalition.

In December 2001, British citizen Richard Reid, a member of Al Qaeda, was arrested after trying to light explosives hidden in his shoes on a Paris-to-Miami flight. Reid pleaded guilty and was sentenced to life in prison.

American troops in Afghanistan also captured Yaser Esam Hamdi, who was flown to the U.S. navy base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and held there for several months until it was discovered he was born in Baton Rouge, La.

He was held in the naval brig in Norfolk, Va., then transferred in late July to a jail at the Charleston Naval Weapons Station in South Carolina.

At least nine Britons are being detained in Guantanamo, where some 660 men from 42 countries are being held on suspicion of links to the Taliban or Al Qaeda. None of the men has been charged and some have been held for nearly two years without access to lawyers.

Lt.-Col. Pamela Hart, a spokesperson for the mission in Guantanamo, said Tuesday that none of the detainees being held there had been captured in Iraq.


http://www.torontostar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1063795703101&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968793972154
 

Boss Hog

TRIBE Member
WMD Searchers Come Up Empty Again

They are called 'The Searchers'. But what are they looking for?

Tony Blair's hopes of finding WMD lie with the Iraq Survey Group. But, report Raymond Whitaker and Glen Rangwala, they don't appear to have much to do and have even less to report
21 September 2003


Some 1,400 British and American experts are supposedly scouring Iraq to prove what Tony Blair and George Bush claimed before the war - that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction which posed an imminent threat to the world. But most of the Iraq Survey Group, the body created by the victorious coalition to replace the UN weapons inspectors, is not even in Iraq at the moment.

And only a small fraction of the ISG is actually assigned to looking for WMD. The site inspections group, known to colleagues as "the searchers", has 200 personnel, but that includes back-up staff, translators and drivers. Even the searchers do very little work on visiting suspect sites. "That was what the 75th Expeditionary Force were doing, and they don't need to replay that task," said a source in Baghdad. Another joked: "They have spent their time doing their laundry and napping."

The ISG engaged in a flurry of activity when it first came into Iraq in late June and early July, conducting a full range of interviews with Iraqis previously involved in Saddam's weapons programmes, for example. But the inspectors have failed to contact many of those they did not take into custody at the time, such as a nuclear scientist who was interviewed by the ISG early on and has heard nothing since.

In Washington, meanwhile, officials claim that former weapons scientists may have to be given immunity from prosecution to "overcome their fear" of the former regime. The hope is that scientists who say that Saddam's regime destroyed its WMD more than a decade ago might change their tune once they have immunity. But last week their view received powerful support from Hans Blix, the former chief weapons inspector. Dr Blix, who has become ever more outspoken since his retirement in the summer, said he now believes it is almost certain that Iraq got rid of its illegal weapons immediately after the first Gulf War. He condemned British and American "spin" on WMD, saying: "We know that advertisers will advertise a refrigerator in terms they do not quite believe in, but you expect governments to be more serious and have more credibility."

London and Washington had "over-interpreted" the intelligence on WMD, Dr Blix went on. "They were convinced that Saddam was going in this direction ... but in the Middle Ages people were convinced there were witches. They looked for them and they certainly found them. This is a bit risky. I think we were more judicious, saying we want to have real evidence."

Of the group which replaced his inspectors, Dr Blix said dismissively: "In the beginning, they talked about weapons concretely, and later on they talked about weapons programmes. Maybe they'll find some documents of interest."

Confronted by the scorn of the former chief inspector, Downing Street quickly urged doubters to wait for the ISG to complete its work. Mr Blair believed the group's report, due within weeks, would provide clear proof of Saddam's guilt over WMD, said a government source, adding that the ISG could come up with "interesting findings which will lay those doubts to rest". But the ISG staff on the ground appear to be in the dark about the outcome of their work. The results of early searches and interviews were fed back to colleagues at the "analytic centre" in Qatar, since when feedback has been low: staff in Iraq have had little guidance from Qatar about what to follow up.

As for when the group's report will come out, all the searchers know is what they have read in media reports, some of which say an interim report will be produced early this week for Donald Rumsfeld, the US Secretary of Defence. No draft has been seen in Baghdad, however. It will be the Pentagon, not the ISG, which decides how much will be released, and when - though there have also been rumours that there is so little to show from the entire exercise that the ISG's findings will never be made public.

Certainly the main focus of the ISG's work does not point to major new revelations. It has been concentrating on past weapons programmes, with most of the documentary work tracking production before the first Gulf War in 1991. The other principal emphasis has been on how specific facilities could have been switched from civilian use to producing prohibited weapons. Though sources will not talk about specific finds, the phrase employed is "just-in-time capacity". All this, however, is highly speculative, and nothing like what the pre-war rhetoric led British and American voters to expect.

And while the Hutton inquiry casts doubt on Downing Street's case for war - most notably the claim that Saddam had WMD ready for use within 45 minutes, which Dr Blix has called a "fundamental mistake" - the White House is faring no better. Few of its weapons claims have gone unchallenged, and now another has fallen down.

"Iraq has unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons," President Bush declared last October. "We're concerned that Iraq is exploring ways of using these UAVs for missions targeting the United States." His Vice President, Dick Cheney, told congressional leaders at private meetings of the danger of silent death from the skies, while in February the Secretary of State, Colin Powell, told the UN Security Council: "Iraq has developed spray devices that could be used on unmanned aerial vehicles with ranges far beyond what is permitted by the Security Council. A UAV launched from a vessel off the American coast could reach hundreds of miles inland."

However, The Wall Street Journal revealed last week that the US Air Force, after studying Iraq's pilotless drones, had concluded that they were too small and too ill-equipped to do anything of the sort. It issued a little-noticed report saying so last October, at the time the President was stoking up the threat.

But that was not the only retraction. Last week, only three days after Mr Cheney spoke of Iraq as the "geographic base" of terrorists targeting America, "most especially on 9/11", Mr Bush was forced to admit for the first time that there was no evidence that Saddam Hussein had anything to do with the attacks on New York and Washington. While he has never explicitly made the connection, his administration has consistently mentioned Iraq and al-Qa'ida in the same breath, and the US public has drawn its own conclusions: a recent poll showed 70 per cent of Americans believe Saddam was personally involved on 11 September 2001.

And the President went on to argue that the former Iraqi regime did have links with al-Qa'ida. Like much else, the proof of that has yet to be found.


http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=445444


All you clowns who pushed for this war in the winter: you were WRONG.
 

man_slut

TRIBE Member
Foreign firms to bid in huge Iraqi sale

Foreign firms to bid in huge Iraqi sale
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1047008,00.html

Rory McCarthy, Baghdad
Monday September 22, 2003
The Guardian

Iraq was effectively put up for sale yesterday, when the US-backed administration unveiled a sweeping overhaul of the economy, giving foreign companies unprecedented access to Iraqi firms which are to be sold off in a privatisation windfall.

Under the new rules, announced by the finance minister, Kamil Mubdir al-Gailani, in Dubai, foreign firms will have the right to wholly own Iraqi companies, except those in the oil, gas and mineral industries. There will be no restrictions on the amount of profits that can be repatriated or on using local products. Corporate tax will be set at 15%.

Mr Gailani said a free and open market was the quickest route to prosperity. "Our objective is simple to state: promote Iraqi economic growth and raise the living standards of all Iraqis as soon as possible," he said.

The reforms won the backing of the US treasury secretary, John Snow, who said they were "policies that make sense... that offer real promise."

The news came as President George Bush said in an interview with Fox News that he was unsure how far the US would have to yield to the United Nations to make way for a new resolution on Iraq.

He said he would declare in his speech on Tuesday to the UN general assembly that he "made the right decision and the others that joined us made the right decision" to invade Iraq.

Yesterday, one Iraqi businessman warned that the economic reforms would "destroy the role of the Iraqi industrialist". Wadi Surab told the BBC that Iraqi entrepreneurs would be unable to compete with foreign companies in privatisation tenders.

The rules give foreign firms greater access to business in Iraq than in most developing countries, where local industries are often shielded from overseas buyers. For some Iraqis such unfettered access is a concern, yet the privatisation of Iraq's 192 public sector companies is not up for debate.

The most valuable contracts on offer have already gone to US corporate giants.

Kellogg, Brown and Root - a subsidiary of Halliburton which was once run by the American vice-president, Dick Cheney - won a contract worth up to $7bn (£4.3bn) to repair Iraq's oil infrastructure.

Bechtel, a San Francisco-based firm, won the $680m chief contract to start rebuilding other essentials, such as roads and schools.

One of the most high-profile contracts still up for grabs - for mobile phone licences - is to be announced shortly. Fifteen bids have been put forward, including some from Iraqi businessmen who plan to involve more Iraqis in the business of reconstruction.

"There is a big business class of Iraqis that we haven't seen yet. We want to get them back doing things for their own economy," said Mohamed Shaboot, an Iraqi businessman educated in the US who has spent 10 years in Baghdad.

Mr Shaboot and several other Iraqis have formed a consortium, called Zagil, which has submitted a bid to run one of three new mobile phone networks. The consortium's proposal for the licence includes a pledge to sell half the company to ordinary Iraqis.

Mr Shaboot said: "We are trying to get Iraqi investors to put in some of the money that they have made abroad back into their country. This is the first step towards really rebuilding."

There are few mobile phone contracts left in the world that offer such potential. Many expect at least 2 million subscribers within a few years.

But the licence, worth at least $200m, will not be won easily. The US-led authority in Iraq, the coalition provisional authority (CPA), stipulated that bidders must have run mobile phone networks in other countries. Some argue that key contracts should be reserved for Iraqis. But among the elder Iraqi businessmen, some are struggling to adapt to the new business climate.

Farouk al-Obeidi, the vice-president of al-Maimana group, one of the country's most established construction and trading firms, has a file on his desk containing some of the CPA's requests for bids to provide equipment. "This is a chaotic situation. Out of these 50 offers, I've only been able to submit proposals for three and none of them has won," he said.
 

organik

TRIBE Member
Journo claims proof of WMD lies
By Paul Mulvey in London
September 23, 2003

AUSTRALIAN investigative journalist John Pilger says he has evidence the war against Iraq was based on a lie that could cost George W. Bush and Tony Blair their jobs and bring Prime Minister John Howard down with them.

A television report by Pilger aired on British screens overnight said US Secretary of State Colin Powell and National Security Adviser Condoleeza Rice confirmed in early 2001 that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein had been disarmed and was no threat.

But after the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington on September 11 that year, Pilger claimed Rice said the US "must move to take advantage of these new opportunities" to attack Iraq and claim control of its oil.

Pilger uncovered video footage of Powell in Cairo on February 24, 2001 saying, "He (Saddam Hussein) has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbours."

Two months later, Rice reportedly said, "We are able to keep his arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt."

Powell boasted this was because America's policy of containment and its sanctions had effectively disarmed Saddam.

Pilger claims this confirms that the decision of US President George W Bush - with the full support of British Prime Minister Blair and Howard - to wage war on Saddam because he had weapons of mass destruction was a huge deception.

Pilger interviewed several leading US government figures in Washington but said he did not ask Powell or Rice to respond to his claims.

"I think it's very serious for Howard. Howard has followed the Americans and to a lesser degree Blair almost word for word," Pilger told AAP before his program was screened on ITV tonight.

"All Howard does is say `well it's not true' and never explains himself.

"I just don't believe you can be seen to be party to such a big lie, such a big deception and endure that politically.

"It simply can't be shrugged off and that's Howard's response.

"Blair has shrugged it off but Blair is deeply damaged. It's far from over here, there's a lot that is going to happen and much of it could wash onto Howard.

"And it's unravelling in America and Bush could lose the election next year.

"I've not seen political leaders survive when they've been complicit in such an open deception for so long."

Howard last week dismissed an accusation from Opposition Leader Simon Crean that he hid a warning from British intelligence that war against Iraq would heighten the terrorist threat to Australia.

In his report, Pilger interviews Ray McGovern, a former senior CIA officer and friend of Bush's father and ex-president, George Bush senior.

McGovern told Pilger that going to war because of weapons of mass destruction "was 95 per cent charade."

Pilger also claims that six hours after the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Centre, US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said he wanted to "hit" Iraq and allegedly said "Go Massive ... Sweep it all up. Things related and not."

He was allegedly talked down by Powell who said the American people would not accept an attack on Iraq without any evidence, so they opted to invade Afghanistan where Osama bin Laden had bases.

Pilger claimed war was set in train on September 17, 2001 when Bush signed a paper directing the Pentagon to explore the military options for an attack on Iraq.

http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,7350504^2,00.html
 

Boss Hog

TRIBE Member
Questions are Raised on Awarding of Contracts in Iraq
By PATRICK E. TYLER and RAYMOND BONNER

BAGHDAD, Iraq, Oct. 3 — Last month the Iraqi Governing Council questioned why the American occupation authority had issued a $20 million contract to buy new revolvers and Kalashnikov rifles for the Iraqi police when the United States military was confiscating tens of thousands of weapons every month from Saddam Hussein's abandoned arsenals.

On Wednesday the Iraqi council, in a testy exchange with the occupation administrator, L. Paul Bremer III, challenged an American decision to spend $1.2 billion to train 35,000 Iraqi police officers in Jordan when such training could be done in Iraq for a fraction of the cost. Germany and France have offered to provide such training free.

These decisions are being questioned by Iraqi officials as Congress is also seeking to examine how the American occupation authority and the military are spending billions of dollars here. Iraqi officials and businessmen charge that millions of dollars in contracts are being awarded without competitive bidding, some of them to former cronies of Mr. Hussein's government.

"There is no transparency," said Mahmoud Othman, a Kurdish member of the Governing Council, "and something has to be done about it.

"There is mismanagement right and left, and I think we have to sit with Congress face to face to discuss this. A lot of American money is being wasted, I think. We are victims and the American taxpayers are victims."

A number of businessmen say they believe it is necessary to pay kickbacks to win contracts. A spokesman for one of the largest American corporations awarding subcontracts here, Bechtel, said his company had neither paid any kickbacks nor had been approached by Iraqis seeking to pay kickbacks. He said Bechtel made all of its contract information available on its Web site and at offices in Baghdad and Basra. A check of the Web site on Friday found no information, only a notice that the site was "under construction."

The lack of transparency and competition, Governing Council members said in interviews, may be encouraging corruption. They said they believed that many contracts had been inflated beyond the reasonable cost for the work, creating opportunities for kickbacks between prime contractors and subcontractors.

One council member, Naseer K. Chadirji, said: "As the Governing Council we are in a very weak legal position. We don't have the right to investigate these contracts."

He added, "I don't have the evidence, but I think there is corruption. This is a common grievance that people tell me."

An Iraqi executive, who made millions of dollars as an insider under the Hussein government and would not allow his name to be used, said a relative outside Iraq had asserted that a Bechtel executive was looking to become a silent partner in an Iraqi company that would be favored with subcontracts from Bechtel.

A senior Bechtel official in Iraq, Clifford George Mumm, said that his company "would fire immediately anyone who tried to do such a thing" and that he did not believe that any Bechtel executive would engage in the kind of behavior described.

Mr. Mumm said there had been no kickbacks on the 105 subcontracts Bechtel had signed with Iraqi firms.

Asked about Iraqi assertions that Bechtel and other major American companies were awarding contracts to Iraqis who had grown rich under Mr. Hussein, Mr. Mumm said all of the Iraqi businesses that received Bechtel subcontracts were vetted by the occupation authority under Mr. Bremer.

The largest and most prominent Iraqi subcontractor that has emerged belongs to the Bunnia family, which grew immensely wealthy under the former government and was known for lavishing gifts, especially luxury cars, on members of the Hussein family.

"It is hard to understand the rationale for giving them contracts," said an American businessman.

Bunnia family members, in interviews over the last several months, have denied that they supported the old government and have said their business skills are needed to rebuild the country.

Looking at a list of companies that received subcontracts from Becthel, Mr. Othman, the Governing Council member, said he recognized at least a half-dozen that had profited from close relations with Mr. Hussein or members of his family.

Samir Sumaidy, a member of the Governing Council who owns a construction firm doing business in China, said Friday that the Iraqi interim government received no information from Mr. Bremer's authority on how it was spending Iraqi and American funds.

An American businessman, who would not allow his name to be used, said the occupation authority was doling out contracts worth hundreds of thousands of dollars by simply telephoning favored companies and announcing, "I have a contract for you," as he characterized a telephone call he received this week.

Mr. Othman said, "I hope Congress knows what is going on, but if they don't know and we don't know, then God help everybody."

Council members said the contract to train Iraqi police officers in Jordan offended them because Jordan would draw a large payment from the dwindling Iraqi treasury and because many Iraqis resented Jordan's close ties to old government.

"The Iraqis are not very happy to see such large sums of money put in the hands of Jordan," said Mr. Chadirji, a lawyer and Governing Council member.

At a news briefing on Friday, Charles Heatly, a spokesman for the occupation authority, said 35,000 police offers were to be trained in Jordan because the necessary facilities did not exist in Iraq, an assertion that several Governing Council members challenged.

The Jordan plan was formally announced on Friday in a press release. Mr. Heatly said he thought that most council members had understood and agreed with Mr. Bremer's presentation on police training in their meeting on Wednesday.

But five council members said in interviews that the interim Iraqi government opposed the plan. "If we had voted, a majority would have rejected it," Mr. Chadirji said. "He told us what he did; he did not ask us."

The purchase of about 20,000 Kalashnikov automatic weapons, 50,000 revolvers and 10 million rounds of ammunition from Jordan has also been widely criticized by Iraqi Governing Council members.

The contract was issued by the Interior Ministry during the summer when it was being supervised by the former New York City police commissioner, Bernard B. Kerik. Mr. Kerik did not respond to requests for an interview.

"It is totally unnecessary to buy them from outside the country," said Mr. Chadirji, who noted that he had purchased a number of Kalashnikovs to arm his personal bodyguards and that the price in the local market was as low as $50 for each weapon.

Mr. Heatly said logistical problems associated with buying so many Kalashnikovs in small lots from the Iraqi market would be excessive.

There would be no cost if the occupation authority obtained them from the United States military, which is now the custodian of countless thousands of Iraqi weapons, many of them said to be in mint condition.

Mr. Heatly did not have figures for the number of Kalashnikovs in allied hands, but he said there were not enough of them to satisfy the requirements of the contract.


http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/0....html?pagewanted=print&position=
 

Boss Hog

TRIBE Member
^ What we are seeing here is the early stages of a favoured new regime rising in Iraq. One that, for the time being, will act in US interests.

You clowns who say trite things like "hindsight is 20/20" as in when they supported and armed Saddam, this is the exact same thing over again.
 

Boss Hog

TRIBE Member
Police flee as Saddam loyalists fuel city revolt

Police flee as Saddam loyalists fuel city revolt
By Patrick Cockburn in Baiji
06 October 2003


Iraqis shouting pro-Saddam Hussein slogans have staged an uprising in the important oil refining city of Baiji, burning down the mayor's office, fighting with American troops and forcing local police to flee.

About a thousand people, some holding pictures of Saddam Hussein, were in a stand-off with American troops last night, with tanks surrounding the police station in the city, 160 miles north of Baghdad.

Loyalty to the ousted president, who is still being sought by Allied troops, is strong in the Sunni Muslim heartland.

The crowds were chanting: "With our blood, with our spirit, we are ready to die for you Saddam.''

"We were in a big firefight this morning but now we're back in control,'' claimed a US soldier manning a checkpoint on the outskirts of the city. But, despite the presence of American forces, pro-Saddam townspeople appeared to be in command of most streets in Baiji.

The uprising, which started early on Saturday morning, underlines the fragile grip on power held by the occupying US troops, and the local police they have appointed, even in an important centre such as Baiji.

The city lies on the main road between Baghdad and the northern capital city of Mosul. Baiji contains the largest oil refinery in Iraq and is on a main oil pipeline. The uprising was largely spontaneous but was fuelled by hostility to the American occupation and by rumours that Iraqi oil was being smuggled to Israel via Turkey.

According to Majid, a local man who was in the city centre at the time five or six men arrived in a Brazilian-made car and began chanting pro-Saddam slogans.

He said: "A crowd gathered in the market place. Then the police attacked them and [other] people ... and were also shooting. Four people were hit and were lying on the ground.''

Enraged by the shooting, many citizens joined the crowd in attacking the police. The town's police chief, General Ismail Abdullah Jassim, was in any case extremely unpopular according to Rafid, a truck driver who, like many people in Baiji, refused to give his family name for fear of retribution.

He said: "The police chief took all the cars belonging to the government for himself. He became like a president here in Baiji.'' A large crowd then advanced on the office of the mayor of Baiji, Hamid Rajabayef al-Qaissi.

He tried to stop them by saying that the police had overreacted but the crowd refused to accept this and burnt his office.

The fire was put out but scorch marks showed where the flames had consumed the building.

The people of Baiji, 30 miles north of Saddam's home town of Tikrit, are Sunni Muslims. Many of the inhabitants worked in the security forces and administration of the old regime and lost their jobs after the occupation, a predicament that has led to many protests.

After the burning of the mayor's office, most of the police fled, according to local people. American officers at the US base just north of Baiji demanded that the police returned to their posts. They replied that they would be killed if they did.

The Americans threatened to sack the officers, who mostly come from villages outside the city, unless they went back.

The police said they had no bulletproof vests or radios, but later a few patrols did return to Baiji. Local people attacked Turkish trucks passing through the town, leaving two vehicles burnt out.

Turkish truck drivers are a target for local hatred in Baiji because it is believed that they buy fuel cheaply, causing local shortages, and then smuggle it into Turkey to sell at higher prices.

The crowds were particularly enraged, according to one report, by a rumour that the oil being taken by the Turkish truck drivers was to be sold in Israel. But there is no doubt that people in Baiji are more willing to express their support for Saddam Hussein than demonstrators in Ramadi and Fallujah, the Euphrates river towns where there have been repeated attacks on American troops.

The atmosphere in Baiji yesterday evening was still very tense. Iraqi truck drivers said they were frightened of driving through in case they were mistakenly identified as Turkish. "No one is in control. It is anarchy there,'' said one man on the outskirts of the city.

The number of dead and injured is unclear. At one point on the road there was an orange truck which was hit by a rocket, killing the driver, local people said.

A medic at the local hospital, Dr Assaf, said 11 people had been brought in with bullet wounds on Saturday, but he did not know how many casualties were treated yesterday.

"The most seriously injured have all been moved to the main hospital in Tikrit,'' the doctor said.

Last night American troops appeared keen not to provoke further trouble. Although crowds, many holding stones, were still surrounding the main police station.


http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=450367
 

~atp~

TRIBE Member
Some quotes from recent news sources relating to Iraq...

At least 23 soldiers are believed to have taken their lives since the Anglo-American invasion and others have been wounded in attempting suicide.
src

In total, [Human Rights Watch] collected reports of 94 civilian deaths in Baghdad involving questionable legal circumstances that warrant investigation.
Wolfowitz, the No. 2 civilian at the Pentagon, was unhurt in the attack on the heavily defended al-Rashid Hotel, which killed one U.S. soldier and wounded 15 other people early Sunday, a coalition spokesman said.

...

In Washington, Secretary of State Colin Powell said the incident should be seen in the light of a security situation that is improving overall.
src

The growing toll and reports of poor conditions and low morale among troops have produced an undercurrent of dissent among US military families. The Guardian has found that 75% of the 478 troops removed from the Iraqi theatre because of mental health issues have been reservists.
src

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Suicide bombers struck four times in Baghdad's Monday morning rush hour, killing 34 people and wounding 224 near the Red Cross offices and police stations...26 of the 34 dead were civilians and eight police. Sixty-five police and 159 civilians were wounded.
src

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) expressed outrage at Monday's unprecedented suicide bombing of its Baghdad headquarters, which killed at least 10 people, and said it was weighing a withdrawal from Iraq.
src

Iraq Center for Research and Strategic Studies. The poll of 1,620 Iraqis was conducted in seven cities from Sept. 28 to Oct. 10. The margin of error is 3 percent:

• How did you perceive the coalition forces when they first arrived, compared to six months later?

First arrived/six months later:

Occupying force: 45.9 percent/66.6 percent.

Liberating force: 42 percent/14.8 percent

Peacekeepers: 4.6 percent/10 percent

• Over the past three months, would you say the conditions for peace and stability in Iraq have improved, worsened, or stayed the same?

Improved: 23 percent

Worsened: 46 percent

Remained the same: 18.1 percent

• Do you support or oppose the presence of coalition forces in Iraq?

Support: 33 percent

Oppose: 50 percent
src

A plan to send upward of 10,000 Turkish troops to Iraq, a proposal the US heavily lobbied for in recent months, has effectively been shelved due to vehement opposition in Iraq.

...

The quiet crumbling of the plan to send Turkish troops to central Iraq makes it less likely that the 101st Airborne will be able to go home after a one-year tour of duty as hoped.
src

George Bush's explanation for the motivations of those who led the recent attacks:

"They can't stand the thought of a free society. They hate freedom. They love terror. They try and create fear and chaos," Bush told reporters at the White House.

"We're determined not to be intimidated by these killers. We're even more determined to work with the Iraqi people to create the conditions of freedom."
src

With the Bush administration pledging $20 billion, the total from [a reconstruction] conference came to about $33 billion -- short of the $56 billion that the World Bank and the United Nations have said Iraq would need during the next five years.

...

With the new [International Advisory Monitoring] board, Chris Patten, the European Union's external affairs commissioner, said, "I have absolutely no doubt the money for which I am responsible . . . is going to be used for the people of Iraq.

The $20 billion U.S. contribution will go directly to Iraq and not be subject to international monitoring.
src

Candidates for the Democratic presidential nomination attacked President Bush on Iraq Sunday night, charging that he misled the country before the war and lacks an exit strategy to end it

...

The divisions over Iraq highlighted the 90-minute debate among the nine Democrats and overshadowed differences on the economy and other domestic issues
src

MP George Galloway has been expelled from the Labour Party in the wake of his outspoken comments on the Iraq war.

...

The accusations were judged to break a rule which bans "bringing the Labour Party into disrepute by behaviour that is prejudicial or grossly detrimental to the party".

There is no right of appeal against the ruling, although it is possible that it could be challenged in the courts.
src

The Washington Post reported Wednesday that the Bush administration has ordered the Pentagon to prevent any news coverage of the bodies of US troops being sent home from Iraq. The blackout on casualties is part of the attempt by the White House to recast the nightmare in Iraq as a “good news” story.
src

one solider from the 101st Airborne Division asked what was on the minds of many: When will the worldwide fight against terrorism be over?

"I wish I could give you a date, but I can't," Rumsfeld said. That would be like estimating when a town will no longer need firefighters or police, he told the soldier.

...

Pentagon planners are considering moving some of the 116,000 troops under the U.S. European Command away from their Cold War bases in Western Europe and into former Warsaw Pact countries closer to the Middle East.

...

Repositioning American forces is part of what Pentagon officials call forward defense. The idea is to have troops on hand to go after terrorists where they congregate and strike them before they can attack the United States.
src

Influential advisers at the Pentagon are backing the development of a new generation of low-yield nuclear weapons - so-called mini-nukes - in a controversial report to be published this autumn.

The document, entitled Future Strategic Strike Force, has been produced by the Defence Science Board, which has a Pentagon brief to "transform the nation's armed forces to meet the demands placed on them by a changing world order".
src

Our aim is to remind Americans of these lessons and to draw their consequences for today. Here are four consequences:

• we need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global
responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future;


• we need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values;


• we need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad;


• we need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.

Such a Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity may not be fashionable today. But it is necessary if the United States is to build on the successes of this past century and to ensure our security and our greatness in the next.
src




1 = American military fatalities.
2 = Number killed on 9/11.
3 = Iraqi civilian casualties.
4 = Iraqi military casualties.
White shading represents children under the age of 14.



 

Ditto Much

TRIBE Member
Whats funny is I still expected it to be far worse!!


See I supported the war. Not to get rid of WMD and not because of any terrorist bull shit. I supported the war for a completely different reason.

See I thought Saddam was a horrible guy, a murdering sack of shit. I expected that the sanctions against his country would have cause a revolution and thus him to be gone from the inside.

But ten years of sanctions simply didn't do this, if anything it made him stronger and forced him to work harder at being a prick. See in the end I think we all can agree that the man was in fact a prick. And I think we can also agree that he was a murderous prick who should never have been allowed to stay in power as long as he was.

Personally I want to see the mans head on a stick. I want to see the sanctions gone as well. But you can't really drop the sanctions and leave the man in power, its just silly to do so. So rather than be forced with another Libya or another Cuba I thought a war made more sense.

I drew my number at 50,000. I would support the war as long as it cost no more than 50,000 lives. I based this number on the estimated cost of lives being caused by the sanctions. It was estimated that in 10 years of sanctions 500,000 people died. I consider this unacceptable to maintain and continue and a one time war and death cost of 50,000 seemed better to me than an ongoing 50,000 per year.



Things aren't good. but lets not forget that things have been bad there for a long time. Lets keep some context to our passions.
 

~atp~

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by Ditto Much


Things aren't good. but lets not forget that things have been bad there for a long time. Lets keep some context to our passions.
This is very true--in the context of global conflict, we might almost describe this particular case peanuts.

I suppose that a) I wanted to paint a picture that is contrary to the filth spewed by the White House (yes, I know it's in their interest to say positive things) and b) I vehemently oppose the war.

Ditto, you mentioned an uprising as a result of sanctions. That's a good point, it would have been nice to see that happen. Why didn't the U.S. support the uprising immediately after the Gulf War though?
 

Ditto Much

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by ~atp~
This is very true--in the context of global conflict, we might almost describe this particular case peanuts.

I suppose that a) I wanted to paint a picture that is contrary to the filth spewed by the White House (yes, I know it's in their interest to say positive things) and b) I vehemently oppose the war.

Ditto, you mentioned an uprising as a result of sanctions. That's a good point, it would have been nice to see that happen. Why didn't the U.S. support the uprising immediately after the Gulf War though?

Matter of many discussions that happened after the war and of even bigger speculation. But I have always broken it down as follows...

1) The formation of a kurdish state can never happen.
2) The division of Iraq can never happen
3) Upon signing a cease fire the US and UN were limited by the cease fire.

The first and second point are somewhat linked. If you divide Iraq you are going to create a serious issue with both Iran and with Turkey. Turkey is an allie Iran is an enemy and thus your best ploy is to leave both of them in the same situation as before and Iraq the same size and shape as before else your going to be stuck with a much greater conflict.

The third point is specific. Part of the cease fire (the first cease fire that Schwartzcough had ever been involved in!!) was that although Iraq had to ground its jets it was allowed to use helicopter for policing. And although Iraq had to pull out of the North and the South they were allowed to keep there police infrastructure in place.

This basically allowed Saddam to use helicopter gun ships to utterly pumel any revolt that occured. Although this might in retrospect have looked like a bad idea it also was part of trying to keep points one and two in place. And as far as points one and two are concerned it was key.

Then one must look at the cost of a single bullet. The US could reasonably have assinated Saddam (or lets pretend they could have). Would have ended his regime? or would the only people who would have been able to consolidate power had been his sons who are just as bad. See Saddam did effectively kill all of his opposition, he controled the media, he controlled the schools and he did manage a police state with Stalin like efficency.

If Saddam had lost in a revolution your now left with a revolution which you have even less control and say over. If he lost in a revolution and the revolution killed 100,000 people the USA would be left with another disaster in there history books to forever try and deny. The first gulf war ultimately was lost by the coalition in my opinion. Although Kuwait was free and Iraq was strangled it left them with many other problems. They were still forced to patrol the persian gulf, they were still left with Saddam in power, they were still left with an inspections program that was costing a fortune and they still had to face the fact that saddam was illegally shipping out oil.

it was a victory only from a military stand point, from a socio-political stand point it was as big a loss as vietnam if not worse. In the end they became the inspectors of all things going in and out and were ultimately the bag men for all the blame.
 

~atp~

TRIBE Member
C B C . C A N e w s - F u l l S t o r y :
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

UN pulling staff from Baghdad

Last Updated Thu Oct 30 09:45:54 2003



BAGHDAD-- Following a similar announcement by the Red Cross, the United Nations said it's temporarily pulling its staff out of Baghdad because of security concerns.

The staffers will talk with UN headquarters "on the future of our operations, in particular security arrangements that we would need to take to operate in Iraq," U.N. spokeswoman Marie Okabe said.

She said staff in northern Iraq would remain.

About 60 UN employees are believed to be in Iraq, including some 20 in Baghdad. UN Secretary General Kofi Annan ordered most others out in September after an August truck bombing at its Baghdad headquarters killed 23 people, including the top UN envoy to Iraq, Sergio Vieira de Mello.


On Wednesday, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) announced it's scaling back its staff in Iraq following a rash of suicide bombings, including one outside the agency's headquarters in Baghdad.

The attack badly damaged the headquarters, killing two Iraqi Red Cross employees and as many as 10 other people outside the compound.

The aid group Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors Without Borders) said they were also pulling some of their workers out of Baghdad because of safety concerns.



Written by CBC News Online staff
 

dicksherwood

TRIBE Member
15 dead, 21 wounded in deadliest day for US soldiers.

That number makes me very uncomfortable no matter which side it's on.

This handover of power and departure of US soldiers needs to come quickly if they really eant the killing to end.
 

Jazz

TRIBE Member
"We don't do body counts" - General Tommy Franks, US Central Command

The bloody toll

US troops

359 dead - of which 234 died in combat (119 since end of the war) and 125 in non-combat (102 since end of the war)

563 wounded

UK troops

51 dead - of which 19 died in combat (11 since end of the war) and 32 in non-combat (seven since end of the war)

53 wounded

Iraqi forces

Estimates of between 4,895 and 6,370 (unofficial thinktank estimates) total deaths during the war.

Iraqi civilians
Estimates range from 7,784 to 9596 (www.iraqbodycount.net)

Journalists and media workers

19 dead (Non-combat - accidents and friendly fire)
 

OTIS

TRIBE Member
I love the fact that Bush's appearance on the carrier is now referred to as his 'declaration of major hostilities' speech instead of the victory speech.

:rolleyes:

Fucking dumbass media. Call it what it is.
 

Jazz

TRIBE Member
Pentagon keeps dead out of sight

Bush team doesn't want people to see human cost of war
Even body bags are now sanitized as `transfer tubes'

TIM HARPER
WASHINGTON BUREAU

Washington—Charles H. Buehring came home last week.

He arrived at the air force base in Dover, Del., in the middle of the night, in an aluminum shipping case draped in an American flag.

When the military truck drove his remains across the tarmac, workers paused and removed their hats.

He was met by a six-member honour guard acting as pallbearers, to allow a "dignified transfer" to the Charles C. Carson mortuary, where he became one of an estimated 60,000 American casualties of war that have been processed there over almost five decades.

"It reminds us we are at war," says Lt.-Col. Jon Anderson, who describes business at the Dover mortuary as "steady."

But America never saw Lt.-Col. Buehring's arrival, days after a rocket from a homemade launcher ended his life at age 40 in Baghdad's heavily fortified Rasheed Hotel last Monday.

Americans have never seen any of the other 359 bodies returning from Iraq. Nor do they see the wounded cramming the Walter Reed Army Medical Centre in Washington or soldiers who say they are being treated inhumanely awaiting medical treatment at Fort Stewart, Ga.

In order to continue to sell an increasingly unpopular Iraqi invasion to the American people, President George W. Bush's administration sweeps the messy parts of war — the grieving families, the flag-draped coffins, the soldiers who have lost limbs — into a far corner of the nation's attic.

No television cameras are allowed at Dover.
full article here
 

Deep_Groove

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by OTIS
I love the fact that Bush's appearance on the carrier is now referred to as his 'declaration of major hostilities' speech instead of the victory speech.

:rolleyes:

Fucking dumbass media. Call it what it is.
I am SO tired of correcting the idioicy, but....sigh....the unbiased readers of this page deserve it...

From the Washington Post, May 1 2003
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A2627-2003May1

Full Text: Bush Speech Aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln

FDCH E-Media
Thursday, May 1, 2003; 9:43 PM

This is the full transcript of President Bush's speech aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln to mark the end of major combat operations in Iraq.

Thank you. Thank you all very much. Admiral Kelly, Captain Card (ph), officers and sailors of the USS Abraham Lincoln, my fellow Americans, major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed. (APPLAUSE) And now our coalition is engaged in securing and reconstructing that country. In this battle, we have fought for the cause of liberty and for the peace of the world. Our nation and our coalition are proud of this accomplishment, yet it is you, the members of the United States military, who achieved it. Your courage, your willingness to face danger for your country and for each other made this day possible. Because of you our nation is more secure. Because of you the tyrant has fallen and Iraq is free. Operation Iraqi Freedom was carried out with a combination of precision and speed and boldness the enemy did not expect and the world had not seen before. From distant bases or ships at sea, we sent planes and missiles that could destroy an enemy division or strike a single bunker. Marines and soldiers charged to Baghdad across 350 miles of hostile ground in one of the swiftest advances of heavy arms in history. You have shown the world the skill and the might of the American armed forces. This nation thanks all of the members of our coalition who joined in a noble cause. We thank the armed forces of the United Kingdom, Australia and Poland who shared in the hardships of war. We thank all of the citizens of Iraq who welcomed our troops and joined in the liberation of their own country. And tonight, I have a special word for Secretary Rumsfeld, for General Franks and for all the men and women who wear the uniform of the United States: America is grateful for a job well done. (APPLAUSE) The character of our military through history, the daring of Normandy, the fierce courage of Iwo Jima, the decency and idealism that turned enemies into allies is fully present in this generation. When Iraqi civilians looked into the faces of our service men and women, they saw strength and kindness and good will. When I look at the members of the United States military, I see the best of our country and I am honored to be your commander in chief. the images of fallen statues we have witnessed the arrival of a new era. For a hundred of years of war, culminating in the nuclear age, military technology was designed and deployed to inflict casualties on an ever-growing scale. In defeating Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan, Allied forces destroyed entire cities, while enemy leaders who started the conflict were safe until the final days. Military power was used to end a regime by breaking a nation. Today we have the greater power to free a nation by breaking a dangerous and aggressive regime. With new tactics and precision weapons, we can achieve military objectives without directing violence against civilians. No device of man can remove the tragedy from war, yet it is a great advance when the guilty have far more to fear from war than the innocent. (APPLAUSE) In the images of celebrating Iraqis we have also seen the ageless appeal of human freedom. Decades of lies and intimidation could not make the Iraqi people love their oppressors or desire their own enslavement. Men and women in every culture need liberty like they need food and water and air. Everywhere that freedom arrives, humanity rejoices and everywhere that freedom stirs, let tyrants fear. (APPLAUSE) We have difficult work to do in Iraq. We're bringing order to parts of that country that remain dangerous. We're pursuing and finding leaders of the old regime who will be held to account for their crimes. We've begun the search for hidden chemical and biological weapons, and already know of hundreds of sites that will be investigated. We are helping to rebuild Iraq where the dictator built palaces for himself instead of hospitals and schools. And we will stand with the new leaders of Iraq as they establish a government of, by and for the Iraqi people. (APPLAUSE) The transition from dictatorship to democracy will take time, but it is worth every effort. Our coalition will stay until our work is done and then we will leave and we will leave behind a free Iraq (APPLAUSE) The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September the 11th, 2001 and still goes on. That terrible morning, 19 evil men, the shock troops of a hateful ideology, gave America and the civilized world a glimpse of their ambitions. They imagined, in the words of one terrorist, that September the 11th would be the beginning of the end of America. By seeking to turn our cities into killing fields, terrorists and their allies believed that they could destroy this nation's resolve and force our retreat from the world. They have failed. (APPLAUSE) In the battle of Afghanistan, we destroyed the Taliban, many terrorists and the camps where they trained. We continue to help the Afghan people lay roads, restore hospitals and educate all of their children. Yet we also have dangerous work to complete. As I speak, a special operations task force lead by the 82nd Airborne is on the trail of the terrorists and those who seek to undermine the free government of Afghanistan. (APPLAUSE) From Pakistan to the Philippines to the Horn of Africa, we are hunting down Al Qaida killers. Nineteen months ago I pledged that the terrorists would not escape the patient justice of the United States. And as of tonight nearly one half of Al Qaida's senior operatives have been captured or killed. (APPLAUSE) The liberation of Iraq is a crucial advance in the campaign against terror. We have removed an ally of Al Qaida and cut off a source of terrorist funding. And this much is certain: No terrorist network will gain weapons of mass destruction from the Iraqi regime, because the regime is no more. (APPLAUSE) In these 19 months that changed the world, our actions have been focused and deliberate and proportionate to the offense. We have not forgotten the victims of September the 11th, the last phone calls, the cold murder of children, the searches in the rubble. With those attacks, the terrorists and their supporters declared war on the United States, and war is what they got. (APPLAUSE) Our war against terror is proceeding according to the principles that I have made clear to all. Any person involved in committing or planning terrorist attacks against the American people becomes an enemy of this country and a target of American justice. (APPLAUSE) Any person, organization or government that supports, protects or harbors terrorists is complicit in the murder of the innocent and equally guilty of terrorist crimes. Any outlaw regime that has ties to terrorist groups and seeks or possesses weapons of mass destruction is a grave danger to the civilized world and will be confronted. (APPLAUSE) And anyone in the world, including the Arab world, who works and sacrifices for freedom has a loyal friend in the United States of America. (APPLAUSE) Our commitment to liberty is America's tradition, declared at our founding, affirmed in Franklin Roosevelt's Four Freedoms, asserted in the Truman Doctrine and in Ronald Reagan's challenge to an evil empire. We are committed to freedom in Afghanistan, Iraq and in a peaceful Palestine. The advance of freedom is the surest strategy to undermine the appeal of terror in the world. Where freedom takes hold, hatred gives way to hope. When freedom takes hold, men and women turn to the peaceful pursuit of a better life. American values and American interests lead in the same direction. We stand for human liberty. (APPLAUSE) The United States upholds these principles of security and freedom in many ways: with all of the tools of diplomacy, law enforcement, intelligence and finance. We are working with a broad coalition of nations that understand the threat and our shared responsibility to meet it. The use of force has been and remains our last resort. Yet all can know, friend and foe alike, that our nation has a mission: We will answer threats to our security, and we will defend the peace. (APPLAUSE) Our mission continues. Al Qaida is wounded, not destroyed. The scattered cells of the terrorist network still operate in many nations and we know from daily intelligence that they continue to plot against free people. The proliferation of deadly weapons remains a serious danger. The enemies of freedom are not idle, and neither are we. Our government has taken unprecedented measures to defend the homeland and we will continue to hunt down the enemy before he can strike. (APPLAUSE) The war on terror is not over, yet it is not endless. We do not know the day of final victory, but we have seen the turning of the tide. No act of the terrorists will change our purpose, or weaken our resolve, or alter their fate. Their cause is lost; free nations will press on to victory. (APPLAUSE) Other nations in history have fought in foreign lands and remained to occupy and exploit. Americans, following a battle, want nothing more than to return home. And that is your direction tonight. (APPLAUSE) After service in the Afghan and Iraqi theaters of war, after 100,000 miles on the longest carrier deployment in recent history, you are homeward bound. (APPLAUSE) Some of you will see new family members for the first time; 150 babies were born while their fathers were on the Lincoln. Your families are proud of you, and your nation will welcome you. (APPLAUSE) We are mindful as well that some good men and women are not making the journey home. One of those who fell, Corporal Jason Mileo, spoke to his parents five days before his death. Jason's father said, ``He called us from the center of Baghdad, not to brag but to tell us he loved us. Our son was a soldier. Every name, every life is a loss to our military, to our nation and to the loved ones who grieve. There is no homecoming for these families. Yet we pray in God's time their reunion will come. Those we lost were last seen on duty. Their final act on this Earth was to fight a great evil and bring liberty to others. All of you, all in this generation of our military, have taken up the highest calling of history: You were defending your country and protecting the innocent from harm. And wherever you go, you carry a message of hope, a message that is ancient and ever new. In the words of the prophet Isaiah, ``To the captives, come out; and to those in darkness, be free.'' Thank you for serving our country and our cause. May God bless you all. And may God continue to bless America. (APPLAUSE)
---------------------------------------------------------------

Please point out where Bush stated that the Iraq mission was completely finished. In the areas I have highlighted, you can see that he implied exactly the opposite. Once again, the media are doing their job in accurate reporting and you are doing the job you have chosen by lying and evading.

- Deep_Groove
 

OTIS

TRIBE Member
Selectively bolding segments that support your diluted viewpoint does not give them more merit, or hide the truth. But hey, maybe it's the way to get through to you.

Originally posted by Deep_Groove
The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September the 11th, 2001 and still goes onThat terrible morning, 19 evil men, blagh blagh blagh Deep_Groove masturbates to this speech every night blagh blagh blagh...
Let me state it again.

Originally posted by Deep_Groove
The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September the 11th, 2001 and still goes onThat terrible morning, 19 evil men, blagh blagh blagh Deep_Groove masturbates to this speech every night blagh blagh blagh...
I'm sure you'll find some other definition for the word 'victory' in your little Idiot's Guide to Right-Wing Idealism - Aging Virgin's Edition.

And just for clarification, I was criticizing the allofasudden change in the media's spin on his speech. More than once (soon after said speech) I saw it referred to as a 'victory speech' in the mainstream press.
 
Top