130 Killed in Wave of Sectarian Attacks
Bush called Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki on Monday to reassure him that it was not true that the US planned to dump him if he had not produced better results in two months.
Bush hasn't dumped Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, who has not produced better results for 3 years, so al-Maliki need not have worried.
Shiite militia reprisal killings against Sunni Arabs in the largely Shiite town of Balad north of Baghdad continued on Monday. 91 Sunnis have been randomly killed by Shiite death squads since Saturday. Other Sunni families have been ethnically cleansed and forced to take refuge in Dhuluiyyah. The rampage was provoked by the murder of 17 Shiite laborers at nearby Dhuluiyah on Friday. What is amazing is that Iraqi police and military forces seem to just be standing aside and letting the bloodletting and attacks go on. Either they are collaborating or afraid, and either way they are not doing their jobs. As long as they don't, the bloodletting in Iraq, which is killing 200,000 a year, will go on.
In addition to the further killings in Balad, of some 20 or 30 persons, Reuters reports another 50 deaths from political violence throughout the country, including 20 (some reports say 30) dead from two major bombings in the capital. Also, police found 63 bodies in the capital on Monday. Some 40 of them were found in the Sunni Arab districts and were presumably Shiites, while about 20 were found in Shiite districts and were probably Sunni Arabs. Monday's war of the corpses in the capital appears to be a response to the murders of Sunnis by Shiite death squads at Balad.
A transcript of my appearance on the Lehrer News Hour Monday evening is here. I called for a phased withdrawal of US troops because I despair of getting Shiites and Kurds to compromise with Sunni Arabs in any other way. I realize that they still might not compromise, but at least there is a chance they would come to their senses if they couldn't have the Marines keep their enemies down for them.
Iraq at home:
Iraq vet Tammy Duckworth has a fighting chance of occupying Henry Hyde's seat in Congress.
Michigan media ignored Jim Marcinkowski, the Democratic candidate for congress facing Republican Congressman Mike Rogers. Marcinkowski, a career intelligence officer with a background in law, is passionate about what the Bush administration has done to the US Constitution. But he could not get a hearing unless he bought one. But that is a chicken and an egg proposition; if he had a hearing, he could have perhaps raised more money. The lazy US media, most often owned by Republicans or lacking in public spirit, shouldn't be permitted just to ignore a whole congressional race to the benefit of a well-heeled incumbent.
posted by Juan Cole @ 10/17/2006 12:30:00 AM
|
Facebook
20 Comments:
Where is pro-dem content?
Strict media control is the only reasonable explanation why Lieberman gets amazingly disproportionate share of attention in the mainstream media - including the NPR. In general, regional races are pretty much invisible, party affiliation is pretty much all one knows about the candidates when he goes to the poll.
Yes, MSM time is costly, and it is not surprising that the GOP controls it. From the other side, Internet delivery is free, but the first thing we know about Dean is that he was successful in using the Net - for fundraising. That is, Internet was used to collect money which is used mostly to buy time for hugely expensive TV ads!
The problem is, TV ads do not really discuss the issues, their natural purpose is to promote the candidates. Also, we know that when it comes to issues, dems usually do better, the power of the GOP is exactly in avoiding any meaningful discussion of anything concrete in favor of abstract, pointless, but hot rhetoric.
The mystery is, why the GOP leads even on Internet with its free content delivery, where is pro-dem content? Fiercely pro-GOP sites like townhall.com, freerepublic.com and bloggers are much more visible than their pro-dem counterparts!
In fact, there is an impression that between the major elections, dems, unlike the GOP, simply disappear from the scene.
BRIAN DICKERSON. BRIAN DICKERSON: Media culpa: How the press serves status quo
Editors contend that it's more important to find out what "real people" think about the issues than to give candidates a platform. But political parties already pay pollsters millions of dollars to pick voters' brains; it's the electorate that's starved for reliable information about the candidates.
Without print and broadcast outlets dedicated to surfacing new faces and ideas, moneyed sponsors effectively decide which candidates meet the name recognition and fund-raising thresholds that command media attention.
So if you're a candidate with something to say, buy an ad. And as for you voters, well, how 'bout them Tigers?
When only 28% of the women in this country now support the Iraq war, I can't Tammy Duckworth's opponent getting a large share or their vote. Beyond politics, her bravery is astounding and truly an inspiration.
You saw the movie, now read the book -- or at least, that's what I have been doing, for some early 20th-Century Arabian history.
I came across this last night from T. E. Lawrence's "Seven Pillars of Wisdom:"
It was a natural phenomenon, this periodic rise at intervals of a little more than a century, of ascetic creeds in Central Arabia. Always the votaries found their neighbours' beliefs cluttered with inessential things, which became impious in the hot imagination of their preachers. Again and again they had arisen, had taken possession, soul and body, of the tribes, and had dashed themselves to pieces on the urban Semites, merchants and concupiscent men of the world. About their comfortable possessions the new creeds ebbed and flowed like the tides of the changing seasons, each movement with the seeds of early death in its excess of rightness. Doubtless they must recur so long as the causes -- sun, moon, wind, acting in the emptiness of open spaces, weigh without check on the hurried and uncumbered minds of the desert-dwellers.
NYT: Can You Tell a Sunni From a Shiite?
"Most American officials I’ve interviewed don’t have a clue. That includes not just intelligence
and law enforcement officials, but also members of Congress who have important roles overseeing our spy
agencies. How can they do their jobs without knowing the basics?
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/17/opinion/17stein.html
Re: KNOW EXIT
Have you noticed? It used to be that that Talking Point, Stay The Course, had a certainty to it, the conceit implicit of reslove that appeals so much to conservative voters.
Cut & Run, besides sounding defeatist, also seemed vague ~ there was less certainty as to How To Do It: neither Democrats nor the Officer Corps could agree upon or articulate simply How To withdraw and/or re-deploy such that, in the minds of the electorate : there is A Way to do this and it has consistency.
That's all changed. That's what was different in the television discussion that engaged the Professor on PBS last night. The question that could not be answered was, "Stay The Course, How?"
How To ReDeploy now seems less unknown, after all ~ we've done this before. The silly straw man notion of "all at once," or "phased withdrawal" is passing away ~ of course, you can't just load everybody on transports and >POOF< no more Occupation. Obviously, you un-wind the position with the same care any Hedge Fund Manager exercises when he sells OIL and buys REITs.
What the AngloAmericans no longer have is a solution to the problem that is How To Stay The Course? What does that mean? Just hunkering down in Green Zones and Forward Operating Bases requires a truly awesome quantity of imported, off-grid energy, and constant air/land convoys to sustain. Even at idle, this portfolio burns what, ~$4 billion USD treasure per month, and bleeds ~40 dead and ~400 wounded : Stay The Course = Borrow & Bleed doesn't "pencil."
That's the cost of Occupation, when we don't do anything. Almost all NGO reconstruction "forces" have already withdrawn from IRAQ ~ almost all funding for those projects ended OCT-01 coincident with the Federal fiscal year. Ask the soldiers, and they'll tell you: "What we want, is a mission."
Congressional races always present a paradox. Voters rate congress poorly, yet return incumbents again and again. Tigers games and "survivor" shows draw more attention. Voter turnout is low, which favors conservative suburban voters with a stronger registration base and aversion to taxes.
Rogers is a dittoman for Hoesktra on the House Intelligence Committee. When some questioned its nuclear warning on Iran, he fired off letters affirming the report's warnings.
Marcinkowski may not get much traction on Iraq or other security issues. Habeas corpus and "innocent until proven guilty" are not popular principles. These days, referendum to "lock up anybody suspicious and throw away the key" might win lots of votes.
Unfortunately, the only way to win elections these days seems to be to scare people and convince voters that your opponent is too lax, wishy-washy, or hung up on world opinion or "rights of terrorists."
By the way, don't put down being "well-heeled," since that is almost the only way to get ahead in this era of costly media and dead unions. Think of NJ's Corzine. Furthermore, Roger's personal financial statement suggest only ordinary personal resources. Were Marcinkowski to match Rogers' fundraising, he'd have to go begging to the same vested interests, just like H. Clinton.
"Bush hasn't dumped Sec...who has not produced better results for 3 years...."
What makes anyone think that he planned and intended for other results!!! These results are conceived and implemented by a grand design. The (troops fighting for America, for the American way of life and other mottos) will never leave Iraq until the last drop of oil is pumped. The war will continue to heap fortunes on the Military and service industries that are owned by Jews mostly and are awarded the contracts without fair bids.
The Iraq war (billed exclusively by the rich, believed exclusively by the poor and incredibly “ “Americans as WAR on TERROR) is really a very successful war if you viewed its current results from a different prism.
Since Iraq never was or ever will be a threat for the used like wiping rags Zionists in Palestine, in fact, a buffer and a dam on Iran’s border (mentioned for the sake of argument, not that I don’t cherish Iran’s Islamic leadership), then you can view it as strictly an economic war, one that will benefit the few warlords that are using the lower classes to die and murder for them, while they create this war purely as a “Wealth Transfer Means” from the same poor Americans that are dying and killing to the Rich Jewish Masters that are in control of all those Corporations that are heaping all the war billions.
It is a free enterprise, the American way of life, so live with it and pay for it. As for the Democracy part? Democracy is for the secular, rich and educated masses and not for the ignorant, mentally challenged one that are wearing crosses and banging heads on a stable wall waiting for that Jew Carpenter-cum-God Jesus (not a shred of evidence that he in fact ever existed) to rise from the dead and establish his kingdom on earth.
I do not pity the losers and do cheer the winners, it is survival of the fittest and the smartest. Jefferson and Franklin gave them a great country and the greatest Social, Political and Economic systems ever invented by man, a turning point in mans history, and after few hundred years of hard work and perfection, the under-educated, Mentally Challenged handed it over to the Jews and Crusaders to turn it and the world into another Holly Grail
Assuming the "dialog" on the Leher show lasted 10 minutes, and dividing the Lancet's figure of 655,000 dead by the @1300 days of war and occupation, then dividing by the 24 hours in a day and rounding up a tad, then dividing by the 60 minutes in an hour, and finally multipltying by the 10 minutes of showtime, we get a figure of 3.5 people having died. In other words, according to the Lancet study, a person dies in Iraq about every 3 minutes [655,000/1300=503.85/24=21/60=.35x10=3.5]--a figure worth announcing at the beginning of any discourse about Iraq. The figure also provides a different context for somewhat abstract things like timetables: In the 75 days remaining in 2006, 37,800 Iraqis will die. The Oregon county I live in has about 47,000 residents. In the time it took me to compose this, 14 died, which is sobering and outrageous.
In Professor Cole's News Hour appearance he argued, in effect, that the U.S. military is playing a specific political role in the civil war. His analysis stands in contrast to the usual blank descriptions of the military mission as "providing security" or "fighting an insurgency." Though I cannot assess his particular claims, it seems that this sort of analysis is very important for finding an alternative policy in Iraq. If a new way of using the military can be connected to a positive and concrete political strategy for Iraq, there may be hope. Until then, "staying the course" is the only alternative to "defeat." It must be shown in exactly what way redeployment is part of a courageous strategy for victory (and in what way staying the course is an ineffective means for accomplishing even our immediate political goals). Until then the politicians will not lead us out of there.
You are correct, sir. I live in MI, and I've never heard the challenger's name;much less try to spell it from memory here! Is that a failure of the media, his campaign, or the Democratic party? Perhaps, a bit of all 3.
Is there some American figure that could take over al-Maliki's job and do it better? Iraq must be the most difficult country in the world to govern, yet we expect an individual who has never led a country before, or participated in any significant way in the leading or governing of a country, to make a dramatic difference in the conditions in Iraq (much less in 60 to 90 days). What did Bremer ever accomplish with all the resources at his fingertips?
The people doing the violence in Iraq are not doing it because no one has explained to them that it is wrong. People are fighting, dying, and killing for reasons they hold very serious, whether it be religious, ethnic, economic, criminal, or patriotic. From everything I've read the national government is merely a US created "democracy" contrivance. Its an entity where all the fighting factions can meet to hone their differnces rather than difuse them.
Al-Maliki's only tool is the same as everyone else's tool, violence. His main violence resource is the US military. Victory will require brutal search and destroy tactics against just about every faction in the killing field. If the Kurds try to slip away (with some oil fields of course), al-Maliki will have to turn the guns on them also. Of course collateral damage, i.e. dead and wounded civilians, will be huge. I doubt that the Iraqi soldiers and police would have much stomach to support the national government in this enterprise since most of them have blood ties to the waring factions.
So when Warner and Hamilton talk about doing something, they are talking about adding more violence to the current violence. I'm sure McCain and Graham will chime in with their tough-guy gravitas. They may suprise me and make propose some peaceful strategies but everyone knows what "stay the course" means - more bombing, breaking down doors, death threat check points, arresting, and killing.
The only other non-violent weapon system the US can use against Iraq is money. If we can draw down the military while at the sametime poring the money not spent into Iraqi hands, in ways that make the recipients feel more secure, maybe there can be a non-violent ending, if not an egalitarian democracy ending. Preposterous at first thought, but so is spending another 500 billion to perpetuate today's staus quo.
'Unfortunately, the only way to win elections these days seems to be to scare people and convince voters that your opponent is too lax, wishy-washy, or hung up on world opinion or "rights of terrorists." '
Gee John, you sound let down that your side seems, "unfortunately", to have come up with a winning formula to dominate elections and thus to carry out its redistribution of wealth and it's "borrow and bleed" program to smash and grab control of Middle Eastern Oil while sowing chaos amongst the people who might stand up to Israel's similar onslaughts.
Please, John, no crocodile tears from you,
How in the hell is Bush going to "remove" Maliki anyway? My god, is he going after regime change in Iraq AGAIN? I remember a big lecture Bush gave us all about "sovereign nation" with the heavy emphasis on SOVEREIGN vis a vis Pakistan, speaking slowly as though he were talking to a bunch of third graders who had spilled the paint on the teacher's desk. Isn't Iraq, according to official theory anyway, a sovereign nation now?
My god, I guess we just go around picking off leaders we don't like now.
Bush called Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki on Monday to reassure him that it was not true that the US planned to dump him if he had not produced better results in two months.
Maliki blew his chance to unify Iraqis at the start of his term by demanding that US troops leave his country. He's played ball with the occupiers and now will go down with them when real American and Iraqi patriots see to it that the US occupation forces do leave.
I have a two comments regarding your grasp of numbers and one regarding "Redeployment".
First: Your statement on the Lehrer show "I called for a phased withdrawal of US troops because I dispair of getting the Shiites and Kurds to compromise with Sunni Arabs in any other way." I think you have the situation turned around. Our presence is the only thing keeping the Shia and Kurds from annihilating the Sunni. Shia and Kurds are just as nasty as the Sunni. They have well founded grudges and effective control of the government means of violence. Already a significant percentage of the Sunni have left Iraq, 10 to 20%.
Second: You speak of 200,000 dying in Iraq yearly, apparently you accept the Lancet number. It would take a daily death toll of 548 per day to reach 200,000 per year. Nothing that I see supports this high a death rate.
REDEPLOYMENT to where? The Arabic an Pharsi for Redeployment is "retreat in defeat". If we leave before the job is done, we will not remain in Kuwait or any other Gulf country in any significant numbers because they will not allow it. They will see that in Osama's words we are the "weak horse" and they will start looking for accomodation with the Islamists / Al Queda types, or protection from another large country, with Russia and China being the only alternatives.
Tome Horne said "Our presence is the only thing keeping the Shia and Kurds from annihilating the Sunni. Shia and Kurds are just as nasty as the Sunni."
But our main preoccupation for the first three years of the occupation was "Sunni Triangle" 24/7. Our objectives were to destroy the Sunnis ability to wage their guerilla war against us, to deny them access to power by throwing the Baathist out of government and disolving the army, and rounding up and jailing any Sunni that looked at us crosseyed. All the while we let the Shiites build there strength and Kurds do as they please.
So now our mission is to stop the Shiites and Kurds from beating up the Sunnis the way we've been doing for the last three and a half years. Not even Machiavelli could figured this one out.
The last paragraph of sherm's post at 1:33 AM endorses the "Model Communities" approach to stabilizing and securing western Iraq.
Thanks for the validation. Anyone else want to support or criticize the approach ? It really is up to this community to solve Iraq - the people who post here. The Administration isn't up to the task, the Congress isn't either, nor are the think tanks or universities.
USAID is committed to an approach called "Community Stabilization Program" that replaces US military officers with civilian "PRT's" that take over administering the occupation. Reminds me of a Guiness commercial: brilliant.
Occupation and democracy are incompatible. An honor society must resist foreign occupation.
People all 'round the world, join in, join a peace train, peace train. If this community can coalesce around the "Model Communities" approach, we can embarass the USIP and the Secretary of State and the Democratic Congress into doing the right thing.
Mr Horne,
Just what is "the job"? It looks to me that it is supervising the genocide of Iraqis; their deaths is the only rising index.
The "Federal" issue has succeded in cementing the civil war. Sadr and the Sunni want a unitary state because there's no trust between factions. Secession/Partition can be the only result of this issue given the current status quo. Yet given the geopolitical forces, a unitary Iraq stands the best chance at withstanding the coming storms. Violence is sure to continue no matter the road taken.
However, the long-term solution to all ME problems must undo once and for all both the Balfour Declaration and the Sykes/Picot Agreement for they are at the foundation. There must also be some guarantee to the oil producers from the "international community" that war will not be waged for the control of hydrocarbons. [I know this latter point will seem empty to many as war as an instrument of foreign policy is actually unconstitutional--Kellog/Briand Pact; never repealed, so still the law of the land, as if we were actually a society of laws.]
How to keep the militias from fighting? By providing them productive work in and for their communities/neighborhoods. I would bet there's a direct correlation between the rise in violence and the rate of Full Time employment.
The funding would be routed through the mosques by bankrolling the leading clerics; they would act like private construction firms whose work would be subject to government standards, permits and oversight. The only place for the US in the equation is that of bankroller--reparations, one trillion dollars to start. The "Coalition forces" would evacuate and be replaced by Chinese peacekeepers, as provided by a UNSC resolution. This might be called Buy Your Way Out.
I see "the job" as getting our people out asap while putting militia members to work rebuilding all the damage we've caused since 1991.
Mr. Karlof1,
The "job" is to provide enough security and stability to allow the Iraqi government to develop the ability to govern effecively. Admitidly it is slow going, partialy because we have kept the gloves on, unwilling to pay the butchers bill. We and the Iraqi's will now pay that bill over time with compound interest. (stolen phrase)
Had we been more agressive, and sought earnestly to kill those that resisted us as soon as they resisted us, such as Al Sadr, the situation would be different, Shia oposition would not have grown to the level it has. Also, had we been more scary to Syria and Iran there would not be the cross border support for insurgents.
Wars fought to a conclusion do settle things. Feeding people to a slow meat grinder does not settle anything and leads a moral society to recoil and retreat in defeat, which will begin after Nov. 7 if the Dims take control in House and Senate.
At this point it looks to me like the best thing to do to bring this thing to a relatively stable situation is to bring on the civil war. Defeat the Sunni.
Remake the ME by undoing the post Turkish rule border alignments? In an ideal world populated by well educated people of Scandinavian mentality that would have been done by concensis long ago. In the real world it is not going to happen.
Chinese peacekeepers would probably be very good at making the "peace of the dead" and keeping it. That may be what it will take, though both of us would probably think they were a little too harsh.
Now Karlof1 endorses "Model Communities." Put authentic local leaders in charge, give them the reconstruction and aid dollars. We're on a roll.
Anyone else ?
Post a Comment
<< Home