"The State Department plans major increases in its Iraq mission, with hundreds more employees there and a stepped-up diplomatic presence outside Baghdad as the U.S. military prepares to leave later this year.
A new fiscal 2010 supplemental request asks for $2.1 billion for use in Iraq, the bulk going to set up two permanent consulates and three temporary “Provincial Development Teams.” The funding will enable another 129 State Department positions in Iraq, bringing the total to 664 by the end of this fiscal year. One consulate will be in Basra, one in northern Iraq. The PDTs will be along the Arab-Kurd fault line near Kirkuk, Ninewa, and Diyala, and $735 million in the supplemental request is designated for the security needed to protect civilians in the new outposts. The new presence around Iraq is described in the budget request as crucial “to mitigate ethno-sectarian conflict, to minimize the risk of instability, and to seize strategic policy opportunities.”"
In other words, the occupation will continue indefinitely."
I wonder if Anthony is seeing Iraq through the lens of Palestine, like many Arabs do.
ReplyDeleteJust the title alone should be a warning to take this with a grain of salt. Forever, Antony? Really? But... but.. I thought the American Empire was in decline? How can we hold Iraq forever?
ReplyDeleteThis is the same guy who said we should give OUR support to the Iraqi resistance.
I am still researching the DU issue in Iraq. Do any of you have any suggestions on how to contact <span>Minister of Human Rights, Wijdan Mikhail Salim?</span>
ReplyDeleteA smart friend of Mojo's and mine suggested one cause of birth defects in Iraq might be the heavy asbestus content of many Iraqi buildings.
Do some of you have any thoughts on the question of genetic defects? Any academic studies on this subject that anyone can suggest? Something on JSTOR perhaps?
I don't understand why the GoI isn't doing more to research this important issue.
One problem with the GoI is that they are horrible at returning e-mails. To get a response from them, you need to call their cell phone numbers inside Iraq.
ReplyDeleteThe new presence around Iraq is described in the budget request as crucial “to mitigate ethno-sectarian conflict, to minimize the risk of instability, and to seize strategic policy opportunities.”
ReplyDeleteIn other words, complete bullshit from the bowels of the ziocon Lie Factory.
<span></span>
You said you bought some warm sheepskin or something. Not doing the trick?
ReplyDelete<span><span>anan you made a claim on the other thread that:</span>
ReplyDelete<span> "the Syrian army was defeated in the Iraqi civil war ."
</span>
<span> Do you have a link or a source? Possibly in relation to this very claim (Syrian Army defeated) and not any other nonsense about a bunch of barefoot militants coming from Aleppo or Hama because that can hardly be called "the Syrian Army".</span></span>
Many senior officers of the Syrian army were arrested inside Iraq. They were leading what they called the "Iraqi Resistance." This was especially the case in Ninevah province.
ReplyDeleteThe Baa3thist insurgency in Ninevah province was in large part a Syrian lead one, although the Jordanians and Saudis were also deeply involved.
TGIA, how do you think the "resistance" was able to kill 15 thousand IA (Iraqi Army) and IP (Iraqi Police), not to mention over 3 thousand MNF-I troops. {Not all the MNF-I troops were killed by the "resistance" or sunni arab militias.}
Note I am not mentioning the many thousands of Iranian backed extremist Shiite militias killed by the "Iraqi Resistance." {ISCI's Badr force, Jaish al Mahdi, Hezbollah, IRGC backed rogue "special groups" etc.}
Zeyad once explained to Charlie Rose that "resistance" meant "sunni arab militias." Molly and CSS know Zeyad and his blog--"Healing Iraq."
I have lost count of the number of Colonels in the Syrian army arrested inside Iraq. The "Iraqi Resistance" was trained, equipped, funded, advised and lead in large part outside of Iraq.
The Iraqis were under great pressure from the Bush administration to understate the Syrian/Jordanian/Saudi/Egyptian involvement in attacking the GoI, ISF and MNF-I. Supposedly, Saudi Arabia with its boatloads of money was a "US ally." The Bush administration didn't want KSA's Iraq exploits {killing US soldiers} to get too much attention in the US media. Why do you think I keep calling former President Bush a "wimp"?
One of the big problems in Iraq was that Cheney hated Iran even though Iran nominally was a supporter of the GoI and the ISF against the resistance (Sunni Arab militias.)
President Bush didn't authorized the US military to defeat the "Iraqi Resistance" until after Rumsfeld was fired in late 2006. Could part of the reason be that the "Iraqi Resistance" was mass murdering many of of Iran's allies?
TGIA, Iraq was far more complex than you realize.
Mojo knows this, but a few years ago Gen George W. Casey (who lead all Multinational Forces-Iraq troops from June 2004 to the end of 2006) publicly said that he was never told by President Bush to defeat the insurgency, and that he never knew that was his mission.
ReplyDeleteThis might seem strange at first. But considering that the "Iraqi Resistance" was focused mostly on attacking other Iraqis and on fighting what it called the "Iranian occupation" rather than attacking MNF-I; is this really so surprising?
TGIA, you heart aches for Palestine. So does VAA's, V's, RS', Legal I's, etc.
But note, 15 thousand Iraqi Army and Iraqi Police were murdered while fighting to defend their country and their democratically elected legitimate government from the foreign backed "resistance." Often they had to do with with half hearted partial backing from President Bush.
15 thousand is far more than the number of Palestinians that have died violent deaths since 1967. Why no compassion for Iraqis? Why no empathy for the Iraqi Government and its security forces?
Ultimately it was the Iraqi Army and Iraqi Police that defeated the enemies of Iraq. Violent attacks against the Iraqi Army and Iraqi Police are down 95%. It is they, the Iraqis who won this victory. They defeated Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Egypt.
After defeating them and their "Iraqi Resistance", PM Maliki ordered the Iraqi Army and Iraqi Police to smash the Iranian backed Shiite militias in March, 2008. They were defeated by the ISF by May, 2008.
<span><span>As expected, not a single link or source to substantiate any claim you're making. I learned my lesson..No link or source, zero credibility.
ReplyDelete</span>
You made the fantasmagoric claim that "the Syrian army was defeated" but did not back it up. Only downgraded your claims to some Syrian colonels who were arrested. Not the same thing! Unless you think we're that stupid over here my friend.</span>
Some people say America was defeated in Vietnam because America's ally the ARVN (South Vietnamese Army) was defeated. I don't agree with this point of view since the South Vietnamese Army was not America; and because America turned against the ARVN and stabbed them in the back; facilitating the NVA (North Vietnamese Army) defeating them.
ReplyDeleteA similar principle was at work with Syria in Iraq.
Syria organized, advised, trained, equipped and funded Sunni Arab militias inside Iraq. The defeat of Syria's proxies inside Iraq was a defeat for Syria (and Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt.)
Ask yourself this simple question, who trained/equipped/advised/organized/funded the Sunni Arab militias?
Resistance movements rarely amount to much without substantial foreign help.
Remember that in 1775, 90% of the gunpowder used by the US militias against the British was provided free of charge by the French. The US revolutionaries were trained, equipped, advised and funded by foreigners.
In Lebanon, Amal would have been defeated in 1982 by the PLO and Sunni Arab militias without substantial Iranian help and de facto Israeli help (Israel was trying to kiss up to Khomeini at the time and was actively helping Khomeini fight with the wanna be anti-christ Saddam.) I doubt Hezbollah could have defeated Amal in the late 1980s without substantial Iranian and Syrian help.
The Iraqi resistance couldn't have fought Saddam in 1975 and again 1980-2003 without substantial Iranian help. Notice how when the Shah cut off the Iraqi resistance in 1975 as part of a deal with Saddam, the resistance stopped for 5 years.
TGIA, what kind of sources do you want? Active duty Syrian Colonels are the Syrian army. They were embedded advisors for the Sunni Arab militias. Much like MNF-I were embedded advisors for the Iraqi Army and Iraqi Police; and much like IRGC Kuds force and Hezbollah were embedded advisors for Shia militias.
Iraq was in large part a series of proxy war. Between Sunni Arabs and Iran. Between Iraq and the Sunni Arab neighbors. Between America and the Sunni Arab neighbors. In a very subtle and complex way between America and Iran. Between Kurds and Turks. In 2008 between Iraq and Iran, until the Iranians folded in May, 2008. Between Al Qaeda linked Takfiris and Iraq.
Syria's role in Iraq was complicated by Syria's relationship with Iran and Hezbollah. Syria was supporting both the Iraqi resistance and providing a conduit for assistance by Iran and Hezbollah to assist the Shiite militias.
ReplyDeleteSyria was backing two confederacies that were fighting with each other.
The Syrian connection with Iran is a reason why Muqtada angrily and publicly denounced Iran for backing Al Qaeda. Muqtada did this while living in Iran and during a time when his JAM militia was almost completely dependent on Iranian officers, advisors, trainers, funding and equipping. In fact much of JAM reported to Khamenei rather than Muqtada.
TGIA, Iraq was complicated.
Even Palestine is complicated.
yes it is but the problem is the hands and feet!
ReplyDeleteugh, sorry off topic, but i just shared a taxi home from my arabic class with this american woman who is extremely proud of her "expat salary" working for USAID. she actually said to me "i've done what ur doing and well, it's nice to be taken care of." i felt like saying "i've done what ur doing and well, it's really empty."
ReplyDeleteYou are twisted, it's a simple question that tgia asked, a frigging link.
ReplyDeletebut of course there is none , because it happened in your little head.
Liar
TGIA, Iraq was complicated.
ReplyDeleteEven Palestine is complicated.
------------
Geezus, that was DEEP! Thanks genius.
Still, your claim was utter bullshit and you know it..Shame on you!
ZID
ReplyDeleteYou're full of shit.Your village called, they want you back
<span>"In Lebanon, Amal would have been defeated in 1982 by the PLO and Sunni Arab militias without substantial Iranian help and de facto Israeli help"</span>
ReplyDelete----------
WTF
more of the same ?
dear anan,
ReplyDeleteT hank you for sharing your knowledge of the ME's conflicts, tho your educational efforts may be wasted on some folks, I benefit.
And,OH YES, the USA is going to have a strong presence in Iraq for a LONG Time.Iraq's democracy is precious to the USA, and we're going to protect , and support it as best we can.Let's Roll !