The latest: http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20050612...n_050612231004

This is an interesting more specific glimpse into what they are facing over there. I don't really see this as a negative or positive thing. More like, a transition.

Oh to answer your question Powerclown, IMO, I think: stability (short answer)

Decent article jorgelito, thanks.

As the Iraqi Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari (Iraq's first democratically elected Prime Minister in 50 years) said himself recently, it is difficult to reconstruct what took 35 years to destroy.

I also read with interest your highly detailed response in the other thread in regards to future stability in Iraq. Thorough post indeed. :thumbsup:

*A positive sign from the new Iraqi government in regards to the formation of their new Constitution. A call for moderation from the highest levels, amidst fears over the creation of another fundamentalist regime in the Middle East. Kudos to the Chicago Tribune for making the right decision to publish the article.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...own/purple.gif

Shiites Want to Limit Islamic References in Iraqi Constitution

27/05/2005 Chicago Tribune - By Liz Sly
BAGHDAD, Iraq - (KRT) - Shiite legislators have decided not to push for a greater role for Islam in the new Iraqi constitution out of concern that the contentious issue will inflame religious sentiments and deepen sectarian tensions.

Instead, the United Iraqi Alliance, the Shiite coalition that won the most seats in January’s elections, will advocate retaining the moderate language of Iraq’s temporary constitution that was drawn up under the auspices of the American occupation authority.

Humam Hamoudi, the Shiite cleric who heads the 55-member constitutional committee that will draft the new document, said that any attempt to debate the issue of Islamic law could ignite a firestorm of competing sectarian demands and that the brief references to Islam in three paragraphs of the temporary constitution should be left untouched.

"These paragraphs represent the middle ground between the secularists and those who want Islamic government, and I think the wisest course of action is to keep them as they are," he said in an interview at his Baghdad home. "Opening up the subject for discussion would provoke religious sentiments in the street."

The decision is likely to defuse what could have been one of the most divisive and rancorous issues confronting Iraqi lawmakers as they begin writing the constitution, the main function of the National Assembly elected in January.

But many controversial issues remain to be settled, and it appears increasingly unlikely that the assembly will be able to complete the constitution by the Aug. 15 deadline. Asked to rate the chances that the constitution will be finished on time, Humam replied "30 percent."

More than halfway into the time allotted, the real work of drafting the document has not yet begun and further delays are expected as politicians wrangle over ways to include members of the marginalized Sunni community in the process.

If the constitution is not ready by August, lawmakers can ask for a six-month extension, pushing back the date of the next election, scheduled for December, into the middle of next year.

According to the temporary constitution, or Transitional Administrative Law, if two-thirds of voters in any three provinces vote against the constitution, the document will be scrapped, fresh elections will be held for a new assembly and the process will start all over again. Sunni leaders have already warned that they will call on Sunnis in the four provinces where they are a majority to veto any constitution drawn up without Sunni participation.

But including Sunnis could be just as problematic. It took more than three months to negotiate the formation of a government that includes six Sunnis, and no one is taking any bets on how long it will take to reach a satisfactory formula for the constitutional committee.

"We have agreed that the TAL will be the basis for our discussions. We can edit it, more or less," said Fuad Massoum, the committee’s Kurdish deputy chairman. "This way we can easily reach an agreement and finish the job on time."

The TAL says Islam should be considered as "a source of legislation," but not the sole source. The words were a point of contention during the drafting of the law, when Shiites, including new Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari, pushed hard for Islam to be recognized as the only source of law.

"People are worried about the role of Islam. I think this will be the least time-taking issue because it’s been defined in the TAL and we accept that," said Ali al-Dabbagh, a Shiite legislator on the constitutional committee. He said as much as two-thirds of the TAL could be adopted in the new constitution.

Bringing Sunnis into the process will likely complicate the process, however. A Sunni bloc formed last weekend to represent Sunnis comprises mostly religious parties and clergymen, and they called for Islam to be given a stronger role in the constitution.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

powerclown, instead of replying to roachboy by using such a similar tactic as Bush used to attempt to dimisnish the relevancy of the "Downing Street Memo";
your variation was to label WAPO reporter Pincus as, "possibly one of the most liberal, anti-Bush reporters in Washington." , and then by attempting to change the subject, why didn't (or won't) you reply to roachboy's points, or to Pincus's article?

Is roachboy's observation valid that the "liberal media" has a tendency to publish articles such as the one written by Pincus. on the weekend when they don't receive as much attention as they could? Would a truly "liberal" media not give the article more exposure.....say on the front page on a tuesday?

What do you disagree with in Pincus's reporting in this article? He quoted Bush, Blair, and GOP chairmain Ken Mehlman in a straightforward way, without interjecting his own "spin" about their comments. Is there anything misleading or untrue in the article? At least in this case, can you agree that Pincus wrote a balanced report, or can you point out particular examples of Pincus misleading an uniformed reader who is trying to brush up on current events?

In edit....I do not disagree with making a point as to the bias, as you understand it, of the source of an article that is presented by another poster.
I take issue with doing that when it is substantially all you do to refute the authenticity or the impact of the article, without even pointing us to examples as to why the source of the article is biased, or to his credentials or affiliations. or to examples of bias in the content of the article, itself.

I'd be more comfortable (with what he reports as fact) if he could produce this 'memo'. He can't. The biggest hint of Pincus' bias is his record of speaking out against the war and everything related to it. It's simply a matter of public record. The assertion here that the "U.S. military was not preparing adequately for...a "protracted and costly" postwar occupation of that country" is obvious to everyone by now, and Pincus is using it to make a political anti-war statement. Is there a science to reconstructing an entire country from scratch? Is it really just a matter of referring to the "How to Rebuild A Ruined Nation in 60 Days" manual? You have to question the motivation of someone who - article after article - chooses to put a blatantly negative spin on an obvious situation.I don't dispute roachboy's point of a mistake made by running an ad during low-traffic time slots. The Democrats also made the mistake of electing Howard Dean as their party chairman, so how can one make heads or tails out of anything they do lately? If the article was 100% accurate and verifiable, why wasn't it published in primetime?

And to top it off, al-Jazeera - the unoffical mouthpiece of the insurgency - ran the story on the front page of their website. Credibility issues here.

::steps on both hands to prevent a response to Powerclown::

*One of the earliest memories I have of the televised days immediately following Hussein's demise was watching a looter's pickup truck stuffed to the gills with what appeared to be museum pieces. Someone managed to get a camera into one of these looted museums, where one could see aisle after aisle of empty display cases and shelves, shattered glass everywhere. It is amazing to me to learn that so many of the pieces are being recollected. This must be unprecedented in the history of warfare - historical items actually being returned to the scene of a battle. Well done to whoever is responsible for finding these things.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...n/artifact.gif

Thousands of Stolen Iraqi Artifacts Found

By Betsy Pisik
THE WASHINGTON TIMES

NEW YORK -- Roughly half of the 15,000 items looted from the National Museum of Iraq in 2003 have been recovered, said its director, who thanked American officials for assistance in restoring the building.

Archaeologist and museum director Donny George said law-enforcement and customs officials in the United States had intercepted at least 1,000 artifacts stolen from the museum in the chaotic days after the fall of Baghdad.

Another 3,000 or so artifacts have been found and secured in Jordan, Syria, Italy and other nations, said the museum director, an Iraqi-born Christian. However, he said, the governments of Iran and Turkey -- both neighbors with porous land borders -- have failed to respond to legal and diplomatic inquiries.

Many stolen Iraqi artifacts or their counterfeits still are advertised on EBay and change hands through channels known to collectors. U.S. law-enforcement and customs agencies say they are on the lookout for antiquities but cannot provide current information on interceptions or prosecutions.

U.S. troops, journalists and contractors returning from Iraq are among those who have been caught with forbidden souvenirs -- mostly paintings and small seals and cylinders that can be carved exquisitely and hidden easily.

"We are grateful to our friends and dear brothers" for intercepting the artifacts, Mr. George said Tuesday evening during a slide presentation to the National Arts Club in New York.

Much of Baghdad was plunged into chaos after U.S. troops captured the capital on April 9, 2003. As Iraqi troops fled, looters and professional thieves quickly overran the museum, which was left unguarded.

Mr. George -- like many Iraqis and much of the American press -- blamed U.S. military planners at the time for ignoring the history and culture of the country they had come to liberate.

But the museum director was much more conciliatory at the National Arts Club, where he told a well-heeled audience that he was "satisfied" with the level of financial and technical support to rebuild the shattered museum.

Asked whether the Pentagon had offered an apology for failing to guard the museum, Mr. George said U.S. assistance allowed his staff to rebuild the museum's offices and galleries, install new security systems and create computer networks where there had been none.

"I will take that as an apology," he said.

Mr. George, the director of research for the State Board of Antiquities under Saddam Hussein, was installed as director of the National Museum of Iraq by the U.S.-run Coalition Provisional Authority that governed the country from early 2003 until last summer.

He remained in that post under the interim government and has been retained by the transitional government of Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari. He also has the support of the international antiquities specialists.

"He's a real professional, one of the archaeologists in the Middle East," said McGuire Gibson, a professor of Mesopotamian archaeology at the University of Chicago's Oriental Institute who visited Iraq's museum and archaeological sites in 2003 for the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization and the National Geographic Society.

Mr. George said much of the thievery was done by insiders, but told The Washington Times this week that Iraqi and museum authorities have made little effort to find the culprits.

"I am asking [U.S. investigators] to tell me who they have caught," he said with a shrug.

The museum is trying to establish a database of the looted artifacts, in part to make them more difficult to sell. The FBI, Interpol and many museums also have put up images of the missing artifacts.

In the meantime, Mr. George said, he has asked governments to document and hold on to what they intercept until Iraq is more stable.

Thousands of missing pieces are presumed to be inside Iraq, where a corps of mostly untrained volunteers has been scouring markets in search of the missing antiquities.

The museum also has been fortified with tall concrete walls and welded gates that enclose the galleries, but Mr. George said it is not safe to reopen the doors to visitors.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

powerclown: as regards your absurd characterization of al-jazeera, straight from rumsfeld to this board via a thread about happynews from iraq--watch "control room" which features an extended analysis of the looting of the iraqi museum. more in ten minutes of footage and commentary from folk actually on the ground and not within the american presspool is worth more than a thousand stories about how the stolen items were magically "found"...

on the point/counterpoint front, the above article about the delightful american practice of "rendition" becoming a center of increasingly controversy.

once again, problems that you do not like are not for that going away any time soon.

So this is what this thread has come to, huh? See who can post more goodnews stories vs badnews stories. Damn. Time for some people to grow up. The thread is titled Iraq: Positive Developments. Another thread can be started called Iraq: Negative Regressions if it pleases. But argue the validity of the positive newsstories, don't try to counterpoint them with random negatives. Its useless and not at all conducive to the debate in this thread.

Hey Powerclown,

Thanks for the article on the museum pieces. I always wondered what happened there. It's like a movie waitiing to happen. Maybe Vin Diesel, Angelina Jolie head an all-star cast of adventurers, curators, treasure hunters and looters in a film about how the treasures were stolen and then found. Sort of an updated Indiana Jones pic...ha!

But seriously, theose are priceless relics and can be used in a positive manner in expressing national pride or as a rallying point too. Personally, I think some of these human interest stories an be helpful in the development of Iraq. Especially psychologically.

For example, the Iraqi football (soccer) team was a great source of pride, hope and positivity for the Iraqi people. Yes I know the war sucks and people are dying but there are rays of hope out there. It's how we balance and temper the two that could make a real difference. There's enough negative stories out there for sure, no question nor denial of that. Just searching for positive stories takes a while while combing through the days reality of bombimngs, attacks etc.

Cheers!

Incidentally, the article Powerclown posted reprised how the whole fiasco of the missing museum pieces started in the first place. Poor US mililtary planning. But, they are ta least, trying to make up for their mistakes. I think that's significant. It's a good article, pretty balanced IMO.

well gee, stevo, if there was only one type of article posted in the thread, there wouldnt be much debate would there? posting from a contrary viewpoint is part of the debate--particularly since this happyface thread is basically set up not only to provide happyface infotainment, but also to trivialize the many many problems with the iraq adventure.

i posted my reasons for putting the articles that i have up in here: i consider those reasons to be legitimate--and will do so until it bores me to continue.

i understand that you might prefer a limbaugh style "debate' in which everyone agress up front, the opposition is systematically excluded and you get to pretend you have access to a range of perspectives which magically mirror your own. there are fundamental disagreements aborad in the land--you can run away from them into the illusion of unanimity if you like, but that you run away does not mean they are not present.

Agreed.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

The stories here are reports of real-life events - if one chooses to call it infotainment, I don't have any problem with that. Just make sure to label all such public-domain reporting likewise for the sake of consistency.

I tend to agree with Stevo here.
Roachboy, that rendition article doesnt even deal with Iraq. I think a proper responce would be anything discrediting the articles posted or any points made on the subject.

i think the types of information talk by each other, mantus: i see very little anywhere directly critiquing press pool releases and others concerning specific actions the us has done to begin rebuilding iraq. on its own terms, i dont have any real interest in attacking the stories that powerclown posts--in fact i find them interesting. the objection i have is that these stories are posted to the exlcusion of wider questions, particularly about the war itself.

so in there is the link to the rendition article--but its a bit of a stretch--my apologies for that part.

Is the Bush regime and it's supporters, circa 2003-2005, the contemporary equivalent of "barbarians"? While reading this, that was the question that came to my mind. The ignorance, the conceit, the incompetence and disregard in the projection of military force, against an old "ally", in such a sensitive area in so many ways.....literally in the "cradle of civilization. Our "commander in chief's" own father detailed why he avoided this drastic, and still, in 2003, easily avoidable option, and his "boy" elected to do it anyway! How would this play if the cultural destruction involved the <a href="www.louvre.fr/louvrea.htm -">Louvre</a>, or the <a href="http://www.polomuseale.firenze.it/english/uffizi/">Uffizi Gallery</a>, or
<a href="http://www.thebritishmuseum.ac.uk/">the British Museum</a>.
The following is so important to the Iraqi people, and the results of 26 months of "trying" by the U.S administration, is.........well.......extremely mediocre !
This "happy talk" thread is a positive, but what has the Bush administration done right, in Iraq, in the U.S., and in the world? No one who is a Bush "team player" is ever fired. General Shinseki had it right in his pre-invasion criticism of planned troop levels.....and he was discredited by this administration. George Tenet at CIA had it wrong, and he received the highest civilian award from Bush, the Medal of "Freedom". Condi and Wolfowitz had it wrong, and Bush promoted both of them.

This is a thread that seems to put a spotlight on mediocre positives in the wake of the destruction wrought by a mediocre U.S. administration

There isn't enough power....

because the Iraqi people are trying to raise their standard of living higher than it was under Sadam.

Yes, thats horrible :rolleyes:

I'm sure when we pull out the troops everything will be hunky doory though :hmm:

a long article from this morning's washington post.

first, it was a bit beyond even my cynicism about the bush administration to think that when bush et al talk of "spreading freedom" what they really meant was spreading the current administration's curious notion of freedom, one that extends to kidnapping, illegal detentions without trial, and so on.

second, there is a tendency in coverage of iraq to act as though the iraqi people are passive--for example, earlier there was an article about rebuilding the iraqo oil industry that included remarks about the lack of training amongst iraqis--whcih would make you wonder how the iraqi oil indutry managed to function previously. maybe the iraqis need colonialism. the same argument has been floating around since the 1870s.

this patronizing attitude has curious effects--among them it that it sets the americans up to get played--and in this situation, i think that they really are being played by the kurds.

but read the article and decide for yourself.

source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...061401828.html

Interesting article roachboy.

There indeed appears to be much going on behind the scenes in Iraq, away from the spotlight of Michael Jackson, and missing debutantes in paradise. One has to wonder sometimes why so much attention paid to absolute trivialities. What is the point of a tranquilized, distracted populace?

This is my take on the article: The Kurds and the Americans are trying to establish a 'beachhead' in the north. Northern Iraq is different from the rest of Iraq for 2 reasons: 1) it is mostly free from Sunni Arab insurgent violence, 2) it is politically stable and organized. In this particular instance, the Kurds seem to be trying to consolidate power in the north by jailing ex-Baathists and other troublemakers who they (and others) see as a threat to this stability. It makes sense to me. In laying out the framework for a democratic system, it seems the forces in the region are using the north as a starting point (one of several?), with the aim of eventually working their way south.

At the same time, while the Sunni Arabs are busy trying to destroy everything in their path in central and southern Iraq, the Kurds are trying to establish a 'firewall' to keep these guys from doing the same in the north. The Americans seem to be working with the Kurds to this end, and for good reason. It is also telling that the police force is working in accordance with the 2 major political parties there; they seem to be dividing their attention somewhere between local law enforcement (social order) and larger regional priorities (consolidation of power/base of operations).

interesting take, powerclown.

another way of seeing the implications of the article is that the americans are not running the show, really, but instead have become one variable amongst others in a complex and fragile political game. what is curious is that the americans were heavily reliant on kurdish assistance in the context of the invasion, and so appear to be getting played by the group with whom the americans are in fact most closely aligned.

if this is correct, then i end up having to hope that you are more on point on iraq than i am, powerclown, because this is a logic of civil war in the worst possible mode for the americans--as a faction amongst others on the one hand, as a kind of elephant in the chinashop to be manipulated by any and all parties for their own ends on the other. this possibility is why i have been watching the bizarre manoevering of the iraqi regime with concern.

it seems to me that the iraqi police force embodies most of the contradictions of the situation in general. the relation of the american "training" and the factionalized relaity of the force being trained is also a good metaphor for the what i think the american position in all this in fact is.

of course, these are partial--like you say, it is hard to get a view of what is happening behind the carefully framed information circulating from the pentagon into the press pool.


on another level, relative to the american image internationally, i think this kind of development amongst the kurds functions as a powerful immanent critique of the american category "freedom"--dissent, real and possible, armed and discursive, a question of actions or one of belonging to a group that would enable potential action to be imputed to you--all equivalent, all outside the rule of law, all dealt with in what you have to admit are extra-legal means.

the counter would be to argue that this is a state of war. but i thought the war was over. i remember bush saying as much. if that is true, then the argument that would legitimate operating in a wholly extra-legal manner in the name of security should go out the window.

but this entire argument, no matter your position on it, rebounds back onto the bush administration and its particular choices justified in the name of this fictive "war on terror"....

and here the rendition article actually becomes relevant to the discussion.

host, thanks for some background on the museum looting that when on during the early stages of the war. It was a bad mistake on the part of...somebody.

Not sure about Bush himself being a barbarian, but his daughter Jenna can definitely throw down like one!!

http://www.gawker.com/news/JennaBush.jpg

:eek:

Yes, I can see the manipulation angle you point out roachboy, where the Kurds are using American technology and firepower to secure their own interests and spheres of influence, but I would say it works both ways. The Americans wouldn't be playing ball with the Kurds if they weren't reaping rewards as well. An entire area to the north of Baghdad (including Turkey) allied to the US is a highly desirable situation for the Yanks. I can foresee a time when this area could develop into a US (and allies)-friendly military/intelligence base of operations - an eagle's aerie so to speak - in the heart of the Middle East.

So far, I don't see US involvement with the Kurds as a prelude to civil war; this would be tantamount to a complete pullout of troops and I don't think the Americans are going to be completely out of the region now, or ever. I just don't see an American Rwanda in Baghdad at this point. I think the one factor that will prevent civil war will be the oil. Once the Iraqi oil markets are up and running, the entire international community will have a stake in maintaining the stability of the region, and there is a lot of oil in northern iraq.

As far as the implementation of this process (and as far as I understand your point) through less-than-savory methods, I can only look to the future and point out that this undertaking, if successful, will be of benefit to far, far more people long-term than it inconveniences short term.

i dont understand what you are saying here--could you explain?

i should have been clearer--i was referring to the situation in iraq in general, linking the curious situation that emerged today in the post with other information about other regions. the pattern seems to indicate that the americans are not the structuring power, but rather are one (big, heavily armed but not dominant) faction amongst others. what is worrying from the viewpoint of civil war is the jockeying that is going on on the part of the central iraqi govt. relative to the sunni community. if that breaks down, then the americans will find themselves involved in a civil war that they do not and cannot control. it seems to me that this--admittedly dark--scenario would run in a direction opposite to a pullout--it would tip into a morass.

the point about the iraqi "security force" was seperate: it has seemed to me that if you were to look at one institution as a metaphor for the situation in general, it might well be the security forces, which seem a microcosm of the factionalised situation both within the "legitimate" sphere of politics and in the relation of this "legitimate" sphere to the insurgency.

what is curious in this--whcih i did not talk about becuase it only just occurred to me--is the american tendency to pitch the insurgency as a foreign entity, ia kind of 5th column--which seems misleading as an information strategy--but if this reflects hwo strategy is being considered, then i think the results would be not good at all. but i do not know (and am not sure how i would find you--any ideas?) the extent to which the two are linked, if they are (information strategy/military strategy).

hope this clear up a bit what i posted earlier.

Turkey was much happier with the Kurdish situation when Saddam was firmly in control of northern Iraq, than they are now.

Turkey sees only two tolerable outcomes for the Kurds. One is incorporation inside an expanded Turkish border, and the other is marginaliztion of Kurdish nationalistic and political ambitions as in the policies towards the Kurds of Saddam's Iraq. For Turkey, this is not a problem confined to Iraq. There are Kurdish populations in contiguous Syria, Iran, and in Turkey itself that have ambitions of forming an independent Kurdistan with their cousins in northern Iraq. Bush and company apparently did not study history, and consequently, they appear to have us poised to repeat it.
(The earlier part of the entire article offers a description of Kurdish ambitions in the context of the current political vacuum. The point is made that now, things are probably as good as they will ever get for Kurds in a geographically intact Iraq, and they know it.)

I'm not sure that's entirely true. Hussein's campaign of genocide against the Kurds forced at least 1 million refugees into Turkey (following the Halabja massacre and then the Gulf War) causing a humanitarian, social and economic catastrophe for Turkey. Also of relevance is the fact that, as a member of NATO, Turkey enjoys the combined protection of all NATO members, under Article 4:

"The Parties will consult together whenever, in the opinion of any of them, the territorial integrity, political independence or security of any of the Parties is threatened"

Another counterbalance to Turkey's situation with the Kurds is that the benefits of future memembership in the EU would make Turkey more willing to accomodate the notion of some kind of independent Kurdistan in Iraq.

*Further signs of reform in heart of the Middle East. It is a particularly unfortunate side effect of the Muslim faith that burqa-clad women of the region must endure, for the moment, the scorching hot temperatures of the tropical desert climates in what appears to be the clothing equivalent of snowsuits. It seems to me that it would have been much kinder of Fate to have based their societies much farther away from the equator. Such is life.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...lown/women.gif


Iraq: New Radio Station For Women Goes on the Air

Date: 14 Jun 2005

BAGHDAD, 14 June (IRIN) - A radio station focusing on women's issues has hit the airwaves in the Iraqi capital, Baghdad.

Topics under discussion include the importance of women's rights and the new constitution, the forthcoming general election, childhood needs and family problems.

"The radio station is a voice for Iraqi women in the country, a voice to speak about her rights, her issues, her ambitions, her problems without hesitation," manager of the radio station, Majed Rahak, said.

Known as radio "al-Mahaba" meaning love in Arabic, the station is supported by the United Nations Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM) programme.

The station was established by the Ministry of Municipality and Public Works (MMPW) working with local women's NGOs including the Iraqi Women's League (IWL), Women Rise (WR), General Student's Union (GSU) and the Flower of Iraq (FoI)

"This project aims to encourage, strengthen and support Iraqi women at all levels to know their rights, to enjoy equality and dignity and to define their future effectively by understanding international laws," a UNIFEM representative in Iraq, Besma al- Kateab, said.

Broadcasts started in April and the station has had a slow start but is now increasing programming.

"I listen to al-Mahaba radio every day. They have good programmes for women about life and rights in society," listener, Muna Ferhad said.

Transmitting for eight hours a day, the station presents a variety of material.

"We have good educational programmes, legal advice and many social discussions. We have interviewed famous Iraqi women and specialists in civil society," Rahak said.

The station employs both female and male, producers, trained journalists, technicians and musicians. It also gives young female talent a chance to shine.

"We are encouraging young women to come and display their talent here by showing off their art and handicrafts, reading poems and to advertise any training for women listening to the programmes," radio presenter, Niran Ali said.

Al-Mahaba radio now plans to increase transmission time and to extend its reach by broadcasting countrywide.

Source: United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs - Integrated Regional Information Networks (IRIN)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Turkey accepting an indepentant Kurdistan? I suppose EU membership could ease that hurt, but it would a major concern to them. They view Kurds as terrorists. They're our good guys, but to the Turks, they're a major threat. Plus, theorizing an indepentant Kurdistan presupposes an Iraqi civil war.

Not necessarily. Maybe the use of the term 'Kurdistan' is a sticking point. I was referring to a Kurdish territory in the federalist sense - a part of Iraq, yet independent in its own internal affairs, as Detroit is within the United States, for example.

Ayatollah Al-Sistani has repeatedly denounced any attempt for Kurdish autonomy apart from participation in a national iraqi government. Given his sway in Shia politics, i think that suggestion is DOA. I don't know if you're making a crack about Detroit, or if you're downplaying Kurdish nationalism, or being generous about local power in American politics. But i don't think that that's what the Kurds are longing for, the Turks are afraid of, and the Shia desperate to prevent.

This may be true, but I think you may be forgetting that the Kurds (and any other people or region with a two-thirds majority in three governates) have been granted the power to reject a draft constitution. This has the effect of ensuring that orthodox Islamic law won't become the sole source of legal interpretation, which would keep the Kurds (and other minorities in Iraq) from becoming subjects of a Shia majority.

The reference to Detroit was straightforward. A new 'Kurdistan', established within the federalist system of the country of Iraq.

Or, on a smaller level, a Chinatown within New York City.

which is just a nod to the reality of how many guns kurds are hodling. it's also a potential source of major gridlock and political stalemate. if they had something holding them together...it could be a source of compromise. but as things are, i would think that such a structure will produce self-interested vetoes, and stalemate and confrontation. remember how long it took to get the cabinet in place? remember how long it's taken to get anything done?

Sorry, martinguerre, but I seem to be missing your point here.
Yes, the Kurds are armed with guns, they have a 40,000-strong security force. The developing Iraqi Police force are armed as well of course. And what exactly is a source of gridlock/stalemate??

*Quite a remarkable development. The word was that the Sunnis were going to be a part of the new government despite boycotting the elections, and here is confirmation. This is precisely the spirit needed to push forward in Iraq. I wonder how the insurgency feels about this agreement - a major denunciation coming from their own people. Their cause seems more obsolete by the day.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...lown/agree.gif

Sunnis Added to Iraq Constitution Panel

By Andy Mosher and Omar Fekeiki
Washington Post Foreign Service
Friday, June 17, 2005; Page A22

BAGHDAD, June 16 -- Iraqi political leaders reached a compromise Thursday to include more Sunni Muslim Arabs on the committee responsible for writing the country's new constitution, ending weeks of stalemate and raising hopes that the document can be crafted before the panel's deadline expires in two months.

"The problem is solved and ended. The Sunnis will participate in the process of writing the constitution," said Tariq Hashimi, the secretary general of the Iraqi Islamic Party, a leading Sunni organization.

The breakthrough in bringing minority Sunni Arabs into the constitution-writing process bridged a divide between leaders of the 55-member constitution committee. Shiite Muslims, the dominant group on the panel, had offered to add 13 Sunnis to the two already on the committee. Sunni groups had demanded that 25 be added.

Under the compromise, the new panel will include members of the existing committee, 15 additional Sunni Arabs with full voting rights and 10 more Sunnis in an advisory, non-voting role. A member of Iraq's Sabean sect, an ancient religious group, will also be added and allowed to vote.

Adnan Janabi, the head of a subcommittee that has been negotiating for weeks to involve more Sunnis in the process, called the compromise "the best we could reach. It was unanimously agreed upon by both sides."

But Saleh Mutlak, who leads a Sunni coalition known as the National Dialogue Council, said: "We bitterly agreed on the decision. The country is in a critical situation, and if we don't agree, the political process will be delayed."

Iraq's Sunni Arabs, who held the bulk of power in Iraq for centuries, boycotted January's parliamentary elections and hold relatively few seats in the 275-member National Assembly. When the Shiite coalition that holds a majority in the assembly formed a constitution committee in May, only two Sunni Arabs were included.

Since then, leaders from across Iraq have been working to ensure that more Sunni Arabs have a role in writing the constitution, which is scheduled to be completed by Aug. 15. The committee could extend the process by six months, but that would delay a referendum on it scheduled for Oct. 15 and ultimately postpone the election of a permanent government.

Party leaders said Thursday that they would assemble a list of candidates' names to be presented to the National Assembly for inclusion on the new panel. Hashimi, the secretary general, said that the list would include members of established parties and independents and that it would be compiled by Saturday.

Well, that's certainly good news.

As John Adams said, a lawful government comes from consent of the governed.

Kurdish interests are being protected not by some stable system, or motivation to participated in a legitimated and equitable system. The motivation the Shia have for listening to the Kurds is that they have guns.

At some point, the people holding boomsticks may decided that they're not being listened to enough, or that the rest of the country is going to hell in a handbasket. And unlike the Shia forces, the Kurds actually stand together and have a deep leadership reserve since their structure wasn't de-ba'athistized or whatever we called dismantling their army.

What i'm saying is that lack of motivation to participate in a central government, and the ability to get away with nationalist seperatism may win out long term.

This all said...the new compromise does seemt ohave some promise to it. let's hope it sticks.

Oprah has a fan base in Iraq. Iraqi mothers fret about the amount of time their teenagers spend watching "Star Academy," an Arabic-language cross between "American Idol" and "The Real World."


yeah, we´re improving their lives big time.

Indeed...when people are given a choice. It appears at this point that the Iraqis et al are prepared to compromise for the greater good.

I completely agree with you here. One shouldn't forget that the Shia are also well-armed. Nobody wins if one group or another gets disproportionately greedy. The insurgency obviously is an example of a illegitimate, rogue group trying to go it alone without anyone's consent, let alone majority consent. I believe their days are numbered.

Hehe, better they join Oprah's Book of the Month club than join Zarqawi's Suicide Bomber of the Day club, eh?

*Financial institutions from around the world are starting to take an interest in investing towards the future of Iraq. This particular article focuses on loans from the International Finance Corporation to Iraqi banks to assist small business ventures in Iraq. No doubt there will be much more of this type of thing once the security situation further stablizes.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...lown/dinar.gif

IFC Invests in Iraq’s Banking Sector

June 2 2005

Press Release - International Finance Corporation

The International Finance Corporation, the private sector arm of the World Bank Group, will provide a $12 million loan to support the SME lending operations of National Bank of Iraq, also known as Al-Ahli Bank of Iraq. The financing represents IFC’s first investment under the Iraq Small Business Finance Facility, which seeks to assist micro, small, and medium enterprises in Iraq through local financial institutions.

Funded by IFC and donor agencies representing the United Kingdom, the United States, Japan, and Spain, the $105 million Iraq Small Business Finance Facility provides technical assistance funding to develop Iraqi banks’ capacity for lending to smaller businesses. It also extends term loans to certain Iraqi partner banks for on-lending to small local enterprises.

Jyrki Koskelo, Director of IFC’s Global Financial Markets Department, said, “IFC expects to do more transactions through the Iraq Small Business Finance Facility to support Iraqi bank lending to smaller businesses. We intend to work with a number of local banks to develop their capacity and to strengthen their operations.”

Sami Haddad, IFC’s Director for the Middle East and North Africa, noted, “The project will achieve a high developmental impact. It will help revive economic activity in small enterprises at the grass-roots level and create new jobs and opportunities in Iraq’s private sector.”

Ghassan Jameel, General Manager of National Bank of Iraq, welcomed IFC’s involvement in the bank and added, “The new partnership with IFC is crucial for our business as it will enable us to serve our SME clients in a much better way. I hope that more foreign investors will follow IFC’s example and engage in the Iraqi banking sector.“

Mohammad Ali K. Al-Husry, Chairman and Chief Executive of Export and Finance Bank of Jordan, which has received approval to take a 49 percent shareholding in National Bank of Iraq, observed, “Export and Finance Bank of Jordan has recently raised National Bank of Iraq’s capital to $17 million making it one of the best capitalized banks in the country. Our financial and technical input will enable National Bank of Iraq to tap into the vast pool of opportunities in the country. We are very pleased to work with IFC in helping rebuild Iraq’s financial system and in providing training to young Iraqi bankers, including women.“

Established in 1995 as a commercial bank in Jordan, Export and Finance Bank has recently raised its capital to 72 million Jordanian Dinars ($102 million). It offers its domestic and foreign clients a range of commercial and merchant banking products including money transfers, letters of credit, letters of guarantee and others services for the Iraqi market.

National Bank of Iraq, a domestic commercial bank with headquarters in Baghdad, was established in 1995. It is currently finalizing a capital increase, which will make it one of the best capitalized players in the country’s banking system. The bank will focus increasingly on SME financing and retail operations across Iraq. Its operations will be strengthened through a capacity building technical assistance program funded by the Iraq Small Business Finance Facility.

this would seem to be a good thing--getting other countries to pledge support means that the americans can maybe begin to pull back from the center of the various firestorms bush's misbegotten invasion has created. it would be a good thing indeed to split the notions of democracy away from the degenerate version of it embodied by bushco. if the administration was ever, at any point, serious in what it claimed to be its ultimate justification for this war--once every last one of the others had fallen apart--that is in liberating the iraqi people, then reducing american centrality is an important step.

Nice post Roachboy, good find. There's so much work to do still. In my opinion, we made a mistake, but now we have to make good on it.

It also helps "Bushco" to reach out to the international community.

*I agree, and not only you and me, but many, many countries around the world also understand that a stable Iraq is in the best interests of everyone, as the below story illustrates. (I watched Control Room last night btw...good movie, too many broadcasts of injured iraqi children, imo. We all know war is hell. Interesting to hear the al-Jazeera producer mention the need for all media outlets to 'propagandize' their coverage. I don't disagree.)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -



http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...wn/soldier.gif

Iraqi Army Col. Thear, commander of the 2nd Battalion, 2nd Iraqi Army Brigade briefs his troops during training on
the armored personnel carriers at the Diyala Regional Training Facility on Forward Operating Base Normandy, Iraq
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

France, Other Nations Help Train Iraqi Forces
Europe quietly aids reconstruction effort


Elizabeth Bryant, Chronicle Foreign Service
Saturday, May 21, 2005

The six men seated around the white classroom table -- including the pudgy Foreign Ministry attache, the former army captain, the man with the sad, brown eyes who introduced himself vaguely as a "director general" -- were the unlikely vanguard of Iraq's bold new experiment in democracy.

"What's most important are the principles," said Jean-Pierre Massias, the head of this University of Auvergne training program for senior Iraqi officials. "The rule of law. Checks and balances. Compromise. How local governments can be a tool to prevent conflicts. How to administer a country."

After bitterly dividing over the war, Europe is uniting to help reconstruct Iraq, and these civics lessons in central France are part of that effort. Plans are in the works to coach about 750 Iraqi judges and prison guards on Western law and to hold an international conference in Brussels. European programs to train Iraqi security forces are mostly taking place outside the turmoil-torn country. The same stipulation is tied to a French offer to drill 1,500 Iraqi troops and police.

These efforts -- and more on the drawing board -- are taking place as the newly seated Iraqi government struggles to get under way amid the continuing carnage that appears to target the same kinds of people the Europeans are training.

"Europeans aren't going to ratchet up their military commitment in Iraq - - they're going in the opposite direction," said Richard Whitman, a European expert at Chatham House, a London-based policy institute, referring to the decision by several EU members to pull their troops from Baghdad. "But they will contribute to the development and administration of Iraq, especially out of the country -- that's where their comfort zone lies."

Before leaving his Paris post, former U.S. Ambassador Howard Leach chided France for not doing more to secure a shaky peace.

"They can offer to train more people. They can contribute funds for the reconstruction of Iraq," said Leach, who departed for his part-time home in San Francisco last month. "French companies can become more involved in rebuilding the economic strength of Iraq."

French Foreign Minister Michel Barnier suggested that Paris is willing to offer a more generous hand to a country where France once was a powerful economic player. "We're willing to go fairly far when it comes to matters of civilian, administrative and economic cooperation," he told reporters recently.

The course held last month at Cleremont-Ferrand included lectures on federalism and decentralization, the composition of local governments and budgeting. While the Iraqis here describe themselves as fierce opponents of deposed President Saddam Hussein, they take France's stand on the U.S.-led war in stride.

"France was against the Iraq war for humanitarian reasons," said Audey Abed Awn, 33, an official in the Foreign Affairs Ministry. "Now, France is opening its doors to Iraqis."

From the first day -- when the students turned out to be lower-level bureaucrats rather than the eight governors who had been expected -- it has been an exercise in flexibility. "We're not absolutely certain who all these people are," Massias said. "We have no idea who's Sunni and who's Shiite. We don't know their professional backgrounds. ... The one thing I know is that they're interested. They're curious. They ask a lot of questions."

At a morning lecture on decentralization, for example, 51-year-old Talib Al-Mhana pressed for more information about French laws. "How are they publicized?" Al-Mhana asked in Arabic. "How do French peasants learn about legal changes?"

A former captain in Hussein's army, Al-Mhana fled Iraq in 1981. He joined the Iraqi opposition, he said, moving from Lebanon to Syria and then to the Netherlands. He returned to Iraq in 2003. He heads Iraq's "de-Baathification" committee, aimed, he said, at reintegrating Hussein-era bureaucrats into the new Iraqi government.

Like the rest of the men here, he is learning his new job from scratch --
and weathering the downsides, including two assassination attempts in Baghdad. "It's true, there are attacks against us," said Al-Mhana, whose family remains in the Netherlands. "But we hope democracy will arrive one day."

Ahmad Abd, whose business card reads "press man," was in the anti-Hussein opposition. Today he edits the Al-Zamman newspaper. "There's freedom of expression now," he said, "but it's hard to find out the real truth from the Americans."

Massias, the program head, is not a Middle East specialist, but he has trained dozens of legal and political professionals from ex-communist countries.

"The example of former Soviet states is very interesting for the Iraqis because it's about governments in transition -- from totalitarianism to democracy," he said.

"And also the territorial problems -- Kurdistan for them corresponds to a Chechnya, or a Crimea," he added, naming two restive, former Soviet republics and the northern Iraqi region seeking a degree of autonomy in the new Iraq. "What I think they want to find out is how to give the Kurds a little bit of power, without losing them. It's a country that lives in fear of seeing Kurdistan secede."

But another main message for the Iraqis here, he said, is about burying past grievances.

"I tried to tell them there can't be social revenge against people who were attached to Saddam Hussein," Massias said. "If you make these people afraid, they'll become your enemies and you'll have to pressure them to keep calm.

"And that," he added, "is not democracy."

*Glass half empty - Glass half full? Who's to say? We're all familiar by now with Senator Ted Kennedy's take on the situation in Iraq, his favorite word for it being 'quagmire' in reference to Vietnam.

(As an aside, once upon a time I vacationed in Cozumel, Mexico to enjoy a bit of scuba diving. Upon our diveboat departure to the reef, we were informed that because a certain yacht had accidently anchored into one of Cozumel's world-class and legally protected reefs and damaging it, we would be forced to go elsewhere. Apparently, the owner of the yacht, one Senator Ted Kennedy (D) Massachusetts, was being questioned and ticketed by the local authorities and told to move his yacht from the area immediately.)

Today's Positive Development comes from a most unlikely source: United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan. Apparently convinced now of the need for success in Iraq, Mr. Annan weighs in on the current state of affairs there:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...lown/kofi2.gif


There's Progress in Iraq

By Kofi Annan
Tuesday, June 21, 2005; Page A21

Today I am traveling to Brussels to join representatives of more than 80 governments and institutions in sending a loud and clear message of support for the political transition in Iraq.

A year ago, in Resolution 1546, the U.N. Security Council set out the timetable that Iraq, with the assistance of the United Nations and the international community, was expected to fulfill. The Brussels conference is a chance to reassure the Iraqi people that the international community stands with them in their brave efforts to rebuild their country, and that we recognize how much progress has been made in the face of daunting challenges.

Elections were held in January, on schedule. Three months later the Transitional National Assembly endorsed the transitional government. The dominant parties have begun inclusive negotiations, in which outreach to Sunni Arabs is a major theme. A large number of Sunni groups and parties are now working to make sure that their voices are fully heard in the process of drafting a new constitution, and that they participate fully in the referendum to approve it and the elections slated for December.

Indeed, just last week an agreement was achieved to expand the committee drafting the constitution to ensure full participation by the Sunni Arab community. This agreement, which the United Nations helped to facilitate, should encourage all Iraqis to press ahead with the drafting of the constitution by the Aug. 15 deadline.

As the process moves forward, there will no doubt be frustrating delays and difficult setbacks. But let us not lose sight of the fact that all over Iraq today, Iraqis are debating nearly every aspect of their political future.

The United Nations has been strongly urged by a wide spectrum of Iraqis to help them maintain momentum, as we did with January's elections. They have sought our support in constitution-making, in preparing for the October referendum and the December elections, and in coordinating donor assistance for the political transition as well as reconstruction and development.

Our response has been prompt and resolute. We have set up a donor coordination mechanism in Baghdad, deployed a Constitutional Support Unit, and established an active and collaborative relationship with the assembly's constitutional committee. Today more than 800 U.N. personnel -- both local and international, including security staff -- are serving in Iraq in the U.N. assistance mission.

In a media-hungry age, visibility is often regarded as proof of success. But this does not necessarily hold true in Iraq. Even when, as with last week's agreement, the results of our efforts are easily seen by all, the efforts themselves must be undertaken quietly and away from the cameras.

Whether U.N. assistance proves effective will depend largely on the Iraqis. Only they can write a constitution that is inclusive and fair. The United Nations cannot and will not draft it for them. Nor do we need to, because Iraqis are more than capable of doing it themselves. They would welcome advice, but they will decide which advice is worth taking.

As important as particular constitutional provisions is the underlying accommodation between Iraq's diverse communities. My special representative, Ashraf Qazi, is encouraging and facilitating the delicate task of political outreach to all Iraqi communities to promote a truly inclusive transition. His work, too, is necessarily carried out away from the media glare, as he seeks to build the trust and confidence among the various constituencies that will be the key to the successful transition envisaged by Security Council Resolution 1546.

There are, of course, those who wish to exacerbate communal tensions and prevent the emergence of a democratic, pluralist, stable Iraq. They seek to capitalize on the serious difficulties faced by ordinary people, and to exploit popular anger and resentment to promote hatred and violence. Their work is seen on the streets of Iraq every day.

I do not believe that security measures alone can provide a sufficient response to this situation. For such measures to be successful, they must be part of a broad-based and inclusive strategy that embraces the political transition, development, human rights and institution-building, so that all of Iraq's communities see that they stand to be winners in the new Iraq. These efforts must be underpinned by steps to deal with Iraq's tortured past -- a past that still exacts revenge and will, if not addressed, blight future generations. This is difficult for any society in transition, let alone one as dangerous as some areas of Iraq are today.

In aid of the transition, the United Nations is at work, both inside and outside the country, to support donor coordination, capacity-building of Iraqi ministries and civil society organizations, and delivery of basic services. Reconstruction of schools, water-treatment and waste-treatment plants, power plants and transmission lines, food assistance to children, mine clearing and aid to hundreds of thousands of returning refugees and internally displaced persons -- all of these activities occur every day in Iraq under U.N. leadership.

The Iraqi people continue to endure a painful and difficult transition, and they still have a long and tough road ahead. The United Nations is privileged and determined to walk it with them. In doing so, we serve not only the people of Iraq, but the peoples of all nations.

The writer is secretary general of the United Nations.

*As an insurgent in good standing, you know you've arrived at rock bottom when you've been ordered to kill musicians. Now, killing civilians is bad enough, but you've reached a unique level of loserdom when you want to kill someone whose dedication in life is, by and large, to create music for the entertainment of others. On the other hand, if one chooses to think creatively - as any self-respecting insurgent might - one could imagine the formidable amount of damage a tuba or french horn could inflict in the hands of the good guys. Think battle-mace, or cudgel.

Anyway, progress continues in Iraq, and the musicians play on.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...lown/muzik.gif

Baghdad Symphony Strikes a Hopeful Note
73 musicians play on despite death threats

Jim Maceda
Correspondent
NBC News
Updated: 8:41 p.m. ET June 10, 200

BAGHDAD — It was a gala classical concert with favorites by Beethoven and Schubert. But in Baghdad Friday night that meant blanket security — dozens of undercover police blended into the invitation-only crowd of 300.

Just performing is a victory for the 73 members of the Baghdad Symphony Orchestra and it's why Iraqi soloist Karim Wasfi chose the Dvorzak Cello Concerto.

“It has this will of survival,” says Wasfi. “It has this winning feeling in it. The music makes you feel a winner, somehow.”

The orchestra knows all about survival. The first in the Arab world, it struggled through two wars and economic sanctions under Saddam Hussein. The best talent fled Iraq. Musicians who stayed earned $1 a month and instruments fell into disrepair.

Still, the group, somehow, played on. And after Saddam's fall, life — and salaries — improved. There were also gifts of new instruments and a trip to America — all funded by the former U.S. authority in Iraq — highlighted by a concert in Washington, D.C., attended by President Bush.

Karim Wasfi, who studied cello at the Indiana University School of Music, gave up a lucrative music career in America. Instead, he's come home to give back.

“The challenge is huge and the rebuilding process is huge,” says Wasfi.

This mix of Sunnis, Shi'ites and Christians are working hard — and together. The musicians see themselves as more than simply makers of music. This orchestra is their cause. It is living proof that Iraq can offer not just bombs and death, but beauty as well.

Karim Wasfi knows he can't stop the violence, but his music can at least give life to something better.

“The message is that we are stronger than the situation,” he says.

And it's spreading with every courageous curtain call.

Thanks for the post Powerclown. I enjoyed the article very much. In fact, I think this may be my favorite so far with the Iraqi Soccer Team in the Olympics a close, close second. It's nice to have a positive story (human interest) come out of Iraq without political strings attached.

Again, I am against the war, but I can still appreciate a positive development. Oh, where are your comments?

More positive developments. This time its not about schools or sports, but about security and iraqis taking control and stopping the terrorists.

http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/news...KOC_0_IRAQ.xml

the more i think about the scenario in iraq, the more i think that the americans have no obvious way out except to transnationalise the reconstruction process and so to make it into a reconstruction process and not an occupation modality--i woudl not be surprised if it in the end will require that the americans back out of it almost altogether, which would include ceding control of the oil. otherwise, i do not see how reconstruction and occupation are to be separated and so how anything good the americans might say they are doing will come to fruitition.

Pardon, but did you think we were keeping control of the oil fields and instilling a puppet government?

Ironicly you outlined what the plan already is.

i dont really have an opinion about the provisional government, in fact. i am interested in how things are playing out, but i do not work with the assumption that they are american stooges. sorry to disappoint, if that does.

i do remember bush et al saying that the war would pay for itself through use of iraqi oil...that seems to have been forgotten, along with all kinds of other problematic claims about this war. and i have seen nothing anywhere that this idea has modified. this is not to be blurred into a war for oil take on the iraq adventure itself--so please avoid taking this into a tedious area by not trying.

and if this is the plan, ustwo, you would think that there would by now be actual movement on it--so far i have seen only preliminary negociations/agreements in principle. personally, i think that it could well drag on another 3 years like it is now, more or less, simply because i doubt the capacity of this administration to eat crow on this war. i simply do not think they are big enough as human beings to do it. but i am even more sure that you would take a contrary view on this. and i do not see anything in the bushlogic as those of us notin the administration understand it (that would include you) to indicate that the americans are willing at any level to bow out of reconstruction to the degree i think they will have to in order for it not to be seen as a type of occupation. because i think that this withdrawal would be understood as total defeat for the admninistration, on their own terms, a political situation that would require them for example going to the united nations that in hand, saying they are sorry and trying to rebuild something like american credibility. bush nominated that fool john bolton to the un--tell me on that basis if there is any likelihood--any at all--that this administration will undertake what is required to back out of the mess it made so that it can be cleaned up.

Thats funny. I remember bush saying iraq would be able to pay for its own reconstruction through their own oil profits.

semantics i suppose.

I almost started another thread, but then I thought would probably fit in here well enough.

In short, this army medic got shot by a sniper, jumped up, shot the sniper, found him, and then administered first aid.

I am very proud that this young man is an American Soldier. We could use more like him.

Of course, I am fairly bitter that you won't see this headlining the national news while the soldier that shot the wounded fighter was a headliner for days, but that is another thread.

------------------------------------
http://www.kare11.com/news/news_arti...storyid=102632

Family of soldier shot by sniper, proud and relieved

Being shot at by a sniper is a weekly occurrence for many U.S. soldiers stationed in Iraq.

But the experience Army Pfc. Stephen Tschiderer, of Mendon, New York, had in Baghdad on June 2 was highly unusual.

During a routine patrol in Baghdad, Tschiderer, a medic, was shot in the chest by an enemy sniper, hiding in a van just 75 yards away. The incident was videotaped by the insurgents.

Tschiderer, was knocked to the ground from the impact, but he wasn’t killed, thanks to the protective body armor he was wearing. “I knew I was hit,” said Tschiderer, “but was uncertain of the damage or location of the hit. The only thing going through my mind was to take cover and locate the sniper’s position."

After a few seconds, Tschiderer jumped to his feet, shot back, then took cover and located the sniper.

The U.S. Army has released footage of the incident that shows Tschiderer, 21, being shot in the chest by a sniper, then getting away.

His mother, Debbie Tschidere, has had a chance to view the tape, after first getting an e-mail from her son. In the e-mail, Pfc Stephen wrote, “Treating the man who shot me didn't really sink in until afterwards. At the time, I just did my job and didn't really think about it too much."

After she saw the tape, she told a local television station that she just couldn’t believe her son got up. She says learning he went on to capture the shooter and render first aid tells the world what she already knows, that her son is a top-notch soldier, "And to me that shows incredible strength of character that we're incredibly proud of," said Debbie Tschiderer.

After being shot and calling for help, other soldiers from Tschiderer’s unit joined him and together they tracked down the wounded sniper by following the blood trail he left as he and another attacker fled the scene.

The sniper was handcuffed and given medical aid by the very man he had tried to kill, Tschiderer.

Tschiderer is with E Troop, 101st “Saber” Cavalry Division, attached to 3rd Battalion, 156th Infantry Regiment, 256th Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Infantry Division.

Great story. Our soldiers' body armor works and the training is the best as this story illustrates. What character and bravery. True hero.

this version with some graphics:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4692589.stm

a link to a pdf version of the entire report:
http://www.oxfordresearchgroup.org.u...qbodycount.htm



i dont think i need say anything more.
except to emphasize a point made clear in the bbc article and in the first pages of the report itself, which is that the source material is press reports and that the press is still pooled. i do not have a particular opinion on this question, beyond the obvious. am still working my way through the textof the report.

http://www.gbn.com/ArticleDisplaySer...=2400&msp=1242

I don't think I need to say anything more. Except to emphasize a point that there will always be articles written to make the US out to be the great satan.

and might I point out that since this article was written in April '03 the average number of iraqi civillian deaths per day has dropped from 38 to 34 - and that includes the insurgency.

stevo:

the report i cited was released yesterday and represents one of the first attempts to provide a context (in terms of "collateral damage") of this misbeggoten colonial adventure in iraq. if you actually read the report--you will see that it is not about "painting the u.s. as the great satan" as you would prefer to believe.
better to read the report, then respond.
it's not long and there are lots of pictures.
the report is not "civilian deaths caused by americans" but rather civilian casualties in iraq since 2003 in general. it includes the insurgency. geez.

the war in iraq is not an abstract theater against which from time to time happyface stories of indivudal heroism emerge--it is a nasty brutal war situation in which lots of people who are as real and important as you or me are killed or maimed.


the material you post is a non sequitor--what you are obviously interested in doing is reverting to the only remaining defense of the iraq war the bush administration has left--that hussein was a bad man (an american-supported bad man from his ascension to power through the end of the iran war, btw--an american supported and armed bad guy whose actions were at no time seen in themselves as constituting a contradiction with "american values" or any other such empty nonsensical slogan---until the invasion of kuwait--at which point, in a very 1984 way, everything suddenly changed)

and the response is obvious--the americans have installed, supported, propped up regimes far worse than saddam hussein
think mobutu in what was zaire for example--the americans were behind the assasination of patrice lumumba and supported mobutu, one of the bloodiest dictators in a particularly bloody area--not a fucking word of protest from the americans on the basis of body count--how was someone like him not problematic?---simple--the brutality of a regime supported for other reasons by the americans is never--ever--bad enough to change american policy--but if that policy is changed for other reasons, then the body count becomes politically significant. that is how things have gone, that is how things are.
and the examples couild be multiplied--think about the period of military dictatorship in chile and argentina during the 1970s-1980s.
think saddam hussein's human rights record from the period before the invasion of kuwait, for another example.

no-one is saying, here or elsewhere, who opposes and opposed the war in iraq that hussein was a great guy--but do not even try to pretend that human rights abuse constitutes a fundamental point in the shaping of american policy. it is a tool that the americans use to justify actions the logic of which operates on other grounds. period.

I don't know how different your post was from the article you linked to, for I only read what you posted (and I saw no pictures). Your atricle was about the civillian death toll since the american invasion. My article was about the death toll under saddam. I think it is an appropriate rebuttal. But you appear to counter with evidence of american intervention/non-intervention pertaining to other brutal regimes and since there was no action taken in the past we should not have engaged saddam.

This war was presented on the notion of pre-emption because of Saddam's likelyhood of WMDs. Whatever happened to them, everyone saw the same documents, everyone, left, right, clinton to kerry to bush believed he had them. When they're not found he's a liar and the war's unjust - but those last two just aren't true.

There is plenty of justification for ousting saddam, as well as plenty of justification for doing the same with any brutal regime. But because it isn't acted upon every time doesn't mean we should never act upon it.

first, have a look at the report itself--the last link above--it is more up to date and more transparent as to method than what you posted. it is a small-ish pdf file. i posted the bbc press release to signal the report's release, that's all--it was not posted as a substitute for the report itself.

secondly, my argument against your post was not quite as you took it--what i was saying is that on its own human rights abuse by a given regime are not free-standing problems insofar as american policy is concerned, particularly not if you line up this administration's actions with the broader history of american foreign policy.
this is not a problem or quirk that is particular to george w bush either--frankly, i would find the argument that you make far more compelling if the americans had intervened in rwanda, say, on human rights grounds. but they didnt----the point is that this cuts across the republican/democrat divide..in the end, it is a function of the basic logic that shapes american foreign policy as a whole.

the reason i went this direction in response to you was to say that i do not doubt that saddam hussein was a brutal guy, but you cannot seriously expect me or anyone else frankly to accept that this fact prompted or justified anything about the war in iraq. the cynicism comes from the history of american foriegn policy--you cannot pretend it is without grounds.

Good articles, guys.

stevo, I'm with you 100%. The Left like to wave around civilian casualty figures like it's some validation of failure. As if the coalition are the ones indiscriminately killing civilians and police. Yeah right. And of course, the Left never point out that it is muslim terrorists who are killing muslim civilians daily by the dozens.

Lebell, that kind of professionalism is what sets the United States military apart from all others, and why I believe that in the end, we will win this struggle. Heck of a story.

I've got some stories I've been following - I'll post them here soon.

I think that is a very false statement and a simple attempt to demonize.


Roachboy, Stevo,

What both of you showed me though the articles you posted and they statements they hold is that these numbers cannot apply to just one particular argument.

I just hope that the people reading this won't make the mistake of assimilating the information given to support their particular point of view while rejecting the other. Things are up in the air at the moment.

An excellent piece of advice that applicable on large and small scales.

I am saddened and frustrated to say that it is nonsensical to continue to support a U.S. "regime" that has consistantly misled U.S. residents about the reasons, justifications, mission, goals, and results for and of the invasion of Iraq. Since April 2004, the one year "anniversary" of the invasion, U.S. combat zone deaths are 1165, and 10119 wounded.<b>(1)</b>

In that time, all signifigant stated measures of announced goals are down....progressing backwards. How is it possible to continue to believe what political and military leaders tell Americans about the "progress" or the lack thereof, especially in the face of the losses of real family members in American households:

Daily Electrical production in Iraq in June, 2005, is lower than in April, 2004.<b>(2)</b>

Daily Oil production in Iraq is 5 percent lower that it was one year ago.<b>(2a)</b>

President Bush dramatically misled Americans last September as to the progress in training Iraqi security forces to replace the security duties of U.S. troops. President Bush <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,133299,00.html">claimed....twice,</a> September 23, 2004 on that there already were "Nearly 100,000 fully trained and equipped Iraqi soldiers, police officers and other security personnel are working today and that total will rise to 125,000 by the end of this year. The Iraqi government is on track to build a force of over 200,000 security personnel by the end of next year."
(Bush seemed confused, when he also said, It's important that we train Iraqi troops. There are nearly 100,000 troops trained. The Afghan national army is a part of the army.

By the way, it's the Afghan national army that went into Najaf and did the work there.

There's a regular army being trained, a border guard being trained, their police being trained. That's a key part of our mission")<b>(3)</b>

Now, our generals tell us, ten months later, that the bulk of the Iraqi security forces are still not capable of assuming duties now performed by American troops, but, by October, an 18,000 member force will be capable of "taking the lead in securing baghdad".<b>(3a)</b>

Iraq appears to be headed in the direction of a political, religious, and an economic alliance with Iran.<b>(4)</b>

The new Iraqi constitution appears to result in at least an even chance that Iraqi women will lose the rights and unique secular autonomy that they have enjoyed since 1959, in favor of Muslim doctrine and law.....<b>(5)</b>

<h4>(1)</h4>The "price" in dead and wounded U.S./Coalition/Iraqi Forces:
<h4>(5)</h4>
<h4>(4)</h4>
<h4>(3)</h4>
<h4>(3a)</h4>
<h4>(2)</h4>
<h4>(2a)</h4>

Bump for relavancy to Roachboy's new thread.

Good call Elphaba.

Okay....this thread is a year old, and it's early in the fourth year of the U.S. "liberation" aka "occupation" of Iraq. If the Washington Post, which represents the following to be an authentic, intercepted report from the staff of the U.S. embassy in Baghdad, authorized by U.S. ambassador to Iraq, Khalilzad, is correct, the following description "underplays" the implications of the U.S. failure of policy, and it's cost.

Here is a link to the six page memo, "Snapshots from the Office -- Public Affairs Staff Show Strains of Social Discord."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv...ocs_061606.pdf
IMO, this thread is the most appropriate one to display this post, for the original POV of the thread seemed to be a kind of WMD "redux". Opinion attempted to prevail over the stark details of news reporting from Iraq, with the failure of promised increased production of electricity in Iraq, even in it's largest city, being an easy "tell" for me, that the "Iraq: Positive Developments", were not indicative of the reality of everyday life in Iraq, or of where the trends of "reconstruction" and "democratization" were heading.

The question now is how much more U.S. blood and money will be expended to no good effect, before the current U.S. administration and it's supporters will, as they are so fond of describing it, "cut and run" from Iraq.

We have entered a new chapter in the serial war crimes that are the invasion and occupation of Iraq. How much more waste and suffering must take place until the "hold outs" in our government and their supporters in denial, calculate a way to distance themselves from this disasterous folly, even as they attempt to paint the blame on those who have continually identified the lies and deception and protested against all of it?

Does the future of our country remain stunted at each and every turn, while the "elected" leaders who are so consistantly wrong, take so much time and expend so much obviously avoidable blood and treasure before they abandon failed "missions", like the hunt for Iraqi WMD, and none too soon, the "occupation and democratization", of Iraq?

Host....Pay Attention
 

We have (or had)...only one thread in this entire forum focused on the good things happening as a result of this war. Your own personal dissatisfaction is well known and understood by the community that frequents TFPolitics, and you are certainly entitled to it.

That said....your hijack of this thread is inappropriate, and transparent, thought I will let this stay here just to prove a point. Should you feel the need to take over a thread in the future...active or not....by changing the topic completely to suit your personal aganda, there will be no Public statement as to the acceptability of your actions, it will be thru PM and wont be pretty.

It is now up to the membership to put this thread back on track....should Host decide he wants discussion on his post....he will simply need to start a thread.

Do Not Hijack......Period