Sunday, April 15, 2007
Fighting The War On War
So far today, four bombs were detonated in Baghdad amidst what many White House republicans would call a successful security crackdown. The number of dead is now at 37 and the injuries including severe burns are much higher. Many women and children are suspected to be victims in these attacks while further violence in Iraq targets their own people in this bloody civil war. Meanwhile, diplomacy towards peace goes mostly ignored.
One of the witnesses of a car bombing, an owner of a glass shop, said that a man merely parked his minibus and walked away. It was nothing out of the ordinary until, "Five minutes later, the bus blew up — damaging the surrounded area and burning more than eight civilian cars that were passing by."
First of all, I am aware of the pure irony in a man owning a glass shop in Baghdad. Second of all, it seems as though the vast majority of these attacks are not targeted against U.S. troops but against the people in an effort to both terrorize Iraqis into believing that they cannot be protected by the U.S. and their own U.S.-installed government and also to push the American people into seeing that our military strategies are simply failing.
Is one tyranny worth trading for another? What the Iraqi people are faced with is a complete political and sociological reversal. It is: oppression by fear of one's government and inactivity of the people vs oppression by the fear of the people and inactivity of one's government.
Saturday, April 14, 2007
The Motive V.S. The Crime
Today in Baghdad, 56 people were killed in a deadly suicide bombing at a busy bus stop. A 72-year-old woman ran through the hospital searching for her 6-year-old grandson and daughter. "They were near the bomb. They went to buy something for our lunch. What did they do to deserve this? To whom should I complain? There is no government to protect us," she said, sobbing.
Also happening in Iraq, mainly around Baghdad, was a car bomb that killed 10 people on the Jadriyah bridge. Gunmen attacked the home of Adnan al-Dulaimi who is the head of the largest Sunni bloc of parliament. In the attack five guards were injured and al-Dulaimi was not at home. Three bodyguards of Mohammed Abdul Jabar, the deputy minister of industry, were injured in a drive-by shooting. Three civilians and one policeman were killed in another drive-by shooting. Two policemen and one civilian were killed by a roadside bomb. Another roadside bomb killed one civilian. And a bomb missed by Iraqi security patrols injured three electricity workers.
This exhaustive list of atrocities finally poured over the edge with Iraqis and so a mob rioted around the Karbala governor's office demanding resignations for the poor security they have been offering their people. Police cars were burned and buildings were damaged by rocks being thrown at them.
The situation in Iraq has reached a dire point in need of serious help. This is the product of war. The only thing that comes from war is death and destruction by its own definition. Is this what the U.S. had in mind for a better Iraq? Is this what the terrorists and insurgents want for their own people? They have been killing more innocent Iraqis than the occupying troops have been killing insurgents. The future of Iraq is looking bleak and everyday people are suffering more than the last. As the grandmother in the above quote was saying; there is no government protecting the people. But it is more difficult than that because it is the people who are hurting each other. Only when these issues that are making people hurt each other are confronted diplomatically will the violence end.
For every bomb that goes off and every life that is lost, there is a voice crying for something they feel is worth killing for or even dying for. And it is far too easy to brush it off as pure evil as President Bush has done. The killing and violence is happening for a reason and until people start asking why and begin trying to solve these problems no end will be in sight for those endless droves of men, women and children searching for their families in crowded hospitals. No one should have to live with the sort of terror, anguish and sorrow that the Iraqi people have been living with since being "liberated".
Also happening in Iraq, mainly around Baghdad, was a car bomb that killed 10 people on the Jadriyah bridge. Gunmen attacked the home of Adnan al-Dulaimi who is the head of the largest Sunni bloc of parliament. In the attack five guards were injured and al-Dulaimi was not at home. Three bodyguards of Mohammed Abdul Jabar, the deputy minister of industry, were injured in a drive-by shooting. Three civilians and one policeman were killed in another drive-by shooting. Two policemen and one civilian were killed by a roadside bomb. Another roadside bomb killed one civilian. And a bomb missed by Iraqi security patrols injured three electricity workers.
This exhaustive list of atrocities finally poured over the edge with Iraqis and so a mob rioted around the Karbala governor's office demanding resignations for the poor security they have been offering their people. Police cars were burned and buildings were damaged by rocks being thrown at them.
The situation in Iraq has reached a dire point in need of serious help. This is the product of war. The only thing that comes from war is death and destruction by its own definition. Is this what the U.S. had in mind for a better Iraq? Is this what the terrorists and insurgents want for their own people? They have been killing more innocent Iraqis than the occupying troops have been killing insurgents. The future of Iraq is looking bleak and everyday people are suffering more than the last. As the grandmother in the above quote was saying; there is no government protecting the people. But it is more difficult than that because it is the people who are hurting each other. Only when these issues that are making people hurt each other are confronted diplomatically will the violence end.
For every bomb that goes off and every life that is lost, there is a voice crying for something they feel is worth killing for or even dying for. And it is far too easy to brush it off as pure evil as President Bush has done. The killing and violence is happening for a reason and until people start asking why and begin trying to solve these problems no end will be in sight for those endless droves of men, women and children searching for their families in crowded hospitals. No one should have to live with the sort of terror, anguish and sorrow that the Iraqi people have been living with since being "liberated".
Friday, April 13, 2007
The Sinking Ship Of Martyrs
In response to the suicide bombing that took place in the cafeteria of the Iraqi parliament building yesterday, many Iraqi lawmakers spoke out against the atrocities. Vice President Adil Abdul-Mahdi said in a speech, "The more they act, the more solid we become. When they take from us one martyr, we offer more martyrs."
To further emphasize this sense of unity between all Iraqis, Iraqi parliament speaker Mahmoud al-Mashhadani said, "We feel today that we are stronger than yesterday. The parliament, government and the people are all the same--they are all in the same ship which, if it sinks, will make everyone sink."
This unity is something that every country needs before it can fully succeed and it is called nationalism. Only when people stop thinking of themselves as Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds and begin thinking of themselves as Iraqis will that brotherhood seep into the patriotic psyche and band the nation together.
Meanwhile, the Islamic State issued on its website commonly used by insurgents, "A knight from the state of Islam...reached the heart of the Green Zone...the temporary headquarters of the mice of the infidel parliament and blew himself up among a gathering of the infidel masters."
If Iraq is a sinking ship and the Iraqi politicians are mice, then it would be wise for the Iraqi people to do what all maritime victims do when their ships are sinking: follow the mice to higher ground. The people of Iraq have two options. They can stay aboard the sinking ship and accept the chaos that has gripped their nation or they can follow diplomacy to the higher ground and avoid the violence and bloodshed. If the Iraqis wish to survive, it is better to follow the mice to peace than to sink with the martyrs of war.
To further emphasize this sense of unity between all Iraqis, Iraqi parliament speaker Mahmoud al-Mashhadani said, "We feel today that we are stronger than yesterday. The parliament, government and the people are all the same--they are all in the same ship which, if it sinks, will make everyone sink."
This unity is something that every country needs before it can fully succeed and it is called nationalism. Only when people stop thinking of themselves as Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds and begin thinking of themselves as Iraqis will that brotherhood seep into the patriotic psyche and band the nation together.
Meanwhile, the Islamic State issued on its website commonly used by insurgents, "A knight from the state of Islam...reached the heart of the Green Zone...the temporary headquarters of the mice of the infidel parliament and blew himself up among a gathering of the infidel masters."
If Iraq is a sinking ship and the Iraqi politicians are mice, then it would be wise for the Iraqi people to do what all maritime victims do when their ships are sinking: follow the mice to higher ground. The people of Iraq have two options. They can stay aboard the sinking ship and accept the chaos that has gripped their nation or they can follow diplomacy to the higher ground and avoid the violence and bloodshed. If the Iraqis wish to survive, it is better to follow the mice to peace than to sink with the martyrs of war.
Thursday, April 12, 2007
A Mammoth Problem In The Iraqi Tar Pits
The secret ingredient in Thursday's lunch meat at the Iraqi parliament building cafeteria was explosive. A suicide bomber detonated in the cafeteria killing two lawmakers and injuring ten others. Forgive me for sounding a little unsympathetic but this is just another attack within the protected green zone that republicans such as our president and Senator John McCain have raved about in terms of safety.
"I am standing now at the site of the explosion and looking at the severed legs of the person who carried out the operation. If this tells us anything, it tells us that security is lax," said Mohammed al-Dayni, a member of the National Dialogue Front.
Also, another suicide bomber destroyed the al-Sarafiya bridge in Baghdad killing 10 people and injuring 26 others as cars drove into the river amidst the explosion. And with all of this violence continuing in Iraq, who do we blame? Certainly not ourselves. No. We blame Iran.
"We know that there are [EFPs-explosively formed penetrators] being in fact manufactured and smuggled into this country [Iraq], and we know that training does go on in Iran for people to learn how to assemble them and how to employ them. We know that training has gone on as recently as this past month from detainees' debriefs," said Major General William Caldwell, the U.S. military spokesman.
If these detainees' reports are even accurate, citing previous methods by the military to extract information from prisoners (Abu Ghraib), then what exactly is the issue here? I wish that I could simply believe the intelligence but our government's intelligence gathering sources have been--how should I say--completely inaccurate and biased to the administration's agendas up to this point.
The spokesman of Iran's Revolutionary Guard, General Ramazan Sharif said in response to Caldwell's accusations, "This sort of news and information is planned by occupier [U.S.] forces in Iraq as part of their psychological operations against Iran."
Now, for starters, Bush has been the boy who cried war since 9/11. We had sketchy intelligence pushed by the Bush Administration that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and so we went to war where we found nothing. Oops. Speed up to today and we have once again more intelligence coming in that now Iran is supporting the insurgency within Iraq.
This is where I play the devil's advocate for just a moment. What is Iran doing that the U.S. is not? Assuming that the intelligence (if that's what it is) is correct, Iran is interested in training and arming the Shiite Iraqis because Iran itself is a Shiite nation surrounded by Sunnis. If the armed and trained Shiites succeed in taking the country and kicking out all memories of the U.S. in a traditional Iranian fashion then Iran will have a new neighboring ally in the Middle East which can prove most useful with the growing tensions between them and the west. The U.S. is arming and training Iraqis as well with the hopes of protecting their interests that they have invested so heavily in. If Iraq's oil fields are open to the U.S. then having Iraqis in power who are friends (in debt?) to the United States will prove very useful as well.
Either way, oil is at the base here. The U.S. doesn't want Iraq befriending Iran because then the majority of the world's oil supply is in the hands of our enemies and let's be real--the U.S. needs its oil. Gobble, gobble, gobble. This is all about power and money and who will be the ones reaping the benefits. Unfortunately, neither of these wolves in sheep's' clothing care about the Iraqis themselves. To whom the oil fields are open to and to whom this new nation will ally itself with in the coming conflicts brewing in the sands of the Middle East are the only issues on the tables of Iran and the U.S. Meanwhile, the people of Iraq are suffering as these two powers fight over the right to abuse and exploit these people once stability is restored.
The innocent people of Iraq are drowning in the oil the rest of the world so desperately covets and I'm afraid that despite whoever wins over Iraq, the nation will very soon become nothing more than a tar pit filled with the remains of those who fought for a better life and in return found themselves in over their heads.
"I am standing now at the site of the explosion and looking at the severed legs of the person who carried out the operation. If this tells us anything, it tells us that security is lax," said Mohammed al-Dayni, a member of the National Dialogue Front.
Also, another suicide bomber destroyed the al-Sarafiya bridge in Baghdad killing 10 people and injuring 26 others as cars drove into the river amidst the explosion. And with all of this violence continuing in Iraq, who do we blame? Certainly not ourselves. No. We blame Iran.
"We know that there are [EFPs-explosively formed penetrators] being in fact manufactured and smuggled into this country [Iraq], and we know that training does go on in Iran for people to learn how to assemble them and how to employ them. We know that training has gone on as recently as this past month from detainees' debriefs," said Major General William Caldwell, the U.S. military spokesman.
If these detainees' reports are even accurate, citing previous methods by the military to extract information from prisoners (Abu Ghraib), then what exactly is the issue here? I wish that I could simply believe the intelligence but our government's intelligence gathering sources have been--how should I say--completely inaccurate and biased to the administration's agendas up to this point.
The spokesman of Iran's Revolutionary Guard, General Ramazan Sharif said in response to Caldwell's accusations, "This sort of news and information is planned by occupier [U.S.] forces in Iraq as part of their psychological operations against Iran."
Now, for starters, Bush has been the boy who cried war since 9/11. We had sketchy intelligence pushed by the Bush Administration that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and so we went to war where we found nothing. Oops. Speed up to today and we have once again more intelligence coming in that now Iran is supporting the insurgency within Iraq.
This is where I play the devil's advocate for just a moment. What is Iran doing that the U.S. is not? Assuming that the intelligence (if that's what it is) is correct, Iran is interested in training and arming the Shiite Iraqis because Iran itself is a Shiite nation surrounded by Sunnis. If the armed and trained Shiites succeed in taking the country and kicking out all memories of the U.S. in a traditional Iranian fashion then Iran will have a new neighboring ally in the Middle East which can prove most useful with the growing tensions between them and the west. The U.S. is arming and training Iraqis as well with the hopes of protecting their interests that they have invested so heavily in. If Iraq's oil fields are open to the U.S. then having Iraqis in power who are friends (in debt?) to the United States will prove very useful as well.
Either way, oil is at the base here. The U.S. doesn't want Iraq befriending Iran because then the majority of the world's oil supply is in the hands of our enemies and let's be real--the U.S. needs its oil. Gobble, gobble, gobble. This is all about power and money and who will be the ones reaping the benefits. Unfortunately, neither of these wolves in sheep's' clothing care about the Iraqis themselves. To whom the oil fields are open to and to whom this new nation will ally itself with in the coming conflicts brewing in the sands of the Middle East are the only issues on the tables of Iran and the U.S. Meanwhile, the people of Iraq are suffering as these two powers fight over the right to abuse and exploit these people once stability is restored.
The innocent people of Iraq are drowning in the oil the rest of the world so desperately covets and I'm afraid that despite whoever wins over Iraq, the nation will very soon become nothing more than a tar pit filled with the remains of those who fought for a better life and in return found themselves in over their heads.
Wednesday, April 11, 2007
Spinning Wheels In The Sand
With the U.S. spending so much time and energy into arming and training the Iraqi soldiers who support the current government and Iran apparently spending so much time and energy arming and training the Iraqi insurgents to oppose the current government, it is obvious that Iraq has definitely become the victim child in a custody hearing; being pulled between two countries highly invested in the future of the born-again nation. And to further show signs of either unflinching commitment or pure stubbornness, the Pentagon has extended the Army's tours of duty for soldiers from 12 months to 15 months and is planning to divert about $1.6 billion of its military budget to fund the troops until mid-summer while Congress and Bush duke out a bill.
And meanwhile, the president invited Democrats to the White House yesterday to discuss a bill funding the war but was clear that he was not going to negotiate a time table for withdrawing troops. With the president vowing to veto a bill attached to a time table and Congress pledging to cut funding for the war altogether if Bush does so, this move on the president's part seems to be yet another backwards step in his continuing dance of shame in this unsuccessful and abusive war. The president should to realize that he needs Congress to fund this war whether he likes it or not. Congress has many times pleaded with the president to negotiate and talk with an open-mind about a bill that would satisfy everyone but Bush has stayed the course and is costing our troops valuable necessities.
With around $120 billion on the table from Congress, Bush has been a fool to turn it down simply because it offers the only logical exit strategy since the war began. If he vetoes that bill, then he better start either reaching into his pockets to come up with some money or pick up a gun and march over to Iraq himself. His arrogance and stubbornness has already cost this country a great deal of suffering and has made few efforts to making our nation safer. He has created more enemies than we can fight and is now undermining the troops by pledging to veto a bill that prevents more young Americans from being into the furnace to try and salvage his presidential legacy.
Seeing as impeachment is beyond the reach of our simple-minded politicians, I can only hope that President Bush realizes that he is staying the course alone and needs the support of the American people before he can support the American troops.
And meanwhile, the president invited Democrats to the White House yesterday to discuss a bill funding the war but was clear that he was not going to negotiate a time table for withdrawing troops. With the president vowing to veto a bill attached to a time table and Congress pledging to cut funding for the war altogether if Bush does so, this move on the president's part seems to be yet another backwards step in his continuing dance of shame in this unsuccessful and abusive war. The president should to realize that he needs Congress to fund this war whether he likes it or not. Congress has many times pleaded with the president to negotiate and talk with an open-mind about a bill that would satisfy everyone but Bush has stayed the course and is costing our troops valuable necessities.
With around $120 billion on the table from Congress, Bush has been a fool to turn it down simply because it offers the only logical exit strategy since the war began. If he vetoes that bill, then he better start either reaching into his pockets to come up with some money or pick up a gun and march over to Iraq himself. His arrogance and stubbornness has already cost this country a great deal of suffering and has made few efforts to making our nation safer. He has created more enemies than we can fight and is now undermining the troops by pledging to veto a bill that prevents more young Americans from being into the furnace to try and salvage his presidential legacy.
Seeing as impeachment is beyond the reach of our simple-minded politicians, I can only hope that President Bush realizes that he is staying the course alone and needs the support of the American people before he can support the American troops.
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
Zimbio Debate Part II
If you are reading this you should first look at the first part of the debate as this whole article would make much more sense.
4-8-07
Jason: Yes, yes it is very hard to sway a person who holds very firms beliefs one way or another. And while I agree that this debate has been productive my endstate is always to win...that is let the other person say "you're right" it happens to my wife all the time. I generally take offense to those who say they support the troops but not the war although I think you are sincere and that your anti-war stance is taken more from a compassion for us than a hatred for them viewpoint. In the end I do not want a warmonger in charge either (I don't think Bush is one), but I want someone with enough guts to stand up to the likes of Iran, Hezbollah, Hamas and especially al-Queada. This era of blogs and internet postings has certainly given a voice to those of us long silenced by big media. The problem with big media is that you can fill volumes with what they don't report. By the way, I do respect other opinions and ideology. I just can't accept them as having any influence on the direction our country should go.Jason
4-8-07
P.R.: As much as I would like to let you "win" this debate, I am not your wife. Although, I feel that we have a mutual respect for each others' opinions and that is what matters in the end. I too want a president who will be tough against threats to America. I can only hope that our next one creates fewer. And like it or not, other people's opinions and ideologies do have an influence in the direction our country will go. That's a democracy. Good luck in Iraq and I wish you the best for a safe return home and the same goes for all of your fellow soldiers. America and I are proud of you.P.R.
This concludes the zimbio debate. I hope that it helps clarify the views of some Americans today and gives a new perspective to the war in Iraq.
4-8-07
Jason: Yes, yes it is very hard to sway a person who holds very firms beliefs one way or another. And while I agree that this debate has been productive my endstate is always to win...that is let the other person say "you're right" it happens to my wife all the time. I generally take offense to those who say they support the troops but not the war although I think you are sincere and that your anti-war stance is taken more from a compassion for us than a hatred for them viewpoint. In the end I do not want a warmonger in charge either (I don't think Bush is one), but I want someone with enough guts to stand up to the likes of Iran, Hezbollah, Hamas and especially al-Queada. This era of blogs and internet postings has certainly given a voice to those of us long silenced by big media. The problem with big media is that you can fill volumes with what they don't report. By the way, I do respect other opinions and ideology. I just can't accept them as having any influence on the direction our country should go.Jason
4-8-07
P.R.: As much as I would like to let you "win" this debate, I am not your wife. Although, I feel that we have a mutual respect for each others' opinions and that is what matters in the end. I too want a president who will be tough against threats to America. I can only hope that our next one creates fewer. And like it or not, other people's opinions and ideologies do have an influence in the direction our country will go. That's a democracy. Good luck in Iraq and I wish you the best for a safe return home and the same goes for all of your fellow soldiers. America and I are proud of you.P.R.
This concludes the zimbio debate. I hope that it helps clarify the views of some Americans today and gives a new perspective to the war in Iraq.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)