Iraq: More Than A Shiite Hole

On Easter Sunday, six U.S. soldiers were killed and nothing about it was in Monday's newspaper. I don't know if the news simply didn't reach the Florida Today or if that just wasn't as important as little Johnny finding colored eggs in his front lawn. And meanwhile, marking the fourth anniversary of the fall of Baghdad (coincidentally the same day as the fourth anniversary that Baghdad was still a violent s#*t hole), tens of thousands of Iraqis including members of Iraq's very own police and military participated in a mass demonstration demanding that the U.S. leave Iraq. Amazingly, no violence ensued during the peaceful protest. And what kind of man could organize such a successful sign of progress? Not George W. Bush but his arch nemesis Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr.
Oppressed severely by the regime of Saddam Hussein, al-Sadr grew up in an Iraq where survival meant protesting tyranny underground. The reason Bush has declared him a menace to success in Iraq is because al-Sadr has denounced the government set up by America in his country and wishes that the Iraqis had more of a choice in who was nominated for power. In a way, Iraq is becoming a mini-state of the U.S. with Bush appointing public officials even in other countries. And while the Iraqi people did vote for their president, they had no choice in who the candidates were. It seems as though al-Sadr wants the people to have more of a say in their government. And with Iraq split between Shiites and Sunnis predominantly, why shouldn't al-Sadr have a political seat?
He has proven that he can rally tens of thousands of followers to protest peacefully in a country riddled with bullet holes. And in April of 2003, al-Sadr filled in the public service vacuum in Sadr City that the government could not by providing health care, food and clean water to his people. And sometime later, on August 30, a peaceful disarmament of al-Sadr's men was reached between him and Prime Minister Iyad Allawi. But only a day later, the prime minister backed out and the fighting continued. In his most recent speeches he has told his people not to harm other Iraqis and focus on pushing the Americans out.
Now I rigidly disapprove of any encouragement of violence especially to my own American soldiers. But if for a moment we could look aside the threats and at the bigger picture we may see something valuable. This is a man with immense political potential who has been yearning for stability, peace and unification within his country since the beginning. And only when his voice goes unheard and doors are kicked down while gun barrels are pointed in the faces of his people does he fight back. So ask yourself whether or not you would do the same in his position? We have no right to be occupying Iraq any further. He has no connections to terrorism although insurgency would be a more appropriate word (focusing not on al-Qaeda but anti-occupation fighters) . He has shown that he has what it takes to lead his people and I think he should be given a chance to speak in the Iraqi government.
If this administration truly wanted peace and stability in Iraq, they would look aside American loyalty, as they have here in America shown party loyalty, and see that if the people are going to stop the violence they need a leader of the people in power and not someone chosen from halfway around the world. But perhaps with these views in mind I might find myself an enemy of the Bush Administration. I simply want what is best for America and Iraq and only when we let them be a sovereign nation of their own people will peace and stability reach the country. And I believe that if pro-Bush agendas were set aside and the people of Iraq were taken into consideration, maybe Muqtada al-Sadr could be seen as an asset to peace instead of a catalyst to war. But hell, who am I kidding...Bush doesn't even put his people first in his own country.

Life Imitating Art Or Art Imitating Life?

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

This was a little collage I did that acts like a slide-out image from a pop-up book. Rated for

children 17 or older seeing as that is the minimum enlisting age for the U.S. military with parental consent.

If The Streets Of Baghdad Could Talk

When it comes to the reason we're in Iraq right now, it doesn't take a top notch detective to figure out that the motives our government has given us are all wrong. Even if by some incredibly small chance this administration did in fact receive faulty intelligence from the CIA and went to war with the best intentions of relieving Saddam from his weapons of mass destruction, Bush's actions speak louder than words. Even after it was proven that there were no WMDs in Iraq, we are still there fighting harder and longer than ever before. If the previous scenario were true, wouldn't this administration have realized the intelligence was wrong and shifted strategies? But because we are still there for the same reasons it makes me think that this war was going to happen on any terms and the lie of WMDs was merely a smokescreen. Now that we're there, Bush figures who cares now...we're there and we need to focus on victory and nothing else. But whether we leave is partly determined by why we came. That we may never truthfully know. And while I may not have Bush's account number the Saudi royal family is depositing money into, that scenario seems more likely than the one saying that oil has nothing to do with why we're in Iraq. Our military is merely protecting big oil interests at this point.
Also, I find that the only real experts on Iraq are the Iraqi civilians. They have no political agenda or warped perception of patriotism. Their only agenda is to survive. And what is best for the minority is clearly not always best for the majority. Perhaps we should listen to what they have to say about how the war is really going. Perhaps they know better than anyone we could send because they live among the violence everyday while their own friends and families are put into jeopardy. In my opinion, their voices speak the loudest; not the soldiers, not John McCain and not the Bush Administration--the voices of victims...the voices nobody are listening to.

Good War Business (G.W.B) What Else Shares Those Initials?

After reading Time Magazine today, I found out that "the Army is once again getting the smallest share of Pentagon funds", recruits include high school dropouts and convicted felons, mid-level officer positions and military intelligence officers are in high demand with little supply and suicides among soldiers is increasing. With facts like this reaching me, little is left to the imagination as to why I feel that this war is a total bust. And with 13,000 National Guard troops scheduled for deployment to Iraq by next year, Americans are getting tired of the death tolls. And as this administration provokes even further conflict in the Middle East with Iran from sending in carrier groups to run "drills" in the Persian Gulf, making threats against Iran's policies and pointing blame at Tehran for the roadside bombs in Iraq, it seems as though war is the only word on President Bush's lips these days. How did the insurgents get their automatic rifles, rocket-propelled grenade launchers and other weapons? Why doesn't the government look into that? Why are they so interested in Iran? Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that Iran produces the world's largest supply of oil. Hey, if war with Iran comes about prices will skyrocket and Bush's pals, the Saudis, will make a fortune. And I'm sure none of that "luck" will rub off on George W.
Hell, even John McCain who has taken a beating from his stance on the war in Iraq, jeopardizing his rise to presidency, has been seeing benefits to playing the right hand of the devil. "And McCain's top finance officials say the senator's position on the war has, if anything, helped him with many of his wealthy donors," reported Michael D. Shear of the Washington Post. No one can argue that there is money to be made in war. I only wish that our very own presidential administration didn't have their hands stuck in the cookie jar. The Saudi-Bush connections have been made and oil is the binding factor here between the Middle East and why we give a damn about Iraq.
And with polls showing numbers scattered all over the place, it is difficult to see where many Americans stand these days unless you can cut through all of that political grime. In the Washington Post-ABC News' most recent poll, 64% of those polled said "it [war in Iraq] was not worth fighting." But then in the same poll, "70% of republicans said the Iraq war has been worth fighting." The only thing to figure out is how many Americans consider themselves republican. What this poll tells me is that republicans need to pull their heads out of their chair warmers and let go of their violent blood lust. If they want to fight our "enemies" so badly, then why don't they join the Army and fight? I'm sure they'll be accepted. With the Army taking even convicted felons I can't imagine that war hawk republicans would be denied. Maybe they would shoot better, though, if they could see straight!
Also in the news was John McCain's speech trying to convince Americans to give General David H. Patraeus more time. "This gives him an opportunity to put a marker down on what his foreign policy vision will be and how important it is to win the war in Iraq..." said McCain.
Of course his foreign policy vision will be coming from the standpoint of a military general and so I doubt it will involve the Army leaving any time soon. Job security is on the line, you know. And as far as I'm concerned the war is over and won. Saddam is out and now all that is left is a civil war we have no business being in militarily.
And to finish up probably one of my longest articles; if I hear a sharp-nosed republican saying "if we leave Iraq now the terrorists will follow us home" one more time I am going to vomit. Does anyone honestly think they need a bread crumb trail left behind the U.S. Army to tell where America is? They can look on a f**king map! Having our troops home will ensure a better defense instead of having them thinned out halfway around the world making more enemies.
I hope people try to see the signs everywhere that change needs to be made soon and it needs to be dramatic. The world is becoming impatient with this administration's stubbornness and the only progress being made right now is that the hole we're digging ourselves into is becoming deep enough to fit George W.'s ego.

Overhead Luggage In Over Head

It has recently come to my attention that for much of the war in Iraq, the bodies of our fallen soldiers were being handled by the same undergraduates who lose my luggage at the airport every year. Unloaded by civilian personnel from a commercial jet by either a mechanical belt or forklift, the bodies of sons and daughters, fathers and mothers, husbands and wives were presented to their families in a disgraceful act that objectified those who gave their lives for this country.
It wasn't until a father of a son who fell in Iraq lobbied for change that in January the bodies of our soldiers began coming home via charter jets and met by the honor guard for a proper and respectful return home. The main reason for this dishonorable treatment was because of--what other--money. It cost nearly $1.2 million last year to transport the bodies of our soldiers home via commercial jets whereas now the winning contract for six months for a more appropriate return costs about $11 million (according to the associated press). But with billions of dollars floating around from the war funds, who cares about soldiers who aren't able to go back into the fight, right? That seemed to be the opinion of the Pentagon. Whether it be conditions at Walter Reed or simply the treatment of the deceased upon arriving home to loved ones, it has become evident that this administration only values those who can fight their war.
"Regardless of what the reality was, there was a perception there that the proper respect was not being provided to those who made the ultimate sacrifice," said Pentagon spokesman Maj. Stewart Upton.
It is sad that this issue was seen as merely an misperception and not a real problem. It may be an unsettling concept for war strategists and politicians but Americans do in fact care about their soldiers before, during and even after they return from war.
I can only hope that the number of our brave soldiers who fly third class home dwindles to zero soon. in this pathetic administration's war And if this administration continues to wage war perhaps they should begin making it a habit to tag their luggage so that it doesn't get confused with my suitcase at the airport. And if finance becomes a problem, maybe the president can make room on Air Force One right next to his golf clubs.

He Never Learns

Today it was announced that nearly 12,000 National Guardsmen were to be deployed to Iraq for involuntary service with a one-year commitment. This was due to the regular army troops being thinned out in a poorly planned war. These additional troops will help relieve the already fatigued soldiers on the ground in Iraq. It seems that if the government cannot get funding to the troops through the president's unwillingness to pass into law a bill attached to a pull-out date they use their reserve troops as the solution. Now this administration is defying the American people by sending more of our American heroes into the hostility of a civil war we have no business in militarily across the Atlantic Ocean. The solution to putting out a fire, Mr. Bush is not to throw more wood on the flames. Bringing peace to Iraq has nothing to do with soldiers trained for war.
But if any of the soldiers being sent to Iraq are worried about their service and have well-connected fathers then fear not; drink up, lay back and when you get out early run for president.

Bush: The Boy In The Political Bubble

Once again it seems as though the White House is within its own little bubble while the president continues to speak about imaginary problems that, when he tries to solve them, become real problems. In a recent visit to Fort Irwin, the president continued his quest to convince the American people to push forward in this war. Britain, our strongest ally, has already begun putting into motion the removal of 1,600 troops and plans to remove more by summer. In his speech, the president cited an incident when Iraqi insurgents used children in the backseat of a car rigged with explosives to get through security checkpoints as a main point in his attempt of persuasion.
"It makes me realize the nature of the enemy we face, which hardens my resolve to protect the American people...People who do that are not--it's not a civil war, it is pure evil. And I believe we have an obligation to protect ourselves from that evil," Bush said in his speech.
The nature of the enemy we face is complete devotion to their cause--a devotion we have never seen before and have trouble understanding. And are our soldiers not "American people"? Protect them by bringing them back home and stop sending American people in uniform to Iraq to die in a war America is not in favor of. And for the president to boldly say that this is not a civil war proves how detached he truly is from reality. Iraq had not harmed American people before we invaded. There were no Iraqis on the planes of 9/11 and Iraq was found to have no connections to the terrorists. All the meanwhile, Bush wants to protect Americans? He is creating the enemies we have to fight. Before our enemy was al-Qaeda and now it's these Iraqi insurgents we spawned.
Evil is a relative term. Though it was evil to use children as pawns in their insurgency, this chess game of objectifying human beings is a game the Bush Administration is all too familiar with. Is it evil of us to continue occupying Iraq long after the original war was won? Is it evil of us to continue using military force when diplomacy is what they need? Is it evil of us to use WMDs as a false pretense for war and then use democracy and freedom as a false pretense for continuing the fight? The president's hidden agendas involving Iraq's oil fields and his Saudi friends are the engines driving these violent acts against humanity. By the way, the 9/11 terrorists were Saudis. Hmmm. If our president wants to truly protect the American people from evil perhaps he should resign as president so the world can move forward in healing from the wounds this administration has caused international relations. After all, we nearly impeached Clinton for lying about his sex life but it is acceptable that this president's lies have killed over 3,000 American soldiers and tens of thousands more Iraqi civilians. If anything, impeach Bush for using the "missionary accomplished" position.