Does Peace Feel Lucky...Well, Does It?

As the death toll for American soldiers passes 100 for this month, there is word from Iraqi as well as U.S. officials that sectarian loyalties have been interfering with military operations within Iraq. It is a scandal reminiscent of the firing of eight U.S. attorneys for their lack of cooperation in republican party loyalties. This administration seems to be rubbing off a little too much on Maliki's government in Iraq.

"Although some of the officers appear to have been fired for legitimate reasons, such as poor performance or corruption, several were considered to be among the better Iraqi officers in the field. The dismissals have angered U.S. and Iraqi leaders who say the Shiite-led government is sabotaging the military to achieve sectarian goals," said Joshua Partlow of the Washington Post.

Even American Colonel Ehrich Rose, the chief of the Military Transition Team who has trained multiple foreign armies including Iraq's was appalled by the sectarian loyalties of some of the Iraqi officers. "The Iraqi army, as far as capability goes, I'd stack them up against just about any Latin American army I've dealt with. However, the politicization of their officer corps is the worst I've ever seen," he said.

This sectarian loyalty is not much different than the party loyalty President Bush has demanded since taking office in 2000. I suppose the apple doesn't fall far from the tree. Meanwhile, I have read in the newspaper a continuous flow of editorials about how the Democrats want the U.S. to lose in Iraq or how the Democrats will fail America if we pull out now. Okay, I've heard enough of this overly simplistic crap for too long. If we are going to lose in Iraq by pulling out, then how can we win in Iraq? I have only heard the one negative side of the argument on how we will lose. Well, if the Republicans are so smart, then how are we going to win? Are we going to remain in the country until every Iraqi citizen raises an American flag and sings our National Anthem? Are we going to wait until the insurgents get tired of fighting and decide to put down their guns, kiss and make up? Or are we waiting for a conventional peace treaty from some unconventional enemy lurking in the shadows of Baghdad? I have listened to people say how we can "lose" this war but since the beginning no one has had half a clue on how to "win" it. At least the Democrats are trying to support the troops by bringing them home so that they can stop being killed or maimed in a country we have no reason being in nor any plan for what to do tomorrow.

Republicans, and now apparently Bush's brain child--the Iraqi government, has put peace up against the wall until their blood-thirst is satisfied. President-pretender Bush and Prime-example-of-what-not-to-do Minister Maliki feel that not until all opposition is eliminated will there be peace and consensus among the people. Saddam's iron fist did command stability even though it harbored mounting tensions between the two sects. And that is the direction both of these governments are headed toward--the iron fist. But that is no way to support a democracy and that is no way to help a people.

Bush: CEO Of America

It is getting increasingly difficult to take our government seriously amidst the constant barrage of scandals and leaks but one thing remains consistent--American government never turns its back on the green.

Inspectors recently reviewed multiple facilities throughout Iraq to determine if the buildings were operating at their full capacity. At a recruiting center, sewage was backed up because the holding tanks were on the other side of a concrete barrier wall. At a maternity and pediatric hospital more sewage backups were found. And at one police station razor wire was held down by sand bags and other signs of poor work by contractors was found. A $79,000 generator wasn't being used because no one knew how to use it. And with further information coming to light about poor contracting work, I turn my head toward Halliburton, the single winner in a noncompetitive bid for contracting in Iraq by the U.S. government. Halliburton is known for mismanagement of their operations in Iraq, citing its most well-known: "We now know Halliburton paid $25,000 per month per truck to haul fuel into Iraq and got paid even when those trucks sat idle in Kuwait [due to high-risk security issues]," said a director of the Postconflict Reconstruction Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Fredrick D. Burton, "For this cost you probably could have flown the fuel in."

Another scandal was in September of 2005 when members of Congress found out that Halliburton was continually feeding spoiled food and contaminated water from the Euphrates River to our troops in Iraq as testified by former KBR (Halliburton subsidiary) employees Rory Mayberry, Ben Carter and Ken May.

And in the monopoly Halliburton holds over contracts in Iraq, it was discovered in October of 2006 by the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction (SIGIR) that Halliburton was hiding contract details from the public. SIGIR said Halliburton, "marks almost all of the information it provides to the government as...proprietary data." This data marked "proprietary" allows the military to keep this information from the public. The only problem is that that is not allowed to be done after the bidding for contracts is over. As a result of Halliburton gaining and holding onto the only contract for Iraq there have been about $108 million in overcharges. And to drill in the fact that war equals money, Halliburton contracts between 2000 and 2005 increased by over 600 percent.

And who is in charge of Halliburton? Currently, David J. Lesar is the CEO of the company after taking over the reins from none other than Dick Cheney, our current vice president. As found on the Halliburton Watch website, there are many interesting parallels between what Vice President Cheney said and what he did. "We [Halliburton] have not done any business in Iraq since U.N. sanctions were imposed on Iraq in 1990, and I had a standing policy that I wouldn't do that," said Cheney. Between 1997 and 2000, while Cheney was still head of Halliburton, his company sold over $73 million in "oil production equipment and spare parts to Iraq," as found out by Halliburton Watch.

"And since I left Halliburton to become George Bush's vice president, I've severed all my ties with the company, gotten rid of all my financial interest. I have no financial interest in Halliburton of any kind and haven't had, now, for over three years," said Cheney.

Halliburton Watch reported that, "As vice president, Cheney continues to receive a salary of over $150,000 each year from Halliburton while maintaining 433,333 shares of unexcersised stock options in the company."

While many republicans may consider Halliburton Watch merely a Cheney-bashing website, I stress that the facts speak loudest and should not be overlooked. For those who claim that this war has nothing to do with oil, consider that Halliburton's own description of itself is, "Halliburton adds value through the entire lifecycle of oil and gas reservoirs, starting with exploration and development, moving through production, operations, maintenance, conversion and refining, to infrastructure and abandonment."

Oil has been the backbone of this entire war and if the American people cannot see the parallels between oil profits and the Bush Administration by now then there is no hope.

Either Step Up Or Sit Down: Enough Name Calling

As a result of the debates I have been having with various people on the war in Iraq, I feel that it is important to mention that I do understand there are reasons for and against this issue. I have heard many emotional arguments for the war in Iraq filled with passion and patriotism. But I have also heard many arguments against the war filled with the same passion and patriotism. From all of the information that I have gathered--all of the facts, data, statistics and witness accounts--I have come to the conclusion that this war is unjust and wrong. All the while, I accept other people's opinions that differ from mine and take as much into consideration as possible. There have been many individuals who have been insulting and disrespectful for lack of a better argument and it is a shame that so many people cannot be civil in their debates. We are all Americans and we all love this country. It hurts me to see so many Americans fighting each other over this war when we are all on the same side. But in the end, I will stand by my beliefs and defend them to my last breath. Because while my views may change over time in light of a constant flow of new information, my unwavering stance by them will not. I refuse to be threatened or intimidated into believing that we should be in Iraq. And it sounds like many people are frightened by this administration's scare tactics that compel people to believe that if we do not have total victory in Iraq, Osama will be hiding under our beds in those quiet suburban slices of Americana. Throughout all of my debates with people, I have never heard any clear justification for the war in Iraq. I have heard a lot of slander about the treason of Democrats. I have heard a lot about al-Qaeda taking over the world starting with Iraq. I have even heard that Iraqis wanted to hurt American citizens long before the war even took place. But I am yet to hear a single fact emerge from the pile of war-hawk crap that truly justifies our presence in Iraq from the beginning. If you've got one, let me hear it. Because what it all comes down to in the end is that anyone can insult someone else for their beliefs, but no one can justify this war in Iraq.

Burqa Of Iraq: The Truth Concealed

The war in Iraq has become shrouded beneath a veil of lies and corruption since the beginning and while the cost of human life is clear, the reason for us being there is not. In the war on terror, which includes Afghanistan and Iraq, the U.S. was once again reminded about that little country they left behind. Taliban fighters seized control of a province in eastern Afghanistan after killing the district mayor and four policemen including the police chief. Women were forced to don their burqas (Muslim garment to cover women's bodies) in fear of strict Taliban rule. The town was later retaken by Afghan troops but this sort of temporary take-over by the Taliban is not uncommon throughout Afghanistan. While our forces are concentrated heavily in Iraq, we have forgotten that the war on terror started in Afghanistan. We left the country just as they were starting to get onto their own two feet leaving them with the means for a Taliban revival as seen here. Also, because we have poorly chosen to invade Iraq, al-Qaeda has received less pressure from U.S. forces in Afghanistan, found more recruits in Iraq and have all around benefited from the war in Iraq as they have taken the offensive against U.S. troops on the ground. Why then, are we in Iraq?
Well, if you read my last article, "George Puts The Oil Back In Toil" you would see my views on how oil is the prime factor here. But one thing is for sure, it wasn't weapons of mass destruction like the Bush Administration had claimed. And to further back that up, former CIA Director George Tenet wrote in his new book, "At the Center of the Storm" that the meeting he attended with the president was to simply find out what information could be used publicly to get Americans behind the coming war.
Tenet said, "I'll never believe that what happened that day informed the president's view or belief of the legitimacy or the timing of the war. Never!"
Tenet felt that there was overwhelming pressure on him prior to the meeting to push the country into war. And most of this pressure came from who else but Beelzebub himself, Vice President Dick Cheney. The White House has dismissed these criticisms brought on by Tenet but in the end, it is just one more nail in the coffin for George W. Bush's war in Iraq.
I would imagine that if the real reason we went to war was because we honestly felt that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction that posed a threat to national security, then Bush would have made an apology to the American people when the WMDs were found to be nonexistent. After all, it was a noble enough cause that could have been the mistake of anyone lower in the chain of command. But the president's insistence that the war is still justifiable even after the prime reason for going to war was proven to be false tells me that WMDs were just a convenient cover over his hidden agendas.
The real victims here are the Iraqis who have suffered under Saddam's regime and must now suffer from the mediocre planning of Operation Iraqi Freedom. And while we continue to occupy the country in the middle of their civil war, we only stall the peace process and make needless victims of our troops. This war has seen some ugly atrocities but none as despicable as the lies told by the Bush Administration that led to such unnecessary death.

George Puts The Oil Back In Toil

I am becoming increasingly fatigued by this war in Iraq. In a recent poll by NBC News and Wall Street Journal it was found that 56% of Americans polled agree with the Democrats in Congress about placing a deadline on the bill and only 37% of Americans sided with Bush. And in the same poll 55% of Americans said that they do not believe that victory is possible in Iraq and only 37% said there was still a chance. While the president continues to ignore the American people, construction of a wall in the Sunni populated Baghdad neighborhood, Azamiyah, was stopped due to overwhelming protests by the residents. When confronted about the situation, Brigadier General Qasim al-Moussawi said, "We expected this reaction by some weak-minded people."
The only weak-minded people I have been listening to are people like Brigadier General al-Moussawi and our president. I would venture a guess that the average height of the war hawk republican in the White House is about three and a half feet tall because they all have their heads up their asses. We need politicians who can set aside their agendas and represent their people. After all, that is what a democracy is for.
Also, I know that I have been saying that oil is the main reason for this war in Iraq and while many people agree that oil has something to do with it, I feel like I haven't really explained the details. So here it goes. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration Iraq holds "the world's second largest proven reserves [of oil]." In December of 2002, there were 2,000 oil wells in Iraq. In December of 2002, there were nearly 1 million oil wells in...where else...Bush Country (Texas). Interestingly, the Bush family including our president, are good friends with the Saudi royal family. Saudi Arabia is the world's largest oil producing nation. I don't want to come off as a conspiracy buff for lack of evidence but the coincidences here are clearly suspect. War in oil-rich regions raise the price of oil across the board. No doubt, the Saudis have made a lot of money from the risen prices.
On a side note, there is the fact that the 9/11 terrorists were from Saudi Arabia and yet we have invaded two Middle Eastern countries not Saudi Arabia; one of which really had nothing to do with al-Qaeda until we invaded--Iraq. It is strange that we are friends with the nation that bred the terrorists but enemies to adjacent nations in the war on terror. But I am sure that George W. Bush, who was involved in the Texas oil industry prior to becoming president, has good reasons to remain close friends to the largest producer of oil in the world despite that nation's direct link to al-Qaeda. And I am sure it has nothing to do with oil.
And while Iraq has the second largest oil reserves in the world, it is barely a contender for exports because of the poor condition of the production and refinement systems in the country. And where did our troops head for first once touching ground in Iraq? The oil fields. Securing the oil is clearly an extremely valuable factor that was taken into consideration for the war plan far much more seriously than an exit strategy. At this point, we are merely trying to protect our oil interests so that Iran cannot have any influence in Iraq's economy.
And in February, the Iraqi Cabinet met and passed a draft law backed by the U.S. to place the nation's oil fields under control of the central government. The Kurds in the north have objected to this saying that it is unconstitutional and unfair. They fear that the revenue from the oil will not be distributed fairly citing that the Iraqi government is already behind in payments for various endeavors. Also, the Kurds, who hold the northern oil fields in the country, do not want to be neglected nor abused as was such during Saddam's regime. So much for capitalism. It seems that if the central government controls the oil reserves, the U.S., which still has an overwhelming presence in Iraq, can have a much more influential say in how that oil is used.
While I do not feel that oil was the only reason we went to war with Iraq, due to a lack of WMDs, solid links to al-Qaeda as a strong ally to Saddam and other weak or downright false arguments, oil seems to be one of the strongest motivators for this war. Perhaps George W. should look into creating an engine that runs on human blood. Based on his lack of consideration for human life it would probably be cheaper for him to drive around his ranch that way.

Building A Wall With Nonbinding Mortar

After forty-six people were killed throughout Iraq today, the day closes on an equally somber note: the proposed solution. The wall that the U.S. military is building around Azamiyah is continuing to be built despite orders from the Prime Minister to halt construction. The wall is being built to protect the Sunni minority in a Baghdad neighborhood but protests by hundreds of citizens showed that the residents felt like they were being walled in and not that the terrorists were being walled out. U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker said that the purpose of the wall was “to try and identify where the fault lines are and where avenues of attack lie and set up the barriers literally to prevent those attacks.”

I don't know too much about suicide bombers but I am pretty sure that they are in no way related to earthquakes. Violence due to suicide bombing doesn't have "fault lines". You cannot simply build walls to keep out the suicide bombers. They are mobile people who have penetrated even the Green Zone within Baghdad. All a wall will do is represent a target of U.S. occupation to be blown up. Building a wall to thwart suicide bombers from attacking civilians is like building a dam out of coffee filters.

Also, I understand that in politics there is a certain gift from...well, somewhere...called a nonbinding resolution. The only question I have is: what is that term doing in a bill that can not only fund our troops abroad but bring them back home thus ending our occupation in a country which despises our presence in the middle of their civil war. By having the timetable for troop withdrawal as a goal and not a deadline, Bush could sign the bill into law and then ignore the pullout date. The beauty of a nonbinding resolution is that in addition to being an oxymoron, it is a way of achieving political success without really accomplishing anything. The republicans get to have their war and the democrats can say they tried to end it. The only people suffering are our soldiers and the Iraqi civilians unable to move forward.

With politics getting in the way of diplomacy, everyone is worried about their images and the legacies they will leave behind. This war is about politics and power and if you believe anything else, you have been misled along the way by the propaganda forged by the politicians. The only way real progress is going to come about if politicians do the unthinkable and put aside their own agendas and focus on the people. Nonbinding resolutions and 3-mile long walls are merely illusions in the political theater meant to misdirect the public while the real trick is played on us. The sad truth: in a democracy who is to be blamed for those ignoring the will of the people but the people themselves who ignore their responsibilities to that democracy.

Iraq's Reality: Viewer Discretion Advised

photo: www.prisonplanet.com/
Quote from Associated Press on 4/22/07 obtained by msn.com

"Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, on a tour abroad to ask the mostly Sunni-led governments of the Arab world to help his struggling government stop the violence in Iraq, said he told Egypt’s president that Iraq’s reality is 'not a civil or sectarian war.'"

Then what is it--a bicycle ride through the park? I don't think so. Only when we can admit that there is a problem can we solve it. And while this image is extremely graphic, this is what war looks like. Perhaps if people realized how real war truly was, they would be less likely to start them.