via Flixxy

Posted at 06:10 AM in Travel, War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Brilliant

Posted at 06:00 AM in Humor, Politics, War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

9/11 Conspiracy Theories 'Ridiculous,' Al Qaeda Says

Posted at 02:39 PM in War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

A terrible loss, and and even greater waste:

Via Yahoo

Posted at 06:28 AM in Humor, Idiot!, War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

click for larger graphic

Graphic courtesy of NYT

>

See also
Kosovo - Key events 
http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/serbia/kosovo/key_events_en.htm

Kosovo's Final Status: A Key to Stability and Prosperity in the Balkans  http://www.state.gov/p/eur/ci/rb/c13099.htm

>
Source:
Kosovo Declares Its Independence From Serbia 
DAN BILEFSKY   
NYT, February 18, 2008   
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/18/world/europe/18kosovo.html

Posted at 07:47 AM in Current Affairs, Politics, War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Freakin' hysterical:

Posted at 06:18 AM in Humor, Sports, War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Click thru for full graphic:

Sources:
A Year in Iraq
ADRIANA LINS DE ALBUQUERQUE and ALICIA CHENG
NYT, January 6, 2008
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/06/opinion/06chart.html

Graphic
http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2008/01/06/opinion/06opchart.ready.html

Posted at 06:00 AM in Media, War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack

The End of the World

We Will Rock You

Posted at 05:54 AM in Current Affairs, Humor, War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

This is my vote for the most overlooked story of the year:  Former DOJ Official Tested the Method Himself,  in Effort to Form Torture Policy

A senior Justice Department official, charged with reworking the administration's legal position on torture in 2004 became so concerned about the controversial, interrogation technique of waterboarding that he decided to experience it firsthand,sources told ABC News., Daniel Levin, then acting assistant attorney general, went to a military base near Washington and underwent the procedure to inform his analysis of different interrogation techniques.

Keith Olbermann *SPECIAL COMMENT* 11/5/07-

Part 1

Part 2

DoJ Official Declared Waterboarding Torture      

Posted at 06:33 AM in Current Affairs, Idiot!, War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Posted at 06:35 AM in Current Affairs, Idiot!, War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Amusing

Posted at 06:49 AM in Current Affairs, Humor, War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Tom Toles, via Yahoo!

Posted at 11:16 AM in Current Affairs, Idiot!, Politics, War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

via the Long Tail

"Admit it - back in the 20th Century, none of you imagined that World War III would be Robots vs. Muslims. Seems obvious now."   

Posted at 07:26 AM in Current Affairs, War/Defense, Web/Tech | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

via Headline Junky, we see this monograph for the Army War College titled "Deprogramming an Ideology."

Its the only appropriate item I found for today . . .

Posted at 02:56 PM in Current Affairs, Politics, Religion, War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Popular Mechanics on how to survive anything: Hurricanes, floods, earthquakes tornadoes -- 55 ways to save yourself:

• How to Survive Anything Mother Nature Throws at You
One hundred years of technological progress can be erased in minutes by nature’s fury. Recent disasters have left not only destruction, but also heroism in their wake, and we can learn from the experiences of the survivors.

• 5 Steps to Get Ready for Disaster (Not Stuck in It)
If it becomes necessary to leave your home, there may be little advance notice. Here's how to prepare for an evacuation, while staying healthy and in touch, plus tips on which gear and documents to have by your side when it's go time.

• 22 Steps to Save Yourself When Natural Disaster Hits
If there are only moments to spare, you need to know how to react to everything from an earthquake to a tornado and a flood to hurricane. Study up on the basics so you can be decisive during the destruction.
PLUS: How to Shut Down Your House in 5 Minutes

• 7 Steps to Eat, Drink and Be Smart When Worse Comes to Worst
A healthy family of four typically consumes a lot more than you'd think—50,400 calories and 14 gal. of water a week. Get a menu for four different lengths of time away from the fridge, plus smart tips on where to find good water.

• 4 Steps to Power Your Home When the Grid Fails
Generators fill in to juice your home, but you need to be smart about buying the right generator and installing it safely. Inside, we compare three top portable power sources—and make sure they can handle your load.
VIDEO: How to Safely Install a Generator

• 5 Steps to Fix Your Home After a Crisis
The damage is done, and you need answers. Here's how to get everything at home in order when the worst-case scenario plays out, from personal safety to insurance, emergency repairs to water damage.
DIY: 3 Quick Home Projects for Disaster Recovery

• 107 Pieces of Survival Gear for Your Car, Home and To-Go Bag
A well-stocked disaster kit can save lives in a crisis. Relief agencies recommend keeping three days’ worth of essentials in the house at all times, but we recommend you go further. That way, when disaster strikes and there’s no time to think, you won’t have to.
DOWNLOAD: Print Out PM's Ultimate Survival Checklist Right Now!

>

Source:
Survive Anything
Popular Mechanics, August 2007
http://www.popularmechanics.com/survival

Posted at 06:55 AM in Current Affairs, Science, War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

No one seems to understand that in the modern era, whatever you say or do is recorded for posterity.

Here's Dick Cheney, explaining why invading Iraq is such a bad idea?

Posted at 06:52 AM in Current Affairs, Politics, War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack

ight o9f

Tom Toles via Yahoo!

Posted at 05:46 AM in Humor, Idiot!, Politics, War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Tom Toles via Yahoo

Posted at 06:08 AM in Humor, Politics, War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Hysterical:

Retired Gen. George Washington Criticizes Bush's Handling Of Iraq War

WASHINGTON, D.C.—The Revolutionary War veteran noted that while Hussein was a tyrant, that alone did not justify a "conflict that seems without design or end."

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/62432

WASHINGTON, D.C.—The Revolutionary War veteran noted that while Hussein was a tyrant, that alone did not justify a "conflict that seems without design or end."

Copy and paste this code into a new post in Blogger, MySpace, or any other blog tool. It will display this Onion headline, picture, and teaser copy on your page, depending on what you select above.

It's up to you to write the rest of the blog post.

Text This Headline

* Thousands More R Thousands More Dead In Continuing Iraq Victory December 18, 2006

WASHINGTON, DC—Breaking a 211-year media silence, retired Army Gen. George Washington appeared on NBC's Meet the Press Sunday to speak out against many aspects of the way the Iraq war has been waged.
Enlarge Image Gen. George Washington

Washington likens Vice President Cheney to controversial British Chancellor of the Exchequer and Stamp Act architect George Greenville.

Washington, whose appearance marked the first time the military leader and statesman had spoken publicly since his 1796 farewell address in Philadelphia, is the latest in a string of retired generals stepping forward to criticize the Iraq war.

"This entire military venture has been foolhardy and of ill design," said Washington, dressed in his customary breeches and frilly cravat. "The manifold mistakes committed by this president in Iraq carry grave consequences, and he who holds the position of commander in chief has the responsibility to right those wrongs."

Washington noted that while Saddam Hussein was an indefensible tyrant, that alone did not justify a "conflict that seems without design or end."

"The Iraqi people did suffer greatly under unjust rule," Washington said. "But in truth, it is the duty of any people that wishes to be free to fight for its own independence. Had France meddled in our revolution beyond the guidance and material assistance they provided, I should think similar unrest would have darkened our nation's earliest hours."
Enlarge Image CNN Retired Gen. Speaks Out

Washington made the cable news rounds, telling Wolf Blitzer that the war was a "tragic mistake for our nation."

The Virginia-born Revolutionary War veteran and national-capital namesake also expressed his worry over the state of the American militia, the unchecked powers of the executive branch, and the lack of a congressional declaration of war.

"The very genius of the American presidency is that it is an office held by an elected representative of the people, not by a monarch who can rule by fiat and enact policy at will," Washington said.

The retired general asserted that many of the current problems in Iraq could easily have been predicted by wiser civilian leadership.

"I can say from personal experience that even a malnourished force with feet clad in rags should not be underestimated, even by a far superior power," added Washington, who has disavowed further comparison between the Iraqi insurgency and the American colonists. "There is nothing a committed fighting force cannot accomplish if bolstered by the strength of its convictions."

Washington's critical comments echo those of other retired generals, including Maj. Gen. John Batiste and former NATO Supreme Allied Commander Wesley Clark, who attacked Bush's Iraq policy in a series of television ads run by political action committee VoteVets.org during the 2006 midterm elections.

"We're very happy that someone of General Washington's stature is speaking out," said Jon Soltz, cofounder and chairman of VoteVets.org. "He has impeccable conservative credentials, extensive foreign policy experience, is a true citizen-soldier with a proven commitment to his country, and, if that's not enough to get Bush to listen, he's the face on the dollar bill."

However, White House response to the former general's criticism was swift and sharp. Spokesman Tony Fratto dismissed Washington as "increasingly irrelevant" and "a relic" who "made some embarrassing gaffes" during his own military career, such as the Continental Army's near destruction in the Battle of Long Island in 1776.

"The general's reckless and irresponsible comments show that he clearly does not understand the realities of 21st-century warfare," Fratto said.

Conservative pundits moved quickly to discredit the decorated general.

"I don't care who you are—or if you cannot tell a lie—it's un-American to question the president in a time of war," Sean Hannity said on his radio program Monday. "Plus, I find it very interesting that a man who owned slaves and sold hemp thinks he's entitled to give our Commander in Chief lessons on how to run a war."

Toward the end of his Meet the Press interview, Washington expressed fears for the future of Iraq, Middle East policy, and America itself.

"These convoluted foreign adventures were not what I envisaged for my young nation," Washington said. "Certainly the citizens of the republic deserve better than this. Had I but known this was the fated course of my country, I might not have found the strength to liberate Her from the mantle of King George."

Posted at 06:36 AM in Current Affairs, Humor, Politics, War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Contractor: FN Manufacturing

Cost per item: about $4,000

Size of 2007 contract: $48.3 million

The Army’s primary machine gun can spit 850 bullets per minute. FN Herstal developed the gun in the early 1980s for the Pentagon, which wanted a lightweight automatic weapon (the one here is 17 pounds). The Belgian company’s South Carolina factory makes about 550 a month for the Army.

Full article is here:

Weapons of Mass Production
John Hockenberry 
Portfolio, May 2007 Issue
http://www.portfolio.com/news-markets/international-news/
portfolio/2007/03/29/Weapons-of-Mass-Production

Posted at 06:18 AM in Design, War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

frickin hysterical:   

Is Your Mouth Your Money?

via kottke

Posted at 06:43 AM in Humor, Politics, Television, War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Nicely done CG animation about a Nazi war robot that wreaks havoc on the Allies.

Part I

Part II

Posted at 06:21 AM in Film, War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

In recent times US grand strategy has been guided by a new kind of doctrine, named after not its author but its exemplar: the Costanza doctrine. The Iraq policy pursued by the Bush administration satisfies the Costanza criterion: it is the opposite of every foreign policy the world has ever met:

First, military and diplomatic resources are finite and should be directed towards your greatest priority. An example of the opposite approach would be for a country that has been attacked by a non-state terrorist group to retaliate by removing a state regime that had nothing to do with the attack.

Second, take care not to weaken your intimidatory powers through poor military performance. Aim for short, sharp victories (such as that in the 1991 Gulf war) that get your adversaries worrying about the extent of US power. The opposite would be to launch a war of choice involving the drawn-out occupation of an Arab country – the kind of thing that gets your allies worrying about the limits of US power.

Third, you get by with help from friends. Although the powerful are sometimes tempted to go it alone, international support helps determine the perceived legitimacy of an action, which affects its risk and costs. Building this support requires discussion and compromise. The opposite would be to spurn real negotiations, slough off your allies, bin multilateral agreements you do not like and declare that you are not bound by the rules that govern everyone else.

Fourth, state-building is hard. Few of the international efforts at state-building since the cold war’s end have succeeded. Luckily there are numberless reports identifying lessons learnt. The alternative would be to do the opposite of what those reports recommend, for example by deploying insufficient troops and dismantling any extant national institutions such as the army.

Fifth, democracy is a blessing that requires patient nurturing. The opposite approach would be to seek to impose democracy by force of arms on a population traumatised by decades of vicious and totalitarian rule.

Sixth, politics, like nature, abhors a vacuum. If two dangerous states are struggling for dominance of a strategic region, maintaining a balance between them may be the least worst option. The opposite would be to emasculate one of them, thereby greatly increasing the relative power of the other.

Source:
America’s ‘Seinfeld’ strategy in Iraq
By Michael Fullilove
FT, March 29 2007 17:46
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/f1874316-de08-11db-afa7-000b5df10621.html

Posted at 06:38 AM in Humor, Politics, War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Frightening:

NYTimes:

"E.F.P.’s are one of the most devastating weapons on the battlefield. The weapons fire a semi-molten copper slug that cuts through the armor on a Humvee, then shatters inside the vehicle, creating a deadly hail of hot metal that causes especially gruesome wounds even when it does not kill.

Many of the E.F.P.’s encountered by American forces in Iraq are both difficult to detect and extremely destructive. Because they fire from the side of the road, there is no need to dig a hole to plant them, so they are well suited for urban settings. Because they are set off by a passive infrared sensor, the kind of motion detector that turns on security lights, they cannot be countered by electronic jamming.

Adversaries have used the weapon in new ways. On Feb. 12, a British Air Force C-130 was damaged by two E.F.P arrays as it landed on an airstrip in Maysan Province, the first time the device was used to attack an aircraft, according to allied officials. Allied forces later destroyed the aircraft with a 1,000-pound bomb to keep militants from pilfering equipment.

Over the course of the war, the devices have accounted for only a small fraction of the roadside bomb attacks in Iraq; most bombing attacks and most American deaths have been caused by less sophisticated devices favored by Sunni insurgents, not Shiite militias linked to Iran. But E.F.P.’s produce significantly more casualties per attack than other types of roadside bombs.

“They were a new type of threat with a great potential for damage,” said Lt. Col. Kevin W. Farrell, who commanded the First Battalion, 64th Armor of the Third Infantry Division, in 2005, when a penetrator punched through the skirt armor of one of the battalion’s M-1 tanks and cracked its hull. “They accounted for a sizable percentage of our casualties. Based on searches of the Baghdad environment we occupied and multiple local Iraqi sources, we believed that they came from Iran.”

Source:
U.S. Long Worried That Iran Supplied Arms in Iraq
MICHAEL R. GORDON and SCOTT SHANE
NYTimes, March 27, 2007
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/27/world/middleeast/27weapons.html

Posted at 09:38 AM in Current Affairs, War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Monthly figures for civilian casualties are from Iraq Body Count which uses at least two media reports as the source for each death. We have used a mean number of IBC's minimum and maximum figures for each month.

click for interactive map

Source:
Baghdad: Mapping the violence
BBC
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/in_depth/baghdad_navigator/

Posted at 12:03 PM in Current Affairs, Politics, War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Rageh Omaar embarks on a unique journey inside what he describes as one of the most misunderstood countries in the world, looking at the country through the eyes of people rarely heard - ordinary Iranians.

It took a year of wrangling to get permission to film inside Iran but the result is an amazing portrayal of an energetic and vibrant country that is completely different to the usual images seen in the media. A country of contrasts

Rageh soon discovers that Tehran is a complex place and uncovers a city of extremes of wealth and poverty, where some people survive on less than a dollar a day and others shop till they drop in glitzy shopping malls.

Iran is a country that bans women from riding motorcycles but where 60 per cent of the student population is female. It is also a youthful place, with two thirds of Iran's 70 million population under the age of 30. Local stories

Rageh meets with local people to hear their personal stories and feelings about the current state of affairs in Iran. There are stories of taxi drivers, wrestlers, business women, people working with drug addicts and the country's leading pop star and his manager - the 'Simon Cowell' of Iran.

Rageh Inside Iran transcends images of angry demonstrations and burning flags to reveal a country that isn't without its problems but which is also fascinating, dynamic and hospitable.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/​programmes/misc/ragehinsideiran.shtml

Posted at 06:20 AM in Current Affairs, Politics, Religion, War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Posted at 05:49 AM in Humor, Politics, War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack

What Would George Bush Do?

via Wellingtong Grey

Posted at 06:04 AM in Current Affairs, Humor, Politics, War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

via the New Yorker

See also, this NYT artice:

"A quarter century ago, on March 29, 1976, a simple, pastel map of New York City appeared on the cover of The New Yorker. Drawn from the perspective of a low-flying bird looking west from Ninth Avenue, you could see the world receding from the city: the Hudson River, New Jersey, Kansas City, then the Pacific Ocean and Japan. It was Saul Steinberg's famous ''View of the World from Ninth Avenue,'' a drawing reproduced and imitated countless times. Every city wanted a version of its own. Steinberg once said that if he had gotten the proper royalties, ''I could have retired on this painting.''

This week, another simple pastel map, a flat, bird's-eye view of New York City drawn in pen and wash, appeared on the cover of The New Yorker. It showed the names of the city's neighborhoods Afghanistanicized: Lubavistan, Kvetchnya, Irate, Irant, Mooshuhadeen, Schmattahadeen, Yhanks, Feh, Fattushis, Fuhgeddabouditstan, Hiphopabad, Bad, Veryverybad, E-Z Pashtuns (leading to New Jersey), Khakis and Kharkeez (in Connecticut) and, most touchingly, Lowrentistan, where the World Trade Center once stood."

Source:
Critic's Notebook; A Funny New Yorker Map Is Again the Best Defense
SARAH BOXER
NYT,  December 8, 2001
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/08/arts/design/08NOTE.html

Posted at 06:08 AM in Art & Design, Humor, War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Posted at 06:55 AM in War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

I recieved an email this weekend.

Its a photo of a US Servicement holding a little Iraqi girl.

The caption accompanying the photo was oh so very telling

"Why isn't this all over the news?  If he had done something wrong, it surely would be!"

Unfortunately, the discourse over the war has been reduced to swapping emotional images and lamenting the PR battle. It saddens me, because it shows how far we have fallen from grace.

To answer the emailer's question, it is not all over the newspapers because its not news. The good guys are supposed to do things like this. Its only news when the bad guys do this.

The good work of a US Military officer, a small kindness in a war zone -- thats what is expected of us. We are Americans, and in case you forgot, we are the GOOD guys. We are expected to do good deeds -- it is who we are.

We saved the world from anarchy in the early parts of the last century, from Fascism in the middle of the century, from Communism later in the Century.

The United States has time and again saved the world from evil -- and yet never before have any of us complained about the "PR" of our actions  Our list of global accomplishments and good deeds goes on and on. There was a concern for the results, not media imagery. This is a subtle but important point.

Can you imagine partisans whining that US Servicemen had freed the camp victims at Auschwitz -- but there wasn't enough coverage, it wasn't front page news?  That rebuilding of Germany and Japan after WWII wasn't getting enough airplay? The foodlifts to Africa, the inventions of life saving medicines, the racing to comfort earthquake victims, tsunami survivors, disasters anywhere on the planet neneded to be exploited further? Back then did anyone cry "Hey, where's our credit?!"

Absolutely not -- you shut your mouth and you got the job done. The results mattered more than the image.

That was a different era. We had leaders of great intellect, courage, and judgement. They surrounded themselves with the best and the brightest. They purposefully kept aides around them who challenged their views, thought strategically, mapped out all possible consequences, believed in Science. They were pragmatic, not idealogues; they were experienced experts, not partisans.

Too many people have lowered their standards to a point that is absurd. Hey, everyone, we repainted a school in Baghdad!

Talk about the soft prejudice of low expectations. Is that what our measure of greatness has become?

I regularly appreciate all of the great deeds done by US Servicemen, working with insufficient equipment under a great hardship. We've donated old cell phones to servicemen, participated in raising money for armor. Do not misinterpret this as anything but supportive of the troops in harm's way.

But recognize who we are talking about: These are the US Marines, the greatest fighting unit in the history of mankind! These are Air Force officers, flying the most sophisticated and powerful weaponry know to the planet. US Army personnel, Navy sailors -- these aren't just any military -- these people make up the Armed Forces of the United States of America! Does the emailer complaining about the lack of media coverage understand the history of these institutions, what they have accomplished over the past 2 centuries? I think he does not. Because if he did, he would not be as concerned about a single gentle kindness, about the imagery, about the PR, rather than the actual war itself.

The Marines understand war and their obligations within a conflict; that's why Semper Fi -- Always Faithful -- is their philosophy. The Air Force says "Aim Higher" -- because their philosophy is to achieve greater and greater results, as opposed to media spin. 

No, my dear emailer, you have forgotten who we are and what we are all about. A good deed by a US serviceman is what WE DO ANYWAY. In case you didn't know, we are the GOOD GUYS. If this not being in a newspaper is what upsets you, than you NO LONGER GET IT. This is what the United States is all about. This is what is expected of us. This is the standard we aspire to. This is who we are.

Follow the advice of the Armed Services. Worry less about the PR, and more about what really matters. "Aim Higher."

Posted at 06:05 AM in Philosophy, Politics, War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBack

Posted at 06:00 PM in Humor, Politics, War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Posted at 06:30 AM in Politics, War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Via Foreign Policy comes  The Terrorism Index
 

Source:
The Terrorism Index
Foreign Policy, February 13, 2007
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=3700

PDF

Posted at 03:10 PM in Politics, War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

From the Guardian's news blog, comes this tidbit.

One would hope that the president of the World Bank, Paul Wolfowitz would dress appropriately for the job. Apparently, not so much:

Paul Wolfowitz: Embarrassing the United States since 1976

Posted at 05:55 AM in Current Affairs, Photo Caption Contest!, Politics, War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack

What follows is a line by line takedown of the President's speech on Iraq. When you read analyses of this sort, its startling to see the degree to which our political discourse has been reduced to manipulative phrases and empty rhetoric.

We used to have leaders capable of brilliant oratory, astute analysis, who could rally the nation to their side for a worthy cause. Now, the countr's leaders have been reduced to 10 second sound bites and Bumper Stickers.

The author (bio here) holds the Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy at the Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS).

He writes:  Below, I’ve selected a number of important phrases from the address that beg for more detailed discussion, and included my own analysis of the validity and practicality of what the president seems to have in mind.

***

President Bush: Tonight in Iraq, the armed forces of the United States are engaged in a struggle that will determine the direction of the global war on terror and our safety here at home.

Analysis: Iraq is only one element in the war on terrorism. The resurgence of the Taliban in Afghanistan and the failure to suppress Al Qaeda globally are probably of equal importance, and the Bush administration seems to have no overall strategy for America's "other war" in Afghanistan or the broader war on terrorism.

When I addressed you just over a year ago, nearly 12 million Iraqis had cast their ballots for a unified and democratic nation. The elections of 2005 were a stunning achievement.

Analysis: The elections were anything but a "stunning achievement." The system used virtually ensured that Iraqis would vote by sect and ethnicity and that the outcome would further divide Sunni Arabs and Shiites, compounding the tensions created by American efforts to make Iraqis draft a new constitution.

But in 2006, the opposite happened. The violence in Iraq - particularly in Baghdad - overwhelmed the political gains the Iraqis had made.

Analysis: This statement reinvents history. The level of sectarian violence had built up steadily during 2005. The rise of sectarian and ethnic conflict was a major factor long before President Bush announced his previous strategy at the end of 2005, before the attack on one of the Shiites' holiest sites, the Golden Mosque in Samarra - an event whose importance the administration sharply played down at the time.

The consequences of failure are clear: Radical Islamic extremists would grow in strength and gain new recruits. … Our enemies would have a safe haven from which to plan and launch attacks on the American people.

Analysis: This statement again tries to link Iraq to the broader war on terrorism. In reality, the risks are far greater that Iraqi Shiites and Kurds would end up fighting Sunnis, if not each other. Iranian influence would grow. Sunni nations would intervene on the Sunni side. The primary risk is civil war with broad regional implications, not a Sunni extremist victory.

The most urgent priority for success in Iraq is security, especially in Baghdad. Eighty percent of Iraq's sectarian violence occurs within 30 miles of the capital.

Analysis: In reality, Iraq has about a dozen major cities, and there are severe problems in many, including Basra, Mosul and Kirkuk. It is far easier to measure the violence in Baghdad because there has been more killing there. But the kind of intimidation and softer forms of ethnic cleansing that are occurring across the country are equally important.

Our past efforts to secure Baghdad failed for two principal reasons: There were not enough Iraqi and American troops to secure neighborhoods that had been cleared of terrorists and insurgents. And there were too many restrictions on the troops we did have.

Analysis: This is simply untrue. Other factors - which could also destroy the president's new plan - have been more important. The real reason previous operations did not succeed was that the Baghdad government would not confront the Shiite militias and Iraqi forces were largely ineffective when they did fight. This forced American troops to act alone, and the result was often a substantial local backlash.

Our military commanders reviewed the new Iraqi plan to ensure that it addressed these mistakes. They report that it does. They also report that this plan can work.

Analysis: This ignores the fact that reports have repeatedly shown that a significant number of commanders fear the United States will still not get effective support from the Iraqis, and will be perceived as the enemy by one or more sides.

Let me explain the main elements of this effort: The Iraqi government will appoint a military commander and two deputy commanders for their capital. The Iraqi government will deploy Iraqi Army and National Police brigades across Baghdad's nine districts. When these forces are fully deployed, there will be 18 Iraqi Army and National Police brigades committed to this effort - along with local police.

Analysis: While admirably specific for a political speech, this plan seems far too optimistic. Iraqi Army units still have major effectiveness problems. The police still have ties to Shiite militias and death squads, and often are corrupt and poorly trained and equipped.

I have committed more than 20,000 additional American troops to Iraq. The vast majority of them, five brigades, will be deployed to Baghdad. These troops will work alongside Iraqi units and be embedded in their formations. Our troops will have a well-defined mission: to help Iraqis clear and secure neighborhoods, to help them protect the local population, and to help ensure that the Iraqi forces left behind are capable of providing the security that Baghdad needs.

Analysis: This raises serious political issues since Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki's advisers and the leaders of the powerful Supreme Council of Islamic Revolution in Iraq have gone on record as opposing an increase in American troops. The initiative will almost certainly mean a major confrontation with the Shiite cleric Moktada al-Sadr, who can now draw on as many as 60,000 fighters nationwide.

In reality, the United States forces will not support or "help" Iraqi forces because the latter are too weak and lack motivation. The Bush plan will add up to 17,500 troops to the 15,000 now in the greater Baghdad area, and calls for three Iraqi brigades. But it seems unlikely those Iraqi troops will do much - the Iraqi Army deployed only two of the six battalions it promised for last summer's Baghdad offensive. Embedding an American battalion of 400 to 600 men in each of the nine military districts in Baghdad may help, but it is still United States forces that will do almost all of the hard fighting and dying.

In earlier operations, Iraqi and American forces cleared many neighborhoods of terrorists and insurgents, but when our forces moved on to other targets, the killers returned. This time, we will have the force levels we need to hold the areas that have been cleared. . . . Prime Minister Maliki has pledged that political or sectarian interference will not be tolerated.

Analysis: Mr. Maliki has been quietly put under intense pressure, but may or may not continue to comply. More important, he simply does not have the political power to give a green light to the cleaning of Baghdad. This has to come from the Iraqi people in the neighborhoods involved.

I have made it clear to the prime minister and Iraq's other leaders that America's commitment is not open-ended. If the Iraqi government does not follow through on its promises, it will lose the support of the American people - and it will lose the support of the Iraqi people.

Analysis: The plan creates a strong incentive for the elements hostile to the United States to keep up military pressure, and for sectarian Shiites to push the Maliki government to not cooperate.

Our enemies in Iraq will make every effort to ensure that our television screens are filled with images of death and suffering. Yet over time, we can expect to see Iraqi troops chasing down murderers, fewer brazen acts of terror, and growing trust and cooperation from Baghdad's residents. When this happens, daily life will improve, Iraqis will gain confidence in their leaders, and the government will have the breathing space it needs to make progress in other critical areas.

Analysis: The very real risks in the president's new strategy do not mean it cannot succeed. They simply mean the odds of success are probably somewhat short of even. The president clearly expects much more intense urban fighting, and understands that a more powerful American military effort to "win, hold, build" in Baghdad could significantly increase our casualties. What is not clear is what happens if the Iraqi people turn against American forces or the insurgents simply lie low and outwait the United States in what is fundamentally a long war of attrition.

America will hold the Iraqi government to the benchmarks it has announced.

Analysis: Benchmarks are important, but there is no real schedule here and no clear picture of what the United States will do if the Iraqi government proves unwilling and untrustworthy.

The Iraqi government plans to take responsibility for security in all of Iraq's provinces by November. To give every Iraqi citizen a stake in the country's economy, Iraq will pass legislation to share oil revenues among all Iraqis. To show that it is committed to delivering a better life, the Iraqi government will spend $10 billion of its own money on reconstruction and infrastructure projects that will create new jobs. To empower local leaders, Iraqis plan to hold provincial elections later this year. And to allow more Iraqis to re-enter their nation's political life, the government will reform de-Baathification laws and establish a fair process for considering amendments to Iraq's Constitution.

Analysis: These are laudable and ambitious goals, but the practical question is whether the Iraqi government can and will meet them. Assigning Iraqis responsibility for security in Iraq's provinces has so far proved to be a cosmetic gesture. Past pledges on oil revenues, local elections and de-Baathification have not been met. The fact is that Iraqis already planned to spend this much money on reconstruction, and the United States will actually have to finance most new job creation efforts.

We will increase the embedding of American advisers in Iraqi Army units and partner a coalition brigade with every Iraqi Army division. We will help the Iraqis build a larger and better-equipped army and we will accelerate the training of Iraqi forces, which remains the essential United States security mission in Iraq.

Analysis: These are potentially positive measures, but the statement disguises the reality that a coalition brigade has far more real combat power than an Iraqi division and would do most of the fighting. It also does not address the fact that at the end of December, the Iraqi Army had trained and equipped 132,000 men, but many had deserted (as have at least a quarter of new police officers), many of the remainder were ineffective, and even effective units were often largely Shiite or Kurdish and had mixed loyalties.

We will double the number of provincial reconstruction teams. These teams bring together military and civilian experts to help local Iraqi communities pursue reconciliation, strengthen the moderates and speed the transition to Iraqi self-reliance.

Analysis: The administration has had huge problems recruiting qualified civilians even for the present number of reconstruction teams and in effectively administering every aspect of its aid programs.

Our military forces in Anbar are killing and capturing Al Qaeda leaders, and they are protecting the local population. Recently, local tribal leaders have begun to show their willingness to take on Al Qaeda.

Analysis: Washington has been saying for two years that local leaders in Anbar were turning against the Islamist extremists, but there have been little more than token results. It is far from clear that 4,000 more American troops in the province will be enough to make a decisive difference.

Succeeding in Iraq also requires defending its territorial integrity and stabilizing the region in the face of the extremist challenge. This begins with addressing Iran and Syria.

Analysis: This seems to reject the option of regional diplomacy and to tie Syria and Iran into a common threat. It's a hard-line position that may be justified, but it will certainly drive the two countries closer to each other.

We will use America's full diplomatic resources to rally support for Iraq from nations throughout the Middle East. Countries like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan and the gulf states need to understand that an American defeat in Iraq would create a new sanctuary for extremists and a strategic threat to their survival.

Analysis: Again, good goals. The question is whether major additional aid and support will be forthcoming. And there is no specific mention of any new Arab-Israeli peace initiatives.

Victory in Iraq will bring something new in the Arab world: a functioning democracy that polices its territory, upholds the rule of law, respects fundamental human liberties, and answers to its people. A democratic Iraq will not be perfect. But it will be a country that fights terrorists instead of harboring them, and it will help bring a future of peace and security for our children and grandchildren.

Analysis: This promises more than history is likely to deliver in Iraq in the near future, and far more than victory in Iraq can deliver to our children and grandchildren.

To step back now would force a collapse of the Iraqi government, tear that country apart, and result in mass killings on an unimaginable scale. Such a scenario would result in our troops being forced to stay in Iraq even longer and confront an enemy that is even more lethal.

Analysis: This overstates the risks of withdrawal or "defeat," just as those calling for force cuts and withdrawal understate them.

>

Source:
Analysis: Bush's Iraq Plan, Between the Lines
ANTHONY H. CORDESMAN
NYT, January 12, 2007
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/12/opinion/12cordesman-text.html

About the author:  Anthony Cordesman holds the Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy at the Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS). The author's full bio is here

Posted at 07:32 AM in Current Affairs, Politics, War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Astounding:

Posted at 06:11 AM in Current Affairs, Television, War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Over the past six months, Baghdad has been all but isolated electrically, Iraqi officials say, as insurgents have effectively won their battle to bring down critical high-voltage lines and cut off the capital from the major power plants to the north, south and west.

The battle has been waged in the remotest parts of the open desert, where the great towers that support thousands of miles of exposed lines are frequently felled with explosive charges in increasingly determined and sophisticated attacks, generally at night. Crews that arrive to repair the damage are often attacked and sometimes killed, ensuring that the government falls further and further behind as it attempts to repair the lines.

And in a measure of the deep disunity and dysfunction of this nation, when the repair crews and security forces are slow to respond, skilled looters often arrive with heavy trucks that pull down more of the towers to steal as much of the valuable aluminum conducting material in the lines as possible. The aluminum is melted into ingots and sold.

What amounts to an electrical siege of Baghdad is reflected in constant power failures and disastrously poor service in the capital, with severe consequences for security, governance, health care and the mood of an already weary and angry populace.

“Now Baghdad is almost isolated,” Karim Wahid, the Iraqi electricity minister, said in an interview last week. “We almost don’t have any power coming from outside.”

That leaves Baghdad increasingly dependent on a few aging power plants within or near the city’s borders.

Source:
Iraq Insurgents Starve Capital of Electricity   
JAMES GLANZ
NYT, December 19, 2006
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/19/world/middleeast/19electricity.html

Posted at 06:33 PM in War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Via Toles:

via Yahoo!

Posted at 05:50 AM in Humor, Politics, War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack