The Iraq thread 3

[EiZei 0]

At least I have not heard any sane news outlets calling the iraqi militias "freedom fighters". Not that "terrorists" would be a terribly good choice either.

[quicksand 0]

Quote[/b] ]I hope you are aware of the fact that the words used to describe the enemy are a part of all propaganda. You will never describe your enemy in a good light, you want them to appear as evil and bad as possible. Thats why the coalition wont call them freedom fighters. But it really doesnt matter, its just words.

Perfect explanation...

I mean just by watching Senor&Kimmitt briefings you can smell the propaganda comming out.What is concerning is they actually resort straight forward lies in order to manipulate the public.

Anyone remember when Kimmitt was praising the ICDC for how supportive they were in the siege of Fallujah and the excelent job they were doing?Turned out three days later that there was no ICDC in Fallujah and they refused to fight.That really put it into perspective for me as to what lies they are capable of to create the picture of a sunny Iraq on track to demoracy where US forces are in firm control of the situation.

And another one:

"Fallujah inhabatants are hostages of foreign fighters"

Or maybe he refered to US marines as foreign fighters  

[turms 0]

Quote[/b] ]Kimmitt was praising the ICDC for how supportive they were in the siege of Fallujah and the excelent job they were doing?Turned out three days later that there was no ICDC in Fallujah and they refused to fight.

heres some interested reading about the Iraqi army....

msnbc

[quicksand 0]

URL=http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=AGC0VOIUFB2NOCRBAEZSFEY?type=topNews&storyID=4857465]REUTERS[/url]

Quote[/b] ]WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States will not negotiate for the release of an American soldier being held by insurgents in Iraq but is working to win the freedom of hostages there, top administration officials said on Sunday.

....

Oh the stupidity coming from this people.It`s tragic that this man has his death signed all because his stubberned gouverment is incapable of adapting to a situation.Their statements are a broken record that keeps repeating the same thing:

"We shall not negotiate with terrorists" ,and support for their decission goes skyrocket just by using the "T" word 50 times in their public adress.

Resistance fighters were actually really moderate in their request.Nothing of the sort of retreat from our country or he dies,instead a fair exchange of prisoners.

Plain and simple US gouverment does not give a f*ck how many US soldiers are going to get killed as long as they manage to keep Bush`s "bring `em on" attitude under the impresion that it`s working.

[MLF 0]

URL=http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=AGC0VOIUFB2NOCRBAEZSFEY?type=topNews&storyID=4857465]REUTERS[/url]

Quote[/b] ]WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States will not negotiate for the release of an American soldier being held by insurgents in Iraq but is working to win the freedom of hostages there, top administration officials said on Sunday.

....

Oh the stupidity coming from this people.It`s tragic that this man has his death signed all because his stubberned gouverment is incapable of adapting to a situation.Their statements are a broken record that keeps repeating the same thing:

"We shall not negotiate with terrorists" ,and support for their decission goes skyrocket just by using the "T" word 50 times in their public adress.

Resistance fighters were actually really moderate in their request.Nothing of the sort of retreat from our country or he dies,instead a fair exchange of prisoners.

Plain and simple US gouverment does not give a f*ck how many US soldiers are going to get  killed as long as they manage to keep Bush`s "bring `em on" attitude under the impresion that it`s working.

you really are nieve, you cannot budge when it comes to hostages, no matter who is taken hostage, whether it be a General or a Grunt you cannot budge 1 bit.

[Balschoiw 0]

what if the president of the USA would be held hostage ?

Would there be negotiations ?

Yeah yeah...

[red oct 2]

at the moment, i don't think to many would be upset if bush were a hostage.

Hostage takers: "Get out of Iraq by tonight, or we will kill Bush!"

Kimmitt: "HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!"

Hostage takers: "Whats so funny? We have your President as a Hostage!"

Kimmitt: "We'll leave Iraq if you do kill him."

[bucket man 2]

That "we dont negotiate with terrorists" crap shouldnt even apply in this situation.

Those men for all I know did not target civilians. They targeted occupying force military convoy so they are not terrorist in the actual meaning of the word.

And even if they would be terrorists US government should negotiate as demands were reasonable and that soldiers life is at stake here!

QuicKsanD, you are so right on that terrorist word stuff. Hell if US military would accidentaly blow up 250 marines in an airstrike all they have to do is repeat the word terrorist.

"We lost some men today but terrorists... freedom... terrorists... Al Qaeda.... Bin Laden.... terrorists."

[brgnorway 0]

at the moment, i don't think to many would be upset if bush were a hostage.

Hostage takers: "Get out of Iraq by tonight, or we will kill Bush!"

Kimmitt: "HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!"

Hostage takers: "Whats so funny? We have your President as a Hostage!"

Kimmitt: "We'll leave Iraq if you do kill him."

Hehe that was my first real laugh this day!  

If it came to negotiations I bet they would agree on Bush having to eat the false plastic turky he brought last Thanksgiving....

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

I like Kimmit (however I dont like the whitehouse spokesperson next to him)

[turms 0]

Quote[/b] ]BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - Iraqi security forces will not be ready to protect the country against insurgents by the June 30 handover of power, the top U.S. administrator said Sunday - an assessment aimed at defending the continued heavy presence of U.S. troops here even after an Iraqi government takes over.

The unusually blunt comments from L. Paul Bremer came amid a weekend of new fighting that pushed the death toll for U.S. troops in April to 99, already the record for a single-month in Iraq and approaching the number killed during the invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein last year.

The military had always planned to remain after June 30, when the U.S. is to handover sovereignty to Iraq. In recent months coalition officials acknowledged the transfer of security will be significantly slower than hoped because Iraqi forces were not prepared.

But Bremer said the fighting across the country this month exposed the depth of the problems inside the security forces.

Now could this be the beginning of US postponing the date when the governing of Iraq will be given to iraqis...

[bmgarcangel 0]

I have a story to tell about the war....at the begining of the war, sorry to get a little off-topic on the time and shit.

It was on the 4th day of the war. That night our marines got pinned down, I don't remember the city, but they got pinned down and these two dug in iraqi tanks had already put two american APC's on fire, well, bassically shot a hole in them. So our marines were taking lots of cassaulties from the well dug in Iraqies, lots of wounded, so they had no choice but to call in the A10 warthogs. This was a night time mission, and I don't remember the guys name, I ment him down at this musuem when he was parked with his A10 showing everyone. He had just returned from another mission and was going back to base but they told him to go and help out the marines. He arrived on the scene and saw with his NV googles the 2 apcs and tracers going everywhere.

He found where the enemy was, which side they were....he flew in and dropped 3 bombs. After that he used his Gattling gun and straffed the enemy position till he was out of ammo. 30 minutes after he arrived he started to fly of, marines told him they had the up hand now.

He has the most interesting life. At age 34 he's flown the A10, B52, and F-15. First plane he flew, B52, he flew with nuclear bombs on those patrols that still go on today. In case nuclear war breaks out they go to there targets and boom. After a few years of that he spent most of his career flying the F15. Just 2 years ago he was assigned to fly the A10.

I'm a Marine brat ok, don't tell me that they don't call in support if they are way over their heads.

I talked to the pilot, shaked his hand, thanked him for what he has done for our country and the Iraqi people guys. Don't argue with the goddamned truth. For one, you all don't know a whole lot about the truth. If you did, then the news would have so much more to talk about.

Most battles are not heard on televissions, you have to dig really deep sometimes to find out alot of information.

~Bmgarcangel

P.oh fricken SS.

Now lets see, its all pretty evident that the Iraqi force isn't ready. They aren't that strong and do you guys know how many are dropping out each day and how many are joining the Insurgents each day? Its crazy shit guys. We have a mess on our hands and I hope and believe though that we will pull through!

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]at the moment, i don't think to many would be upset if bush were a hostage.

Hostage takers: "Get out of Iraq by tonight, or we will kill Bush!"

Kimmitt: "HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!"

Hostage takers: "Whats so funny? We have your President as a Hostage!"

Kimmitt: "We'll leave Iraq if you do kill him."

Two Thumbs down.

Quote[/b] ]That "we dont negotiate with terrorists" crap shouldnt even apply in this situation.

Those men for all I know did not target civilians. They targeted occupying force military convoy so they are not terrorist in the actual meaning of the word.

And even if they would be terrorists US government should negotiate as demands were reasonable and that soldiers life is at stake here!

I believe it is a long standing policy not to negotiate. Do you know the people that they want to be release?

I heard that Jesse Jackson is going to negotiate with the people that have the trucker....

[ozanzac 0]

B52, he flew with nuclear bombs on those patrols that still go on today.

Hmm, I was certain that Chrome Dome and other similar aerial nuclear armed patrols had ceased operations by 1991.  

About the captured US soldier. I seriously doubt that any negotiations regarding his release will take place. Even if the demands for his release were more reasonable than what they are at the momment, the mentality that 'We will not negotiate with terrorists' will still be rife amongst the coalitions command. Which in my opinion is wrong. The US needs to establish a connection with the resistance factions in order for peace to prevail, but the conundrum is, there's so many factions, that a deal worked out with one may not filter down or apply to another. Hence the US really has got itself neck deep in manure.

Had the coalition focussed on returning Iraqi everyday life back to normal, there would never have been the civil unrest that has errupted in the past month. Instead, they've left the country in ruins, and what have they got to show for it? Apart from catching Saddam, and establishing a police force, a new Iraqi army, and a somewhat flawed Iraqi government, they have done jack f'ing shit.

[quicksand 0]

Quote[/b] ]I believe it is a long standing policy not to negotiate. Do you know the people that they want to be release?

Does your gouverment know?No,they didn`t establish any connection with them,they have no idea what are their demands,all they have done is start a vendeta on TV to underline how determined they are in not negotiating with this *terrorists.

Conclusion:Your gouverment does not give a flying f*ck about its soldiers when they need its help the most.

*Irregular acts of revolutionary or guerrilla warfare are not considered to constitute terrorism as long as they do not target civillians(dictionary) thus the people that attacked the American convoy and are now requesting an exchange of prisoners are not terrorists.Your gouverment is once again lieing in order to manipulate the public and win its support,but that`s not surprising at all,is it?

[theavonlady 2]

Time to put on your bifocals and read some embedded reporting:

Quote[/b] ]U.S. Marines face tough times in postwar Iraq

Knight Ridder - Sunday, April 18, 2004

St. Louis Post-Dispatch

By Ron Harris

CAMP AL QAIM, Iraq _ Lt. Jason Johnston couldn't hold back his frustration.

"I don't think the American people understand that this is full-blown guerrilla warfare," he said as he stood inside one of the cramped barracks housing scores of Marines in this remote outpost.

"This is the real war. Last year was a cakewalk."

Johnston is one of the thousands of Marines who have returned to Iraq following only four months back in the United States after fighting their way from the deserts of Kuwait to Baghdad last year. They get most of their U.S. news via the Internet, and they don't always like what they see.

"Who gives a damn about gay marriage or Martha Stewart?" said Johnston, a rifle platoon leader and 13-year veteran from Scottsdale, Ariz. "This is what matters. This is what counts."

Any Marine here who fought during the early stages of the invasion of Iraq will tell you that the Marines' mission now is more complex, more difficult and much more dangerous _ even before the recent upsurge in violence in Fallujah, Ramadi and Baghdad.

"What you are really facing is what the Marines call `the 3-block war,'" said their commanding officer, Lt. Col. Matthew Lopez, a 40-year-old Chicago native. "On one block you can be doing humanitarian aid. In another block you could be providing security. In the third block you could be engaged in full combat.

"In this environment, the transition between those three blocks happens instantaneously."

It was a lot easier last March and April, when U.S. forces had the enemy on the run, plowing through Saddam Hussein's armies and moving through Basra, Nasarijah, Numaniah, Salmen Pak, Baghdad, Tikrit, Ramadi and Fallujah.

In the eight months that 3rd Battalion, 7th Marines served in Iraq last year, they suffered only a handful of combat injuries and no Marines were killed by enemy fire. In just a little over a month here, however, four in their unit have been killed and more than a dozen wounded seriously enough by enemy fire, roadside bombs or land mines to return to the United States, some with lost legs, arms or eyes.

The response of Iraqis has changed, too. Now, many are reluctant to be seen with the Americans, for fear of retribution from insurgents.

"This is the real war," said Lopez, who heads the more than 1,000 Marines whose job it is to bring peace and security to the region of al-Qaim. The Iraqi equivalent of an American county, it is about the size of the island of Bermuda, encompassing about 230,000 people and four major towns: Husaybah, Ubaydi, Karabilah and Sadah.

The Marines hope to accomplish their task by winning over the populace with good deeds and good manners that will convince the local population that they are here to help instead of to conquer.

But they face attacks that can come from anywhere, from anybody and at anytime.

"It's a lot more dangerous than it was before," said First Sgt. Stephen Francois, who was with Kilo Company during the early run to Baghdad. "The enemy is not clear cut. Now, they might smile at you on the street and be planting a bomb by the road at night."

First Sgt. Michael Templeton, 40, with six other Marines captured 67 Iraqis during the early portion of the war. Upon his return, he was hit by a roadside bomb on his first patrol just two days after arriving.

"Before, there was an enemy," he said. "You could see him and confront him. If he attacked you, you could respond and kill or capture him. Now, the enemy has no face. It's an Improvised Explosive Device (homemade bomb) or a land mine."

The unit has been bloodied significantly.

Gunnery Sgt. Darryl French of Birchtree, Mo., took shrapnel to the arm the on his first patrol and was awarded a Purple Heart.

Staff Sgt. John Kelley, of Stuebenville, Ohio, was in the lead Humvee when the vehicle directly behind him was hit by a roadside bomb, killing two Marines under his command and wounding three others. Days later, he was involved in the shootout with the Syrian Army at the border between Iraq and Syria when one Marine was wounded. More of his Marines were seriously injured days later when his platoon was hit with another homemade bomb. And on Wednesday, his vehicle was again hit by a bomb.

Lt. Tom O'Neill barely escaped a 16-inch piece of metal shrapnel that "would have cut me in two" when a bomb went off next to his vehicle as he was leaving a city following a town hall meeting recently.

On Thursday, one Marine from the unit and another stationed at the base were killed and nine others injured in a series of bomb attacks.

Friday, one Marine was killed in an ambush.

The unit is finding between three to eight roadside bombs daily. In one day, Lopez, their commanding officer, found three in a local town and was able to clear the area before insurgents detonated the explosives.

The elusiveness of the enemy and the nature of the combat have pushed many Marines to compare and contrast this war to one of the darkest periods in recent U.S. foreign policy and military history _ the Vietnam War.

"It's the same thing they got hit with in Vietnam," said Staff Sgt. Carl Scott, who served in Desert Storm in 1991, and both phases of the current war. "You can't see who is shooting at you a lot of the time. You can't see who is blowing you up. They throw a rock and hide their hands."

Capt. Trent Gibson, the Kilo Company commander, read a book on the Vietnam War during his flight from America to Kuwait. He flashed to thoughts of that conflict on his first day in the region.

"I was driving down Market Street in Husaybah and I had the windows of the Humvee rolled down. I'm waving at people, and only maybe 30 percent would give me, like, a tentative wave, the kind where if somebody saw them, they could pretend they were doing something else," said Gibson, 35, whose uncles served in Vietnam.

"I couldn't help but think of the stories I read about Vietnam and it seemed to me that it was like then, the Viet Cong owned the village, and nobody wanted to be associated with the Americans."

_

The Marines are making slower progress than they did a year ago, but even then some of their accomplishments appeared short-lived.

Last year, they took over Karbala, a city in southern Iraq dominated by Shiite Muslims. The battalion provided security and reconstruction, and made tremendous strides with a more accepting population. Iraqis and Marines alike wept when they pulled out.

But one month after the Marines turned over their mission there to the Bulgarian Army and returned to the United States, a suicide bomber rolled a car into Lt. Col. Lopez's former office and killed five Bulgarians and two Iraqis.

Doubt has begun to creep into the minds of even the most committed Marines as to the ultimate success of their mission.

Staff Sgt. Carl Scott of Pine Bluff, Ark., a veteran of Desert Storm in 1991 and the early push into Baghdad, has heard a number of Marines voice reservations.

"Most of these Marines, you can give them an M-16 and one bullet, and they'll go out there and battle to the death," said Staff Sgt. Carl Scott, 39, of Pine Bluff, Ark. "But some are beginning to question why we're here. It's not that they don't want to be here. It's just that in times like this, it's hard for them to find a purpose."

One officer put it more bluntly.

"I love my country, I love the Marines and I love George Bush, but Iraq is going to collapse the moment we pull out," he said. "It doesn't matter what we do. It's time to go home."

Lopez doesn't dismiss such talk among his men, but he says such conversation is to be expected.

"Anytime you are engaged in combat, it's natural for them to question the outcome of that conflict," he said, while pushing a meal of spaghetti and meatballs around on a cardboard tray in the area mess hall. "It's been that way throughout history. But it is through the Marines' actions that they show how committed they are to a successful end."

Part of the Marines' frustration is their inability in this new war to hit back, to strike back immediately at the men who are killing and maiming their brothers.

"It's really frustrating for the younger guys," said Gunnery Sgt. Elia Fonteccio, 29. "I talk to them and try to help them through it."

_

The convoy mounts up and visits a local television station, where Lt. Dan Casey of Chicago leads a discussion with workers at the station on efforts to put up security lights around the building. The television workers say they want to do the work themselves instead of using a contractor.

"The contractor is only concerned about getting paid," one says. "They don't care about the quality of the work."

Casey tells them he will need a written proposal in order to approve having them do the work and giving them the money. Casey also gives the Iraqis a DVD of Lt. Col. Lopez addressing an area city council to address their concerns. He asks the workers to broadcast it for three nights in a prime 7:45 p.m. slot. They agree.

It is an uneasy meeting for the Iraqis. They apparently are eager to work with the Americans, but they are careful to maintain a distance.

"Basically, we're not working with the coalition forces," explains Saleh, a 34-year-old station employee. "We're working for our country ... with the help of the Americans."

He admits that he feels danger when the Americans come to the station.

"We have heard of many incidents of people hurt because they are working with the coalition forces. "The situation is very dangerous. You cannot protect yourself."

Before the Marines leave, an elderly man who works at the station complains that the Army took his computer when they were in charge of the area, and he'd like to get it back. Henderson asks how much the man thinks the computer is worth.

They settle on a price, $350. In a hallway outside the room, away from the other Iraqis, Cpl. Garrett Kimble peels off $50 bills from a large wad of money he has stuffed in his pocket.

Kimble is one of the battalion's' dispersers. It's his job to hand out hundreds of thousands of dollars to Iraqis and Marines. The money goes for reconstruction work, like fixing schools, paving roads and repairing water systems. It's also paid to Iraqis for damage or distress the Marines may have caused.

Kimble is 20-years-old, from Big Timber, Mont. He's been a Marine for two and a half years. He's carrying $5,000 today. So far, he says, he has handed out about $250,000, but none for damage and suffering.

"Fortunately, we didn't have to destroy anyone's property and we didn't harm anyone," he explained.

_

From time to time, Marines here gather to discuss their thoughts on life, their circumstances and their mission. Recently, some wandered in and out of a balcony on the second level of the command center that has been unofficially designated a smoking area.

"So, what do you think?" a veteran Marine asked the group.

"Think about what?" one responded. "Think about our mission, what we're doing here?"

Marines were firmly committed to doing what was required of them, but there were varying opinions about its effectiveness. Some wondered if the American public would give them enough time to complete their mission, particularly with the growing body count.

Others said no matter what, they believed that Iraq ultimately would devolve into civil war.

"Hey, democracy doesn't come easy," one said. "Look at the United States. We had a civil war and a whole lot of other stuff. It's just not so simple."

Ultimately, the conversation drifted to the Vietnam War, a subject on the lips of many Marines these days.

"If you look at it, the Marines who died in Vietnam died for nothing," said one veteran, whose father served two tours in Vietnam.

It was a shocking statement, one that only a veteran Marine would dare make in the presence of other Marines.

"Look, they were there supposedly so that Vietnam wouldn't become Communist and become a threat to the United States and the world," he said. "Well, Vietnam is Communist. Is it a threat?"

The other Marines mumbled, but there was mostly silence.

Then the discussion turned back to Iraq. Saddam is gone, his sons killed and his regime destroyed. There are no weapons of mass destruction. Why are we still here? Why not leave now?

"We owe these people," said one Marine. "We owe them to finish the job that we have started."

Plus, he said, with the intense criminal element intimidating the people, the corrupt politicians, the sense of lawlessness, the weak police force and the Jihadists operating in the region, the area could easily become a haven for terrorists.

The other Marines nodded in agreement.

Ultimately, the conversation drifted to the upcoming missions. Kilo Company was going out that night to search a house in Karabilah believed to be a center for making roadside bombs. India Company was assigned to do security patrols the next day and wouldn't be back for another 36 hours. Another Marine was headed up to Lima Company, near the town of Husaybah, considered the region's most dangerous location.

After a few more minutes of small talk, the men drifted off the balcony and back to their assigned sleeping areas where they would prepare for another day of "the real war."

___

© 2004, St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

The end.

[Tex -USMC- 0]

Good read.

[theavonlady 2]

@ April 19 2004,11:22)]Good read.

Thank you. Here's another:

Quote[/b] ]Stability of Iraqi police eroding

By Thanassis Cambanis, Globe Staff | April 18, 2004

BAGHDAD -- The virtual collapse of Iraqi police authority in many parts of the country during the dual uprisings last week threatens one of the linchpins of the US strategy: to hand over policing responsibility and put an Iraqi face on domestic security.

US officials have not publicly disclosed the extent to which Iraqi

Baghdad highways closed; Fallujah talks proceed. A12

police officers quit, stayed home, or mutinied during the nearly two weeks of turmoil that engulfed Iraq at the beginning of April. But discussions with senior Iraqi interior ministry officials, police officers, members of the Civil Defense Corps, and some military officials who work with them highlight the deep flaws in the security services that were hastily assembled beginning last summer. They also paint a disturbing picture of a security force nowhere near ready to take a central role.

Originally, American officials expected Iraqi forces to be taking the lead on domestic crime and terrorism by now. Instead, it appears that even after the planned June 30 handover of power, the already busy US-led occupation troops will have to continue spending much of their time on police work.

''We are starting from zero. The police force is full of people who are good for nothing, appointed because of who they know," said Brigadier General Ahmed Ali al-Khafaji, a former resistance fighter who is now responsible for nearly 60,000 police officers in Iraq's provinces as a deputy to the interior minister.

In Baghdad, as many as seven police stations -- more than 10 percent of the city's total -- were abandoned in the face of threats from Moqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi Army militia during the first week of April, said Brigadier General Hussein Kamal, the deputy interior minister now responsible for Baghdad's police.

In three provincial cities -- Kut, Karbala, and Kufa -- police surrendered weapons and equipment to the militia and withdrew entirely from the streets. They also withdrew from stations in Nasiriyah, but did not cooperate with the rebels.

Details now emerging show that dozens of police stations came under coordinated attack at the peak of the fighting in the first weeks of April from either the Shi'ite Mahdi militia or from Sunni resistance fighters who view Iraqi police as collaborators with the occupation.

In Shi'ite areas, clerics accompanied by Mahdi fighters visited police stations at the beginning of the uprising and demanded that officers either join the militia or go home, Iraqi police officials said. In many cases, the police handed over uniforms, police vehicles, and machine guns to the militia.

Before the uprising, key police officers received warnings at their homes that their families would be killed if they protected police stations. Many chose not to return to work until the violence subsides, Iraqi police and a senior coalition official said.

And in cases where police officers chose to defend their stations from attacks, they were vastly outgunned, using light machine guns to fend off hundreds of fighters armed with rocket-propelled grenade launchers, hand-grenades, and heavy machine guns.

US and Iraqi officials said they are investigating every police officer to learn who shirked their duties and who mutinied during the tumultuous events this month, but they have refused to estimate the breadth of the problem. Still, some senior Iraqi police officials estimate that more than half of the nation's police force isn't qualified to be on the beat.

''In an emergency, I have 1,000 officers I can trust to control Baghdad," said the police chief for the entire capital region, Major General Jamal Abdullah al-Ma'athede. He has 10,000 officers under his authority and is responsible for a region of at least 6 million people.

Last week, as the situation in Baghdad calmed, Ma'athede gave an unusually frank assessment of the police force's response to the Shi'ite militia takeovers in several Baghdad neighborhoods earlier this month.

''There are no standards for someone to become an Iraqi police officer. He just comes from anywhere, says I was punished by Saddam, and now I want to be in the new police," Ma'athede said. ''No one checks them. No one examines them."

Since last summer, when there were almost no Iraqi security forces, the US-led occupation authority has assembled and trained some 200,000 local security forces, including a contingent of building security guards, police for electric lines, and border patrol units. The most visible are the police, who number 70,000.

US officials have always cautioned that the vetting process for new recruits isn't perfect and that over time they hope to augment the three-week training course in human rights given to new and re-hired police recruits.

But the breakdown in authority and police loyalty this month exceeded even the fears of some of the force's fiercest critics. In Shi'ite strongholds in Baghdad, most notably Sadr City and Shula, uniformed police officers openly joined ranks with the Mahdi, taping posters of Sadr to their vehicles and taking orders from clerics at his offices.

At the same time, many officers refused to help when police stations in Sunni areas came under attack by insurgents. In Aadhamiya, for example, a Baghdad neighborhood with a history of anti-American resistance, more than 100 heavily-armed men attacked the police station several nights running at the beginning of April.

On the first aggressive night of the assault, only six police officers came to the station to protect it, said Sergeant Ali al-Louabi. ''The new police officers have no sense of duty or honor."

Added a US military police officer who trains Iraqi police: ''Whoever has the biggest gun, that's who they'll follow."

US officials acknowledged for the first time last week the severity of the problems in the police force.

General John Abizaid, commander of the US Central Command, told reporters the police needed an improved chain of command, and acknowledged that a ''troubling" number of police officers defected to Sadr's militia.

''Clearly, there's things that we have to do better with the police," Abizaid said. ''Some of it has to do with leadership. Some of it has to do with vetting. Some of it has to do with training. But most of it has to do with time and confidence, which is what we're going to have to work on the most."

The senior coalition official in Baghdad said the occupation authority and the Iraqi Interior Ministry were trying to establish quickly how many officers failed to perform and who should be fired.

After June 30, Abizaid reiterated, US troops will continue to guarantee security in Iraq. But, he said: ''The ultimate point to which this country must move is Iraqi security by Iraqis. Everyone knows that."

Khafaji, the national police coordinator, recalled that last summer, in their rush to hire recruits, the US military and its allies flooded police departments across the country with thousands of green officers, pushing the total to its present level.

But hiring and training varied wildly from province to province. In some areas, like Nasiriyah, Italian troops have built a sophisticated emergency call center and have tried to give police enough vehicles to function; even that was not enough for them to match the force of the religious militia that drove them off the streets for three days in earlier this month. In other provinces, Khafaji said, a force of thousands shares five mobile phones and has no reliable direct communications link to headquarters in Baghdad.

The embryonic state of communications was illustrated during an interview with Ma'athede, the Baghdad police chief, who learned from a reporter that a key Sadr lieutenant had been arrested at a downtown hotel -- a capture that could have sparked renewed violence.

And at the Interior Ministry's headquarters, Khafaji opened a national ''operations room" 10 days ago; it boasts one telephone, a handwritten logbook, and paper wall maps of a dozen provincial cities. ''We'll get the rest of the maps next week," he said.

Khafaji delivered a report Thursday proposing an overhaul of the interior ministry: He wants to see the minister, his deputies, and police chiefs take a hands-on approach, meeting every day to discuss crises, trends, and the ongoing effort to revamp the nation's police force.

''We need efficiency in addition to enthusiasm," he said. ''Most of the people in charge are civilians who don't even know the alphabet of security or defense."

Kamal, the deputy interior minister, said that within a month ''retraining camps" would open in Kurdistan. He estimates that at least 60 percent of the police force around the capital needed to learn their jobs anew.

Khafaji said he believes that the police will never succeed unless Iraq's political parties and clerics disband their militias. He has also invited clan leaders and sheiks to the Interior Ministry, to convince them that their political power and wealth depends on security.

''We need radical plans," he said. ''Success at this stage is a matter of life and death."

Thanassis Cambanis can be reached at tcambanis@globe.com.

[denoir 0]

Time to put on your bifocals and read some embedded reporting:

Interesting article.

[quicksand 0]

Quote[/b] ]"Look, they were there supposedly so that Vietnam wouldn't become Communist and become a threat to the United States and the world," he said. "Well, Vietnam is Communist. Is it a threat?"

That pretty much says it all...

Nice article it nicely points out that the Resistance fighters tactics are starting to succed,as we can see all the Marines interviewed acknowledged in the article that their moral is breaking up and they are beginning to question their presence in Iraq.When that happens you are on a one way ticket to loosing the war.

Also it kinda stabs in the heart the emotional moment when Mr President landed on the carrier waving "Mission Acomplised"

[theavonlady 2]

Quote[/b] ]"Look, they were there supposedly so that Vietnam wouldn't become Communist and become a threat to the United States and the world," he said. "Well, Vietnam is Communist. Is it a threat?"

That pretty much says it all...

Don't forget the next few sentences:

Quote[/b] ]Then the discussion turned back to Iraq. Saddam is gone, his sons killed and his regime destroyed. There are no weapons of mass destruction. Why are we still here? Why not leave now?

"We owe these people," said one Marine. "We owe them to finish the job that we have started."

Plus, he said, with the intense criminal element intimidating the people, the corrupt politicians, the sense of lawlessness, the weak police force and the Jihadists operating in the region, the area could easily become a haven for terrorists.

The other Marines nodded in agreement.

Quote[/b] ]Nice article it nicely points out that the Resistance fighters tactics are starting to succed,as we can see all the Marines interviewed acknowledged in the article that their moral is breaking up and they are beginning to question their presence in Iraq.When that happens you are on a one way ticket to loosing the war.

Again read the above quotation. Maybe. Maybe not.

Does it bother anyone here that some of the biggest losers will be the Iraqis themselves or do you all have an attitude of letting them rot for another few decades?

[denoir 0]

So, what can be done? Continuing as is does not seem like a possible solution. Abandoning Iraq will probably result in the same thing that resulted when the Soviets left Afghanistan: civil war and a haven for terrorists, so that doesn't seem like a good option either. UN troops are no solution as it will be seen by the resistance like just another flavour of occupation. Besided, it's unlikely that even with a strong UN resolution that any of the larger military powers want to get involved in this mess.

So, how can the situation be salvaged?

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

On the other hand, what do we realy know about what is going on Iraq? Not only the US forces restrict freedom of press but journalist have restricted acess because of kidnapping-threats.

Right now, the only news we can trust are the ones from peaceful cities and areas, the rest is just science-fiction!

[Longinius 1]

Its not easy, but I think people have to figure these things out by themselves. I doubt you can force "liberation" on people. They first have to want to be liberated.

And I dont think any liberating force, be it coalition or UN, will ever get the peoples support until they start doing things right in the public eye.

This means to hell with all oil interests and start putting focus on things that matter. Security, electricity, working hospitals, clean water, food and most of all jobs.

Sure, it isnt easy, it isnt done over night. But the key is getting the people to feel right about a change of government and a change of system. Of course it might also help to be able to protect those that get themselves involved. I can fully understand police officers abandonning their post if their families are threatened, and the risk of them being killed is high.

[quicksand 0]

Quote[/b] ]Don't forget the next few sentences:

.....

Yes but what this Marines fail to do is relate the first part to the second.Remember the Vietnam war,what politicians said would happen if they lost the war:Vietnam becoming the greatest enemy of America,the domino effect,communism would prevail etc.

None of this asumptions materialised.Why do people think it`s impossible for US to be wrong again about "Iraq becoming a heaven for terrorists".

What triggers terrorism anyway?In Iraq we can safely say that the war triggered it(there was no terrorism during Saddam`s reign),so what if the American agression towards Iraq ends could it be that terrorism in the country will also stop?

Who are we to underestimate the Iraqis good willing and their capacity of rulling their own country and Sunnis and Shia`s getting along,should we forget where the roots to all civillisation comes from?

Quote[/b] ]So, how can the situation be salvaged?

Can the Arab League take control?I know they have a poor millitary capacity but on the other hand they are arabs,they understand Iraqis,they will be respected,violence would probably cease.Couldn`t they supervise Iraq until the gouverment shapes and the country becomes stable?