The Iraq thread 4

[FerretFangs 0]

Or the Coalition of the needed?

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]Or the Coalition of the needed?

Needed only because a frantic government went on a war that noone needed as we know today.

If Bush talks about "groundbreaking" freedom in the ME maybe he should have talked to his arab friends first. That may have saved a lot of lives. Ask Iraqi Joe if he needs coaltion troops on his soil, burnt by coalition troops. I guess he´d be extremely happy to kick them out of his country as soon as possible as they already know that the TBA promises were worth nothing except great contracts for Bechtel and Halliburton and it´s daughters and brought fullscale terrorism to their neighbourhood.

Noone even expects the US to fix what they messed up. They can´t do it so it´s better to have them out of the country. That´s what average Iraqui Joe thinks when he goes out on the streets to demonstarte against the US. Over 47 percent of Iraq´s population has no job today. A direct effect of the war. The basic rebuilding has not even really started although Iraqi money was spent in billions. They were forced into war, imprisoned in high numbers and can´t feed their families. Thank you very much. I guess that´s what they waited for.

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]I have not rushed to a judgement. Read then talk. If you think you have to go on a personal vendetta billybob you will see what you will get.

The report is worth as much as all the other reports from US investigations.

I´d like to see the octopus soldier who can go through his ROE´s within 4 seconds. That´s just a really funny claim. Nothing more

Whatever you say:

Quote[/b] ]If you transport this incident to the general Iraqi situation you´ll know that the coalition forces in service act anything but effective or professional.

Yeah, it is rubbish because it does not fit your view point. Furthermore, you still haven't explain what are coalition troops are then.

Quote[/b] ]I guess it´s time to rename the "coalition of the willing" to "coalition of a few"...

Nice spin, bals:

Quote[/b] ]

"When the UN mandate in Iraq expires, the Polish stabilisation mission must also end," Szmajdzinski told reporters after a cabinet meeting.

"The government adopted this position after examining the political situation in Iraq and the advances made in building Iraq's own security force, as well as (after examining) our own capacity," Szmajdzinski said

How dare they follow a UN mandate. I guess the coalition is just sucking up air. BTW, 10k (give or take) are in jail right now in US-run prisons in Iraq. High number, no. Furthermore, there are reconstruction projects going on but at a slow pace. You know why? It begins with a I. Once the insurgency is done with, reconstruction will pick up at a faster pace. Also, you failed to mention that US tax dollars are been used for those projects and not just Iraqi money and Bush is catching flak because of this.

[miles teg 1]

They can kill and imprison all the insurgents they want, but the fact of the matter is that the insurgency is NOT losing steam. As long as the perception is that America is stealing oil from Iraq and is trying to oppress Islam. You can argue until your face turns blue that we're not oppressing Muslims, but the fact of the matter is that this is the perception all over the Middle East and much of the world for that matter.

Even a large number of Americans believe that we are there only for oil.

But more to the point, as long as there is the perception that America is attacking Islam, then you will see a continued flood of Jihadists going into Iraq and you will continue to see young Iraqi men, bitter with their experience with the American occupying force, turning to fundamentalist brands of Islamic militant ideologies as a source of strength and inspiration.

Until we start addressing the root of terrorism, we will not make much progress. Eventually we almost certainly will have another massive terrorist attack here in America as a result of this long unjust war because we refuse to try and understand who our enemy is and why they believe what they do.

That is the key to destrying our enemy. By understanding their belief systems and the roots of those beliefs, you can then begin to attack terrorism at its source and begin to make headway reducing and ultimately eliminating the insurgency in Iraq.

But right now, Iraq is the Mecca of terrorists and a massive recruiting boost for Al-Qaeda.

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

[theavonlady 2]

They can kill and imprison all the insurgents they want, but the fact of the matter is that the insurgency is NOT losing steam.

Are you sure? From the left side of the press:

Quote[/b] ]Stop killing Iraqis, nationalists warn religious fanatics

By Patrick Cockburn in Arbil, northern Iraq

11 April 2005

Gunmen ordered 16 off-duty Iraqi soldiers out of a truck in Latafiya, south of Baghdad, at the weekend and killed them, but signs are growing that the slaughter of all Iraqis in the army or police, or civilians working for the government, is leading to divisions in the resistance.

Quote[/b] ]Iraq: is the tide turning?

Iraq: is the tide turning?

12 April 2005

Two years after American troops pulled down the statue of Saddam Hussein in central Baghdad and a lethal insurgency against US occupation of Iraq began, the nightmare that has brought death to countless civilians may be coming to an end.

Attacks on US forces are down from 140 a day to 30 a day. Casualty figures are down. So are assassination attempts. US commanders believe they can reduce forces by up to 40,000. An upbeat General Richard Myers, the chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, said this week: "We're on track."

Yesterday, an American civilian contractor was kidnapped in Baghdad. The dying is not over but, in Baghdad and Washington, the feeling is growing that the worst might just be over.

[Scrub 0]

Quote[/b] ]

Balschoiw Posted on April 14 2005,06:56

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Noone even expects the US to fix what they messed up. They can´t do it so it´s better to have them out of the country. That´s what average Iraqui Joe thinks when he goes out on the streets to demonstarte against the US.

Again, I'll ask so you can ignore the question...  "How often do you visit Iraq and chat with the populace?"

You seem to know a great deal about what they think.  Or do you just listen to news reports like everyone else, with their own country/company's spin and perspective?

This war sucks, no doubt.  Lots of people got hurt, true.  Halliburton?  Yea, I'm skeptical of their contract and efforts.  The important point is that the world is now in this situation, pro and con both.  If the US forces leave, there's going to be ALOT more killing, mostly the current government, domestic service workers etc.  There will be a great amount of chaos in the power vacuum as the Iraqi security forces are nowhere near a stable enough entity to continue sustained effort against the insurgents.  Basically IMO, this could develop into a fullblown civil war, with all the neighbors getting their fingers more involved in the outcome.  Stability is hard for an outside force to affect, while chaos is easy.

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]Whatever you say:

I don´t seem to be alone with my assumptions.

British commanders condemn US military tactics

Quote[/b] ]Senior British commanders have condemned American military tactics in Iraq as heavy-handed and disproportionate.

One senior officer said that America's aggressive methods were causing friction among allied commanders and that there was a growing sense of "unease and frustration" among the British high command.

The officer, speaking on condition of anonymity, said part of the problem was that American troops viewed Iraqis as untermenschen - the Nazi expression for "sub-humans".

Speaking from his base in southern Iraq, the officer said: "My view and the view of the British chain of command is that the Americans' use of violence is not proportionate and is over-responsive to the threat they are facing. They don't see the Iraqi people the way we see them. They view them as untermenschen. They are not concerned about the Iraqi loss of life in the way the British are."

The phrase untermenschen - literally "under-people" - was brought to prominence by Adolf Hitler in his book Mein Kampf, published in 1925. He used the term to describe those he regarded as racially inferior: Jews, Slavs and gypsies.

Although no formal complaints have as yet been made to their American counterparts, the officer said the British Government was aware of its commanders' "concerns and fears".

The officer explained that, under British military rules of war, British troops would never be given clearance to carry out attacks similar to those being conducted by the US military, in which helicopter gunships have been used on targets in urban areas.

British rules of engagement only allow troops to open fire when attacked, using the minimum force necessary and only at identified targets. The American approach was markedly different, the officer said.

"When US troops are attacked with mortars in Baghdad, they use mortar-locating radar to find the firing point and then attack the general area with artillery, even though the area they are attacking may be in the middle of a densely populated residential area.

"They may well kill the terrorists in the barrage, but they will also kill and maim innocent civilians. That has been their response on a number of occasions. It is trite, but American troops do shoot first and ask questions later."

The officer believed America had now lost the military initiative in Iraq, and it could only be regained with carefully planned, precision attacks against the insurgents.

"The US will have to abandon the sledgehammer-to-crack-a-nut approach - it has failed," he said.

"They need to stop viewing every Iraqi, every Arab as the enemy and attempt to win the hearts and minds of the people."

- Telegraph

There was also a british governmental report published 1 or two weeks ago that highlighted the hindering effects of US troops behaviour in Iraq.

If anyone can post a link, it would be much appreciated.

And it is no secret that over 13 000 people in Iraq were imprisoned without charge. That´s no secret. Also the losses among the civil population are no secret. Obviously you´re sitting in a dark hole in the ground billybob. Else you would know what the reports tell.

Short reminder: You were the one who said that you are sure that there are WMD in Iraq, that Saddam had close AQ ties, just to mention a few of your "ideas". Yes, I guess

I am more close to reality than you will ever get with your oversized US patriotic problem.

Quote[/b] ]Yeah, it is rubbish because it does not fit your view point. Furthermore, you still haven't explain what are coalition troops are then.

No it´s rubbish because 1+1 is still 2. If you can´t calculate like Daddl already showed you, it´s a basic problem within your school education.

Quote[/b] ]Furthermore, you still haven't explain what are coalition troops are then.

Why should I ? Was I asked to do it ?

Coalition soldiers in Iraq are a species becoming rare over the next year given the numbers of retreating national contingents, in case you missed that....

Quote[/b] ]Nice spin, bals

Spin ? Face the facts. The coalition is melting away the same way the reasons for the war melted away. Countries feel cheated by the US and that´s the truth. They sent soldiers to a country under false reasons. The reasons were given by the USA and their puppy, Tony Blair. People don´t like that. They raise pressure on their governments and the governments have to react if they want to keep their seats.

Aznar is out of business, Berlusconi´s chair is heavily tumbling, Blair´s chair is heavily tumbling. The people want answers and just get a "Sorry, we attacked Iraq for ...erm...well...Freedom ! Yes freedom !" A freedom that will not have the chance to get a permanent one as the political and ethnical situation certainly won´t get better and separation initiatives will not stop. The rich south is already on it´s way to oppose the government and the kurds in the north will not be happy unless they get some kind of sovereignity. This is all nothing new. Those are things that every expert said prior the war and we can see this come true today.

Quote[/b] ]High number, no.

Sure it a high number when you see that about 50 percent aren´t even charged with anything and International red cross is not allowed to visit detention facilities. There was a riot in a prison lately and the US spokesmen even denied that there was a riot until he got presented proof. So don´t say that the US authorities are known for their willingness to speak open about the situation and the problems they got down there.

As for the investigations: Can you tell me the result of the investigations, like the investigations about cruise missile impacts on markets and in residential areas ?

I never heard of that investigations again. So yes, à don´t believe in US military investigations that investigate US military wrongdoings. Best example : Abu Ghraib. Or do you call this a comprehensive investigation ?  

Quote[/b] ]Once the insurgency is done with, reconstruction will pick up at a faster pace.

Aha. Wasn´t Bremer the one who should have ended it all long ago ? No ? Must have been reading the wrong news then...

Reconstruction efforts besides oil-pipelines tend to zero.

Even volunteering iraqis who know the installations as they worked there before the war are not allowed to help rebuilding as this is a multi-billion dollar business for some hand - picked - not - iraqui - campanies. Those companies sacked a a lot of money and did not very much to fulfill their contracts.

Tax money ? Who cares ? You support the war, you pay for it. Besides that there was a really big debt relief from all over the world. So even OUR tax money is wasted down there.

Edit:

Found the article:

Read it carefully billybob. You may learn something.

UK Panel: U.S. Troops Too Heavy-Handed

Quote[/b] ]LONDON - U.S. troops in Iraq are provoking civilians and hampering rebuilding with an excessive use of force, British lawmakers said in a report Tuesday.

The House Foreign Affairs Committee also found that the slow pace of reconstruction had fueled the insurgency in Iraq and suggested the country had replaced Afghanistan as a training ground for international terrorists.

"Excessive use by the U.S. forces of overwhelming firepower has also been counterproductive, provoking antagonism toward the coalition among ordinary Iraqis," the report said, echoing the concerns of British officials.

Some have complained that the U.S. military is too heavy-handed in Iraq, compared with British soldiers, who often patrol on foot and in berets instead of helmets in an effort to win the trust of local Iraqis.

The committee of lawmakers, representing three parties, said foreign fighters had played a leading and deadly role in the insurgency.

"However, the evidence points to the greater part of the violence stemming from Iraqi groups and individuals, some motivated by religious extremism and others who have been dispossessed by policies adopted by the coalition since the war, such as de-Baathification and the disbanding of the Iraqi security forces," the report said.

The committee said U.S.-led forces had clearly failed to stem the violence and suggested the new Iraqi government should try to negotiate with the insurgents.

"We conclude that to date the counterinsurgency strategy has not succeeded. This may reflect an overriding focus on a military approach to the detriment of political engagement ... While negotiations with al-Qaida and foreign fighters are out of the question, it might be possible to address some of the Iraqi insurgents' grievances through political negotiations," the report added.

The findings are similar to those of other parliamentary committees that have criticized the coalition's poor post conflict planning in Iraq.

The committee, which scrutinizes Britain's foreign policy, also was critical of the British government. It said ministers had failed to state clearly whether Britain had used intelligence extracted under torture from suspects in other countries.

"We find it surprising and unsettling that the government has twice failed to answer our specific question on whether or not the United Kingdom receives or acts upon information extracted under torture by a third country," said the report.

The committee said ministers also should speak out against the detention of terror suspects in Guantanamo Bay and other U.S. facilities in Iraq and Afghanistan, where there was a "lack of due process and oppressive conditions."

So it´s just me...

Again: 1+1 is still 2

It´s the british lawmakers, not Balschoiw.

I know billybob, all made up, british terrorist commie regime and all that....

[turms 0]

I agree with Bals completely.

Interesting article about US loosing its military manpower Here at globalsecurity.org ,definetly worth reading. I wont copy paste in here becouse of the length of the article.

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]No it´s rubbish because 1+1 is still 2. If you can´t calculate like Daddl already showed you, it´s a basic problem within your school education.

It was a joint investigation and the Italians agreed with 99% of the findings. MPH is the only problem. Seriously, bals. did you work on the investigation. You think it's rubbish but the Italians do not. Which is more important? You or the Italians

Quote[/b] ]Spin ? Face the facts. The coalition is melting away the same way the reasons for the war melted away. Countries feel cheated by the US and that´s the truth. They sent soldiers to a country under false reasons. The reasons were given by the USA and their puppy, Tony Blair. People don´t like that. They raise pressure on their governments and the governments have to react if they want to keep their seats.

Aznar is out of business, Berlusconi´s chair is heavily tumbling, Blair´s chair is heavily tumbling. The people want answers and just get a "Sorry, we attacked Iraq for ...erm...well...Freedom ! Yes freedom !" A freedom that will not have the chance to get a permanent one as the political and ethnical situation certainly won´t get better and separation initiatives will not stop. The rich south is already on it´s way to oppose the government and the kurds in the north will not be happy unless they get some kind of sovereignity. This is all nothing new. Those are things that every expert said prior the war and we can see this come true today.

Did Poland pack up before the mandate ended? No. They still are leaving because the UN mandate is ending not because of public pressure like Spain. You thought Poland was going to say there forever. Anyway, Anzar would had been elected again if he didn't fudge up the investigation of the bombing and he was the favorite to win.

Quote[/b] ]Reconstruction efforts besides oil-pipelines tend to zero.

Even volunteering iraqis who know the installations as they worked there before the war are not allowed to help rebuilding as this is a multi-billion dollar business for some hand - picked - not - iraqui - campanies. Those companies sacked a a lot of money and did not very much to fulfill their contracts.

Tax money ? Who cares ? You support the war, you pay for it. Besides that there was a really big debt relief from all over the world. So even OUR tax money is wasted down there.

Wrong, bals.

http://www.usaid.gov/

Do I have to find news vid links to show more reconstruction?

Who Cares? You gave that passion filled post about Iraq money being used but in fact majority comes from the US for reconstruction and other things.

Quote[/b] ]

So it´s just me...

Again: 1+1 is still 2

It´s the british lawmakers, not Balschoiw.

I know billybob, all made up, british terrorist commie regime and all that....

Old News. Like you say "Who Cares?" The US soldiers/maines patrol a way larger area than the brits. The reason US soldiers/marines wear all that crap is for protection against IEDs and etc which happens in their areas more than the brits. Furthermore, most importantly, there was this thing called a "election" in which the Sunnis (majority of the insurgents) could of used to their advantage. The Iraqi govt. are willing to let them in the political process with forgivness for their actions.

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]It was a joint investigation and the Italians agreed with 99% of the findings.

I´ll keep my answer billybob-style now as I don´t feel the need to waste my time with long, explanatory posts as you don´t seem to read them billybob.

So my comment on this one:

I want to see the full report AFTER the investigation has been finished, wich is not official status right now as italian prosecutors are investigating also.

Quote[/b] ]Seriously, bals. did you work on the investigation.

At least I wait until the legal investigations are done...

NOT only the US one...

Quote[/b] ]Did Poland pack up before the mandate ended? No.

Polands premier has stated that they got cheated into this war and that there are deep graves of mistrust against the TBA.

For sure the end of the mandate is a great chance to say "Bye-bye" the diplomatically correct way. They would have cited another reason if the mandate did not run out by the end of the year. Obviously you don´t know much about european affairs.

Quote[/b] ]Wrong, bals.

Haha, great. Yes sure, a government page that tells the flowers and cheers....

Why not check the independant ones billybob ?

<a href="http://www.iraqrevenuewatch.org/reports/092404.shtml" target="_blank">

DISORDER, NEGLIGENCE AND MISMANAGEMENT: HOW THE CPA HANDLED IRAQ RECONSTRUCTION FUNDS</a>

Quote[/b] ]NEW YORK, September 28, 2004-Recent audits expose serious failures in American oversight of Iraq's revenues and U.S. reconstruction funds, said a report by the Open Society Institute's Iraq Revenue Watch project.

The audits-released in late July by the Coalition Provisional Authority Inspector General (CPA-IG)-paint a picture of disorder and negligence. Contractors made little effort to control costs, while the Coalition Provisional Authority, which was in charge of managing Iraqi reconstruction funds, failed to adhere to federally mandated procedures for awarding and overseeing contracts.

"The CPA did not do its job regarding the oversight of reconstruction funds," said Svetlana Tsalik, director of the Revenue Watch project. "It failed to stop the misuse and waste of money that belonged to the Iraqi people and American taxpayers."

An analysis of the data suggests that of $1.5 billion in contracts, the CPA awarded U.S. firms 74 percent of the value of all contracts paid for with Iraqi funds. Together with its British allies, U.S. and U.K. companies received 85 percent of the value of all such contracts. Iraqi firms, by contrast, received just 2 percent of the value of contracts paid for with Iraqi funds. "Government favorites such as Kellogg, Brown and Root benefited at the expense of Iraqi companies whose workers badly need jobs," said Tsalik.

The report finds that 60 percent of the value of all contracts paid with Iraqi funds went to Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg, Brown & Root (KBR)-the same company that Pentagon auditors in December 2003 found had overcharged the U.S. government for as much as $61 million for fuel imports into Iraq. A criminal investigation of KBR was launched by the Department of Defense in February 2004.

The CPA-IG audits confirm the findings of previous ones. A report released in July 2004 by the International Advisory and Monitoring Board, the watchdog body set up by the United Nations, found numerous problems in the CPA's control and use of Iraqi oil assets during the occupation. These include the absence of oil metering to control theft, poor record-keeping on oil sales, an absence of oversight of spending by the Iraqi ministries, the use of noncompetitive bidding procedures for some contracts, and the CPA's refusal to transmit crucial information to the UN-mandated body.

A recent Pentagon audit of KBR's billing system, which shows that systematic deficiencies in the company's accounting and billing procedures incurred significant costs to U.S taxpayers and to Iraqi oil revenues, is further proof of mismanagement.

Following the model of its American predecessor, the Iraq interim government to date has provided scant information about how it is managing Iraq's oil revenues.

AUDITORS FIND POOR PRACTICES IN MANAGEMENT OF IRAQI OIL REVENUES

Quote[/b] ]A preliminary audit of the Coalition Provisional Authority's (CPA) management of Iraqi oil revenues and the Iraqi State Oil Marketing Organization's (SOMO) export sales and barter transactions reveals serious accounting weaknesses and opportunities for corruption. The audit is being carried out by KPMG for the International Advisory and Monitoring Board and is due to be made public in mid-July.

Iraq Revenue Watch has called attention to the lack of transparency in the CPA's management of Iraq's oil revenues. KPMG's preliminary findings indicate that the CPA has provided a poor example to its successors on how to manage oil revenues transparently.

A copy of KPMG's preliminary findings was provided to Iraq Revenue Watch and highlights the following concerns:

* Lack of cooperation. KPMG reported serious problems of access and lack of cooperation that could prevent the completion of their work by the June 30th deadline. It reports resistance from CPA staff who have indicated that their workload is already excessive and that cooperation with the auditors is a low priority. They note that although cooperation with the audit team led by Colonel Engelbrektsson, Deputy Comptroller of the U.S. Defense Logistics Agency has been exemplary, they are concerned that with the Colonel's rotation on June 7, this cooperation would diminish.

KPMG's visits to Iraqi ministries have also been hampered and they have succeeded in meeting with only one ministry. They have also encountered bureaucratic hurdles in obtaining the passes needed to enter the "green zone" where CPA and government offices are based.

The auditors also regret the lack of information provided to them about sole source contracts from the DFI. These contracts are among the most controversial of the DFI's operations, and the IAMB raised concerns about them in recent meetings. KPMG states that they have not been given access to audits conducted by the CPA of these sole source contracts.

* Poor accounting for the Development Fund for Iraq (DFI). KPMG noted a number of weaknesses in the CPA's accounting practices for the DFI, which result in inaccuracies and are prone to error. The report notes that the DFI's accounting lacks a double entry system and consists solely of spreadsheets and tables maintained by a single accountant, making the records prone to error. Another weakness is that only cash transactions are recorded, to the exclusion of accruals and prepayments. This obscures obligations against the DFI that have not yet been paid. Moreover, the high rate of turnover at the Comptroller's office has led to inconsistencies in accounting practices.

KPMG also notes the poor reporting around dispersals made by the Commander's Emergency Response Program (CERP) and the Rapid Regional Response Program (RRRP). These are highly discretionary programs that allow reconstruction officials based in the regions to use their judgment in giving out Iraqi oil dollars to maintain peace and pay for urgently needed repairs. Transfers to CERP and RRRP are not itemized, which according to the auditors, "greatly diminishes the transparency of the expenditures made and leaves the DFI open to fraudulent acts."T

he report also notes that the CPA does not have "effective controls over the ministries spending of their individually allocated budgets."

* Poor record keeping on oil sales. KPMG found critical deficiencies in SOMO's records on oil sales and barter transactions. They note that the standard contracts used by SOMO do not thoroughly define terms and conditions, leaving ambiguity surrounding the obligations and liabilities of contracting parties. For example, demurrage costs, which are the costs that shippers must pay for delays in loading or unloading cargo at a port, are not mentioned in SOMO's contracts.

Decisions on tenders or contracts are not documented, which undermines transparency. When contracts are not awarded to the highest bidder, there is no explanatory note prepared to justify the decision.

KPMG also finds poor record-keeping about barter transactions. Key data about quantity and value are missing, and the only database is one based on verbal reports from staff.

Because it has not maintained its general ledgers, SOMO has not prepared any financial statements for 2003 and 2004. SOMO's audit department fails to provide adequate oversight because it does not have access to sales contracts. It only has the authority to oversee administrative expenses.

KPMG warns that unless the CPA acts to improve the auditors' access to needed documents and staff, KPMG may not be able to meet its reporting deadline.

The sloppy record-keeping maintained by the CPA and SOMO, and the absence of oversight within the Iraqi ministries has created opportunities for corruption to flourish under the CPA. In order to put a stop to the cronyism and corruption that prevailed under Saddam Hussein, the interim government must take steps to correct the accounting weaknesses identified by the IAMB's auditors.

I can go on for ages with that. How about the Pentagon spendings ? They are so secret that they don´t even know what they spent the money for themselves. It´s really funny.

Quote[/b] ]comes from the US for reconstruction and other things.

Other things seem to be the most expensive ones as reconstruction only marginally happens in Iraq today. Whatever you say, that´s reality. And didn´t you bomb the things that need to be rebuilt now ?

Good enough that you choose the contractors for the rebuild , right ?

Quote[/b] ]Old News.

April the 5th is not that long ago...

You knew it already. I wonder why the brits even brought it up if you already knew it....

How dare they !

It´s useless to debate with you as you live in denial of reality. You can nitpick as much as you want but this won´t save you from having a criticaL look on the Iraq affair. The whole story is filled with incomptence from the TBA, greed, a few benefitting companies, oil and the arrogance to just keep on going without self-reflection for a single second. People who support such would have taken anything for granted in the cinemas during WW2 while they watched Wochenschau.

[miles teg 1]

I agree to some points both billybob and Bals are making.

Bals I believe is right in that support is fading on many different levels including here in America. But nobody knows what to do except the old mantra of training the Iraqi military and police force to takeover.

As Avon pointed out, yes attacks are down, but they still continue and I see no reason why they will not continue even after America leaves unless Iraq becomes a police state as they were under Saddam Hussein where everyone spied on each other. One thing is for certain...the very fact US troops are in Iraq ATTRACTS Islamic militants from all over the world to come and kill Americans. Once they arrive there they often find that its just easier to kill softer targets.

However on the topic of reconstruction there are indeed reconstruction projects going on as my old unit was involved in supporting those. However in Baghdad and central Iraq area, reconstruction projects are very very difficult due to the continuing attacks by insurgents on Iraqi contractors. So yes Iraqis are involved with the reconstruction effort more then just providing labor. Also in the Kurdish areas and in Southern Iraq, reconstruction efforts have been alot more successful. However, there are also VAST sums of money that have not been accounted for and indeed there have probably been billions of dollars pocketed by corrupt individuals on both the Iraqi and American sides in Iraq.

So there is still alot wrong with the reconstruction effort and still large areas of Iraq do not have regular electric or water supplies and there are still constant fuel shortages.

So things are not all rosie in Iraq like the right wing press portrays Iraq as being. But neither is it a country without hope. What it is a country that will likely face a VERY difficult and violent future for probably at least the next decade.

What I am more concerned about is how Al-Qaeda is using the American presence in Iraq for recruting new Jihadists, some of whom may be American Muslims. Our presence in Iraq makes it so much easier to do this especially when the US government does nothing to make Iraqi oil revenues transparent which then just feeds into the accusations that America is stealing oil from Iraq and draining the wealth from the Iraqi people. With another big terrorist attack in the United States, who knows what the reaction of our government and our nation will be. I guess then we'll have to go invade Iran regardless of whether or not the terrorists came from there. Kinda like how we invaded Iraq.

Also if Iraq becomes a real democracy and the elections arent' rigged. There is nothing stopping Iraqis from electing a heavily anti-American government or politicians who want Shariat law. There already is alot of talk and movement towards making Shariat Law the official Iraqi law.

This has happened to us before in our dealings with CIA installed Latin American, SE Asia, and African governments. These installed governments however were usually removed by a coup in which they were replaced by a more American-friendly government. I imagine that such will be the case in Iraq if Iraq becomes to anti-American because then our vital interests (oil) and the lucrative contracts associated with that oil would be threatened.

I wish conservatives like Billy Bob would owe up to the fact that Iraq is a vital strategic interest to the American economy and that Iraqi oil is a primary reason for America being there right now. Once a person realises this, it quickly becomes clear that all the WMD and freedom & democracy stuff takes a back seat to the primary prize... oil.

One thing is for certain. We are certainly doing NOTHING to stop terrorism being in Iraq. Iraq is a terrorist generating machine.

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]I want to see the full report AFTER the investigation has been finished, wich is not official status right now as italian prosecutors are investigating also.

Now, you say "after".

Quote[/b] ]They would have cited another reason if the mandate did not run out by the end of the year. Obviously you don´t know much about european affairs.

So, you know what he is thinking? He didn't cut and run like another nation leader did. Even the US is thinking about cutting forces. Anyway, Albania (yes, Albania) is senting troops soon to Iraq.

Quote[/b] ]Haha, great. Yes sure, a government page that tells the flowers and cheers....

Why not check the independant ones billybob ?

Changing the subject about reconstruction to mismanagement (which is all ready know and public)... back to reconstruction...which you seem lacking info on since claming it does not exist.

http://www.state.gov/m/rm/rls/2207/apr2005/html/44192.htm

Quote[/b] ]Accelerated Iraqi Reconstruction Program (AIRP)

The AIRP, implemented by PCO using Development Fund for Iraq (DFI) funds, continues to create jobs and build infrastructure that improves quality of life. The projects provide clean water, waste treatment facilities, roads, bridges, clinics, schools and infrastructure in eight key governorates. More than 360 projects valued at over $313 million are under contract and are employing approximately 5,000 Iraqis. Of these, 200 projects valued at over $52 million have been completed to date, with total work in place valued at over $145 million. The majority of these projects will be completed by July 2005. Those few projects that extend beyond July will be transferred to Iraqi control in order to build Iraqi management capacity.

There are billions left in the fund (non-iraqi money) that isn't being used. Congress is pissed about that and you know the reason why it has been used no. In addition, that link information is reported to Congress by law. I won't think they bs on that.

Quote[/b] ]I wish conservatives like Billy Bob would owe up to the fact that Iraq is a vital strategic interest to the American economy and that Iraqi oil is a primary reason for America being there right now.

I see myself more has a moderate with right leanings. Anyway, I simply just cannot compute war=oil.

[FerretFangs 0]

Especially when you consider gas prices are higher now than ever. The only way it could be about oil, is it equates to sales at the pump, and it's just not there.

[Wilco 944]

Quote[/b] ]BAGHDAD - The friendly fire shooting at a U.S. military checkpoint last month in Baghdad wounded Italian journalist Giuliana Sgrena and killed intelligence agent Nicola Calipari.

advertisement

Now, NBC News has learned that a preliminary report from a joint U.S.-Italian investigation has cleared the American soldiers of any wrongdoing and provides new details into the shooting.

Intelligence agent Calipari had just negotiated Sgrena's release from Iraqi kidnappers on March 4 when the two and a driver headed for the Baghdad airport in a compact rental car.

It was dark when the Italians turned onto a ramp leading to the airport road where the U.S. military had set up a temporary checkpoint.

The investigation found the car was about 130 yards from the checkpoint when the soldiers flashed their lights as a warning to stop. But the car kept coming and, at 90 yards, warning shots were fired. At 65 yards, when the car failed to stop, the soldiers used lethal force — a machine gun burst that killed Calipari and wounded Sgrena and the driver.

Senior U.S. military officials say it took only about four seconds from the first warning to the fatal shots, but insist the soldiers acted properly under the current rules of engagement.

The investigation failed, however, to resolve one critical dispute: The Americans claim the car was racing toward the checkpoint at about 50 miles per hour, the Italians say it was traveling at a much slower speed.

In Italy, agent Calipari was given a state funeral, but the investigation found he himself may have committed a fatal error. He reportedly chose not to coordinate his movements with the U.S. military for fear it would jeopardize his efforts to free the Italian hostage.

Sgrena, meanwhile, disputes the military's account and says she has little confidence the investigation will reveal the truth.

As a result of the incident, the U.S. military will review its procedures regarding the use of lethal force at checkpoints, but senior military officials say they'll take no action that would put American soldiers at greater risk.

From

[Akira 0]

Especially when you consider gas prices are higher now than ever. The only way it could be about oil, is it equates to sales at the pump, and it's just not there.

Being about oil is not about being for the consumer, being about oil is about being about oil company profits, which are rising as the consumer pays more and speculators continue to rise the price per barrel.

It is NOT about what we pay at the pump. Remember, every major Cabinet member of TBA is or has been affiliated and still has interest in the major oil companies.

[FerretFangs 0]

And.....? Exports from Iraq are minimal at best. If it's about oil, the oil must be going somewhere to a customer. That's just business. buying, selling, supply and demand......

[Jinef 2]

Well I'm about to be banned for breaking forum rules however as this forum amounts to 0.2% of my life I don't really think I am going to lose much.

The whole 'off topic' and 'on topic' concept puzzles me. You make a thread which is called 'The Iraq Thread' .... ambiguous isn't it?

Talking about growing potatoes in an arid climate is entirely ontopic here as Iraq has an arid climate, talking about how people's religion affects actions and opinions is quite viable too as Iraq has people in it and suprisingly enough it also has religion.

A good political debate will uncover many many issues and digress constantly. This thread has no good debate in it, as it's got a limited scope, you have one side throwing facts and figures and news links and vice versa. You might as well watch a game of table tennis, because all you are doing is hitting the same fucking white ball.

Now you can either lose the censorship and allow people to use their brains and link actions to many other variables or you can rename the thread to -

"Discussion of the conflict between the United States and the coalition and indigenous forces from March '03 to present day in the region of the middle east labelled 'Iraq'. No brainpower required."

I think that is quite fitting.

How the hell you can simply ignore vital points made by saying it's 'offtopic' is simply censorship.

It is the military equivalent of the Germans simply flying over the Maginot line in WW2 and attacking from the rear, the French didn't say "HEY THAT'S OFF TOPIC". They simply realised they were being fucked in the arse and stopped clenching.

The other reason I find this thread absolute dribble to read is that people are anonymous and safe. I very much doubt Avon Lady would accuse me of being a jew hater and a nazi if she saw me and was 2 feet away. Everything I say on this forum I would say in real life to your faces, I very much doubt that the 15 year old kids and 'I am a US marine ... in 6 years" who post complete bollocks would say this in real life. I would want to see

the supposed US army rangers and marines in a political debate with a bunch of Russians, I very much doubt anyone would use the term 'commie scum' and 'pinko honey pissing liberals' when in face to face enounters. It's just rude.

I have travelled, I have met Americans and been in debates with them, I have been to Russia and the Ukraine, met Russians. I have friends who flew lightnings in the cold war intercepting tu-192s over the North Sea. I would never use the term 'commie scum'.

Get a reality check, stop using these horrible terms to describe people you have never met.

Now i'm just rambling again. I posted this in retort to my ally Hurlo being censored.

If I was to have a political discussion with you lot (I have never really posted anything worthwhile, just inflammatory bits of shit so I can watch people get vexed) I would want to do it on voice comms, more personal, you hear their voice and you hear their intonation, a lot harder to call someone a pinko liberal when you hear add a person to the opinion.

Fuck it, I'm just going to stop it now, too much crap.

[ralphwiggum 6]

wish granted

[walker 0]

And.....? Exports from Iraq are minimal at best. If it's about oil, the oil must be going somewhere to a customer. That's just business. buying, selling, supply and demand......

Hi FerretFangs

Why the Iraq war is a war for Oil

It works like this:

Company X

If you own oil shares in company X that does not sell oil from Iraq and you stuff production of oil in Iraq you then have all the market share that would have bought Iraqi oil to play for.

Resuilt: Price of oil goes up.

Company H

If you are company H and you can get exclusive control of the fixing of Iraqi oil production equipment after the war you have your hand around the throat of Iraqi oil production you can increase or decrease production as you wish.

Result: Price of oil can be varied as you wish.

If you can alter perception of the availability of oil by having government officials announce problems with oil producer nations you can make investors worried about oil price increases.

Result 1: This increases demand and oil is stock piled. This in turn increases price.

Result 2: Any specualtor in the know about the above can make a lot of money on betting the price will go up.

The NeoConMen's falacy of cheap oil

The falacy that oil prices would go down is based on the misconception held by the NeoConMen that they could break OPEC with Iraqi oil in their control. That was wrong on several accounts:

1) OPEC is no longer relevant it is no longer the chief supplier of oil and lots of its oil is sour crude which costs more to refine.

2) The NeoConMen assumed they could steal the Iraqi oil in a privitiseation event, even their lawyers told them that was a non starter and the Iraqi interim government was not packed with enough yes men to say anything other than "In yer dreams NeoConMen!" to that one.

3) Power Corrupts 18 billion dollars worth of oil was in US control and 7 to 9 billion is unaccounted for and all the NeoConMen are looking at bigger oil company balance sheets and future cushy revolving door jobs with various companies, which makes you forget about wanting cheaper oil prices.

4) Most US oil companies do not want cheap oil; expensive oil makes them more money. US citizens cannot live without oil, so the US Oil Companies can ride the US consumer till they. "Squeal little pigy." they are making gigantic profits on the false oil market. (This is the same as ENRON did to Californians in the false energy market)

Giving US consumers the finger

All in all TBA's buddies in the oil business and the speculators made billions of dollars on the Iraqi war for oil. And as for the the US consumer? Well I believe the phrase is, "They gave them the finger."

Kind Regards Walker

[turms 0]

I agree with Jinef, religion is an very important factor in events happening in Iraq, and it shouldnt be banned from this debate.

[Leveler 0]

Every once in a while I check this thread to find out gathered information about the situation in Iraq.

It looks like the purpose of the coalition forces has failed completely (exploiting Iraqi oil). Now everyone is abandoning Iraq to the current situation and a weak political leadership is left to face the massive issues.

Is some help going in to Iraq for the reconstruction?

Is Iraqi oil going to be available anytime soon to the market?

Is there an alternative to the US for cheap oil in the coming years?

I am asking those in light of the potential oil crisis (Peak oil) that may start after 2010. Even if the date is incorrect, it is only a matter of time with current growth and consumption untill this becomes a problem.

[miles teg 1]

Every once in a while I check this thread to find out gathered information about the situation in Iraq.

It looks like the purpose of the coalition forces has failed completely (exploiting Iraqi oil). Now everyone is abandoning Iraq to the current situation and a weak political leadership is left to face the massive issues.

Is some help going in to Iraq for the reconstruction?

Is Iraqi oil going to be available anytime soon to the market?

Is there an alternative to the US for cheap oil in the coming years?

I am asking those in light of the potential oil crisis (Peak oil) that may start after 2010. Even if the date is incorrect, it is only a matter of time with current growth and consumption untill this becomes a problem.

Current oil prices have little to do with our control of Iraqi oil. OPEC sets quotas for oil production which the Bush administration can conveniently point to when gas prices go up. There are also other economic/market factors that effect oil prices.

However, I would ask any of you to try and find any information on Iraqi oil production levels or oil revenues before you start saying that no money is being made off of Iraqi oil. I have yet to find any current information.

Good luck.

The fact of the matter is that we are sitting on the 2nd largest oil reserve in the world. That in itself is a HUGE strategic bonus for the United States in terms of long term economic stability and in terms of massive short term profits (and stable growth for oil companies in the long term) as long as we control Iraqi oil and don't have to rely on Saudi Arabia.

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

[walker 0]

Hi all

The biggest future oil source is probably the South China Seas. Hence the current friction between China and Japan. That oil will probably get used up in the expanding Chinese economy and Japan has wanted its own oil source for the last 100 years finding it on its doorstep was truly a christmas experience for them. The rest will probably get traded to SE asia.

OPEC is no longer the big player it was in the oil market or in setting the price. Most oil there particularly in Saudi Arabia is very sour and expensive to refine.

Causcusses Oil is the major European supplier along with the North sea. Iran has a big Stake in caucusses oil already. Russia is already heavily involved from historical pipelines.

Afghanistan hoped to get involved in caucusses oil with a pipline through that country in to northern Pakistan this was the offer that TBA originaly made to the Taliban before 9/11 but the continued threat of Bin Laden in the region makes such a long pipline through a still destabalised region a very risky and expensive business.

America may be able to get some of its future supply from Alaska.

Kind Regards Walker

[quicksand 0]

Insurgents Seize 60 Hostages in Iraqi Town

Quote[/b] ]BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Sunni guerrillas took at least 60 people hostage in an Iraqi town near Baghdad on Friday and threatened to kill them unless Shi'ites left the area, a Shi'ite official quoted residents as saying.

The hostage-taking and three successive days of bombings which killed at least 34 people suggested insurgents had regrouped after a lull in violence since Jan. 30 elections.

"People from the town called me begging the Iraqi government to save their relatives who are hostages. They told me there are at least 60 hostages," the official, who asked not to be identified, told Reuters in Baghdad.

Insurgents with heavy weapons appeared to have taken control of the mixed Sunni and Shi'ite town of Madaen, just south of Baghdad, and no police or government forces were in sight, said the official.

"The residents told me the insurgents were wandering the streets in cars and warning people on loudspeakers that if Shi'ites want the hostages to be safe they must leave town," he said.

Guerrillas have taken control of cities such as Falluja before but seizing many hostages in a town so close to the capital will pile pressure on Iraq's new leaders to deliver the improved security Iraqis have expected since the elections.

Like I've said a few posts before,a decrease of insurgent activity should deffinetly not be taken as a sign of victory against them.Instead they could be regrouping,preparing something bigger.Recent days have prooved just that,with a significant increase in attacks,US and especially Iraqi security forces casualties.

Taking control of a city is a good strategy for a show of force and undermining the government's capability,but I can't help wondering what could they achieve by threatening to kill shiites and banish them from mixed cities.

They make 60% of the population and such acts can only make them only more comit to allying themselves with US and joining the security forces.It is also making impossible for them to shape a nationalistic movement against the US occupation.So presuming they represent the majority of insurgents,could their agenda be as simple and gruesome as achieving US withdraw and after engaging in a bloody Shia-Sunni civil war relying on their superior military experience and weapons to force their way back to power?

[miles teg 1]

The insurgents in that particular town may not even have a strategy. It may be as simple as them hating Shi'a because they see them as threatening to destroy historic Sunni control over their city and don't want to be ruled by people they may consider to be "fake" Muslims who are corrupting their religion. Essentially it probably just boils down to basic tribalism. THey're a a different group and they may feel that there's no way they will allow themselves to be ruled by their religious rivals. If any of them actually stopped and thought about the long term implications they would either realize that their goals are foolish or that indeed, as you suggest, they are preparing for a bloody civil war...one that could plunge Iran into war "to protect the Shi'a people"...and whats more scary..could get neighboring Sunni Arab countries involved "to protect Sunnis". Mix that in with TONS of oil to be captured, you have a highly volatile situation much like the DRC (Democratic Republic of the Congo) where neighboring countries support various militant groups to try and steal or control diamond mines or other rich natural resources in the Congo.

So... it's kinda hard to tell what these militants are thinking. Their aims may be purely short-sighted religious fanaticism or they may have more sinister long term goals.

That is what US intelligence agencies are supposed to be finding out. What US Spec Ops should be doing is "snatch and grab" missions of some of these militants manning the perimeter of the city in order to interrogate them. Another way to find out is to simply get a mediator out to the city to establish contact with that group's leaders and find out what they want other then just Shi'a leaving their city. Perhaps thats all they want...in which case they're just religious fanatatics or people who just really hate Shi'a as an ethnic group.

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>