Advertisement

There's no such thing as a stupid question, but they're the easiest to answer.
Login
Search

Advertisement

Civilized Debate Civilized Debate
Search Search
Search for:
Tech Support Guy > > > >

And the beat goes on, the beat goes on


(!)

plschwartz's Avatar
Member with 11,436 posts.
THREAD STARTER
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: I am a third generation New Yo
Experience: Intermediate
30-May-2003, 04:15 PM #46
Colombo:
If things were different I would gloat. But with the deaths and the ruination of the country and the chaos in Bagdad, I can only hope that maybe somebody will have their eyes a little more open next time round.
bassetman's Avatar
Computer Specs
Moderator - Gone but never forgotten with 47,973 posts.
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Great White North (WI)
Experience: Getting somewhere I hope
30-May-2003, 04:32 PM #47
I just heard on the radio that Wolfowitz (sp?) just admitted the WMDs had nothing to do with it, but were "used" to justify the war, so the US could get it's troops out of Saudi.
Mariusz's Avatar
Senior Member with 1,072 posts.
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Toronto, Canada
30-May-2003, 04:52 PM #48
Quote:
Originally posted by columbo:
Are you really suprised anymore PL?

How many more officials (people directly involved) have to make this point before people start to listen?

The "war on terrorism" and the "war on Iraq", are not the same. The war with Iraq was not fought on behalf of the safety and security of the American people.
maybe, but it was the excuse bush used to go into iraq despite a no from the UN
Stoner's Avatar
Account Disabled with 44,931 posts.
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Dayton,Oh
02-Jun-2003, 07:28 AM #49
Contradictions of foreign policy and the current support of countries of terrorist crimes, in order to achieve immediate rather than long term goals.

As Reagan/Bush supported Saddam in the early 80's, Bush 2 now is recognizing Sudan :


(read full story at: )
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=32869

U.S. to forgive Sudan
for 2 million deaths?
Washington to overlook genocide,
atrocities for new strategic relationship

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: June 2, 2003
1:00 a.m. Eastern



The U.S. is prepared to overlook the deaths of 2 million mostly Christian Sudanese in return for a new strategic relationship with Khartoum, reports the latest issue of Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin.

State Department officials say they are on the verge of removing Sudan from its list of "terror countries," where it was placed in 1997 by the Clinton administration.

A glance at the map clarifies Sudan's strategic importance. The country is close to the new headquarters of the U.S. Combined Joint Task Force relocated from the Gulf to Djibouti at the entrance to the Red Sea. Another element of importance is the short distance, of some 250 miles, between Sudan and Saudi Arabia across the Red Sea. Other advantages are Sudan's borders with Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Uganda, the Congo, Central African Republic, Libya and Egypt. Sudan is also the largest African country with some 2.5 million square kilometers, a nation that controls the flow of the Blue and White Niles, Egypt's lifelines. The confluence of the two rivers runs through Omdurman, just north of Khartoum.

Last edited by Stoner; 02-Jun-2003 at 07:40 AM..
Stoner's Avatar
Account Disabled with 44,931 posts.
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Dayton,Oh
02-Jun-2003, 07:39 AM #50
(full story at: )
http://reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml...toryID=2857692

U.S. Nuclear Aims Raise Arms-Control Fears
Sun June 1, 2003 12:05 PM ET
By Will Dunham
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Bush administration is reassessing America's nuclear arsenal with an eye toward smaller bombs to combat 21st century perils but arms control advocates worry Washington wants to lower the threshold for using nuclear weapons.

"They are seeking to make these weapons more usable and are thinking about these as just another kind of weapon in our arsenal," said Daryl Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association.

"And that kind of thinking is dangerous. It promotes proliferation. And it's unnecessary given our overwhelming conventional superiority. This is the classic case of capability overkill."
Stoner's Avatar
Account Disabled with 44,931 posts.
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Dayton,Oh
10-Jun-2003, 07:35 AM #51
Just something to watch.




http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2976954.stm

Powell puts pressure on Cuba

By Clinton Porteus
BBC correspondent in Santiago


The US Secretary of State, Colin Powell, has stepped up pressure on pan-American countries to condemn Cuba over its human rights record.
In Chile for the 33rd general assembly of the Organisation of American States (OAS), Mr Powell said member nations had an obligation to speak out against the tactics of President Fidel Castro.


Cuba imprisoned 75 dissidents in April
Mr Powell said the 34 member nations had a responsibility to denounce the long jail sentences passed in Cuba.

"I think if we call ourselves a community of democracies, it is our obligation to speak out," he said.

In April, 75 Cuban dissidents were jailed with sentences of up to 25 years.

The European Union formally protested but the OAS has not put Cuba on its agenda for official discussions.

Last month, half the members refused to sign a motion criticising the jail sentences.

Several member states said Cuba could not defend itself as it has been excluded from the OAS

Mr Powell will be looking for some kind of support against Cuba on the final day of the assembly.

However, he will be leaving the meeting early to fly to Argentina for talks with Nestor Kirchner, the new Argentine president.
Tuppence2's Avatar
Member with 6,562 posts.
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Trowbridge, Wiltshire, England, UK
Experience: Learning as I go along
10-Jun-2003, 08:02 AM #52
Hello,

I heard on the news today that "Weapons Inspectors" were running out of places to look for WsMD.

No doubt, someone will tell me not to believe everything I hear!

Bye,
Penny
Stoner's Avatar
Account Disabled with 44,931 posts.
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Dayton,Oh
12-Jun-2003, 07:40 AM #53
Start with the last paragraph and then read the article;

"Observers will note that Barnett's arc of instability corresponds well to regions of great oil, gas and mineral wealth, a reminder again of Wolfowitz's 1992 draft study. It asserted that the key objective of U.S. strategy should be ''to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power''


_______
http://www.ipsnews.net/interna.asp?idnews=18697

POLITICS-US:
Pentagon Moving Swiftly to Become 'GloboCop'

Analysis - By Jim Lobe

Much like its successful military campaign in Iraq, the Pentagon is moving at seemingly breakneck speed to re-deploy U.S. forces and equipment around the world in ways that will permit Washington to play ''GloboCop'', according to a number of statements by top officials and defence planners.

WASHINGTON, Jun 10 (IPS) - Much like its successful military campaign in Iraq, the Pentagon is moving at seemingly breakneck speed to re-deploy U.S. forces and equipment around the world in ways that will permit Washington to play ''GloboCop'', according to a number of statements by top officials and defence planners.

While preparing sharp reductions in forces in Germany, Turkey and Saudi Arabia, military planners are talking about establishing semi-permanent or permanent bases along a giant swathe of global territory -- increasingly referred to as ''the arc of instability'' -- from the Caribbean Basin through Africa to South and Central Asiaa and across to North Korea.

The latest details, disclosed by the 'Wall Street Journal' on Tuesday, include plans to increase U.S. forces in Djibouti on the Horn of Africa across the Red Sea from Yemen, set up semi-permanent ''forward bases'' in Algeria, Morocco and possibly Tunisia, and establish smaller facilities in Senegal, Ghana and Mali that could be used to intervene in oil-rich West African countries, particularly Nigeria.

Similar bases -- or what some call ''lily pads'' -- are now being sought or expanded in northern Australia, Thailand (whose prime minister TThaksin Shinawatra has found this to figure high on the bilateral agenda in talks here this week), Singapore, the Philippines, Kenya, Georgia, Azerbaijan, throughout Central Asia, Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, Qatar, Vietnam and Iraq.

''We are in the process of taking a fundamental look at our military posture worldwide, including in the United States,'' said Deputy Defence Secretary Paul Wolfowitz on a recent visit to Singapore, where he met with military chiefs and defence ministers from throughout East Asia about U.S. plans there. ''We're facing a very different threat than any one we've faced historically.''

Those plans represent a major triumph for Wolfowitz, who 12 years ago argued in a controversial draft 'Defence Planning Guidance' (DPG) for realigning U.S. forces globally so as to ''retain pre-eminent responsibility for addressing selectively those wrongs which threaten not only our own interests, but those of our allies or friends, or which could seriously unsettle international relations''.

The same draft, which was largely repudiated by the first Bush administration after it was leaked to the 'New York Times', also argued for ''a unilateral U.S. defence guarantee'' to Eastern Europe ''preferably in co-operation with other NATO states'', and the use of pre-emptive force against nations with weapons of mass destruction -- both of which are now codified as U.S. strategic doctrine.

The draft DPG also argued that U.S. military intervention should become a ''constant fixture'' of the new world order. It is precisely that capability towards which the Pentagon's force realignments appear to be directed.

With forward bases located all along the ''arc of instability'', Washington can pre-position equipment and at least some military personnel that would permit it to intervene with overwhelming force within hours of the outbreak of any crisis.

In that respect, U.S. global strategy would not be dissimilar to Washington's position vis-à-vis the Caribbean Basin in the early 20th century, when U.S. intervention from bases stretching from Puerto Rico to Panama became a ''constant feature'' of the region until Franklin Roosevelt initiated his Good Neighbour Policy 30 years later.

Indeed, as pointed out by Max Boot, a neo-conservative writer at the Council on Foreign Relations, Wolfowitz's 1992 draft, now mostly codified in the September 2002 National Security Strategy of the USA, is not all that different from the 1903 (Theodore) Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine, which asserted Washington's ''international police power'' to intervene against ''chronic wrongdoing, or an impotence which results in a general loosening of the ties of civilised society''.

Remarkably, the new and proposed deployments are being justified by similar rhetoric. Just substitute ''globalisation'' for ''civilisation''.

The emerging Pentagon doctrine, founded mainly on the work of retired Admiral Arthur Cebrowski, chief of the Pentagon's Office of Force Transformation, and Thomas Barnett of the Naval War College, argues that the dangers against which U.S. forces must be arrayed derive precisely from countries and region that are ''disconnected'' from the prevailing trends of economic globalisation.

''Disconnectedness is one of the great danger signs around the world,'' Cebrowski told a Heritage Foundation audience last month in an update of the ''general loosening of the ties of civilised society'' formula of a century ago.

Barnett's term for areas of greatest threat is ''the Gap'', places where ''globalisation is thinning or just plain absent''. Such regions are typically ''plagued by politically repressive regimes, widespread poverty and disease, routine mass murder, and -- most important -- the chronic conflicts that incubate the next generation of terrorists''.

''If we map out U.S. military responses since the end of the Cold War, we find an overwhelming concentration of activity in the regions of the world that are excluded from globalisation's growing Core -- namely the Caribbean Rim, virtually all of Africa, the Balkans, the Caucasus, Central Asia, the Middle East and Southwest AAsia, and much of Southeast Asia,'' Barnett wrote in 'Esquire' magazine earlier this year.

The challenge in fighting terrorist networks is both to ''get them where they live'' in the arc of instability and prevent them from spreading their influence into what Barnett calls ''seam states'' located between the Gap and the Core.

Such seam states, he says, include Mexico, Brazil, South Africa, Morocco, Algeria, Greece, Turkey, Pakistan, Thailand, Malaysia, the Philippines and Indonesia. Those nations, the logic goes, should play critical roles, presumably including providing forward bases, for interventions into the Gap.

At the same time, if states ''loosen their ties'' to the global economy, ''bloodshed will follow. If you are lucky'', according to Barnett, ''so will American troops''.

On the eve of the war in Iraq, Barnett predicted that taking Baghdad would not be about settling old scores or enforcing disarmament of illegal weapons. Rather, he wrote, it ''will mark a historic tipping point -- the moment when Washington takes real ownership of strategic security in the age of globalisation''.

Observers will note that Barnett's arc of instability corresponds well to regions of great oil, gas and mineral wealth, a reminder again of Wolfowitz's 1992 draft study. It asserted that the key objective of U.S. strategy should be ''to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power''. (END)
___

end
Stoner's Avatar
Account Disabled with 44,931 posts.
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Dayton,Oh
12-Jun-2003, 07:48 AM #54
http://abcnews.go.com/wire/US/reuters20030611_105.html

Rumsfeld Says Iran May Have Nuclear Weapons Soon




June 11
— GARMISCH-PARTENKIRCHEN, Germany (Reuters) - Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said on Wednesday Iran was fast approaching a point where it may have nuclear weapons, although it did not appear to have any at present.

"The intelligence community in the United States and around the world currently assess that Iran does not have nuclear weapons," he told a meeting with students in the southern German town of Garmisch-Partenkirchen.

"The assessment is that they do have a very active program and are likely to have nuclear weapons in a relatively short period of time."




Iran has denied developing nuclear weapons but has been accused by Washington of violating the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty by using undeclared nuclear material to test a uranium enrichment system.

The International Atomic Energy Agency has also accused Tehran of failing to declare it had imported uranium in 1991 or to show where and how it was processed.

Rumsfeld, on a brief visit to Germany to attend an anniversary ceremony at a U.S.-German security policy center, also said the United States would not tolerate attempts by Iran to promote a religious government in neighboring Iraq.

"The efforts by Iran to try to make Iraq become a model of Iran with a small group of clerics taking over the country and controlling it, we're not going to let happen," he said.

"We're going to actively oppose any Iranian influence in that country that attempts to make Iraq an Iran-type model and we'll do it with words to start with and we'll do it energetically," he said.

Rumsfeld also urged more international cooperation to counter "rogue states" that allegedly have weapons of mass destruction, singling out North Korea.

"Take proliferation. It is not a problem that individual nations can handle by themselves," Rumsfeld said in prepared remarks from a speech he was due to give later.

"We know that North Korea is the world's foremost proliferator of ballistic missile technology. Now they have stated that they may not only build but also sell nuclear weapons and materials," he said.

The remarks were the latest in a long series of U.S. verbal attacks on North Korea, which said earlier this week it wanted to build up its nuclear weapons capability to cut its conventional forces and divert funds to prop up its economy.
plschwartz's Avatar
Member with 11,436 posts.
THREAD STARTER
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: I am a third generation New Yo
Experience: Intermediate
14-Jun-2003, 03:22 PM #55
Judas goats identified at CIA
CIA experts on Iraq arms shifted to different jobs
Some say 2 staffers in 'exile' because banned weapons not found

Greg Miller, Los Angeles Times Saturday, June 14, 2003

Washington -- The CIA has reassigned two senior officials who oversaw its analysis on Iraq and the deposed regime's alleged weapons of mass destruction, a move that a CIA spokesman said was routine but that others portrayed as an "exile."

The officials served in senior positions in which they were deeply involved in assembling and assessing the intelligence on Iraq's alleged stocks of chemical and biological arms.

The failure so far to find banned weapons in Iraq has raised questions of whether the prewar intelligence was flawed or shaded to support the White House's desire to present a compelling case for war.

U.S. search teams have yet to find conclusive evidence that Iraq had such weapons in the months before the war -- an assertion that was the Bush administration's principal justification for the March invasion.

One of the officials was reassigned last week to the CIA's personnel department after spending the past several months heading the Iraq Task Force, a special unit set up to provide 24-hour support to military commanders during the war.

The other, a longtime analyst who had led the agency's Iraq Issue Group, was dispatched on an extended mission to Iraq. The group is responsible for the core analysis of all the intelligence the United States collects on Iraq.

CIA spokesman Bill Harlow said Friday the changes were routine and that it is "absolutely wrong to think this is somehow punitive or negative or indicative of anything other than a normal rotation." Citing security concerns,

he asked that neither employee be identified by name.

But other intelligence sources offered a different account.

"Two of the key players on this problem have essentially been sent into deep exile," said one agency official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

The official added that the changes seemed designed to show the administration that "we're being responsive to charges that we did not perform well."

The moves come as congressional committees are reviewing prewar intelligence, and some Democrats are pushing for public hearings and a full- scale investigation.

Democrats on the Senate Intelligence Committee signed a letter this week seeking a meeting with Chairman Pat Roberts, R-Kan., in an effort to pressure him to drop his opposition to a full investigation.

Meanwhile, staffers on the House and Senate Intelligence committees are already poring over thousands of pages of prewar intelligence documents turned over by the CIA in recent days.

One Capitol Hill aide who has reviewed the material said there are troubling contradictions in the documents and statements.

In some cases, records show officials reaching one conclusion on Iraq's weapons, only to offer a contradictory conclusion a few months later. "It's all fodder for the Democrats," the aide said. "What they'll find is people having said things that aren't consistent with what they're saying now."

An intelligence official familiar with the Iraq assessments said congressional investigators are not likely to find documented proof that analysts were pressured to tailor their assessments.

"They'll be hard-pressed to find any kind of smoking gun, a case of somebody coming in and saying, 'I wrote it this way and it came back from the seventh floor telling me to write it another way,' " the official said, referring to the location at CIA headquarters where Director George Tenet and top officials have offices.

Instead, the official compared the pressure analysts faced preceding the war to that applied by lawyers "badgering the witness -- asking the question over and over and over again to the point where people get worn down."

Much of this pressure, the source said, came from top officials at the Pentagon, including Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. Pentagon officials have repeatedly denied seeking to influence the intelligence on Iraq.

The weapons controversy has exposed new fault lines between the White House and the intelligence community.

In a series of media appearances this week, senior White House officials including national security adviser Condoleezza Rice stressed that all of the administration's prewar claims came straight out of briefings from the CIA.

"You had a director of central intelligence that produced an estimate that said this regime had weapons of mass destruction," Rice said in a television interview.

Earlier this week, the White House put Tenet in charge of the ongoing weapons hunt, a job that had previously belonged to the Pentagon. "They handed the whole ball to George," said one intelligence source familiar with the details of the assignment. He said the message being sent to Tenet seemed clear: "You said (the banned weapons) were there. You go find them."

Many in the intelligence community are now pessimistic that stocks of anthrax, botulinum toxin, sarin gas or other agents Iraq was accused of producing will be found.

"It's not that they were never there or that we worked for years on erroneous information," one intelligence official said. Rather, there is growing concern that the nation's spy community missed the destruction of the materials because analysts were not prepared to consider Hussein capable of taking such a st
Stoner's Avatar
Account Disabled with 44,931 posts.
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Dayton,Oh
30-Jun-2003, 12:22 PM #56
FROM JOSEPH FARAH'S G2 BULLETIN
Is U.S. facing
an 'Iraqifada'?
Winning hearts and minds proves
difficult in new phase of Gulf war
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=33322
Posted: June 30, 2003
1:00 a.m. Eastern


© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com
Almost daily attacks on U.S. soldiers in Iraq are taking their toll.
Is this a quagmire? Has Washington miscalculated the costs of liberating Iraq? Does America have the stomach for a protracted conflict? Has the U.S. become engulfed in an "Iraqifada"?
That's what some intelligence experts and security analysts are calling the emerging guerrilla war in Iraq – linking it with Israel's protracted battle with Palestinian terrorists for the last three years.
Those sources interviewed by Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin <http://www.g2bulletin.com> say America is indeed repeating some of the mistakes of the past – believing it can win the hearts and minds of Iraqis by improving their quality of life and public services.
Israel, which in the years between 1967 and the beginning of the first Intifada, or Palestinian uprising, in 1986, is an example of the futility of such policies, says the G2 Bulletin report. Israel spent billions improving the quality of life and public services in Judea, Samaria and Gaza. It may have been the humanitarian thing to do, but it had no impact on anti-Israeli Palestinians, who opted for terrorism instead of appreciation, say G2 Bulletin sources.
Experts on military rule of occupied territories agree that a humanitarian approach is a must, but add it should never undermine the military approach to terrorism and guerrilla warfare. An Egyptian intelligence officer, in touch with Western embassies in Cairo, was among those who reacted to recent scenes of demonstrators chanting anti-U.S. slogans and stoning British troops, while in another neighborhood coalition soldiers were cleaning the streets.
"An army cleaning streets cannot be taken seriously" said the Egyptian officer, who spoke to G2 Bulletin under the assurance of anonymity.
He and others in the Middle East said that if the coalition wants to devote efforts to clean neighborhoods, there is work for 100 years to come available in the decaying neighborhoods of Cairo or Mogadishu or thousands of other communities in the developing world, where neglect is part of the unfortunate way of life.
A former Israel Defense Forces intelligence officer, Lt. Colonel Ret. Simon Mendes, who worked for many years in the civil administration of Judea, Samaria and Gaza, told G2 Bulletin that "an army involved in civil duties and not in military tasks is unacceptable in the Arab world."
He and others have suggested allowing the Iraqis to solve their own municipal issues. A similar opinion was expressed by former British and French military personnel with experience in North Africa or the Middle East, observing with great concern the situation in Iraq. They expressed concern over the state of coalition forces and their morale.
Counter-terror and counter-insurgency analysts believe the situation in Iraq is steadily moving to guerrilla warfare and especially to the most complicated style of this kind of war – namely urban guerrilla. Analysts say the more coalition troops continue to confront hostile religious, ideological and intelligence elements, the more Iraq will become destabilized. Any military study will show that lack of determination and resolve and too much "political correctness" can cost armies the fruit of their victories, say G2 Bulletin sources.
Among the anti-coalition forces active at this early stage of the post-war are the following elements, according to G2 Bulletin:
Syrian intelligence and its terror tentacles.
Iranian intelligence, the Revolutionary Guard, and their controlled terror groups.
Former members of the Baath police security and secret services.
Professional Iraqi army officers and others hurt by the May 24 decision to dissolve the Iraqi army and thus terminating their income, pensions, etc.
Local Shiite clergy, political and militia groups including "newcomers" from Iran.
Arab Sunni and Arab Shiite Iraqis in Kurdish-controlled areas.
Agents working for pariah nations with strong anti-American agendas, such as North Korea, which at this time are interested in seeing more American troops pinned down anywhere else but the Far East.
Pan-Islamic terror groups such as Jamaa Islamiah.
Wahabi-oriented Islamic terrorist organizations influenced by al-Qaida's ideology.
Extreme Muslim organizations based in the West and active in collecting funds and recruiting volunteers to fight against "Infidels."
Islamic terror organizations with Saudi Arabian, Egyptian, Jordanian and Sudanese backgrounds.
Islamic terror organizations from the Gulf region and the Horn of Africa.
Lebanon-based Hezbollah and its cells in Iraqi Shiite centers.
Palestinian extremists such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad with a strong anti-U.S. agenda.
All the above-mentioned groups and more have no problem in acquiring weapons, especially light arms and explosives. These are the main weapons used in urban guerrilla campaigns. They also don't have any problem obtaining portable rockets of various types, mortars and heavy machine-guns. Most of those weapons are stacked away in many Iraqi homes.
Weapons are mainly available in the countryside and tribal areas. A review of hundreds of deserted Iraqi army camps across the country shows that millions of military items, from pistols to main battle tanks, were left lying around at the end of the war. To date, the coalition has not revealed what was collected. A Defense Intelligence Agency officer described the situation as "a real weapon bonanza." He ridiculed attempts to provide legal shelter or funds to those who surrender their weapons, saying: "For any rifle surrendered, there are probably another 10 stashed away in the basement."
A few months after the official end of "Operation Iraqi Freedom," there is no sign yet of attempts to create a hostile umbrella organization of anti-coalition and anti-American forces. However, sources in the CIA and the Egyptian intelligence as well as Israelis, British and Jordanians, claim embryonic attempts to form an anti-coalition block have already begun in Iran and Syria.
One of the most dangerous developments in this respect is the disbanding of the pro-Iranian, anti-Iraqi Bader Corps. organization, led by Ayatollah Mohammed Baqer al-Hakim of the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq. His organization, with thousands of fighters, was allowed by the coalition to re-enter Iraq from Iran under the promise members would leave their weapons behind. Together all these groups total more than 15,000 well-trained guerrillas now operating in Baghdad and other Iraqi cities, under the guise of "humanitarian activities." Hussein Ali al-Bader, a former officer of the Bader Corps., describes his activities in the capital as "operations of a humanitarian militia."
Funds for this militia come from Iran, and, undoubtedly, the military structure of the group has remained unchanged. Should it decide to undertake any guerrilla or terrorist activities, members will have no problem in acquiring weapons from local resources.
The unfolding security complications in Iraq suggest the Pentagon may have failed to do its "homework," say G2 Bulletin sources. Apparently the U.S. is still relying on disinformation disseminated by Iraqi exiles and lobby groups active in the years leading up to the war. The Pentagon and the State Department obviously had no doubts about the promises that almost every Iraqi was eagerly awaiting liberation.
A U.S. military spokesperson said foreign nationals, including Saudis, Yemenis, Syrians, Egyptians, Iranians and Palestinians are now active in Iraq. Many sources in Iraq are reporting massive infiltrations of anti-coalition volunteers.
Information coming from CENTCOM indicates another negative development – that the coalition has control of some of the main roads and the centers of large cities, but not the whole country. Very little is known about the situation in the countryside, along Iraq's borders, in slums, remote dusty towns and even in the outskirts of Baghdad.
Another analysis shows growing problems in the area of intelligence-gathering. This does not include electronic or satellite intelligence, but rather the most important asset in counter-terrorism, namely human intelligence. Currently the coalition does not have a viable network of informants and agents. Without this kind of intelligence, it is almost impossible to conduct so-called "surgical operations," including killing of guerrilla leaders and carrying the war into the areas where organizations and various groups are deployed.
An Israeli officer observing the situation in Iraq told G2 Bulletin the photos of dozens of handcuffed Iraqis, lying on the ground or being loaded onto trucks on their way to interrogation "is an indication the main intelligence response of the coalition is of a peripheral nature, hoping to find the needle in the haystack." The officer said whatever success Israel has been demonstrating in her war on terrorism is based on years of experience and a reservoir of human intelligence. In a conversation with G2 Bulletin, the officer used the example of U.S. errors in 1993 in Mogadishu, when an attempt to extract a warlord was based on a poorly informed cab driver and lack of other intelligence, including a lack of understanding of the terrain and the firepower of the enemy.
A former British officer with experience in northern Ireland and the Persian Gulf and now a security consultant to some of the Gulf states, evaluated the situation by saying: "When I don't see focused operations, such as the Israeli tactics in Gaza, or the former SAS operations against the IRA, I come to the only possible conclusion – that the strong side in the conflict, which should be pro-active and maintain the initiative, does not have enough intelligence to conduct ongoing aggressive operations and, therefore, might lose control."
A number of experts and analysts have suggested several ways of operating in an environment that seemingly will demand the long-term presence of coalition troops and planning of strategy and tactics suitable for the Iraqi reality.

Separation of civil, political, humanitarian and military goals. They cannot be interwoven and directed by the same officials and commanders.

A military de facto government apparatus should be implemented without delay.

Defining assets and infrastructure elements to be defended and safeguarded.

Establishing Iraqi police and gendarmerie units including paid militias under the control of the coalition headquarters. Such forces could be used for policing and promoting local humanitarian and municipal goals.
Developing an effective wide-range intelligence network and shaping concepts for immediate reactions to info. This should include the CIA, DIA and FBI experts.
Increased deployment of Special Forces.

Creation of new special units trained for the Iraqi environment. (Such units were developed during the Vietnam War and are the most successful counter-guerrilla force in the Israeli and other active armies combating terrorism).

Aggressive strategies and tactics to secure Iraq's borders. Full control by the coalition on all border crossings and ports of entry.

Strict restrictions on political anti-coalition activities.
Developing a concept of aggressive air patrols over areas known to harbor guerrillas.

Developing special relationships with tribal leaders.
These recommendations might be essential as long as the final goal of pacifying Iraq has not been achieved, say G2 Bulletin source. Without such definitions and actions, it will be impossible to talk about "bringing the troops home before Christmas." It will also be impossible to convince friendly nations to join the coalition and to accept missions beyond the traditional U.N.-inspired theories of buffer zones, separation of forces, humanitarian help and food distribution.

In conclusion, it is obvious that further deterioration in Iraq will indeed force the U.S. and its fighting men and women to face the inevitable eruption of an "Iraqifada."
________________
(sorry for the poor formating-it wouldn't carry over from the original text)
plschwartz's Avatar
Member with 11,436 posts.
THREAD STARTER
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: I am a third generation New Yo
Experience: Intermediate
30-Jun-2003, 12:55 PM #57
http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentSe...=1012571727102
World Print article | Email
America must avoid the Chechnya trap
By Mark Brzezinski
Published: June 29 2003 20:44 | Last Updated: June 29 2003 20:44

Reports of foreign fighters joining the resistance against US forces in Iraq are an alarming development as America and Britain try to win the peace and establish security. Direct engagements between American troops and armed Syrians, Saudis, Yemenis, Algerians, Lebanese and even Chechens are increasingly reported. American soldiers are being subjected to sniper attacks and ambushes almost daily, with tragic consequences.
Advertisement

The involvement of non-Iraqis in particular suggests a parallel between the US challenge today in Iraq and Russia's experiences in Chechnya since the outbreak of the second Chechen war in 1999.

Before 1999, the Chechen rebellion was primarily a localised conflict in the North Caucasus. While some aid and fighters were funnelled from abroad to Chechnya in the first Chechen war in 1996, the leadership and soldiers of the rebellion were mainly home grown. Indeed, the leader of the first Chechen rebellion, General Dzhokhar Dudayev, was Chechen and had been an officer in the Soviet army.

After the second Chechen rebellion broke out in 1999, Russia pursued a scorched-earth programme to crush the rebels. While Russia promised to rebuild Chechnya and improve social services, the ruthlessness of Russian actions was widely noted. The levelling of the Chechen capital of Grozny in early 2000, the gross violations of human rights by Russian soldiers, and President Vladimir Putin's comment that he "would rub the Chechens out in the toilet", were widely covered in the Muslim world.

Two developments followed. First, more foreign fighters, so-called "mujahideen", came to Chechnya to support the Chechen cause and fight Russian oppression. These fighters came from throughout the Muslim world and even elsewhere - there were reports of Lithuanians and other central Europeans being captured among Chechen rebels. One rebel leader, Khattab, was not Chechen, but Saudi Arabian.

Second, the practice of Islam became radicalised in Chechnya. Before 1999, women did not wear burkhas frequently, and suicide attacks, with videotapes of rebels reciting the Koran, were unknown. In many parts of the Muslim world, Chechnya became the cause célèbre.

Foreign fighters in Chechnya are less motivated toward gaining Chechen national independence and more inspired toward expanding fundamentalist Islam.

There are many differences between the Chechen conflict and the US occupation of Iraq. For a start, coalition forces in Iraq have gone out of their way to minimise the loss of civilian life. In Iraq, there have not been the kind of reports of mass looting, rape and other human rights violations perpetrated by Russian soldiers in Chechnya and documented by Human Rights Watch. Nor has there been a systematic attempt to intimidate the civilian population in Iraq, as Russian forces have managed to do through their zachistki, or cleansing operations. In addition, the US and coalition forces are doing their best to bring water, food, health care and shelter to a civilian population in need.

But there are some similarities in the role of foreign fighters. The goals of foreign fighters in Iraq are similar to those of their counterparts in Chechnya: to raise the casualty toll of the "occupying forces" and create pressure on them to withdraw. And as in Chechnya, efforts to contain the influx of foreign fighters by sealing the border are inadequate. Russia put tremendous pressure on Georgia to control its northern border, but despite Georgian efforts (with US support), foreign fighters and equipment continue to cross into Chechnya: Pankisi Gorge in eastern Georgia remains a corridor of support for the Chechen cause.

There are limits to how much the borders of Iraq with Syria and Iran can be controlled. US soldiers have reduced infiltration across the Iran-Iraq border as well as Iraq's border with Syria. But there is a broad swathe of Iraq, west of the capital and north between Baghdad and Tikrit, where the US presence is limited, and foreign fighters have been able to get a foothold along with Saddam Hussein's loyalists.

Just as in Chechnya, foreign fighters in Iraq succeed where they have the support and assistance of the local population. This is where the US can diverge from Russia's experience. Russia promised that military action would be followed by investments in infrastructure and social services. But the quality of life in Chechnya has gone from bad to worse. As a result, the only role associated by the Chechen population with Russian forces in the North Caucasus is that of oppressor, not liberator or benefactor.

The US, by contrast, still has a chance to convince Iraqis that the coalition administration will be good for them and for their nation. But if the US cannot meet the population's basic needs - water, food, shelter, health care - and if it is not sensitive to the population's national and cultural dignity, we will have lost the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people. The US has a small window of opportunity to avoid becoming bogged down in Iraq. But it will take butter as well as guns.

The writer is a Washington lawyer. He served as director for Russian and E
plschwartz's Avatar
Member with 11,436 posts.
THREAD STARTER
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: I am a third generation New Yo
Experience: Intermediate
30-Jun-2003, 01:49 PM #58
Meaner then a Junkyard dog
US retaliation against Egypt hits trade plansBy Edward Alden in WashingtonPublished: June 29 2003 21:11 | Last Updated: June 29 2003 21:11
http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentSe...=1012571727102

The US has suspended plans to advance free trade talks with Egypt in response to the Arab country's decision not to join the US in a World Trade Organisation complaint against Europe's ban on genetically modified foods.

The harsh US retaliation against one of its closest Arab allies has taken Egypt by surprise and set back the initial stages of President George W. Bush's plans for a region-wide free trade area by 2013.
US beats Egypt with trade stick
Click here

Robert Zoellick, the US trade representative, delivered the tough message to Egyptian trade officials last week after Egypt confirmed that it would not be a co-complainant in the WTO case.

Egypt says it is stunned by the fury of the US response over what it says are small differences over GM foods.

The US announced last month that Egypt - along with Argentina and Canada - would join the US in a WTO complaint aimed at forcing the European Union to approve the sale of new GM varieties, which have been blocked since 1998.

Egypt's participation was crucial to the US claim that the European ban is hurting developing countries as well as US biotechnology companies.

But Egypt, faced with a domestic backlash, pulled out of the case and has decided to pursue its complaint against the EU separately.

"If you're going to do a free trade agreement with someone, it's important that the people you're talking to are going to be able to deliver," said a US trade official. "They told us one thing and did another."

The US has suspended plans to advance free trade talks with Egypt in response to the Arab country's decision not to join the US in a World Trade Organisation complaint against Europe's ban on genetically modified foods.

The harsh US retaliation against one of its closest Arab allies has taken Egypt by surprise and set back the initial stages of President George W. Bush's plans for a region-wide free trade area by 2013.
US beats Egypt with trade stick
Click here

Robert Zoellick, the US trade representative, delivered the tough message to Egyptian trade officials last week after Egypt confirmed that it would not be a co-complainant in the WTO case.

Egypt says it is stunned by the fury of the US response over what it says are small differences over GM foods.

The US announced last month that Egypt - along with Argentina and Canada - would join the US in a WTO complaint aimed at forcing the European Union to approve the sale of new GM varieties, which have been blocked since 1998.

Egypt's participation was crucial to the US claim that the European ban is hurting developing countries as well as US biotechnology companies.

But Egypt, faced with a domestic backlash, pulled out of the case and has decided to pursue its complaint against the EU separately.

"If you're going to do a free trade agreement with someone, it's important that the people you're talking to are going to be able to deliver," said a US trade official. "They told us one thing and did another."
Stoner's Avatar
Account Disabled with 44,931 posts.
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Dayton,Oh
02-Jul-2003, 06:10 AM #59
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Con...l=968793972154

Jul. 2, 2003. 01:00 AM


U.S. cuts military aid to 35 countries
World criminal court backers hit Americans

seek exemptions



WASHINGTON—The United States is cutting off military aid to 35 countries, including Colombia and six east European nations, because they back the International Criminal Court and have not exempted Americans from possible prosecution.

Another dozen countries were also prohibited from receiving U.S. military aid but they had not been getting any this year.

This is Washington's latest attack on the international court, set up last year in The Hague, to try war crimes and acts of genocide and is seen as a coercive tactic to persuade more countries to sign bilateral exemption agreements with the U.S.

Washington is a signatory to the treaty creating the court but the Bush administration is afraid it might hear politically motivated prosecutions of its military and civilian leaders.

The suspension affects $47 million in U.S. foreign military aid and $613,000 in international military and educational training this year, State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said.

Under last year's American Service Members Protection Act, the U.S. president can issue waivers for governments that sign exemption deals with Washington or when aid is in the national interest.

President George W. Bush signed waivers for 22 countries yesterday.

Reuters News Agency
Stoner's Avatar
Account Disabled with 44,931 posts.
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Dayton,Oh
02-Jul-2003, 11:31 AM #60


Attached Thumbnails
And the beat goes on, the beat goes on-0702peters.gif  
As Seen On

BBC, Reader's Digest, PC Magazine, Today Show, Money Magazine
WELCOME TO TECH SUPPORT GUY!

Are you looking for the solution to your computer problem? Join our site today to ask your question. This site is completely free -- paid for by advertisers and donations.

If you're not already familiar with forums, watch our Welcome Guide to get started.


(clock)
THIS THREAD HAS EXPIRED.
Are you having the same problem? We have volunteers ready to answer your question, but first you'll have to join for free. Need help getting started? Check out our Welcome Guide.

Search Tech Support Guy

Find the solution to your
computer problem!




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools


WELCOME
You Are Using: Server ID
Trusted Website Back to the Top ↑