Authorities have detained 15 foreigners in Chechnya, most of them citizens of former Soviet Muslim republics, military officials said Tuesday.
Ahah! Udmurts! I knew it all the time!
The detained foreigners were mostly citizens of Azerbaijan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan and Ukraine whose visas had expired or who hadn't properly registered with authorities, said Maj. Gen. Ilya Shabalkin, a spokesman for Russian troops in Chechnya. Shabalkin also said none of the detained could explain what they were doing in Chechnya, raising suspicions of their collaboration with Chechen rebels.
"Doing here? Why, I don't know! I went to sleep on the bus, see? And when I woke up, here I was!"
He added that several wounded rebels have been illegally taken for treatment to Crimea in Ukraine. Meanwhile, Chechen police detained two suspected rebels and confiscated their weapons, the Interfax news agency reported, citing acting Chechen Interior Minister Ruslan Alkhanov. One of the men had been on the wanted list as an aide to radical Islamic warlord Shamil Basayev, who has taken responsibility for a series of devastating terrorist attacks.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/14/2004 1:18:58 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
A SYDNEY man accused of planning terrorist attacks in Australia had maps of the national electricity network, aerial photographs of defence installations and instructions for making explosives, a court was told today. Architect Faheem Khalid Lodhi, 34, faces nine charges, including committing acts in preparation for a terrorist act and collecting documents connected with terrorism.
As his committal hearing began in Central Local Court today, Prosecutor Richard Maidment, SC, told the court that in October 2001 Lodhi had acted "in an apparent official capacity" at a training camp in Lahore, Pakistan, operated by banned terrorist organisation Lashkar-e-Taiba. "The camp specialised in urban warfare," Mr Maidment said. In 2003, after returning to Australia, Lodhi allegedly helped set up French terror suspect Willy Brigitte in a Sydney home and with a mobile phone which was, like his own, registered in a false name. The court was told that before Brigitte was deported to France in October 2003, he and Lodhi communicated regularly with each other and with a contact in Pakistan known as Sajid. Mr Maidment said the association was "connected with the preparation of one or more terrorist acts in Australia". Lodhi also allegedly used a false name to buy maps of the national electricity network and authorities found 15 handwritten pages containing instructions for making explosives in his office. Lodhi also allegedly inquired about purchasing chemicals, a number of which were also listed in the written instructions as ingredients for explosives, Mr Maidment said.
On October 25 last year, Lodhi was seen depositing an A4 envelope in a rubbish bin at a public reserve. It was found to contain 37 pages of aerial photographs of defence establishments HMAS Penguin, Holsworthy Army Base and Victoria Barracks. Mr Maidment told the court Lodhi had downloaded the photographs from the internet in connection with a terrorist act "involving the bombing of one or more establishments". The hearing continues.
Posted by: God Save The World ||
12/14/2004 3:42:40 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
No, no, no! Architects are artistic types who should never, ever be allowed even in the same room with chemical processes! Please, O Lions of Islam, reserve bomb making to those with some academic training in chemistry, lest they accidently blow up the entire neighborhood, instead of just themselves.
Based on your comments at Rantburg though, and what I know of American factories, I suspect that your job training was heavily biased toward how to make things not go boom.
#7
Very funny, Half. Half's making fun of me because I went to Auburn University. I later transfered to Engineering and yes, my job is how to NOT make things go BOOM and how to comply with the EPA.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
12/14/2004 16:00 Comments ||
Top||
#8
There you are then, Deacon dear. You're simply an engineer who mistakenly studied the wrong subject at first, before getting yourself straightened out. My own husband thought he wanted to be a doctor, but we caught him in time. I love him dearly, but he wouldn't have handled diabetics who walk into the office eating Twinkies very well, I'm afraid.
Police investigating radical Islamic cells in Spain arrested three Algerians and a Moroccan on Tuesday. The four men were detained in the northern cities of Victoria and Teruel and in Madrid, said a national police spokesman, who spoke on condition of anonymity. The Moroccan, Khalid Zeimi Pardo, 27, is suspected of ties to Moroccan fugitive Amer el Azizi, who is wanted in connection with the Madrid terror bombings and the Sept. 11 terror attacks in the United States, the spokesman said. Zeimi Pardo also had contact with the alleged mastermind of the Madrid attacks, a Tunisian named Serhane Ben Abdelmajid Fakhet and others charged with terrorism in Spain, police say. He was also detained in April but freed after five days due to insufficient evidence.
Looks like they found some.
Authorities believe Azizi was a middleman between Spanish cells of mainly North African immigrants and Osama bin Laden's al-Qaida terror network. Seventeen people, mostly Moroccans, are jailed in Spain on provisional charges over the Madrid train bombings, which are blamed on Islamist militants with possible links to al-Qaida. The bombings killed 191 people and injured more than 1,800. The arrests of the three Algerians, identified as Abdelkader Lebik, Abdallah Ibn Moutalib Kaddouri and Brahim Amman, are part of a police investigation into an Islamic cell that allegedly plotted to blow up the court overseeing Spain's anti-terror investigations, the spokesman said. Thirty-three people, Moroccans and Algerians, have been provisionally charged and jailed since late October in the alleged plot to slam a truck carrying 1,100 pounds of explosives into Madrid's National Court.
Posted by: Steve ||
12/14/2004 9:34:20 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
Under cross-examination that at times grew testy, a co-defendant of activist lawyer Lynne Stewart admitted yesterday that he had sent money to and corresponded with at least 15 Islamic men convicted of terrorist charges, including Ramzi Yousef, mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. Ahmed Sattar, a U.S. postal worker who served as a paralegal for Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman beginning soon after the sheik's arrest in July 1993, is accused of conspiring with Stewart and Mohamed Yousry, an interpreter for Abdel-Rahman, to pass messages from the imprisoned sheik to his terrorist followers. The sheik is serving a life term after having been convicted in 1995 of a plot to bomb New York landmarks and inciting followers to conduct the first World Trade Center attack. Stewart defended the sheik in that case. Assistant U.S. Attorney Christopher Morvillo grilled Sattar in Manhattan about his knowledge of the sheik, the Islamic Group and their goals to overthrow the secular Egyptian government. Sattar insisted the Islamic Group sought, "not to overthrow the government, but to replace it."
I guess it all depends on what your definition of "overthrow" is
Morvillo also questioned Sattar about a list of 14 convicted terrorists that was found in his possession that included their inmate numbers and mailing addresses.
Just a few "pen pals"
"You have corresponded with people convicted of terrorism-related charges?" Morvillo asked. "Yes," Sattar replied. "They were sending me letters asking for me to assist ... some were calling me that they are in need of money and, as a point of the charity for many Muslims, especially during Ramadan, I used to send them money. Yes, they are criminals, but they are also human beings." Morvillo asked Sattar if he knew Yousef, and Sattar replied, "I never met Ramzi Yousef ... I never spoke to him."
"Nope, nope, never talked to him"
"Wasn't it true you had some letters from him?" Morvillo asked. "Yes, I had a letter," Sattar said, explaining that he had published a Muslim newspaper and that after he stopped publishing it, Yousef "sent me a letter asking me why we stopped sending it to him. That was my only contact with him..."
"You said talk to him, never asked about writing. That's different"
Morvillo asked Sattar if "jihad" to Abdel-Rahman meant "jihad by the sword." Sattar insisted "jihad" was a struggle in one's heart, adding, "it could mean by hand, by intention and the act of opposing something." Morvillo showed him one of the sheik's sermons found among Sattar's possessions in which the sheik declares, "If God ... say do a jihad, it means do it with the sword, with the cannon, with the grenade and with the missile; this is jihad." Sattar conceded, "Right here in this sermon ... he is saying that, yes."
"Thank you, next witness"
Posted by: Steve ||
12/14/2004 10:13:23 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"sent money to" ???
Uh, isn't there some little legal problem with doing that, lawyer or not?
Channeling Dan Akroyd: "Lynne, you ignorant slut..."
#2
In what way is what Stewart was doing not "aid and comfort"? Why isn't she facing treason charges and the death penalty?
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
12/14/2004 11:13 Comments ||
Top||
#3
I think the "Stewart Connection" is going to prove very interesting in very many ways. It must be an interesting journey, following her slime trail back through the years.
#4
RC:
The punishment for treason is no longer the death penalty. It is one of:
1. Tenured chair at major university.
2. Star in major Hollywood movies
3. Presidential candidate.
#6
It's politically incorrect to pursue these kinds of cases. This one will probably evaporate and she'll get one of the penalties RC enumerated. One of these days, though, one of them will push it just an inch too far and it'll be cigarette and blindfold time.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/14/2004 17:44 Comments ||
Top||
GAUHATI, India (AP) - Suspected separatist militants launched a series of coordinated bombings Tuesday across India's northeastern state of Assam, killing two people and wounding at least 44, police said. The six attacks - two were bombs hidden in bicycle bags, three were grenade attacks and another was a bomb set off outside a railway station - were in Gauhati, the capital of Assam, and other towns in the state...Police have not said who they suspect in the string of Tuesday bombings, but they suspect the United Liberation Front of Asom, or ULFA, in the Monday attacks. ULFA, a guerrilla group that has been seeking an independent homeland in Assam since 1979, is the largest of the region's militant groups. Last week, ULFA rejected an invitation by the federal government for unconditional peace talks, saying the offer did not mention its main demand of sovereignty. At least 10,000 people, mostly civilians, have died in fighting in the past 15 years between the government and the rebels of ULFA and another separatist group, the National Democratic Front of Boroland. Assam's state government offered a peace deal to both groups in September. The ULFA rejected the peace overtures, while NDFB responded with a cease-fire offer.
Suspected Islamic rebels shot and killed a Buddhist high school teacher Tuesday, and an upscale hotel closed because of the violence in Muslim-dominated southern Thailand. Early Tuesday, a gunman on the back of a cycle of violence motorcycle shot and killed 42-year-old teacher Pinyo Wongrukawej in Narathiwat province's Sungai Padee district while he drove to work with his wife. "We believe that the insurgents were responsible for the shooting," said police Lt. Nethiwut Kingkhaew. Later in the day, Narathiwat Chamber of Commerce Chairman Panya Hongtrakul said the Royal Princess Hotel in Narathiwat's capital will close Jan. 1. It was not immediately clear if or when the hotel will reopen. Another southern hotel closed last month due to lack of business, Panya said.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/14/2004 11:00:56 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
He must've been pretty harsh in his grading...
Time for the Thais to go medieval on the Muslims. The overt aggression of Islam's attempt to spread into Thailand deserves the best shot the Thais can throw. It's now or never, Toxin.
#3
Nah, the Thais, being good Buddhists, give one free shot. They are really capable of some nasty shit when they've given it - and received shit in return. I expect the south to heat up and become a serious battle zone.
#5
You can expect M'sia to get involved covertedly despite all denials because of the typical partisan factor. Already that Farish A Noor is denying about the madrassa's role: http://www.malaysiakini.com/opinionsfeatures/32098
Posted by: Wo ||
12/14/2004 13:53 Comments ||
Top||
Civilized countries have "sex workers." Paleostine has "security workers."
A Palestinian security worker was shot and killed Tuesday by Israeli troops in the southern Gaza town of Rafah, Palestinian medical officials said. Samir Khafaja, 27, was walking in the street when he was shot in the head and chest in the town on the Gaza border with Egypt, medical officials said. Two other Palestinian security personnel were wounded. An Israeli military official said the army opened fire on three suspicious figures crawling in the area of the border. The official could not say if the figures were armed.
"Hey, man! Whudja do that for? We wuzh jus' crawlin' down the street on our way home from a... a... buzhinesh meetin'!"
Posted by: Fred ||
12/14/2004 1:14:49 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Civilized countries have "sex workers." Paleostine has "security workers." was walking in the street when he was shot
A COUSIN and former aide to Saddam Hussein has been arrested and will face trial along with the former dictator and his other deputies, Iraqi interim Prime Minister Iyad Allawi said today. He told Iraq's National Council in a televised speech that Izzeddine al-Majid al-Tikriti, who was not on the US list of 55 most wanted members of Saddam's regime, had been captured last week. He gave no further details. Majid was accused by US authorities in July of funding and arming the anti-American insurgency in Iraq, a charge he denied.
"Nope. Nope. Wudn't me."
Majid, a former officer in Saddam's elite Republican Guard, is believed to have fled to Jordan in 1995 along with his family and his brother-in-law, Hussein Kamel, a general and son-in-law of Saddam. When Kamel, his family and Majid's wife returned to Iraq the following year, they were killed by Saddam's inner circle. Majid, meanwhile, escaped to Turkey. In recent years he is reported to have been in exile in Jordan, Britain and the United Arab Emirates. Trials of some of Saddam Hussein's aides will begin next week, Iraqi interim Prime Minister Iyad Allawi said today. Speaking to Iraq's National Council, he did not name the lieutenants that would go on trial or say when Saddam himself would appear in court. "I will tell you clearly and specifically that next week, God willing, the trials of the symbols of the former regime will begin," Mr Allawi said.
That'll make a nice run-up to the Iraqi election
He added that an alleged senior figure among the foreign-inspired Islamists who are believed to be making common cause in an anti-American insurgency with secular former Saddam loyalists had also been caught. "In addition to the members of the former regime, there are terrorist elements that came from abroad," Mr Allawi said. "A person called Hassan Ibrahim Farhan Zaydi was killed. He is one of Zarqawi's people. Two of his aides were detained. "Of course he was killed in a confrontation. These were involved in major acts of destruction."
Posted by: Steve ||
12/14/2004 11:38:20 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
In the deck of cards, he was the little instruction sheet for ordering more Official Bicycle products.
Unknown assailants set off a fire near a vital oil pipeline in northern Iraq, raising concerns that the heat could damage the line, an official said Tuesday. Firefighters were trying to put off the fire which began late Monday after someone set ablaze a hole in the ground filled with oil that had leaked out during previous attacks, said a Northern Oil Co. official who spoke on condition of anonymity. He said the fire, in an area about 43 miles southwest of Kirkuk, could cause nearby pipelines to explode. They include the line leading from the northern oil fields to the Turkish port of Ceyhan, a principal export route.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/14/2004 11:13:13 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
The surest way to stop this nonsense is to establish an Iraqi oil trust fund and make sure that every Iraqi citizen understands that their annual checks come from the sale of oil. Once they realize that attacks on the pipeline cost them money, they will put an end to the people who do this.
There about 115,000 Iraqi security troops on duty. This includes police, troops and security forces that basically guard things like power plants and oil facilities. Journalists over there tend to concentrate on those incidents where Sunni Arab soldiers or police run away. But the majority of the Iraqi armed forces and police are doing their job. The jails are filling up with criminals again, and the Sunni Arab gangs in central Iraq often attack Iraqi police and soldiers, only to find that they are Kurds or Shia Arabs, who are eager to shoot right back. Even some of the Sunni Arab police fight, but that isn't news.
The Sunni Arab terrorism is giving rise to an increasing amount of similar actions by Shia Arab groups. The Shia Arabs, unlike the Sunni Arabs, are not trying to take over the government. Once elections are held next month, the Shia Arabs will be the largest block in parliament. What the Shia gunmen are looking for now is revenge. What outsiders often forget is that decades of terrorism and violence by Saddam was done most often by Sunni Arabs who did not hide their identities. The Shia took names, and some are not waiting for trials. They have lists, and are out looking for Sunni Arabs to kill. It is personal. And the police are not bothering much with these vigilantes.
NATO has agreed to help Iraq train police commanders and army officers, but few NATO members will actually send trainers. Most Iraqis (the Kurds and Shia Arabs) believe that the violence in central Iraq is supported by Saddam Hussein's many friends. This in includes Iraq's Sunni Arab neighbors, and many European countries (Russia and France were major weapons suppliers to Saddam). So NATO's reluctance to help them makes sense. Conspiracy theories are popular in Iraq, the one about France and Russia wanting to put Saddam back in power has gained some traction.
Posted by: Steve ||
12/14/2004 9:52:26 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
So, um, where's the problem? Vigilantes serve their purpose during times when there is insufficent or non-neutral local law. It fades as bona-fide law takes root - local law and enforcement that is trustworthy and even-handed - and that always has and always will take time. Most societies have a tradition, a custom, of some sort dealing with feuds and overripe blood debts. Certainly the Arabs do.
"Laws are sand, customs are rock. Laws can be evaded and punishment escaped but an openly transgressed custom brings sure punishment."
-Twain
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, the posse is being formed and there are some necks to be stretched - for decades of wanton violence perp'ed under the aegis of Saddam's thugocracy. Payback's a bitch.
#2
My thoughts exactly, .com. In fact, among the most consequential disappointments with Iraqi performance, post-liberation, has been the LACK of ferocious score-settling directed against the portion of the Sunni community implicated in the decades of despotism. Obviously in the majority-Sunni heartland like al-Anbar this wouldn't apply, but within B'dad and perhaps northern Babil, and around Mosul, the Shi'a and Kurds should have gone medieval on their erstwhile tormentors. I know there has been an ongoing, limited, and barely reported (Strategy Page talked about it yesterday, I think) campaign of informal retribution by non-Sunni hit squads. But imagine how much further we'd be in the civil war to crush the violent part of the Sunni community if their former victims had cleaned house in mixed areas like B'dad metro and northern Babil. This is a politically incorrect little item making up part of the The Blindingly Obvious Fact That Dare Not Speak Its Name: Iraqi performance has been the main problem since liberation, not anything done/not done by the US or coalition.
#4
And, to some degree at least - certainly a distant second to Turkey's betrayal, that lack has exacerbated the post-war occupation woes that are constantly heaped on Rummy by the 20/20 hindsight voyeurs and hand-wringers. Sigh. They are slow, aren't they? Especially for all the tough talk about Arabs and their blood feuding. The whole stable of MSM BS has been utterly discredited, from the vaunted tough Afghan fighters and their brutal winters to the terrible blood oaths of Arabs. Yadda3. Yeah, we've heard it - and it didn't happen. So much romantic twaddle by cheesedick reporters, so few facts. Pfeh.
#5
rollback of Arabization is a problem huh? I'd like to see it rolled WAyyyyyy back
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/14/2004 10:46 Comments ||
Top||
#6
verlaine - are you seriously suggesting that Rummy was counting on Shia vigilantes, and that the problems of the occupation are due to their absence?
Lets get real folks - we didnt go into Iraq to avenge the Sunni deeds against the Shia - we went into Iraq to strenghten our position in the region. Now I know that there are two ways that works the public plan (which I favor) of making Iraq a model for democracy. And the implicit plan, preferred by many here, of scaring the bejeezuz out of everyone in the region. To some extent these strategies conflict - the first strategy requires a greater emphasis on hearts and minds, the second on showing how much it sucks to be beaten by the US. And they conflict as far as initial numbers of troops - the democracy strategy needed large numbers to restore order and rebuild society - the make em quake in fear strategy required showing what we could do with only three divisions.
But vigilantes does neither. On the one hand it gets the entire Sunni Arab world to hate you (especially as vigilantes have nasty tendency to go beyond justice, and to get the wrong people, or to pursue personal grudges aside from war crimes, etc) and it ALSO fails to make the Sunni arab world fear - there is no similar demographic situation anywhere else in the region - a vigilante strategy CANT be repeated, and so adds to reason for sunni arabs OUTSIDE of Iraq to fear. To go with a vigilante strategy is a sign of FAILURE, a willingness to settle for whatever will get Iraq under control, and get us out of the "quagmire" and give up on Iraq as a WIN in the WOT.
And, BTW, it was Rummys job to have backup plans, not to count on Turkey.
I mean at some point you have to use hindsight. No one here, or in the MSM, or in the blogosphere could judge Rummy with foresight, since we were not (and are not) privy to his plans, the info he had available, etc. We can ONLY judge by the results. Which, while not as bad as the more alarmist segments of the MSM imply, seem to be worse than they should have been.
#10
Since when has perfection been an option in the real world?
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
12/14/2004 11:11 Comments ||
Top||
#11
good comments LH.
As an aside, not meant to contradict - I don't understand this piling on Rumsfeld. He's not an all seeing God. He had to make a billion decisions and the idea that he could conduct the "Perfect War"TM is ridiculous. You can always say, "it could have been done better". Quite frankly, I think we were lucky to have Rumsfeld, as I think few others would have had the strength to do it as well.
#12
Good Lord, I remember reading about vigilante murder of Saddam's henchmen right after the invasion...April or May of last year, or thereabouts. This is fish wrap stuff! In Germany, Jewish troops were quietly hunting down Nazis for considerably longer than this -- it will go away when the courts are processing cases at full speed.
#13
among the most consequential disappointments with Iraqi performance, post-liberation, has been the LACK of ferocious score-settling directed against the portion of the Sunni community implicated in the decades of despotism.
Nonsense. The Kurds and Shia have acted with great restraint because they are grownups and actually want a peaceful, governable country based on the rule of law.
I have great respect for the Kurdish leaders and Sistani based on how they have restrained things in anticipation of elections. Verlaine, OTOH, takes a narrow, shortsighted and counterproductive stance.
#14
2b - oh, yeah, Rummy made a lot of good decisions. I think he did very well in the war in Afghanistan, and in the first few months post 9/11 generally. It may well turn out, when we have fuller info, that he did about as well as could have been done in Iraq. I dont really know. What I have problems with is the tendency to jump hard on any criticism of Rummy, and to deny the extent to which things ARE screwed up in Iraq.
#15
LH - fair enough. I'm a knee-jerk Rummy defender, and will rethink. My main bitch is that the same people (Dems, MSM, etc.) that criticize him for (pick one, or several) not using enough troops, armor, etc., would undoubtedly be the loudest Rummy critics if he had sent another 100,000 troops over. Quagmire!
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/14/2004 11:56 Comments ||
Top||
#16
What I have problems with is the tendency to jump hard on any criticism of Rummy, and to deny the extent to which things ARE screwed up in Iraq.
Hmmm...I guess I just haven't noticed that tendency in the MSM :-)
Seriously, I have no problem with constructive criticism, but 99.9% of what I've read is nothing but useless, woulda,coulda,shoulda. I don't think it's constructive.
#18
Lh / Theans Whatever - Hey, folks, I'm the vigilante guy. Pick on me, K? You are woefully ignorant of history if you don't know, understand, and see where vigilantism occurs and why.
Restraint on the part of the Kurds, I completely agree with. They are busy building a very nifty capitalist society - and policing their own and their area most effectively. Kudos to them - I wish they were independent of the baggage of Arabs.
Regards Sistani, name all of his positive accomplishments on behalf of the Shi'a who blindly follow him? Compared to what he might have done? Rummy gets whacked for anything and everything that goes awry in post-war Iraq - and Iraqis such as Sistani get a pass. Bullshit. Sistani's actually been AWOL / MIA in terms of doing anything more than the minimum of, say, breathing. Bush spends capital attempting to accomplish goals. Other leaders, such as Putty, Sistani, et al, seem to hoard their capital and polish their knobs.
When the Arab Iraqis pull on their bootstraps and get serious about doing something for themselves, then positive shit will happen. Blaming Rummy for their lazy blame society and the lack of Shi'a accomplishment to counter the Sunni insanity of longing for The Good Old Days sorta reeks of disingenuity to me. I know you guys are after the same thing I am, a free and democratic Iraq, but let's be even-handed and call a spade a spade, heh.
#19
Dot com - once again, it was Rummys job to PLAN for things like Sistani being a problem. Thats what youre supposed to do when you occupy a country like Iraq - you dont assume it will all go hunky dory. You recognize that things locally are gonna go wrong, and you have resources to deal with that. Its Rummys job to assure the interests of the United States, its not Sistani's. There were folks who said this couldnt work, cause the locals were too fucked up. I didnt agree then - and IIRC, neither did you. But I did think that we were going to manage this thing well ourselves. Look dot com, you have yourself made inciteful criticism of how we deal with Sistani and the locals - maybe Rummy needed a dot com at his side. At least if hed listened to you he would have known how f*cking hard it would be to fix an arab society. Maybe he did know - but its sure hard to get that impression from the planning that was done (or largely not done) I suggest reading Hanlons piece in full.
#20
Sistani's actually been AWOL / MIA in terms of doing anything more than the minimum of, say, breathing
Somebody needs to be reading the news and thinking about it more. Sistani gave his support to crushing Sadr's Mahdi. As a result elections WILL happen soon.
If you don't see that as a serious contribution, your ability to judge anything about Iraq is called into major question.
#21
Magic wands. Rumsfeld was SORELY lacking in his failure to procure and issue them prior to the invasion.
Nasty nasty SECDEF. Not nearly as competant as armchair critics with loud rhetoric.
Pfah.
Posted by: too true ||
12/14/2004 12:21 Comments ||
Top||
#22
Why do I feel like I've just been had? Lol!
Well I guess we part ways regards our expectations. I don't care for the blame society. I believe in what I believe is a pragmatic approach: you plan for the knowns, try to buffer up resources for the unknowns, and deal with shit as it happens - for the plan is toilet paper 5 minutes after the show begins. [Hey, it's how I live my life - do you make plans which execute to perfection? Hey - I want some of your advice about my investments, heh!] I believe that's what Rummy did, IMHO, so I am naturally empathetic - and bristle at the second-guessing. So we have different approaches leading to different expectations. You think mine are whacked-out frequently enough, right? I think yours are the Pollyanna game in this case. Such is life.
amen. If I was asked to point to the number cause for all ills we face, the "blame society" would top my list. Blame is nothing but a way to make yourself feel useful, without actually doing anything useful.
#24
rkb - You mean when he suddenly had a heart problem to fix in London? Lol! Oh yeah, he's been a peach of a leader. Y'know, your comment is pretty fucking arrogant... from here you may take it where you will.
#26
As for Rummy, the Afghanistan campaign was a work of art. A masterpiece. Well planned, well executed. Iraq on the otherhand, while not as bad as is presented, could have been done better. The simple fact of the matter is that given the scope of the mission in Iraq, it is going incredible well. To deny that and try to "blame" Rummy for this or that is to deny history and to deny reality.
The ONLY way that the occupation could have gone "smoothly" would have been by bringing the full force of our power against them. To crush them. To beat any will to fight out of them. If we'd have had 100k more troops for the invasion and hit every area of Iraq hard, those troops could have made a difference. But today, 50k or 100k more troops will NOT make a difference at this point. What are they going to do? And don't forget this, we handed sovereignty over to the Iraqi's. They need to and are taking more responsibility for their own destiny. We don't need to double our footprint there. It will only breed resentment against us. What we need to do is everything we can to help the IP and ING to become an effective force as quickly as possible. Because while we are the ones stomping out the bad guys, we generate resentment and we hinder the growth of confidence in the IP and ING.
#27
Amen, AHM... The grief began (and continues) with Turkey's betrayal, but the future is exactly as AHM sez: with the Iraqis, themselves, making Iraq a better place once day at a time while we cover their backs.
#28
Okay, my language was stronger than it needed to be.
But seriously, .com, I think you don't acknowledge the key role Sistani has been playing. That "heart problem" took him out of the country after several attempts at assasinating him and as we were moving in on the Mahdi holed up in a very holy Shia site -- a move he did not condemn at all and which threatened major damage to the shrine to which many are deeply attached.
More important overall is what he has consistently refused to do despite great pressure from some Shias - and against the influence of Iran's mullahs. He has refused, multiple times, to endorse the idea of an Islamic government in Iraq. His refusal of an overt leadership role politically is consistent with the form of piety for which he is considered the spiritual leader among Shia, but his rejection of Islamacism for the government was also a key factor in preventing either a greater Islamicist tone to the insurgency or a Shia uprising of their own.
He may not be a US puppet, but that's fine with me. From my perspective he, Allawi and others are doing pretty much what we might hope they would do in moving Iraqis along towards a stable, secular and peaceful representative government.
As for arrogance, well ... sometimes I'm guilty of that, although I hope not in this case. But from over here I might gently suggest that the demands of many here at RB and elsewhere that Rumsfeld have A Plan Which Foresaw and Accounted for All Possible Events seems to tend a bit in that direction as well ...
Now I know that there are two ways that works the public plan (which I favor) of making Iraq a model for democracy. And the implicit plan, preferred by many here, of scaring the bejeezuz out of everyone in the region.
Making Iraq a democracy will, by its very nature, scare the bejeezuz out of everyone in the region because none of the governments in that region, with the exception of Israel, rest upon popular suffrage. Point in fact, the overwhelming majority of governments in that region must suppress popular suffrage in order to survive. This is evidenced by their continued use of military and paramilitary force against dissenting citizens, lack of an institutionalized and impartial legal system, opaqueness of the political and governmental process as well as an operative and independent fourth estate.
Your use of politically charged characterizations like âpublicâ versus âimplicitâ strikes me as an unnecessary aside which detracts from your argument. We went in for a number of reasons, some validated, some disproved, but all discussed in the public market by a free and unfettered press and citizenry. .
To some extent these strategies conflict - the first strategy requires a greater emphasis on hearts and minds, the second on showing how much it sucks to be beaten by the US. And they conflict as far as initial numbers of troops - the democracy strategy needed large numbers to restore order and rebuild society - the make em quake in fear strategy required showing what we could do with only three divisions.
I donât want to be overly contentious about this characterization other than to say itâs a meme thatâs been advanced since the fall of Baghdad. The argument about the number of troops required for post-conflict stabilization versus initial invasion depends more upon the local national government, its legitimacy, police powers, etc. than our own. Restoring order requires paramilitary and police forces not military forces. Consequently, putting more infantry on the ground wonât, necessarily, enhance order but will increase US force protection requirements.
But vigilantes does neither. On the one hand it gets the entire Sunni Arab world to hate you (especially as vigilantes have nasty tendency to go beyond justice, and to get the wrong people, or to pursue personal grudges aside from war crimes, etc) and it ALSO fails to make the Sunni arab world fear - there is no similar demographic situation anywhere else in the region - a vigilante strategy CANT be repeated, and so adds to reason for sunni arabs OUTSIDE of Iraq to fear. To go with a vigilante strategy is a sign of FAILURE, a willingness to settle for whatever will get Iraq under control, and get us out of the "quagmire" and give up on Iraq as a WIN in the WOT.
In my experience as a prior Special Forces Captain, most of the world operates on the demographic situation that LH claims is not repeatable. The idea of local police operating under a formal code of laws in an impartial manner is the non-repeatable situation. Most of the places Iâve worked or visited, donât have police. Justice, such as it may be, is delivered locally by âvigilantesâ or not at all.
The assumption that there is a unified Sunni Arab world which will either hate or fear us, seems, perhaps, a bit naïve. Exactly which Sunni Arabs are you talking about? There are significant and historic dividing lines within the âSunni Arabâ world. It isnât a singular group except to outsiders, typically with an agenda. Within the context of Iraq Sunni Arab tribal society, particularly in the towns and tribes sponsoring insurgent violence, vigilante justice âper se, is the normal condition. You may consider it a failure. They donât. Vigilantism may be sanctioned or restrained by tribal necessities or religious proscriptions or it may ignore those if the grievance is considered serious enough by the affected parties.
If Iraq is a quagmire given the time and casualty rate, then how would you characterize WWII or the US Civil War, where more Americans were killed in a single battle than in Iraq to date? This sort of sloganeering speaks more to your fortitude than to the realities on the ground. We are the dominate military force in the country. Local national police, national guard (paramilitaries) and military forces are being built. Two thirds of the country and the majority of Iraqi population supports the current situation and looks forward to transitioning into some form of representative government..
And, BTW, it was Rummys job to have backup plans, not to count on Turkey.
I mean at some point you have to use hindsight. No one here, or in the MSM, or in the blogosphere could judge Rummy with foresight, since we were not (and are not) privy to his plans, the info he had available, etc. We can ONLY judge by the results. Which, while not as bad as the more alarmist segments of the MSM imply, seem to be worse than they should have been.
The presumption of perfection is a canard maintained only by those who remove themselves from responsibility. What should the results have been? Show me a comparable but more successful military/political operation? Certainly not the Revolutionary War, Civil War, Spanish American War, WWI, WWII, Korea, or Vietnam.
#30
"Exactly which Sunni Arabs are you talking about? There are significant and historic dividing lines within the âSunni Arabâ world. It isnât a singular group except to outsiders, typically with an agenda"
Please tell me which Sunni Arabs, anywhere from oman to Morocco, will be more friendly to the US, or to US supported experiments in democracy, due to vigilante justice by SHIA and KURDS in Iraq? Really, if you know of any, id be eager to find out. I did not say vigilante justice was rare - when i said the demographic situation was unique, I meant that to the extent we have an end result that Shia look on approvingly, but that Sunnis do not, it MIGHT help inspire pro-US democratic revolution in say, Iran, but not in the arab middle east - theres no other country where Sunni arabs are a minority and Shia are an overwhelming majority (although on reflection perhaps Bahrain is an exception to that)
What was the civil war? It was conflict in which Lincoln went through TWO secretaries of war, and numerous commanders in the East (hard to count, due to the confusing and changing command structure - do we count John Pope, for example? Meade AND Grant?)Similarly in WW2, Churchill went through 3 commanders in the Mideast before he got Montgomery, IIRC.
You misread me. I am NOT saying we wont pull this out and win, ultimately. As we did in the civil war and as we and our allies did in WW2. I am saying there is considerable appearnce, from the outside, of major incompetence. And a refusal to hold certain people accountable.
#31
Justice, such as it may be, is delivered locally by âvigilantesâ or not at all.
DaveK - that's an interesting thought. While a system of laws is preferable, it's far from perfect itself. Here in the US, rapists, child molestors and murderers are routinely set free to shatter an exponential number of lives. Rich and powerful often get a pass. Lawyers in the western world see justice as a game, and very frequently, justice is NOT served by our courts.
Laws and courts are the ideal, but justice correctly delivered by the hands of vigilantes is still "justice". The danger with vigilantes is simply that it is so easy for power to be abused. But I would say that our lawyers are often just as abusive.
#32
rkb - I took it that you were saying I'm not paying attention regards Iraq and Sistani's "actions" - hell, that's all I do, lol! I do believe he has largely wasted the last 18 months and acted for the greater good primarily by inaction. Indeed, by not coming to Sadr's aid in Najaf, instead flying off to London, he allowed Sadr to be seriously roughed up. It was opportune, and we laughed about it here IIRC, but the water was carried by the Jarines and Air Cav so I'm loathe to give Sistani credit for it. Okay - different views . In one regard you have me cold: I have a saying that "no answer is, indeed, an answer" so I'm hoisted on my own pitard there, heh.
In total I recall only 2 times Sistani has been constructive - first by saying he was apolitical way back after the invasion had succeeded in toppling Saddam and second regards Sadr and the Najaf operation - which was rather nice for him in that it marginalized Sadr completely.
I can think of several times when he was unhelpful, such as openly favoring Shi'a militia when another Shi'a cleric was bombed / killed, saying that the occupation was illegal, resistance was okay by him, and we should leave immediately, calling Allawi and the Interim Gov't illegal, openly opposing the Constitution and the panel writing it that he apparently failed to control - especially the Federal aspects and wymyn's rights, backing on the "slate of candidates" vs local representative democracy to boost the Shi'a's power, formulating the committee to create the Shi'a slate and rather stacking it with his kind of people: clerics, etc. I guess you could say that I think he failed to serve the Iraqi people, but served his own interests excusively.
So believe me: I am paying attention, heh. Too much for my sanity, lol! We're cool - just in disagreement over the value ol' 1000 yard stare here brings to the table:
Now my head is spinning. I thought it was called the RESPONSIBILITY society, where folks are accountable for results.
If Iraq were a school district in the US, Rummy would have 12 months to meet numerical goals in terms of number of violent incidents, number of US casualties, etc, and if he failed to meet those numeric standards, the Iraqis would be able to reject US troops and instead be able to apply a portion of the US defense budget to CHARTER infantry divisions, instead. Rummy would say to hell with strategy, and would spend his time drilling officers in how to meet the numerical goals.
#35
LH, I agree that Rummy's arrogance has often been (to coin a phrase) unhelpful to our overall objectives in Iraq. No problem with criticizing him here.
But I think one source of the intense reaction your critiques generate here is the quite obvious bad faith of so many of those who also critique Rummy without ever having committed to promoting Iraqi democracy or overthrowing Saddam. As for me, when I hear someone criticize Rummy these days, I know it's an opening wedge for later arguments in favor of quietly, slowly, gradually walking away from Iraq. I predict that the most strident critiques of Rummy will soon come from isolationist Republicans. First Buchanan, then Novak, then Hagel and co, and finally from the Bush41 realpolitik crowd.
If you want to help us stay the course in Iraq, it's more helpful to couch your critiques as constructive and friendly. Replacing Rumsfeld now would be a green light to all the isolationist hyenas, both left and right, to call for bringing the boys home, moving the goalposts from promoting Iraqi democracy to promoting Iraqi stability, and a fortress America approach. I don't think that's the outcome you want.
#36
Spin no more, Linda Blair. You're absolutely right, LIBERALhawk.
He failed to meet your specs, your criteria, in an obviously predictable endeavor. Apples = Oranges = Hot Dates at the Oasis. I will go wash my keyboard out with soap to atone. Rummy's shit. The entire situation is shit. Quagmire! Liberals should hang him. He should resign. Life sucks. Rummy's at fault.
#37
LH: You are one of those annoying fans who screams at the professional athletes about how much they suck - each and everytime they fail to move the ball forward - aren't you?
#38
What I have problems with is the tendency to jump hard on any criticism of Rummy, and to deny the extent to which things ARE screwed up in Iraq.
Perhaps what you call "denial" is, in fact, recognition that things are LESS screwed up in Iraq than they were two years ago.
As for Rummy -- I rarely hear valid criticism of him. It's mainly Monday morning quarterbacking and whiny sniping by people who, intellectually, aren't fit to shine his shoes.
If Iraq were a school district...
You expect us to take you seriously after that?
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
12/14/2004 14:05 Comments ||
Top||
#39
But I think one source of the intense reaction your critiques generate here is the quite obvious bad faith of so many of those who also critique Rummy without ever having committed to promoting Iraqi democracy or overthrowing Saddam
Theres certainly plenty of bad faith on the left, and those whove heard me here no I despise it. Theres ALSO bad faith on the right as well. I havent let Karl Rove keep me from criticizing Michael Moore or John Kerry, and I wont let Robert Byrd or Dan Rather keep me from criticizing Rumsfeld.
#40
You are one of those annoying fans who screams at the professional athletes about how much they suck - each and everytime they fail to move the ball forward - aren't you?
Tell the truth now.
I think its more like a team with a huge budget, just barely beating inferior teams, and several obviously bungled calls by the head coach. Just cause the team is pulling out wins, and just cause there are some idiots who think it will lose (when it wont) doesnt mean the coach should get a pass.
#41
Perhaps what you call "denial" is, in fact, recognition that things are LESS screwed up in Iraq than they were two years ago
Less screwed up than under Saddam? So youre saying that unless Iraq is as bad off as it was under Saddam, the worst totalitarian on the planet, you wont accept that things are screwed up? Can anyone say "the soft bigotry of low expectations"?
#42
and dont get me wrong. i would like events to prove me wrong. I would like nothing better than for Zarqawi to be capture this month, for the Iraqi elections to run smoothly, for the insurgency to collapse, and for US forces to be freed up for other tasks. Id rather have Rummy, and four years of a Bush clone after 2008, if we SUCCEED in this endeavour.
But if, in November of 2008, we're still talking about how plans go awry, and how at least things are better than they were under Saddam, and how people whined during WW2, I will NOT be with you.
#44
I think its more like a team with a huge budget, just barely beating inferior teams, and several obviously bungled calls by the head coach. Just cause the team is pulling out wins, and just cause there are some idiots who think it will lose (when it wont) doesnt mean the coach should get a pass.
But there's no "final score" here with which to judge success. Even if you think there is one, this "game" is more like one of those cricket matches that goes on for weeks. And it's a match at which we are not even spectators. Your critique of our side's cricket coach, no matter how intelligent or convincing you may think it, is about as reliable as a translation of a Chinese reporter's version of a French weblogger's account of what his buddy told him he saw happen in the match from watching it intermittently on a barroom TV.
I'm sorry but none of us is an expert on troop strength or counter-insurgency in a post-stalinist multi-ethnic arab state.
#45
I do believe he has largely wasted the last 18 months and acted for the greater good primarily by inaction.
Agreed, .com. However, that is consistent with Sistani's broader interpretation of Shia Islam, which is that clerics should not be involved in politics or governing -- a position we should be grateful for, I think. He went wobbly once or twice when it looked like the Sunnis were being cut a deal, but by and large he has refused to oppose us, which is a big help in and of itself even if he's not out there pro-actively giving sermons in favor of Allawi and the coalition. I don't doubt that clerics influenced by him have in turn influenced their listeners on Fridays, which has contributed to Shia patience in the runup to the elections.
#46
Why is it fair to criticize Rumsfeld for the political aspects of the Iraq campaign? I thought he was only responsible for the military. And is doing a reasonably good job of it.
Posted by: Rafael ||
12/14/2004 14:39 Comments ||
Top||
#47
Less screwed up than under Saddam? So youre saying that unless Iraq is as bad off as it was under Saddam, the worst totalitarian on the planet, you wont accept that things are screwed up?
No. Not at all.
Were you expecting, perhaps, things to get better without going through the intermediate state of "screwed up, but better than it was"? We're in that intermediate state, and will be for a while. Focusing on the "it's screwed up" is worthless; it does nothing to solve the problems and, honestly, looks more like political point-scoring.
What did you expect to happen in Iraq? What standard are you judging against?
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
12/14/2004 14:40 Comments ||
Top||
#48
Why is it fair to criticize Rumsfeld for the political aspects of the Iraq campaign
Cause at least till Bremer left, and Negroponte came in, DoD was running the political aspects. Unless it comes out in the future that Bremer was forced on Rummy.
#49
Why is it fair to criticize Rumsfeld for the political aspects of the Iraq campaign?
Because State is sacrosanct.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
12/14/2004 14:44 Comments ||
Top||
#50
what standard?
The insurgency, in mid 2003, is said to have numbered about 5000 men, and was under pressure as we rounded up Baathists. I expected that it would DECLINE from there, and that by now Iraq would be quiet. That wed be well into physical reconstruction, and that there would be zero cities where contractors couldnt go. Failing that, that at least the insurgency would be no worse than it was in summer 2003. That the borders would be secure.
Rantburg has an archive. Point me to where in 2003 you said that things would still be like this 20 months after the invasion.
Ive already discussed why its worth reviewing this.
#51
rkb - Okay - agree to disagree with what he could've / should've done? Lol! The Shi'a have been cowed so long I'm not sure they really "got it" that they were finally free for awhile, heh. Even then, they were convinced they should be protesting the "invaders" and "occupiers" cuz that seemed the safest game - once they figure out that we wouldn't shoot them for protesting. Must've been a serious shock, heh. I can only imagine the mental machinations, though we had a few early Iraqi bloggers trying to illuminate us. Here's to tomorrow and the elections and the Iraqi security forces - may they survive first contact and realize they can actually do the job. :-)
#53
Lex, you mentioned Lincoln's two secretaries of war. This reminds me of the Civil War in general... I was under the impression that Grant and Sherman were very controversial, and Lincoln had to spend a lot of political capital in order to keep the other politicians off their backs.
LH: I didn't think the insurgency would still be going on in Iraq to this extent because I thought by now we would have attacked their sources of logistical support in Syria and Iran (which everyone is pointedly not talking about, and reaching for issues to talk about instead, hence the every truck/jeep a tank meme).
Posted by: Phil Fraering ||
12/14/2004 15:15 Comments ||
Top||
#54
rummy: a defense
the Weekly Standard:
"And Rumsfeld is correct to concentrate his efforts on building a set of military institutions that will be appropriate to the long-term fight in the greater Middle East and elsewhere. Rumsfeld is not the real problem with Bush administration policy--the problem has been, and remains, the unwillingness of the White House to increase defense spending sufficiently and to enlarge U.S. ground forces, especially the Army. This has much more to do with macro political judgments and the president's second-term agenda than anything inside the Pentagon. If told to rebuild the Army, Rumsfeld and Army chief of staff Gen. Peter Schoomaker would build the right kind of force."
#55
think its more like a team with a huge budget, just barely beating inferior teams, and several obviously bungled calls by the head coach. Just cause the team is pulling out wins, and just cause there are some idiots who think it will lose (when it wont) doesnt mean the coach should get a pass.
There is a saying, that I doubt you are familiar with or will understand: If you aren't part of the solution, you are part of the problem.
Even if your dark assessment were true, it doesn't change the fact that your comments, blaming Rumsfeld, aren't meaningful. If you were suggesting who might be better than Rumsfeld and why, or advancing your own beliefs on how things should move forward..it would be interesting. But your comments lack solutions and thus amount to little more than screaming "The coach sucks!" from the stands.
I think you mistakenly believe you are scoring some sort of cheap political points by doing so, but you are just annoying the other readers.
#56
Phil Fraering - Lex, you mentioned Lincoln's two secretaries of war
actually, I made an anology to a cricket match that no one seemed to find clever or germane. :-
But you're absolutely right that the Civil War was the ultimate botch job, at least til late 1863. In any case, the deciding factor was ultimately Lincoln's willingness to stick with the "drunken butcher" whose determination to exploit his numerical advantage-- ie send many tens of thousands of Union troops to their deaths, again and again-- allowed him to triumph in the western campaigns and turn the tide of what until then was a complete disaster.
Get a little perspective, LH. Rummy's done an OK job overall. Axing him would make the NYT editors happy and do f***-all to help us crush the ba'athist deadenders at this point.
#57
But your comments lack solutions and thus amount to little more than screaming "The coach sucks!"
Oh c'mon. Then we should never criticize anybody because for all intents and purposes we can never propose meaningful solutions with the information we have, or better yet, the information we don't have. We are simply judging results. And if they suck, well, we can surely admit that they suck, can't we?
Posted by: Rafael ||
12/14/2004 15:52 Comments ||
Top||
#58
haha. LH.. glad to dump Rummy in exchange for the pres himself, are we??
Do you just not care how tranparent your political cheap shots are, or do you really believe that you accomplishing something?
#59
Rafael..no, fire away. I think criticism is a good thing. But..
we have a war going on and good men are dying to keep us safe here at home. I just think it is shameful to use the war as a tool to advance personal politics.
#60
the prez himself - honestly, i saw the thing on WS, and was impressed by it. the dig at the prez was only a side benefit. The point remains unanswered of course.
it is shameful to use the war as a tool to advance personal politics
2004 victory
Its not shameful to hold political leaders accountable for the results of their policies. Thats democracy. If Bush succeeds I will give credit where it is due. If not, not. AS lex says, things are mixed. Maybe, net - net Rummy is good. Maybe screwing up Iraq will mean less in the long run than winning in Afghanistan. Maybe the consequences of scaring the bejeezus out of everyone (the turning of Libya, the discovery of the AQ Khan network) etc will prove more important than having 130,000 plus US troops tied up in Iraq for months or years longer than was necessary. Maybe reforming the Pentagon and the military into something leaner and meaner will be worth an Iraq thats less of a model than it might have been - honest folks, we wont know that this year. We may not know it this decade.
But the attitude that forbids any acknowledgement of whats wrong to the point that folks can blame the current state of Iraq (blame culture, anyone?) on the lack of sufficient Shia vigilantism, is well .....
I think it will take a generation, say 25 years, to bring stability to the Muslim world. Both the insurgency in Iraq and Islamacist jihadis are something we need to deal with, but they themselves are not necessarily aware of all of the forces shaping their actions nor are they in control of them. Things like the possibly predictable but maybe not actions of a Sistani ... all of these are in play in Iraq. So are larger forces yet, including oil, weather, the election here in the US, our success so far in intercepting attempted attacks on US and UK soil since 9/11.
To put it in the jargon of my academic research, movements like the insurgency and political events in Iraq are "complex adaptive systems". Short form: the behaviors we see are due to many many interactions and decisions by many players at the local level. In CAS it is very difficult to predict the system-level behaviors even if you know the tendencies of each of the players.
There ARE techniques for modeling CAS and they are being used to good effect wrt the insurgency now that we have some data to work with. Those models helped capture Saddam and shaped the Fallujah offensive. but they are not a panacea either.
My perspective is that Rumsfeld has the bigger picture right on some key ideas. First, the transformation of our military along multiple lines (technology, unit rotation, the rise of Special Ops, an increased emphasis during training on cultural and language skills). Second, that too large a US presence in Iraq will inevitably have the effect of removing from the Iraqis responsiblity and incentives for creating a representative government and stable country for themselves. And third, that a confrontation such as the one going on in Iraq right now is both inevitable and also a very delicate balancing act, given the larger desire to maintain an effective power base in Iraq and Afghanistan for some time to come.
Finding the right level of involvement would IMO be very difficult even not taking into account the hostile actions of e.g. the insurgents, not to mention neighbors like Syria and Iran.
For that reason, it's important to consider what a Plan might or might not entail. For instance, those who criticize Rumsfeld for not sending more troops at the start are conspicuously silent re: the geopolitical impacts and perverse incentives involved if we just pulled troops overnight from places like Germany and So. Korea for that purpose.
I tend to cut Rumsfeld a fair amount of slack, as I do Bush, because I believe that a) their overal assessments of the threats we face are accurate and b) their general strategies are right. There will be mistakes at the more tactical level but those must be put into perspective.
And here's why that's so important to do: we *will* be facing these sorts of amorphous, difficult conflicts (whether shooting or otherwise) for a couple of decades. We had better get good at rewarding leaders who get the main things right, or we will find ourselves electing leaders who do all the wrong things flawlessly.
#62
honestly, i saw the thing on WS, and was impressed by it. the dig at the prez was only a side benefit.
lol!
Well to be honest, I'm glad you found that quote too. Cause now that you have a better quote, that directly blames the president, I guess we can all stop trying to this silly game of trying to pull down Rumsfeld's pants in order to embare-ass the president.
#63
We had better get good at rewarding leaders who get the main things right, or we will find ourselves electing leaders who do all the wrong things flawlessly.
rkb...very well said! All of it. And on that fine note, I must say goodbye.
#64
2b - im glad you think you can read my mind. I dont want the president to be embarassed, i want him to succeed. Especially in the WOT, which i see as a life and death matter.
RKB - if there had been more US troops, the Iraqis would have gotten lazy and not built their own force? The welfare reform approach to force sizing? Dont make em dependent. But if their had been a smaller insurgency they could have also gotten lazy. So the insurgency was a GOOD thing, in that it meant that the Iraqis have to build their own force? Oh, but wait, for the first few months, when we needed more US forces, there WAS no iraqi force, or at least no effective one. Were only getting an effective Iraqi force NOW. And its completely dependent on the US for training and development (Well, were finally getting some Nato help, I suppose). Sorry this makes no sense. The welfare reform argument may have made sense in Afghanistan, where there WAS a local fighting force, which might have sat on its hands if there were too many US troops. But not Iraq, where the only local force was the peshmerga, which we have not used effectively until the last couple of months.
As for there not being troops available in april 2003 - well I would suggest that given that the WOT started on Sept 2001, Rummy had plenty of time to increase force size. In fact the Army was asking for larger forces from the beginning of the admin.
#65
rkb, excellent comment. I concur on the key points, and furthermore strenuously agree that they ARE the key points.
My comment on vigilantism possibly having some benefit was merely a common sense observation that if some non-Sunnis were spontaneously doing some of the harvesting/intimidation of the bad guys, we'd have less to do and probably have fewer losses. Of course I wasn't suggesting such actions had been part of any plan, or that the lack of major score-settling explained the state of affairs.
LH, you've completely lost me with your last comment, yet I suspect I'm not the one who's lost. rkb's point about dependency is a very salient one in Iraq, as anyone who's followed things knows. Your focus on numbers of troops suggests you're not serious about this discussion, since there were obviously far more troops than needed at the outset, and probably still are today. The challenge is what to do with the troops, not whether you have a few more or less.
I mourn and am enraged at the losses we and friendly Iraqis are taking, yet I understand that things are going pretty well. The "insurgency" has no program and no chance, about 95% of the nightmare scenarios never developed, and we have a leadership that is both smart and tough enough to persevere in what is clearly a winning strategy.
#66
In CAS it is very difficult to predict the system-level behaviors even if you know the tendencies of each of the players
What rkb said. It is simply ridiculous to suggest that anyone could have grasped all the factors, contingencies, unintended consequences etc of this war. Rumsfeld's done a remarkable job in many areas-- remember all the howling lsat March re Rumsfeld's insistence on a lightning strike, relatively lightly armed strategy? and a so-so job in other areas. Perhaps more troops would have helped, but I seriously doubt it. It's a long tough slog regardless of the path taken and it's wishful thinking to presume otherwise.
I'm beginning to think that keeping Rumsfeld on as a whipping boy for the anti-Bush brigades is yet one more example of Bush's supreme political cunning. Keep 'em distracted. Let 'em vent. Keep 'em away from any substantive policy matters where they might come up with a valid, well thought-out alternative.
#69
One of the first few comments on this thread expressed disappointment at the lack of vigilante action. (I have not read all of the comments yet). However, let me assure you that personal scores ARE being settled.I would not be surprised to see another 1000 or more Saddamites exterminated in 2005.
#70
#50 what standard? The insurgency, in mid 2003, is said to have numbered about 5000 men, and was under pressure as we rounded up Baathists. I expected that it would DECLINE from there, and that by now Iraq would be quiet. That wed be well into physical reconstruction, and that there would be zero cities where contractors couldnt go. Failing that, that at least the insurgency would be no worse than it was in summer 2003
Based on what's happened since, and what information has come out about the pre-war planning and external support for the terrorists, that's not a reasonable expectation. Remember, the enemy gets to make their input into how things turn out.
Rantburg has an archive. Point me to where in 2003 you said that things would still be like this 20 months after the invasion.
I can't. Because I'm pretty sure I didn't. I don't even understand why you'd make such a demand. I may have said I thought it would be better, but so what? I've never claimed to be prescient.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
12/14/2004 17:51 Comments ||
Top||
#71
I hear a few soldiers sharted their pants in the field, and didn't have extras. Rumsfeld should be held personally responsible, or something, and all of his undies should be confiscated.
Yeah, right LH, that's exactly what we need. Ultimate accountability and infallibility. Gotta be perfect, don't they?
BAGHDAD (AFP) - An aide to Iraq's most-wanted man, Jordanian Islamist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi has been killed in Iraq and two others captured, Prime Minister Iyad Allawi said. "I have been told that an individual by the name of Hassan Ibrahim Farhan Zyda from Zarqawi's group has been killed and that two of his deputies have been arrested," Allawi told the interim national assembly. The two detainees were suspected to have "beheaded innocents," he added, in a possible reference to the murders of hostages that have been claimed by Zarqawi's Al-Qaeda linked group.
Posted by: Steve ||
12/14/2004 9:43:26 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Wow. With all the aides he's had, the red tape must of been horrific. We've certainly killed or captured a bunch. Kind of like a boy in every port.
#7
Leaddog, please don't bold everything. It makes your posts very hard to read. Harder still to take seriously, if you don't think your words will stand on their own, 'k?
#8
Hopefully, the Iraquis will be able to obtain useful information out of the two captures on the whereabouts of Zarquawi. Hope the endgame is near as lex says.
INVESTIGATORS had discovered a new mass grave in Iraq, near the city of Sulaimaniya in the autonomous Kurdish region of northern Iraq, interim Prime Minister Iyad Allawi said today. Mr Allawi told Iraq's National Council that the grave, which may contain around 500 bodies, had been discovered today, but gave no further details.
Posted by: tipper ||
12/14/2004 8:42:55 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"Michael Moore declined comment"
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/14/2004 8:43 Comments ||
Top||
#2
sigh. I don't ever want to get immune to the horror and loss this represents.
#4
These must have been those children playing in a field and flying kites that Mike Al-Moore found (oops, right - he didn't have the courage to actually go to Iraq - my bad..). We haven't found them anywhere else.
I'm sure the MSM will be all over this just as they finish with soddomizing the prison scandal dead horse and the marine-shooting an 'innocent' terrorists scandal and any other scandals which come along. Tell you what -- I'll call you in about 5 years.... (dont call me).....
#6
I used to believe that we would have been much better off to divide Iraq up into three states, Shia, Sunni and Kurd. But now I think I was wrong. Alone, they would not have been safe from Turkish aggression to remove the threat Turkey perceives from an Independent Kurdistan. Yippy The Dogman would have, IMHO, seen opportunity to eliminate "The Kurd Problem" and to grab those oil fields. I now believe the Kurds are much stronger and better off within the larger republic of Iraq.
#7
Wouldn't be just Turkey, 2B. Figure Syria to the West taking Sunni portions under 'protection' and what part of Iraq's south that the Saudis didn't control, becoming an Iranian version of Lebanon.
Afghan security forces have captured fugitive Taleban leader Mullah Omar's former security chief, officials say. Mullah Naqibullah Toor is reported to have been picked up with another Taleban commander on Monday in the southern city of Kandahar. Provincial government spokesman Khalid Pashtun confirmed the arrests. Mullah Naqibullah Toor was unarmed when he was arrested late on Monday after a tip-off, Kandahar officials say. He headed Mullah Omar's household security when the Taleban controlled Afghanistan, but the BBC's Rahimullah Yusufzai, a long-time watcher of the Taleban, says it is not clear how important a role he has played in recent years.
Oh, he's probably harmless. Just let him go...
Afghan officials accuse Mullah Naqibullah Toor of a string of attacks, and say his arrest is highly significant. "It will definitely help to reduce bomb attacks and insurgency in Kandahar because he was the main person organising these kind of attacks," Kandahar police chief Khan Mohammed told AFP news agency.
Wouldn't that statement tend to negate the previous statement that it's not clear how important a role he's played in recent years? (Who the hell writes this stuff?)
Officials say Mullah Naqibullah Toor was seized along with a second man, Mullah Qayyum Angar, an alleged Taleban commander accused of involvement in recent violence in the province. The Taleban were ousted in late 2001 when US forces invaded Afghanistan following attacks on the World Trade Centre in New York and the Pentagon in Washington. The Taleban had given sanctuary to Osama Bin Laden and members of his al-Qaeda network, who carried out are accused of carrying out the attacks.
Posted by: Paul Moloney ||
12/14/2004 7:37:49 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
the "Escape Motorcycle of Doomâ¢" in the shop?
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/14/2004 8:27 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Join "Mullah Naqibullah Tours " for a grand
tour of Gitmo.
Posted by: Elder of Zion ||
12/14/2004 9:20 Comments ||
Top||
#3
"but the BBCâs Rahimullah Yusufzai, a long-time watcher of the Taleban, says it is not clear how important a role he has played in recent years."
Whether or not he has played an important role, he was involved in the attacks on 9/11. It's time to bring out the pliers & meat hooks and make this PIG squeal. If doesn't want to talk, then a hollow point at close range will suffice. Bottom line is that he plots against and hates the U.S.
BTW, I love the way the BBC is making excuses for this terrorist.
I wouldn't be surprised if Beebs stays on this story to make sure he is not tortured. I believe the Egyptian introgaters are in order here. Let's stop being PC and call the the Taliban for who they are, "Paki's".
#4
1. hats off to the afghan "federales" who made the catch. Theyve come a long way. (insert generic praise of our brave muslim allies here)
2. Hats off to US spec ops, intell, etc who certainly provided the the info behind the catch
3. Lets hope he leads mullah omar Hisself. That would be a big catch, and would probably help in the Osama hunt.
#8
Long flowing robes + chain drive = Darwin Award
Posted by: Steve ||
12/14/2004 10:55 Comments ||
Top||
#9
More details, they bagged three of them: Acting on a tip from an informant, Afghanistan provincial forces arrested two top Taliban figures in southern Afghanistan, The Telegraph reported Tuesday. Captured were the personal security chief for Taliban leader Mullah Mohammad Omar,Toor Mullah Naqibullah Khan, and Mullah Angar, another senior official with the fundamentalist Islamic group. The pair were riding in a van between Arghandab and Kandahar, and police reported also seizing "a satellite phone and some important documents."
Posted by: Steve ||
12/14/2004 14:43 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Captured were the personal security chief for Taliban leader Mullah Mohammad Omar,Toor Mullah Naqibullah Khan, and Mullah Angar, another senior official with the fundamentalist
Three? I thought Toor Mullah Naqibullah Khan WAS the personal security chief for Taliban leader Mullah Mohammad Omar. Thus making a pair, along with the other guy.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
A SYDNEY man accused of planning terrorist attacks in Australia had maps of the national electricity network, aerial photographs of defence installations and instructions for making explosives, a court was told today. Architect 
A Palestinian security worker was shot and killed Tuesday by Israeli troops in the southern Gaza town of Rafah, Palestinian medical officials said. 
