PARIS (Rooters) - France on Thursday denied a report that it is setting aside roughly 1,000 troops for possible deployment in Afghanistan, a move that would be a boon to the United States, which wants NATO countries to do more there.
Weekly newspaper Le Canard Enchaine reported on Wednesday that President Nicolas Sarkozy had asked the head of the armed forces to keep a batallion of about 1,000 men at NATO's disposal so that they could be dispatched to Afghanistan if needed.
Asked about the report, Defense Ministry spokesman Laurent Teisseire said France had a batallion in NATO's strategic reserve, and there had been no change regarding its status. "There is no evolution," he told a weekly news conference. "I confirm that there is indeed something called the strategic reserve and that France contributes a batallion to this strategic reserve," he added.
France has roughly 1,000 troops in Afghanistan, where it is part of the NATO-led International Security and Assistance Force. Paris said in June that around 150 extra soldiers would be sent to train Afghan forces, and a further 50 such troops have been pledged since then.
Washington says it wants more NATO countries to get involved in the heavy fighting against Taliban forces in the south and east of the country, a task done mainly by U.S., British, Dutch and Canadian troops.
Sarkozy said after meeting U.S. President George W. Bush last week that he was looking at how best to help in Afghanistan. "We are thinking about the best way to help the emergence of a democratic Afghanistan," Sarkozy said at a joint news conference with Bush on November 7. "Is it by reinforcing the training effort to lay the foundations of a modern Afghan state? Is it by providing other military means? We are discussing it," he added.
Asked on Thursday whether France was looking to increase its military presence in Afghanistan, Sarkozy's spokesman David Martinon said it was too soon to tell. "As you know, important measures have been taken regarding the reinforcement of the French presence on the ground, so let's let these three teams establish themselves before adding any more," he told a news conference, referring to the 150 extra troops, which are due to be deployed before the end of the year.
#1
My understanding was that the French were some of those that refused to go into the combat zones in the Stan. However, recently, I'm been seeing words like these in reports by whomever post them here in the burg:
A French air force M2000 Mirage provided a show of force for a coalition convoy near Qalat. The pilots then provided overwatch for the convoy and reconnaissance of suspicious activity in the area.
My question, has the French Air Force always been there, or is this a recent thing since Sarkozy?
RIGA, Xinhua -- The Latvian government Tuesday agreed to expand its aid to Afghanistan and increase its peacekeeping troops in the war-torn country. According to a government-approved statute, Latvia will continue to participate in the NATO peacekeeping mission for the next six years.
Latvia will expand its Afghan mission by increasing the current 95 troops stationed in the country to 150-200, and will provide arms and ammunition worth around 3.1 million U.S. dollars, says the statute drafted by Latvia's defence ministry. It is necessary to continue to provide funds for Afghanistan's reconstruction, as well as material and technical assistance in other fields besides the military, it says.
Latvia began sending troops to Afghanistan to join the peacekeeping mission in February 2003, and rotates its contingent every six months.
The US military has begun making contingency plans in case its supply lines to US forces in Afghanistan are disrupted by the continuing turmoil in Pakistan, a Pentagon spokesman said on Wednesday.
Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell also said the US had no concerns about the security of Pakistans nuclear weapons. We believe they are under appropriate control, he said. But he said the supply lines were a real area of concern for our commanders in Afghanistan because 75 percent of all our supplies in Afghanistan flow through or over Afghanistan, including 40 percent of all fuel.
Morrell had no details on alternate routes being looked at by the US military. The US in 2005 lost access to a base in Uzbekistan, which offered a land route into Afghanistan from the north.
This article starring:
Geoff Morrell
Posted by: Fred ||
11/15/2007 00:06 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
#1
WAFF.com Poster > Iran allows US to have air corridor over Afghanistan???
ION, TOPIX > RUSSIA MAY GIVE UP INF + RUSSIA TO DEPLOY NUCLEAR MISSLES IN BELARUS. Iskanders SS-26 Tactical missles, near POLAND, conventional-nuclear warheads, and which can be improved for longer distance and greater warhead explosive yield. Russ plans to field several Iskander units and face 'em towards NATO.
#2
What I would have liked to see back in 2001-02 was the construction of a super highway from Karachi to Bagram. I mean, 6 lanes of pavements each direction with 3 lanes of gravel shoulder and a line of rail in the middle to go each direction, perhaps a pipeline while at it - you know something an astronaught could snapshop, then a 50 yard cleared zone on either side with dragon teeth and other anti-vehicle structures to prevent vehicle entry everywhere but for a select few entry/exit ramps (every 90-120 miles? except for spaced military bases); refueling stations built as islands in the road.
Hire local labor and buy local supplies - dig down a small mountain for gravel for display purposes - and equip them with basic road buildinging equipment and send them to clear, follow with US military road building units also setting up bases along the way with UAVs so thick the kite festival would look like a day of making mud pies, then followed by a trusted contracter/screened employees to lay the pavement and final touches. Build it alongside the Indus river (for river control and as a moat) as close to Islamabad as possible before cutting across and buiding a tunnel right through their precious mountains into Afghanistan (counter-mining would be an issue). To the farmers: we are going to destroy your crops after this season with sprays and evil curses - join the highway crew and make a good living for 3 years then retire. The vanguard would be locals, with adequate protection of course but ambush and opposition would be against their brothers (and sisters? if it could be pulled off).
Rebuild the docks at Karachi to accommidate civilian vessals but designed to host current and near future Navy and Marine ships. Offshore pumps and unloading stations.
At an average of 3 miles per day it could be done in less than a year. The ability to land and move military units right through the heartland would be intimidating militarily but also the increase in trade straight into Afghanistan would provide an alternative to the dope trade; a marvel bringing modern trade and ways right into the bandits nest (gift the construction equipment to Afghan upon completion and there would be a highly skilled workforce by then to use it). There would be many problems to overcome (oh, you don't like that idea perv? well you are either with us or against us, imagine the money you and cronies will make; besides if it works well you will have control of the highway ceded to you after x# of years depending on behavior a la Panama Canal)(designing leapfrogging cement and rubble stations, pavement and tunneling machines)(hey NATO nations you want to be on board with this because you would not be participating in combat operations, you would be safeguarding the highway which would eventually be bringing EU goods, such as construction equipment and personnelle, into and tradables out of thus securing the future of the oppressed Afghan people but also helping to open a new market)(imaginine the number of Fawaffle Houses and such opening up at those entry/exit points) but that is what this - indeed any - conflict is about.
Roman baby, yeah!
#3
Okay, sounds good enough. I'll get the RFP out to you first thing.
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
11/15/2007 13:29 Comments ||
Top||
#4
OK, swks, have you prepared an Environmental Impact Statement? I am sure this project will negatively affect (fill in the blank). Plus, after requisite bribes were paid, the cost would exceed the Gross Global National Product.
#5
Glenmore : )
Lets see (gets pen)..
Environmental Impact Statement: Precision JDAM, artillery, and Napalm effects can be referenced. 'Bad Ju Ju' leaflets would be printed with soy ink on swine vellum - biodegradable and edible if flash fried and seasoned.
This project will negatively effect__the traditional indiginous customs of the Taliban causing a dramatic loss of their heiritage of hubristic domination theories.
Bribary costs would be offset by seizing dope materials and selling them wholesale to phamacutical companies, and well as the discontinuation of general pakistan aid packages to be diverted to the local tribal bribal ethos (that is, rather than just giving the government money make the locals work for it - perv can get his with a negotiated set port/transport tax).
UNITED NATIONS (AP) - A joint peacekeeping force will not be prepared to take over in Darfur by the start of 2008 unless Sudan quickly accepts units from outside Africa and contributing countries offer critical equipment, a top U.N. official warned Wednesday. Jean-Marie Guehenno said the world could face a grim choice: either delay the takeover or start the deployment with an ill-equipped force that may not be able to protect its own peacekeepers, let alone civilians.
Send in the mighty Uruguayans!
The United Nations has already been wrangling with Sudan over the U.N.-African Union mission for over a year while the conflict in Darfur has raged. More than 200,000 people have died since fighting broke out in 2003, and the peace process suffered a setback last month when key rebels boycotted talks in Libya.
Guehenno, the U.N. undersecretary-general for peacekeeping operations, expressed frustration with Sudan for resisting critical contributions from Thailand, Nepal and Nordic countries. But he also criticized U.N. member countries for failing to offer helicopters and other equipment. "If those issues are not addressed very shortly, it means the mission in 2008 will not be able to make the difference that the world wants to it to make and that it may become a failure," Guehenno told reporters after briefing the Security Council.
Let the French, Germans and Belgians give to this one.
The 26,000-member force still needs 18 transport helicopter and 6 support light helicopters crucial for sending reinforcements swiftly in emergencies, he said.
How many Belgian heavy barbers?
U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon is in constant talks with defense ministers around the world, but has yet to receive concrete offers, Guehenno said. "I think it tells a sad story on the commitment for Darfur, frankly," he said. He acknowledged that Sudan's reluctance to accept contributions from outside Africa may be deterring governments from pledging help.
Oh, think so? Peacekeeping troops having to worry that the central gummint troops might plug them does tend to lower enthusiasm for the mission.
The joint force is to takeover from a beleaguered 7,000-member African Union mission. But Sudan has yet to approve a list of contributing countries despite concessions to its demands that the force be predominantly African.
Diplomats said the Security Council would soon reconvene to discuss what to do about the problem, but offered no indications about possible steps.
Time for another strongly-worded condemnation.
Posted by: Steve White ||
11/15/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Sudan
Went to a gunfight with a knife again, eh? I would have figured they'd know better by now.
Is it just me, or does anyone else feel like the UN is already setting up a handy excuse for why they will utterly fail (what else?) in the next six months or so?
Perhaps a better title might be "Prepare for the usual result in six months", or maybe "We hope enough people believe this crap and we won't have to go out of business". Or perhaps "Our yearly all-expenses-paid week-long post-mortem party convention to be held in the French Riviera this summer".
Snip, duplicate. Always check for duplicates before posting. AoS.
Posted by: gorb ||
11/15/2007 03:55 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Sudan
#1
Eeyore, the old grey Donkey, stood by the side of the stream, and looked at himself in the water.
"Pathetic," he said. "That's what it is. Pathetic."
He turned and walked slowly down the stream for twenty yards, splashed across it, and walked slowly back on the other side. Then he looked at himself in the water again.
"As I thought," he said. "No better from this side. But nobody minds. Nobody cares. Pathetic, that's what it is."
The point is that no matter what he says or what he does it will be pathetic no matter where you stand.
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
11/15/2007 13:34 Comments ||
Top||
#2
UNCONFIRMED - RUMORMILLNEWS > HAL TURNER SHOW: 80,000 US Reserve Troops are being called up, receiving training for IRAN ATTACK-INVASION come JANUARY 2008???
#3
That theme is the same for the USA phil_b...
keep hammering the message wherever youse gos.
We here in the USA should put emphasis on Brain Power and Cultural Compatibility when selecting our new immigrants.
It's Common F*cking Sense folks!! There are Two Criteria I think will help the most.
Go back to our previous emphasis on Europeans from the first half of the 20th century!
It's a good thing! We could use that large dollop of Familiarity and Harmony that infused us with the same European root stock our forefathers grew from.
Instead of the uneducated poor, guaranteed barrio bound, you know the groups we are flooded with now.
select the best brightest emphsis on Europeans[non-muslime], Russians, Jews, Indians [non-muslime], Mongolians, Japanese, the Schmart folks...
Posted by: Red Dawg ||
11/15/2007 18:42 Comments ||
Top||
Britain will spend 400 million pounds abroad on fighting radicalisation, Prime Minister Gordon Brown said on Wednesday, adding that for the first time, Britain would sponsor events in Pakistan to counter extremist propaganda.
Are they going to do something to counter BBC?
He said Britain would boost security at stations, airports and other potential targets to protect them against car bombings and counter a growing threat from Islamist militants. Crowded locations in Britain such as restaurants, theatres, cinemas, schools and hospitals would be given instructions on how to improve security arrangements, Brown told parliament as he unveiled new security proposals.
This article starring:
Gordon Brown
Posted by: Fred ||
11/15/2007 00:01 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under: Global Jihad
#1
Are they going to do something to counter BBC?
Exactly. The point is not to spend more money it is to spend less money. Less money arming our enemies, less money floating their regimes on a sea of oil we gave them for no good reason, less money taking in and housing their trouble-making rabble and their extended families and above all less money paying the salaries of treasonous academics and journalists.
#1
I am concerned also, that there isn't enough of it.
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
11/15/2007 13:38 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Here's a novel idea. Ban any *form* of Islam that advocates violence, does not respect other religions or no religion, or women, requires the wearing of concealing clothing, or in any way supports factions of Islam that do.
This ban should be made immediately after the *creation* of a new "reformed Islam", by a secret committee of non-Muslim religious experts. This new *form* of Islam accepts any Muslim to its ranks that swears to, and abides by this creed.
The riots that would follow would be an opportunity to round up and deport all rioters as "hostile aliens", giving them free, one-way passage to any non-European Muslim nation that would accept them.
Those Muslims remaining behind could either embrace "reformed" Islam, not practice their religion, or leave.
Otherwise, other versions of Islam would be under the same constraints as is neo-Nazism in Germany, forbidden under penalty of law.
#3
Way to go, 'moose. Whatever resolution is reached, it will likely be something similar to the ban you cite or simple wholesale slaughter. It's time for Muslims to begin choosing which. In its present form, Islam has long ago worn out its welcome on this earth.
Chancellor Angela Merkel's government is to press specialist German engineering companies to reduce business in Iran, following pressure from Washington for Berlin to act more forcefully against Tehran's nuclear ambitions.
Berlin is to target companies where Iran is reliant on German technology, legislators said on Wednesday, in a bid to prevent Tehran from being able to tap alternative suppliers in China or elsewhere.
The action - seen in Berlin as additional to the new sanctions being considered in the United Nations Security Council - is being co-ordinated with European partners, with the governments in France, Britain, Spain, Italy and Austria expected to take similar action towards their exporters, the legislators said.
Companies specialising in machine engineering, tunnelling, construction of power plants, and support work for the oil and gas sectors are to be pressed by the Economics Ministry or other government departments to reduce or end business in Iran. Government officials refused to comment and it was unclear on Wednesday night which specific companies would be targeted.
Around 1,700 German companies do business with Iran, according to one estimate, and Germany is the biggest exporter to the Islamic republic, with exports worth $5.1bn last year. Michael Tockuss, former head of the German-Iranian chamber of commerce in Iran, said last December that two-thirds of Iranian industrial companies rely on German products. Experts in Iran have also said that Tehran is reliant on German technology.
Germany has previously opposed bilateral or European sanctions on Iran, but this week Ms Merkel appeared keen to bend to US pressure if it increased the likelihood of a non-military solution to the Iran stand-off.
On Saturday she told US president George Bush at a meeting at his Texas ranch that Germany "will further restrict our trade [with Iran]". On Monday she said after a meeting in Berlin with Nicolas Sarkozy, French president, that "we have discussed with each other, and with other European countries, that we each want to reduce to some extent our trade with Iran".
Germany has refused to stop all export guarantees to German companies with ties to Iran, but has cut them significantly over the last two years.
The Norwegian Public Service Pension Fund (SPK) has ruled against compensating a Norwegian soldier for lasting injuries suffered during service in Afghanistan. The injury suffered while in a vehicle during a military operation in Afghanistan is not an occupational injury according to the SPK, newspaper Dagbladet reports.
The SPK reasons that the operation in Afghanistan falls within the job description and that this work involves the risk of injury - in other words, that is not covered by insurance since injury risk is part of the daily routine. "This is by definition a waiver of responsibility. If you are stupid enough to go on an international operation, you have to take the hit yourself. If you are injured, you don't get compensation," the former soldier told Dagbladet's web site.
Negotiation leader Ragnar Dahl of the Joint Officers Union believes that the case will hurt the recruitment of personnel for international assignments. "The Norwegian Public Service Pension Fund line means that people taking part in various operations have incredibly poor insurance coverage. I must say this frightens me," Dahl told Dagbladet.
The compensation rejection will now be tested in the courts.
#1
But if you are a jihadi immigrant/refugee/undocumented worker doing the jobs Norwegians won't do then you are entitled to life-long compensation for yourself and your entire extended family. A Taliban would have a better chance getting compensation from Norway.
#2
Wel, not for long, Excalibur, if things continue as they do, there won't be any Norway soon. Sweden is on the same path to national suicide.
Icelanders are isolated from the troublez of sick Europe, but they too seem to be on the way out, considering their suicide rates and populatio implosion. Within Scandinavia, only Danes seem to have some life left in them.
#7
Good dhimmi. Your muzzie overlords will be pleased to learn the filthy infidel crusader will not be compensated for injury incurred in the line of duty while in the House of Islam.
Stick a fork in 'em. Norway is done.
Posted by: Mark Z ||
11/15/2007 12:01 Comments ||
Top||
#8
silly infidel - you can't go out after dark and we won't let the oyster man deliver to your neighborhood..not halal
Right now, the most hospitable European country for Islamic radicals is Belgium, where leftist politicians shield the Moslem community from too much scrutiny, in return for votes. This is turning out to be a dangerous game, as one would expect. The growing Islamic radical activity in Belgium is causing the majority of Belgians to question the way counter-terrorism operations are being conducted.
Posted by: Chuck ||
11/15/2007 00:57 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under: Global Jihad
#1
LUCIANNE > Miliband - EU MUST BE READY [willing]TO USE MILITARY FORCE/POWER, to defend the Continent and suppor any EU agenda.
Muslim forces anesthetist from operating room
De Stem, Netherlands
Belgian anesthetist has filed a complaint against a Muslim who blocked him from entering the operating theatre where his wife was to undergo emergency surgery.
The woman was operated with the male doctor shouting instructions from a hallway to a female nurse.
Doctor Philippe Becx from Bree, Belgium, was called to the hospital in the middle of the night because a woman had to undergo an emergeny caesarean section.
However, her husband blocked the door and demanded a female anesthetist. The latter was unavailable.
After a two-hour discussion proved fruitless, an imam was summoned. The imam permitted the doctor to apply an epidural injection, but only if the woman was fully covered with only a small area of skin showing.
During the surgery itself, performed by a female gynecologist, the anesthetist was to remain in the hallway. Through a door that was slightly ajar, he shouted instructions to a nurse who was monitoring the anesthesia.
According the hospitals directors, the doctor acted with admirable understanding. He would have been in his right to have the man removed by police.
#7
Deja vu all over again. Our friend in Malmo, Sweden who is an OB-GYN has spoken of similar experiences there. But she does call the police. The Belgian medical community has to come up with some cajones real quick or their going to die trying.
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
11/15/2007 13:45 Comments ||
Top||
#8
The Belgian Muslim woman wants to reject hospital personnel and procedures, fine; she can go home and have the baby on her own. Women have done it successfully for millenia - John Edwards notwithstanding. And if she's one of the unsuccessful ones, she'll at least die clean (so to speak.)
#9
Anyone have any doubts that the Leftists, world wide will need to be interned, or otherwise restricted for our own good? It would be for the children.
Posted by: George Speremp4240 ||
11/15/2007 17:56 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Hubby should have been first in line for the needle. Problem solved.
ANKARA, Turkey - The United States began sharing intelligence with Turkey about positions of Kurdish rebels on Wednesday, NTV television quoted the foreign minister as saying.
Turkey -- which has massed tens of thousands of troops along the Iraqi border -- had been waiting for the United States to start sharing reAl time intelligence, sometimes within minutes, to stage a cross-border offensive against Kurdish rebel hideouts in northern Iraq. 'The share of real time intelligence began as of today, private NTV television quoted Foreign Minister Ali Babacan as saying. This is very important.
Babacan said the government, which has been authorized by Parliament to order an incursion into Iraq if needed, would 'no doubt fulfill its responsibility, NTV said.
Posted by: Steve White ||
11/15/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
Posted by: Bobby ||
11/15/2007 12:58 Comments ||
Top||
#3
To quote Forrest Gump, "Stupid is as stupid does." The Federal Government should shut off all federal funds to places like Olympia and then enjoy the outraged howls from the city council.
Watch for slanted horseshit galore on top complete sympathy and raging co-dependence from the f*cking Alphabet Media.
/puke
Posted by: Red Dawg ||
11/15/2007 13:09 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Round them up and have them shot for sabotage during war time. Then if the city doesn't crack down on this type of shit, cut off all federal funds. Watch the city bankrupt overnight.
Posted by: Rob Crawford ||
11/15/2007 17:41 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Blood. Boiling.
That video (the chickenshit video operator sure didn't get in line with the measlies, must not have wanted to use the corric lens) - the protesters looked cold. Perhaps a fire rig with some class A foam could be utilized.
#9
Round them up and have them shot for sabotage during war time.
The problem is that no one in Washington has the courage to declare war, be it on Saudi Arabia, Pakistan or any of our other so-called Islamic "allies". Until that happens, expect more of this crap. When war finally is declared, there's a whole lot of these turds gonna get squished.
Theres new information about the young Lebanese woman who pleaded guilty Tuesday to charges she lied about her background to get jobs at the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Central Intelligence Agency.
Current and former intelligence officials tell NBC News that Nada Nadim Prouty had a much bigger role than officials at the FBI and CIA first acknowledged. In fact, Prouty was assigned to the CIAs most sensitive post, Baghdad, and participated in the debriefings of high-ranking al-Qaida detainees.
A former colleague called Prouty among the best and the brightest CIA officers in Baghdad. She was so exceptional, agree officials of both agencies, the CIA recruited her from the FBI to work for the agencys clandestine service at Langley, Va., in June 2003. She then went to Iraq for the agency to work with the U.S. military on the debriefings. Early on, she was an active agent in the debriefings, said one former intelligence official. It was more than translation.
On Tuesday, she pleaded guilty to conspiracy to illegally search FBI computers for classified information about Hezbollah and to naturalization fraud a sham marriage to a former husband just to become a U.S. citizen. As the Justice Department noted, she needed to be a U.S. citizen to join the CIA and thus had defrauded the agency. (Prouty first came to the United States on a student visa in 1989 and after overstaying her visa paid an acquaintance in Detroit to marry her so she could get U.S. citizenship. She later divorced the man.)
Although no one claims Prouty worked for Hezbollah, her computer searches led U.S. officials to question her. She looked up files on her sister, Elfat El Aouar, and brother-in-law, Talal Khalil Chahine, both of whom attended a Hezbollah fundraiser in Lebanon alongside Hezbollah spiritual leader Sheikh Muhammad Hussein Fadlallah, designated by the United States as a terrorist.
Chahine is currently a fugitive believed to be in Lebanon. He, along with Proutys sister and others, was charged in 2006 by the U.S. attorney in Detroit with tax evasion in connection with a scheme to conceal more than $20 million in cash received by La Shish restaurants in suburban Detroit and to route funds to persons in Lebanon with links to Hezbollah.
Moreover, as she was moving between agencies in 2003, Prouty accessed the FBIs Automated Case Support system and obtained information on investigations into Hezbollah being conducted by the FBIs Detroit Field Office.
National security experts say the combination of her being at one of the CIAs most sensitive stations, working on some of the agencies' most sensitive cases, and having her relatives under investigation put her in a vulnerable position and make the potential damage she could have caused far greater than either the FBI or CIA has admitted.
Roger Cressey, an NBC News analyst and former deputy director of counterterrorism at the National Security Council, says it never should have happened. The issue is that she had access to very sensitive information regardless of where she was in the hierarchy, said Cressey. Because she was able to interview high-value targets, that put her in a very unique position. So if she therefore shared that information, it could have cost major damage to our nations security.
A senior U.S. official familiar with the case says there is no evidence she was a spy Boggles the mind that anybody could say something so stupid. And on my tax dollar.
and noted that the CIA and FBI have a good record in prosecuting spies, particularly in their own agencies. He says her role was limited.
This is not John Dillinger or Reilly Ace of Spies, said the official. She took an illegal shortcut to the American dream, then she made some inappropriate computer searches. At this point, there is no reason to treat this as a counterintelligence case. There is NO allegation she had ever ties to Hezbollah. You cant let suspicions get ahead of the facts.
Prouty has agreed to submit to lie detector tests as the CIA assesses the damage.
Posted by: ed ||
11/15/2007 11:04 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
This is not John Dillinger or Reilly Ace of Spies, said the official. She took an illegal shortcut to the American dream, then she made some inappropriate computer searches. At this point, there is no reason to treat this as a counterintelligence case. There is NO allegation she had ever ties to Hezbollah. You cant let suspicions get ahead of the facts.
So who said this, Ted Kennedy? Is this her way of "coming out of the shadows"?
#1
Watch these guys come back and one of them runs for Governor of Arkansas and then is elected President in 2020.
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
11/15/2007 13:24 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Before Thursday's ruling, the Federal Court of Appeal last rejected the claims by Hinzman and Hughey, who crossed the border rather than face possible court martial and imprisonment for refusing to serve in a war they say they morally oppose and is illegal because it was not sanctioned by the United Nations.
Here's an idea. Let's saddle them up and send them over to that UN sanctioned thing in Darfur.
Happy now, boys?
#3
REDDIT > CANADIAN COURTS: CANADA IS AMERICA'S BITCH. Threader isn't happy about Canada's decision on WOT war dodgers. Plus, RUMORMILLNEWS > JOIN THE REVOLUTION TO SAVE THE USA/US CONSTITUTION.
Hamas believes Sen. Hillary Clinton, if elected president in 2008, will end President Bush's "unlimited military and diplomatic support for Israel" and adapt a more "evenhanded" approach toward the Palestinians, says the group's top political adviser.
Speaking yesterday with WND Jerusalem bureau chief Aaron Klein, Ahmed Yousuf, the top aide to Ismail Haniyeh, the Hamas leader in Gaza and deposed prime minister of the Hamas-led Palestinian government, said in recorded comments the group heard from "many Americans" that if the Democrats take the White House next year they will implement "drastic changes" to U.S. foreign policy and relations with the Palestinians.
"I do believe Miss Clinton will have a more balanced policy when it comes to how to solve the Arab-Israeli conflict," Yousuf told Klein. "And I don't think she is going to give to the Israelis this unlimited military and diplomatic support that they are actually enjoying now; so the future politics in the region will [see] a very drastic change when it comes to how to handle the Palestinian question."
Yousuf, speaking in English, said he hopes Clinton will "follow in the footsteps" of her husband's administration when it comes to dealing with the Palestinians.
And in Arabic, he said, "Death to the infidels! We shall have Dire Revenge!"
#2
"I do believe Miss Clinton will have a more balanced policy when it comes to how to solve the Arab-Israeli conflict,"
Dangling the eternal bait for yet another effing gullible chump. Can it be any more clear that there will never be a peaceful solution to the Arab-Israeli "conflict"? Genocide is genocide and the Arabs want nothing less. The Palestinians will never accept any form of coexistence so the entire question is moot. There is no way to solve a conflict that one side does not want resolved, save by permanently maiming the recalcitrant party's military capability.
I remain quite confident that none of this deters Hillaryor any other politician, for that matterfrom lusting after the sure-fire Nobel Prize that such an achievement would surely garner. In reality, the Nobel Committee is a serious culprit in this tiresome Kabuki act. By awarding stooges like Arafat a Peace Prize for his role in this farce, they lend credence to the thought that there will ever be any sort of peaceful coexistence between Islam and Israel. Israel will only find peace once Islam has been dismembered and scattered to the four winds.
#5
The Arafat apologists have never forgiven Clinton for saying the failure of Camp David was Arafats fault.
I doubt any of the guys quoted has really thought this through.
In fact Ive seen Hillary attacked by Obama supporters for her statements in support of Israel, and of course shes being attacked more recently by Obama for her position on Iran.
As for Clinton vs Bush, what did Clinton do but hold a summit, which is precisely what Bush is doing.
Prior to this, Bush didnt get involved, cause with Arafat leading an intifadah, and later with Abbas trying to negotiate with a Hamas that was running the govt in the PA, there was no Pal partner. Despite Dem attacks on Bush for staying aloof from the peace process, he had no choice.
Evidently some of these terrorists have not understood the situation Bush was in, and have picked up some of the mistake memes attacking Bush. If they had not, they could hardly consider Bush worse for the Pals than Bill Clinton.
WASHINGTON (AP) - House Democrats pushed through a $50 billion bill for the Iraq war Wednesday night that would require President Bush to start bringing troops home in coming weeks with a goal of ending combat by December 2008. The legislation, passed 218-203, was largely a symbolic jab at Bush, who already has begun reducing force levels but opposes a congressionally mandated timetable on the war. And while the measure was unlikely to pass in the Senate - let alone overcome a presidential veto - Democrats said they wanted voters to know they weren't giving up.
More importantly, they need the Kos kiddies to keep sending donations.
``The fact is, we can no longer sustain the military deployment in Iraq,'' said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. ``Staying there in the manner that we are there is no longer an option.''
The White House pledged to veto the bill, and Republicans said they would back the president. ``These votes, like the dozens of previous failed votes, put the interests of radical interest groups ahead of the needs of our military and their mission,'' an administration statement said.
The bill represents about a quarter of the $196 billion Bush requested for combat operations in the 2008 budget year, which began Oct 1. It would compel an unspecified number of troops to leave Iraq within 30 days, a requirement Bush is already on track to meet as he begins in coming weeks to reverse the 30,000 troop buildup he ordered earlier this year. It also sets a goal of ending combat by Dec. 15, 2008, and states that money included in the bill should be used to redeploy troops and ``not to extend or prolong the war.'' The measure also would set government-wide standards on interrogation, effectively barring the CIA from using such harsh techniques as waterboarding, which simulates drowning.
Makes you wonder why the Dhimmis don't just put forward a simple, single-purpose 'no waterboarding' bill. Unless they don't think they could pass such a bill even as they have a majority.
The bill was on shaky ground this week, after some liberal Democrats said they were concerned it was too soft and would not force Bush to end the war. Conservative Democrats said they thought it went too far and would tie the hands of military commanders. The bill's prospects brightened somewhat after three leading anti-war Democrats announced they would support it. California Reps. Lynn Woolsey, Barbara Lee and Maxine Waters said they had agreed to swing behind it because the bill explicitly states the money should be used to bring troops home.
But still uncertain the bill would pass, Pelosi on Wednesday delayed a vote by several hours while she met with supporters and asked them to help her round up votes.
Attagirl, Nance, real courage there.
Fifteen Democrats broke ranks and joined 188 Republicans in opposing the measure. Four Republicans joined 214 Democrats in supporting it.
Republicans fought bitterly against the timetable in the bill, as well as the restrictions on interrogations. Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio, his party's leader, said the bill would lead to ``nothing other than failure.''
Hours before the scheduled vote, the White House dispatched Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to Capitol Hill to brief lawmakers on Iraq. In one closed-door meeting, Gates urged a group of senators not to support the bill. He said the same lawmakers who criticized Pentagon civilians for previously ignoring the advice of its uniformed generals were asking him to ignore them now, according to an official who attended the meeting.
Similar legislation has passed repeatedly along party lines in the House only to sink in the Senate, where Democrats hold a razor-thin majority and 60 votes are needed to overcome procedural hurdles. It is expected that if the measure fails in the Senate, Democrats will not consider Bush's war spending request until next year. Democrats say the military won't need the money until then and the Pentagon can transfer money from less urgent accounts or from spending set aside for the last three months of this year.
I'd start with the pork contracts in the districts of various Dhimmis, like Pelosi, Obey and Murtha.
The Pentagon says moving money around is a bureaucratic nightmare that costs more in the long run. And if taken to the extreme, the military would eventually have to freeze contracts or lay off civilian workers to ensure troops in combat have what they need.
Lay off the ones in Dhimmi districts first if that's what it comes down to.
In another provision that drew White House opposition, the House bill would require that all government interrogators rely on the Army Field Manual. The manual is based on Geneva Convention standards and was updated in 2006 to specifically prohibit the military from using aggressive interrogation techniques, such as waterboarding.
The White House said in its statement that the Geneva Conventions shouldn't apply to ``captured terrorists who openly flout that law.''
The bill also would require the president to certify to Congress 15 days in advance that a unit being sent into combat is ``fully mission capable,'' although Bush could waive that requirement if necessary.
Thus putting the onus on Bush, rather than the Congress, which is where the Dhimmis want it.
Posted by: Steve White ||
11/15/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under: Iraqi Insurgency
#1
Of course, you all know that you can not e-mail Speaker Pelosi unless you are a constitutent of her district. But at her website, looking for a way to contact her, I found this:
If you are not a constituent of the 8th district of California, and would like to e-mail Congresswoman Pelosi in her role as Speaker of the House, please email her at AmericanVoices@mail.house.gov
I will.
Posted by: Bobby ||
11/15/2007 6:40 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Nice work, Nancy. No hippie piss on the lawn this weekend. Slows down that Sheehan juggernaut too...
#6
The US Army is claiming that raising Army manpower levels to pre-determined, budgeted new levels may not be good enough anymore to support US policies + new mil burdens in the GWOT. Army will suppor new level only within the narrow context that the USG-Congress had already approved the increase - reserves Service right to evaluate and demand more.
The problem of suicide among veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan has recently been in the news, with the Department of Veteran Affairs promising to beef up its mental health services in response. Veterans of previous conflicts continue to have problems as well, and the VA has estimated that a total of 5000 suicides among veterans can be expected this year.
However, CBS News has now completed a five-month study of death records for 2004-05 which shows that the actual figures are "much higher" than those reported by the VA. Across the total US veteran population of 25 million, CBS found that suicide rates were more than twice as high as for non-veterans (according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, suicide accounted for 32,439 deaths in 2004).
CBS spoke to the families of several veterans who killed themselves after returning from Iraq. "The war didn't end for him when he came home," said the mother of one soldier. "I think he was being tormented and tortured by his experiences."
Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA) told CBS, "That's a lot of young men and women who've gone to fight for us who've come home and found themselves that lost."
#1
This story, despite coming from CBS News, does not sound totally implausible to me. And if something can be done to help, then it should.
That said, given that it comes from CBS News, I question whether the statistics are actually being interpreted honestly - are the comparison samples properly controlled for other variables, like sex, age, geographic origin, etc?
(Aside: my cousin was a Vietnam vet, and committed suicide, but given other circumstances of his life, predating his service, I doubt the two had anything to do with each other.)
#2
This article smells. A year or two ago, suicide rates of Iraq veterans were trumped up by the press. It was finally determined that Iraq vets had a lower suicide rate than the national average once gender and age were taken into account
Posted by: ed ||
11/15/2007 12:03 Comments ||
Top||
#3
LIES! DAMNED LIES!
It's another example of "How to Lie with Statistics". Details here:
http://www.bloggernews.net/111684
#4
Vets from what wars, what age, a detail please. How did they come up with the trend line? What was the amount last year? How far back in years are the stats taken? Was the 25 million subtracted from the total population when comparing to national? Stats and Polls are crap.
#5
What about the MSM contribution to the trend? They certainly ain't helping morale!
On a sadder note, my next door neighbor is a Lt. Colonel in the Army Reserve, and lost his son last year to suicide, after he returned from Afghanistan.
I don't even have a clue how to express my sorrow.
Posted by: Bobby ||
11/15/2007 13:02 Comments ||
Top||
#6
swksvolFF, visit the link I posted (#3) and you'll see EXACTLY how CBS produced this statistical scam.
#7
Bobby, just telling him you don't even have a clue how to express it will suffice. I have a friend who lost a son and harbored a grudge for years with another coworker who never even mentioned it afterwards.
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
11/15/2007 13:51 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Thanks for the link Darrell - only had a few moments before lunch and entered my standard made fill-in-blank contest to a publicized stat story. Jack is Back! has a good link also.
It is a serious issue well known to those directly involved with/related to troops - crap stat stories like this are not made to help but to attract readers IMO.
#11
Army Releases Suicide Data, Promotes Prevention Programs Aug. 16, 2007 Though its number of suicides increased in 2006, the Armys suicide rate still is lower than the rate for the same age and gender group in the overall U.S. population, according to a report the service released today.
Posted by: ed ||
11/15/2007 16:18 Comments ||
Top||
With Congress' approval of a new attorney general who refused to describe waterboarding as torture, the U.S. Army has sent out a message to its leaders repeating that the interrogation technique is prohibited in the military. The service issued the Nov. 6 message "to eliminate any confusion that may have arisen as a result of recent public discourse on the subject."
The U.S. military formally banned waterboarding as an interrogation technique in September 2006.
However, at Senate confirmation hearings last month, then-attorney general nominee Michael Mukasey repeatedly refused to say whether he considers waterboarding a form of torture, as claimed by an unlikely coalition of military officials, doctors and humans rights groups.
The service issued a "strategic communication hot topic" alert to its senior leaders two days before the Senate confirmed Mukasey, asking them to make sure every soldier, family member and Army civilian employee understands the ban on waterboarding. Mukasey was sworn in Nov. 9. "The U.S. Army strictly prohibits the use of waterboarding during intelligence investigations by any of its members. It is specifically prohibited by Field Manual 2-22.3 and is not a sanctioned interrogation technique in any training manual or any instructions to soldiers in the field," the statement says.
Waterboarding is a harsh interrogation technique that involves strapping down a prisoner, covering his mouth with plastic or cloth and pouring water over his face. The prisoner quickly begins to inhale water, causing the sensation of drowning.
Mukasey's refusal to define waterboarding as torture came in response to senators' questions about the CIA's alleged use of the technique. It is believed the CIA used the technique on three prisoners, the last time in 2003. CIA Director Gen. Michael Hayden prohibited the use of waterboarding in CIA interrogations in 2006.
If Mukasey confirmed that waterboarding is torture, it could put the CIA interrogators and possibly the chain of command above them in legal peril. Torture is illegal both under U.S. and international law.
Mukasey couldn't confirm it because waterboarding isn't illegal at this time, and Mukasey doesn't make law -- he enforces it. If the Congress wants to make waterboarding illegal (and it should), it need only pass a law.
As Mukasey equivocated on Capitol Hill, saying he would have to know the specific details surrounding the interrogation to judge whether it was torture, Defense Secretary Robert Gates reiterated the military ban at a press conference on Nov. 1. "The fact is it's not a permitted technique under the Army Field Manual, and therefore, no member of the U.S. military is allowed to do it, period," he said.
Gates would not say whether he believes the banned technique amounts to torture. "I am not going to wander into that legal thicket," he said.
#3
Torture is the use of pain with the proffer of pain avoidance, as a means to either acquire information or confessions.
Water boarding uses discomfort - admittedly extreme - and creates an artificial sensation of near-death to induce feelings of helplessness. The object - and objectification of terrorists is legitimate - expects a slow death, and does what he has to do to remain alive.
Frankly I would prefer immediate pain to slow death. I agree that military professionals should not use Waterboarding; however, I would allow selective use of same by intelligence services, as long as the target is a known terrorist.
For the record, reports suggest that no mere terror suspect has been waterboarded. Yet that is what is portrayed in Hollywood's deceitful film, "Rendition."
I'm fully aware of the problems returning soldiers have in getting help. PTSD is a serious issue for any soldier, and we damned well ought to have whatever resources it takes to help our people. At the same time, you can't go AWOL just because you want to.
SYRACUSE, N.Y. (AP) - A soldier who served two combat tours in Iraq was arrested Wednesday for leaving the Army without permission more than a year ago to seek treatment for post traumatic stress disorder.
At a news conference hours before his arrest, Sgt. Brad Gaskins said he left the base in August 2006 because the Army wasn't providing effective treatment after he was diagnosed with PTSD and severe depression. "They just don't have the resources to handle it, but that's not my fault," Gaskins said.
Tod Ensign, an attorney with Citizen Soldier, a GI rights group that is representing Gaskins, said the case is part of a "coming tsunami" of mental health problems involving Iraq and Afghanistan vets. Last month, the Veterans Administration said more than 100,000 soldiers were being treated for mental health problems, and half of those specifically for PTSD.
Citizen Soldier is, as you might guess from the lack of information and the benign-sounding name, not really a self-help group for GIs. It's one of usual leftie-front groups with all the usual grievances. I looked at their web site and found all the usual signs. Sad thing, they're going to use Mr. Gaskins until he's no longer useful or convenient, then they're going to walk away from him.
Gaskins, 25, of East Orange, N.J., was taken into custody at a Watertown cafe by civilian police officers from Fort Drum and two local police officers, Ensign said. The lawyer said he had been on the phone with military prosecutors working out the details of Gaskins' surrender when the soldier was arrested. Fort Drum spokesman Ben Abel said after a soldier is AWOL for more than 30 days he becomes classified as a deserter and a federal arrest warrant is issued. He said he was unaware of the specifics of Gaskins' case and declined to comment on it.
An eight-year Army veteran, Gaskins served two tours in Iraq and a peacekeeping tour in Kosovo. He said his mental health began deteriorating during his second tour in Iraq, which began in June 2005, when his job was to conduct road searches and locate improvised explosive devices. He said after returning to Fort Drum in February 2006, he began suffering flashbacks and nightmares, headaches, sleeplessness, weight loss and mood swings that took him from depression to irrational rages. Military doctors sent him to the Samaritan Medical Center in Watertown, where he spent two weeks and was diagnosed with PTSD. When he later asked his commanders about returning to Samaritan, they told him it would delay any chance he had at obtaining a medical release, Gaskins said.
At the time, the Fort Drum mental health facility had a staff of a dozen caring for approximately 17,000 troops, Ensign said. The base has expanded its mental health facility staff to 31 in the past year, with plans to add another 17 staffers, Abel said. "Is there a need for more - yes," he said.
Gaskins said that because he had been unable to get proper help, he requested a two-week leave and went home to New Jersey, where he has been living since. Gaskins said he hasn't been able to get a job because of his PTSD, and that he and his wife have separated. He said he has only supervised visitation rights with his two children.
Posted by: Steve White ||
11/15/2007 00:04 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[10 views]
Top|| File under: Iraqi Insurgency
#1
...I had a couple AWOLs among my troops while I was in, and if the civilians arrested this guy, he was a deserter.
In wartime.
Under the UCMJ, that is a capital offense, and really should be dealt with as such.
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
11/15/2007 7:22 Comments ||
Top||
#2
If ex-JAG were still trolling here, I'm sure we could get the latest legal advice, but iirc, as long as he kept his mil ID, the precedent is that it is AWOL and not desertion, because it shows intent of returning [at some time].
If there is any med eval that indicates a verifiable case of PTSD or symptoms, he'll be handled administratively, not judicially, unless there is information that the media didn't get or dropped that indicates other criminal issues.
#4
I don't think he would have received much sympathy in any of our wars prior to Vietnam. As a grunt, the only cases of PTSD I've come across are guys who were Sh%tbags to begin with, and usually, they have no reason to claim PTSD, because due to their lack of performance, they get left behind to guard gear when the bad stuff goes down anyway. Just my take.
#5
Mr. Wife's uncle clearly suffered from PTSD -- he recently started going to counselling at his local VA hospital. He was a Green Beret in Viet Nam, even re-upped for a second stint. At one point he was, I believe, the 13th strongest man over there.
I don't think he was left behind to guard the gear. Not if the photo album Mr. Wife saw as a child is any indication.
Brain SPECT imaging (click on "anxiety disorder") apparently reveals a significantly different firing pattern for anxiety disorders such as PTSD than for normal brain function. It's been around for a long time -- WWI vets were said to be suffering from shell shock, but the symptoms are the same.
#6
I have had to deal with PTSD. But its no reason to desert. Thats dishonorable.
If the guy truly did desert over this and never intended coming back but has some conditions, then they should hande his case administratively, and give him a other than honorable discharge for desertion, but mark it so that he is eligible for VA care for his mental problems.
If its direct cause and he did have some intent of coming back, then give him a company grade article 15 (maybe yank a stripe), restrict him to quarters at the mental care unit, and try to make him into a soldier again with treatment. You don't leave the unit and go AWOL then desert in wartime without consequences.
If the problems are serious, like clinical depression, schizo (preexisting), then "chapter" him out with a general discharge (not honorable) and hand him to the VA. He can apply to have the discharge upgraded and likely will get approved after a year or two.
IF he bailed, and had no intent of coming back, and he was only dealign with PTSD and no other issues, then Dishonorable Discharge for Desertion after some stockade time during which he gets some counseling while in confinement. Mark the DD to allow him help for PTSD and nothing else at the VA.
#8
But its no reason to desert. Thats dishonorable.
For what it's worth (not much -- I've never soldiered, nor has Mr. Wife), I quite agree. Although, what should someone with PTSD do if whoever is responsible for such things does not help him get the treatment he needs?
#9
You keep banging pots and pans together until someone does the job. Call your Congressman - that usually brings immediate pain to the whole chain of command.
SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico (AP) - An operations manual for the U.S. prison at Guantanamo that was mysteriously posted on the Internet is out of date but still should not have been released to the public, the military said Wednesday.
The 238-page detention camp "SOP," a military abbreviation for Standard Operating Procedures, that was posted anonymously from the Internet was from 2003 and was not a classified document, said Army Lt. Col. Ed Bush, a Guantanamo spokesman. Many changes in operating procedure have been made since then, he said.
Still, the manual - which outlines procedures for such things as how often a prisoner's cell should be searched and the proper way to handle a Muslim detainee who has died - was not meant to be public, Bush said. "It had been designated 'For Official Use Only' and for many reasons, to include the safety and security of U.S. service members, was not intended for mass distribution," he said.
The manual was posted in recent days and was being reviewed Wednesday by lawyers for detainees and human rights groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union and Center for Constitutional Rights. ACLU lawyer Jamil Dakwar said he was particularly concerned about a section that said some detainees should have no contact with representatives from the International Committee of the Red Cross and another section outlining how dogs should be used to patrol the camp.
Since when does the ACLU have a position on patrol dogs? If a Muslim prisoner doesn't want to encounter a dog, he should behave himself and stay in the areas where he's told. Seems obvious to me.
The military says all detainees now have access to Red Cross representatives and that dogs are no longer used at Guantanamo. Detention operations ... have evolved significantly since 2003," Bush said.
Posted by: Steve White ||
11/15/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under: al-Qaeda
Posted by: Flavirong Wheaper3794 ||
11/15/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under: Global Jihad
#1
Yes, it's hard to maintain a full court press on your anti-war media message when the casualties move further back and are less frequent in the coverage then that from the road carnage and murders/drive-bys happening in your own neighborhood.
#2
I remember back then, the Army Times was loaded with obits. It was mostly of combination of two things: tougher PT standards that had 35-45 year old, smoking and drinking guys dropping like flies of heart attacks during runs; and the jeep, which could tip over in a tight, 15 mph turn. Trying to drive a jeep like a car was asking for it.
I about got killed twice in a jeep, by two different drivers, on the same day. I decided after that, that the only jeep I wanted to ride in was driven by somebody over 30 who had a happy family life and wanted to waste time to get out of onerous duty.
The third big category was DWI fatalities. One First Sergeant I knew was in the habit, at the final formation before a weekend or holiday, of ordering his company not to "ride in any vehicle (pron. vee-hickle) or aircraft that is going to crash."
As far as PT goes, there was an unwritten rule that if you had any physical event with more than 500 people (battalion) involved, you had better have an ambulance and stretcher team handy and expect to use it.
#3
Does this really say much except the conversion to a volunteer army and the rampup to really take on the Soviets in the early 80s was very, very dangerous.
The U.S. military is examining different contingencies for supplying American troops in Afghanistan if supplies can no longer be shipped through Pakistan, Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell said today. (Video)
Morrell said at a Pentagon news conference that the supply line issue is a very real area of concern for our commanders in Afghanistan, because 75 percent of all of our supplies for our troops in Afghanistan flow either through or over Pakistan. This includes about 40 percent of the fuel shipped to U.S. forces, which comes directly from Pakistani refineries. No ammunition goes through Pakistan, the press secretary said.
Morrell could not say what the contingency plans are, but was confident troops would be supplied if a Plan B were needed. We are a can-do operation, he said. Theyll figure out a way to get it done if it needs to get done.
Morrell said Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates visited Capitol Hill today in part to urge lawmakers to quickly pass the supplemental war spending bill.
As of yesterday the Department of Defense has had to move money from base budget accounts so that we can continue to support essential operations such as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, he said. The Army is in a particularly precarious situation. Absent extraordinary measures, it would run out of money by mid-February, so quick congressional action is needed.
#4
Son of a gun. That line is roughly the one between Baghdad and Herat. Whodathunkit.
Posted by: Steve White ||
11/15/2007 16:15 Comments ||
Top||
#5
For that matter, 3dc, one could go from Chabahar to Herat, splitting off Sistan va Baluchestan in the process. The Baluchis would reunite with their Pak Baluchi cousins, and they'd be grateful to us (for a minute).
Posted by: Steve White ||
11/15/2007 16:16 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Well, maybe that would revive John Baluchi's career, if nothing else would.
#7
Yeah, Steve, I was looking at that line but the roads look a little thin on the maps. Likely filled with opium smugglers and what not. It does have promise though.
Seabees or Engineers might be able to make something of it.
#8
U.S. Examines Plan B for Supplying Troops in Afghanistan.. Southern Route
Shortest overland route from the Arabian Sea to A-stan cuts through Baluchistan. We've already had dealings & contact with the Baluchs so it's entirely possible to cut new deals and Trade the Baluchs for "escorts" visa-vi supply routes.
These maps are very useful for Plan B --->>Supplying Troops in Afghanistan Ethnographic map A-stan
Detained opposition leader Benazir Bhutto said Thursday she hopes to form a national unity government to replace President Gen. Pervez Musharraf ahead of elections, and is contacting other opposition parties to get them on board. "I am talking to the other opposition parties to find out whether they are in a position to come together," she told The Associated Press in a telephone interview from the home in Lahore where she is under house arrest. "We need to see whether we can come up with an interim government of national consensus to whom power can be handed."
Bhutto left open the question of whether she, or someone else, would lead such a government, saying it was a subject that would have to be worked out in negotiations. But she said a consensus must be reached that would ensure an orderly transition should Musharraf agree to step down.
In an Associated Press interview Wednesday, Musharraf said he expects to quit as chief of the army by the end of November, heralding a return to civilian rule. However, he rejected Western pressure to quickly end the emergency.
Bhutto made the comments shortly after a visit from Bryan Hunt, the U.S. consul general in the eastern Pakistani city. Hunt was allowed to cross the barricades and heavy police cordon surrounding the house where Bhutto has been confined since Tuesday. He emerged an hour later and said he had told Bhutto of Washington's wish for Musharraf to lift the state of emergency, quit as army chief and free opposition politicians and the media. "We need to move as rapidly as possible to have free and fair elections held on time," Hunt said.
Bhutto said Washington is concerned about a power vacuum in Pakistan, and wanted to know if she would still consider working with Musharraf. "He came to find out whether I could work with Gen. Musharraf, and I told him that it was very difficult to work with someone who instead of taking us toward democracy took us back toward military dictatorship," she said.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/15/2007 08:49 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
#1
The Islamofacist are going used and discard her, like they do to all the other women. What a foul!
Posted by: ANA ||
11/15/2007 9:09 Comments ||
Top||
Top military authorities have said that some of the people released under the Supreme Court (SC)s orders are attacking security forces and targeting national installations.
We have irrefutable evidence that the people who were set free under the SCs directives are attacking security forces, targeting national installations and worsening the situation, senior military officials said while briefing senior media representatives at GHQ Rawalpindi on Wednesday.
They said the army is countering extremism, adding that it has been reactivated in the Tribal Areas and Swat from October 23. They said 100,000 troops are participating in the war against militancy in Balochistan, the Tribal Areas and other parts of the NWFP. They said the armys primary target was Baitullah Mehsood and vowed that the army would arrest or kill him. They said the army was cooperating and coordinating with international forces engaged in Afghanistan.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/15/2007 00:10 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under: Taliban
#1
Pak courts are Islamized, so I don't doubt they are releasing known jihadis for political purposes.
Do you trust unelected judges? Here's why I don't. In 1804 SCOTUS ordered reinstatement of a public official, Marbury, in spite of both a lack of legislative power to do so, and the fact that President Madison backed the sacking (Madison was named as a respondent party in the petition). SCOTUS decided the case on nominal principle: "remedy" must follow a finding of "right." Sounds good, except for one thing: Marbury was a fellow judge; SCOTUS looked after their own.
Fast forward to 1857, when Dred Scot petitioned for freedom as an escaped slave on free territory. With SCOTUS in the hands of Chief Justice Taney's slaver-interest group, they found that remedy was moot. Why? Because, on the issue of rights they upheld the colonial view that the Negro was: "an inferior sort of being." The Dred Scot case led the South to invoke all-state settled law, as a basis of their right to re-constitute (secede) on maintenance of the slave-trade. While hundreds of thousands of bodies piled up in the Civil War, the "Emancipation Proclamation" undid an atrocity committed by an unelected and unprincipled judiciary.
More cause to question reliance on judges: in the eighties a mini scandal arose when it came out that former SCOTUS clerks were citing sole authorship of high court cases, some of which were of extreme importance. SCOTUS geezers were in no position to deny said claims. Although the favor (who won) of SCOTUS determinations are decided by said geezers, the text of what is cited is usually written by Law Clerks in their early twenties. SCOTUS is not a fount of wisdom. I would reduce their power to an advisory role.
Exiled former premier Nawaz Sharif said on Wednesday that he was ready to work with Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) Chairwoman Benazir Bhutto against President General Pervez Musharraf. We are ready to set aside our differences with the PPP, and work for the return of a democratic rule, Sharif said via telephone from Saudi Arabia. Asked whether there was any possibility of a broad opposition coalition against Musharraf, he said, Its the need of the hour. This joint effort should be carried forward with sincerity and steadfastness. It should be focused on achieving the objectives and targets. There should be no room for flexibility and slackness. Nawaz said, It has been our stand throughout that we are against any extra-constitutional action and coup detats. He said the opposition should focus on reinstating judges Musharraf had dismissed.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/15/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
#1
Nawaz is a has-been. The PPP will unite with Mushy's PML(Q) and could form a national unity government. Morticia and her klepto husband aren't that happy about an honest judiciary forming in Pakistan.
President General Pervez Musharraf said he would step down as army chief after a Supreme Court ruling on the validity of his re-election, which he said was expected by the end of November.
But wasn't he going to step down... Oh, never mind.
Speaking with The Associated Press, he said he would then begin a new presidential term as a civilian, warning that the country risks chaos if he gave into opposition demands to resign. He said he had originally planned to quit as army chief by Thursday, when his presidential mandate expires, but was forced to delay until a court ruling on his re-election. All those who are blunt enough to tell me to my face what the reality is, all of them think, yes, it will lead the country to chaos if I do not handle the political environment now with me remaining as the president, he said.
"No one else will do."
The president said he does not believe Al Qaeda has rebuilt in Pakistan, adding that the army remains absolutely loyal to him.
"I'd bet my life on it. In fact, I do."
He accused former premier Benazir Bhutto of fueling political turmoil, and rejected Western pressure to lift emergency rule. He also dismissed a threat from the Commonwealth to suspend Pakistan unless the emergency is lifted by November 22. I take decisions in Pakistans interest and I dont take ultimatums from anyone, he said.
"Nobuddy tells Perv what to do!"
Posted by: Fred ||
11/15/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
Tensions between Iraq and Turkey have subsided and relations are improving, asserted Iraqi President Jalal Talabani in an interview with a Kuwaiti newspaper Wednesday. The crisis with Turkey has passed, he told the daily Alrai in an interview, without further explanation, even as Turkish troops remain massed at the Iraqi borders over the presence of anti-Turkish rebel fighters in the Iraqi Kurdish regions mountainous hinterland.
His remark came as Turkish helicopters swooped into Iraqi territory Tuesday firing on villages in renewed efforts to dislodge the fighters of the Kurdistan Workers Party, or PKK, which has been fighting for autonomy for Turkish Kurds since 1984. Talabani, who was set to begin a four-day visit to Kuwait on Wednesday, said conditions in war torn Iraq have improved, but more efforts at national reconciliation were needed to make the situation last.
Security situation: The situation is better now. Most of the areas are safe and many Iraqis are fighting terrorists, the president said. He said Iraqis now see members of Al Qaeda as a danger to them. He cautioned, however, that the execution of Sultan Hashim al-Tai, a Saddam Hussein-era defence chief sentenced to death for his role in Anfal campaigns against the Kurds in the 1980s, would harm the general atmosphere and impede reconciliation efforts.
Talabani also warned against the premature withdrawal of US forces, saying it could lead to the fracturing of the country. When we complete building our armed forces and police, coalition forces can pull out, maybe at the end of next year, he told Alrai.
But such a withdrawal now and under current circumstances could lead to a sort of civil war, and will not result in stability but into the partitioning of Iraq into more than three entities. he added. The US military says attacks around Iraq have fallen to their lowest level since February 2006, and US military deaths are on the decline partly due to a surge of nearly 30,000 troops sent by President George W Bush earlier this year.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/15/2007 00:15 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
This is very, VERY troubling.
even as Turkish troops remain massed at the Iraqi borders over the presence of anti-Turkish rebel fighters in the Iraqi Kurdish regions mountainous hinterland.
Why? Because it has been swept under the radar of national news and that means it is BIG news. This is a very disturbing development.
No problem with our taking refugees as long as they're vetted, with preference to those who actively helped us. But let's work on the improving conditions in Iraq, so that these refugees can feel safe returning home.
DAMASCUS, Syria (AP) - Thousands of Iraqi refugees in Syria have applied for resettlement in the United States, a U.N. refugee agency official in the Syrian capital said Wednesday. Laurens Jolles, head of the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees office in Damascus, said the office has registered some 140,000 Iraqi refugees in Syria, where the bulk of Iraqis fled to escape the violence in their war-ravaged homeland.
Jolles told The Associated Press that 6,700 of them applied this year for resettlement, including 4,662 seeking to resettle in the U.S. A U.S. State Department spokesman in Washington declined immediate comment.
The U.S. plans to admit 12,000 Iraqi refugees in a year's time. But only 450 were let in last month - less than half the monthly average needed to reach the target. The Bush administration has conceded a moral obligation to assist Iraqi refugees, but the slow pace of admissions has sparked criticism from refugee advocates and lawmakers.
The blame has been placed on bureaucratic slowdowns - including bickering between the State Department, which is in charge of refugee resettlement, and Homeland Security, which must screen all refugees for admission. Those from Iraq are subjected to additional security checks because of fears of terrorism.
Posted by: Steve White ||
11/15/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under: Iraqi Insurgency
#1
Then the next generation starts believing the BS about supposed US targeting of Iraqi civilians, and security goes to hell. Reminder: religious minorities are persecuted in 100% of Muslim majority countries, yet they want special treatment in the West.
#2
No problem with our taking refugees as long as they're vetted, with preference to those who actively helped us. But let's work on the improving conditions in Iraq, so that these refugees can feel safe returning home.
NoMajor problem taking refugees from Iraq, an Islamic country btw. :)
The religious, political, cultural, and tribal social order of Iraq is so antithetical with the ideal here anyway.. personal freedom, independence of thought, and liberties taken with personal responsibility to our communities and society..
The "citizens" of Iraq were raised with an National Gubmint acting like the Big Jefe in their lives.
The demoC'raps will probably love to promise them Cradle to Grave hand outs for votes, just like Saddam did.
Posted by: Red Dawg ||
11/15/2007 7:49 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Interpreters [who are not double agents] and those who've stuck their necks out for our guys, along with immediate family, of course.
The rest can do it the old fashion way, through Mexico City.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/15/2007 00:16 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under: Palestinian Authority
#1
Free all prisoners, give up the whole West Bank, no Temple Mount, the Western Wall's Islamic, and the PA won't formally recognize Israel as a Jewish State and all refugees get to return.
The United States said on Wednesday that a date is now set for the US sponsored meeting in Annapolis to mediate the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. "We now have a date, but I'm not prepared to share it yet", said State Department Sean McCormack but hinted it would be sometime before December 21 and most likely not in November.
You're such a tease, Sean.
McCormack said that invitations could be extended in "a variety of different means" such as "oral invitations or via cable".
"I am not sure that there's going to be a formal printing process" he added.
Translated, that means: "We don't want to give Islamic Jihad or Al-Aksa Martyrs too much of a head start."
McCormack said the Israeli and Palestinian sides are drafting the joint document ahead of the anticipated meeting in Annapolis, Maryland and not the United States. "It is not done yet; they still have work to do. They are still continuing to meet on it", he added.
McCormack said that Washington expects to be a document ready and a progress made in the first phase of the roadmap. "But I fully expect that they are going to be prepared for Annapolis and that part of being prepared means coming to agreement on the document", he added noting that the Israeli Prime Minister Olmert and the Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas "were going to try to make as much progress as they possibly could before the end of President Bush's term in office".
"We are offering our counsel and advice where it might be needed, where we think it is wise to offer it", he added.
McCormack described the Annapolis meeting as "the starting point" for the negotiation track to address all of the core issues in the conflict. "In the run-up to Annapolis we would hope that there is some progress on the practical on-the-ground measures", he concluded.
"We're OK with 2 States. It just that they have to both be Palestinian."
Annapolis will be the crappiest piece of crap in Craptown. How many Kazzams will Hamas and Islamic Jihad let fly on that day?
Saeb Erekat said Wednesday that the Palestinians would never formally recognize Israel as the Jewish state
Opposition from Palestinian leaders to Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's demand that the Palestinians recognize Israel as the "state of the Jews" intensified on Wednesday, threatening to derail the planned post-Annapolis attempt to renew substantive peace negotiations.
Nonetheless, Olmert - who reiterated on Wednesday that there could be no such talks without explicit Palestinian recognition of Israel as the Jewish state - is confident that the Annapolis joint statement of principles, which is still being negotiated between the two sides, will satisfactorily resolve the issue, The Jerusalem Post was told.
Veteran Palestinian peace negotiator Saeb Erekat said Wednesday that the Palestinians would never formally recognize Israel as the Jewish state. "Israel can define itself however it sees fit; and if it wishes to call itself a Jewish state, so be it," he said in an interview with the satellite station Al-Arabiya. "But the Palestinians will never acknowledge Israel's Jewish identity."
In similar vein, Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salaam Fayad was quoted by Israel Radio as rejecting Olmert's demand as unacceptable.
On Tuesday, PLO Executive Committee member Yasser Abed Rabbo also dismissed the demand, stating: "It is only a Zionist party that deals with Israel as a Jewish state, and we did not request to be a member of the international Zionism movement."
Olmert has stressed repeatedly in recent days that there can be no negotiations whatsoever between Israel and the Palestinians until they acknowledge that Israel is the state of the Jewish people, and that he has made this clear to both the Palestinians and the Americans in the run-up to the Annapolis summit scheduled for the end of the month.
According to a statement issued by the Prime Minister's Office on Wednesday, following Olmert's meeting with visiting European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana, Olmert "referred to Israel's insistence that the foundation for the post-Annapolis negotiations with the Palestinians be recognition of the State of Israel as the state of the Jewish people." Olmert, the statement went on, "made it clear that from Israel's point of view, this issue is not subject to either negotiations or discussion."
Earlier this week, Olmert declared that "Israel is a state of the Jewish people. Whoever does not accept this cannot hold any negotiations with me."
Despite the apparently irreconcilable positions on this issue, the Post was told by well-placed sources on Wednesday night that Olmert believed the Annapolis joint statement would address the matter satisfactorily, enabling negotiations to proceed.
Israel, the sources pointed out, came into being in the wake of the UN General Assembly's approval 60 years ago of the partition of Palestine "into Jewish and Arab states." The entire basis of the two-state solution, they added, revolved around the notion of the Jewish state, Israel, alongside the Arab state sought by the Palestinians, Palestine.
"We are not the Israeli nation," the sources said. "We're the Jewish state."
A lot of negative rhetoric was being heard from Palestinian officials, the sources acknowledged, saying, "They're going to have to resolve some of those contradictions." â¢
#2
Since they've got a US sec state who believes that Abbas is a Palestinian Martin Luther King, backed by a POTUS who believes that Muslims can be civilized.
#4
Nonetheless, Olmert - who reiterated on Wednesday that there could be no such talks without explicit Palestinian recognition of Israel as the Jewish state - is confident that the Annapolis joint statement of principles, which is still being negotiated between the two sides, will satisfactorily resolve the issue, The Jerusalem Post was told.
#5
Since they've got a US sec state who believes that Abbas is a Palestinian Martin Luther King, backed by a POTUS who believes that Muslims can be civilized.
End of story. Bush seems bound and determined to cripple whatever historical legacy he might once have deserved.
#6
"Israel can define itself however it sees fit; and if it wishes to call itself a Jewish state, so be it,"
That may or may not be enough. See what this is about, is the PA giving up the unlimited right of return. Which they will have to do when a final settlement is signed,but they dont want to do until theyve gotten everything else they want, cause its one of their main points of leverage. IOW, its exactly cause they ARE beggars, that they have to make their only chip count. This is all part of the chess game of how specific a statement will come out of Annapolis.
18 vs. 27 minutes. Latest line of defense; everybody uses staged footage.
PARIS - More than seven years after Muhammad al-Dura, 12, was apparently shot to death during clashes between IDF troops and Palestinian gunmen at Gaza's Netzarim junction, a small packed courtroom in the Palais de Justice here viewed raw footage of the incident Wednesday.
Among those present in court were Charles Enderlin, the Israel correspondent for the France 2 TV station whose original report of the September 2000 incident blamed Israel for the killing, and Philippe Karsenty, the director of the media watchdog group Media-Ratings, whose assertion that France 2's coverage was "a hoax" sparked the ongoing legal battle.
Members of the French media did not appear to be present among the approximately 60-strong audience; some members of the public could not get into the small room where the uncut footage provided by France 2 was screened from 2:15 p.m. to 4 p.m. Although the footage itself ran for a total of 18 minutes, it was stopped at several points so Enderlin could comment on what was happening.
Toward the end, the footage appeared to show Dura briefly putting his hand to his forehead to check what was happening around him, and moving his leg.
The footage also featured his father shouting out, "Muhammad is dead! Muhammad is dead!"
Enderlin said after the hearing that France 2 had produced all the raw footage it had, based on "an original tape that was kept in a safe until now. We presented a DVD that was made in front of a bailiff from the original tape... not from the various copies you can find here and there."
Karsenty has claimed that there is additional footage beyond what was shown.
France 2's original September 30, 2000, broadcast showed 55 seconds of edited footage from the Netzarim junction. Enderlin was not present at the junction, but voiced over the footage according to information given him by cameraman Talal Abu Rahma. He explained in his news report that the footage showed a father and his son caught in a gunfight and that the boy was killed by shots coming from the IDF position at the Netzarim junction. France 2 offered the video for free to other television stations.
Wednesday's hearing followed a September demand from the French appeals court judge that France 2 show it the raw video footage of the events.
Following the incident, al-Dura became an instant icon for Palestinian suffering at the hands of Israeli brutality. However, the IDF, which initially apologized for the death, concluded after an investigation that the boy could not have been hit by Israeli bullets.
When Karsenty branded France 2's video of the incident a hoax, he was sued and found guilty of slander. His appeal prompted the current legal battle.
Two months ago, the deputy commander of the IDF Spokesman's Office, Col. Shlomi Am-Shalom, wrote to France 2 asking for the unedited footage. Am-Shalom stressed that the IDF had "ruled out" the notion that al-Dura was killed by Israeli fire.
#8
This stuff needs to be preserved for posterity :-)
Ibrahim Al-Khoulib: "This civilization killed one and a half million people. It killed a million Iraqi children during the siege. It left traces of enriched uranium from the weapons that were used, and destroyed the environment for the next 35 billion years, according to American estimates. Is this a civilization? Was it the Muslims who annihilated the Indians? Did the Muslims ever annihilate any people, or even a nation of animals?"
...
Nidhal Na'isa: "...All we hear of is the culture of camel-urine drinking and breastfeeding adults. He was talking about the [Western] culture of homosexuality... with regard to homosexuality, Dr. Al-Khouli, it has existed from the prehistoric times, from the days of Lot, and in all societies..."
...
Nidhal Na'isa: "Exactly. You are talking about Andalusia. Dr. Ibrahim, my dear friend, you must open your mind and enlighten yourself."
Ibrahim Al-Khoulib: "Enlighten yourself! I enlighten you, not the other way around, boy!"
Nidhal Na'isa: "You are a boy yourself. You listen to me."
Ibrahim Al-Khoulib: "You are a boy compared to me."
Nidhal Na'isa: "And you're a boy compared to me too."
November 15, 2007 (RFE/RL) -- Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinejad makes a trip to the Gulf island state of Bahrain on November 17 to meet with Bahraini ruler Hamad bin Isa al Khalifa.
Ahmadinejad and the emir should have much to talk about during the Iranian leader's one-day visit to Manama.
Bahrain is former Persian territory, and an Iranian desire to reclaim it arose again recently, shocking the island state's leadership. Bahrain's crown prince recently became the first Arab leader to publicly accuse Tehran of trying to develop nuclear weapons. His kingdom is also the base for the U.S. Navy's Fifth Fleet, which could play an important role if hostilities erupt between Iran and the United States.
Old Claim Resurfaces
Tehran's old territorial claim to Bahrain was resurrected by a senior journalist who is also reputed to be an adviser to Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. "Kayhan" Editor-in-Chief Hoseyn Shari'atmadari wrote in July that Bahrain should be returned to Iran.
Regional analyst Mustafa Alani, the director of security at the Gulf Research Center in Dubai, is critical of this claim emerging from a source so close to the Iranian leadership. "Basically the Iranian behavior is not acceptable on this issue," he says.
"The Shi'a community in Bahrain has strong links with Iran. A peaceful and good relation with Iran helps stability in the kingdom [and] this is why the [Bahraini leadership] believes a good relationship with Iran is necessary." -- analyst Mustafa Alani
Bahrain was indeed Persian territory in the 19th century. The British -- the power in the Persian Gulf at that time -- took a 99-year lease on the islands. Once it expired, Britain gave Bahrain independence in 1971, following a UN-supervised referendum.
Iran at the time was handed the disputed Greater and Lesser Tunb islands, and in exchange for that it agreed to put aside its claim to Bahrain, which has a mostly Shi'a Arab citizenry.
'Nuclear Lies'
The tension inherent in Iranian-Bahraini relations was sharpened by the recent assertion of Bahraini Crown Prince Salman bin-Hamad al-Khalifa that Iran is seeking nuclear weapons. The statement -- in a November 2 interview in the British daily "The Times" -- was an unusually blunt reference by an Arab leader to Iran's nuclear program, which Tehran claims is solely for peaceful purposes.
The prince said straight out that Iran was developing a bomb, or the capability for it --- thus becoming the first of Iran's Persian Gulf neighbors to accuse Tehran of lying about its nuclear program.
The prince also said the whole region could be drawn into any military conflict and called on India, as well as Russia, to help find a diplomatic solution to the present standoff.
Some see a link between the crown prince's comments and Ahmadinejad's visit two weeks later.
This is a tense time for Iran, as Western pressure mounts over the nuclear accusations and Iran's role in Iraq. The last thing that Tehran wants is for Arab neighbors to side openly with those who are convinced that Iran is hiding its true intentions.
Massoumeh Torfeh of London University's School of Oriental and African Studies tells RFE/RL that the Iranian leader could be aiming to deliver a warning to the Bahrainis that the kingdom could "put itself in danger" by such direct accusations.
Torfeh says Ahmadinejad could encourage the prince to retract his statement. She notes that Iranian press reports of the prince's comments claimed his remarks were "distorted."
She also says "Ahmadinejad is extremely nervous -- despite his pretenses to the contrary -- that an American attack on Iran could become a reality."
Analyst Alani says the Iranian involvement with nuclear power has put the six countries of the pro-Western Gulf Cooperation Council, of which Bahrain is a member, under pressure to develop their own nuclear expertise.
"The GCC feels we have the necessity now to develop at least the know-how in the field of nuclear energy," Alani says. "But the GCC program, unlike the Iranian program, will be under the supervision of the [International Atomic Energy Agency], and it's going to be a peaceful research program."
Despite the multiple tensions, Bahrain is constrained to cultivate the best ties it can with Tehran, Alani says.
"Bahrainis need Iran for a very simple reason: There's the question of the Shi'a community in Bahrain, which has strong links with Iran," he says. "A peaceful and good relation with Iran helps stability in the kingdom [and] this is why the [Bahraini leadership] believes a good relationship with Iran is necessary."
Sunni-Shi'a Tensions
Shi'as compose some 70 percent of Bahrain's population, while the elite are mostly Sunnis. Long-standing tensions between the two communities came into the open after the 1979 Islamic revolution in Iran.
Apparently inspired by the revolution, Shi'ite fundamentalists in Bahrain tried to stage a coup in 1981 that was aimed at installing a Shi'ite theocratic government in Manama. After it failed, the Sunni-led Bahraini government cracked down on Shi'a, and many were jailed. The suspicion lingered that Tehran was involved in the coup attempt, but Iran has always denied that.
Alireza Nourizadeh, the director of the Center for Arab and Iranian Studies in London, says that bilateral relations improved greatly under the presidency of Ahmadinejad's reformist predecessor, Mohammad Khatami. But he says they have deteriorated again since Ahmadinejad took over in 2005.
"This also can be sourced back to the relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia: Whenever [Shi'ia-led] Tehran enjoyed good relations with [Sunni-led] Saudi Arabia, relations with Bahrain were also very close," he says. "Now it seems that the visit of Mr. Ahmadinejad may bring back relations to the point where Khatami left off."
U.S. Presence
Another factor that deeply complicates Iranian-Bahraini relations is the fact that Bahrain is the home port of the powerful U.S. Fifth Fleet.
The presence of the fleet is a constant reminder that the United States intends to keep open the Gulf, the waterway through which much of the world's oil supplies are shipped.
Positioned strategically halfway between Kuwait at the head of the Gulf and the narrow strait of Hormuz at its entrance, the fleet also faces the entire south coast of Iran. In the event of any military hostilities between Iran and the United States, the 5th Fleet's ships and aircraft could play a key role.
For Bahrain, however, the situation is as usual difficult. A staunch ally of the West, Bahrain risks the wrath of Iran in the event of conflict.
The Bahraini government has pledged that it will not allow its territory to be used to wage a conflict with any of its neighbors. But it is difficult to see in practical terms how that would work, given the logistical support provided by a home base to a fleet at sea.
#1
JPOST > ISRAEL PREPARING FOR A NUCLEAR TEHRAN. Jpost Posters opinions - RETALIATION WILL BE TOO LATE ["Day After" is too late] + SAMPSON STRATEGY [Attack one = Attack All]+ MOSLEMS WILL KEEP MAKING BOMBS [Until have more Bombs than Israel has ARROW, etc. BMD] + IT MAY ALREADY BE TOO LATE FOR ISRAEL.
HAARETZ > US WANTS ISRAEL TO GET USED TO THE IRANIAN BOMB; + TOPIX > GET USED TO IRANIAN BOMB/IRAN WITH NUCLEAR BOMBS.
#2
It is noteworthy that 33% of the people who live in Bahrain are not citizens, but guest workers. However 81% are Muslim, with 10% being Christian and another about 10% being "other".
Since their population is small, at only 709,000, the government could easily change various balances for different ends by bringing in foreigners and giving them citizenship. For example, import 20,000 Russian Orthodox workers.
The pitch would be that Bahrain is a warm and sunny place, like another Cuba. A vacation spot for upper middle class and wealthy Russians. They could stay at subsidized resorts full of Russian employees, so they would feel right at home. Even have some Russian Orthodox churches.
That would mean Russia would not be happy at all for Iran to Attack Bahrain.
The Bahrains could make a similar deal with China, giving their connected noveau riche a international place to hang out.
All of it would have heavy, internationalist business overtones, which is something Bahrain has been pushing for years.
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Wednesday was given the green light from the Iranian Majlis (Parliament) for new oil and industry ministers, Gholam Hossein Nozari as oil minister, while Ali Akbar Mehrabian was confirmed as industry minister by a slightly slimmer margin. Nozari got 217 votes while Mehrabian received 174 votes. The president last month nominated the two men to the Majlis for approval.
Posted by: Seafarious ||
11/15/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Iran
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.
Britain will spend 400 million pounds abroad on fighting radicalisation, Prime Minister 
ANKARA, Turkey - The United States began sharing intelligence with Turkey about positions of Kurdish rebels on Wednesday, NTV television quoted the foreign minister as saying.
WASHINGTON (AP) - House Democrats pushed through a $50 billion bill for the Iraq war Wednesday night that would require President Bush to start bringing troops home in coming weeks with a goal of ending combat by December 2008. The legislation, passed 218-203, was largely a symbolic jab at Bush, who already has begun reducing force levels but opposes a congressionally mandated timetable on the war. And while the measure was unlikely to pass in the Senate - let alone overcome a presidential veto - Democrats said they wanted voters to know they weren't giving up.
SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico (AP) - An operations manual for the U.S. prison at Guantanamo that was mysteriously posted on the Internet is out of date but still should not have been released to the public, the military said Wednesday. 
Detained opposition leader Benazir Bhutto said Thursday she hopes to form a national unity government to replace President Gen. Pervez Musharraf ahead of elections, and is contacting other opposition parties to get them on board. "I am talking to the other opposition parties to find out whether they are in a position to come together," she told The Associated Press in a telephone interview from the home in Lahore where she is under house arrest. "We need to see whether we can come up with an interim government of national consensus to whom power can be handed."
Exiled former premier Nawaz Sharif said on Wednesday that he was ready to work with Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) Chairwoman Benazir Bhutto against President General Pervez Musharraf. We are ready to set aside our differences with the PPP, and work for the return of a democratic rule, Sharif said via telephone from Saudi Arabia. Asked whether there was any possibility of a broad opposition coalition against Musharraf, he said, Its the need of the hour. This joint effort should be carried forward with sincerity and steadfastness. It should be focused on achieving the objectives and targets. There should be no room for flexibility and slackness. Nawaz said, It has been our stand throughout that we are against any extra-constitutional action and coup detats. He said the opposition should focus on reinstating judges Musharraf had dismissed.
President General Pervez Musharraf said he would step down as army chief after a Supreme Court ruling on the validity of his re-election, which he said was expected by the end of November.
Tensions between Iraq and Turkey have subsided and relations are improving, asserted Iraqi President Jalal Talabani in an interview with a Kuwaiti newspaper Wednesday. The crisis with Turkey has passed, he told the daily Alrai in an interview, without further explanation, even as Turkish troops remain massed at the Iraqi borders over the presence of anti-Turkish rebel fighters in the Iraqi Kurdish regions mountainous hinterland. 
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Wednesday was given the green light from the Iranian Majlis (Parliament) for new oil and industry ministers, Gholam Hossein Nozari as oil minister, while Ali Akbar Mehrabian was confirmed as industry minister by a slightly slimmer margin. Nozari got 217 votes while Mehrabian received 174 votes. The president last month nominated the two men to the Majlis for approval.
