Hi there, !
Today Mon 02/09/2009 Sun 02/08/2009 Sat 02/07/2009 Fri 02/06/2009 Thu 02/05/2009 Wed 02/04/2009 Tue 02/03/2009 Archives
Rantburg
531705 articles and 1855999 comments are archived on Rantburg.

Today: 87 articles and 360 comments as of 15:12.
Post a news link    Post your own article   
Area: WoT Operations    WoT Background    Non-WoT    Local News    Politix   
Islamabad High Court frees AQ Khan
Today's Headlines
Headline Comments [Views]
Page 4: Opinion
0 [] 
5 00:00 Pappy [] 
2 00:00 Anonymoose [] 
4 00:00 Woozle Elmeter 2700 [1] 
1 00:00 Anonymoose [1] 
4 00:00 Bobby [] 
6 00:00 Anonymoose [] 
Page 1: WoT Operations
1 00:00 Steve White [2]
10 00:00 AlmostAnonymous5839 []
39 00:00 Barbara Skolaut [3]
0 []
0 [1]
2 00:00 g(r)omgoru [2]
0 []
5 00:00 Skunky Glins 5*** [1]
6 00:00 .5MT []
2 00:00 trailing wife []
0 []
0 [2]
3 00:00 JosephMendiola []
5 00:00 Gabby [1]
0 [2]
2 00:00 Ebbang Uluque6305 []
2 00:00 gromky [1]
0 [1]
Page 2: WoT Background
0 []
8 00:00 Jeremiah Fleling8479 []
4 00:00 Old Patriot [1]
4 00:00 JFM []
2 00:00 Caesar Slineting4188 []
4 00:00 JosephMendiola [2]
1 00:00 JosephMendiola []
10 00:00 Nimble Spemble [1]
1 00:00 g(r)omgoru []
1 00:00 trailing wife [2]
0 [1]
1 00:00 Ming the Merciless []
0 [1]
3 00:00 trailing wife []
2 00:00 JosephMendiola []
7 00:00 Spike Uniter []
11 00:00 Rambler in Virginia []
2 00:00 JosephMendiola []
4 00:00 .5MT []
8 00:00 Mike N. [2]
7 00:00 Pappy []
3 00:00 Glavitle Barnsmell6442 []
3 00:00 Rambler in Virginia []
0 []
0 []
0 []
0 []
Page 3: Non-WoT
2 00:00 .5MT [2]
9 00:00 JosephMendiola []
7 00:00 Frank G []
7 00:00 CrazyFool [1]
6 00:00 CrazyFool [1]
3 00:00 ed []
2 00:00 JosephMendiola []
2 00:00 tu3031 []
14 00:00 lotp [1]
1 00:00 JosephMendiola [1]
0 []
9 00:00 AlmostAnonymous5839 [1]
3 00:00 DarthVader []
0 []
0 []
0 []
3 00:00 Glenmore []
Page 5: Russia-Former Soviet Union
0 [2]
7 00:00 Old Patriot []
12 00:00 OldSpook [2]
2 00:00 Old Patriot [1]
3 00:00 Alaska Paul []
3 00:00 Frank G []
8 00:00 Chemist []
8 00:00 JosephMendiola [1]
12 00:00 OldSpook [1]
3 00:00 OldSpook []
0 []
1 00:00 g(r)omgoru []
Page 6: Politix
5 00:00 JosephMendiola [1]
6 00:00 Jack Salami []
6 00:00 Old Patriot []
19 00:00 SteveS []
6 00:00 SteveS []
6 00:00 Besoeker []
Afghanistan
Iran and the US: United over Afghanistan?
Posted by: tipper || 02/06/2009 17:18 || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:


Home Front: WoT
Peggy Noonan: "Ignorance keeps you perky."
...On Wednesday, in an interview with Politico, Dick Cheney warned of the possible deaths of "perhaps hundreds of thousands" of Americans in a terror attack using nuclear or biological weapons. "I think there is a high probability of such an attempt," he said.

When the interview broke and was read on the air, I was in a room off a television studio. For a moment everything went silent, and then a makeup woman said to a guest, "I don't see how anyone can think that's not true."

I told her I'm certain it is true. And it didn't seem to me any of the half dozen others there found the content of Cheney's message surprising. They got a grim or preoccupied look.

The question for the Obama administration: Do they think Mr. Cheney is essentially correct, that bad men are coming with evil and deadly intent, but that America can afford to, must for moral reasons, change its stance regarding interrogation and detention of terrorists? Or, deep down, do the president and those around him think Mr. Cheney is wrong, that people who make such warnings are hyping the threat for political purposes? And, therefore, that interrogation techniques, etc., can of course be relaxed? I don't know the precise answer to this question. Do they know exactly what they think? Or are they reading raw threat files each day trying to figure out what they think?

The bad thing about new political eras is that everyone within them has to learn everything for the first time. Every new president starts out fresh, in part because he doesn't know what he doesn't know. Ignorance keeps you perky....
Posted by: Mike || 02/06/2009 06:35 || Comments || Link || [1 views] Top|| File under:

#1  I will give Obama the benefit of the doubt that he is sane and he is intelligent enough to understand his daily G2 briefings. If so, I cannot see how he could be so absolutely reversal regarding interrogation techiniques, Gitmo, WoT, etc. I suspect Jim Jones has him on a rigorous training regime so he can understand all the nuances of what he is reading and hearing. But he also has a political faction he is beholding to for cover. Which one he listens to at the time of decision is the final determination.
Posted by: Jack is Back! || 02/06/2009 12:14 Comments || Top||

#2  Peggy should know.
Posted by: Glavitle Barnsmell6442 || 02/06/2009 12:31 Comments || Top||

#3  Ignorance keeps you perky

Wondered how Katie Couric got that way. Now we know.
Posted by: Mullah Richard || 02/06/2009 13:02 Comments || Top||

#4  You're right Richard. Very Perky. But dumb as a box of rocks.
Posted by: Woozle Elmeter 2700 || 02/06/2009 13:59 Comments || Top||


India-Pakistan
How to reverse the militancy crisis
by Charles Ferndale

A frequent cause of the human animal's capacity for self-deception is arrogance coupled with wishful thinking. When Robert Gates, the American secretary of defence, said recently something to the effect that America could not afford the money or time to create some sort of Valhalla in the NWFP, if that was what was required to defeat the militancy there, he was deluded by arrogance. Does he think it can be done on the cheap, according to America's timetable?
Probably it can't be done at all. Ignorance and misplaced arrogance are considered virtues in the NWFP. The locals don't take kindly to outsiders trying to tinker with their age-old culture. For that matter, they don't take kindly to insiders doing so.
Valhalla, in Norse mythology, is a great hall to which half of those who die in battle go and where they then live in peace. I doubt that Gates had read up on his Norse mythology. What he intended to say was that America could not afford to create an ideal land in the NWFP just to put an end to the militancy there. But what Mr Gates failed to realise is that, in the troubled areas of Pakistan, paradise is having something to eat, is not freezing to death, is not having one's family killed and injured, is not having one's home destroyed; in short, is not being terrorised. And Mr Gates seems to have overlooked the fact that this tragedy is a direct consequence of American foreign policy since 1977. Since the Americans made the dreadful mess, they should pay to have it cleaned up.
What if we say we can't afford it, and the locals don't want the mess cleaned up, and we walk away from it?
Mr Gates should make up his mind whether or not the present American administration wants seriously to help defeat the militants.
Killing them actually does defeat them. Ask Sri Lanka.
Successive US administrations have claimed that defeating the militants is vital for the security of the rest of the world, so presumably they should be deeply committed to that end. Pakistan can certainly not afford to do what is necessary alone. If the Americans really do want victory over the militants, then they must do whatever it takes.
That would ideally involve killing the bad guyz where they're found, which would include Chitral and Miran Shah and even Quetta, if necessary.
Here is what I think is the minimum that must be done in order to defeat the militants:
Oh, pray tell on...
-- The Americans should guarantee Pakistan against any first attack from India, so that the Pakistani Army can concentrate fully on the troubles on its western border.
Let us count the number of times India has attacked Pakistain.
  • In 1947 Pak forces attacked and occupied approximately 33 percent of Kashmire and Jammu. This resulted in the local maharajah acceding his principality to India, the creation of the line of control, and Pak keeping Pak-occupied Kashmire.

  • In 1965, Pak forces tried to infiltrate Jammu and Kashmire. The Indians beat them up, taking their own lumps in the process, and the Treaty of Tashkent reestablished the status quo ante.

  • In 1971 Pakistain so oppressed its Bengali-speaking population in East Pakistain that they allied themselves with India in their liberation war.

  • And in 1999 the Paks tried swarming across the Line of Control and shelling Indian positions, initiating the Kargil War.
  • A quick analysis of these four wars reveals that 1.) in no case has India attacked Pakistain and 2.) in no case has Pakistain won.

    -- The militants' sources of finance should be discovered and stopped. No insurgency can survive without a continuous supply of money. If, as many Pakistanis believe, a major source of funds is the Indian intelligence agency, RAW, then America must make India an offer they cannot refuse.
    Every time somebody goes "kaboom" in Pakistain the government whips out the "hidden hand" story. Within a day or two it comes out that it wasn't insidious (Subcontinental) foreigners, but Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, which is an al-Qaeda front, or one of its taste-alikes. When there's been an open-source money trace discussed, it's originated in the UAE or thereabouts -- let's just politely say "the Arabian peninsula." No doubt the masterminds at RAW are operating through Arab frontmen and disguising the money as the donations of The Faithful.
    -- The resupply of arms must be stopped by whatever means it takes.
    I've always found that arms supply question really interesting. Afghanistan's a landlocked country and yet its southern third has more arms per square foot than anyplace in the world, with the exception of the western third of Pakistain. How does all that armament get in without anybody noticing? Once it's in, do Pashtun children file off all the serial numbers and other identifying data so that the hardware becomes untraceable?If I was still in the intel bidniz, which regrettably I'm not, I'd have a big map on the wall in my office with the paths of all those guns and ammo traced out in different colors, showing where they came from, when, and who paid for them -- and who waved them through customs.
    -- Anyone who has studied guerrilla warfare will know that the single most powerful weapon that can be used against insurgents is inside knowledge, so the militants must be infiltrated. They are too smart and too closed a society to be infiltrated from outside, so their own people should be induced by whatever means it takes--one of which is money--to inform on their colleagues.
    We're doing that. Every once in awhile somebody's head's chopped off in one of the Wazoos.
    -- Whatever information is gained from infiltration of the insurgents must not be allowed to leak back to the insurgents, which, given the supposed sympathy for militancy within the ISI, cannot be guaranteed except by setting up sealed cells within the intelligence services.
    Thank you, Captain Obvious. This is why ISI doesn't get advance notification of dronezaps or special operations raids.
    -- A study of successful counter-insurgencies shows that conventional armies do not do well against insurgents.
    Depends on the situation. Lanka's doing just fine at the moment, thankew. The Ethiops did find against the Islamic Courts. The Northern Alliance did just fine against the Talibs. And the Russers, using an army of draftees with some fairly incompetent officers, did pretty well against the Chechens once they'd leveled most of Grozny (which is Russian for Terrible).
    What is needed is undercover special forces who are as hard to detect as are the insurgents.
    Those'd be the hunter-killer teams I've talked about a time or two here. They have a definite place within a combined arms scenario.
    The Pakistani Army has little experience in this type of warfare,
    ... and they don't do real well at the warfare they have experience with...
    so they should find those who do and get them to train the Pakhtuns as a counter-insurgency guerrilla force.
    I think we're setting similar things up on the other side of the border, modeled on the Iraqi experience. However, they're not a cure-all. The Paks have lots of experience with tribal lashkars, which have become a running joke on the 'Burg. Going back to the Vietnam experience, there were village defense forces that did okay against Viet Cong, but which folded in the face of North Vietnamese regulars.
    The trainers could be sympathetic Mujahideen who fought the Russians, Vietnamese who defeated the Americans, the mountain warfare sections of the British Marines and the British SAS, the Canadians, and so on.
    The sympathetic mujaheddin who fought the Russers were mostly the Northern Alliance. The "Vietnamese who defeated the Americans" are now pushing 60 and live in an entirely different climate and society. The Brits have done okay when their government hasn't put their feet in buckets, but that's happened in almost every operation they've been on. Basra's not going in the books next to Torres Vedras, by any means. And the Canucks, while fine soldiers, could really give a crap. What the writer's left out is the Americans, who're now possessed of the world's best military, bar none.
    -- Chairman Mao, the great Chinese insurgent, said that guerrilla fighters are fish that swim in the sea of the people. Take away the cover of the people among whom they hide and they become fish out of water.
    Yeah, yeah. "The guerilla is the fish, the people are the sea, and the party's the hook." Got any other good quotes?
    The only effective way to do this is to take back and secure, permanently against re-incursion, every village and town in which the insurgents seek cover, food, medical care and resupply. America's record in Vietnam for successfully doing this was bad; maybe the Pakistanis, especially well trained Pakhtuns, can do a better job because they are of the people.
    The Pakhtuns are the problem, not the solution. They're the ones chopping people's heads off. The bad boyz originate in the villages and towns -- they're not seeking cover there. The solution's not the cannon fodder, but the leadership, and the leadership appears to be sacrosanct. The Paks won't even take out an idiot like Mangal Bagh, which would decapitate Lashkar-e-Islami and relieve the pressure on Peshawar. Mullah Fazlullah drives around in a mobile FM transmitter, but no one's taken an RDF fix on him, followed by about 40 rounds of HE Frag. His father-in-law, Sufi Mohammad, hasn't met with an unfortunate accident since being released from jug. And despite having Mullah Omar's address in Quetta, there hasn't been one more unexplained explosion in that fair city.

    Furthermore, with the number of Arabs and Chechens wandering around NWFP and FATA, it should be fairly easy to pick the Qaeda fish out of the Pashtun sea. They don't even speak the same languages fergawdsake. The Arabs are the ones with the gutterals, the Chechens and Uzbeks the guys with the cedillas. And the Uighurs are the short guys that look like Chinamen. Shoot them.

    -- With villages and towns permanently secured,
    ... which means the head cheeses have been Swissed ...
    the damage done by the army and militants can be undone, and people can return to nearly normal life
    Normal life in the NWFP is enough to make a strong but civilized man shudder...
    in the sure knowledge that they will not be killed by the army or militants later. Putting guards on schools so as to lure back girl students is a hopeless idea unless the area is permanently secured. The smaller the area the easier this strategy should be. So start in the small villages and broadcast successes.
    Good idea. This will lure the turbans back like bees to honey...
    The people of the towns and villages should also be armed and trained by Pakhtuns already armed and trained in counter-insurgency.
    They can form tribal lashkars or village defense councils...
    Having broadcast the successful freeing of a village from militants, these guerrilla counter-insurgents should lie in wait for militants returning to take revenge on the newly freed village.
    Ah, yes. The old flypaper technique.
    -- To guard against arrogant and indifferent abuses of power by the army, as many Pakhtun commanders as possible should lead the conventional army in the NWFP operations. Special operations should be largely made up of Pakhtuns from the areas in which they fight.
    You're making the assumption they're good at that sort of thing and that they're immune to arrogance and abuse of power.
    -- Stop killing non-combatants in the areas affected by insurgency.
    Sounds good. What should you do about human shields, though? Seriously? If Paw's a head-chopping fishy in the great sea of the Pashtun people, and he bravely keeps Maw and the kiddies around him at all times for his safety, what're y'gonna do? Think fast now, 'cause he's planning on sending faceless minions to chop off your head.
    The present curfew policy--shooting curfew-breakers on sight--is an obscenity.
    Are the curfew breakers armed? Then it's not.
    Anyone who is not an insurgent and is willing to risk life by breaking the curfew is clearly in urgent need of help, which they should be given.
    But how do you know they're not insurgents? How do you know they're not myrmidons, skulking about and up to no good? How do yo know they're not coming to chop your head off?
    The Punjabi dominated army should be reminded that it is their job to protect, not to kill, non-combatants.
    Oh. Yeah. That'll work. Why didn't we think of that before?
    This is something the Americans have never understood,
    ... because Americans are dumb, unlike the writer...
    for the simple reason that all the wars they have fought in the last 63 years have been in other people's countries, where they have shown indifference to the deaths and injuries they have inflicted upon the indigenous people. The Pakistani army often behaves as if the NWFP were a foreign country.
    But they're not good at killing people who speak languages other than native tongues. How much effort does it take for a Punjabi to pot an Arab, anyway?
    -- Deprive the insurgents of their means of communication, both in military and in propaganda terms. Why the army has not jammed the militants' FM radio, or bombed it out of existence, is beyond me. Radio triangulation is not rocket science.
    I've mentioned that a time or two in the past, right in these pages. Neither is artillery rocket science. Unless you're firing rockets, of course.
    -- Launch effective and honest information services (radio and television) to counter the propaganda put out by the insurgents, and to inform people isolated by war of what is going on around them (set up a Tribal Broadcasting Network).
    The holy men will then shut it down or take it over...
    Set up communication systems so that people within range can call in rapid assistance teams (medical, military, food, information). The people whom the militants terrorise must have good reason not to feel abandoned by the government and the militants must know that their attacks on those people will cost them their lives. The supply of personnel to the militants will dry up if non-combatants feel safe and are not enraged by suffering they perceive to have been caused by the central government.
    You've got a multiple set of problems, Chuck, and you're trying to solve it as one. If you set the hunter-killer teams on the Arabs, Chechens, and Uzbeks (and any Avars, Huns, Goths or Gepids who're included in their number) then you're decapitating the bad guy network. The supply of militants includes places like Mosul and Jeddah, so it's not gonna be an overnight process, but if you make NWFP unhealthy for furriners, you'll kill the insurgency there. Coupled with that, you've got to cut off the supply of heavy armaments and trace them back to their points of origin, where terrible accidents should occur. And if you trace the money flow, no doubt "hackers" will be happy to divert all that cash to their own accounts. Pashtuns represent mostly cheap and easily replaced muscle, with the exception of people like Sami ul-Haq, who should have met with unfortunate accidents years ago. They're the middle men between the Arabs and their henchmen and the locals.
    -- Within the secured areas, undertake intensive, effective, projects that will employ the people and make them self-sufficient. Almost universal literacy could be accomplished within a year at most (in Nicaragua, the Sandanistas changed 85 percent illiteracy to 5 percent in six months, though their population and area was larger). Set up clinics, schools, agricultural advice centres, technical colleges, markets and especially agencies whose job it is to listen to people's grievances and to seek honest solutions to their problems.
    Perhaps they should hire Sandinistas. The Paks aren't even competent to set up elementary schools throughout the country. People send their kids to madrassahs because they're free and (mostly) clean.
    -- Address all the grievances of the local people with impartial courts and jirgas comprised of only trustworthy indigenous people and deprive the bullying intruders of all power and, if necessary, of their ill-gotten property too.
    Ohfergawdsake. The reason the locals are supportive of shariah courts in places like Swat is because the legal system is so riddled with corruption and incompetence they can't get anything resembling "justice." Cases drag on for years. You can murder somebody and unless somebody else files a FIR nothing will happen to you. "State vs. Mahmoud" doesn't appear to exist in Pak jurisprudence. It's all civil unless you're a big cheese -- and even then probably not. Witness how many people have been hung for killing Benazir.
    In my view, these are the necessary, if not sufficient, conditions for a successful reversal in the NWFP of the present militant terror. Of course, if they were implemented, it would mean that the NWFP would become an area in which social justice would truly exist, for the first time in Pakistan. That would not be Valhalla, it would be a miracle.

    The writer has degrees from the Royal College of Art, Oxford University, and the Institute of Psychiatry, University of London. He divides his time between the UK and Pakistan
    Posted by: john frum || 02/06/2009 00:00 || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

    #1  AFGHANISTAN reportedly has 1.5Milyuhn Taliban of which 60% are foreigners [ e.g. PRO-TALIB IRAQIS], versus only 80,000 Afghan Govt troops at the moment [US hopes to raise to 134,000 by 2012].

    IOW, YEAR 2012 > AFGHAN PRO-US NEW GOVT MAY STILL BE SHORT 1.3MILYUHN TROOPS JUST TO PAR WID THE LOCAL TALIBUNIES???
    Posted by: JosephMendiola || 02/06/2009 1:13 Comments || Top||

    #2  The writer has degrees from the Royal College of Art, Oxford University

    And taht makes you competent on Foreign Affairs?


    and the Institute of Psychiatry, University of London


    They give degrees at inmates?

    And noticed that all of the blame was fir America not for Russia?
    Posted by: JFM || 02/06/2009 2:59 Comments || Top||

    #3  -- The Americans should guarantee Pakistan against any first attack from India, so that the Pakistani Army can concentrate fully on the troubles on its western border.

    No guarantee for India against terrorist attacks from Pakistan?
    Posted by: john frum || 02/06/2009 5:30 Comments || Top||

    #4  Just because Ferndale's 14 point boilerplate is working effectively for the Muslim domination of the UK does not necessarily mean it will work in Pakistan.
    Posted by: Besoeker || 02/06/2009 8:06 Comments || Top||

    #5  A frequent cause of the human animal’s capacity for self-deception is arrogance coupled with wishful thinking.

    A masterful demonstration of the principle, Chuck.

    Posted by: g(r)omgoru || 02/06/2009 8:12 Comments || Top||

    #6  What a hoser. The situation in Afghanistan is similar to the situation in Vietnam, because of the border with Pakistan. Until Pakistan is stable, Afghanistan cannot be stable. It is the Laos and Cambodia of Afghanistan.

    W. Bush had a good idea, to make the Pakistani government strong enough to rule all of Pakistan, under Perv. But the reality was that Perv was far weaker than we imagined, and though Pakistan is far more unified than it once was, it is still a collection of enclaves.

    Since the Pak army cannot muster the will to occupy and control the NWFP, the best possible thing would be for the Indian army to follow through with its offer to station a large number of personnel on the Afghan border. This would compel the Pak army to occupy the NWFP, and their presence alone would subdue much of the nonsense.

    But other than holding down the fort in Afghanistan, and helping in redevelopment, the best thing the US can do is to severely undermine the leadership of the al-Qaeda and Taliban, which is what we are doing.

    If I had my druthers, I would throw in a covert program to take out the instigators in Pakistan as well. Starting with the most radical, take out big batches of them and their lieutenants, in what amounts to a counter-terrorism program.

    See how they like having a cement truck full of high explosives blown up in the middle of their Madrassa.
    Posted by: Anonymoose || 02/06/2009 10:23 Comments || Top||


    International-UN-NGOs
    UN panel calls for better treatment of Canada's Aboriginals, immigrants
    Extract
    These include charges of racism, xenophobia, discrimination against ethnic minorities, poverty and homelessness, the treatment of vagrants and deportation of asylum seekers to countries where they might be tortured.

    For example, Cuba criticized Canada for its discriminatory policies against Aboriginals and for cutting HIV/AIDS programs.

    Saudi Arabia said there has been a re-emergence of "anti-Semitism and Islamophobia."

    Iran urged Canada to take measures to put an end "to discrimination against the indigenous population."

    Syria called for an end to racial discrimination against the Arab and Muslim communities in Canada, including "racial and religious profiling."
    Posted by: tipper || 02/06/2009 16:49 || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

    #1  How could Canada respond to this without sounding racist, xenophobic and discriminatory? Hmmmm.

    "Hey guys, you're right! Just so we don't continue down this horrible wretched path, we'll send you folks all our vagrants, Arabs and Muslim communities. They'll be much better off with you, eh, and we'll be better financially able to take care of our Aboriginals and HIV/AIDS patients."
    Posted by: Mullah Richard || 02/06/2009 17:14 Comments || Top||

    #2  Sounds like the standard "blame the         " form that the UN uses to blame US or Israel for stuff and all. I guess someone felt froggy and decided to put Canada in the blank. You know, just for grins.
    Posted by: AlmostAnonymous5839 || 02/06/2009 19:13 Comments || Top||

    #3  What's REALLY crazy is that Canada treats its "aborigines" better than most countries do. They even created a special state for them along the northern coast.

    Muslims more or less got a free ride until they started making exorbitant demands. After that, Canada took a long, hard look at its "immigrants", and didn't like what it saw. I'm not surprised - I don't care much for unassimilated and unassimilatable immigrants, either (Messico, take note). Driving them into the Bay of Fundy at low tide may be a bit much, especially since most Muslims can't swim, but it cleans up the problem pretty well.
    Posted by: Old Patriot || 02/06/2009 20:36 Comments || Top||

    #4  What about the rampant anti-Americanism in Canada?
    Posted by: Nimble Spemble || 02/06/2009 21:23 Comments || Top||

    #5  Oh, that's always been there. It's just that the veneer of civility peeled off a decade or so ago.
    Posted by: Pappy || 02/06/2009 23:16 Comments || Top||


    Iraq
    Low turnout (51%) in Iraq's election reflects a disillusioned nation - US 1996 49%
    BAGHDAD — Voter turnout in Iraq's provincial elections Saturday was the lowest in the nation's short history as a new democracy despite a relative calm across the nation. Only about 7.5 million of more than 14 million registered voters went to the polls.

    Interviews suggest that the low voter turnout also is an indication of Iraqi disenchantment with a democracy that, so far, has brought them very little.

    Since the U.S.-led invasion in 2003 and the fall of a brutal dictator, Iraqis witnessed unprecedented violence in their nation and what they believe is humiliation under a foreign occupation. Even on Saturday, U.S. tanks could be spotted across Baghdad on largely empty roads.

    Following elections in 2005 Iraq spiraled into a sectarian war. People cowered in their homes while others literally killed each other in the streets. Many here feel the people they elected were party to or were at least complicit in the violence. The security forces too were feared as sectarian death squads and Iraqis also believed that American raids or passing U.S. tanks sometimes resulted in innocent civilian deaths.

    Many blame the U.S. presence in Iraq for sowing the seeds of sectarianism by bringing back exiles to rule them.

    Beyond the disillusionment, thousands of potential voters were unable to cast ballots Saturday because official voter lists did not contain their names. Street protests resulted.

    "I didn't participate in this election because I don't trust any list," Yasir Baqir, 28, said on Saturday in Fallujah. "Like any election, we read and see many promises but nothing real (happens) and there is still a crisis, a security crisis, an economic and a services crisis."

    Saturday's turnout of about 51 percent was well below the 76 percent turnout who cast ballots in national elections in December 2005 and even below 57 percent who voted for provincial councils and their national assembly in January 2005. On Election Day in January 2005, 44 people were killed. Saturday one person was reported killed in non-election related violence.

    "There was a mood of apathy before the elections," said Ali al Adeeb a Shiite legislator from Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki's party. "Many asked themselves what is the good? Why should we vote and for what? The enthusiasm came as the elections got closer."

    Despite the turnout, the Independent High Electoral Commission said participation was a positive sign for provincial elections. The commission also characterized voting violations on Election Day as extremely low.

    "[The commission] is very pleased with the turn out," said Judge Qassim al Aboudi. "All these complaints who claimed not to be on a voter registry for a number of reasons were at the wrong center or did not update their information."

    Despite that assessment, it seems that tens of thousands of mostly displaced people didn't get to vote. The commission said this was a mistake on the voter's part. Many didn't check where they were supposed to vote before Election Day.

    Most of the confusion seemed to be concentrated in Sunni Arab and Kurdish areas.

    On Sunday Maliki's Coalition of the State of Law seemed to be the big winner but preliminary results will not be available until the end of the week. Maliki spent weeks heavily campaigning for the party of candidates who would fill the seats across the nation. He was widely criticized by other slates for using government resources to campaign.

    The extent of the power of the provincial councils is unclear. While they control the security, public facilities and influence local ministry official appointees, their budgets come from the central government. Governors, who are elected by the provincial councils, can be ousted by a vote of the national parliament.

    Maliki has strongly advocated for a stronger central government and weaker provinces. If he can fill provinces with his supporters, he may be able to garner further power for the federal government.

    Many officials outside of Maliki's circle worry he has grown too strong.

    As a Shiite Islamist, he recast himself last year as a nationalist despite heading a Shiite Islamist party. Maliki cracked down on Shiite militias in the south and in Baghdad and his support for Arab parties in the Kurdish Arab regions has given him new support from some Arab Sunni constituents.

    Iraqis cast their ballots in 42,000 heavily secured polling stations across the country on Saturday. The electoral commission received the most complaints from Nineveh province and Diyala province where Kurds and Arabs rub up against each other and are vying for power.
    Posted by: GolfBravoUSMC || 02/06/2009 01:43 || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

    #1  What is this lefty bad news doing here? Jeez, millions of people vote and it's a bad thing.
    Posted by: gromky || 02/06/2009 3:03 Comments || Top||

    #2  The left prefers the usual totalitarian 99%, that's why they work so hard to make sure the dead vote and vote often, why districts show more votes than voters who signed in, and why Mickey Mouse is so often registered by ACORN in multiple districts across the county. It's just not a popular name. The left only wants a facade of democracy, as in Peoples' Democratic Republics.
    Posted by: Procopius2k || 02/06/2009 8:30 Comments || Top||

    #3  Just another example of how Iraqi life was better under Sadaam where nearly everyone voted. Or else.
    Posted by: SteveS || 02/06/2009 14:24 Comments || Top||

    #4  I swear I read this a couple of days ago; maybe in Mrs. Bobby's WaPo...
    Posted by: Bobby || 02/06/2009 18:04 Comments || Top||


    Home Front: Culture Wars
    Faith equals fertility
    Posted by: tipper || 02/06/2009 09:21 || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

    #1  I wonder if this includes Shakers?
    Posted by: g(r)omgoru || 02/06/2009 12:31 Comments || Top||

    #2  Moral inhibition also plays a strong part as well.

    While the high school football coaches are not entirely correct about sex making your legs weak, there are biological reasons why using sex solely for reproduction, at least during the reproductive years, and monogamy, will produce more, and possibly better quality offspring.

    Two reasons, especially, is less stress on the immune system from the different "fingerprint" of bacteria cultures from other people--one partner will be less stressful than multiple partners.

    The other reason is non-competition with sperm, which are designed to compete with other males' sperm.

    If there is no competition, the female has no "choice" of favoring one males sperm over another, and there is less stress on the successful sperm. This matters, even at the cellular level.

    But the list from conception to maturity strongly favors religious people.
    Posted by: Anonymoose || 02/06/2009 13:15 Comments || Top||


    The meaning of Huntington
    Posted by: tipper || 02/06/2009 02:44 || Comments || Link || [1 views] Top|| File under:

    #1  He sounds annoyingly Hegelian, using the assumption that if you take any two things and blend them together, you will always get something better than the original. This is not true, as it ignores the value of competition in culling bad and antiquated ideas.

    Take for example, civilization and barbarism. Unless civilization is so weak that barbarism can annihilate it, it will eventually destroy barbarism, because barbarism cannot compete. Barbarism has *no* elements that are preferable to civilization, so the struggle is one of natural selection.

    This can be seen right now in Iraq and Afghanistan, where foolish efforts to preserve parts of their failed governmental systems along with new and efficient modern systems is an obvious lesson. Everything new has succeeded, and every preserved system has failed.
    Posted by: Anonymoose || 02/06/2009 10:10 Comments || Top||



    Who's in the News
    72[untagged]
    4Hamas
    1al-Qaeda in Arabia
    1Chechen Republic of Ichkeria
    1Govt of Iran
    1Govt of Pakistan
    1Govt of Sudan
    1Iraqi Insurgency
    1Islamic State of Iraq
    1Lashkar e-Taiba
    1Mahdi Army
    1TTP
    1al-Qaeda

    Bookmark
    E-Mail Me

    The Classics
    The O Club
    Rantburg Store
    The Bloids
    The Never-ending Story
    Thugburg
    Gulf War I
    The Way We Were
    Bio

    Merry-Go-Blog











    On Sale now!


    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.
    Click here for more information

    Meet the Mods
    In no particular order...
    Steve White
    Seafarious
    tu3031
    badanov
    sherry
    ryuge
    GolfBravoUSMC
    Bright Pebbles
    trailing wife
    Gloria
    Fred
    Besoeker
    Glenmore
    Frank G
    3dc
    Skidmark

    Two weeks of WOT
    Fri 2009-02-06
      Islamabad High Court frees AQ Khan
    Thu 2009-02-05
      Thirty dead in Pakistan blast: hospital
    Wed 2009-02-04
      Bridge Attack Severs Afghan Supply Route
    Tue 2009-02-03
      Somalia orders recapture of Baidoa
    Mon 2009-02-02
      Bomber in police uniform kills 21 Afghan policemen
    Sun 2009-02-01
      Sheikh Sharif elected as Somalia's president
    Sat 2009-01-31
      Polls Close in Iraq Elections, No Major Violence
    Fri 2009-01-30
      'Incompetent' Hamid Karzai's political future in doubt
    Thu 2009-01-29
      Pakistan busts suicide bomb gang
    Wed 2009-01-28
      Yar! French navy nabs 9 Somali pirates
    Tue 2009-01-27
      Al-Shabaab fighters seize Somali parliament headquarters
    Mon 2009-01-26
      GSPC founder calls for al-Qaeda surrender in Algeria
    Sun 2009-01-25
      Lanka troops enter final Tiger town
    Sat 2009-01-24
      Twenty killed in separate strikes in North, South Wazoo
    Fri 2009-01-23
      Hamas arms smuggling never stopped during IDF op in Gaza

    Better than the average link...



    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.
    44.200.237.112
    Help keep the Burg running! Paypal:
    WoT Operations (18)    WoT Background (27)    Non-WoT (17)    Local News (12)    Politix (6)