Iraq War

[masamuneehs]

UPDATE: US Policy on Prisoners related to Terrorism

Guys, prisoners of war stuff, anyone? Anyone pay two fucking cents of attention to the world they're living in? Europe people! Your governments are practically stoning us for these prison camps we are supposedly running! SAY SOMETHING!!!

Holy fucking christmas people wake the hell up!

And for the completley clueless, Condilezza Rice is the US Secretary of State. She is the mouthpiece and persona of US foreign policy when Bush is busy playing cowboy on his Texas ranch. That means any questions addressed to her are being posed to the entire US government, especially those relative to matters of international conflict and world law.

NEWS
"US may make mistakes in war" - Condi Rice - http://today.reuters.com/News/...UROPE-RICE-GERMANY.xml

CBC- Canada- US Dogged on by CIA policy
http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/.../12/06/rice051206.html

Daily Times - Pakistan - Al Qaeda suspects moved to Africa
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/d...Cstory_7-12-2005_pg7_9

LA Times - USA - Most say torture OK, under proper cirumstances
http://www.latimes.com/news/na...ns-ap-nation-headlines

News Telegraph - International- US emptied jails before Rice talks to Europe
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...05/12/07/ixportal.html

[masamuneehs]

The official election results from the Iraq elections are in.

The Shiite minority won the largest share. (128 seats out of 275, won by the Shiite coalition). The Kurds got about half the number of seats the Shiites did, 53 seats.

The big news is that the Shiite and Kurdi seats combined, falls 1 seat short of the two-thirds majority required to maintain a majority in the legislature. That means they will HAVE TO combine forces with the Sunnis (the sect that is most prevalent around Baghdad and the sect that Saddam Hussein's Ba'ath Party came from).

I love this. Cooperation between these three groups is the only way that Iraq can recover political stability IMO.

Also, it is interesting to note that the political part of the current interim Prime Minister Ayad Allawi of Iraq (a secular politician) only got 25 seats.

Maybe there's hope yet!

News coverage:
NY Times Coverage on Iraq Election
ABC News - Iraqi election breakdown
RadioFreeEurope coverage

[ImitationSanen]

Been there done that got the Tee-Shirt. Its so easy for everyone sitting in their chairs at home in Country X,Y,Z (That includes the United States) to be arm chair president and general. How quickly the international community forgets the atrocities of the late 80s. Oh america has no proof of WMDs. Let me refute that right now. Would anyone like to come with me to the Center for Disease Control and the UN Commitee for infectious diseases, and take a look at the Thousands of bodies of Kurds that were Nerve Gased by Saddam hussein? We have a few frozen still, desperately trying to find out how to repair the genetic damage. The children those people who survived are having, have genetic deformaties that make their lives unfit to live. So despite the international news media's big horny line about no WMDs ever being in Iraq, I ask you, what better evidence than 1000's of bodies being swept up with large equipment since there is no other way? The suffering of those people may never end, as the genetic defects resulting from the nerve gas exposure carry from generation to generation. His attacks will be responsible for the misery of people 100 years from now.

Its really easy to sit back thinking, well I don't like the president because he talks with a texas accent so he must be stupid or, the americans are a bunch of dirty imperialist pigs who lie to further their economic gain. Am I saying this war is a perfect virteous venture? Absolutely not, show me one thing in history that was ever perfect. However, I can tell you, that those remaining nerve gas shells will never ever be used on my sons or daughters and they won't be used on you or your family either. So remember, before you decide to throw stones and spit at us and call us dishonorable pigs, bastards, and other unique phrases I have heard, that I put my life on the line every day so that you are able to have that opinion without having to worry about someone detonating a nerve gas shell in your neighborhood. If you disagree fine, just remember, dissent against policies of a nation, and degrading its people, and it's troops are a different story entirely.

I want to go home, more than any of you want me to, but when we make a pledge to the people of Iraq and tell them, No more do you have to worry about being hung from a ceiling fan and beaten with barbed wire. We wont wire your testicles to batteries and torture you, and your lives will have whatever meaning that you decide to give them, I see that as a good thing. It is the job of the powerful to protect those who cannot protect themselves. That is why I fight in iraq and at home. My government is human as any other and some motives are not honest, but I know that good is being done, and when all the squabbling by the news media and the politicians from each country is done, I still sit in a barrack commanding my men to do the job we swore to do for a people not our own, because we know that strength should be used to allow others to become strong.

[Kraco]

Originally posted by: ImitationSanen
So despite the international news media's big horny line about no WMDs ever being in Iraq, I ask you, what better evidence than 1000's of bodies being swept up with large equipment since there is no other way?

I never saw any real news agencies reporting there never were WMDs in Iraq. They were reporting the occupation forces didn't find WMDs now. But everybody knows Saddam used them against Kurds, and that hasn't been denied in the media. But it looks like Saddam ordered his stockpiles, or at least most of it, destroeyed between the two Iraq-US wars.

[ImitationSanen]

I cant say anything other than in 15 years under the freedom of information act, certain things may come to light that will give a more definte answer to your last sentence. I can't say anymore for obvious reasons.

Let me put an analogy here.

Which is better? Letting someone know there is a weapon around and where it is hiding or convincing everyone that theres nothing there, make yourself look like a fool. Distracting the entire world from your real objective. Giving you more time to find and destory what you know is there?

With that in mind, when most of us are in our late 30s we can talk more about this situation =)



I would like to note, that I have been to Abu Gharib prison. While I do endorse any method used in order to save the lives of my soldiers and my countrymen, I do not condone torture of the barbaric nature unless it is a case of absolute life and death. Would I hang a guy by his feet for 3 days if he had the location of the next 9/11? You bet your ass I would, but don't be fooled by the Anti American media that would have you think we randomly arrest innocent people that appear arabic in order to torture and abuse them for our pleasure. There is nothing pleasurable about any of this. Were not perfect, but when I go to sleep every night, I know I dont use women and children as human sheilds, I dont sell drugs laced with deadly chemicals to college students, and I dont condone and endorse the slaughter of Innocent civilians. I don't respect, or admire my enemy. I respect the people of iraq who have had the endurance to stick with us during this invasion, to bring us water and food while we patrol and who support us, even when our supposed allies don't.

I hope that the United States demands reparations from France for violating the Weapons ban with iraq. Having our Air Assets fired upon by french AA missles (Which are worthless like most french weapons, we lost more Helos to power lines and sand in the turbines than those things =p) that are less than 3 years old signals in my mind the real reason behind Frances strong dissent towards an American invasion, and the issue has been kept relatively quiet for now. When this is all said and done, I hope the French are big enough to apologize, or the next time they over extend themselves we may not be willing to risk our lives to save them as we did in WW1,WW2, and Vietnam.



Oh btw Kraco I love your sig, I wanna crawl in the blanket next to her!

[Xollence]

Well we were forced into WWII. Like he stated in his other book, Hitler would've eventually targetted America after conquering all of Europe. So we really had no choice once the Battle of France was over and the Battle of Britain began.

The AEF joined WWI pretty late in the war and didn't have as much of an impact as they did in WWII. And besides us joining that war made us the leader in the world's economy since all of Europe relied on our farmers, so it's not like we risked our lives for nothing.

[KitKat]

A few days ago I went to a talk given by Romeo Dallaire, the commander of the UN forces in Rwanda. More specifically, he wrote the book 'Shake Hands with the Devil: The Failure of Humanity in Rwanda' which has won numerous international awards. (For those of you unfamiliar with the Rwandan situation, it was a genocide where over 800,000 people were killed in 100 days, and according to Dallaire although the warning signs were clear and the UN could have stopped it, they instead ordered Dallaire to do nothing). But anyways, this has recently led me to rethink my position on the role of the military. In question period, one of the people there asked Dallaire about his thoughts on Canada's opposition of the war in Iraq. His comment was that he absolutely supported Canada's decision not to ally with the US because the US didn't have UN sanction to go in. However, he said that Canada is equally at fault for washing their hands of the whole situation, since after the war started Canadian troops could have been more useful and effective since they are seen as being more impartial and not having a hidden agenda. I don't know if I completely agree with him (I'm still processing a lot of what he said and thinking it through), but he's been a military general for years and I suppose he has much better knowledge of the situation than I.

All of that is sort of an aside though. What I really want to say is this: If the US government is really serious about waging a 'War on Terror' why is their spending on foreign aid and international development so low? It seems to me that it would be far less expensive to deal with the primary root cause: poverty. By getting rid of poverty, you get rid of the conditions that breed terrorists and don't have to spend billions of dollars on military initiatives later on. I'm not saying that getting rid of poverty would get rid of all terrorists, but it would eliminate a lot of the desperation that drives people to terrorism. Granted, the US spends the most on aid in hard dollar amounts, but a lot of that is tied aid which isn't really that helpful at all. In the 70's, most of the developed countries agreed to raise their aid to 0.7% of GNP by 2015. Both Canada and the US are woefully behind, with Canada at 0.33% and the US at 0.16%. Countries like Sweden, Denmark, and Norway have already reached and even exceeded this goal.

We also have the issue of debt payments. Currently, both the US and Canada are still collecting debts from some of the most impoverished countries in the world. Some of these countries have already paid back more than their entire original debt in interest payments, but still their total debt increases. Very often, their loans came with strings attached such as structural adjustment programs where things like education and health care suffered in order to artificially boost their economies. We allowed this to happen, and we become richer as they become poorer.

Now, none of us are exactly influential government officials, but that doesn't mean we can't make our voice heard. Raise these issues. Hassle your elected representatives. Write letters to the editor. Know the facts, and make your government listen. If they want to fight a war on terror, they must also be prepared to fight a war on poverty. Just as you can't fight a half-assed war with your troops when their lives are on the line, neither should you fight a half-assed war on poverty when millions more lives are on the line.

[ImitationSanen]

I totally agree with the last paragraph Kitkat, everyone needs to let those politicians know we want effectiveness, not the status quo that costs the lives of many a military member and innocent civilian. However, I can assure you, the war we are fighting is not half ass, the bullets are real, the bombs are real, and the bodies are real. Its hard to fight an enemy who blends himself with innocents, its not even so much a war anymore as a giant police investigation to find out where these cowards are so we can exterminate them, but by no means half ass, were trying our best.


Sweden Norway and Denmark, have the luxury of A. Knowing that they do not need a military infrastructure because the UN will protect them (Which everyone else knows means the United States and England, since virtually every other UN country has taken the money from their military and throw it into their economies, and yes foreign aid. B. They are countries that have the benefit of neutral status, since criminals from every nation in the world like to bank there, since they are very unwilling to allow funds of known terrorists to be siezed. They have very few fears and their populations are all taxed heavily, therefore the government has more money to throw towards foreign aid. I don't think its a bad thing, but let us not attack the United States for its apparent "lack of care" since its are the reason most countries are able to live with little or no military, they know that they will be protected.

Debt Repayments,

Well money doesnt grow on trees, I work, and fight and pay taxes like every other American , I am all about loaning countries money to help build their economies, but I expect it to be paid back with intrest, thats how loans work. If they didnt like the terms they shouldnt have accepted the loan. My government is nice enough to only take about 35 percent of it, so we cannot give as much aid as other countries, well I worked for my money and I have a right to spend it on what I see fit, and aid for africa I am sorry is just not as high on my list as trying to feed starving Vietnam vets. We had some of the worst hurricanes in history, I did not see the outcry of aid other countries recieve in similar situations.

Oh and Kitkat, I did a tour in Rwanda my first year in the Military, that place is so horrifing it defies words. The first night there, 4 women were killed in the village across the river and we wernt allowed to do anything because of the UN fumbling its hands. 3 days later we were evacuated because our presense was no longer legal, 3 days later that village was massacred. That event made me despise the worthlessness that is the UN more than anything. Hopefully today we can see the troubles in rwanda and exterminate those who would commit such vile acts. But we have to commit to action, because debating in the air conditioned UN building over which country should do what is just the kind of useless diplomatic garbage that has allowed Iran to get to the point of Nuclear Enrichment. The UN needs to either learn to work how it was supposed to, or forget ever being recognized by the United States as anything other than a bunch of over educated fools with no experience in the reality of nation building or war.

You know it all comes down to this, every country in the world, talks bad about us, insults us on every level, mocks us, calls us ignorant, then expects us to help them and their causes whenever they are in trouble. The United States is getting really tired of it. I often wonder at night, if we just stuck to our side of the world and let europe stick to its side of the pond if we would be better off.

[KitKat]

Originally posted by: ImitationSanen
However, I can assure you, the war we are fighting is not half ass, the bullets are real, the bombs are real, and the bodies are real.

Very true, and I apologize for being unclear. What I wanted to say was, you should be putting as much effort into fighting poverty as you are into the war.

I don't think its a bad thing, but let us not attack the United States for its apparent "lack of care" since its are the reason most countries are able to live with little or no military, they know that they will be protected.

Don't think I'm attacking just the United States. Although I've been speaking directly of your government policies, drawing on examples from the Iraq war, these are issues that all of us should be raising with our governments, as it is an issue that should be of concern to all of humanity. In fact, every point I've brought up the Canadian government is equally responsible for and I've been working hard to hold them accountable for it as well. Keep in mind though it's not just quantity of aid (in fact, sometimes aid can be extremely damaging to developing communities) but the quality of aid. Even if the amount of aid was kept constant, but became untied, or if trade laws were placed to ensure more equitable conditions for people struggling to survive, we'd have incredible improvement. To give you an example, most of the rice eaten by people in Ghana is American rice. How can this be, since rice is one of the main crops of Ghana, and labour is far more expensive in the US, in addition to the fact that the rice must be flown overseas? The answer is that the American government provides large subsidies to their farmers, allowing those farmers to sell rice at extremely low prices, undercutting local markets in Ghana. It's cheaper for them to buy American rice than to grow their own. Now, Canada doesn't grow rice, but we do the exact same thing with many other products that we subsidize.

Well money doesnt grow on trees, I work, and fight and pay taxes like every other American , I am all about loaning countries money to help build their economies, but I expect it to be paid back with intrest, thats how loans work. If they didnt like the terms they shouldnt have accepted the loan.

I think this is unfair to many countries. Take for example, South Africa. After apartheid, when they became independent, they inherited the debts of their previous oppressors. In this way, the South African people are still paying for their own oppression. Many countries also have debts incurred by military dictators. Is it fair to make a country pay back the money spent to kill and control their citizens? After World War II, the US allowed Britain lower interest rates on their debt to allow them space to rebuild. The interest collected on third world debt is much higher than this, and they are given no space at all. If you are an individual and you find yourself heavily in debt, you can always declare bancruptcy. Countries don't have this option. It is the very debt repayment strategies imposed by organizations like the IMF and World Bank that have plunged these countries even farther into poverty and crisis.

My government is nice enough to only take about 35 percent of it, so we cannot give as much aid as other countries, well I worked for my money and I have a right to spend it on what I see fit, and aid for africa I am sorry is just not as high on my list as trying to feed starving Vietnam vets. We had some of the worst hurricanes in history, I did not see the outcry of aid other countries recieve in similar situations.

Canada's (previous, if the election results so far are accurate) prime minister tried the same tactic and just as I don't buy it from him, I don't buy it here. Let's be perfectly honest here. It's not that we can't afford it. We're two of the richest countries in the world. Our economies are growing and our standard of living is enormously high. The reason we think we can't give that much aid is that we don't want to give up our standard of living. We think that by the random chance we were born into these countries, we are entitled to the money we earn. Let me tell you, I know that I do not work half as hard as the woman in Ghana who spends all day carrying water from a stream in buckets just to irrigate her crops or the child in Zambia who has to work in the field instead of going to school just to have food the next day. These people know hard work, and all they ever see from it is the ability to keep on living day to day.

As for the hurricanes, it's true that they were among the worst in recent history and wreaked terrible damage. The reason there was no worldwide outpouring of money showering down on you is because your country is capable of dealing with something like this (although, I know there was some since my local community did raise a lot of money for hurricane relief when Katrina hit). When a disaster happens in north america, we have the capacity to rebuild and rally round to contain the consequences. In a situation such as the Tsunami of last year, the consequences are multiplied to gigantic proportions due to poverty. The people there don't have the infrastructure or the resources to cope. To give you a more down to earth example: For me here in Canada, a summer without rain on my farm means that my family makes less money that year, and maybe we have to give up that winter vacation or putting that addition on the house that year. For a farmer in Zambia, a drought means death.

But we have to commit to action, because debating in the air conditioned UN building over which country should do what is just the kind of useless diplomatic garbage that has allowed Iran to get to the point of Nuclear Enrichment. The UN needs to either learn to work how it was supposed to, or forget ever being recognized by the United States as anything other than a bunch of over educated fools with no experience in the reality of nation building or war.

Granted, there are some serious problems with the UN. However, I don't think that it's possible to do without it. An impartial organization is essential otherwise there is no external accountability and countries do whatever they see fit. If the UN isn't doing it's job, find a way to fix it or create a new organization free of any national interests. We all see things according to our own biases and priorities, and none of us can be trusted to act impartially on our own.

You know it all comes down to this, every country in the world, talks bad about us, insults us on every level, mocks us, calls us ignorant, then expects us to help them and their causes whenever they are in trouble. The United States is getting really tired of it. I often wonder at night, if we just stuck to our side of the world and let europe stick to its side of the pond if we would be better off.

It would be nice, wouldn't it, if all we had to do was govern our own countries and forget the rest of the world. Too bad our economies are directly dependent upon those countries across the pond. And for the record, there are many Canadians who support the US. Canada's (presumably) new prime minister Stephen Harper is a supporter of George Bush and wants to pledge more Canadian troops to US initiatives.

But back to my original point, reducing poverty around the world would save us a lot of trouble in the long run. The reason military dictators can come into power is because people are helpless, powerless, and lack the necessary education to be able to stop it, or can't see it happening until there is a soldier standing over them with a gun (I know, I'm oversimplifying....but this post is long enough as it is). You may think that other countries are letting you down by investing in foreign aid rather than their militaries, but contributing to development of impoverished nations and empowering their people is just as effective a weapon against terrorism as the work you are carrying out right now with your troops, in my opinion. Not to say that the military doesn't play a role, since there will inevitably always be armed conflict, but development should have just as much of a role, rather than being marginalized in our societies.

[ImitationSanen]

Kitkat,

I cant say I agree with you on many of the issues we talked about however, I read your post a few times, it was well written and the opinions you put forth were backed up by what I thought to be great reasoning. I honestly feel like ive learned something. I do believe I am entitled to every dime I earn, and that money should be spent to repair the countries own problems before trying to repair others. However that was the way I was raised to believe, I think at this point we would have to just agree that different value systems taught in each country will likely dictate this and their is no correct and incorrect answer.

I did not mean that we recieved no aid, The United Kingdom sent several Helos and paratroopers to help rescue efforts, and I would like to thank the generous people of Canada for the money and time they have donated to help the relief effort for the victims of the Gulf hurricanes. I am glad to see that even though we often disagree, when we are in trouble we can drop the politics in order to preserve human life.

About the UN, if it was an impartial organization that would be wonderful, however with the recent oil for food scandals among others, in my opinion shows its inability to be impartial. I do believe though, that with the 21st century just begining and the way information travels the world in seconds, a forum of international communication is required, I just wish for one that consisted of less beaucratic garbage, and more ability to act for the good of the world. then again, who is it that decides what is good for the world? That I don't have the answer to.

Again would like to say good post, I appreciate you interpreting my sometimes over emotional take on issues involving my nation as love for my nation not hatred for others. In an ideal world, I wish everyone had something to eat, a place to sleep at night and the ability to practice what they believe without fear of reprisal.

[Kraco]

Originally posted by: ImitationSanen
We had some of the worst hurricanes in history, I did not see the outcry of aid other countries recieve in similar situations.

That's both true and untrue. One side is what KitKat mentioned: You are the richest country in the world and thus it wouldn't make much sense to pour money in your direction. However, many countries reacted immediately to send material aid that no country, no matter how rich, couldn't produce in short time, unless it was already ready and waiting.

Originally posted by: ImitationSanen
You know it all comes down to this, every country in the world, talks bad about us, insults us on every level, mocks us, calls us ignorant, then expects us to help them and their causes whenever they are in trouble. The United States is getting really tired of it.

This might be the first time when I actually see an American fully believing in that propaganda. Some anarchist has succeeded.

[KitKat]

ImitationSanen, I am likewise grateful that you have been understanding of my overzealous ideal to end poverty. International development is something that few people understand well, but is one of the things I am most passionate about. Being able to learn from each other is the best possible outcome that can come about at an online forum such as this. I think your love for your country is an awesome thing, because it will motivate you to work to improve your country and not just settle for the status quo or be satisfied with policy decisions you feel go against the core values your nation was founded on. We're all taught to look out for ourselves first, but more and more these days, the gaps are getting smaller and we are all finding ourselves to be citizens of a global community. What nature this global community will take on, I'm not to sure since it's still changing and evolving. All we can do is what we think is best.

[masamuneehs]

Updated again. Things are getting really messy in Iraq recently. Theres been some serious conflict in the past couple days, and not aimed against the foreign armies.

The response from the Iraqi government is a curfew in the more turbulent provinces. And I dont mean be home before dinner. Were talking about a daytime curfew. No cars, no going to market, no going to mosque and (and this is probably the real aim of the curfew) no going to a large religious event this week.

It started when the famous mosque in Samarra was destroyed on Wednesday. The mosque at Samarra is a Shiite mosque that was known for its golden dome. Since then over 130 Iraqis have died, along with 7 US troops (roadside bombs). Over 100 Sunni mosques have been attacked, ranging from drive-by shootings to entire takeovers and burnings.

Its the first time the civil war has really been used as a phrase to describe what the events might lead to.

However, since the curfew has been imposed the violence has greatly decreased (obviously I mean, if you cant leave your house theres not going to be much ruckus to create)

http://www.canada.com/topics/n...6070b37cdc&k=77742
http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WO...meast/02/24/iraq.main/
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,1717196,00.html

[Xollence]

Well the curfew's been lifted and there are even more bombings and deaths.

It already is a civil war.

[masamuneehs]

The following documents have been ordained 'declassified' information and made available to the public by the Pentagon.

These records pertain to Guantanamo, the U.S. military prison in Cuba. Several human rights groups and the U.N. have asked the U.S. to close the prison in the past, claiming that it violates several international laws and codes including torture and unfair trials. The U.S. has no intention of closing the base.

These are the first concrete records to be released about the Guantanamo Prison since 9/11. They include:

Names of 'detainees' and nationality.
Testimony of Detainees Before the Combatant Status Review Tribunal
Testimony of Detainees Before the Administrative Review Board
and (and in my opinion much more interesting)
Administrative Review Board Summaries of Detention/Release Factors

You can find the documents here:
Reprocessed Combatant Status Review Tribunal