Military's interaction with foreign kids will be long remembered
published 12/28/05
This is a story about children in foreign lands and how Americans interact with them. The first part is from ABC News.
A little boy was brought to the station where the paramedics were working in a remote valley in Kashmir. He was lifeless in his father’s arms, and the paramedics from New York City could not even find a vein to start an IV due to his dehydration.
They started an IV into his shin, while the child showed no indication that anyone had touched him. A half hour later, the child was crying and protesting the strange men speaking a strange tongue who were sticking needles into his arm. As he tried to escape the strange (heat-retaining) blankets to get to his father, these same strange men would not let him. But he could clearly see his father, who had a smile on his face as he cried tears of joy. His son was clearly going to live.
Now that child did not understand the situation he was in, but it is clear that when he grows up, his father will see to it that he knows what happened.
He will know who exactly saved his life after he got sick with double pneumonia and became severely dehydrated. The father had already lost his wife and daughter to the earthquake, and his joy at seeing his son survive was very obvious and heart warming.
Another story involving children and American men came from the pages of the Asheville Citizen-Times, a story about U.S. troops interacting with Iraqi children. That article stated: “Soldiers generally believe the presence of children lowers the chance of enemy attack.” To believe such a thing, and to then go to where children are, would indicate that the soldiers are willing to use the children as human shields. I sincerely hope this is wrong.
Children are generally delightful, and I am sure that is true no matter what part of the world they come from. In the article called “Winning Small Hearts and Minds in Iraq” the soldiers were giving candy and toys to the children in Iraq. At first, the children reacted with fear to their presence, which in light of the fact that they are in a war zone, would be the normal and expected response. They soon warmed up to the men, and it appears all had a good time.
However, it was not prudent on the part of the soldiers to reduce the children’s fear of getting close to U.S. troops. It puts them at risk, since there are 80 to 100 attacks per day against U.S. troops in Iraq. (This is the overwhelming majority of attacks, by the way, even though we hear more about the attacks against civilians, which result in a higher death toll.) One teacher at this school stated very plainly: her primary concern was the sewers. It matters not if the children get candy and trinkets if they get sick from the unclean water and lack of sanitation.
The soldiers and their families gathered the toys and the candies that were handed out that day. I applaud them for trying to brighten the children’s lives. However, I do not feel it is prudent or safe (at this time) for them to personally hand out these items or interact with the children. They could certainly place the items in boxes with a note saying they are from the Americans, and drop the boxes off with the teachers.
I have heard many painful stories of children around U.S. troops who have fallen victim to the violence overwhelming Iraq at this time. The fact that they are near U.S. troops marks them as targets for the terrorists. Recently there was a report of a terrorist bombing directed toward U.S. troops handing out toys to children in a hospital in central Iraq.
We must do everything possible to keep these children alive and provide them with a future. I would like to see our U.S. Congress, particularly Sen. Elizabeth Dole, R-N.C., who serves on the U.S. Armed Services Committee, redirect our troops’ efforts in Iraq. The troops should focus on providing security, clean water, sewers, electricity and medical services in Iraq, all of which are in dire need of improvement.
They can collect and distribute toys and candy for children, but their interaction with the children should be limited to providing direct medical care only in the event of an emergency. Playing with the children, and interacting with the children, will have to wait until the day when peace comes to Iraq.
And when these children grow up, their parents will see to it that they understand and remember what happened when they were too young to understand.
Link to publication.
Thursday, December 29, 2005
Saturday, December 24, 2005
About Zarqawi's letters
Isn't it rather odd that the US military in Iraq can intercept a letter reportedly to Zarqawi, yet they cannot find Zarqawi himself?
And isn't this the third or fourth letter intercepted? How come they seem to mirror Mr. Bush's ominous talking points about Iraq?
What ever happened to that Pentagon "Office of Strategic Influence" anyway? Well, here's what Mr. Rumsfeld had to say about it:
"And then there was the Office of Strategic Influence. You may recall that. And 'oh my goodness gracious isn't that terrible, Henny Penny the sky is going to fall.' I went down that next day and said fine, if you want to savage this thing fine I'll give you the corpse. There's the name. You can have the name, but I'm gonna keep doing every single thing that needs to be done and I have."
Indeed, I think he has.
And isn't this the third or fourth letter intercepted? How come they seem to mirror Mr. Bush's ominous talking points about Iraq?
What ever happened to that Pentagon "Office of Strategic Influence" anyway? Well, here's what Mr. Rumsfeld had to say about it:
"And then there was the Office of Strategic Influence. You may recall that. And 'oh my goodness gracious isn't that terrible, Henny Penny the sky is going to fall.' I went down that next day and said fine, if you want to savage this thing fine I'll give you the corpse. There's the name. You can have the name, but I'm gonna keep doing every single thing that needs to be done and I have."
Indeed, I think he has.
Friday, December 23, 2005
Concerning Zarqawi's letters (letter to the editor)
Isn't it rather odd that the US military in Iraq can intercept a letter reportedly to Zarqawi, yet they cannot find Zarqawi himself?
And isn't this the third or fourth letter intercepted? How come they seem to mirror Mr. Bush's ominous talking points about Iraq?
What ever happened to that Pentagon "Office of Strategic Influence" anyway? Well, here's what Mr. Rumsfeld had to say about it:
"And then there was the Office of Strategic Influence. You may recall that. And 'oh my goodness gracious isn't that terrible, Henny Penny the sky is going to fall.' I went down that next day and said fine, if you want to savage this thing fine I'll give you the corpse. There's the name. You can have the name, but I'm gonna keep doing every single thing that needs to be done and I have."
Indeed, I think he has.
And isn't this the third or fourth letter intercepted? How come they seem to mirror Mr. Bush's ominous talking points about Iraq?
What ever happened to that Pentagon "Office of Strategic Influence" anyway? Well, here's what Mr. Rumsfeld had to say about it:
"And then there was the Office of Strategic Influence. You may recall that. And 'oh my goodness gracious isn't that terrible, Henny Penny the sky is going to fall.' I went down that next day and said fine, if you want to savage this thing fine I'll give you the corpse. There's the name. You can have the name, but I'm gonna keep doing every single thing that needs to be done and I have."
Indeed, I think he has.
Thursday, December 22, 2005
Letter to Christian Science Monitor
John Hughes claims in his article that "...people must decide whether Bush, in the face of all this opinion, was lying and really knew Hussein did not have these weapons, or whether he believed, on the basis of overwhelming opinion at the time (which ultimately proved to be wrong), that the threat was real."
It certainly was a popular position at the time (and now) that "overwhelming opinion" said that Iraq had WMDs, but this most certainly not the case outside the USA, then or now.
I work as a pediatric audiologist in North Carolina, and I used my six year old notebook computer and an AOL connection to determine that there were no nuclear WMDs in Iraq by October 2002. Furthermore, if there were chemical or biological weapons there (which was plausible) there was certainly no means for Saddam to deliver them to the USA, hence no threat. I reached these conclusions by reading widely from around the world, and researching available evidence.
If I could do this, so could the White House and the US Congress. My conclusion is that they are either liars or amazingly gullible fools.
Here is some memorable evidence I uncovered:
Rice and Powell both publicly stated in early 2001 that Saddam was contained and not a threat.
Many on the UN Security Council did not believe that Iraq was a threat.
There had been no WMDs uncovered in Iraq since 1991.
All prior WMDs uncovered in Iraq were done so with the assistance of Iraqi weapons and intelligence experts.
In 1998, the UN weapons inspectors left because Clinton was going to start bombing Iraq, not because Saddam kicked them out. The UN weapons inspections had been compromised by political agendas back here in the USA which Clinton signed on to.
There was no concrete evidence that Saddam had restarted his nuclear weapons program since 1998, and there was no nuclear weapons program in 1998.
There were credible former UN weapons inspectors (notable Ritter) claiming that Iraq had no nuclear weapons.
A working connection between Saddam and bin Laden defied common sense.
After October 2002, more evidence emerged:
UN weapons inspectors numbered in the hundreds were on the ground and were finding nothing of significance.
With the exception of Kuwait and Israel, Iraq's neighboring countries did not feel Iraq was a threat and did not want a war started there in Iraq. If Jordan, Turkey, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iran and several other middle eastern countries did not feel a threat, how could there possibly be a threat to the USA or Europe? Again, it defied common sense.
Powell's presentation at the UN was based on circumstantial evidence. Almost no one at the UN bought it. Many sources outside the USA discredited what he had to say immediately afterwards. This mainly went unreported in the US media.
Saddam publicly stated on British TV that he had no WMDs and no connections to bin Laden. He said if he did have a connection, he would be proud to announce it. This went unreported in the US media.
Tens of millions of people around the world demonstrated against this war, which was unprecedented in history. With a few minor exceptions, this was mainly ignored in the US media. I saw no real attempt to have a discussion with these protestors as to why they were objecting to this war. There was no real attempt to bring in dissenting voices of some authority into the mainstream of discussion. Rather, they were often ridiculed and dismissed, both in the media and by US officials.
With these above mentioned events going on in the world, it was clear to me that mainstream media in the USA, particularly television, was not to be trusted.
There was growing and growing evidence in 2003 that there were no WMDs in Iraq. After the war started, I remember sending an emotional letter to one of my Senators, John Edwards, saying "I hope you find those WMDs in Iraq so you can justify this illegal and immoral war."
I knew he would not. I knew the nuclear WMDs were not there, and quite likely there were no biological or chemical ones either. I predicted, and I sincerely hope I am someday proven wrong, that Iraq would melt down into a civil war that will spread to a regional war engulfing the entire middle east. I would be very happy to be wrong about something concerning this war. I do not buy that "everyone thought" that Iraq had WMDs because that is simply not true, particularly in the world at large. I do not believe that this administration and the prior US Congress could not figure this out. If that premise is true, then they are fools. And if they did figure it out, then they are tools (liars).
Fools or tools.... you pick. Either way, we need to get them out of office and elect people who are both intelligent and honest. I do hope you publish this to counter the prevailing position that "overwhelming opinion" around the world said that Iraq had WMDs. That was delusional then, and now.
They did not publish my letter.
It certainly was a popular position at the time (and now) that "overwhelming opinion" said that Iraq had WMDs, but this most certainly not the case outside the USA, then or now.
I work as a pediatric audiologist in North Carolina, and I used my six year old notebook computer and an AOL connection to determine that there were no nuclear WMDs in Iraq by October 2002. Furthermore, if there were chemical or biological weapons there (which was plausible) there was certainly no means for Saddam to deliver them to the USA, hence no threat. I reached these conclusions by reading widely from around the world, and researching available evidence.
If I could do this, so could the White House and the US Congress. My conclusion is that they are either liars or amazingly gullible fools.
Here is some memorable evidence I uncovered:
Rice and Powell both publicly stated in early 2001 that Saddam was contained and not a threat.
Many on the UN Security Council did not believe that Iraq was a threat.
There had been no WMDs uncovered in Iraq since 1991.
All prior WMDs uncovered in Iraq were done so with the assistance of Iraqi weapons and intelligence experts.
In 1998, the UN weapons inspectors left because Clinton was going to start bombing Iraq, not because Saddam kicked them out. The UN weapons inspections had been compromised by political agendas back here in the USA which Clinton signed on to.
There was no concrete evidence that Saddam had restarted his nuclear weapons program since 1998, and there was no nuclear weapons program in 1998.
There were credible former UN weapons inspectors (notable Ritter) claiming that Iraq had no nuclear weapons.
A working connection between Saddam and bin Laden defied common sense.
After October 2002, more evidence emerged:
UN weapons inspectors numbered in the hundreds were on the ground and were finding nothing of significance.
With the exception of Kuwait and Israel, Iraq's neighboring countries did not feel Iraq was a threat and did not want a war started there in Iraq. If Jordan, Turkey, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iran and several other middle eastern countries did not feel a threat, how could there possibly be a threat to the USA or Europe? Again, it defied common sense.
Powell's presentation at the UN was based on circumstantial evidence. Almost no one at the UN bought it. Many sources outside the USA discredited what he had to say immediately afterwards. This mainly went unreported in the US media.
Saddam publicly stated on British TV that he had no WMDs and no connections to bin Laden. He said if he did have a connection, he would be proud to announce it. This went unreported in the US media.
Tens of millions of people around the world demonstrated against this war, which was unprecedented in history. With a few minor exceptions, this was mainly ignored in the US media. I saw no real attempt to have a discussion with these protestors as to why they were objecting to this war. There was no real attempt to bring in dissenting voices of some authority into the mainstream of discussion. Rather, they were often ridiculed and dismissed, both in the media and by US officials.
With these above mentioned events going on in the world, it was clear to me that mainstream media in the USA, particularly television, was not to be trusted.
There was growing and growing evidence in 2003 that there were no WMDs in Iraq. After the war started, I remember sending an emotional letter to one of my Senators, John Edwards, saying "I hope you find those WMDs in Iraq so you can justify this illegal and immoral war."
I knew he would not. I knew the nuclear WMDs were not there, and quite likely there were no biological or chemical ones either. I predicted, and I sincerely hope I am someday proven wrong, that Iraq would melt down into a civil war that will spread to a regional war engulfing the entire middle east. I would be very happy to be wrong about something concerning this war. I do not buy that "everyone thought" that Iraq had WMDs because that is simply not true, particularly in the world at large. I do not believe that this administration and the prior US Congress could not figure this out. If that premise is true, then they are fools. And if they did figure it out, then they are tools (liars).
Fools or tools.... you pick. Either way, we need to get them out of office and elect people who are both intelligent and honest. I do hope you publish this to counter the prevailing position that "overwhelming opinion" around the world said that Iraq had WMDs. That was delusional then, and now.
They did not publish my letter.
Wednesday, December 21, 2005
Information on Progressive Democrats of America
How is PDA Different From DFA (Democracy For America), MoveOn, Progressive Majority, etc?
This question is asked so many times that we thought we’d give you some talking points to help answer the question.
PDA is the only group that coordinates with progressive leaders on the hill. By organizing on a Congressional District model, PDA serves as the grassroots base for the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC).
PDA is the only group organizing progressives within the DNC.
PDA is the only group that works through our inside/outside strategy to move social movements into the political process of the Democratic Party.
PDA works on state party reform by supporting progressive activists to gain voice and vote within their state party structure and by embracing the Progressive Caucus model within the Democratic Party’s State Committee.
PDA is accountable to no one except the grassroots who support us. We rely on donations from grassroots “Sustainers” to support our work. Please go here to contribute.
More information on Progressive Democrats of America here.
PDA is not a click-and-join organization. We are about feet on the street and heat in the street.
“Who is left to open the eyes of the country – to tell Americans what is happening? There is no one left, none but all of us.” Bill Moyers 10/1/05
This question is asked so many times that we thought we’d give you some talking points to help answer the question.
PDA is the only group that coordinates with progressive leaders on the hill. By organizing on a Congressional District model, PDA serves as the grassroots base for the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC).
PDA is the only group organizing progressives within the DNC.
PDA is the only group that works through our inside/outside strategy to move social movements into the political process of the Democratic Party.
PDA works on state party reform by supporting progressive activists to gain voice and vote within their state party structure and by embracing the Progressive Caucus model within the Democratic Party’s State Committee.
PDA is accountable to no one except the grassroots who support us. We rely on donations from grassroots “Sustainers” to support our work. Please go here to contribute.
More information on Progressive Democrats of America here.
PDA is not a click-and-join organization. We are about feet on the street and heat in the street.
“Who is left to open the eyes of the country – to tell Americans what is happening? There is no one left, none but all of us.” Bill Moyers 10/1/05
Tuesday, December 20, 2005
Bush makes some comments
From Bush's comments on 12/19/05
BUSH: "If you think the terrorists would become peaceful if only America would stop provoking them, then it might make sense to leave them alone."
I recommend we stop provoking them and NOT leave them alone. Talk to them, study them, try to understand what they are about and try to anticipate what they might try next. As soon as they commit a crime, arrest them, try them, and if guilty, lock them up for life. Conspiracy to commit murder is a crime.
BUSH: "September the 11th, 2001 required us to take every emerging threat to our country seriously, and it shattered the illusion that terrorists attack us only after we provoke them."
This ignores the reality that you and former US officials, had been provoking them for decades.
BUSH: "My conviction comes down to this: We do not create terrorism by fighting the terrorists. We invite terrorism by ignoring them."
No, you create terrorists by killing and harming innocents. You invite terrorism by ignoring this reality and showing the world you do not care.
BUSH (referring to terrorists): "fear the rise of a democratic Iraq."
So how come they called a truce for the election?
BUSH: "I see the consequences when I talk to parents who miss a child so much -- but tell me he loved being a soldier, he believed in his mission, and, Mr. President, finish the job."
I want to see you publicly encourage your daughters to serve in Iraq.
BUSH: "If you think the terrorists would become peaceful if only America would stop provoking them, then it might make sense to leave them alone."
I recommend we stop provoking them and NOT leave them alone. Talk to them, study them, try to understand what they are about and try to anticipate what they might try next. As soon as they commit a crime, arrest them, try them, and if guilty, lock them up for life. Conspiracy to commit murder is a crime.
BUSH: "September the 11th, 2001 required us to take every emerging threat to our country seriously, and it shattered the illusion that terrorists attack us only after we provoke them."
This ignores the reality that you and former US officials, had been provoking them for decades.
BUSH: "My conviction comes down to this: We do not create terrorism by fighting the terrorists. We invite terrorism by ignoring them."
No, you create terrorists by killing and harming innocents. You invite terrorism by ignoring this reality and showing the world you do not care.
BUSH (referring to terrorists): "fear the rise of a democratic Iraq."
So how come they called a truce for the election?
BUSH: "I see the consequences when I talk to parents who miss a child so much -- but tell me he loved being a soldier, he believed in his mission, and, Mr. President, finish the job."
I want to see you publicly encourage your daughters to serve in Iraq.
Saturday, November 12, 2005
What the MNF publications said
MNF Iraq Operations from their publication
Summary October 22-28, 2005
Combined operations: 220
IEDs found and cleared: 144
Anti-Iraqi forces detained: 485
Foreign fighters captured or killed: 29
Weapons caches found and cleared: 53
From Iraq Coalition Casualties website, same dates.
US and Coalition Fatalities: 17 (Fatalities from IEDs: 8)
Iraqis civilians killed: 168
Iraqi police and military killed: 191
I feel this rather shows that they are losing a lot to IEDs, in spite of the number found. It shows that most of the forces fighting them are Iraqis, not foreigners. It also shows that the Iraqi police and military, and the Iraqi civilians, are taking a much, much higher toll than the US forces.
As always, the civilians and native populations pay a heavier price for war.
Summary October 22-28, 2005
Combined operations: 220
IEDs found and cleared: 144
Anti-Iraqi forces detained: 485
Foreign fighters captured or killed: 29
Weapons caches found and cleared: 53
From Iraq Coalition Casualties website, same dates.
US and Coalition Fatalities: 17 (Fatalities from IEDs: 8)
Iraqis civilians killed: 168
Iraqi police and military killed: 191
I feel this rather shows that they are losing a lot to IEDs, in spite of the number found. It shows that most of the forces fighting them are Iraqis, not foreigners. It also shows that the Iraqi police and military, and the Iraqi civilians, are taking a much, much higher toll than the US forces.
As always, the civilians and native populations pay a heavier price for war.
Thursday, November 10, 2005
Department of Peace meeting
Here in western North Carolina, we had our first meeting to promote the Department of Peace in the USA on October 29, 2005. The department would be a cabinet level position, and have equal footing with other cabinet level positions in the President’s cabinet. It is now in the proposal stage, and I think it will take a long time to make it a reality. The purpose of such a department would be to provide the President with verified recommendations on how a specific policy either decreases or increases the prospect of domestic and international peace. Another purpose would be to provide the President with recommendations regarding the social and financial impacts of domestic and international policies. This department would work on both international and domestic causes of violence and how to address these. Our American society often feels it needs to control violent people with violence, when another more human and compassionate response would work better. Of course, this will take a long while to get this Department of Peace established, and it will have no impact on a man like Mr. Bush.
More information can be found at The Peace Alliance.
People came to our meeting from GA, VI, NC, SC, TN. There were military people present also. Lynn McMullen was our speaker for this meeting/workshop. A women shared the story of explaining war to a very young child, who said: "Why are they so mad they would kill people they don't know?"
A musician at this workshop wrote this song:
Give peace a voice; let our hearts be heard,
Sounding our choice to love and preserve,
Give peace a voice, uniting nations of the world.
by Shawn Galloway
I have neglected this blog for almost two months, and that is somewhat due to the blogging I have been doing on Today In Iraq. I generally post there on Friday and Saturdays, but I fill in on other days. I will try to up date this blog at least every weekend.
More information can be found at The Peace Alliance.
People came to our meeting from GA, VI, NC, SC, TN. There were military people present also. Lynn McMullen was our speaker for this meeting/workshop. A women shared the story of explaining war to a very young child, who said: "Why are they so mad they would kill people they don't know?"
A musician at this workshop wrote this song:
Give peace a voice; let our hearts be heard,
Sounding our choice to love and preserve,
Give peace a voice, uniting nations of the world.
by Shawn Galloway
I have neglected this blog for almost two months, and that is somewhat due to the blogging I have been doing on Today In Iraq. I generally post there on Friday and Saturdays, but I fill in on other days. I will try to up date this blog at least every weekend.
Thursday, November 03, 2005
Today's toll.............
From Reuters AlertNet on 11-02-05
Car bomb in central Iraq killed at least 23 people.
Earlier, roadside bombs and shootings killed at least 12 people.
US forces did an air strike in Ramadi, killed 35 people.
Two roadside bombs in Baghdad killed 5 civilians and 5 Iraqi soldiers.
Iraqi policeman shot in Baghdad.
Iraqi soldier killed by a bomb in Falluja.
Two insurgents killed by US forces.
At least 6 insurgents killed in safe houses in Qusayba by US bombs.
Doctors in Qusayba say 15 Iraqi civilians were killed in these US air strikes.
So, what's the total?
90 Iraqi civilians.
7 Iraqi police and soldiers
8 insurgents
and 4 US troops.
So, Iraqis are dying at 26 times the rate of US troops.
What an evil tragedy the US government has started here.
Car bomb in central Iraq killed at least 23 people.
Earlier, roadside bombs and shootings killed at least 12 people.
US forces did an air strike in Ramadi, killed 35 people.
Two roadside bombs in Baghdad killed 5 civilians and 5 Iraqi soldiers.
Iraqi policeman shot in Baghdad.
Iraqi soldier killed by a bomb in Falluja.
Two insurgents killed by US forces.
At least 6 insurgents killed in safe houses in Qusayba by US bombs.
Doctors in Qusayba say 15 Iraqi civilians were killed in these US air strikes.
So, what's the total?
90 Iraqi civilians.
7 Iraqi police and soldiers
8 insurgents
and 4 US troops.
So, Iraqis are dying at 26 times the rate of US troops.
What an evil tragedy the US government has started here.
Saturday, October 29, 2005
What the Senators are saying
IN AFTERMATH OF 2,000 AMERICAN DEATHS IN IRAQ:
CONGRESSIONAL RHETORIC STRONGER;
SENATE LEGISLATIVE FOLLOW-THROUGH STILL ABSENT;
Sen. Robert Byrd (D‑WV)
The American people seek an end, they seek an end, they want an end to this ongoing bloody war in Iraq, not new conflicts in neighboring countries.
Senate floor statement ‑ October 25, 2005
Sen. Dick Durbin (D‑IL)
Each step the Iraqis take toward the successful establishment of self‑governance should bring our troops a step closer to home . . . The choice we face in Iraq is not a choice between resolve or retreat. The men and women in our military and their loved ones deserve a clear path to stability in Iraq so they can come home as soon as humanly possible.
Senate floor statement ‑ October 25, 2005
Sen. Russell Feingold (D‑WI)
As my colleagues may know, I have suggested a target date of December 31, 2006, the end of next year, for the completion of our military mission. Today, I want to talk a little bit about why a flexible timetable for withdrawal will help make the U.S. stronger and our enemies weaker . . . But with the words of Republicans like Melvin Laird and military leaders like General Casey, more and more people understand that having a flexible timetable will strengthen our national security. This is not a timetable where the objective is troop withdrawal, the objective is to focus on our national security needs and the timetable is one step towards that goal. A timetable is not about domestic politics‑‑it's about undercutting insurgency recruiting and unity, encouraging more Iraqi ownership and responsibility, and creating space for other important U.S. national security efforts.
Senate floor statement ‑ October 25, 2005
Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA)
Asked how the Mr. Bush could revive the plan [to revamp Social Security], Iowa’s Sen. Charles Grassley replied: “Get the troops out of Iraq and get New Orleans rebuilt.”
Wall Street Journal - October 20, 2005
Sen. Edward Kennedy (D‑MA)
Instead of covering up mistakes in Iraq, it is time for the President to admit them, to adopt an effective strategy to end this war and begin to bring our troops home, and to stop ignoring the very real priorities facing the Nation and the many many challenges facing us at home and abroad.
Senate floor statement ‑ October 25, 2005
Sen. John Kerry (D-MA)
The way forward in Iraq is not to pull out precipitously or merely promise to stay “as long as it takes.” To undermine the insurgency, we must instead simultaneously pursue both a political settlement and the withdrawal of American combat forces linked to specific, responsible benchmarks. At the first benchmark, the completion of the December elections, we can start the process of reducing our forces by withdrawing 20,000 troops over the course of the holidays . . . It will be hard for this Administration, but it is essential to acknowledge that the insurgency will not be defeated unless our troop levels are drawn down, starting immediately after successful elections in December. The draw down of troops should be tied not to an arbitrary timetable, but to a specific timetable for transfer of political and security responsibility to Iraqis and realignment of our troop deployment. That timetable must be real and strict. The goal should be to withdraw the bulk of American combat forces by the end of next year.
Speech at Georgetown University - October 26, 2005
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D‑VT)
Without answers‑‑real answers, honest answers‑‑to these questions, I will not support the open‑ended deployment of our troops in a war that was based on falsehood and justified with hubris . . . Once a new Iraqi government is in place, I believe the President should consult with Congress on a flexible plan that includes pulling our troops back from the densely populated areas where they are suffering the worst casualties and to bring them home.
Senate floor statement ‑ October 25, 2005
Sen. Carl Levin (D‑MI)
MR. RUSSERT: There are now about 150,000 Americans on the ground in Iraq. Knowing what you know about the situation in Iraq and knowing what you know about American politics, how many Americans do you believe will be in Iraq come November of 2006 when the mid‑term congressional elections take place?
SEN. LEVIN: Less than we have there now. For one of two reasons. Either because the Iraqis will put their own house in order, both politically and security‑wise, or they won't. Either way, there is going to be fewer troops there because if the Iraqis can handle the situation, that obviously will lead to fewer troops. But if they refuse to put their political pieces together, if they don't make those compromises, it seems to me it's obvious that we're going to have to consider that timetable for reduction and withdrawal . . . I would think that we'll have at least a third of our troops out by a year from now. That is my guess either way.
Meet the Press - October 16, 2004
Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D‑MD)
We need to see faster progress on all these things. When these things happen, we can begin to withdraw our troops in stages and bring them home. Our military men and women have sacrificed in Iraq. They honored our country by volunteering to serve. We must honor them with an effective plan to finish their work, and bring our troops home . . . we need a workable plan to drawdown our troops.
Senate floor statement ‑ October 25, 2005
Sen. Ken Salazar (R-CO)
"It's important that we push for a successful strategy in Iraq and, for me, that's defined by taking the baton of protecting the government and handing it to Iraqi security forces so we can begin to withdraw our troops," Salazar said . . .We've been told that we've trained (250,000) Iraqi soldiers and we've spent $300 billion on the war, so I do believe you'll see us begin withdrawing our forces next year."
The Pueblo Chieftain - Thursday October 27, 2005
Rep. Jim McGovern (D‑MA)
I will be introducing legislation to end U.S. military operations in Iraq, and I invite you to join me as an original cosponsor of this bill. Quite simply, this bill would end all funding for the deployment of U.S. Armed Forces in Iraq. Department of Defense funds could be provided for te safe and orderly withdrawal of all U.S. troops from Iraq.
Dear Colleague letter - October 26, 2005
Rep. Brad Miller (D‑NC)
There is no better way to persuade the Iraqi people that we really intend to withdrew than to begin withdrawing. The Price‑Miller resolution calls for a partial withdrawal as soon as possible.
House floor statement - October 25, 2005
Rep. David Price (D‑NC)
I rise in support of the Price‑Miller resolution, which we have introduced today, to require the President to submit to Congress a plan for the withdrawal of United States troops from Iraq in the wake of the October 15 constitutional referendum, beginning with an initial drawdown. This is not a requirement I propose lightly . . . But we must end the occupation, and the approval of the Constitution offers us an opportunity to begin that process. It is an opportunity we must seize . . . Our resolution draws in concept and content on one introduced in the Senate by Mr. Feingold on June 14. It updates that resolution by taking explicit account of the constitutional referendum and proposing an initial immediate drawdown of troops.
House floor statement - October 25, 2005
Rep. Ike Skelton (D‑MO)
In a letter to the President, Congressman Ike Skelton (D‑MO) suggests a formula to guide the redeployment of U.S. forces from Iraq which would provide the American and Iraqi people with a measurable sense of progress in the region. Skelton proposes that for every three Iraqi security force combat brigades rated "Level 1" (or fully capable), an American brigade or unit of similar size, type, and mission should be strategically redeployed from Iraq. This would establish a clear link between the development of Iraqi security forces and the redeployment of American forces, demonstrating progress in a way that both the American and the Iraqi people can plainly see.
Press statement - October 24, 2005
Rep. Maxine Waters (D‑CA)
Mr. Speaker, it is time to bring our soldiers home. It is time for Republicans and Democrats alike to understand that we do not need to lose another American soldier in Iraq.
House floor statement - October 26, 2005
Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D‑CA)
It is time to return Iraq to the Iraqi people and the troops safely home to their families.
House floor statement - October 26, 2005
CONGRESSIONAL RHETORIC STRONGER;
SENATE LEGISLATIVE FOLLOW-THROUGH STILL ABSENT;
Sen. Robert Byrd (D‑WV)
The American people seek an end, they seek an end, they want an end to this ongoing bloody war in Iraq, not new conflicts in neighboring countries.
Senate floor statement ‑ October 25, 2005
Sen. Dick Durbin (D‑IL)
Each step the Iraqis take toward the successful establishment of self‑governance should bring our troops a step closer to home . . . The choice we face in Iraq is not a choice between resolve or retreat. The men and women in our military and their loved ones deserve a clear path to stability in Iraq so they can come home as soon as humanly possible.
Senate floor statement ‑ October 25, 2005
Sen. Russell Feingold (D‑WI)
As my colleagues may know, I have suggested a target date of December 31, 2006, the end of next year, for the completion of our military mission. Today, I want to talk a little bit about why a flexible timetable for withdrawal will help make the U.S. stronger and our enemies weaker . . . But with the words of Republicans like Melvin Laird and military leaders like General Casey, more and more people understand that having a flexible timetable will strengthen our national security. This is not a timetable where the objective is troop withdrawal, the objective is to focus on our national security needs and the timetable is one step towards that goal. A timetable is not about domestic politics‑‑it's about undercutting insurgency recruiting and unity, encouraging more Iraqi ownership and responsibility, and creating space for other important U.S. national security efforts.
Senate floor statement ‑ October 25, 2005
Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA)
Asked how the Mr. Bush could revive the plan [to revamp Social Security], Iowa’s Sen. Charles Grassley replied: “Get the troops out of Iraq and get New Orleans rebuilt.”
Wall Street Journal - October 20, 2005
Sen. Edward Kennedy (D‑MA)
Instead of covering up mistakes in Iraq, it is time for the President to admit them, to adopt an effective strategy to end this war and begin to bring our troops home, and to stop ignoring the very real priorities facing the Nation and the many many challenges facing us at home and abroad.
Senate floor statement ‑ October 25, 2005
Sen. John Kerry (D-MA)
The way forward in Iraq is not to pull out precipitously or merely promise to stay “as long as it takes.” To undermine the insurgency, we must instead simultaneously pursue both a political settlement and the withdrawal of American combat forces linked to specific, responsible benchmarks. At the first benchmark, the completion of the December elections, we can start the process of reducing our forces by withdrawing 20,000 troops over the course of the holidays . . . It will be hard for this Administration, but it is essential to acknowledge that the insurgency will not be defeated unless our troop levels are drawn down, starting immediately after successful elections in December. The draw down of troops should be tied not to an arbitrary timetable, but to a specific timetable for transfer of political and security responsibility to Iraqis and realignment of our troop deployment. That timetable must be real and strict. The goal should be to withdraw the bulk of American combat forces by the end of next year.
Speech at Georgetown University - October 26, 2005
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D‑VT)
Without answers‑‑real answers, honest answers‑‑to these questions, I will not support the open‑ended deployment of our troops in a war that was based on falsehood and justified with hubris . . . Once a new Iraqi government is in place, I believe the President should consult with Congress on a flexible plan that includes pulling our troops back from the densely populated areas where they are suffering the worst casualties and to bring them home.
Senate floor statement ‑ October 25, 2005
Sen. Carl Levin (D‑MI)
MR. RUSSERT: There are now about 150,000 Americans on the ground in Iraq. Knowing what you know about the situation in Iraq and knowing what you know about American politics, how many Americans do you believe will be in Iraq come November of 2006 when the mid‑term congressional elections take place?
SEN. LEVIN: Less than we have there now. For one of two reasons. Either because the Iraqis will put their own house in order, both politically and security‑wise, or they won't. Either way, there is going to be fewer troops there because if the Iraqis can handle the situation, that obviously will lead to fewer troops. But if they refuse to put their political pieces together, if they don't make those compromises, it seems to me it's obvious that we're going to have to consider that timetable for reduction and withdrawal . . . I would think that we'll have at least a third of our troops out by a year from now. That is my guess either way.
Meet the Press - October 16, 2004
Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D‑MD)
We need to see faster progress on all these things. When these things happen, we can begin to withdraw our troops in stages and bring them home. Our military men and women have sacrificed in Iraq. They honored our country by volunteering to serve. We must honor them with an effective plan to finish their work, and bring our troops home . . . we need a workable plan to drawdown our troops.
Senate floor statement ‑ October 25, 2005
Sen. Ken Salazar (R-CO)
"It's important that we push for a successful strategy in Iraq and, for me, that's defined by taking the baton of protecting the government and handing it to Iraqi security forces so we can begin to withdraw our troops," Salazar said . . .We've been told that we've trained (250,000) Iraqi soldiers and we've spent $300 billion on the war, so I do believe you'll see us begin withdrawing our forces next year."
The Pueblo Chieftain - Thursday October 27, 2005
Rep. Jim McGovern (D‑MA)
I will be introducing legislation to end U.S. military operations in Iraq, and I invite you to join me as an original cosponsor of this bill. Quite simply, this bill would end all funding for the deployment of U.S. Armed Forces in Iraq. Department of Defense funds could be provided for te safe and orderly withdrawal of all U.S. troops from Iraq.
Dear Colleague letter - October 26, 2005
Rep. Brad Miller (D‑NC)
There is no better way to persuade the Iraqi people that we really intend to withdrew than to begin withdrawing. The Price‑Miller resolution calls for a partial withdrawal as soon as possible.
House floor statement - October 25, 2005
Rep. David Price (D‑NC)
I rise in support of the Price‑Miller resolution, which we have introduced today, to require the President to submit to Congress a plan for the withdrawal of United States troops from Iraq in the wake of the October 15 constitutional referendum, beginning with an initial drawdown. This is not a requirement I propose lightly . . . But we must end the occupation, and the approval of the Constitution offers us an opportunity to begin that process. It is an opportunity we must seize . . . Our resolution draws in concept and content on one introduced in the Senate by Mr. Feingold on June 14. It updates that resolution by taking explicit account of the constitutional referendum and proposing an initial immediate drawdown of troops.
House floor statement - October 25, 2005
Rep. Ike Skelton (D‑MO)
In a letter to the President, Congressman Ike Skelton (D‑MO) suggests a formula to guide the redeployment of U.S. forces from Iraq which would provide the American and Iraqi people with a measurable sense of progress in the region. Skelton proposes that for every three Iraqi security force combat brigades rated "Level 1" (or fully capable), an American brigade or unit of similar size, type, and mission should be strategically redeployed from Iraq. This would establish a clear link between the development of Iraqi security forces and the redeployment of American forces, demonstrating progress in a way that both the American and the Iraqi people can plainly see.
Press statement - October 24, 2005
Rep. Maxine Waters (D‑CA)
Mr. Speaker, it is time to bring our soldiers home. It is time for Republicans and Democrats alike to understand that we do not need to lose another American soldier in Iraq.
House floor statement - October 26, 2005
Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D‑CA)
It is time to return Iraq to the Iraqi people and the troops safely home to their families.
House floor statement - October 26, 2005
Friday, October 28, 2005
One down, 10,000 more to go....
One criminal arrested today. Now, we just need to arrest the other 10,000 criminals that start this optional evil war for bogus reasons..... which is a nice way of saying LIES.
I hope I can have a "Judith Miller goes to jail for the RIGHT reasons" party one day.
I hope I can have a "Judith Miller goes to jail for the RIGHT reasons" party one day.
Media coverage of the vigil
Last night I was interviewed on WLOS TV. I said that things were getting worse and worse in Iraq, in spite of our military's best efforts (okay, I am giving them the benefit of a doubt, which some of them DO NOT deserve, but some do- I wanted to reach the Americans who are not convinced that the US military needs to leave Iraq).
I said that life for Iraqis is getting more and more treacherous.
I heard it was replayed this morning. It was great to hear the newscaster say "Not one more Death! Not one more Dollar!" was our slogan for last night's vigil. That came from the American Friends Service Committee. www.afsc.org It is important to get on TV, since that is where a huge number of Americans get their "news" (which is why they don't know anything).
On Friday, I will be blogging on Today in Iraq (www.dailywarnews.blogspot.com). Please read about the bell-ringing action under PEACE ACTION.
I said that life for Iraqis is getting more and more treacherous.
I heard it was replayed this morning. It was great to hear the newscaster say "Not one more Death! Not one more Dollar!" was our slogan for last night's vigil. That came from the American Friends Service Committee. www.afsc.org It is important to get on TV, since that is where a huge number of Americans get their "news" (which is why they don't know anything).
On Friday, I will be blogging on Today in Iraq (www.dailywarnews.blogspot.com). Please read about the bell-ringing action under PEACE ACTION.
Thursday, October 27, 2005
Vigil for 2000 US Troops Died in Iraq
We had a good turnout (132 people) and good press representation. We placed candle luminaries around the fountain, and people held candles as they talked and socialized. We observed a minute of silence in rememberance of the deceased, and one of our Vets for Peace got up and spoke to the crowd about her feelings concerning the 2,000 US troops that have died. She spoke of her sorrow at that fact, and she spoke to the underlying falsehoods that were the foundation of this war. She was very moving.
It was a bit cold in Asheville, and a bit windy, but the candles did stay lit for over an hour and a half. We did have the local TV and newspaper show up and interview people.
The reason I hosted this vigil and did the press contacts was to try to keep this issue in front of the American people, and hopefully, to convince them that this war is wrong and we need to get out of Iraq.... for the sake of the Iraqi people.
I realize that the Iraqis have suffered far, far worse than what the US troops and their families have suffered.
It was a bit cold in Asheville, and a bit windy, but the candles did stay lit for over an hour and a half. We did have the local TV and newspaper show up and interview people.
The reason I hosted this vigil and did the press contacts was to try to keep this issue in front of the American people, and hopefully, to convince them that this war is wrong and we need to get out of Iraq.... for the sake of the Iraqi people.
I realize that the Iraqis have suffered far, far worse than what the US troops and their families have suffered.
Wednesday, October 26, 2005
Not One More Death!
Tomorrow, October 26, 2005 is the day that people across America will hold vigils to honor the 2,000 US troops that have died in Iraq. In Asheville, this event will be at Pack Square at 6:30 PM. It will be a candlelight prayer vigil, and I am requesting that people bring candles (and something for them to drip into) and signs - but signs without politicians names on them.
This is also a rememberance of all the tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands, of innocent Iraqi civilians who have lost their lives due to this war. This is by far the greater tragedy.
In the interests of increasing awareness among Americans, the following organzations are focusing on the American losses:
American Friends Service Committee
United for Peace and Justice
True Majority
Democracy for America
and MoveOn.Org
If you cannot join a vigil tomorrow night at 6:30 PM, please say a prayer for peace in this world. Please say a prayer that our politicians will find a way to solve problems without resorting to war.
This is also a rememberance of all the tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands, of innocent Iraqi civilians who have lost their lives due to this war. This is by far the greater tragedy.
In the interests of increasing awareness among Americans, the following organzations are focusing on the American losses:
American Friends Service Committee
United for Peace and Justice
True Majority
Democracy for America
and MoveOn.Org
If you cannot join a vigil tomorrow night at 6:30 PM, please say a prayer for peace in this world. Please say a prayer that our politicians will find a way to solve problems without resorting to war.
Friday, October 21, 2005
Blogging on Today In Iraq
Today was my first post for the blog "Today in Iraq".
This is a blog that is a list of important news items for Iraq and for US/UK troops.
You can find it at:
http://dailywarnews.blogspot.com/
This is a blog that is a list of important news items for Iraq and for US/UK troops.
You can find it at:
http://dailywarnews.blogspot.com/
Thursday, October 20, 2005
Iraqi Deaths
I gathered the following information for the Iraq Coalition Casualties website. They collect stories that report on Iraqi Civilian deaths, and then total them each month. Here’s what they have for six months of this year.
Civilians Police/Military
January N/A 109
February N/A 103
March 240 200
April 302 199
May 572 259
June 477 296
July 518 304
August 1,524 282
September 640 233
TOTALS 4,273 1,885
However, Robert Fisk reported on Democracy Now that there was 1,100 bodies brought to the Baghdad morgue in July for autopsies. Those would only include people who died a violent death. The exact number of Iraqi casualties from this war and occupation is unknown, and apparently, the US/UK forces there will make no attempt to find out. This speaks volumes to me about how much they care about Iraqis, and how much they are really interested in “freedom and democracy” for the Iraqis. I think they are bringing a lot of the Iraqis the freedom of the grave and the democracy of death.
Reuters reports this week: More than 4,300 Iraqis, nearly 70 percent of them civilians, were killed by insurgents in the first nine months of this year, an Interior Ministry official said on Saturday. That would mean there was a heck of a lot of Iraqis killed by coalition troops, if this is accurate.
Civilians Police/Military
January N/A 109
February N/A 103
March 240 200
April 302 199
May 572 259
June 477 296
July 518 304
August 1,524 282
September 640 233
TOTALS 4,273 1,885
However, Robert Fisk reported on Democracy Now that there was 1,100 bodies brought to the Baghdad morgue in July for autopsies. Those would only include people who died a violent death. The exact number of Iraqi casualties from this war and occupation is unknown, and apparently, the US/UK forces there will make no attempt to find out. This speaks volumes to me about how much they care about Iraqis, and how much they are really interested in “freedom and democracy” for the Iraqis. I think they are bringing a lot of the Iraqis the freedom of the grave and the democracy of death.
Reuters reports this week: More than 4,300 Iraqis, nearly 70 percent of them civilians, were killed by insurgents in the first nine months of this year, an Interior Ministry official said on Saturday. That would mean there was a heck of a lot of Iraqis killed by coalition troops, if this is accurate.
Wednesday, October 19, 2005
Warrant for the arrest of Three GIs
Spanish Judge Issues Warrant for Three GIs
From The Associated Press
Wednesday 19 October 2005
Madrid, Spain - A judge has issued an international arrest warrant for three U.S. soldiers whose tank fired on a Baghdad hotel during the Iraq war, killing a Spanish journalist and a Ukrainian cameraman, a court official said Wednesday.In light of the fact that the US miltary did little investigation of civilian deaths in Iraq (as was normally the case), this judge in Spain deciced to issue warrents and pursue the investigation that way.
From The Associated Press
Wednesday 19 October 2005
Madrid, Spain - A judge has issued an international arrest warrant for three U.S. soldiers whose tank fired on a Baghdad hotel during the Iraq war, killing a Spanish journalist and a Ukrainian cameraman, a court official said Wednesday.In light of the fact that the US miltary did little investigation of civilian deaths in Iraq (as was normally the case), this judge in Spain deciced to issue warrents and pursue the investigation that way.
Thursday, October 13, 2005
What Bush said in March 2003
A group called Supaclean took the CSNY song “OHIO” and built on it, back in early 2004. They included, towards the end of the song, a recording of what Bush had to say to the Iraqi people before our troops went in there.
Bush: “All Iraqi military and civilian personnel should listen carefully to this warning. In any conflict, your fate will depend on your actions. Do not destroy oil wells.”
Here’s the song
But, when Bush says “your fate will depend on your actions” I think of the baby in the following story. This baby had the good sense to be thrown clear of the building she was in when a bomb hit (this building was her home) but the rest of her family did not have that good sense. The baby landed in a puddle in a neighbor’s yard and was found the next day. Wounded, but she survived. The rest of her immediate family was killed. I guess, in Bush world, they did not take the right actions, which in this case would mean not sleeping in your own home. The family was killed by US ‘smart’ bombs, done to get Saddam early on in the war. The family never talked to Saddam or had him in their home. Smart bombs, dumb warmonger politicians.
That baby’s story is here.
Below are more personal stories of what happened in Iraq just after the US military arrived. Seems like some more people didn’t take the right “actions”:
Their stories are here.
The song OHIO by Supaclean ends with:
“for the dead, for the dying,
for the Jews that been tricked,
by a Rove, Wolf, Collin, Connie, Bush and a dick.”
Of course, we all know that the oil ministry and oil wells were well protected from the rampant looting done across Iraq just after the invasion. Has anyone determined where those looters came from? Did they even catch one of them and ask?
Bush: “All Iraqi military and civilian personnel should listen carefully to this warning. In any conflict, your fate will depend on your actions. Do not destroy oil wells.”
Here’s the song
But, when Bush says “your fate will depend on your actions” I think of the baby in the following story. This baby had the good sense to be thrown clear of the building she was in when a bomb hit (this building was her home) but the rest of her family did not have that good sense. The baby landed in a puddle in a neighbor’s yard and was found the next day. Wounded, but she survived. The rest of her immediate family was killed. I guess, in Bush world, they did not take the right actions, which in this case would mean not sleeping in your own home. The family was killed by US ‘smart’ bombs, done to get Saddam early on in the war. The family never talked to Saddam or had him in their home. Smart bombs, dumb warmonger politicians.
That baby’s story is here.
Below are more personal stories of what happened in Iraq just after the US military arrived. Seems like some more people didn’t take the right “actions”:
Their stories are here.
The song OHIO by Supaclean ends with:
“for the dead, for the dying,
for the Jews that been tricked,
by a Rove, Wolf, Collin, Connie, Bush and a dick.”
Of course, we all know that the oil ministry and oil wells were well protected from the rampant looting done across Iraq just after the invasion. Has anyone determined where those looters came from? Did they even catch one of them and ask?
Monday, October 10, 2005
Anti-war video worth watching
http://theunitedamerican.blogs.com/Movies/2000A/2000.html
From my friend, Debra, who also sent this quote:
"You're only given a little spark of madness, you mustn't lose it." Robin Williams
From my friend, Debra, who also sent this quote:
"You're only given a little spark of madness, you mustn't lose it." Robin Williams
Saturday, October 08, 2005
What is terrorism?
Terrorism is the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives. - US Federal Bureau of Investigation
So, I would say the US government is using the US military for terrorism.
So, I would say the US government is using the US military for terrorism.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)